COPENHAGEN -- I had a chance to sit in on Thomas Karl (NOAA)’s presentation/summary of the U.S. Global Research Programme at the U.S. Center here. While I only caught the end of his presentation, (the whole report and summary can be found here), there was an interesting question asked by a member of the audience: how do these scientific reports and research projects relate to decision making when it comes to deciding on permits and applications for natural resource development? The audience member cited the Department of Interior’s recent decision to approve Shell’s application to drill in the Arctic Ocean. In the presentation Karl had shown the same area to be one of the most vulnerable to changes and impacts of climate change.
That same issue relates to the negotiations, especially when it comes to adaptation. How will the science behind IPCC and vulnerability assessments translate into policy decisions? While the negotiating text does point to the need for science-based decision making, one can only wonder how this would be implemented. If adaptation is going to happen to the scale that it is required, how will the various types of information needed be managed and analyzed? And, even more importantly, how will this information be accessed by and disseminated to the necessary parties?
RFF’s Climate and Electricity Policy Program just launched an initiative called the Global Adaptation Atlas (full disclosure: I work on this project). It is exactly the management tool needed for science to influence policy and practice on adaptation. It brings the projected impacts of climate change (similar information to the USGCRP) and adaptation activities together on a common platform to look at where there might be confluences of impacts, and takes stock of whether there are appropriate activities to address these impacts. It allows for large-scale dissemination and sharing of knowledge pertinent to adaptation—to whomever is interested (it’s online, free, and allows for download and upload). We think that it’s a pretty great tool to help policymakers and planners access and manage the complex information they need to make decisions.
Some of you might be curious as to what Thomas Karl’s answer was to the question. He said that all types of information and reports were taken into consideration before making the decision—but then again, that sounds like a standard answer.
Nisha Krishnan is the Project Manager of the Global Adaptation Atlas and a Research Assistant with the Climate and Electricity Policy Program at RFF.
