APPENDIX 1
GOVERNMENT RESPONSE TO HOUSE OF COMMONS
SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY COMMITTEE'S THIRD REPORT ON THE SCIENTIFIC
ADVISORY SYSTEM: SCIENTIFIC ADVICE ON CLIMATE CHANGE
1. It is largely because its process of assessment
is, in Sir John Houghton's words, "open, transparent and
rigorous" that the IPCC's reports command such general respect.
(Paragraph 6)
2. The summaries of the IPCC's assessment reports
are concise and useful documents, and present the consensus view
of climate change in appropriately cautious terms. However, focusing
attention on these summaries may limit the IPCC's effectiveness
in communicating to policymakers the extent of the uncertainties
of climate change science. (Paragraph 8)
The Government agrees with the Committee in its recognition
of the strength of the IPCC and the value of its approach to undertaking
its scientific assessments and the usefulness of the IPCC documents,
particularly the Policy Makers' Summaries. It does not agree that
the summaries detract from the uncertainties in the underlying
science. The summaries are drafted by the lead authors of the
main reports and agreed by governments with lead authors present
to ensure consistency. At the end of each IPCC meeting a list
of changes to the underlying report is presented to delegates
to ensure that the summary texts and main reports are consistent.
The IPCC has made a lot of effort to treat uncertainties in a
consistent manner, particularly in the summaries, as noted in
the answer to recommendation 15.
3. We recommend that the Government actively promote
the IPCC model in other policy areas of global significance in
which there is considerable scientific uncertainty. (Paragraph
9)
Agree. The IPCC has proved the worth in international
negotiations of a thorough review process that is shared by all
participants. The scale of the IPCC process is unprecedented reflecting
the nature of the problem it addresses. However, many of the lessons
learnt can be transferred and many are reflected in the OST Guidelines
2000 on Scientific Advice on Policy Making. Whether the IPCC should
be used in other policy areas of global significance will depend
on the financial and human resources available, the time available
and the need for global acceptance of the science. For example,
not all issues are suitable for IPCC-type assessment as public
attitude to risk is a critical aspect which needs to be taken
into account. We consider the use of the IPCC approach in specific
areas in our comments on recommendation 25.
4. We agree that it is important for the Hadley
Centre to work closely with other specialist institutes, and that
it should continue to concentrate on its core strengths. However,
we strongly suggest that it might benefit from more in-house staff
with expertise outside meteorology, including the biological sciences.
(Paragraph 12)
The Government broadly agrees with this conclusion
of the Committee and re-emphasises that it has been the Hadley
Centre's policy to work closely with other institutes where there
is real specialisation, rather than try to re-invent such specialisation
itself. Clearly it is a
matter of judgement as to the most important way
of moving forward with non-meteorological areas, particularly
in a multi-disciplinary subject.
5. We recommend that the results of the 10 year
review of the Hadley Centre be published as soon as it is completed.
(Paragraph 13)
The review has been published on the DEFRA web site.
6. It is important for public confidence that
scientific advice to Government on climate change, as in other
areas, should be seen to be independent and not dependent solely
on the Hadley Centre. (Paragraph 14)
Paragraph 13 suggests that the Government receives
90% of its advice from the Hadley Centre. Whilst it is true that
the Hadley Centre is a significant provider of advice on climate
change science, it is certainly an overstatement to suggest that
it is as much as 90%. Government receives advice through many
sources, including programmes which it funds elsewhere, but also
through the basic research programmes of the Research Councils,
including the Tyndall Centre, The Royal Society, independent scientists,
the published literature and, not least, the IPCC reports. The
IPCC is the Government's foremost authority on global climate
change, although the Hadley Centre is well placed to advise on
specific and very new work. It is noted that the Committee recognises
that the Hadley Centre is independent of Government, although
funded by Government. Its independence is ensured through the
Science Review Group, through open publication and through its
full participation in international programmes.
7. There must be concern whether the Hadley Centre
is able to offer Government critical assessment of the IPCC reports,
because it is so closely involved in the IPCC process. (Paragraph
15)
The purpose of the inclusive peer review process
of the IPCC is to negate the need for a secondary assessment.
The question revolves around where the greatest authority lies.
