Appendix 1: Government response
Background
1. The House of Commons Science and Technology Committee
produced a report Communicating Climate Science on 2 April
2014. This report was the culmination of a year-long inquiry into
the subject. This memorandum is the Government's response to this
report.
2. It should be noted that in the report there is
some conflation between the concept of communications related
to the science of climate change and communications related
to climate change in a broader sense. By 'a broader sense' we
mean a range of issues such as why a response to climate
change is needed and what form such an appropriate response
should take. These issues are, of course, informed by science
but are not solely the preserve of science as they take into account
political considerations, economics, international aspects etc.
3. The Government believes that in order to clearly
communicate about climate change it is necessary to talk about
both climate change science and also the actions, at home
and abroad, we are taking to address climate change. In this memorandum
we seek to be clear where responses to the report are, in our
view, purely scientific and where responses relate to broader
issues. We have tackled both issues, as both are of equal importance.
Report recommendations and responses
4. We consider that Conclusions and Recommendations
3, 4, 5, 6, 15 and 16 do not require a response from Government.
Conclusions and Recommendations 3, 4, 5 and 6 are directed at
independent media organisations and it would therefore be inappropriate
for government to respond. Conclusions and Recommendations 15
and 16 refer to the scientific process and we believe are self-evident.
5. Responses to the other Conclusions and Recommendations
are provided here.
Conclusion and Recommendation 1: In order to communicate
what climate change is, the Government must agree a clear consistent
and precise definition which can be related to direct observations
and measurements. This should be based on Professors Slingo's
and Rapley's definitions.
Our response
6. We agree that Government should be using a clear
definition of climate change. We agree that a scientific definition
is required. However, we also note that the term 'climate change'
does not apply just to the physical manifestation of a changing
climate, but also actions to address human influence on the climate.
For example, a scientific definition of 'climate change' based
on Professors Slingo's and Rapley's definitions does not explain
the use of 'climate change' in the acronym 'DECC'. In this case
'climate change' means not just the physical manifestation but
also steps taken in the UK and internationally to reduce GHG emissions
and other human impacts of the climate.
7. It is possible to come up with a comprehensive
and easy to understand scientific definition of 'climate change'
and we believe the definition provided by the IPCC, that "Climate
change refers to a change in the state of the climate that can
be identified (e.g., by using statistical tests) by changes in
the mean and/or the variability of its properties, and that persists
for an extended period, typically decades or longer. Climate change
may be due to natural internal processes or external forcings
such as modulations of the solar cycles, volcanic eruptions and
persistent anthropogenic changes in the composition of the atmosphere
or in land use." is appropriate.
8. However, we believe that this definition needs
to be accompanied by a broader statement to cover how the term
is commonly used. Climate scientists in DECC are considering this
issue and will come up with a suitable formulation to be included
in our new climate science narrative, to be finalised and made
public shortly.
Conclusion and Recommendation 2: Despite the existing
polling information, it remains difficult to draw firm conclusions
on how public acceptance and understanding of climate change is
changing in the UK. However, it is clear that a significant majority
of people think the climate is changing and that human activity
is at least partly responsible for this. The polling on public
understanding is limited and unlikely to highlight the information
needs of the general public. In its response to this report, the
Government should detail how it will collect, and make available,
more regular and more in depth information on the public understanding
of climate change.
Our response
9. As the committee are aware, DECC currently tracks
attitudes to climate change through our regular public attitudes
tracker, and BIS Public Attitudes to Science 2014[1]
includes attitudes to climate science in the context of other
scientific topics. As part of our on-going work on improving the
way we communicate the science of climate change to the public
(see paragraph 10) we will consider precisely what, if any, additional
information we need to collect in order to track public understanding
of climate change, and whether government is the best organisation
to be carrying out tracking of this kind or whether it would be
best done by independent organisations, such as universities.
Conclusion and Recommendation 7: The internet
and social media are increasingly used by the public when seeking
to verify media reports or obtain further detailed information
about climate change. The Government and other trusted bodies
are currently failing to make effective use of internet or social
media to engage with the public and provide accurate scientific
information about climate change.
Our response
10. The .gov.uk website contains information on both
climate science and government activities to tackle climate change.
