Climatic Change

, 92:31 | Cite as

Uncertainty and assessment of the issues posed by urgent climate change. An editorial comment

  • Paul BaerEmail author
  • James S. Risbey


Climate change raises a number of difficult issues concerning the management of scientific uncertainty. Urgent decisions seem to call for quantified probability statements as the basis of rational policy-making. Yet the answers to many important questions such as the likely rate of sea level rise are not easily quantified, and the utilization of any estimates based on ‘collective subjective probability’ necessarily depends on value-laden judgments about burden-of-proof and the distribution of risk. We suggest that there is a need for a new form of risk assessment that is based in, but not limited to, the scientific community, in which rapid but credible processes address the critical questions that we are now facing.


Emission Policy Wildlife Conservation Society Urgent Decision Climate Science Community Abstract Climate Change 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.


  1. Baer P, Spash C (2009) Is climate change cost-benefit analysis defensible? A critique of the Stern Report. In Pereira AG, Funtowicz S (eds) Science for policy: New challenges, new opportunities. Oxford University Press, Oxford (in press)Google Scholar
  2. Funtowicz S, Ravetz J (1990) Uncertainty and quality in science for policy. Kluwer, Dordrecht, p 229Google Scholar
  3. Funtowicz S, Ravetz J (1994) The Worth of a songbird: ecological economics as a post-normal science. Ecol Econ 10:197–207.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Hansen J (2008) Tipping point: Perspective of a climatologist. In: Woods W (ed) State of the wild 2008–2009: a global portrait of wildlife, wildlands, and oceans. Wildlife Conservation Society/Island Press, Washington, DC, pp 6–15Google Scholar
  5. IPCC (2005) Guidance notes for lead authors of the IPCC fourth assessment report on addressing uncertainties. Technical Report, Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, p 4Google Scholar
  6. Moss R, Schneider SH (2000) Uncertainties in the IPCC TAR: Recommendations to lead authors for more consistent assessment and reporting. In: Pachauri R, Taniguchi T, Tanaka K (eds) Guidance papers on the cross cutting issues of the third assessment report of the IPCC. World Meteorological Organization, Geneva, pp 33–51Google Scholar
  7. Risbey J (2008) The new climate discourse: alarmist or alarming? Global Environ Change 18(1):26–37CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Swart R, Bernstein L, Ha-Duong M, Petersen A (2009) Agreeing to disagree: uncertainty management in assessing climate change, impacts and responses by the IPCC. Clim Change 92:1–2 (this isse)CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media B.V. 2008

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Woods Institute for the EnvironmentStanford UniversityStanfordUSA
  2. 2.The Centre for Australian Weather and Climate ResearchHobartAustralia

Personalised recommendations