In order to evaluate decision making structures of frameworks that could address climate engineering, we present a set of normative principles based on John Rawls' Theory of Justice largely mirroring the current discourse on 'global justice' – a concept often referred to in climate negotiations. From these principles we derive operational criteria, applicable to a hypothetical decision making framework addressing climate engineering technologies in the context of tackling climate change. This set of criteria is applied to two existing decision making frameworks pertinent to – but not necessarily yet addressing – climate engineering, and we evaluate the degree to which each criterion is fulfilled by these frameworks. The resulting evaluation indicates the degree to which these frameworks are 'just'.
