Observations on an unedifying spectacle

The intensity of community debate about climate change that emerged a few years ago encouraged many to hope, if not expect, that meaningful policy debate and decision would follow in Australia. It hasn't. In Garnaut's (2009) view the "whole process of policy making over the ETS [Emissions Trading Scheme] has been one of the worst examples of policy making we have seen on major issues in Australia." There are many plausible origins to this mess. One of them, ironically, may be the level of public interest in, and contest over, the issue and the irresistible temptation this provides for ignoble political exploitation. A less obvious contribution to the policy non-solution to which Australia seems to be headed is the framing of the problem to be solved. There are several dimensions to this and they can be argued to worsen the principal consequence of poor framing: partial analysis. The problem at hand has generally been characterised as "dealing with climate change". This most likely results from the emphasis, from the beginning of popular concern, on "the science". A consequence of the characterisation is that many people assume that there is a standing question as to whether there is a problem and that this will persist, and be a reason to hesitate to respond, until the science is settled. The shrill, irrelevant debates as to whether the planet is definitely warming and whether the warming definitely has any human origins has encouraged this perception. These are irrelevant because there is zero probability of timely disproof and mere confirmation would not resolve the debates. Their shrillness is testimony to the extent to which many people, independent of either intelligence or position on the matter, have a low tolerance of ambiguity. Apocalyptic visions, and threats of "tipping points", reinforce the religious fervour of those who most struggle psychologically to accommodate doubt. More importantly, attention is diverted from the real issue. The more serious a potential threat, the more casually we seem to abandon relevant analytical technique.