The feasibility of different options to reduce the risks of climate change has engaged scholars for decades. Yet there is no agreement on how to define and assess feasibility. We define feasible as “do-able under realistic assumptions.” A sound feasibility assessment is based on causal reasoning; enables comparison of feasibility across climate options, contexts, and implementation levels; and reflexively considers the agency of its audience. Global climate scenarios are a good starting point for assessing the feasibility of climate options since they represent causal pathways, quantify implementation levels, and consider policy choices. Yet, scenario developers face difficulties to represent all relevant causalities, assess the realism of assumptions, assign likelihood to potential outcomes, and evaluate the agency of their users, which calls for external feasibility assessments. Existing approaches to feasibility assessment mirror the “inside” and the “outside” view coined by Kahneman and co-authors. The inside view considers climate change as a unique challenge and seeks to identify barriers that should be overcome by political choice, commitment, and skill. The outside view assesses feasibility through examining historical analogies (reference cases) to the given climate option. Recent studies seek to bridge the inside and the outside views through “feasibility spaces,” by identifying reference cases for a climate option, measuring their outcomes and relevant characteristics, and mapping them together with the expected outcomes and characteristics of the climate option. Feasibility spaces are a promising method to prioritize climate options, realistically assess the achievability of climate goals, and construct scenarios with empirically-grounded assumptions.

中文翻译：

---

气候行动的可行性：通过可行性空间弥合内部和外部观点

几十年来，学者们一直致力于研究降低气候变化风险的不同方案的可行性。然而，对于如何定义和评估可行性尚未达成一致。我们将可行定义为“在现实假设下可行”。健全的可行性评估基于因果推理；能够比较不同气候选项、背景和实施水平的可行性；并反射性地考虑其受众的代理权。全球气候情景是评估气候方案可行性的良好起点，因为它们代表因果路径、量化实施水平并考虑政策选择。然而，场景开发人员在表示所有相关因果关系、评估假设的现实性、分配潜在结果的可能性以及评估用户的代理方面面临着困难，这需要外部可行性评估。现有的可行性评估方法反映了卡尼曼及其合著者提出的“内部”和“外部”观点。内部观点认为气候变化是一项独特的挑战，并试图找出应通过政治选择、承诺和技能克服的障碍。外部观点通过检查给定气候选项的历史类比（参考案例）来评估可行性。最近的研究试图通过“可行性空间”弥合内部和外部观点，方法是确定气候选项的参考案例，衡量其结果和相关特征，并将它们与气候选项的预期结果和特征映射在一起。可行性空间是优先考虑气候选项的一种有前途的方法，