Lessons China can learn from the interactions between climate change research and governance

Abstract

Climate change has attracted the general concern of the international community. Global actions on climate change are based not only in the science, but also involve domestic and international economics and politics. Here we review the interactions between the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) assessment reports and the development of climate policy under the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC). There are inextricable links between the scientific research and political processes. The systematic IPCC assessment reports provide important scientific evidence and conclusions on which the Parties to the UNFCCC have based their negotiations. An important example is policies considering adaptation to long term climate change. Conversely, the UNFCCC negotiations direct research direction and foci for scientific communities and the IPCC. China has participated in global climate change science and policy activities for years, but although its scientific and political contribution has increased, its research activity still lags behind that of Europe and the United States. The percentage of mainland Chinese publications cited in the IPCC's 5th Assessment Report (AR5; 2013), Working Group I (Physical Science Basis), was 2.8%, a doubling from the percentage cited in the Working Group I report from the 4th Assessment Report (2007). For the AR5 second and third working group reports (Impacts, Mitigation), the lead authors were 1.3% and 1.6% respectively. Some core fields, such as the global sequence of surface air temperature data and the accumulated emission space of 2°C, lack expert and Chinese input. With the rapid development of its economy, China will assume more responsibility in global climate change policy. However current domestic scientific research cannot fully support China's transition to a more important global role. More responsibility needs to be matched with more high level capacity. In the future, China should learn from the historical interactions between the international scientific research community (including the IPCC) and global climate change governance (both international and domestic policy making). First, the national long term climate policy should systematically consider the relationships between science and politics, since climate change issues are different from others. Without the confident support from scientific research, it is hard to make any decisions. Second, it should take advantage of expertise in think tanks. Think tanks have played very important role in the West. Given the unprecedented complexity of climate diplomatic decisions, there is an urgent need for high level think tanks to provide forward-looking, agile, accurate, credible, high-quality and efficient support for decision-making. Third, China should continue to maintain and increase investment in climate related scientific research and integrative activities, publication of academic achievements and international recognition. Climate change is a global and systematic issue. It is essential to accelerate the integration of information across different disciplines (natural sciences, social sciences, engineering and technology) and to pay attention to the transformation from basic disciplinary research results into policy recommendations at the state, department, locality and industrial levels. Since the working language assessed by IPCC is English, this requires that the research results of China should be published in English with international recognition. Fourth, China should make full use of the IPCC working procedures to improve scientific decision making for domestic work. The IPCC scientific evaluation norms system ensures broad participation, improve transparency in decision-making, prevent subjective decision-making and ensure a balance of interests. In the domestic decision-making process, it is useful to absorb the opinions of government departments, social organizations and the public, give full play to the role of different stakeholders in decision-making, and establish a decision-making system dominated by government departments, consulting institutions and think tanks, while involving the general public extensively. All sectors of society need to improved awareness of climate change to respond to this crisis, and broader participation will help achieve faster and better decision-making goals.