To quote their website: The Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) was jointly established by the World Meteorological Organization (WMO) and the United Nations Environment Programme (UNEP) in 1988. The terms of reference include: (i) to assess available scientific and socio-economic information on climate change and its impacts and on the options for mitigating climate change and adapting to it and (ii) to provide, on request, scientific/ technological/socio-economic advice to the Conference of the Parties (CoP) to the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC).
And may I direct you to Q7 of the 2001 synthesis report: http://www.ipcc.ch/pub/un/syreng/spm.pdf Question 7 What is known about the potential for, and costs and benefits of, and time frame for reducing greenhouse gas emissions? What would be the economic and social costs and benefits and equity implications of options for policies and measures, and the mechanisms of the Kyoto Protocol, that might be considered to address climate change regionally and globally? What portfolios of options of research and development, investments, and other policies might be considered that would be most effective to enhance the development and deployment of technologies that address climate change? What kind of economic and other policy options might be considered to remove existing and potential barriers and to stimulate private- and public-sector technology transfer and deployment among countries, and what effect might these have on projected emissions? How does the timing of the options contained in the above affect associated economic costs and benefits, and the atmospheric concentrations of greenhouse gases over the next century and beyond? This would, indeed, cover the area Lomborg is concerned with, and may agree with or dispute their findings. I am not sure which is the case. In either case, the IPCC is mandated to analyse and report on the options available to policymakers for mitigation and adaptation. The socio-economic portion of that mandate makes it subject to peer review by economists (even deluded ones who don't understand how the environmental costs are measured like Lomborg). --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups Global Change ("globalchange") newsgroup. Global Change is a public, moderated venue for discussion of science, technology, economics and policy dimensions of global environmental change. Posts will be admitted to the list if and only if any moderator finds the submission to be constructive and/or interesting, on topic, and not gratuitously rude. To post to this group, send email to [email protected] To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/globalchange -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
