Post on 17-Jun-2018
THE 2008 FARRER MEMORIAL
ORATION
Climatechange–afailureofdemocracy?
ProfessorPhilCocksWesternAustralia
FarrerMemorialOration2008
Climatechange–afailureofdemocracy?
ProfessorPhilCocks
IwouldliketothanktheTrusteesforthesingularhonourofbeingawardedtheFarrerMemorialMedalfor2008.Ijoinamostillustriousgroup.IalsothankmyformercolleaguesinSouthAustralia,atICARDAinSyriaand,morerecently,attheUniversityofWesternAustralia,fortheirsupportandencouragement.FinallyIthankmywifeMargaretforhersupportandforthebenefitofaverycriticalmind.
ThroughmoderneyesWilliamFarrerisremarkablebothforhisachievementsinwheatbreedingandforhisapplicationoftheinfantscienceofgenetics.WiththeAustraliandiscoveriesofnutrientdeficiencies,hisworkwasfundamentaltotheestablishmentoftheAustralianwheatindustry.Hewasindeedoneofthefirst,ifnotthefirstofAustralia’sgreatagriculturalscientists.
Inthemagnitudeofitsconsequences,nootherinventionrivalsagriculture.Ittamedwildplantsandanimals,ledtothediscoveryoftheartsandsciences,andremainsthebasisoftheworldeconomytothisday.Ithasoverseenapopulationgrowthoffromperhaps100,000to6billiontoday.Ontheotherhand,itsecologicalconsequences(salinity,soilerosion,lossofforestsanduncontrolledfloods)havecausedthedeclineorextinctionoftheSumerian,Greek,Maya,andRomancivilizations.Today,weareagainthreatenedbyanenvironmentaldisaster-climatechange-causedonceagainbyourpoormanagementofnaturalresources.
Thistalklooksatthepoliticsofresourcemanagementandtheunderlyingvaluesofoursocietywhichleadustothedecisionswemake.Withafocusonclimatechangeittakesyouintothepoliticalprocessitself,theextenttowhichitisbasedonreasoneddebate,anditsunderlyingvalueswhichpermit–evenencourage–suchdevastation.
ModerndemocraticgovernmentFirstIwilllookbrieflyattheideaofdemocracy.
Inthelast2,500yearstherehavebeenthreemajorformsofdemocracy.Thefirstmightbecalledparticipativedemocracy,whereeachcitizencontributestotheresolutionofimportantquestions.Suchwasthepracticeinmanytribalcommunities,inancientAthens,intheRomanRepublic,andtoalesserextentinmodernelectoratessuchasSwitzerlandandCalifornia.Whiletheyresultinsignificantparticipationtheyarecumbersomeand,wherepopulationsarelarge,slowandoftenconservative.
Theadventofcommunismresultedinanewformofdemocracyunderthecontrolofasingleparty.Thesmallestcommunitieswereselfgoverningasfaraspossibleandtookplaceinalargernationalsystem:delegateswereelectedtodistrict,regional,provincialandnationalassemblies.Eachdelegatewasdirectlyresponsibletotheassemblybelow.Thefallofthissysteminthelate1980sdemonstratedthat,althoughitprovideddirectparticipation,itfailedbecauseitwascumbersome,slowtoact,andfailedtoprovidechoice.
Weliveinademocracywhereweelectrepresentativestolocal,stateandnationalassembliestomakedecisionsforus.Itisrareforrepresentativestoconsulttheirconstituentswidely,buttheiroverallperformanceisjudgedregularlybyelectionsinwhichallcitizensparticipate.Clearly,underthissystemweabrogateourrighttobeconsultedinfavourofasystemthathandlesquestionsefficiently.
Allformsofdemocraticgovernmentassumethatpoliticaldebateisbasedonreason–thedrawingofconclusionsorinferencesfromfactsorpremises.AsThomasJeffersonsaidinthe18thcentury‘wheneverthepeoplearewellinformedtheycanbetrustedwiththeirowngovernment;andthatwheneverthingsgetsofarwrongastoattracttheirnoticetheymaybereliedontosetthemright’(quotedbyGore2007).