The IPCC process is open, comprehensive and involves the widest
range of scientific expertise anywhere on this subject. In general,
it would be expected to be the most authoritative, and has proven
to be so. The role of the UK within the IPCC is to ensure that
its work takes place at the highest standards. The Hadley Centre
has inevitably provided several authors to the IPCC and its work
is cited frequently. This is what we would expect from an organisation
which is one of the world's leading climate modelling centres.
This, however, does not prevent the Hadley Centre from providing
the Government with objective assessment of the IPCC output, as
do other UK lead authors (see paragraph 9).
8. If the Tyndall Centre proves its worth, we
recommend that its funding be put on a more secure and long-term
footing, since climate change issues will be with us for many
years yet. (Paragraph 17)
Three of the Research Councils (Engineering and Physical
Sciences Research Council, Economic and Social Research Council
and Natural Environment Research Council) and the DTI have committed
funding for the Tyndall Centre until 31 December 2005. It is anticipated
that a review of performance will make recommendations during
the early part of 2005 on the nature and scope of funding and
support from 2006 onwards.
9. The Government must ensure that it receives
advice on climate change from all relevant scientific disciplines.
(Paragraph 18)
Yes. Contributions are welcomed and used from as
many sources as possible, including the Government's own commissioned
research and its own institutions, its assessment of the peer
reviewed literature, participation by its science advisers in
learned meetings, both in the UK and overseas. Part of the difficulty
is that, in some disciplines, the work on climate change is more
fragmented. The Government has been working hard to build up capacity
in areas such as the impacts of climate change, where work is
co-ordinated through the UK Climate Impacts Programme. The Department
has also supported scientists to participate in the IPCC reports
from a number of disciplines such as climatology, meteorology,
geography, economics, environmental law, social science and health.
Some of them have provided advice, from time to time, on progress
within their own areas.
10. The Government must also ensure that it is
aware of the views of independent scientists, who may dissent
from the consensus view of climate change. (Paragraph 19)
The Government is aware of views from scientists
who dissent in part from the consensus and welcomes serious scientific
debate. Their views have been well represented in the public debate
on climate change conducted through the media and scientific literature.
The IPCC process itself addresses divergent views as noted in
paragraph 11.
11. We believe that there needs to be some rethinking
of the mechanisms by which Government gets its advice. Clear and
transparent channels should be available through which scientists
who hold dissenting views can readily communicate their ideas
to policymakers and can have confidence that they have been heard.
(Paragraph 19)
The issue of dissenting views is addressed by the
IPCC. As well as appointing authors for its assessment reports,
the IPCC appoints Review Editors, part of whose job it is to ensure
that issues of controversy are adequately addressed and where
appropriate diverse views are reflected in the discussion. At
the national level there are no real barriers to scientists who
wish to raise dissenting views on climate change openly and honestly.
The UK Climate Programme, published in 2000, includes a major
section on the scientific rationale for the Government's policies
on climate change. This section was added after the first public
consultation on the programme. The opportunity to raise dissenting
views on the science was provided during the second consultation
period, but none were received.
12. We recommend that the Government establish
a new independent advisory committee to advise Government on the
science of climate change and on policy options. (Paragraph 20)
The Government does not believe it would serve any
purpose to appoint an independent committee on general climate
science. Many members of any worthwhile committee would inevitably
have been involved in the IPCC peer review process. The recent
US National Academy of Sciences report on climate change illustrated
the redundancy of national advisory panels. However, the IPCC
is necessarily of limited value in developing national mitigation
and adaptation policies and for assessing the potential impacts
of climate change on the UK. The Government set up an independent
science review group on the impacts of climate change which reported
in 1991 and 1996. Furthermore, the Government has a range of advisory
bodies and groups which have provided advice to the Government
on the policy side of climate change. These range from groups
like the Royal Commission on Environmental pollution, the Sustainable
Development Commission and the Advisory Panel on Business and
the Environment, which advises on broader issues, to those which
advise on more specific policy areas like the Commission for Integrated
Transport and the Energy Advisory Panel and most recently the
Cabinet Office's Performance and Innovation Unit Study of Energy
Policy. Learned societies such as the Royal Society and the Royal
Academy of Engineering provide independent advice from time to
time. It is difficult to see what added value another advisory
committee would have.
