Much in Responsible Research and Innovation (RRI) is part of a participatory turn within the Technology Assessment (TA) and Science and Technology Studies (STS) community. This has an influence also on the evaluation of Climate Engineering (CE) options, as it will be shown by reference to the SPICE project. The SPICE example and the call for democratisation of science and innovation raise some interesting concerns for the normative evaluation of CE options that will be addressed in the paper. It is by far not clear, or so it will be argued, how much of the innovation process of CE technologies should be put in the hands of social actors and the wider public. This is due not only to special features about CE technologies but also to some more principle concerns against some features of participatory RRI approaches. Still, this does by no way mean that ethical and societal issues in the context of CE technologies should be ignored. Rather, the paper will argue that one can take a step back to expert TA linked to the evolution of approaches of ethical impact analysis in this area. This does not only lead to reconsider the emphasis on participation and democratisation of research and innovation, but also opens up for an alternative evaluative framework for CE technologies developed in the last part of the paper.

中文翻译：

---

负责任的创新和气候工程。回到技术评估的一步

负责任的研究和创新 (RRI) 是技术评估 (TA) 和科学技术研究 (STS) 社区内参与式转变的一部分。这也会对气候工程 (CE) 选项的评估产生影响，因为它将通过参考 SPICE 项目来显示。SPICE 的例子和对科学和创新民主化的呼吁引起了对 CE 选项的规范评估的一些有趣的关注，这些问题将在本文中讨论。目前尚不清楚，或者争论不休，CE 技术的创新过程应该有多少交到社会参与者和更广泛的公众手中。这不仅是因为 CE 技术的特殊性，还因为对参与式 RRI 方法的某些特征的更多原则性关注。仍然，这绝不意味着应该忽略 CE 技术背景下的道德和社会问题。相反，本文将争辩说，人们可以退回到与该领域伦理影响分析方法的演变相关的专家 TA。这不仅导致重新考虑对研究和创新的参与和民主化的重视，而且为本文最后部分开发的 CE 技术的替代评估框架开辟了道路。