(From Moore 2025) “The prevailing “consequences-based paradigm” defines the role of climate scientists as informing the public about the negative effects of climate change, assuming this will mobilize political action to reduce emissions. Under this paradigm, research into strategies other than decarbonization is often seen as counterproductive, an argument advanced by Siegert et al. (1) in their Frontiers in Science lead article, “Safeguarding the polar regions from dangerous geoengineering.” Yet after half a century of alarm-raising, this paradigm has failed to generate the political will needed for deep decarbonization.
This article uses insights from 27 academics, activists, and Arctic inhabitants to propose an alternative: a “harm-reduction paradigm.” We maintain that climate interventions research and decarbonization are not mutually exclusive. Instead of focusing solely on the problems, climate scientists should also explore all potential solutions to reduce harm to humanity. The effectiveness and risks of interventions remain uncertain, and only further research can address these questions; research that some, including Siegert et al. (1) seek to halt.”
Moore et al., A new paradigm from the Arctic, Frontiers in Science, September 9, 2025.
https://www.frontiersin.org/journals/science/articles/10.3389/fsci.2025.1657323/full
