Structures in Norwegian climate research Knut H. Alfsen CICERO Senter for klimaforskning NORKLIMA/Bergen, 20.10.2009
Themes What is the structure today? What is the ideal structure? How to close the gap - what to do?
Klima 21 - a result of the climate agreement Advising the authorities on climate research issues Four working groups: Climate science Impacts and Adaptation Mitigation Structure of the norwegian climate research community
Klima21s styringsgruppe Siri Beate Hatlen, konserndirektør, Universitetssykehusene Oslo Einar Enger, konsernsjef, Norges statsbaner Stein Lier-Hansen, adm. dir., Norsk Industri Helge Drange, professor, Universitetet i Bergen- Bjerknessenteret Pål Prestrud, direktør, Cicero Marit Reigstad, forsker, Norges fiskerihøgskole/uit Arild Vatn, professor, Universitetet for miljø og biovitenskap Ellen Hambro, direktør, Statens forurensingstilsyn Anne Enger, Fylkesmann i Østfold Lars Haltbrekken, leder, Norges naturvernforbund Anne Kjersti Fahlvik, divisjonsdirektør, Norges forskningsråd
I mandatet til Klima21 Hvor kan forskning på klimautfordringen gjøre en forskjell? Hvor og hvordan kan norsk forskning på klimautfordringen gjøre en forskjell? Hvordan kan Norge, som aktiv deltaker i det internasjonale samfunn, gjøre en forskjell i møte med klimautfordringen? Hvor er kunnskapshullene?
Klima21 - strategirapporten Styringsgruppen skal peke på et begrenset antall prioriterte områder Langsiktighet, forutsigbarhet og helhetlig Hvor forskning og norsk forskning gjør en forskjell Hvilke premisser skal ligge til grunn for prioriteringer? Det haster! Nasjonalt ansvar Styrker i forskningen Nasjonale behov
Anbefalinger fra arbeidsgruppene (kort) Arbeidsgruppe 1 - Klimasystemet Regionalisering/nedskaleringer Ekstremvær «Tipping points» Økt forståelse av Arktis klima Tallfesting av usikkerheter i klimaprediksjoner Bedret prosessforståelse
Anbefalinger fra arbeidsgruppene Arbeidsgruppe 2 Konsekvenser og tilpasninger Bedre klimascenarier Realistiske premisser for innretning av effektstudier Helhetlige systemstudier Samspillseffekter mellom og innen systemer Styrke forskning på klimatilpasning Dypere og bredere forskning på usikkerhet
Anbefalinger fra arbeidsgruppene Arbeidsgruppe 3 rammebetingelser og utslippsreduksjoner Nasjonale rammebetingelser og virkemidler Virkemiddelbruk, hindringer, gjennomførbarhet, institusjonelle rammer Internasjonale rammer og virkemidler Avtaler, håndhevelse av, norske tiltak og verden, CDM
Klima 21, WG4 composition Members: Knut H. Alfsen, CICERO (chair) Eystein Jansen, Bjerknes Kirsten Broch Mathisen, The Research Council Alf Håkon Hoel, University in Tromsø Secretariat: Georg H. Hansen, The Research Council Reference group: Odd Einar Dørum, Venstre Inger Hanssen-Bauer, met.no Birger Solberg, UMB Harald Dovland, Ministry of Environment Nalan Koc, Norwegian Polar Institute
Mandate WG4 «Arbeidsgruppe 4 skal vurdere strukturen i norsk klimaforskning, herunder identifisere styrker og mangler ved nåværende struktur. Det skal framlegges forslag til konkrete tiltak som kan sikre en helhetlig og forutsigbar klimaforskning i Norge som ivaretar behovet for langsiktig kompetanseoppbygging og kunnskapsgenerering innenfor de prioriterte fagområdene.»
What is «climate research»? A climate researcher is a person who over some time mainly have studied issues of relevance to climate change and actively have published the results in scientific journals. By climate research is meant research on the climate system, impacts of climate change on the physical and biological environment as well as on the society, research on climate policy and adaptation strategies and research on the climate challenge related to various industries.
Total resource use in climate research (mill. kr.) Kilde: NIFU-Step
Climate research supported by the Research Council (mill. kr.)
Project activities
Own survey: Perspectives/dimensions Disciplines: Natural science Social science Institutions: Universities and colleges: U&H Public institutions (e.g.: Havforsk., Polarinst., met.no,...) Independent institutes (e.g.: CICERO, Nansen, FNI,...) Financing: Project financing (Research Council, EU,...) Other financing
Short- and long term financing (man-years) Project financing Other financing Total U&H 21 % 15 % 36 % Government 9 % 9 % 17 % institutions Independent inst. 33 % 14 % 46 % Total 62 % 38 % 100 % - U&H/governmental inst. and independent institutions approximately 50/50 - Short term financing dominates - Independent institutes more dependent on short term financing than other types of institutions
Structures - disciplines (manyears) Natural science Social science Total U&H 29 % 7 % 36 % Government inst. 17 % 1 % 17 % Independent inst. 39 % 7 % 46 % Total 85 % 15 % 100 % - Natural science dominates - Social science absent from governmental institutions - Social science fragmented and short term financing
Disciplines and man-years Natural science Short term Natural science Long term Social science Short term Social science Long term
Ideal structure? - 4 points We should aim for a structure that allows research to: Deliver good quality: Participate at the international research frontier in order to have access to knowledge generated there Deliver results that can be used to identify, evaluate and prepare actions to: reduce emissions provide information for international negotiations and national prioritization provide information for adequate adaptation Deliver understanding and local scenarios for public authorities, business and society at large Build on comparative advantages with respect to our natural surroundings and existing competencies.
Main conclusion Good quality and high relevance requires that research is carried out within a long term and predictable framework (financial and institutional). We need a better balance between long term and predictable financing (as exemplified by current state institutions) and more short term and dynamic financing (as exemplified by current project financing through the Research Council and the EU). 15-20 years
Recommended thematic actions Establish long term financing of two centers on a) international climate policy including security issue and policies for mitigating GHG emissions b) policies for adaptation to climate change. Secure long term and adequate financing for climate modeling work including user oriented communication of results. Establish a thematic centre for climatic studies by continuing the activities in Bergen/Bjerknes centre. Further develop the national centre for ice, climate and ecosystems (ICE) in Tromsø. Secure a more coordinated effort within the field of climatic impacts on terrestrial ecosystems and continue substantial efforts within the field of climatic impacts on marine ecosystems. Establish a centre for «climate services», i.e. a centre for integrated climate assessments and communication based on scientific knowledge on the challenge of climate change.
Important In addition to establishing centers, project financing through the Research Council must continue. Necessary financing of long term observational time series and other infrastructure of high relevance to climate research must be secured.
Other measures Klima 21 should consider suggesting that the overall responsibility for norwegian climate research should be placed in one ministry. (Which one?) Klima 21 must follow up and on a running basis assess the development of the structure of Norwegian climate research Klima 21 should seek to establish a better use of norwegian researchers and their knowledge in ongoing international negotiations.
Division of labour? Tromsø - snow and ice and marine ecosystems Trondheim - technology Bergen - Climate modeling, marine ecosystems Oslo - Atmospheric chemistry Up for grabs?: international climate policy, control policies for mitigation and adaptation (social sciences) Terrestrial ecosystems (currently Ås, UiO, NTNU, UiB)... Technology Bjerknes Hav ICE?
Thank you for your attention! www.cicero.uio.no 19