I was wondering for some time now, how much the findings of the work of scientists, be it the
IPCC, be it the PIK in Potsdam or what have you, can be taken for granted in order for policy
makers to make valuable
decisions (e.g. cutting carbon emissions
by half
by 2050) and if the uncertainties in the models might outweigh certain
decisions to reduce carbon emissions so that in the end it might happen that these uncertainties make these
decisions obsolete, because they do not suffice to avoid «dangerous climate change»?
Being without the shield of official endorsement, that co-operative effort would earn credibility with the public and
decision -
makers only
by its track - record of the accuracy of its prognoses, meaning that it would be at least as dependent on the proper use of the scientific method as the
IPCC.
By helping local and national
decision -
makers understand the current and future impacts before them, the
IPCC report provides guidance on where to focus our attention in order to help vulnerable communities adapt to climate change.