Stakeholder and expert opinion of solar radiation modification in South Asia: insights into perceptions, geopolitical, and governance concerns in Bangladesh

Abstract The potential inadequacy or failure of current climate change adaptation and mitigation initiatives has prompted debates on solar radiation modification (SRM) technologies, which, despite their potential to lower global temperatures, raises numerous ethical, political, social and governance concerns. Bangladesh, a South Asian country, is especially relevant to the SRM discourse owing to its extreme vulnerability to climate change. This study used a multi-method qualitative research design to compare the opinions of experts and different stakeholders within Bangladesh, including farmers, regarding their perceptions of SRM, geopolitical, and governance issues. The study conducted 17 in-depth interviews with climate experts along with a series of 6 focus group discussions with stakeholders in six different climatic hotspots in Bangladesh. The majority of our experts expressed concern regarding the uncertainties associated with SRM and emphasized the need for more research on its effectiveness. According to both the focus groups and interviews, SRM interventions are also of interest to boost crop productivity. Focus groups findings suggested that farmers in drought-prone and urban areas are enthusiastic about SRM technologies, mainly due to climate risks of higher temperatures and extended dry periods they already experienced. However, fifteen of our experts and most focus group participants preferred nature-based approaches and adaptations over SRM. Experts, especially those working at NGOs and public institutions, still expressed support for SRM research, whereas policymakers were more likely to prioritize adaptation and mitigation. Experts stated that developing countries like Bangladesh lack financial as well as negotiating power, making reliance on developed nations and global consensus on the ramifications of SRM essential. Climate experts and policymakers broadly argued that the national government should lead on governance of SRM, with private organizations, researchers, and academia acting in a supporting role.