cc: Cynparry@aol.com
date: Thu, 2 Dec 1999 10:08:08 EST
from: PARRYML@aol.com
subject: IPCC chapter on Europe
to: zkundze@man.poznan.pl, nwa1@soton.ac.uk, arnell61@btinternet.com, Wolfgang.Cramer@pik-potsdam.de, r.nicholls@mdx.ac.uk, A.Jordan@uea.ac.uk, j.palutikof@uea.ac.uk, mats.oquist@tema.liu.se, m.livermore@uea.ac.uk, m.hulme@uea.ac.uk, nleary@usgcrp.gov, p.martens@math.unimaas.nl, ucfwsdc@ucl.ac.uk, tim.carter@vyh.fi







To Dr Kundzewicz and all IPPC Chapter 13 authors, with copy to other authors 
of the ACACIA report.
Re: IPCC Tar WGII draft report Chapter 13, EUROPE


Lead authors of IPCC WGII are meeting in Canberra over 7-11 December to 
consider reviewers, comments on the draft chapter on Europe.  I regret tat I 
shall not be attending due to commitments elsewhere.  However, Dr Kundzewicz 
who will be present and I have consulted with him about the work to be done 
in Canberra and we believe this to be readily achievable (particularly 
considering the relatively strong state of the chapter).
I offer below some thoughts bout here we go from here.
FIRST, we have a quite strong chapter which we should now take the time to 
stand back and look at with respect to the key messages we wish to convey. We 
can start this process in Canberra and have two further months until the next 
submission date.
SECONDLY, revision is needed of the exec summary in order to encompass E. 
Europe and Russia.  The current bullet points are drawn from some careful 
thinking by the ACACIA authors, but refer to the EU. Should they not say 
something also about the adaptive capacity of Europe and the impact on it 
relative to other (more negatively) regions?
THIRDLY, the section on previous work needs expanding, and we need to make 
clear (in the exec summary and thru points in the text) what our new 
conclusions are.  I think this chapter represents a massive advance on the 
previous IPCC regional summary, so we cannot list all the now points, but at 
least can summarise the new conclusions.
FOURTH, the chapter has a north and western bias fist because the ACACIA 
report is stronger on the north and his is reflected here. We must try to 
balance this with more material on the Mediterranean area. Second, Zbysek 
needs help to build on the remarkable input he has made with colleagues from 
eastern Europe, especially by adding much more information on European Russia
FIFTH, scenarios. This requires plenary discussion, but I think the climate 
scenarios should remain here though perhaps reduced. They are in fact the 
IPCC rather than ACACIA scenarios since these are the same.  Reviewers' 
criticisms that the scenarios are not 'used' in the assessment are true for 
all the TAR.  The point is that readers will wish to know what climate change 
may face Europe, and they should be able to read about it here.  I am sending 
separately a short file with text from Jordan and colleagues on the economic 
and technical scenarios of Europe which I recommend should be a new 13.1.4.
SIXTH, at this stage I do not think we can add new authors (reviewers have 
noted there are none from France and SE Europe)l but  will you raise this 
with the Secretariat to see if IPCC regulations would allow, and then 
consider who might be appropriate.
SEVENTH, I agree that we should include more material from the US country 
studies in E. Europe.
FINALLY, it seems that the specific comments from reviewers are minor but 
useful, and should be incorporated where possible.

Perhaps authors could agree that any post-Canberra additions by authors 
should be submitted to Zbysek and me latest end January.  This would allow 
one month for editing and a final turn around by e-mail.

Best wishes for a sucessful meeting, and my apologies for not being with you.

Martin Parry
