the 2008 farrer memorial oration - department of … · the 2008 farrer memorial oration ... simple...

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


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


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



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



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.



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



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


the 2008 farrer memorial oration - department of … · the 2008 farrer memorial oration ... simple...

Documents