The Met Office website is a good source of material for climate
science with latest science and reports as well as popular infographics
and videos that are well visited and trusted by the public. DECC
users Twitter and other forms of social media to engage on a range
of issues, including climate change. We are taking some specific
steps to improve the communication of climate science, particularly
through
10.1. Improving the presentation of climate science
on .gov.uk. Refreshed pages will be comprehensive, simple and
impactful.
10.2. Providing information on commonly held climate
'myths', explaining why these are untrue, and providing clarification
on some key areas of climate science where confusion or misunderstanding
commonly arise.
10.3. We will continue to support Met Office science
content development so that the very latest science and interpretations
are available in attractive, accessible and sharable formats.
10.4. Sharing and actively promoting these resources
across Government, to enable policy-makers at all levels to have
access to a clear and impactful description of the current state
of climate science.
10.5. Establishing a science expert communications
group to consider how best to further improve the communication
of climate science.
11. Findings from PAS 2014 on social listening research
will be used to inform future engagement activities using social
media. When tracking social media conversations on climate change
during the publication of the IPCC report in September 2013, debates
were highly polarised and although scientific evidence was cited,
this was used to back predetermined attitudes, rather than to
facilitate an evidence-based discussion.
Conclusion and Recommendation 8: We consider the
lack of a narrative strongly reflects a lack leadership in climate
change.
Our response
12. We do not believe that there is a lack of climate
change leadership in the UK. As the committee is doubtless aware,
the Climate Change Act, which requires the UK to reduce GHG emissions
by 80% on 1990 levels by 2050, is the most ambitious piece of
climate legislation in the world. Steps we have already taken
have reduced UK emissions by over a quarter since 1990.
13. We are showing leadership internationally, by
pressing the EU to increase its target for 2020 to 30% and by
supporting a binding domestic EU GHG target for 2030 of at least
40% which should be increased to 50% in the context of a global
climate agreement in Paris. We are also agreeing, as part of the
EU, with other countries to enter the second commitment period
of the Kyoto Protocol; working on changing the global political
conditions; and working on the 2015 agreement.
14. It is also worth emphasising that the political
and policy leadership described above is founded, in part, on
the UK's world-class science and intellectual capital on climate
change. In particular, since the Met Office Hadley Centre was
opened in 1990 the UK has been a leader on the science and evidence
of climate change and we are convinced that maintaining this position
is in the interests of the UK.
Conclusion and Recommendation 9: The Met Office
is an organisation seeking to have a greater role in the communication
of climate science. As such we would have liked to have seen greater
effort to communicate to the public on the publication of the
IPCC AR5 report. It should have been more timely with information
that should be far more accessible to the public at large.
Our response
15. In its oral evidence to the Committee, the Met
Office was clear in saying that it could, with others, help to
improve the communication of climate science to the public, possibly
through the UK Climate Service partnership. It is important to
emphasise however that at present the Met Office has no formal
mandate to communicate climate science to the public though
as mentioned above it already provides resources on its latest
climate science in accessible and shareable formats
16. The Met Office recognises the importance of science
communication and is working with DECC to see how climate science
can be more effectively be communicated to the public. A Met Office
secondee in DECC is part of the team supporting the improvement
of climate science content on .gov.uk and the Met Office will
continue to work with DECC to understand gaps in the public understanding
of climate science and what the government and UK academic community
can do to address these.
17. On AR5 specifically, it should be noted that
the Met Office undertook a range of outreach and communication
activity, including ensuring that its leading scientists were
available to the media for interview and for press briefings.
The Met Office external website included information on AR5, including
the role and contribution of its scientists to the IPCC process
and included a video to bring it to life.
18. In the build-up to the release of the IPCC Working
Group I report the Met Office also published three papers on its
website that provided more information on global temperature trends
in a way that was accessible to a public audience. In addition,
the Met Office website carried an infographic on the basics of
climate science, a 'Guide to Climate Change' brochure and several
blog posts on issues of interest. Leading up to the release of
Working Group II, the Met Office also published a paper on its
website that provided background and context to this area of science.
19. The Met Office is a highly trusted and valued
organisation on both weather and climate and DECC continues to
work to make sure the UK gets full value from its authoritative
voice on climate science.