FARRER MEMORIAL TRUST ANNUAL REPORT 2008 17
FarrerMemorialOration2008
In1939,EMForster(1951)wasabletogive‘twocheersfordemocracy’:onebecauseitadmitsvarietyandtwobecauseitpermitscriticism.Forsterdoesnotmentiontheuseofreason.
Indeedthereisanever-growingschoolofthoughtthattheapplicationofreasonnolongerholdsinmoderndemocracies.Thehistorian/philosopherJohnRalstonSaul(1992)findsfewdemocratswhohaveactivelyencouragedreasoneddebate.HisexamplesarePascalPaoli(PresidentofCorsica,thefirstmodernrepublic),ThomasJefferson(thirdpresidentoftheUSA)andperhapsGeorgeWashingtonandWilliamPitttheElder.WhatSaulcalls‘blindreason’haslargelyreplacedreasoneddebateinthemodernWorld.Blindreasonassumesthattoeveryquestionthereisarightanswer–epitomizedbytheInquisitionwheretheChurchknewtheanswerandpunishedthosewhodidnotgiveit(Singercallsthisphenomenon‘faithreason’).Blindreasonisaccompanied(saysSaul)by‘heroes’,who,liketheinquisitors,‘know’theanswers.NapoleonwasoneoftheearlierexamplesofaherobutbothGeorgeWBushandTonyBlairactedlikemodern‘heroes’inthewaytheyprosecutedandconductedtheIraqWar.
ValuesystemsValuesystemsaretheframeworkswithinwhichpeoplemakeorfollowdecisions.Theyarethenon-rationalassumptionsthatweallmakewhenweconsideracourseofaction.Oftentheyhaveareligiousbasis–Judeo-Christianinourcase–althoughtheymayreflectthewayweviewnatureorhumanity.
Thedominantvaluesysteminthewestis,asJohnBlack(1970)putsit,thedominionofmanovertheEarth’snaturalresources.ThisworldviewissupportedbyJudeo-ChristianwritinginGenesis,where‘Godsaidlet(Man)havedominionoverthefishofthesea,andoverthecattleandoveralloftheEarth’.‘AndGodsaidbefruitful
andmultiplyandreplenishtheEarthandsubdueit’.Consciouslyorunconsciously,andwhetherGenesisisbelievedliterallyornot,thisvaluesystemhasshapedthewaywethinkabouttheWorld.TheEarthistobe‘subdued’,Manshouldpopulateit,anditsnaturalresourcesexploited.
ThisworldviewissowidelyheldintheWestthatitisscarcelyquestioned.
Weturnnowtoenvironmentalists.TheviewofDougCasey,aninfluentialAmericanfreemarketeconomististhat‘thegreenmovementhasmost,ifnotalloftheelementsofareligion,andonlyatenuousrelationshipwithscience’.Thisisaviewsharedby,amongothers,somemembersoftheAustralianparliament,forexamplethememberforMcMillan,RussellBroadbent.Theinfluentialneo-liberalthinktank,theLavoisierGroupalsopromulgatesthisidea.
Ithinkthat,formanypeople,thereissometruthinthisassertion.Forexample,JamesLovelock(1979)seestheEarthasanintegratedorganismofwhichweallformpart.Thisissurelysimilartopantheism,wheretheUniverse,natureandGodareequivalentandinterchangeable.However,itisavaluesystemthatisalsofirmlybasedonthescientifically-generatedviewthatbiologicalandnon-biologicalsystemsareinter-related.
Bothvaluesystemssharetheconceptofstewardship,althoughinslightlydifferentways.InGenesisweread‘theLordGodtookthemanandputhimintotheGardenofEdentodressitandkeepit’.Thisimpliesthatman,althoughoutsidenature,hasaresponsibilityofstewardshiptowardit.Incontrast,ecologistsseethemselvesaspartofnature,notoutsideit,andthereforetheirownandnature’sfateasoneandthesame.Althoughdifferentphilosophically,bothvaluesystemshavesomewhatsimilarresults.
