The Cambridge Conservation Initiative, a partnership of NGOs and departments at the University of Cambridge, is seeking your views on whether the way in which climate change has been communicated to policy-makers and the public can provide lessons for the communication of biodiversity loss. How can biodiversity move up the political agenda, with policy-makers and members of the public recognising the seriousness implications of its loss? Will studying how climate change has moved to the forefront of policy and public awareness help in achieving a similar shift for biodiversity?

Your views will help the CCI and the conservation community more widely, in efforts to make sure that biodiversity loss achieves a higher policy and public profile.

You are invited to complete a brief survey, giving your view on 35 statements, drawn from interviews with experts in climate change and biodiversity conservation. This should take you no more than 20 minutes. The deadline for completion of the survey is 31st August.

From 18th August Local Authorities across the UK will have the restrictions on generating and selling renewable energy removed, following an announcement by the Energy and Climate Change Secretary Chris Huhne this week.

The potential for Local Authorities to lead the way in clean energy generation has been highlighted due to the size of many Local Authority owned estates, combined with a new ability to benefit from the new Feed in Tariff payments. This potential sharply contrasts with existing Local Authorities’ efforts, which have been restricted by 1980s regulations put in place during the privatisation of utilities. This has resulted in Local Authorities generating just 0.01% of renewable electricity nationally.

DECC hope this decision will stimulate action to tie in to their wider climate change mitigation strategy to increase the percentage of energy generated from renewable sources, and reduce carbon emissions. The decision also mirrors the new Coalition Government’s local democracy agenda, by giving Local Authorities an active role in the low carbon transition and the freedom to lead by example. To read Huhne’s letter to Local Authorities, which includes more information on the rationale behind his decision, click here.

There are many different ways the UK can achieve its target of cutting greenhouse gas emissions 80% by 2050. Do you rely entirely on renewable energy sources? Do you develop a strategy using a mixture of nuclear and carbon capture and storage? Or do you focus on cutting energy consumption, rather than changing methods of energy production?

A series of different pathways can be explored using the DECC’s carbon calculator. You are able to modify two columns of sliders; one which gives different scenarios for energy consumption, and one which allows different scenarios for energy production. For each factor, you can select a few options between ‘no change to recent trends’, and a level of change which is described as a ‘heroic effort.’

What’s clear after a quick play with the calculator is that achieving the government’s target is going to be difficult – making effort described as ‘achievable’ by ‘most stakeholders’, the UK would only cut emissions by 42% by 2050.

Climate change Ministers from UK, France and Germany have kicked off a joint initiative to push the EU to move from its current 20% target to a 30% emissions cut by 2020 – in line with commitments made in the Coalition Agreement. The three countries simultaneously published an article outlining the economic benefits for increasing Europe’s targets.

The Secretary of State, Chris Huhne, was clear that the current target was “not sufficient” in allowing business investment in green technologies, and risks “putting Europe in the global slow lane of maximising low carbon economic opportunities.” “Europe’s economic competitors are not hanging back’, the article warns.

The message, however, is positive. “We are convinced that Europe has the capability – but it does not yet have the right incentives for changing investment patterns.”

The full article can be read here.

Building public trust in science should be the scientific community’s top priority. That is the conclusion of an editorial in this week’s Nature (Vol 466: 1 July 2010), which should act as a rallying cry to researchers to engage with the public and policy-makers. Another editorial feature highlights the potential of science blogs to allow researchers to do this.

The stimulus for the editorial is a news feature (p24-25) examining the erosion of public trust in science in the wake of the ‘climategate’ controversies (leaked emails from the Climatic Research Unit at UEA and contention over reporting of glacial melting in the latest IPCC report). Despite concerns that public belief in the reality of climate change has taken a nosedive in recent months, the article suggests that the situation isn’t as dire as many researchers believe: a survey at Cardiff University this year indicated that 78% of UK residents believed that the climate was changing, compared to 91% in 2005. More than three quarters of respondents ascribed climate change at least in part to human activity. A recent BBC poll showed that although there was a drop from November 2009 to February 2010 in the proportion of those believing climate change is caused by human actions, those who had heard about the ‘climategate’ controversies had not shifted their opinion as a result. In fact, it’s more likely that the decline is attributable to the exceptionally cold winter experienced in the UK. In the words of one contributor to the article, Jon Krosnick, a social psychologist from Stanford, “the way people decide whether climate change is happening is by sticking their finger out the window”.

