Speaker Biographies and Presentations

Stephen H. Schneider of Stanford University is a renowned climatologist, founder and Editor of the journal Climatic Change, and a lead author of this year’s forthcoming “Synthesis Report” from the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change. After earning his Ph.D. in Mechanical Engineering and Plasma Physics from Columbia University, Dr. Schneider studied the role of greenhouse gases on climate as a postdoctoral fellow at NASA's Goddard Institute for Space Studies. Internationally recognized as one of the world's leading experts on climate change, Dr. Schneider focuses on climate change science, integrated assessment of ecological and economic impacts of human-induced climate change, and identifying viable climate policies and technological solutions.

Philip Mote, a research scientist and Principal with the Climate Impacts Group and an Affiliate Professor of Atmospheric Sciences at the University of Washington, is Washington’s state climatologist. His research interests include observed variability and change in Northwest climate and mountain snowpack, and influences of climate on water resources and wildfire. Dr. Mote is a Lead Author of chapters on climate observations in the Working Group I “Scientific Basis” report of the IPCC Fourth Assessment (February 2007). He has a Ph.D. in Atmospheric Sciences from UW.

Bob Doppelt directs Resource Innovations, a sustainable development research and technical assistance program, and the Climate Leadership Initiative (CLI), a climate change research and technical assistance program, in the Institute for a Sustainable Environment at the University of Oregon. He teaches systems thinking, global climate change, and sustainable development courses in the Department of Planning and Public Policy. He is a member of Oregon Governor Ted Kulongoski's global warming advisory committee, the Climate Change Integration Group (CCIG).

Jayant Sathaye is Group Leader of the International Energy Studies Group at Lawrence Berkeley Laboratories in Berkeley, California. Dr. Sathaye is internationally recognized for his work on climate change issues in transportation, land-use change, and forestry, and on energy demand and supply in the developing world. A contributor to reports of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change since 1990, Dr. Sathaye is currently a co-Convening Lead Author for the Sustainable Development and Mitigation chapter of the Working Group III “Mitigation of Climate Change” report of the IPCC Fourth Assessment (May 2007). He holds degrees from the Indian Institute of Technology (Bombay) and the University of California at Irvine.

W. Michael Hanemann is Chancellor’s Professor in the Department of Agricultural and Resource Economics and director of the California Climate Change Center at the University of California at Berkeley. His research interests include environmental economics and policy, water pricing and management, and the economics of irreversibility and adaptive management. Dr. Hanemann holds degrees from Oxford University, the London School of Economics, and Harvard University.

Patricia Romero-Lankao is Deputy Director of the Institute for the Study of Society and Environment at the National Center for Atmospheric Research in Boulder, Colorado. A social scientist with advanced degrees from the Autnonomous Metropolitan University in Mexico City and the University of Bonn (Germany), Dr. Romero-Lankao is an author of the Industry, Settlement, and Society chapter of the Working Group II “Impacts, Adaptation, and Vulnerability” report of the IPCC Fourth Assessment (April 2007).

Kathleen Miller is an economist with the The Institute for the Study of Society and Environment at the National Center for Atmospheric Research in Boulder, Colorado.  A specialist on water resources, fisheries, agriculture, and energy demand, Dr. Miller earned her doctorate at the University of Washington where her thesis dealt with western water rights. She is an author of the Freshwater Resources chapter of the Working Group II “Impacts, Adaptation, and Vulnerability” report of the IPCC Fourth Assessment (April 2007).

Morris A. “Bud” Ward literally “wrote the book” on climate change reporting, with his Reporting on Climate Change: Understanding the Science (edited by Bud and published by the Environmental Law Institute) now in its third edition. An environmental journalist and analyst, he is the former editor of The Bureau of National Affairs magazine Environment Reporter and founding editor of the Environmental Law Institute's policy magazine The Environmental Forum. A commentator for National Public Radio's “All Things Considered” and “Morning Edition” and author of two books and more than one thousand articles on environmental issues, Bud helped found the Society of Environmental Journalists.

Additional Resources

Newspapers and Climate Change:
The Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) has now released its much-awaited Fourth Assessment Report. How will editors at major publications ensure that it is covered accurately?
By Bud Ward
Courtesy of Editor & Publisher, January 2007 issue

Throughout 2007, newspaper editors, faced with a certain "inconvenient truth," will need to probe bedrock journalistic principles. Does the emerging global warming crisis pit the two hallmarks of accuracy and balance against each other?

The Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) -- a joint effort of the United Nations Environment Programme and the World Meteorological Organization -- has now released its much-awaited Fourth Assessment Report, based on the findings of thousands of the world's most respected climate scientists. As the most authoritative reference on global warming, our influence on it, and what it means for our future, these reports are at the core of our understanding of climate change.

Editors are in a sensitive position. On a science-driven issue with so much at stake, how do they ensure their coverage accurately and fairly represents the state of accepted scientific knowledge?

Major news organizations over the past few years have often acknowledged the growing scientific consensus that excessive emissions of carbon dioxide are directly affecting our climate. Increasingly they are going beyond tired "he said/she said" formulaic coverage of the issue. More and more of them recognize that the professional scientific community overwhelmingly accepts the troubling underlying science on the issue.

IPCC's reports are widely recognized as the gold standard on climate change, the term many scientists prefer to the more colloquial "global warming." Following the traditional journalistic approaches made popular in Journalism 101, the media long had sought to "balance" the IPCC findings with the contrarian views of a handful of professional doubting scientists -- or, far worse, political operatives.

That often made for good copy, but not for good science reporting.

Like long-forsaken efforts to "balance" the coverage of health impacts of tobacco, that approach has pretty much fallen by the wayside as editors strive to balance not mere opinion, but scientific evidence. For every Galileo, as they say, there are thousands of wannabes and pretenders. "Balancing" a few paid deniers against the broad consensus of thousands of the world's climate experts no longer cuts it.

The IPCC "Working Group I" scientific report is the first of several due from the IPCC during the year. They arrive at a time not only of growing international and domestic concern, but also at a moment of broadening corporate and private sector recognition of a need to act on, and not just further study, the challenge. Changes in the makeup of the congressional leadership in Washington and prospects that climate-change initiatives will be included in both political parties' strategic planning for the next presidential election further heighten the immediacy of the issue. But in the end, it may be that increased recognition of climate change as a critical local story is even more important.

For that strong scientific consensus on the causes of climate change, coupled with growing pressures from states and localities, is transforming the "global warming" story into one that transcends the science desk or environmental beat

So pervasive are the projected impacts of climate change that newsrooms across the country are starting to -- or should in the near future -- factor it into stories dealing with local development, tourism, agriculture, education, forestry, construction of housing, and local infrastructure, to name just a few issues.

Editors, however, need to appreciate the subtle but important distinctions the scientific community applies to terms such as uncertainty, evidence, prove and disprove, and correlation and causality. So-called experts speaking in absolutes and "beliefs" -- and not acknowledging legitimate uncertainties -- may well be dabbling more in political science than in the earth and climate sciences. Editors should also establish mentorships with scientists from nearby universities and community colleges -- "breakfasts with eggheads" is the term Canadian scientists and journalists endearingly use -- to complement their own internal science resources.

Along with providing excellent scientific background, that approach also is likely to lead to climate-change impact stories in your own communities.

Most importantly, editors should recognize that the time has come for climate change coverage to evolve from "whether" it is occurring to "what" to do about it. This evolution will present them with fertile fields for outstanding community journalism. And all of this can be accomplished without sacrificing the journalistic standards of accuracy and fairness at the altar of a false balance that serves only to mislead.

Bud Ward