BeforeleavingourconsiderationofvaluesystemsIwouldliketotouchontheproblemofresourcesheldundercommonownership,especiallyglobalcommonssuchastheoceanandtheatmosphere.While
18 FARRER MEMORIAL TRUST ANNUAL REPORT 2008
FarrerMemorialOration2008
thismaybeconsideredaneconomicissueitis,asHardin(1968)putsit,essentiallyamoralissueandthereforeanissueofvalues.Hardinusedcommonly-ownedrangelandsasanexample.Anindividualherder,throughselfinterest,willincreasethegrazingpressuretoensurethathecapturesthegreatestbenefitbeforehiscompetitordoes.Ifthishappenstherangelandquicklydegrades.Theatmosphereisanothersuchcommongoodandispollutedthroughselfinterestaslongthepolluterperceivesittobeinhisadvantagetodoso.Thismayapplytoindividuals,corporationsandnations.Itsresolutioncannotbemadeinsimpleeconomictermsorindeedtechnologicalterms.
ReasonandlogicinscienceWeturnnowtotheuseofreason,andinparticulartheuseofscienceonwhichtobasedecision-making,althoughsciencetooreflectsandshapesthevaluesystemsofitsday. KarlPopper(1959)revolutionizedthephilosophyofscience.Herejectedclassicalempiricismandtheformingofconclusionsfromobservationsthatgrowoutofit.Popperarguedthatscientifictheoriesareabstractinnature,andcanbetestedonlyindirectly,byreferencetotheirimplications.Thatis,thetheory(orhypothesis)comesfirstandistestedbysubsequentobservations.Anhypothesiscanonlybeprovenwrong–youcanneverbecertainthatsometestwillnot,infuture,proveanapparentlyunassailablehypothesistobeincorrect.Hypothesesarenotverified,theyareonlyfalsified.Popper’sgreatachievementwastoprovideaphilosophicalbasisforexperimentalscience.
DavidMiller(1994)outlinedcogentlywhatiswrongwithsciencebasedonobservationandinduction.Inductionistheprocessofdiscoveringexplanationsforasetofparticularfactsbyestimating
theweightofevidenceinfavourofapropositionortheory.Thetheorycanbeverifiedbytheconsiderationofyetmorefactsandmayberetainedinspiteofsomeinconvenientresults.Popper’sfalsificationprocess,whereanyhypothesisisdiscardedwhenitfailsjustonetest,isfarmorerigorous.
NeverthelessthereareproblemswithPopper’sapproachwhenitcomestoclimatescience.Forexampleitisunlikelythathypothesescanbefalsifiedexceptinthedistantfuturewhenitistoolate.Thereforescientistsmustuseamoreempiricalapproachwheretheweightofevidenceistakenintoaccountbearinginmindthephilosophicalweaknessesofthisapproach.Thisfarfromidealapproachgivesustheopportunitytotakeactionbeforetheevidencereachesthe95%probabilitywenormallyexpect.
Clearly,asPopperputsit,thereisnoidealofcertaintyinscience.AsBarriePittock(2005)says‘uncertaintyisinevitable,butriskiscertain’.Whatweneedtodoissatisfyourselvesthattheriskofclimatechangeissufficientlyhightojustifyaction.
Theconceptof‘peerreview’isanessentialpartofthisprocesswherebyascientist’speersaregiventheopportunitytocriticallyexaminetheweightofevidenceanditsinterpretation.Resultsthatarenotpeerreviewedaresuspect,sincethereisnoopportunityfortherejectionofquestionableresults.
