This chapter provides an overview of the book, with its essential relevance and approach (Sect. 1.1). The novelty and timeliness of this study are also highlighted (Sect. 1.2). Scientific assessments are valuable as tools to inform the public on complex policy issues such as climate change where so much is at stake for so many people. However, guidance is still lacking at the science-policy interface where there are perils lurking. These include the treatment of disputed normative implications in much of the social-science evaluation of policy options. Currently, taking account of this and other challenges, a central open question for many large-scale scientific assessments is whether and how to strengthen and extend social-science policy evaluation to appropriately inform public policy. This book develops a novel philosophical framework for the appropriate role of social-science expertise, particularly economics, in climate policy. The focus is on the integrated economic assessments of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change. The work mainly adds to the existing body of literature by refining John Dewey’s pragmatist philosophy of scientific expertise in public policy, and systematically applying this philosophy to integrated economic assessments.
KeywordsClimate Policy Climate Change Mitigation Scientific Expertise Scientific Assessment Public Policy Process
- Beck, Silke. 2009. Das Klimaexperiment und der IPCC. Schnittstellen zwischen Wissenschaft und Politik in den internationalen Beziehungen. Marburg: Metropolis.Google Scholar
- Bernauer, Thomas, and Lena Schaffer. 2010. Climate change governance. CIS Working Paper 60. http://www.cis.ethz.ch/content/dam/ethz/special-interest/gess/cis/cis-dam/Research/Working_Papers/WP_2010/2010_WP60_Bernauer_Schaffer.pdf. Accessed 13 Mar 2015.
- Biewald, Anne, and Martin Kowarsch (equal contributions), Hermann Lotze-Campen, and Dieter Gerten. 2015. Ethical aspects in the economic modeling of water policy options. Global Environmental Change 30: 80–91.Google Scholar
- Brown, Matthew J. 2012. John Dewey’s logic of science. HOPOS 2(2): 258–306.Google Scholar
- Carraro, Carlo, Charles Kolstad, and Robert Stavins. 2015. Assessment and communication of the social science of climate change: Bridging research and policy. Memorandum from Workshop conducted 18–20 February 2015 in Berlin. http://www.mcc-berlin.net/fileadmin/data/pdf/climate_assessment_memorandum-1.pdf. Accessed 10 Apr 2015.
- Cartwright, Nancy, and Eleonora Montuschi (eds.). 2014. Philosophy of social science: A new introduction. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
- Douglas, Heather E. 2009. Science, policy, and the value-free ideal. Pittsburgh: University of Pittsburgh Press.Google Scholar
- Farrell, Alexander E., and Jill Jäger (eds.). 2006. Assessments of regional and global environmental risks: Designing processes for the effective use of science in decisionmaking. Washington, DC: Resources for the Future.Google Scholar
- Grundmann, Reiner, and Nico Stehr. 2011. Die Macht der Erkenntnis. Berlin: Suhrkamp. English edition: Stehr, Nico, and Reiner Grundmann. 2011. Experts: The knowledge and power of expertise. London: Routledge.Google Scholar
- Grunwald, Armin. 2008. Technik und Politikberatung. Frankfurt: Suhrkamp.Google Scholar
- Habermas, Jürgen. 1968. Technik und Wissenschaft als Ideologie. Frankfurt: Suhrkamp. English edition: Habermas, Jürgen. 1971. Toward a rational society. Boston: Beacon Press.Google Scholar
- Harvey, Fiona. 2011. Worst ever carbon emissions leave climate on the brink. The Guardian, May 29. http://www.guardian.co.uk/environment/2011/may/29/carbon-emissions-nuclearpower. Accessed 13 Aug 2013.
- IAC. 2010. Climate change assessments: Review of the process and procedures of the IPCC. http://www.ipcc.ch/pdf/IAC_report/IAC%20Report.pdf. Accessed 13 Mar 2015.
