top_five_big Voted top five of its week TOP FIVE

Climate - Radical action required from everyone

Late last year, Australian and New Zealand-based scientists Tim Smith, Iain White, and Bruce Glavovic published a paper in the journal Climate and Development (after several other journals knocked them back), called "The Tragedy of Climate Change Science". They argued that the IPCC had done the job it was set up to do 30 years ago, but that it was no longer fit for purpose. Instead, they presented the case forscientists to adopt a more radical approach to counter the "lack of transformational government action": "The tragedy of climate change science is that compelling evidence is gathered, fresh warnings issued, new institutions established and novel methodologies developed to redress the problems. Yet, greenhouse gas emissions and other indicators of adverse climate change, and global change more broadly, rise year upon year …." The "science-society contract has been broken", they wrote, adding that continuing with science as usual was no longer tenable. While the paper was successful in starting a dialogue, almost nine months on they say there is still a lot more change that needs to be made. "We need to take a stand that really takes the breath away of political leaders and governments about what the climate change science community is saying and is willing to do," says Professor Glavovic, an economist, environmental scientist and environmental planner at New Zealand's Massey University. In an ideal world, scientists would provide governments with their research, and governments would act. The ozone hole, CFCs and the Montreal Protocol are a pretty good example of where that has been more or less the case. But today, again under the world's gaze, the rule of law is helping prop up the very industries that are causing climate change, Professor Glavovic says. Glavovic and two of his colleagues have effectively walked off the job, to bring attention to, well, their frustration. He argues carrying on with IPCC reporting in its present form helps to hold up a façade — creating the illusion things are being done, while polluting and extractive industries carry on, more or less with business as usual. "Our institutional architecture is organised around short-term profit that privileges the wealthy and the powerful at the expense of the Global South and the majority of the world's population," he says. "So how do you change that?" Mark Howden, director of the Australian National University's Institute for Climate, Energy and Disaster Solutions, is another critic of the paper. Professor Howden has been involved with the IPCC since 1991. "I've been involved in the second, third, fourth, fifth and now sixth [IPCC] assessment reports," he says. "I think I'm the only person alive, or the only person full stop, who has actually done all of that." As for getting climate change under control, he says that will take radical action from everyone. He can understand the walk off by his colleagues. But when asked what actually has to happen, he repeats the mantra: "It is going to take mobilisation and action on multiple fronts and there will be some stand-out pivotal moments, that you will only realise with the benefit of hindsight." And that, my friends, is what has to happen. Radical change from everyone. So, let's start now.
Vote
Views
241
GD Views
22
Vote Score
59.09 %
Comments