Ask the Scholar

{
    "localId": "285411015",
    "label": "Binder: Conference on Global Climate Change [1]",
    "core": "doc",
    "dtoType": "document",
    "citationUrl": "https://catalog.archives.gov/id/285411015"
}

{
    "id": "285411015",
    "sourceUrl": "https://catalog.archives.gov/id/285411015",
    "contentType": "document",
    "title": "Binder: Conference on Global Climate Change [1]",
    "description": "These records pertain to Global Climate Change.",
    "citationUrl": "https://catalog.archives.gov/id/285411015",
    "identifierLocal": "04822-011",
    "collections": [
        "Records of the Domestic Policy Council (George H. W. Bush Administration)",
        "Subject Files"
    ],
    "iiifBase": "https://s3.us-east-1.amazonaws.com/NARAprodstorage/lz/presidential-libraries/bush/foia/2017/41-bpr-dpc-04822-011.pdf",
    "thumbnailUrl": "https://s3.us-east-1.amazonaws.com/NARAprodstorage/lz/presidential-libraries/bush/foia/2017/41-bpr-dpc-04822-011.pdf",
    "largeImageUrl": "https://s3.us-east-1.amazonaws.com/NARAprodstorage/lz/presidential-libraries/bush/foia/2017/41-bpr-dpc-04822-011.pdf",
    "imageCount": 1,
    "hasImages": true,
    "source": "import",
    "hasTranscription": false
}

{
    "url": "https://catalog.archives.gov/id/285411015",
    "naId": 285411015,
    "levelOfDescription": "fileUnit",
    "recordType": "description",
    "ocrSource": "nara-archive"
}

{
    "seq": 1,
    "pageIndex": 0,
    "type": "document",
    "url": "https://s3.us-east-1.amazonaws.com/NARAprodstorage/lz/presidential-libraries/bush/foia/2017/41-bpr-dpc-04822-011.pdf",
    "mediaId": "925ec0b5fc4ee125",
    "ocrText": "FOIA Number:\nOriginally Processed With FOIA(s):\n2017-0310-F\n2017-0310-F\nFOIA\nMARKER\nThis is not a textual record. This is used as an\nadministrative marker by the George Bush Presidential\nLibrary Staff.\nRecord Group/Collection:\nGeorge H.W. Bush Presidential Records\nCollection/Office of Origin:\nDomestic Policy Council\nDPC Files\nSeries:\nSubseries:\nOA/ID Number:\n04822\nFolder ID Number:\n04822-011\nFolder Title:\nBinder: Conference on Global Climate Change [1]\nShelf:\nPosition:\nRow:\nSection:\nStack:\nG\n18\n20\n2\nTHE WHITE HOUSE CONFERENCE\nON SCIENCE & ECONOMICS RESEARCH\nRELATED TO\nGLOBAL CHANGE\nBRIEFING\nFOR U.S. DELEGATES\nTO\nTHE WHITE HOUSE CONFERENCE\nON SCIENCE & ECONOMICS RESEARCH\nRELATED TO\nGLOBAL CHANGE\nWEDNESDAY, APRIL 11, 1990\n3:00 - 4:00 PM\nROOSEVELT ROOM\nTHE OF SEAL OF THE UNITED\nTHE WHITE HOUSE CONFERENCE\nON SCIENCE AND ECONOMICS RESEARCH\nRELATED TO GLOBAL CHANGE\nApril 17-18, 1990\nWashington, D.C.\nTHE WHITE HOUSE CONFERENCE\nON SCIENCE & ECONOMICS RESEARCH\nRELATED TO\nGLOBAL CHANGE\n55\nthe\nTHE OF SEAL OF THE UNITED\nV\nTHE WHITE HOUSE CONFERENCE\nON SCIENCE AND ECONOMICS RESEARCH\nRELATED TO GLOBAL CHANGE\nApril 17-18, 1990\nWashington, D.C.\nTHE WHITE HOUSE CONFERENCE\nON SCIENCE & ECONOMICS RESEARCH\nRELATED TO\nGLOBAL CHANGE\nTHE WHITE HOUSE CONFERENCE\nON SCIENCE & ECONOMICS RESEARCH\n(*)\nRELATED TO\nGLOBAL CHANGE\nPRE-CONFERENCE MATERIAL\nFOR DELEGATES\nPrinted on Recycled Paper\nTHE WHITE HOUSE CONFERENCE\nON SCIENCE & ECONOMICS RESEARCH\nApril 5, 1990\nRELATED TO\nGLOBAL CHANGE\nDear Colleague:\nOn behalf of President Bush, we are honored that you will be coming to the United\nStates April 16-18 to serve as a delegate to the White House Conference on Science\nand Economics Research Related to Global Change.\nBy contributing your country's expertise in identifying the critical needs in the fields\nof science and economics research, you will advance international cooperation and\nunderstanding in dealing with the uncertainties of global change.\nThe United States welcomes a free and open discussion of the science and economics\nresearch issues related to global change. As co-chairmen of the Conference, we look\nforward to joining you in that effort.