Saturday, June 9, 2012

4977.txt

cc: shepherd_John,h.j.schellnhuber@uea.ac.uk
date: Mon Jun 2 15:26:40 2003
from: Mike Hulme <m.hulmeatXYZxyz.ac.uk>
subject: Re: idea for Royal Society meeting
to: F.BerkhoutatXYZxyzsex.ac.uk (Frans Berkhout)

Dear Frans,
Thanks for alerting me to this. I will bring this to the attention of John Schellnhuber
who will also have some views.
"Climate stabilisation" is certainly central to David Warrilow's interests, and has a
policy driver rather than a scientific one, but it can mean different things to different
people. To do justice to it also requires a widely inter-disciplinary thrust, including
economics and technology.
A variant on this theme might be to focus on critical thresholds for adaptation to climate
change in both human and natural systems - this could bring in some interesting
non-standard scientific perspectives from anthropology and biological science, anything to
get away from a repeat of the same old IPCC crowd (RS did a meeting on IPCC last December
anyway) and thus allowed to be a bit more creative.
Mike
At 18:06 23/05/2003 +0100, you wrote:

Mike
I will comment on this next week.
On another issue: I am on Brian Hoskyn's Royal Society Global Environmental Research
Committee whihc includes bods from various international programmes sponsored mainly by
NERC. They are casting around for themes for a possible meeting at the Royal Society
(international, high profile, bringing senior and junior researchers together), and
something on climate stabilisation was mentioned - partly at the instigation of David
Warrilow. Do you think this is sensible? Should there be a Tyndall presence?
I agreed with John Shepherd (also at the meeting) that I'd raise this with you.
All the best
Frans

No comments:

Post a Comment