Martin Parry ~ Full interview

Chair of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change’s Task Group on Scenarios for Climate Impact Assessment

1.  What are in your view the most urgent problems in the field of climate change?

In my view the problems are twofold. First, making decisions within the next two years regarding international reductions in emissions and a strategy to deal with it over the next 20 to 30 years. This should be included in the Bali roadmap, the successor of Kyoto. The beginning of action is now necessary.

Second, an internationally agreed set of implementation plans for adaptation. And that is where GMO, I think, is important. Because adapting agriculture to a dryer world on the whole means developing crops that are less water demanding. In order to succeed in making these adaptation plans, a funding strategy should be developed to particularly target those regions that are most vulnerable. The implementation of this strategy is local of course. Adaptation to climate changes is always local.

2.  What solutions do you see for these problems?

For the mitigation strategy we probably need 60 to 80% reduction in current emissions in order to stabilize climate change. This is to be realized by the beginning of the next century. If we achieve an 80% reduction we might be able to minimize the global warming to achieve the EU target of 2°C. But since this implies more radical actions then is the case now, it is more reasonable to say we might minimize global warming by 2.5°C.

For the adaptation plans it is important to realize the impacts described by the IPCC in the Technical Summary of Working Group II. We should act now to be ready for an increase of 2°C before the consequences build up into something that is unacceptable in terms of loss of human life or reduction in net incomes.

3.  What are the necessary conditions for successful solutions?

Firstly, there should be international agreement on the problem. This has now been almost achieved. Secondly, there should be international agreement on the actions, and the timing of these actions;this needs to occur in the next 18 months or so, between now and the build-up to Copenhagen.

Once these two major solutions are achieved, you can put in to place the specific actions. For instance, we need a coordinated global research effort on food crop breeding for climate change. Two types of research are needed;for traditional breeding, and for genetic modification. We need to characterize future climates for the most vulnerable regions, and we need to start developing hybridization of current cultivars or the development of entirely new cultivars. An example is the new CGIAR research plan which, I believe , aims to put about 15 million US dollars a year in to such work.

4.  Are there any biotechnological solutions for these problems?

Yes, I think there are. Biotechnological solutions are important because some farming systems, which have developed in tune with current climate, cannot easily be modified to adapt to climate change without the help of biotechnology. In some parts of the world we must expect new climates that don’t exist anywhere else and for which crop plants have not naturally developed, because their environment hasn’t existed. So biotechnology can help do two things. Firstly, it can protect against the negative impacts. This means we need specifically drought resistance crops, because some parts of the tropics, particularly the semi arid tropics, look likely to become even more dry because of higher rates of evaporation and transpiration. Secondly, we need crops that can take advantage of the potential benefits. For instance, warming in the mid- to high-mid latitudes will result in longer growing seasons and longer light conditions.

5.  Should biotechnological solutions be placed higher on the social, political or scientific agendas? If so, why?

I think that biotechnology deserves more attention, because biotechnological solutions are going to be very important for us to meet the challenge of climate change, they therefore need a higher profile.

6.  Which solutions do you think will lead to public debate?

We should show the general public that genetic modification can also serve to preserve the environment. At this time the public often only sees that genetic modification does harm to the environment, but this is not always the case. Research could contribute to this debate.

7.  What are the differences between developing and developed countries (in terms of both problems and solutions)?

The urgency of finding solutions is greatest in developing countries;because the regions where more drought is expected mostly exist within developing countries. Examples are the North and South parts of Africa, and some parts of Latin America. But the geographical location is much more important than whether or not a country is developed.

8.  In your view, what will the field of climate change look like in 20 years time?

If it is not radically transformed, we are going to be in trouble. By saying this, I mean that if we haven’t taken concrete actions by then, things are going to be even more difficult. Furthermore, I hope we have a better knowledge of the change in weather patterns and how this will affect day to day weather events. This will enable us to breed more suitable crops. But we have enough information to act now, so that’s what we have to do.