\nYours Sincerely,\nDAman Samley\nD. Allan Bromley\nAssistant to the President\nfor Science and Technology\nMahal J Brown\nMichael J. Boskin\nChairman\nCouncil of Economic Advisers\nMichael R. Deland\nChairman\nCouncil on Environmental\nQuality\nTHE WHITE HOUSE CONFERENCE\nON SCIENCE & ECONOMICS RESEARCH\nRELATED TO\nGLOBAL CHANGE\nTABLE OF CONTENTS\nOverview of the Conference\nPreliminary Delegation List\nConference Co-Chairmen Biographies\nU.S. Delegation Biographies\nHotel/Transportation/Logistics\nTHE WHITE HOUSE CONFERENCE\nON SCIENCE & ECONOMICS RESEARCH\n$\nRELATED TO\nGLOBAL CHANGE\nOVERVIEW OF THE CONFERENCE\nGOALS AND OBJECTIVES OF THE CONFERENCE:\nPresident George Bush invited the Heads of State from seventeen nations and the leadership of the\nE.C. and the OECD to send ministerial-level delegations to the White House Conference on Science\nand Economics Research Related to Global Change. The Conference is designed to bring together\ngovernment leaders in science, economics, energy, and the environment concerned with the central\nresearch issues of Global Change. The Conference is designed to advance understanding of Global\nChange phenomena, to enhance international cooperation, and to build the basis for future efforts\namong nations to integrate more fully science and economics research into the policy process. The\nConference adds a new dimension to the international dialogue on Global Change - the proposition\nthat economics, both analysis and research on economic policy and economic consequences, is an\nessential link between the science of Global Change and policy alternatives. Science and economics\nresearch can also serve to identify and develop technologies and policy instruments that relax the\ntension between growth and Global Change, allowing for greater progress on both fronts. To address\nthese broad goals, the Conference will:\nFocus on science and economics research issues relevant to policy on Global Change,\nAddress important next steps to substantially enhance and broaden international\nunderstanding of science and economics research issues that relate to Global Change,\nHighlight the special role that economics plays in integrating the science of Global Change\nwith the policy process,\nDemonstrate linkages between science and economics research and domestic and\ninternational policy processes, and\nSeek to take the initial steps to implement joint international science and economics\nresearch efforts.\nThe Conference is conceived as an integral part of the ongoing international process to understand\nthe science of and policy options relating to global environmental issues. The need to improve\nsubstantially understanding of both the science and economics of Global Change has been noted by\nmany world leaders. The Conference, therefore, focuses on science and economics research issues as\na complement to the ongoing Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) and other interna-\ntional forums that seek to address the issue of Global Change. It is hoped that the results of the Con-\nference will contribute to the IPCC process and other ongoing international debates and actions.\nThe Conference focuses on \"Global Change,\" an area of research concerned with understanding the\nfundamental processes that govern the Earth system functions. Global Change encompasses such\ndiverse and interrelated issues as ozone depletion, greenhouse gases, climate change, food security,\nwater supply, sea level changes, wetlands, deforestation, biodiversity, population change, and energy\ndemand.\n1\nOVERVIEW\nPre-Conference Material\nfor Delegates\nThe Conference will provide a forum for international leaders to address the complex science and\neconomics research issues central to the policy process, including:\nHow well can we predict temperature trends in the decades ahead?\nHow \"good\" are our global scale models, such as models to predict temperature changes?\nHow well can we predict the interconnections between global environmental change and the\nresulting social and economic impacts?\nWhat are the economic consequences of adapting to or mitigatinGlobal Change?\nHow \"good\" are the models used to assess these economic consequences and their impact on\nthe well-being of humanity?