今年以来，有6份评估报告对气候研究的方方面面进行了考量——最近的是周一发布的、来自全球多家科学研究院的有关“政府间气候变化专门委员会”(IPCC)的报告。尽管没有一份报告对根本理念——人类活动造成的全球变暖必须通过减少二氧化碳及其它温室气体排放来解决——提出质疑，但却对IPCC以及为其评估提供支持的各气候研究中心提出了（常常是合理的）严厉批评。
现在到了进行根本改革的时候，必须降低未来IPCC评估报告中出现偏见与错误的可能性，提高透明度，并让整个气候研究领域接受尽可能广泛的科学观点。
重塑公众对IPCC的信任至关重要，因为这是科学家与政治家之间的主要居间机构，而政治家所决定的气候政策可能会让全球经济付出数千亿美元的代价。鉴于大多数科学家都认为必须解决全球变暖问题，IPCC不应指望能让最极端的“气候怀疑论者”都感到满意。但该机构绝不能再草率重复夸大气候变化风险的没有事实依据的言论，从而损害自身的可信度，比如喜玛拉雅冰川将在2035年前消失这一世人皆知的论断。
在下个月在韩国召开的全体会议上，IPCC的194个成员国政府必须推动该机构进行管理与程序的全面改革。IPCC需要更强有力的领导层来维持公信力，包括一个全新的执行委员会（至少得有一名成员不是气候领域的科学家），以及执行总裁而不是相对无权的秘书处。尽管自2002年起担任IPCC主席的拉津德•帕乔里(Rajendra Pachauri)在某些方面受到了不公诋毁，但他最近在压力下的表现并无助于气候科学事业发展。他离开的时刻已经到了。
一个重获活力的IPCC领导层将有助于解决该机构在评估过程中的不足。评估过程应该变得更加包容，接纳具有科学依据的另类观点，同时也应该变得更加排他，排斥一切没有事实依据的有关气候剧烈变化的论断。有许多不确定性必须得到重视，IPCC的评估应该比以前更多谈及风险与可能性。如此一来，我们才能回到对气候变化所引发的真正问题的讨论上。
http://www.ftchinese.com/story/001034415
Over the course of this year, six reviews have examined various aspects of climate research – most recently Monday’s report on the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change by the world’s scientific academies. While none has challenged the fundamental view that man-made global warming must be tackled by cutting emissions of carbon dioxide and other greenhouse gases, there has been harsh – and often deserved – criticism of the IPCC and the climate research centres that contribute to its assessments.
Now it is time to implement fundamental reforms that would reduce the risk of bias and errors appearing in future IPCC assessments, increase transparency and open up the whole field of climate research to the widest possible range of scientific views.
Restoring public confidence in the IPCC is essential, because it is the main intermediary between scientists and politicians who have to decide on climate policies that could cost the global economy hundreds of billions of dollars. Given that most scientists believe in the need to tackle global warming, the IPCC cannot hope to satisfy the most extreme “climate sceptics”. But it must never again undermine its own credibility by sloppily repeating unsubstantiated statements that exaggerate the risk of climate change, such as the notorious claim that Himalayan glaciers could disappear by 2035.
At its plenary meeting in South Korea next month, the 194 national governments that control the IPCC must push through a thorough overhaul of management and procedures. The IPCC needs stronger leadership to maintain credibility, including a new executive committee (with at least one member who is not a climate scientist) and a chief executive rather than a relatively powerless secretary. Although Rajendra Pachauri, IPCC chairman since 2002, has been unfairly vilified in some quarters, his recent performance under pressure has not helped the cause of climate science; the time has come for him to move on.
A rejuvenated IPCC leadership could tackle the deficiencies in its review process. This should become more inclusive, welcoming alternative views where these are scientifically valid, and at the same time more exclusive, rejecting unsubstantiated claims of dramatic change. The many uncertainties need recognition, with IPCC assessments talking more about risks and probabilities than they have in the past. Then the debate can get back to the real issues posed by climate change.
没有评论:
发表评论