Althoughsciencedoesnotusethesamephilosophicalapproachtoproblemsasgovernment,thelattershould,andindeeddoesrespecttheformers’conclusions.Thisisforpragmaticreasons-asBertrandRussell(1914)putit,‘thegeneralprinciplesofscience...arebelievedbecausemankindhasfoundinnumerableinstancesoftheirtruth.
TheriskofclimatechangeIturnnowtotheriskofclimatechange.
In1987,asaresultofconcernexpressed
FARRER MEMORIAL TRUST ANNUAL REPORT 2008 19
FarrerMemorialOration2008
byleadingclimatologists,theUnitedNationsestablishedtheIntergovernmentalPanelonClimateChange(IPCC)toexamineallaspectsoftheproblemandtoreportbackonmeasuresneededforitsmanagement.ClimatechangewasdiscussedattheRioSummitin1990,whereAustraliaarguedstronglyforaConventiononClimateChange,anagreementthatwasestablishedandsignedbymostnationsatKyotoin1997.TheIPCChascontinuedtogatherevidence,themostrecentofwhichwaspresentedinBaliin2007.
RKPachauri(2007)inhisacceptanceofthe2007NobelPeacePrizesummarizedthekeyresultsoftheIPCCthusfar.Theyare:
• ThatclimatechangeiscausedbytheburningoffossilfuelsandtheresultingpollutionoftheatmospherebyCO2andothergases.Fromalevelof280ppmbetween1000and1750,theconcentrationofCO2intheatmosphereroseto379ppmin2005,farinexcessofanyfigureseeninthelast600,000years.
• Ifnothingisdoneglobaltemperaturesmayrisebyupto4.50C.
• Precipitationwillfallbyupto20%inmarginalareas,includinglargepartsofAustraliaandAfrica.
• LossoficeinGreenlandandtheAntarcticcouldleadtosealevelrisesofupto4m,andseaexpansioncouldresultinanother0.4–1.4mrise.
• IftemperaturesaretostabilizeCO2wouldneedtopeakatlessthan500ppmbetween2000and2015.
ThereisanincreasingviewthattheIPCCisunderestimatingtheimpactofclimatechange.ForexampletherecentswiftincreaseinatmosphericCO2(therateofincreasehasincreasedby35%since2000)isduefirstlytofastereconomicgrowth,andsecondlytotheinabilityofnaturalsinkstocontinueremovingemissionsatthecurrentrate.
Theeconomicbenefitsofmanagingclimatechangeareclear.Ifnothingis
doneStern(2007)calculatedthatglobalGDPwillfallby5%/year,andifallrisksaretakenintoaccountthiscouldbeashighas20%.Ifclimatechangeismanaged–thatis,greenhousegasemissionsarereducedtoavoiditsworstimpacts–thenthefallinGDPwillbelimitedtoaround1%/year.Sternseesthecriticalperiodasbeinginthenext10-20years.HisfiguresaresimilartothoseoftheIPCC.
Theevidencethatclimatechangeistakingplace,thatitseffectswillbedisastrous,andthatbyactingnowtheworstwillbeavoided,seemoverwhelming.Yetthereisasignificantbodyofopinionthatdisputesthedata,andinparticular,disputesthatclimatechangeiscausedbymankind’sactivities.ThemainpointsweresummarizedbyAnnYoung(2000)andwereessentiallybasedoninformationavailabletoherin1996.• Thereisnoevidencethathigherlevels
ofCO2willincreasetemperaturesandindeed,shesays,therearesuggestionsthattemperaturesmaydecrease(thisviewisnolongerheld).
• Globalmeantemperaturesfluctuatenormally(however,therehavebeennoprecedentstotheriseinglobaltemperaturessince2000).
• Thedataonsealevelchangeisnotconvincing(however,themassofwaterintheseacanbeexpectedtowarmonlyslowlycomparedwiththeatmosphere).
• Climaticmodelsareinadequate(thisremainsacriticalpoint,althoughtheyhavemarkedlyimprovedinrecentyears).
