As we count down to the 4th International Conference on Carbon Dioxide Removal in Milano, we are hosting a series of discussions on the research that will be shaping our sessions this June! 
This research challenges dominant Carbon Dioxide Removal 
governance frameworks by arguing that CDR technologies are shaped by underlying cultural and political assumptions rather than being universally neutral solutions. Drawing on the concept of “cosmotechnics,” the author highlights how Indigenous and Global South practices such as biochar-based terra preta 
, fire management 
, and syntropic agriculture 
offer alternative approaches to carbon removal rooted in care 
, coevolution 
, and local knowledge 
, advocating for “technodiversity” 
as a more just 
and resilient model for global CDR governance.
Read the full paper here: Link 
Does scaling carbon removal always require standardization, or can local knowledge systems scale differently? 
Full Abstract: Cosmotechnics and Carbon Dioxide Removal: Toward Technodiversity in CDR Governance from a Global South Perspective
Authors: DemetrioToledo
The dominant discourse on Carbon Dioxide Removal (CDR) frames it as universal technical solutions to be deployed globally. This paper argues that CDR technologies are not cosmologically neutral: they embody specific assumptions about the relationship between humans, technology, and Earth systems. Drawing on Yuk Hui’s concept of “cosmotechnics” — the idea that different cosmologies produce different technical relations with the world — we propose that current CDR governance reflects a particular cosmotechnics rooted in modern Western assumptions of planetary management, optimization, and control. This framing has significant justice implications. High-tech CDR approaches such as DACCS and BECCS are developed primarily in the Global North, while the Global South is positioned as a site for implementation and risk absorption. Meanwhile, traditional knowledge systems that have practiced carbon sequestration for millennia — such as Amazonian Dark Earths (terra preta de Ăndio), indigenous fire management, and agroforestry — remain marginalized in CDR policy, classified as “nature-based solutions” rather than recognized as sophisticated technologies. We analyze three cases from Brazil: (1) Terra preta de Ăndio, a pre-Columbian soil technology achieving long-term carbon sequestration through biochar; (2) Indigenous fire management in the Cerrado, preventing catastrophic wildfires while maintaining carbon stocks; and (3) Syntropic agriculture combining productivity with carbon sequestration through ecological succession. These cases demonstrate that CDR need not assume a managerial relationship with Earth systems. They emerge from cosmologies emphasizing care, coevolution, and situated knowledge rather than optimization and control. This has practical implications: it challenges assumptions that scaling requires standardization, suggests MRV frameworks must accommodate diverse knowledge systems, and raises questions about who defines “removal” and permanence. We propose “technodiversity” as a normative principle for CDR governance — analogous to biodiversity. Just as biodiversity contributes to ecosystem resilience, technodiversity may enhance climate resilience by avoiding lock-in to single pathways and distributing governance across multiple knowledge traditions. This contributes to CDR justice by moving beyond distributive concerns to recognitional justice: whose knowledge systems are acknowledged as legitimate climate solutions? For a just transition, the Global South must be recognized not as a site for carbon storage, but as a source of cosmotechnical alternatives challenging the monoculture of planetary management.