Search

Home

About the Review

Workplan

FAQs

Meetings

Evidence

News

Links

Contacting Us 

About the Review 

About | Biographies

Overview

The independent Climate Change Email Review was announced in December 2009 after 

emails from the University of East Anglia’s Climatic Research Unit were hacked and 

published online. 

The Review was called for and is being funded by the University of East Anglia, but its work 

and findings are wholly independent. 

The review will: 

1. Examine the hacked e-mail exchanges, other relevant e-mail exchanges and any other 

information held at the Climatic Research Unit to determine whether there is any evidence of 

manipulation or suppression of data which is at odds with acceptable scientific practice and 

may therefore call into question any of the research outcomes. 

2. Review the Climatic Research Unit’s policies and practices for acquiring, assembling, 

subjecting to peer review and disseminating data and research findings, and their 

compliance or otherwise with best scientific practice. 

3. Review the Climatic Research Unit’s compliance or otherwise with the University of East 

Anglia’s policies and practices regarding requests under the Freedom of Information Act 

(‘the FOIA’) and the Environmental Information Regulations (‘the EIR’) for the release of 

data. 

4. Review and make recommendations as to the appropriate management, governance and 

security structures for the Climatic Research Unit and the security, integrity and release of 

the data it holds. 

The remit of the Review can be amended or added to at the discretion of the independent 

chair, Sir Muir Russell.

The Review team

The Independent Climate Change Email Review is being conducted by an expert team, led 

by Sir Muir Russell KCB DL FRSE. The Review team has more than 100 years’ collective 

expertise of scientific research methodology and a wide range of scientific backgrounds. 

None have any links to the Climatic Research Unit, or the United Nations’ Intergovernmental 

Panel on Climate Change (IPCC). More information about each of the review team members 

can be found in the Biographies section.

The House of Commons Science and Technology Committee Inquiry

On 22 January 2010 the Science and Technology Committee announced an inquiry into the 

disclosure of climate data from the Climatic Research Unit at the University of East Anglia. 

Full information about the inquiry and its terms of reference can be found on its website: 

http://www.parliament.uk/...

The Committee invited written submissions from interested parties by Wednesday 10 

February. The independent Climate Change Email Review made a written submission to 

the inquiry by this deadline, which is available to download here. 

Latest 

News

7 July 2010 

REPORT PUBLISHED...more

5 July 2010 

Publication date set for 

13:00 on the 7 July...more

16 April 2010 

Second tranche of 

submissions 

published...more

Review 

Update

The Independent Climate Change Email inquiry Page 1 of 2

http://www.cce-review.org/About.php 7/20/2010
Sir Muir Russell, Chair of the independent Review, also took part in the oral evidence 

session held by the Committee on 1 March.

back to top

CCE-Review 2010

The Independent Climate Change Email inquiry Page 2 of 2

http://www.cce-review.org/About.php 7/20/2010
Search

Home

About the Review

Workplan

FAQs

Meetings

Evidence

News

Links

Contacting Us 

Date: 06/07/10

Type: Written evidence

Number: 0153

Evidence

Evidence

Evidence and submissions to the Review will be published on this page. 

The Review will publish all submissions and evidence by the conclusion of the Review, 

unless there are legal difficulties to prevent publication, or unless they are abusive or 

potentially defamatory. 

If you have made a submission, it will be possible for the public to see that you or your 

organisation have done so – though the Review will not publish private postal or email 

addresses, or telephone contact details. The team will publish submissions in full 

accordance with the Data Protection Act. 

Publication of submissions

The Review reserves the right to withhold publication of submissions if they are abusive, 

potentially defamatory or there are other legal difficulties which prevent publication. In these 

cases, the Review will seek permission for us to publish contact details for the submission’s 

authors, so that interested parties may contact them directly. 

Publication of correspondence or submissions by the Review are not an endorsement of the 

views expressed by the author(s).