\nBy addressing such questions, it is hoped that the nations might pledge to enhance joint international\nresearch efforts that focus on rapid improvement of both scientific and economic knowledge and de-\nvelopment of the necessary infrastructure to implement such efforts.\nTo address these complex and interrelated issues, President Bush invited heads of state from a small\ngroup of nations to send delegations led by ministerial-level officials. The Conference was conceived\nwith the idea that a representative group of countries would be invited to participate. Their selection\nwas based on the simple criteria that the meeting should include countries or organizations of\ncountries that have substantial populations, large land masses, industrialized economies, heavy\nfuture energy needs, major research infrastructures, or have provided international leadership on\nissues related to climate and Global Change. These countries and organizations were selected:\n1.\nAustralia\n2.\nBrazil\n3.\nCanada\n4.\nFederal Republic of Germany\n5.\nFrance\n6.\nIndia\n7.\nIndonesia\n8.\nItaly\n9.\nJapan\n10.\nMexico\n11.\nNetherlands\n12.\nNigeria\n13.\nNorway\n14.\nPoland\n15.\nSoviet Union\n16.\nUnited Kingdom\n17.\nZaire\n18.\nEuropean Community\n19.\nOECD\nThe White House Conference\n2\non Science and Economics Research\nRelated to Global Change\nTHE EXPECTED RESULTS OF THE CONFERENCE\nThe Conference will provide an opportunity to address the science and economics research issues\nrelated to Global Change in the context of the policy process. To accomplish these goals, the Confer-\nence will focus on and seek to promote:\nA substantially enhanced understanding of science, economics, and environmental research\nagenda central to the needs of future Global Change policy development.\nA substantive understanding of the uncertainties in both science and economics knowledge of\nchanges in the global environment of the planet.\nIncreased mutual understanding of and sensitivity to the substance of science and economics\nresearch between both of those research communities.\nIncreased sensitivity by the two research communities to the policy needs evolving in such\nareas as environmental and energy policy, and vice versa.\nA solid and well implemented science and economics research effort as a prerequisite for a\ncomplement to evolving efforts by nations to address the international policy questions of\nglobal environmental changes.\nA communication network among national leaders concerned with, and responsible for, the\nresearch and policy agenda related to Global Change. More particularly, this Conference\nprovides a \"first-ever\" opportunity to forge a partnership between the science and economics\nresearch communities and the policy-makers.\nTo provide a vehicle to focus on these vital issues, the Conference will include two Plenary Sessions\nand several concurrent Working Groups, which will address the three major themes of the Confer-\nence:\nThe Science and Economics Research Challenge\nIntegrating Science and Economics Research in the Policy Process\nBuilding a Partnership for Science and Economics Research\nThe Conference is expected to produce a Co-Chairmen's Report, which will outline the deliberations\nof the Conference and set forth common actions designed to expand research and cooperation among\nnations.\nAs President Bush stated in his invitation letter, \"It is my hope that the expertise, experience, and\ndata available in our respective countries can be brought together in a more integrated and coherent\nfashion. By working together, our nations can enhance international cooperation in these vital areas\nand contribute to the success of the ongoing IPCC process.\"\n3\nOVERVIEW\nPre-Conference Material\nfor Delegates\nTHE WHITE HOUSE CONFERENCE\nON SCIENCE & ECONOMICS RESEARCH\n$\nRELATED TO\nGLOBAL CHANGE\nPRELIMINARY DELEGATION LIST\nCurrent as of April 4, 1990; 12:00 Noon\nBRAZIL\n(tentative)\nName\nTitle\nJose Lutzenberger\nEnvironment Secretary\nJose Goldemberg\nScience Secretary\nCANADA\n(tentative)\nName\nTitle\nLucien Bouchard\nFederal Environment Minister\nDerek Burney\nAmbassador to the U.S.