The great global warming debate, Phase 2

This is not to say that there will suddenly be complete concord, but the debate will increasingly shift in a more positive direction.

The current power structures will attempt to maintain control over the change process, but they have been seriously weakened by the global economic crisis. If viable alternatives arise and gain popular support, as has happened recently in South America with the “pink tide” and in eastern Europe with the “orange revolutions”, then real change may happen quickly.

Hopefully future debate will be informed more by scientific evidence than convenient ideology, and here both scientists and media have a critical role to play as the science needs to be communicated much better.

There are growing signs that scientists are willing to speak out on these issues, which is an important development. In playing their usual limited role - to merely generate the science to inform debate undertaken by others - they just left the field open to the so-called sceptics who managed to convey the impression that the science was much less certain than it is.

Current information technology allows for a more open public debate than in the past, but a relevant knowledge base is essential if this is to be effective. Those with relevant expertise need to participate fully in the policy-making process, and since the issue is essentially scientific that means scientists themselves.

The debate on global warming stalled for more than a decade as various factors came into play, including an irresponsible American administration and party politics generally. Now Kyoto is about to give way to Copenhagen and the world is increasingly aware that global action is necessary to solve global problems. At last a real beginning to effective policy-making can start.