| dc.description.abstract | Scientific interest in geoengineering has ascended in recent years (Belter & Seidel, 2013). Position statements and reports on geoengineering have been issued by scientific societies (AGU, The Royal Society, AMS), conferences and publications on geoengineering have proliferated, and some scientists and individuals are advocating additional research, and in some cases implementation of various proposals (Belter & Seidel, 2013).
In this context, including the large amount of controversy in geoengineering research, makes it constructive to examine the current state of scientific research on geoengineering. Such an analysis would be useful in order to inform policy discussion surrounding geoengineering experiments, to suggest future research directions on this topic (Belter & Seidel, 2013), and to provide a baseline for similar analyses designed to monitor future developments in this research.
This research examines both the current state of geoengineering research and how this reflects on the Oxford Principles. Applying a bibliometric analysis of three case studies. Together the case studies represent the knowledge base in geoengineering research, making use of a defined set of publications. The current scientific state of geoengineering research, has not been highlighted in recent studies and past discussions about the potential of geoengineering schemes, which therefore might lead to an improved understanding of geoengineering research. This research concentrated on the developments in geoengineering research in the time span (2000-2013).
The results of the bibliometric analysis indicated to a large extent, the incorporation of the Oxford Principles in geoengineering research. Geoengineering research involves many different disciplines, organizations and collaborations. Research is largely funded by both Government and University related organizations, leading to open publications and research to be regulated for the public good. Furthermore is geoengineering research almost completely reliable on the output of prolific countries, with the United States as absolute dominant country in geoengineering research. | |
