NEWS Vol 466|8 July 2010

Few fishy facts found in climate report

Dutch investigation supports key warnings from the IPCC’s most recent assessment.
How much of the Netherlands lies complex research in ten-word state-

M. KEijsEr/HoLLANDsE HooGTE/EyEviNE
below sea level? It seems an innoc- ments there will obviously be gen-
uous question — but it sparked eralization,” he says. “And when the
a major review of the work of main projected impacts are all nega-
the Intergovernmental Panel on tive, should we really have empha-
Climate Change (IPCC). sized the trivial positive impacts as
The investigation, commissioned the PBL delicately implies?”
by the Dutch government, focused A parallel assessment of the IPCC’s
on the contribution of Working processes and procedures is currently
Group II — on impacts, adaptation being conducted by the Amsterdam-
and vulnerability — to the IPCC’s based InterAcademy Council, com-
Fourth Assessment Report1. The Dutch measures against posed of representatives of national
Dutch report’s conclusions2, released sea-level rise will not be academies of science from around
on 5 July, highlight a number of mis- affected by IPCC errors. the world. It is due to deliver its rec-
takes — some trivial, others more ommendations to the United Nations
egregious — and suggest ways to minimize former co-chair of Working Group II. next month, and is likely to reinforce some of the
errors in the future. But they also confirm the In 32 projected regional impacts highlighted suggestions made by the PBL review. For exam-
IPCC report’s core message: that global warm- in the IPCC report’s ‘Summary for Policy- ple, the Dutch panel says that the next IPCC
ing poses substantial risks to societies and eco- makers’, the PBL found only one factual assessment report should be more transparent
systems on all continents. error. The number of Africans projected to about how climate-impact researchers arrive at
“By and large, the IPCC has delivered a be exposed to water shortage due to climate their judgements and recommendations, and
formidable summary of the current state of change, stated as 75 million to 250 million should invest more in fact-checking.
knowledge,” says Maarten Hajer, director of people, should be 90 million to 220 million.
the Netherlands Environmental Assessment Elsewhere in the IPCC report, a predicted Trust me, I’m an expert
Agency (PBL) in Bilthoven, which carried out 50–60% decrease in the productivity of “I appreciate the importance of placing a clear
the investigation. “It’s not flawless but it is the anchovy fisheries was erroneously derived emphasis on explaining how issues are framed
best we have, and the best we can aim for is to from an unrelated study projecting a 50–60% and how conclusions are reached,” says Chris
further improve it.” decrease in extreme wind and ocean turbu- Field, director of global ecology at the Carnegie
The inquiry was triggered by widespread lence. Other errors include a handful of incor- Institution for Science in Stanford, California,
media coverage of two errors in the IPCC rect references, table titles and typos. who now co-chairs Working Group II. “I also
report: claims that all Himalayan glaciers “‘Sloppy’ is the relevant word, sadly missing see real value in the suggestion that funding
might melt by 2035 (glaciologists say they are from the report, as it suggests that the errors are for support staff for IPCC author teams could
unlikely to melt so quickly) and that more than neither major flaws in the science nor intended help insure careful quality checking of every
55% of the Netherlands lies below sea level to deceive the reader,” says Leonard Smith, a statement.”
(the real figure is 26%). In April, the Dutch statistician at the London School of Econom- “We will of course pay close attention to
minister for the environment at the time, ics. “Many of the shortcomings noted could be the PBL’s recommendations for strengthen-
Jacqueline Cramer, commissioned the PBL to spotted by scientific copy editors and research ing future reports,” adds Rajendra Pachauri,
reassess the reliability of the IPCC’s regional assistants.” chairman of the IPCC.
projections. The PBL then double-checked The PBL review also criticizes some IPCC Such improvements are vital, not least because
with the IPCC’s coordinating lead authors all report statements as too generalized, citing the climate scientists are now very exposed to public
statements in relevant chapters that seemed claim that freshwater availability will decrease scrutiny and criticism, says Leo Meyer, a project
unclear, unfounded or inconsistent. “in all parts” of Asia. And it points out that the leader with the PBL and editor of the review.
This process has uncovered nothing that report did not highlight positive impacts of cli- “The difficulty is to explain to the public how
would undermine the IPCC’s main conclu- mate change, such as higher crop yields in some complex the problem of climate change is,” he
sions, or the Dutch’s government’s plans for countries, in the summary for policy-makers. says. “Telling people ‘Hey, I’m an expert — you
adapting to climate impacts, including sea- The IPCC has already corrected many of the need to trust me’, is just no longer enough.” ■
level rise, says Hajer. Ironically, the Dutch errors — including the anchovy prediction — Quirin Schiermeier
sea-level error derived from the PBL’s own fig- on its website. But some, including the number
ures, which has caused embarrassment. “My of people affected by water shortages in Africa, 1. Parry, M. L. et al. (eds) Climate Change 2007: Impacts,
Adaptation and Vulnerability. Contribution of Working Group
authors were certainly bemused to find them- remain uncorrected, as the IPCC authors stand II to the Fourth Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental
selves interviewed by PBL about their work by their statements. Panel on Climate Change (Cambridge Univ. Press, 2007);
when actually it was PBL that provided the “I am glad the PBL has found them, but we available at go.nature.com/DGddCM
wrong information which caused the furore don’t agree with some of the details of individual 2. Assessing an IPCC Assessment: An Analysis of Statements on
Projected Regional Impacts in the 2007 Report (Netherlands
in the first place,” says Martin Parry, a visit- points,” says Parry. He also rejects criticisms of Environmental Assessment Agency, 2010); available at
ing professor at Imperial College London and tone and emphasis. “If you have to summarize go.nature.com/wN2TxX

170
© 2010 Macmillan Publishers Limited. All rights reserved