Geoscience Reference
In-Depth Information
In response, the Villach authors contended, “scientists and policymak-
ers should begin active collaboration to explore the effectiveness of alterna-
tive policies and adjustments.”
29
Spearheaded by Swedish meteorologist
and long-time climate science advocate Bert Bolin at Stockholm Univer-
sity, a group of scientific leaders at Villach recommended that the ICSU,
the WMO, and the UNEP modify the assessment process itself. These
scientists wanted work to begin on an international treaty that would miti-
gate what they characterized as an increasingly dire global environmental
problem. In other words, the consensus-making process should begin to
explicitly address not just science but policy.
In 1986, Bolin formed an informal group of international climate sci-
entists called the Advisory Group on Greenhouse Gases (AGGG) to do
just that. Made up of Bolin and two members from each of three orga-
nizations— UNEP, the WMO, and the ICSU— the AGGG undertook to
address the potential impacts and policy responses to climate change and to
“initiate if necessary, consideration of a global convention.”
30
In 1987, with
a grant from the Rockefeller Brothers Fund, as well as support from the
Environmental Defense Fund via Michael Oppenheimer and from George
Woodwell and his Woods Hole Research Center, the AGGG launched
a two-part conference focused on developing national and international
policies for responding to climate change. Held in Villach, Austria, under
the auspices of Stockholm's Beijer Institute in early October, the first meet-
ing laid out the global and regional impacts of greenhouse warming and
addressed “technical, financial, and institutional options for limiting or
adapting to climatic changes.”
31
The second meeting, held a month later
in Bellagio, Italy, used the initial assessment as a platform for proposing
regional policies to mitigate and adapt to climate change and suggested
international institutional arrangements that could help implement these
policies.
32
In retrospect, the shift seems like a relatively minor one; but for cli-
mate scientists at the time, Villach and Bellagio marked a bold step in
how climate scientists addressed policy. The meetings also introduced
a new rubric for evaluating rising CO
2
based on the potential tempera-
ture increase and related sea-level rise it might cause. Bolin and his col-
leagues asked scientists to recommend quantifiable objectives based on
what he saw as a strong consensus on the basic science . . . and they did.
The group suggested that international policymakers set goals that would