13. We recommend that the Government reconsider
the adequacy of the current research programme on the biological
effects of climate change, and its funding, and ensure that it
is properly integrated with other climate change research. (Paragraph
25)
As recorded in the Government response to the Report
of the BSE Inquiry, the Chief Scientific Adviser has responsibility
for overseeing the proper co-ordination of research programmes
between departments and the Research Councils. The Inter-Agency
Committee, now superseded by the Global Environmental Change Committee
(GECC), in a report to the Chief Scientific Advisor, reviewed
the coverage of research on GECC across Government, and ensured
that there was an identifiable lead for each issue identified,
including those with a strong biological component. In July the
GECC agreed to review the UK programme as outlined in the Hoskins
report (the 1996 Report of the Expert Panel on the UK National
Strategy for Global Environmental Research to the IACGEC) in the
light of the recommendations for research made by the IPCC.
The Biotechnology and Biological Sciences Research
Council (BBSRC) has undertaken two initiatives to support research
on climate change. The Biological Adaptation to Global Environmental
Change Programme was an £8 million, 4-year programme launched
in 1992. This was followed by the Resource Allocation and Stress
in Plants Programme which supported a small amount of work on
climate change and ended recently. Work supported through these
initiatives has been taken forward through responsive mode and
through projects at the BBSRC-sponsored Institutes. The Councils
are aware of the continued need to support research on the biological
effects of climate change and this area has been included in the
Rural Economy and Land Use bid which is being developed for SR2002.
In the meantime, there is funding available, through the BBSRC
Research Committees, for eligible applicants and institutions
working in this area.
The former DETR and MAFF (now DEFRA) have commissioned
research on the impacts of climate on nature conservation, biodiversity
and agriculture involving biologists and ecologists. The UK Climate
Impacts Programme includes a number of projects on the impacts
of climate change on ecosystems and agriculture, involving those
from the biological sciences.
14. We are not convinced that the UK's national
research programme on climate change is sufficiently coherent
overall or that it has the required breadth in all areas. (Paragraph
26)
We fail to understand the Committee's reasons for
reaching this view. The Government believes the devolved nature
of climate change research funding has considerable advantages
and that mechanisms are in place through the GECC to ensure that
there is a proper level of co-ordination, that gaps are identified
and dealt with appropriately as noted in paragraph 13.
The role of the GECC is to take an overview of the
positions of Government Departments and other Agencies in relation
to research on Global Environmental Change. It also recommends
to the Chief Scientific Adviser a lead Department or Agency in
areas where responsibility is unclear. The GECC will report to
the Chief Scientific Adviser's Committee on developments in Global
Environmental Change research programmes in November 2001.
15. The formula used by the IPCC to communicate
degrees of uncertainty could usefully be adopted in other scientific
advice. (Paragraph 27)
The Government agrees that the applicability of formal
definitions of levels of uncertainty as used in Volumes I and
II of its Third Assessment Report could usefully be investigated
for use in other areas. This is an innovation for the IPCC itself
and it is still working out how best to communicate the diverse
nature of uncertainty across a wide range of disciplines. We have
drawn the attention of the OST to this approach.
16. Climate change is a prime example of an area
in which the precautionary principle is being applied. Even though
there is considerable uncertainty, the consequences of inaction
are sufficiently serious to require action. In this case, some
action is being taken to curb greenhouse gas emissions, even though
it is not absolutely certain that greenhouse gases cause climate
change, because the consequences of inaction for the climate may
be great. (Paragraph 28)
17. We urge the Government to demonstrate that
it is observing the precautionary principle, not just in its policy
emissions, but in responding to the threatened effects of climate
change - for example, in flood prevention measures and planning
policy - and in alternative transport strategies and in investing
in research and development in renewable energy. (Paragraph 28)
The UK's climate change programme, published in November
2000, recognises fully the potential risks associated with climate
change. It sets out a range of policies and measures to reduce
greenhouse gas emissions and the steps to make the necessary transformation
in the transport and energy sectors. Since then, the Government
has also increased investment in renewable energy to over £260
million for the next three years.
The UK Government and the Devolved Administrations
are taking the lead in preparing to adapt to the impacts of climate
change and have already taken action to build adaptation into
some policies, such as water resources, building regulations and
planning as laid out in the UK Climate Change Programme.
