Deferred Crises and Displaced Risks

In this paper, I clarify two distinct critiques of environmental techno-fixes: the moral hazard critique and the crisis deferment critique. These critiques are often conflated, but they illuminate separate issues and rest on different background assumptions. The moral hazard critique focuses on how technological solutions can redistribute environmental risks and responsibilities in problematic ways, often benefiting decision-makers while burdening marginalized communities or ecosystems. The crisis deferment critique argues that techno-fixes delay necessary systemic changes by providing temporary relief from environmental pressures. Separating these critiques offers a clearer, more nuanced picture of how technological solutions to environmental problems can be problematic, allowing for more accurate normative assessment of real-world technofixes. I use case studies of solar radiation management and desalination projects to illustrate how purported techno-fixes can embody one or both critiques to varying degrees.