The UnAustralian

Tuesday, May 13, 2003
Missing The Forest for the Trees

Note: This is a working "post", rather than anything which even remotely resembles reality. I would really appreciate other peoples comments, especially those with an economics background (I have never studied economics so my knowledge is pretty much nonexistent).

It appears to have become fashionable among the ideologically correct to refer to a recent critique of the economic scenarios used by the IPCC, by Ian Castles (National Centre for Development Studies) and Gerald Henderson (former OECD chief economist) (hereby referred to as Castles/Henderson). By referring directly to Castles/Henderson document, one can pull out some pretty impressive statistics as too why the IPCC economic scenarios are based in fantasy land, all without ever reading the Special Report on Emissions Scenarios. Unfortunately Castles/Henderson give a pretty misleading overview of the IPCC economic scenarios so far too many people are making incorrect assumptions about the nature of the IPCC growth scenarios.

I'll spread this document over several posts for readability's sake. I'll also try to give each post a different aim.

* Why are the scenarios important and how do they work
* Why Castles/Henderson miss the whole point of the emission scenarios

I've already written a bit on the scenarios already. This post describes the scenarios, and this lists the projected growth rates.

9:52 PM
| 9:52 PM