The UK Government issues guidance to flood defence
operating authorities in England and Wales which includes allowances
for sea level rise and higher river flows as a result of climate
change. Similarly climate change will also be considered in Shoreline
Management Plans, Coastal Habitat Management Plans and River Catchment
Flood Management Plans, which will be used to inform long-term
policies on land use planning and coastal and river management.
Investment has been made in improving flood warning services,
increasing public awareness of flood risk, improving flood and
coastal defence infrastructure, and promoting new high level targets
for flood and coastal defence, aimed at reducing long term risk.
Relevant changes are also being planned for the Government's Green
Book on Investment Appraisal.
In Scotland, the Scottish Executive has published
research on climate change impacts on flood risk on Scottish rivers
and the coast so that local authorities, and others, may take
account of climate change in developing appropriate measures.
The Executive has also conducted research to consider 'Potential
Adaptation Strategies for Climate Change in Scotland'. This research,
and subsequent consultation, will inform consideration of a climate
change adaptation strategy for Scotland, including flood prevention,
coastal protection and improved flood warning dissemination.
New planning guidance for England on development
of areas at risk of flooding (PPG 25) was issued on 17 July 2001
and has been strengthened to advise a precautionary, risk-based
approach and to protect against inappropriate development in areas
at risk of flooding. Planning guidance in Scotland continues to
be based on avoiding development where there is a significant
risk of flooding, and managing the threat in other areas where
the risk is less acute. The National Assembly for Wales is undertaking
a full review of its land use planning policies, in partnership
with local government, government agencies, business and the voluntary
sector. In Wales, new planning policy on Flood Risk and Climate
is emerging, through Draft Planning Policy Wales (PPW) and the
revision of Technical Advice Note (Wales) 15 Development and Flood
Risk (TAN 15). PPW will be issued in its final form in March 2002
and a draft TAN 15 will issue for consultation early in 2002.
The guidance will emphasise the need to reduce the risks associated
with flooding and will be underpinned by a risk based methodology
to assist decision-making on the ground.
The Central Local Partnership, at a special meeting
in December last year, agreed that a sub-group should be established
to look at how the country could be better placed to deal with
severe weather events, in particular, in the light of the autumn
2000 storms. The main work of the sub-group has been to take an
overview of various reviews and other on-going work on issues
concerning infrastructure and procedures for responding to severe
weather, ensuring, in particular, that both local and central
government considerations are being fully taken on board. This
includes monitoring progress of a variety of weather-related reviews,
including reviews of flood defence funding and emergency planning.
It also includes considering assessments and predictions of climate
change and its impacts and infrastructure decision-making in the
light of climate change.
18. It is most important that the Department's
analysis of the changes required to reduce CO2 emissions
by 60% be published to inform the public debate on climate change.
(Paragraph 29)
The Government will make a full response to the Royal
Commission when it has considered the review by the Performance
and Innovation Unit (PIU) of the longer term, strategic issues
surrounding energy policy for Great Britain. The PIU will be reporting
to the Prime Minister by the end of 2001.
19. Policymakers in this country and abroad ought
to resist the temptation to hide behind scientific uncertainty
in order to avoid introducing the very great changes required
to reduce greenhouse gas concentrations significantly. (Paragraph
29)
The Government agrees with the Committee that scientific
uncertainty should not preclude action being taken. The UK has
taken the lead in aiming for emission reductions in excess of
our Kyoto target. The UK Climate Change Programme recognises that
if we are to stabilise atmospheric concentrations of greenhouse
gases at levels which will avoid dangerous anthropogenic interference
with the climate system, emissions will need to be reduced by
as much as 60-70% globally on today's values by the end of this
century. Reductions of as much as 95% may ultimately be needed
by developed countries to accommodate growth in developing countries.
20. There are considerable commercial opportunities
for UK science and technology in responding, together with industry,
to the challenges of climate change. (Paragraph 30)
The Government agrees with the Committee that action
to reduce greenhouse gas emissions can bring commercial and competitive
opportunities. The desire to maximise these opportunities and
to enhance the UK's competitiveness formed one of the main aims
of the UK's climate change programme, and many of the policies
included within it should help business reap the benefits of early
action. The Government has also this year set up a new Carbon
Trust to encourage low carbon technologies and practices by business
and commerce though out the UK. It will also collaborate with
business, public bodies, Government and research organisations
to help the UK move towards the sustainable, low-carbon economy
that it will need to meet the challenge of climate change.
