Lessons for Improving Scientific Assessment of Carbon Sinks: A Comparative Study from a Science Studies Perspective

Scientific assessments of Carbon Sinks in the Kyoto Protocol, and Critical Loads on Acidification in the European acidification policy are compared to draw lessons for better scientific assessment of Carbon Sinks by using the approach of science studies. Epistemological realism provides the basis for the comparison. The effectiveness of assessments from a science studies approach might be defined as the level of robustness of the assessment. Robust assessments are capable of being acknowledged as more credible, less vulnerable to deconstruction, and invoke less incentive to deconstruct it. The lessons for robuster assessment of Carbon Sinks are: it should focus on Full Carbon Accounting (FCA) supplemented with apposite institutional mechanisms, such as international research cooperation programs for addressing associated problems of Carbon Sink activities with broad participation from developing countries, and an internationally coordinated monitoring system. This changing course does not have any destructive effect on the Kyoto framework, but it has the potential to provide a sophisticated scientific footing for negotiations. The scientific community should not avoid nor ignore the tensional relations between science and politics inherent in Carbon Sink assessment but to manage it by making the assessment robuster with the focus on FCA and appropriate institutional settings. * Climate Change Research Project, National Institute for Environmental Studies 16-2, Onogawa, Tsukuba, Ibaraki, 305-8506, Japan Tel: +81-29-850-2981; Fax: +81-29-850-2960; E-mail: [email protected]