1. COMMUNICATING SCIENCE &
QUALITY FOR CLIMATE CHANGE
PAMPOSH KUMAR
NATIONAL COUNCIL FOR S&T COMMUNICATION (NCSTC)
D/O SCIENCE & TECHNOLOGY, GOI
pamposh.kumar@gmail.com
011-26525541, 26590473

2. GOOD SCIENCE, BAD SCIENCE & POLICY
 Uncertainty - an integral feature of scientific
research, engineering, production & services quality
 Also used as excuse for not taking action
 A hinderance to developing rigorous policies

3. SCIENTIFIC UNCERTAINTY &
CLIMATE CHANGE SCENARIOS
 In general, uncertainty ranges for results given in the IPCC
Summary for Policymakers are 90% uncertainty intervals
 Estimated 5% likelihood that the value could be above the range given in
square brackets and 5% that it could be below that range.
 A number of uncertainty ranges in the Working Group I TAR corresponded
to 2 standard deviations (95%) using expert judgement.
3

4. Levels of confidence used to express expert
judgements on the correctness of the underlying
science:
very high confi dence represents at least a 9 out of 10 chance
of being correct;
high confi dence represents about an 8 out of 10 chance of
being correct

5. URGENCY FOR ACTION
 1992 Rio: Precautionary principle (Principle no. 15 in Agenda 21):
Where there are threats of serious or irreversible damage, lack of full
scientific certainty shall not be used as a reason for postponing cost-
effective measures to prevent environmental degradation.
 Essentially needed a robust NATIONAL TRACEABILITY
INFRASTRUCTURE!
 BUT GOOD SCIENCE IS A MUST!

6. ROLE OF SCIENCE COMMUNICATION
 Communicate openly.
 Where gaps exist, present the scope of scientific hypotheses & define the level
of uncertainty.
 Assess the likely consequences of taking no action.
6

7. ROLE OF SCIENCE COMMUNICATION
 Diverging views among scientists can be worrying for policy makers.
 Need to weigh few divergent views against international scientific peer-
reviewed consensus.
 Initiate dialogue to resolve/harmonise conflicting views

8. 8
Way Forward: Science, Quality & Policy
Develop “best solutions”
Continuum of
observations- research-
modelling- assessments-
collaborative processes
between scientific
experts, policy makers
and other stakeholders
Refashion
“scientific expertise”
More transparent,
accountable and
democratic enterprise.
(Johannesburg)
Follow “best quality practices”
Ensure high quality,
independent,
policy relevant,
“geo-politically”
legitimate
scientific information
and advice
Rethink
“policy process”
Open, transparent
and institutionalizing
self-refection in
light of
non-remedial
scientific uncertainties,
ecological vulnerability
and irreversibility,

9. Thanks for VERY kind attention.
Welcome to the new climate…let us deal with it!