Send message to Author

Short abstract:

Philanthrocapitalist organizations might believe in technical superiority, but not in automatic implementation. Using examples of philanthropic geoengineering projects, the thesis is pursued that even supposedly clear cases of technosolutionism are flanked by elaborate non-technical persuasion work.

Long abstract:

Philanthrocapitalist organizations, such as the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation, the Omidyar Network or Arnold Ventures, are indeed trying to solve major social problems with technology. However, branding them as "solutionist" easily overlooks the fact that the bulk of their persuasive work does not rely on functioning technology alone. These organizations may believe in the superiority of technical solutions, but not in their automatic implementation. This can be seen empirically in a variety of lobbying activities, but also in efforts to convince potential users of the advantages of philanthrocapitalist solutions in practical trainings. The Degrees Initiative funded by Open Philanthropy is a particularly instructive case in point. It is committed to further research into the geoengineering variant "Solar Radiation Management" (SRM). This example will be used to elaborate the thesis that technosolutionism gains its real power through its non-technical persuasion. Geoengineering has now made it onto the IPCC agenda. The Degrees Initiative is developing projects in countries of the Global South in order to research possible consequences there. Only recently, this organization launched "Grants for social science research on solar radiation modification", which are intended to address "numerous and diverse social and political challenges". Such projects face a wide range of resistance in a differentiated society. Of course, the enormous sums of money involved in this type of philanthropy do help. Nevertheless, according to the thesis, it is not a simple conversion of money into influence, but a planned, but also laborious organization.