There’s no doubt that climate scientists are facing mounting attacks on the integrity of their research. What can the scientific community do to face these challenges robustly and ensure public support for action to tackle climate change? Sheila Jasanoff, a science-policy expert at Harvard (and a contributor to Monday night’s Royal Society Science Policy Centre Debate, covered on this blog) says that more communication is good, but warns against the simplistic ‘deficit model’ – that a problem can be solved simply by transferring more knowledge. Researchers should instead seek to include the public in decision-making, for example as members of advisory bodies.

The editorial piece urges scientists to recognise themselves as ‘public figures and honest brokers’, avoiding hype and over exaggeration and welcoming legitimate scepticism into debate. They must provide policy-makers and the public with clear, accurate and credible information, acknowledging uncertainties and nuances. Polls in the U.S. have consistently shown the public trust in scientists is second only to military leaders – and jointly tied with physicians. To maintain this level of trust scientists and scientific institutions must become more transparent and open about the scientific process and the current limitations of our knowledge.

The Committee on Climate Change has repeated its call made last year for a “step change” in UK policy to meet climate change targets, despite a reduction in emissions.

Although greenhouse gas emissions fell 8.6% from 2008 to 2009, it has mainly been caused by a drop in economic activity as a result of the recession. Prior to the recession emissions fell by 0.6% annually, short of the 2-3% annual cuts required in the period to 2020 to meet carbon budgets. The recession, therefore, has created an “illusion” that progress is being made to reduce emissions.

The committee’s second annual report to parliament continues by warning that the government cannot continue to rely on “light touches”. Instead, it proposes the government introduces new policy in electricity generation, providing greater incentives for home insulation, setting more ambitious targets for the number of electric cars on the road, and encouraging farmers to use fertiliser more efficiently.

The full report can be read here.

Natural England and the British Ecological Society are working together to organise a conference early next year, exploring conservation in the context of a changing climate. This event will take place over two days, 11 – 12 January, at Charles Darwin House, London; the headquarters of the BES.

Effective adaptation research requires a strong partnership between researchers, practitioners and policy makers. It is essential that adaptation measures are developed on the basis of sound science, combined with a rigorous assessment of their feasibility and acceptability to society. This conference will therefore bring scientists together with policy makers and those who are actually implementing adaptation measures.

More information will be available shortly on the Public Policy section of the BES website, under ‘Forthcoming Meetings’.

Researchers from Cambridge University will be appearing at the Hay Festival of Literature and Arts, which began yesterday and finishes on 6th June. The University has set up a blog, with previews of the researchers’ talks and live updates from the Festival, posted as their talks are delivered. Topics will include the climate change and stem cell research.

Cambridge at the Hay Festival Blog

Details of the agreements between the Conservatives and Liberal Democrats have been announced, outlining the coalition’s stance on several environmental topics.

A document on the Liberal Democrat’s website outlines measures seeking to fulfill “joint ambitions for a low carbon and eco-friendly economy”.

Measures include aims to encourage marine energy production and significantly increase energy production from waste, continue public sector investment in CCS technology and introduce emission standards for new coal-fired power stations, and promote green spaces and wildlife corridors to “halt the loss of habitats and restore biodiversity”.

Agreement has also been reached to allow continued Liberal Democrat opposite to new nuclear power plants, whilst permitting the government to “bring forward the national planning statement for ratification by Parliament so that new nuclear construction becomes possible”.

Further details on the arrangement can be found on the Liberal Democrat’s website.

Details of the US bill on climate change are set to be announced later today, whilst Europe’s climate commissioner Connie Hedegaard is to set the case for raising cuts in CO2 emissions across the EU.

Both however face opposition. The American bill, proposing a cut of 17% by 2010, contains several measures to allay opposition, including the possibility of easing restrictions on offshore drilling and a boost for the nuclear power sector. The bill will propose setting a price on carbon emissions for large polluters, and provide monetary incentives for firms to develop so-called clean coal technologies.

However, it is possible that the bill will not be discussed until after elections later this year, where the Democrats may lose their stranglehold on Congress, making it much more difficult to pass comprehensive climate and energy legislation.

An increase in emission cuts may suffer less concerted opposition in the EU. However, a consortium of major European industries issued a statement last week opposing plans to increase cuts to 30% without a reciprocal agreement from the US.

Although this is also the current EU position, Ms Hedegaard said that achieving the current target of 20% is now a third cheaper due to the economic recession, and increasing cuts to 30% may only cost a further 11 bin Euros. Her paper, set to be published later this month, will analyse the costs and benefits of such cuts.

Original articles: “Europe to examine case for bigger CO2 cuts” by Roger Harrabin (http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/science_and_environment/10109088.stm) and “US senators Kerry and Lieberman to unveil climate bill” (http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/americas/8676581.stm).