Conclusion and Recommendation 10: We found little
evidence of any significant co-ordination amongst them [Government,
government agencies and bodies at national and local levels] to
communicate the science. Neither is there any indication that
the Government is regarded as a primary, or even a reliable, source
of information on climate science by the general public.
Our response
20. It is clear from studies of public attitudes
to science that Government is not the most trusted voice on scientific
issues. Scientists are trusted more than politicians and it is
important that those scientific voices and the range of evidence
supporting them are heard by the public. It is hard to see how
any one Government could be regarded as the primary source of
climate change information when there are a multitude of high
quality sources of information already in the public domain, not
least the IPCC and its many authors and contributors. Many will
still view whatever the government produce on any contentious
science issue with suspicion. Nonetheless we accept that government
can help to communicate information on climate science more effectively
and the Climate Science team in DECC is leading to deliver this
change. We will ensure that whatever we produce is comprehensible,
balanced and impactful and most importantly consistent with peer
reviewed science, including the recent assessments of the IPCC.
21. Qualitative research from PAS 2014 found that
the 'messenger matters' and the public are sceptical about what
politicians say about science. The scientific credentials of the
'messenger' where often critical in online conversations.
Conclusion and Recommendation 11: The Royal Society
is a publicly funded body with a responsibility to communicate
about science. We encourage it to step up to that responsibility.
Our response
22. The Government welcomes the publication by the
Royal Society, jointly with the US National Academy of Sciences,
of Climate Change: Evidence & Causes[2],
a key reference document for decision makers, policy makers, educators
and other individuals seeking authoritative answers about the
current state of climate change science. The associated webpage
includes answers to a comprehensive list of frequently asked questions.
We do not agree with the committee that "[the report] could
have been used better to promote and communicate accurately the
most up-to-date science to a non-specialist audience". We
believe the report was clear and well written, and did have an
impact on public understanding of climate science. We note that
the report received significant media coverage. The Society has
informed us that Social media activity around the report reached
over 600,000 people on Twitter in the first week after publication.
23. Linked to this, later this year the Society will
publish Human Resilience to Climate Change and Disasters[3],
a critical evaluation of actions that can reduce risk and enhance
resilience, including a range of engineering, technical, social,
institutional and ecosystem-based solutions.
24. We welcome this attempt by the Society increase
its engagement in this area, and one of the activities DECC will
be actively pursuing this year with regard to the communication
of climate science is to consider how the combined resources of
DECC, the Met Office and the Society can be most effectively brought
to bear to communicate up-to-date knowledge about climate science
to the public. We accept that climate science like all sciences
evolves over time and that continued efforts need to be made to
ensure the very latest science is accessible and shareable
Conclusion and Recommendation 12: Successive Government
efforts to create a clear narrative that ensures a discourse about
climate change that is coherent, constructive and results in proper
public engagement has been disappointingly limited.
Our response
25. As part of its overall overarching DECC-wide
communication strategy DECC has produced a climate change strategic
communications plan, which clearly sets out DECC aims and objectives
for communicating about climate change over the next year.
26. To implement the strategy DECC is establishing
a cross-government climate change communications group. The aims
of this group are to bring about consistency of approach in climate
change communications, ensuring agreed messages are used consistently
and to identify opportunities for maximising communications with
an emphasis on government action to tackle climate change and
the benefits of a low carbon future.
27. A key output from this strategy will be an overarching
cross-government narrative which all relevant departments buy
into to enable DECC and other relevant parts of government to
speak with one voice on the issue of climate change. This narrative
will be clear that anthropogenic climate change is happening now,
and poses a risk to human society. It will set out how the Government
is taking action on climate change, keeping the lights on and
building a stronger greener economy, and it will demonstrate how
strong action to tackle climate change at home puts us in a position
of authority to push for action at international level.
Conclusion and Recommendation 13: The Government's
hands-off approach to engaging with the public and the media,
relying heavily on scientists as the most prominent voice, has
a resulted in a vacuum that has allowed inaccurate arguments to
flourish with little effective challenge.
Our response
28. We do not agree with this conclusion. Public
concern about climate change remains high, and communication of
climate science from a wide-range of sources, including the IPCC
and academics is, and remains, strong. We recognise that these
independent voices can be the most trusted.