David Holland's submission: 

Mr Holland has made a submission to the Review which, like every other submission, has 

been read and noted in full. However, on legal advice we cannot publish the submission in 

its current form. Mr Holland subsequently submitted a letter response in lieu of his 

submission. This also cannot be published in its current form. The Review has offered to 

publish a redacted version of the letter response and publish Mr Holland's contact details for 

those who wish to obtain a copy of his submission directly from him. However, Mr Holland 

has not consented to this. 

External websites

Some of the submissions include website details and/or hyperlinks to websites or blogs. The 

Review is not responsible for the content of external websites referred to in any submission. 

The Review is not responsible for maintaining these websites, and they can be modified or 

updated without the Review’s knowledge or agreement. 

Publication of submissions containing website details and/or links to websites or blogs 

should not be understood to be an endorsement of that website or blog, its content or the 

site’s owners. 

Copyrighted materials

Some submissions include materials which are held under copyright by third parties (e.g. 

excerpts from journal articles or books, or materials written or published by a third party). 

Since the Review does not have the right to reproduce copyrighted materials, the Review 

has removed these materials and provided details about where they can be found and/or 

purchased.

Sort by Date | Type | Number | Author

Latest 

News

7 July 2010 

REPORT PUBLISHED...more

5 July 2010 

Publication date set for 

13:00 on the 7 July...more

16 April 2010 

Second tranche of 

submissions 

published...more

Review 

Update

The Independent Climate Change Email inquiry Page 1 of 3

http://www.cce-review.org/Evidence.php 7/20/2010
Author: Sir Russell's response to Graham Stringer MP's enquiry

Link: click to open

Date: 02/07/10

Type: Written evidence

Number: 0115

Author: Communication relating to Keith Briffa's editorial treatment of a 

submitted manuscript

Link: click to open

Date: 02/07/10

Type: Written evidence

Number: 0116

Author: A list of all FOI and EIR requests received relating to the Climatic 

Research Unit since 2005

Link: click to open

Date: 02/07/10

Type: Written evidence

Number: 0122

Author: Evidence from Review Editors for Chapters 3 and 6 of the IPCC Fourth 

Assessment

Link: click to open

Date: 25/06/10

Type: Written evidence

Number: 0135

Author: Keith R. Briffa - Response to additional Question regarding Keith Briffa's 

request to Eugene Wahl and his Response

Link: click to open

Date: 25/06/10

Type: Written evidence

Number: 0140

Author: Keith Briffa, Response to additional Question regarding Keith Briffa's 

request to Eugene Wahl and his Response

Link: click to open

Date: 15/06/10

Type: Oral evidence

Number: 0144

Author: Notes of Sir Muir Russell & David Eyton's interview with Professor 

Trevor Davies, PVC Research, Enterprise and Engagement

Link: click to open

Date: 09/06/10

Type: Written submission

Number: 0104

Author: Stephen McIntyre

Link: click to open

Date: 08/06/10

Type: Written evidence

Number: 0112

Author: Response from Lisa Williams to questions from Muir Russell on 

governance

Link: click to open

Date: 26/05/10

Type: Written submission

Number: 0103

Author: various

Link: click to open

 1 

2 3

4 5

6 7

8 9

10

11

12

13

14

15

[Next] [Last Page]

CCE-Review 2010

The Independent Climate Change Email inquiry Page 2 of 3

http://www.cce-review.org/Evidence.php 7/20/2010
The Review shall not be liable for any of the following losses or damage (whether such 

damage or losses were foreseen, foreseeable, known or otherwise): (a) loss of data; (b) loss 

of revenue or anticipated profits; (c) loss of business; (d) loss of opportunity; (e) loss of 

goodwill or injury to reputation; (f) losses suffered by third parties; or (g) any indirect, 

consequential, special or exemplary damages arising from the use of www.cce-review.org

regardless of the form of action. 

back to top 

The Independent Climate Change Email inquiry Page 3 of 3

http://www.cce-review.org/Evidence.php 7/20/2010
Search

Home

About the Review

Workplan

FAQs

Meetings

Evidence

News

Links

Contacting Us 

Workplan

Remit

The remit of the review is as follows: 

Examine the hacked e-mail exchanges, other relevant e-mail exchanges and any 

other information held at the Climatic Research Unit to determine whether there is 

any evidence of manipulation or suppression of data which is at odds with 

acceptable scientific practice and may therefore call into question any of the 

research outcomes. 