- IPCC. Eds. Ottmar Edenhofer, Ramón Pichs- Madruga, Youba Sokona, Ellie Farahani, Susanne Kadner, Kristin Seyboth, and Anna Adler, et al. 2014. Climate change 2014 – Mitigation of climate change: Contribution of Working Group III to the Fifth Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
- Jasanoff, Sheila. 1990. The fifth branch: Science advisers as policymakers. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
- Kitcher, Philip. 2011. Science in a democratic society. New York: Prometheus Books.Google Scholar
- Kowarsch, Martin. 2014. What are scientific assessments? MCC Working Paper. http://www.mcc-berlin.net/fileadmin/data/Publikationen_old/2-What_are_assessments_v20141124.pdf. Accessed 13 Mar 2015.
- Maasen, Sabine, and Peter Weingart. 2005. What’s new in scientific advice to policy? In Democratization of expertise? Exploring novel forms of scientific advice in political decision-making, ed. Sabine Maasen and Peter Weingart, 1–19. Dordrecht: Springer.Google Scholar
- Mitchell, Ronald B., William C. Clark, David W. Cash, and Nancy M. Dickson (eds.). 2006. Global environmental assessments: Information and influence. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar
- NRC (Committee on Analysis of Global Change Assessments, National Research Council). 2007. Analysis of global change assessments: Lessons learned. Washington, DC: National Academies Press.Google Scholar
- Parker, Wendy. 2014. Climate change. In Philosophy of social science: A new introduction, ed. Nancy Cartwright and Eleonora Montuschi, 31–37. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
- PBL. 2008. Lessons from global environmental assessments. http://www.pbl.nl/en/publications/2008/Lessons-from-global-environmental-assessments. Accessed 13 Mar 2015.
- Pielke Jr., Roger A. 2010. Major change is needed if the IPCC hopes to survive. Yale Environment 360. http://www.odlt.org/dcd/docs/roger_pielke_harsh_critique_of_IPCC.pdf. Accessed 13 Mar 2015.
- Pintér, László. 2002. Making global integrated environmental assessment and reporting matter. http://www.iisd.org/pdf/pinter_thesis.pdf. Accessed 13 Mar 2015.
- Richardson, Katherine, Will Steffen, Hans Joachim Schellnhuber, Joseph Alcamo, Terry Barker, Daniel M. Kammen, Rik Leemans, et al. 2009. Synthesis report. Climate change. Global risks, challenges & decisions. Copenhagen: University of Copenhagen.Google Scholar
- Risjord, Mark. 2014. Philosophy of social science: A contemporary introduction. New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
- Sarewitz, Daniel. 2011. Looking for quality in all the wrong places, or: The technological origins of quality in scientific policy advice. In The politics of scientific advice: Institutional design for quality assurance, ed. Justus Lentsch and Peter Weingart, 54–70. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- Smith, Joel, Stephen Schneider, Michael Oppenheimer, Gary Yohe, William Hare, Michael D. Mastrandrea, Anand Patwardhan, et al. 2009. Assessing dangerous climate change through an update of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) “reasons for concern.”. PNAS 106(11): 4133–4137.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- UN. 1992. United nations framework convention on climate change. http://www.un-documents.net/unfccc.htm. Accessed 13 Mar 2015.
- UNEP, and UNESCO (Intergovernmental Oceanographic Commission). 2009. An assessment of assessments. Findings of the group of experts. http://www.unep.org/dewa/ProductsandServices/Publications/Publications-2009/AnAssessmentofAssessments/tabid/104486/Default.aspx. Accessed 13 Mar 2015.
- UNFCCC. 2009. The Copenhagen Accord. http://unfccc.int/resource/docs/2009/cop15/eng/l07.pdf. Accessed 13 Mar 2015.
- Watson, Robert T. 2010. The IPCC needs to change, but the science remains sound. Yale Environment 360. http://e360.yale.edu/content/feature.msp?id=2245. Accessed 13 Mar 2015.