Policy responses to rapid climate change: An epistemological critique of dominant approaches Mark Charlesworth a, *, Chukwumerije Okereke b,1 a Research Institute of Law Politics and Justice, Keele University, Keele, Staffordshire ST5 5BG, UK b Smith School of Enterprise and the Environment, University of Oxford, Hayes House, 75 George Street, OX1 2BQ, UK 1. Introduction Evidence is starting to accumulate for the possible beginnings of rapid climate change or at least more rapid change of systems that may affect the climate, than had been assumed (NSIDC, 2005; NASA, 2006; Walter et al., 2006; ESA, 2008, 2009; cf. Pearce, 2006). It can reasonably be argued that the climate and climate related systems are already rapidly changing. Schellnhuber et al. (2006) does not robustly dispel this possibility. This is not evidence of runaway climate change, but might be seen as an indication that a rapid cascade of climate change may become evident more quickly than has previously been ‘assumed’ (cf. IPCCWG2, 2001, p. 129). In this situation crucial questions are (1) how should society and policy respond to current indications of rapid climate change? (2) What should human responses be if the evidence becomes clearer? These questions are already being addressed in the seminal scholarship and highly influential policy documents (Hulme, 2003, 2008; Stern Report, 2006). However, extant approaches appear to embody critical assumptions that might lead to the development of grossly inadequate policies; or at a minimum should be subject to global public debate. These assumptions relate firstly, to the idea that humans can or will soon be able to predict the climate system including tipping points for its period of inertia—perhaps thousands of years. And, secondly that utilitarian economic assumptions can capture the range of human preferences over these periods. This article explores the origin of the predictive paradigm and questions the validity of this and closely related ideas as a basis for national and global climate policy-making. To end, we draw from theories of discursive democracy and virtue ethics to offer brief suggestions for complimentary or alternative approaches. Given the wide acknowledgement that climate change might be the most important challenge ever faced by humanity, we share with Achterberg (2001, p. 183) that the ethical basis for climate policy and indeed the governance of global environmental change be urgently held up for scrutiny. 2. Existing policy responses to rapid climate change The possibility of ‘rapid’ or ‘abrupt’ climate change had been mooted at least as long ago as 1992 (Mintzer, 1992, pp. 55–64; cf. Mercer, 1978, pp. 321–325). However, significant discussions of policy implications have only recently begun to emerge in the literature and policy circles (Rahmstorf, 1994, 1995; Schellnhuber, 1998, 2001; Schneider et al., 2002; Hulme, 2003, 2006, 2007, 2008; Schneider, 2003; POST, 2005; US Congressional Budget Office, 2005; Stern Report, 2006; Lowe, 2006). Existing policy or policy theory responses to rapid climate change tend to make the following key epistemological and ethical assumptions (cf. IPCCWG2, 2001, p. 124; Lenton et al., 2008; Pielke et al., 2000, pp. 385–386; Smith, 2003, pp. 29–51; Stern Review, 2006). The assumptions about knowledge of the Earth System appear to be (1) we need more knowledge so that we can know just how far we can push the climate (earth) system. (2) Humans can know what level Global Environmental Change xxx (2009) xxx–xxx ARTICLE INFO Article history: Received 7 January 2008 Received in revised form 22 August 2009 Accepted 14 September 2009 Keywords: Rapid climate change policy Prediction Epistemology Ethics ABSTRACT This paper reviews existing policy responses to rapid climate change and examines possible assumptions that underpin those responses. The analysis demonstrates that current policy responses to rapid climate change make unwarranted epistemological and ethical assumptions. Specifically, we argue that the assumptions about the possibility of predicting the climate system including tipping points linked to utilitarian ethical assumptions in the form of cost–benefit analysis are open to contestation and should be subject to global public debate. The paper considers alternative normative approaches and briefly proposes complementary policy responses. ß 2009 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved. * Corresponding author. Tel.: +44 01977 780116; fax: +44 01782 733592. E-mail addresses: m.e.charlesworth@keele.ac.uk (M. Charlesworth), Chuks.okereke@smithschool.ox.ac.uk (C. Okereke). 1 Tel.: +44 01865 614916; fax: +44 01865 614960. G Model JGEC-723; No of Pages 9 Please cite this article in press as: Charlesworth, M., Okereke, C., Policy responses to rapid climate change: An epistemological critique of dominant approaches. Global Environ. Change (2009), doi:10.1016/j.gloenvcha.2009.09.001 Contents lists available at ScienceDirect Global Environmental Change journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/gloenvcha 0959-3780/$ – see front matter ß 2009 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved. doi:10.1016/j.gloenvcha.2009.09.001