Global Change: Institute of International Studies, UC Berkeley
he first two parts of this book presented perspectives on what natural and social scientists know and do not know about global warming, what they perceive to be worth knowing, and how they proceed to establish what we regard as knowledge. Natural scientists will say they feel confident that some natural processes are understood, while many others are not. The extension of the scientific understanding of even those processes understood to allow projections of aggregate effects very often must rest on assumptions (often straight-line) about the likely social reaction to such aggregate changes. Social scientists, attempting to understand how natural changes may affect groups of people and how such groups may react either individually or collectively to such change, often find that their studies involve a high level of approximation in data and disagreement as to how to best improve that data. Even where data is satisfactory, disagreement can arise about its significance. Does the environment shape human society? Will human society exhaust the planet's resources, or will society respond to scarcity through innovation? Such disputes often seem to stem from philosophical differences as much as from objective analysis.
ltimately, the knowledge of both natural and social scientists forms the foundation for societal responses, but the link between science and policy is complex and poorly understood. Legislators and policymakers are charged with the crucial tasks of articulating and implementing societal responses to global change, but the capacities of the law and policy-making processes to understand, manage, and draw upon the work of both natural and social scientists on such global change phenomena are quite undeveloped. Even more undeveloped is the capacity for such "knowledge" to be communicated to the various constituencies that will seek to influence the legislators and policymakers. The rules and policies to consider are formed and implemented by a variety of institutions, such as national governmental bodies, international conferences or secretariats, nongovernmental organizations, and private corporations. The structure and goals of each institution shape the laws and policies they adopt. Coming full circle, in any attempt to then assess the function and impact of such policies, legislators and policymakers must turn again to the social and natural sciences.
he contributions to this part of the book explore some of the issues that arise as knowledge of a problem gives rise to and influences society's response. Lawrence Goulder discusses from an economic perspective the proposal for a carbon tax as a response to global climate change. In Goulder's view, knowledge of the dangers (costs) of climate change is only a part of the economic analysis. In economic analysis, one must know also the price of acting to mitigate the possible costs of climate change. "[T]he role of economics is to work out the balance between environmental goals and other goals." While Goulder focuses on a unilateral carbon tax policy option, Joan Donoghue, Daniel Bodansky, and Lee Kimball track the evolution of international efforts to address global change. Donoghue illustrates how both the political and the personal shape legal outcomes. Her contribution provides an account of how international efforts at cooperation develop: the role of shared statements of the problem, the central importance of process, and the need for including all potential contributors to the problem. Bodansky provides an overview and analysis of the tools available for use in international environmental law, distinguishing the types of standards available for regulation and the options available to encourage the implementation of such standards. Finally, Kimball examines the present and future institutional structure for addressing global change, paying particular attention to the themes of linkage between funding and policy, integration of environment and development, the information base, and the role of nongovernmental actors.
any other policy instruments, such as command and control, licensing systems, tradable permits, quotas, or incentive programs may be assessed from the standpoint of the economist, the psychologist, the sociologist, or the political scientist. Also, crucial to the effectiveness of international law and policy is how these are implemented at the national level. The contributions in this part provide an introduction and framework within which to explore these other issues.
The articles in this part illustrate concretely the complex relationship between science and policy. While scientists can carefully explore segments of our vast and complex planet, legislators and policymakers must work through opposition and compromise to produce documents that may be ambiguous or policies that may have uncertain effects. Clearly, although science and policy are related to each other, very different processes are involved in the work of scientists and policymakers. The effort to institutionalize the role of science in the making of policy on problems such as climate change represents an important challenge which tests the capacities of both legislators and scientists to understand the needs of the other and to overcome the obstacles to communication.
See also: Conclusion
Back to Ecological and Social Dimensions of Global Change.
© Copyright 1994, Regents of the University of California