21. Scientific advice on climate change and its
management must be communicated effectively across both central
and local Government. (Paragraph 33)
In 1997 the Department of the Environment set up
the UK Climate Impacts Programme to help various organisations,
including local authorities, to address the potential impacts
of climate change upon their areas of responsibility and to enable
them to develop adaptation strategies. The UK Climate Impacts
Programme serves to provide basic tools for such work and to bring
different bodies into contact with each other in order to build
up a caucus of understanding and capability in addressing climate
change at the regional local level.
Other advice and information is being sent to local
authorities on how they might both adapt to the effect of climate
change and help to reduce greenhouse gas emissions. In June 2001,
the Government in partnership with the Local Government Association,
the Society of Local Authority Chief Executives and the Improvement
and Development Agency sent an action plan to all chief executives.
The guidance will encourage chief executives to review the actions
they are already taking and help them to identify additional practical
measures that could be taken. The plan encourages chief executives
to develop a climate change strategy for their areas, and points
them to further sources of information and advice. The role of
the Central Local Partnership has already been noted in terms
of the potential link between severe weather events and future
climate change.
22. Climate change is an area in which, broadly
speaking, scientific advice to Government appears to be working
well. (Paragraph 34)
The Government believes this is the case as well
and is very pleased that the Committee recognises this.
23. The research programme must anticipate the
need for advice in future years and should be broad enough to
address new and unforeseen issues as they arise. (Paragraph 35)
The UK has a very broad programme of work which encompasses
climate change stretching from the basic research carried out
by the research councils to the more focussed research funded
by departments including the Department for Environment, Food
and Rural Affairs. The Global Environmental Change Committee (GECC),
successor to the Inter-Agency Committee on Global Environmental
Change (IACGEC), was formed to co-ordinate UK environmental research
with representatives from Government and research councils. Chaired
by the Chief Scientist of DEFRA, and reporting to the Government's
Chief Scientific Adviser, it plays a strong role in ensuring that
the strategic research requirements of the Government for climate
change advice are adequately covered. The recent report of the
IACGEC identifies the areas of responsibility for each department
to ensure that particular issues do not fall between areas of
responsibility, as also discussed in paragraph 13.
24. The IPCC has played a very important part
in forging an international consensus on climate change, among
both scientists and Governments, though it is regrettable that
the USA is yet to appreciate the necessity of early action to
reduce its greenhouse gas emissions. We urge the UK Government
to press for international agreement on the rules for implementing
the Kyoto Protocol when the negotiations are resumed in the summer
of 2001. (Paragraph 36)
Clearly, since the Committee met, the situation has
changed considerably. At the recent Conference of the Parties
to the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change,
parties agreed a package of rules to operationalise the Kyoto
Protocol and to pave the way for ratification. Unfortunately the
United States has voiced its opposition to the Protocol in its
current form and stated its intention not to ratify the Protocol.
The Government will continue to make every effort to engage the
United States and to encourage it to play its full part in combating
climate change.
25. We believe that the IPCC model could usefully
be adopted for scientific advice in other policy areas of global
significance, for example on genetically modified organisms and
ocean pollution. (Paragraph 37)
Agree. Paragraph 3 noted our general views on this.
A similar approach is used for the scientific assessments of ozone
depletion that inform the Montreal Protocol. Reports are prepared
by a large body of international experts. However, in this case,
although there is an expert review process, the reports are not
reviewed or accepted formally by governments.
A variation on the IPCC model is being used for endocrine
disrupters. Following agreement at the Intergovernmental Forum
for Chemical Safety, the International Programme for Chemical
Safety is developing an international 'state of the science' assessment
on endocrine disrupters which should be published in spring next
year.
The IPCC approach would not, however, seem to be
appropriate for the assessment of the scientific issues surrounding
genetically modified organisms as many of these depend on local
conditions and there is little need for a global approach.
With regard to marine ecosystems the UK is playing
an active role in international discussions on providing more
coherent and regular assessments of all aspects to better inform
policy makers. In this context a number of approaches are being
considered, including the IPCC model.
Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs
7 January 2002
| 