29. We specifically note that where those 'sceptical'
of the need for action to tackle climate change have been prominent
in the media, strong scientific voices, notably Professor Brian
Hoskins from Imperial and Reading Universities and Professor Peter
Stott from Met Office, have been equally prominent with, in our
view, stronger arguments.
30. That is not to say that government is complacent
and we will do what we can to provide clearer information on climate
science. We will continue to robustly tackle inaccuracies in the
broadcast and print media. And we will continue to invest in cutting-edge
climate science, and expert climate scientists through our support
to the Met Office and the Research Councils. However the government
cannot, and should not, seek to either replace, or coordinate,
the real experts. We believe this would backfire.
Conclusion and Recommendation 14: If the Government
is to demonstrate its climate policies are evidence based, it
needs to be an authoritative and trusted voice which explains
the current state of climate science. It is important that climate
science is presented separately from any subsequent policy response.
We recommend that the Government work with the learned societies
and national academies to develop a source of information on climate
science that is discrete from policy delivery, comprehensible
to the general public and responsive to both current developments
and uncertainties in the science.
Our response
31. We are taking steps, as set out in paragraphs
10 and 21-23 above, to better communicate climate science through
government channels. We believe that this will lead to the government
being seen as more authoritative and trusted in this area. We
will rigorously test what we produce, not just to ensure that
it is scientifically correct but also that it is effective in
communicating to those people we wish to reach.
32. We cannot accept that "climate science is
presented separately from any subsequent policy response".
While we agree that the science should not be influenced
by the policy response, and that the policy response must flow
from the science we are sure that if individuals are presented
with a very large problem (climate change) without information
about possible solutions (adaptation and mitigation policy, at
home and abroad) they will simply discount the problem. This form
of cognitive dissonance is well understood by communications experts.
Therefore we will complete our communications on climate science
with a clear message that there is something that can be done,
and we (the UK) are doing something about it.
33. It is worth noting that the outputs of the Met
Office Hadley Centre are available across government to enable
departments to build policies on a common evidence-based foundation.
34. Ultimately public engagement on climate change
is not just about providing individuals with scientific information.
It is about allowing individuals to understand how climate change
is relevant to them and what they can do in their day-to-day lives
to address it.
35. We welcome the recommendation to work with the
learned societies and national academies to develop a source of
information on climate science that is discrete from policy delivery,
comprehensible to the general public and responsive to both current
developments and uncertainties in the science, and we are looking
at ways to achieve this. We expect to see progress in this area,
in the form of joint communications of some form, by the end of
the year.
Conclusion and Recommendation 17: To achieve the
necessary commitment from the public to climate policy, the Government
must demonstrate a coherent approach to communicating both the
scientific basis and the proposed solutions. We recommend that
the Government consolidates its strategic approach to communicating
climate science across all Departments, formulate the principles
of that approach and make it public. All Ministers should acquaint
themselves with the science of climate change and then they, and
their Departments, should reflect the Government approach in person,
in media interviews and online by a presenting a clear and consistent
message.
Our response
36. A range of scientists, including those from the
Met Office, and the Government Chief Scientific Advisor himself,
are active in providing information to Ministers on climate change,
including through face to face briefings. As the Committee heard,
Sir Mark Walport briefed Cabinet on climate change last year following
the publication of the IPCC Working Group I report. Most recently
Professor Stephen Belcher, Head of the Met Office Hadley Centre,
briefed DECC Ministers on the latest findings from the climate
science community.
37. The ways in which individual Ministers and Departments
communicate is a matter for them. However we recognise that Departments
can be more joined up on this issue and see the establishment
of the cross-government climate change communications group as
an important step in agreeing a shared climate change narrative
which can be used by central government, as well as local and
regional government, and by other government agencies. The DECC
Climate Science team will continue to explore opportunities to
get climate scientists talking to Ministers and other decision-makers
in government.
1 http://www.ipsos-mori.com/Assets/Docs/Polls/pas-2014-main-report.pdf Back
2
https://royalsociety.org/policy/projects/climate-evidence-causes/ Back
3
https://royalsociety.org/policy/projects/resilience-climate-change/ Back
| 
