London, December 10, 2025
African nations have advocated strongly at recent United Nations environmental talks for a global non-use agreement on solar geoengineering, urging a halt to its development and deployment due to significant environmental, ethical, and geopolitical risks. This call, supported by The Guardian editorial, stresses precaution and equitable governance to avoid turning the continent into a testing ground for this unproven climate intervention.
Africa’s Call for a Global Non-Use Agreement
At environmental negotiations held in Nairobi, African diplomats pushed for an outright prohibition on the use of solar geoengineering technologies worldwide. They emphasize that the technology—intended to cool the Earth by reflecting sunlight—is not yet proven safe and carries high risks. African countries argue that adopting a precautionary approach is essential to safeguarding the continent’s ecosystems and communities from potential harm. The continent’s representatives advocate stopping public and private funding, banning outdoor experiments, and suspending patenting and official promotional activities related to the technology until a full understanding of risks is achieved.
Environmental, Ethical, and Geopolitical Concerns
African diplomats spotlight multifaceted concerns surrounding solar geoengineering. Environmentally, the risk of unintended and irreversible effects on local climates and biodiversity looms large. Ethically, there are strong objections to deploying a technology that could disproportionately impact vulnerable populations without their consent. Geopolitically, African nations worry about unequal power dynamics where wealthy countries might impose a solution that serves their interests but undermines sovereign decision-making in less powerful regions.
Divergent International Perspectives
The African position sharply contrasts with that of countries like the United States, which advocate for a balanced approach that weighs both potential benefits and risks. For African leaders and allied states, however, the risks—including the potential for mitigation delay by wealthy nations and a lack of global governance—must be the primary focus. Their stance highlights concerns over neocolonial imposition and the need for global governance frameworks that equitably represent all nations.
Criticisms of Existing Governance Frameworks
Current mechanisms, particularly those under the United Nations Environment Programme (UNEP), are viewed by African diplomats as insufficient. The UNEP framework lacks enforcement power and often operates on consensus, which can dilute accountability and fail to address imbalances in international influence. African governments have signaled a preference for debate and regulation at more authoritative international bodies such as the UN General Assembly and human rights mechanisms, aiming for stronger, more equitable governance of solar geoengineering.
Support from Academia and Civil Society
The African position aligns with broader calls from over 500 scholars and nearly 2,000 civil society organizations worldwide. These groups have advocated since 2022 for a global moratorium on solar geoengineering deployment, emphasizing the necessity of inclusive and transparent decision-making processes. Their campaign underscores the complexity and far-reaching implications of solar geoengineering, reinforcing the demand for precaution and robust international oversight.
This growing international discourse underscores the urgent need for transparent, inclusive discussions on the future of solar geoengineering. The African call for caution and stronger governance signals critical challenges ahead in balancing innovative climate interventions with ecological integrity, socioeconomic justice, and geopolitical equity.