SHARE
In this first update paper since the 2008 Garnaut Climate Change Review, five issues that have been the subject of criticism are addressed and largely refuted.
Summary of key points
The 2008 Garnaut Climate Change Review argued that it is neither rational nor helpful for someone to reject a policy recommendation because they do not like it.
- For discussion of policy to be productive, it is necessary for debate to focus on the validity of the premises, logic and information that led to a recommendation.
- The transparency of the Review’s decision-making framework, premises and sources of information was designed to encourage rational criticism or acceptance of its conclusions.
There have been few general criticisms of the Review’s decision-making framework. It has survived the public discussion as a robust, logical and ethical framework within which to consider the diabolical policy problem of climate change.
- However, there have been some criticisms of specific choices made within the decision-making framework.
Five issues that have been the subject of criticism are addressed in this Update Paper: the Review’s choice of discount rates; the treatment of uncertainty; the contributions to mitigation from low-income developing countries; determining Australia’s proportionate effort as part of global mitigation; and the optimal balance between efforts on climate change mitigation and on climate change adaptation.
The Update Paper finds that:
- the Review’s choice of discount rate was sound and that the Australian case for climate change action is not affected by reasonable variations in the approach to choosing a discount rate;
- the presence of uncertainty in the range of possible climate outcomes strengthens the case for climate change action;
- the Review’s approach to the treatment of developing countries as part of a global response remains a robust and ethical basis for a long-term solution;
- the case for substantial and well-designed Australian action to encourage international agreement on climate responses remains compelling; and
- while the current and prospective realities of damage from climate change warrant effective efforts on adaptation, this does not weaken the case for strong focus on mitigation.
