IMPLEMENTING CLIMATE AND GLOBAL CHANGE RESEARCH
A REVIEW OF THE FINAL U.S. CLIMATE CHANGE SCIENCE PROGRAM STRATEGIC PLAN
THE NATIONAL ACADEMIES PRESS
Washington, D.C. www.nap.edu
THE NATIONAL ACADEMIES PRESS
500 Fifth Street, N.W. Washington, DC 20001
NOTICE: The project that is the subject of this report was approved by the Governing Board of the National Research Council, whose members are drawn from the councils of the National Academy of Sciences, the National Academy of Engineering, and the Institute of Medicine. The members of the committee responsible for the report were chosen for their special competences and with regard for appropriate balance.
This study was supported by Contract No. NASW-01008 between the National Academy of Sciences and NASA/USGCRP. Any opinions, findings, conclusions, or recommendations expressed in this publication are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the views of the organizations or agencies that provided support for the project.
International Standard Book Number 0-309-08865-8 (book)
International Standard Book Number 0-309-53089-X (pdf)
Library of Congress Catalog Card Number 2004110136
Copies of this report are available upon request from Byron Mason, the National Academies, Division on Earth and Life Studies, 500 Fifth Street NW, Keck 610, Washington DC, 20001; (202) 334-3511.
Additional copies of this report are available from the
National Academies Press,
500 Fifth Street, N.W., Lockbox 285, Washington, DC 20055; (800) 624-6242 or (202) 334-3313 (in the Washington metropolitan area); Internet, http://www.nap.edu
Copyright 2004 by the National Academy of Sciences. All rights reserved.
Printed in the United States of America
THE NATIONAL ACADEMIES
Advisers to the Nation of Science, Engineering, and Medicine
The National Academy of Sciences is a private, nonprofit, self-perpetuating society of distinguished scholars engaged in scientific and engineering research, dedicated to the furtherance of science and technology and to their use for the general welfare. Upon the authority of the charter granted to it by the Congress in 1863, the Academy has a mandate that requires it to advise the federal government on scientific and technical matters. Dr. Bruce M. Alberts is president of the National Academy of Sciences.
The National Academy of Engineering was established in 1964, under the charter of the National Academy of Sciences, as a parallel organization of outstanding engineers. It is autonomous in its administration and in the selection of its members, sharing with the National Academy of Sciences the responsibility for advising the federal government. The National Academy of Engineering also sponsors engineering programs aimed at meeting national needs, encourages education and research, and recognizes the superior achievements of engineers. Dr. Wm. A. Wulf is president of the National Academy of Engineering.
The Institute of Medicine was established in 1970 by the National Academy of Sciences to secure the services of eminent members of appropriate professions in the examination of policy matters pertaining to the health of the public. The Institute acts under the responsibility given to the National Academy of Sciences by its congressional charter to be an adviser to the federal government and, upon its own initiative, to identify issues of medical care, research, and education. Dr. Harvey V. Fineberg is president of the Institute of Medicine.
The National Research Council was organized by the National Academy of Sciences in 1916 to associate the broad community of science and technology with the Academy’s purposes of furthering knowledge and advising the federal government. Functioning in accordance with general policies determined by the Academy, the Council has become the principal operating agency of both the National Academy of Sciences and the National Academy of Engineering in providing services to the government, the public, and the scientific and engineering communities. The Council is administered jointly by both Academies and the Institute of Medicine. Dr. Bruce M. Alberts and Dr. Wm. A. Wulf are chair and vice chair, respectively, of the National Research Council
COMMITTEE TO REVIEW THE U.S. CLIMATE CHANGE SCIENCE PROGRAM STRATEGIC PLAN
THOMAS E. GRAEDEL (Chair),
Yale University, New Haven, Connecticut
LINDA A. CAPUANO,
San Jose, California
ELIZABETH CHORNESKY,
University of California, Santa Cruz
MARY A. GADE,
Sonnenschein, Nath, and Rosenthal, Chicago, Illinois
KATHARINE L. JACOBS,
University of Arizona, Tucson
ANTHONY C. JANETOS,
H. John Heinz III Center for Science, Economics, and the Environment, Washington, D.C.
CHARLES KOLSTAD,
University of California, Santa Barbara
DIANA M. LIVERMAN,
Oxford University, United Kingdom
JERRY D. MAHLMAN,
National Center for Atmospheric Research, Boulder, Colorado
DIANE MCKNIGHT,
University of Colorado, Boulder
MICHAEL J. PRATHER,
University of California, Irvine
EUGENE ROSA,
Washington State University, Pullman
WILLIAM H. SCHLESINGER,
Duke University, Durham, North Carolina
DAVID SKOLE,
Michigan State University, East Lansing
ANDREW SOLOW,
Woods Hole Oceanographic Institution, Massachusetts
ROBERT A. WELLER,
Woods Hole Oceanographic Institution, Massachusetts
T. STEPHEN WITTRIG,
BP, Naperville, Illinois
NATIONAL RESEARCH COUNCIL STAFF
GREGORY H. SYMMES, Study Director (Phase I),
Division on Earth and Life Studies
AMANDA STAUDT, Study Director (Phase II),
Board on Atmospheric Sciences and Climate
BYRON MASON, Senior Program Assistant,
Division on Earth and Life Studies
ELIZABETH GALINIS, Senior Program Assistant,
Board on Atmospheric Sciences and Climate
Preface
In September 2002, Assistant Secretary of Commerce for Oceans and Atmosphere James R. Mahoney asked the National Academies to undertake a fast-track review of the U.S. Climate Change Science Program’s (CCSP’s) draft strategic plan for climate and global change studies and the final strategic plan after it had been revised. In response the 17-member Committee to Review the U.S. Climate Change Science Program Strategic Plan was formed (see Appendix C for committee biographies). The committee was given a two-phase statement of task (see Appendix B for full statement of task). The committee’s first report, which reviewed the November 11, 2002, draft strategic plan, was issued in February 2003 and addressed Phase I of the committee’s task. This report, which provides an overall assessment of the revised strategic plan and CCSP’s strategic planning process, addresses Phase II of the committee’s task (see Box P-1).