Itisdifficulttoacceptthatthesereservations,whileweshouldbeartheminmind,shouldpreventusfromtakingaction.
Doingnothing–theresponseofsomewesterngovernmentsFacedwiththeseproblemsthegovernmentsofAustraliaandtheUnitedStates,andtoalesserextentCanadaandJapan,havemostlyignoredtheadvice
20 FARRER MEMORIAL TRUST ANNUAL REPORT 2008
FarrerMemorialOration2008
oftheirscientists.TheyhavehesitatedtoacceptthefindingsoftheIPCC,Ibelieveforfourreasons:
(1) Theatmosphereisaglobalcommonandmanagingpollutionisoftennotinasinglenations’bestinterests:reasoneddebate,inthesecircumstances,reinforcestheJudeo-Christianconceptofmankind’sdutytoexploittheWorld’sresources;
(2) Climatescience,asdiscussedearlier,isanempiricalsciencewheretheoriesrelyonverificationandnotfalsification.Itisthereforenotasrigorousasexperimentalscienceandthereforemoreopentomisinterpretation;
(3) TherearegroupsofscientistsoutsidetheIPCCandoutsidemainstreamsciencewhostronglydisagreewiththemainstreaminterpretation;
(4) Certainvestedinterestgroupshaveusedthesedissidentscientistsandsuccessfullylobbiedgovernmentsbytellingthemwhatthey(thegovernments)wanttohear.
Theresultisabreakdownintrustbetweenthegovernments’scientificadvisersandtheirpolicymakers.
Itisimportanttostatethatnotallgovernmentshavereactedinthisway.Indeed,thegreatmajorityofdeveloped-countrygovernmentshavefollowedtheirscientificadvisers,setgreenhousegasreductiontargetsandhave,toagreaterorlesserextentachievedthosetargets.
Unlikemanydevelopedcountrieshowever,Australiareliesheavilyonfossilfuels.Thisiswhatconcernscertainvestedinterestgroups.Ingeneraltheyrepresentbigbusiness,andparticularlytheenergyandminingbusinesses.Clearly,theyhaveavestedinterestinthepriceofenergy.Theyhavelongenjoyedaccesstoourmajorpoliticalpartiesand,mostsignificantlybutnotonly,totheLiberalParty.Inthiswaytheyhavebypassedpublicdebateand
attemptedtodiscreditscientificadvice.Weshouldnoteinpassingthatthe
LiberalPartytooktothe1990electionapolicywherebyAustraliawouldcommittoa20%reductioningreenhousegasesby2000,afarmoreambitioustargetthananythingsuggestedbeforeorsince.Whathappened?GuyPearse(2007)putitsimply–after1996thePartywas‘captured’bytheenergyandmanufacturinglobbies.
ThekeybusinessinterestgroupinAustraliaistheAustralianIndustryGreenhouseNetwork(AIGN)awealthygroupsupportedby,amongothers,BHPBilliton,RioTinto,Woodside,BP,Exxon-Mobil,Caltex,Shell,WesfarmersandAlcoa.Theywouldnotnumberthemselvesamonggreenhousescepticsbuthavearguedthattakingimmediatemeasureswillexcessivelyharmoureconomy.Theybelievethatcleancoaltechnologyandnuclearenergycanbedevelopedtotheextentthatwithin15-20yearsemissionsinAustraliawouldbesignificantlyreduced.TheHowardgovernmentfollowedtheiradvice,closingthedoortoreasoneddebate.ItwillbeinterestingtoseetheextenttowhichAIGNinfluencesthenewLaborgovernment.
AttheoppositeextremeistheLavoisiergroup,whichisfranklyscepticaloftheIPCC’sscience.Theirinfluencehasbeenlessatwholeofgovernmentlevelbutdeeplyinfluentialamongindividualmembersofparliament.ChairedbyaformerHawkegovernmentminister(PeterWalsh)thegroupbelievesthattheIPCCareborderingonthedishonest,especiallyinthewaythatthey(theIPCC)pressureotherscientiststofallintoline.