1.

Review the Climatic Research Unit’s policies and practices for acquiring, 

assembling, subjecting to peer review and disseminating data and research 

findings, and their compliance or otherwise with best scientific practice. 

2.

Review the Climatic Research Unit’s compliance or otherwise with the University of 

East Anglia’s policies and practices regarding requests under the Freedom of 

Information Act (‘the FOIA’) and the Environmental Information Regulations (‘the 

EIR’) for the release of data. 

3.

Review and make recommendations as to the appropriate management, 

governance and security structures for the Climatic Research Unit and the security, 

integrity and release of the data it holds. 

4.

Approach

The remit requires the Review to address the specific allegations about the way in which 

CRU has handled its data, reflecting comments in the e-mail exchanges that have been 

made public. 

To do this, it will seek written submissions from CRU and other appropriate parts of UEA. It 

will also invite interested parties to comment on what the Issues paper covers, and to 

propose any further matters that clearly fall within the Remit and should also be examined. 

The Team wishes to focus on the honesty, rigour and openness with which CRU handled its 

data. It wishes to gain a proper understanding of:

• The range of data involved, and how it has been indexed and archived. 

The procedures, processes and relevant protocols used to handle the data, 

recognizing that these may have changed over time as data-handling capacity has 

developed. 

•

• The associated metadata, algorithms and codes used for analysis. 

• The extent to which other independent analysis produces the same conclusions.

The peer review process, examining how much was in common between the work 

of the reviewers and the reviewed.

•

The Review’s remit does not invite it to re-do the scientific work of CRU. An audit or 

assessment of that type would be a different exercise, requiring different skills and 

resources. However, the Review’s conclusions will be useful to any such audit by pointing to 

any steps that need to be taken in relation to data, its availability and its handling. 

In making its analysis and conclusions, the Team will test the relevant work against pertinent 

standards at the time it was done, recognizing that such standards will have changed. It will 

also test them against current best practice, particularly statements of the ethics and norms 

such as those produced by the UK Government Office for Science and by the US National 

Academy of Sciences. These identify principles relating to rigour, respect and responsibility 

in scientific ethics and to integrity, accessibility and stewardship in relation to research data. 

This overall approach will allow the Team to establish a conceptual framework within which 

it can make judgements and comment about key issues such as the level of uncertainty 

inherent in all science, and the particular confidence limits associated with the CRU work.

Transparency

The Team will operate as openly and transparently as possible. It is establishing a website 

which will eventually display all of the submissions received, correspondence, analyses and 

Latest 

News

7 July 2010 

REPORT PUBLISHED...more

5 July 2010 

Publication date set for 

13:00 on the 7 July...more

16 April 2010 

Second tranche of 

submissions 

published...more

Review 

Update

The Independent Climate Change Email inquiry Page 1 of 2

http://www.cce-review.org/Workplan.php 7/20/2010
conclusions. The aim will be to publish all received submissions quickly, unless there are 

wholly exceptional reasons to delay, for example legal issues. 

Issues

The Review team have set out the specific allegations it intends to investigate in the Issues 

for Examination Document:

Issues for Examination, February 2010 

Timescale

The Review team issued a call for submissions on 11 February 2010, and expects to receive 

submissions from UEA and the public by the end of February . 

These responses will require analysis and there may be follow-up questions and/or 

interviews. The team expect to have at least preliminary conclusions by Spring 2010. 

back to top

CCE-Review 2010

The Independent Climate Change Email inquiry Page 2 of 2

http://www.cce-review.org/Workplan.php 7/20/2010