Chapter 1 of this report summarizes the committee’s overall assessment of the revised strategic plan. Chapters 2 and 3 examine in more detail how those aspects of the draft plan that were identified in the committee’s first report as particularly challenging have evolved in the revised plan. The scientific scope of the plan and decision support activities that need further development during implementation are addressed in Chapter 2. The major management challenges in implementing the plan are addressed in Chapter 3. The committee responds to the five questions in the Phase II statement of task (see Box P-1) and provides recommendations for future planning efforts in Chapter 4.
The committee held two meetings since the release of the revised strategic plan to gather information and prepare this report. The first meeting was held on August 25-27, 2003, in Washington, D.C. At this meeting Ghassem Asrar, associate administrator for Earth Science at the National Aeronautics and Space Administration, and Richard Moss, executive director of the U.S. Global Change Research Program, presented an overview of the changes to the strategic plan and how the CCSP addressed the committee’s major recommendations. Lead authors of selected chapters of the plan also discussed the changes that were made to their chapters. We thank Ghassem Asrar and Richard Moss along with the following individuals who also participated in this meeting: David Allen, CCSP Office; Susan Avery, National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) and CCSP Office; Louis Brown, National Science Foundation (NSF); Margarita Conkright, NOAA and CCSP Office; David Conover, Climate Change Technology Program; Jay Fein, NSF; Janet Gamble, U.S. Environmental Protection
BOX P-1 Statement of Task for Phase II In the second phase, the committee will provide an overall assessment of the revised (final) plan, with an emphasis on how the plan has evolved in response to NRC and other community input. The committee also will address the following questions related to the processes used to solicit and consider input from the scientific and stakeholder communities throughout the strategic planning process:
The results of phase II will be provided in a report to be delivered to the program within 6 months after the revised (final) plan is published. |
Agency (USEPA); Susan Herrod Julius, USEPA; Chester Koblinsky, NASA and CCSP Office; Kathryn Parker, USEPA; Toral Patel-Weynand, Department of State; Steve Shafer, U.S. Department of Agriculture; and Caitlin Simpson, NOAA. The committee held a second meeting in Irvine, California, in October 2003, during which the committee received an update from James Mahoney and Richard Moss on the status of plan implementation, and prepared this report. We extend our gratitude to James Mahoney and Richard Moss for their support, insights, and openness throughout the study process.
The committee and staff have worked diligently to make this report as useful as possible to the CCSP. We wish the CCSP leadership well as it takes on the challenging task of implementing this ambitious strategic plan. In the opinion of many of the committee members the issues addressed by the CCSP are among the most crucial of those facing humankind in the twenty-first century.
Thomas E. Graedel, Chair
Acknowledgments
This report has been reviewed in draft form by individuals chosen for their diverse perspectives and technical expertise, in accordance with procedures approved by the National Research Council’s Report Review Committee. The purpose of this independent review is to provide candid and critical comments that will assist the institution in making its published report as sound as possible and to ensure that the report meets institutional standards for objectivity, evidence, and responsiveness to the study charge. The review comments and draft manuscript remain confidential to protect the integrity of the deliberative process. We wish to thank the following individuals for their review of this report:
Mark Abbott, Oregon State University, Corvallis
James Anderson, Harvard University, Cambridge, Massachusetts
D. James Baker, The Academy of Natural Sciences, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania
Antonio Busalacchi, University of Maryland, College Park
William Easterling, The Pennsylvania State University, University Park
Gregory Greenwood, California Resources Agency, Sacramento
Charles F. Kennel, Scripps Institution of Oceanography, La Jolla, California
Pamela Matson, Stanford University, Stanford, California
Susanne C. Moser, National Center for Atmospheric Research, Boulder, Colorado
Edward A. Parson, Harvard University, Cambridge, Massachusetts
Edward S. Sarachik, University of Washington, Seattle
Christine S. Sloane, General Motors Corporation, Warren, Michigan
Susan Solomon, NOAA Aeronomy Laboratory, Boulder, Colorado
B.L. Turner, II, Clark University, Worcester, Massachusetts
David Warrilow, Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs, London, United Kingdom
Robert M. White, Washington Advisory Group, Washington, D.C.
Eric Wood, Princeton University, Princeton, New Jersey
Although the reviewers listed above have provided constructive comments and suggestions, they were not asked to endorse the report’s conclusions or recommendations, nor did they see the final draft of the report before its release. The review of this report was overseen by Robert A. Frosch (Harvard University). Appointed by the National Research Council, he was responsible for making certain that an independent examination of this report was carried out in accordance with institutional procedures and that all review comments were carefully considered. Responsibility for the final content of this report rests entirely with the authoring committee and the institution.