Conclusions and recommendations
C&R Sub heading
1. In
order to communicate what climate change is, the Government must
agree a clear consistent and precise definition which can be related
to direct observations and measurements. This should be based
on Professors Slingo's and Rapley's definitions. (Paragraph 12)
2. Despite
the existing polling information, it remains difficult to draw
firm conclusions on how public acceptance and understanding of
climate change is changing in the UK. However, it is clear that
a significant majority of people think the climate is changing
and that human activity is at least partly responsible for this.
The polling on public understanding is limited and unlikely to
highlight the information needs of the general public. In its
response to this report, the Government should detail how it will
collect, and make available, more regular and more in depth information
on the public understanding of climate change. (Paragraph 18)
3. We
acknowledge the difficulty for broadcasters in maintaining coverage
of climate change when the basic facts are established and the
central story remains the same. We consider it vital, however,
that they continue to do so. Our greatest concern is about the
BBC given the high level of trust the public has in its coverage.
It did not convince us that it had a clear understanding of the
information needs of its audience and we note its rejection of
Professor Jones' recommendations on climate. (Paragraph 41)
4. This
is not to say that non-scientists should be excluded from the
debate, the BBC has the responsibility to reflect all views and
opinions in society and it is worth remembering that not all frauds
and mistakes in science have been uncovered by scientists. Where
time is available for careful consideration and discussion of
the facts, it should be possible to explore more detailed consideration
of where the science is less certain, such as how feedback mechanisms
and climate sensitivity influence the response of the climate
to increasing concentrations of carbon dioxide in the atmosphere.
Scientists, politicians, lobbying groups and other interested
parties should be heard on this issue but the BBC should be clear
on what role its interviewees have and should be careful not to
treat lobbying groups as disinterested experts. (Paragraph 42)
5. We
recommend that the BBC should develop clear editorial guidelines
for all commentators and presenters on the facts of climate that
should be used to challenge statements, from either side of the
climate policy debate, that stray too far from the scientific
facts. Public service broadcasters should be held to a higher
standard than other broadcasters. (Paragraph 47)
6. We
are very disappointed by the heavy reliance that the Daily Mail
and the Daily Telegraph place on the ability of their readers
to distinguish between fact and opinion on climate science. This
is especially the case because opinion pieces about climate science
in these publications are frequently based on factual inaccuracies
which go unchallenged. (Paragraph 54)
7. The
internet and social media are increasingly used by the public
when seeking to verify media reports or obtain further detailed
information about climate change. The Government and other trusted
bodies are currently failing to make effective use of internet
or social media to engage with the public and provide accurate
scientific information about climate change. (Paragraph 59)
8. We
consider the lack of a narrative strongly reflects a lack leadership
in climate change. (Paragraph 61)
9. The
Met Office is an organisation seeking to have a greater role in
the communication of climate science. As such we would have liked
to have seen greater effort to communicate to the public on the
publication of the IPCC AR5 report. It should have been more timely
with information that should be far more accessible to the public
at large. (Paragraph 71)
10. We
heard from Government, government agencies and bodies at national
and local levels working at engaging with the public on mitigating
and adapting to climate change. We found little evidence of any
significant co-ordination amongst them to communicate the science.
Neither is there any indication that the Government is regarded
as a primary, or even a reliable, source of information on climate
science by the general public. (Paragraph 79)
11. The
Royal Society is a publicly funded body with a responsibility
to communicate about science. We encourage it to step up to that
responsibility. (Paragraph 91)
12. Successive
Government efforts to create a clear narrative that ensures a
discourse about climate change that is coherent, constructive
and results in proper public engagement has been disappointingly
limited. (Paragraph 105)
13. The
Government's hands-off approach to engaging with the public and
the media, relying heavily on scientists as the most prominent
voice, has a resulted in a vacuum that has allowed inaccurate
arguments to flourish with little effective challenge. (Paragraph
106)
14. If
the Government is to demonstrate its climate policies are evidence
based, it needs to be an authoritative and trusted voice which
explains the current state of climate science. It is important
that climate science is presented separately from any subsequent
policy response. We recommend that the Government work with the
learned societies and national academies to develop a source of
information on climate science that is discrete from policy delivery,
comprehensible to the general public and responsive to both current
developments and uncertainties in the science. (Paragraph 107)
15. We
have always sought to ascertain that policy is evidence based.
We remain convinced that peer review is the best current option
for judging the strength of science in any issue. Peer reviewed
science is overwhelmingly of the view that anthropogenic climate
change exists. (Paragraph 108)
16. Science
is the ultimate sceptic, challenging theories and opinion and
ready to abandon or adapt as the available evidence changes. Genuine
scepticism should be embraced by the climate science community.
Dogma on either side of the debate should be revealed as such.
(Paragraph 109)
17. To
achieve the necessary commitment from the public to climate policy,
the Government must demonstrate a coherent approach to communicating
both the scientific basis and the proposed solutions. We recommend
that the Government consolidates its strategic approach to communicating
climate science across all Departments, formulate the principles
of that approach and make it public. All Ministers should acquaint
themselves with the science of climate change and then they, and
their Departments, should reflect the Government approach in person,
in media interviews and online by a presenting a clear and consistent
message. (Paragraph 110)
|