Computer models, says Vaugan, really call for cutbacks of 50 or 60 percent from 1990 emission levels just to hold the present level of CO2. Plus we have the whole issue of developing countries where the economic boom that's likely is to occur in India, China and Brazil will fully be accompanied by a boom in the emissions of CO2. Not only do we have to develop solutions for ourselves, we have to develop solutions which we can turn around and advocate to a lot of these countries. Vaughan is frank about the contradictions inherent in asking science, with its rigorous methodology and obsession with certainty, to guide the helm of policy-making through the uncharted waters of climate change. The Canada Country Study is about risk.
Scientists historically are very uncomfortable about talking about risk.
We've built ourselves a bit of a trap in science - we reward our scientists, we promote them on the basis of their publications, we lead them to believe that their status in the scientific world is more important than anything else, in terms of what drives them. At the same time we ask them for input into decision making that is rapid and effective. But the two are contrary. Input into decision making is most often based on risk. If you go to a scientist, any scientist, and ask, is climate change really occurring as we anticipate it and he will tell you that he must gather thirty years more data in order to answer that question.