cc: shepherd_John,h.j.schellnhuber@uea.ac.uk
date: Mon Jun  2 15:26:40 2003
from: Mike Hulme <m.hulme@uea.ac.uk>
subject: Re: idea for Royal Society meeting
to: F.Berkhout@sussex.ac.uk (Frans Berkhout)

   Dear Frans,
   Thanks for alerting me to this.  I will bring this to the attention of John Schellnhuber
   who will also have some views.
   "Climate stabilisation" is certainly central to David Warrilow's interests, and has a
   policy driver rather than a scientific one, but it can mean different things to different
   people.  To do justice to it also requires a widely inter-disciplinary thrust, including
   economics and technology.
   A variant on this theme might be to focus on critical thresholds for adaptation to climate
   change in both human and natural systems - this could bring in some interesting
   non-standard scientific perspectives from anthropology and biological science, anything to
   get away from a repeat of the same old IPCC crowd (RS did a meeting on IPCC last December
   anyway) and thus allowed to be a bit more creative.
   Mike
   At 18:06 23/05/2003 +0100, you wrote:

     Mike
     I will comment on this next week.
     On another issue: I am on Brian Hoskyn's Royal Society Global Environmental Research
     Committee whihc includes bods from various international programmes sponsored mainly by
     NERC. They are casting around for themes for a possible meeting at the Royal Society
     (international, high profile, bringing senior and junior researchers together), and
     something on climate stabilisation was mentioned - partly at the instigation of David
     Warrilow. Do you think this is sensible? Should there be a Tyndall presence?
     I agreed with John Shepherd (also at the meeting) that I'd raise this with you.
     All the best
     Frans
