<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><xml><records><record><source-app name="Biblio" version="7.x">Drupal-Biblio</source-app><ref-type>17</ref-type><contributors><authors><author><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Craik, N</style></author></authors></contributors><titles><title><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">International EIA Law and Geoengineering: Do Emerging Technologies Require Special Rules?</style></title><secondary-title><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Climate Law</style></secondary-title></titles><dates><year><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">2015</style></year></dates><volume><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">5</style></volume><pages><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">111-141</style></pages><language><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">eng</style></language><abstract><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">&lt;p&gt;This article explores the adequacy of the&amp;nbsp;international&amp;nbsp;rules&amp;nbsp;on environmental impact assessment to contribute to&amp;nbsp;geoengineering&amp;nbsp;governance, with a focus on three fundamental challenges. First, the near-universal trigger for&amp;nbsp;EIA&amp;nbsp;is the likelihood of significant environmental impact, which may prove to be insufficiently precautionary in light of current risk preferences surrounding&amp;nbsp;geoengineering. Second, the scope of&amp;nbsp;eia&amp;nbsp;has traditionally focused narrowly on the assessment of direct physical impacts; however, many of the concerns that&amp;nbsp;geoengineering&amp;nbsp;research raises relate to environmental and social risks associated with downstream technological implications. A third and related challenge is the consultation requirements under&amp;nbsp;EIA&amp;nbsp;laws, which focus on affected states and affected members of the public. Because many&amp;nbsp;geoengineering&amp;nbsp;activities are anticipated to impact the global commons, there is no clear institutional mechanism for implementing notification and consultation. Additionally, the broader sets of concerns that&amp;nbsp;geoengineering&amp;nbsp;raises are spatially unbounded, again making the identification of consultation partners uncertain. The article concludes with a discussion of the implications of the challenges and limitations of the&amp;nbsp;rules&amp;nbsp;of&amp;nbsp;EIA&amp;nbsp;for&amp;nbsp;geoengineering.&amp;nbsp;&lt;/p&gt;</style></abstract><issue><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">2-4</style></issue></record></records></xml>