Thegistoftheargumentofthisgroupis:• Thatthemodelsusedtopredict
climatechangeareunreliable;• ThatscientistssupportingtheIPCCare
underpoliticalpressuretodoso;• ThatanythingAustraliadoesis
insignificantcomparedwithemissionsfromtheUSAandChina.
FARRER MEMORIAL TRUST ANNUAL REPORT 2008 21
FarrerMemorialOration2008
Aremodelsunreliable?Thereisconsiderableconfidencethatclimatemodelsprovidecrediblequantitativeestimatesoffutureclimatechange,particularlyatcontinentalscalesandabove.Thisconfidencecomesfromthefoundationofthemodelsinacceptedphysicalprinciplesandfromtheirabilitytoreproduceobservedfeaturesofcurrentandpastclimatechanges.Confidenceinmodelestimatesishigherforsomevariables(e.g.,temperature)thanforothers(e.g.,rainfall).Overseveraldecadesofdevelopment,modelshaveconsistentlyprovidedarobustandunambiguouspictureofsignificantclimatewarminginresponsetoincreasinggreenhousegases.
TheideathatscientistssupportingtheIPCCmightbeunderpoliticalpressuretopromoteclimatechangeissimplyabsurd.Politicalpressurefromwhom?InAustraliaitisclearthattheoppositeismorelikelytobetrue.
Thethirdpoint,thatanythingAustraliadoesisinsignificant,leadsustoaconsiderationoftheglobalcommons.
Developedcountriesemittedgreenhousegasesatveryhighratesformostofthe20thcentury,andsoareresponsibleformostoftheextragreenhousegasnowintheatmosphere.Forthisreason,intheinitialKyotoprotocol,developingcountrieswere,forthetimebeing,excludedfrombindingcommitments.Nevertheless,farfromignoringtheirobligations,manydevelopingcountriesareactuallysettingmoreambitiousgoalsthanAustralia.Chinahassetitselfatargettosource20%ofitselectricityfromalternativesourcesby2020.Ithasalsosetstringentfueleconomystandardsfornewvehicles,andnationalenergyefficiencytargets,neitherofwhichhasbeendonebyAustralia.BothChinaandIndiahavesignedtheKyotoprotocol.AndChinahasrigorouspopulationcontrolmeasures. BrazilisaWorldleaderintheproductionofbiofuels.Bangladeshis
providingconsumercreditforhouseholdsolarenergy.BiomassstovesarebeingdistributedinmanyAfricancountries,and180millionsuchstoveshavebeeninstalledinChina.Smallvillage-scalehydro-electricpowerplantshavebeeninstalled.Theargumentthatdevelopingcountrieshavedonenothingisnottenableandwillbecomedecreasinglysointhefuture.
Ifweconsiderthateveryhumanbeinghasanequalrighttoeconomicdevelopment,thensurelyagoodstartingpointforequallysharingtheloadistoaimforequalpercapitaemissions.Thisrecognizestheessentialequalityofpeoplenomatterwheretheylive.
In2002Australiansemitted5.5tofcarbon/person,comparedwithaworldaverageof1.2tandahighincomecountryaverageof4.1t.UKemissionswere3.3tandthoseofFrance2.1t.CarbonemissionsfromChinaarepresently0.7t/personandfromIndia0.4t/person.Sincetheworldaveragemustbereducedfrom1.2ttoapproximately1.0tthereissignificantscopeforAustraliaandtheUSAtoreducetheiremissionsandperhapssomescopeforsmallincreasesinmostdevelopingcountries.
