Review Finds Flaws in U.N. Climate Panel Structure

[I AM NOT THAT GUY 5,715]

UNITED NATIONS — The United Nations needs to revise the way it manages its assessments of climate change, with the scientists involved more open to alternative views, more transparent about possible conflicts of interest and more careful to avoid making policy prescriptions, an independent review panel said Monday.

The review panel also recommended that the senior officials involved in producing the periodic assessments serve in their voluntary positions for only one report — a statement interpreted to suggest that the current chairman of the climate panel, Rajendra K. Pachauri, step down.

Ban Ki-moon, the secretary general of the United Nations, has been struggling to make the United Nations the main stage for addressing climate change. Errors in the 2007 assessment report, including a prediction that the Himalayan glaciers could disappear by 2035, have threatened to overshadow the United Nations’ message that climate change is a significant threat requiring urgent collective action.

“I think the errors made did dent the credibility of the process,” said Harold T. Shapiro, a former president of Princeton University and professor of economic and public affairs there. Being more open about the process will help the report withstand the public scrutiny it now endures, Mr. Shapiro, the chairman of the review committee, told a news conference.

Although there is widespread scientific consensus that human activity is heating the planet, critics used the mistakes — which emerged at the same time as the unauthorized release of hundreds of e-mails from a climate research center in Britain — to question all the science involved. The e-mails opened prominent climate scientists to charges that they had manipulated some data.

The committee noted that some climate panel leaders had been criticized for public statements perceived as advocating specific policies. “Straying into advocacy can only hurt I.P.C.C.’s credibility,” the report said.

It also suggested that the panel revise the way it rates doubts about some of the science, that the process of choosing the scientists who write the report be more open and that the panel require that any possible conflicts of interest be revealed.

http://www.nytimes.com/2010/08/31/world/31nations.html?_r=2&hp

[^_^ 5,021]

It is scandalous that climate scientists have to be told to reveal conflicts of interests. It would seem their ethics are no better than that of the average TV stock analyst.

[Pooky 3,807]

It is scandalous that climate scientists have to be told to reveal conflicts of interests. It would seem their ethics are no better than that of the average TV stock analyst.

Does this mean they have to reveal when they leave the air conditioning on, but open the windows?

[I AM NOT THAT GUY 5,715]

Grant raising is a highly competitive business.

[Ban Hammer 13,403]

It is scandalous that climate scientists have to be told to reveal conflicts of interests. It would seem their ethics are no better than that of the average TV stock analyst.

kinda like lawyers - 99% give the other 1% a bad name.