IssuesofgovernanceandthefailureofourinstitutionsSincethereissuchoverwhelmingevidenceofclimatechangewhatshouldwedoandwhatcanwedoaboutaddressingitsthreat.Clearlytobeginwith,weneedamorerationaldebate,abetterinformeddebateand,perhapsmostimportantly,anon-secretivedebate.Ifwearetoassistgovernmentsintheirdecisionmakingandhelpourinstitutionssucceedincomprehendingthegravityandnatureofclimatechangeweneed:• Adepoliticizedbureaucracy:public
servantswhogiveadvicewithoutfearofreprisalsandagovernmentthatmakestheiradvicepublic;
• Nonsecretiveexternalsourcesofadvicetogovernments:lobbygroups
22 FARRER MEMORIAL TRUST ANNUAL REPORT 2008
FarrerMemorialOration2008
registered,theirsourcesoffundsandlinkswithpoliticalpartiesrevealed,andtheiradvicetogovernmentsmadepublic;
• Tobringourdemocracyclosertodirectparticipation,localcommunitiesempoweredtoimplementappropriatealternativeenergysolutions;
• Betterunderstandingoftheprocessesofscienceanddemocracysothatthecommunityisempoweredtotakepartincomplexdebates;
• Toincreaseparticipationindebate,governmentandnon-governmentinternetsitesavailableandwidelyused.
Ultimatelyweneedthreethings:(1) Ademocraticworldbodytodecide
onissuesinvolvingglobalcommons:theinternationalbodywillformulatelawsandaninternationalcourtwillenforcethem.DavidHeld(1996)arguesthattheonlybodyavailableisareformedUnitedNations.
(2) Aglobalpriceoncarbonfixedbytheinternationalbody–withaninternationalcarbontaxthatdirectlytaxespolluters.
(3) ChangestotherulesoftheWorld TradeOrganizationoverseenbythe
internationalbodytopreventcorporationsfrommovingoffshoretoescapenationalregulations.Theseactionswillneedtoreflectthewelfareofallpeoplesandnotjustthosewithmilitaryandeconomicpower.
InconclusionIwouldliketoquoteRoyalSocietyvice-presidentSirDavidReadwhosaid:“Peopleshouldnotbemisledbythosewhoexploitthecomplexityofclimatechange,seekingtodistortthescienceanddenytheseriousnessofitspotentialconsequences.Thescienceclearlypointstowardstheneedforusall-nations,businessesandindividuals-todoasmuchaspossible,assoonaspossible,toavoidtheworstconsequencesofachangingclimate.”
References
Black,John(1970).TheDominionofMan.UniversityPress,Edinburgh,UK.
Forster,EM(1951),TwoCheersforDemocracy.EdwardArnold.
Gore,A(2007a).TheAssaultonReason.Bloomsbury.
Gore,A(2007b).TheNobelLecture.TheNobelFoundation,Oslo,Norway.
Lovelock,JE(1979).Gaia:ANewLookatLifeonEarth.OxfordUniversityPress,UK.
Held,David(1996).DemocracyandtheGlobalOrder.PolityPress,UnitedKingdom.
Miller,David(1994),CriticalRationalism:arestatementanddefence.OpenCourtPublishingCompany,Peru,Illinois.
Pachauri,RK(2007).AcceptanceSpeechfortheNobelPeacePrizeAwardedtotheIPCC,Oslo,Norway,December2007.
Pearce,G.(2007).HighandDry.Penguin/Viking,Melbourne,Australia.
Pittock,A.Barrie(2005).ClimateChange:TurninguptheHeat.CSIROPublishing,Victoria,Australia.
Popper,K.(1959).TheLogicofScientificDiscovery.Routledge.
Russell,B(1914).OurKnowledgeoftheExternalWorldasaFieldforScientificMethodinPhilosophy.OpenCourtPublishing:ChicagoandLondon.
Sadler,B.Howourclimatehaschanged–Introduction.IndianOceanClimateInitiative,ClimateNote1/05.
Saul,JohnRalston(1992).Voltaire’sBastards.PenguinBooksCanadaLtd.
Stern,BaronNicholas(2007).Sternreviewontheeconomicsofclimatechange.HMTreasury,London.
April 2008
FARRER MEMORIAL TRUST ANNUAL REPORT 2008 23