\nDr. Ann White\nDirector, Canadian Global Change Program\nDr. Arthur W. May\nPresident, the Natural Science and Engineering Research Council\nFEDERAL REPUBLIC OF GERMANY\n(confirmed)\nName\nTitle\nProfessor Dr. Klaus Töpfer\nFederal Minister for Environment, Nature Protection and Nuclear\nSafety\nDr. Gebhard Ziller\nState Secretary, Ministry for Research and Technology\nDr. Wilhelm Knittel\nState Secretary, Ministry for Transportation\nBaldur Wagner\nAssistant Secretary, Federal Chancellery\nDr. Mario Graf von Matuschka\nAssistant Secretary, Foreign Ministry\nDr. Horst Glatzel\nDeputy Assistant Secretary, Federal Chancellery\nWalter Lötz\nDeputy Assistant Secretary, Ministry of Economics\nProfessor Dr. Ansgar Vogel\nDeputy Assistant Secretary, Ministry for Environment, Nature\nProtection, and Nuclear Safety\nDietrich Kupfer\nDirector, Office of International Cooperation, Ministry for\nEnvironment, Nature Protection and Nuclear Safety\nProfessor Dr. Hartmut Grossl\nScientist, Max Planck Society, Hamburg\n1\nPRELIMINARY DELEGATION LIST\nPre-Conference Material\nfor Delegates\nFRANCE\n(tentative)\nName\nTitle\nMinister Hubert Curien\nMinister of Research and Technology\nMinister Brice Lalonde\nSecretary of State for the Environment\nJean Audouze\nScience Advisor to the President\nClaude Alegre\nSpecial Advisor to the Minister of Education\nAmbassador Jean Ripert\nMinistry of Foreign Affairs (Environment)\nYves Martin\nChairman of the Interministry Committee on Greenhouse\nMadame Borione\nMinistry of Foreign Affairs\nAndre LeBeau\nGeneral Director of the Meteorological Center\nM. Nasse\nMinistry of Economy and Budget\nSylvie Faucheux\nProfessor of Economy at Paris I\nINDIA\n(tentative)\nName\nTitle\nMs. Maneka Gandhi\nMinister of State for Environment and Forests\nVasant Gowarikar\nSecretary of Department of Science and Technology\nMahesh Prasad\nSecretary of Ministry of Environment and Forests\nDr. A.P. Mitra\nDirector General of Council for Science and Industrial Research\n2\nThe White House Conference\non Science and Economics Research\nRelated to Global Change\nINDONESIA\n(confirmed)\nName\nTitle\nProf. Dr. Ing. B.J. Habibie\nMinister of State for Research and Technology; Chairman of the\nAgency for the Assessment and Application of Technology\nProf. Dr. Samaun Samadikun\nChairman of the Indonesian Institute of Science\nProf. Dr. John A. Katili\nDeputy Chairman of the National Research Council\nProf. Dr. Gunawan Satari\nPermanent Secretary, Ministry of State for Research and Technology\nMr. Poedji Kuntarso, MA\nDirector General for Foreign Economic Relations; Ministry of Foreign\nAffairs\nProf. Dr. Rustam Didong\nDeputy Chairman (Economics), National Development Planning\nAgency\nProf. Dr. Harsono Wiryosumarto\nDeputy Chairman (Technology Development); Agency for the\nAssessment and Application of Technology\nProf. Dr. S.B. Joedono\nAssistant Minister (Industry, Energy and Mining), Office of the\nCoordinating Minister for the Economy, Finance, Industry and\nDevelopment Supervision\nDr. M. Alwi Dahlan\nAssistant Ministery (Population), Office of the Minister of State for\nPopulation and the Environment\nHis Excellency Abdulrachman Ramly\nAmbassador of the Republic of Indonesia to the United States of\nAmerica\nITALY\n(tentative)\nName\nTitle\nHon. Adolfo Battaglia\nMinister of Industry, Head of Delegation\nProf. Umberto Colombo\nDirector of the National Agency for Nuclear and Renewable Energies\nProf. Giuseppe Biorci\nVice President of the National Research Council\nProf. Giuseppe Bianchi\nDirector General for Energy Sources, Ministry of Industry\nProf. Antonio Praturlon\nPresident of the CNR Committee on Geological Sciences\nProf. Roberto Frassetto\nCNR Institute of the Dynamics of Great Masses\nProf. Emilio Gerelli\nEconomic Counselor to the Minister of Environment\nDr. Corrado Clini\nDirector General for Pollution Prevention, Ministry of Environment\nProf. Guido Visconti\nDepartment of Physics, University of Aquila\nDr. Giovanni Sacco\nVice Director General of Treasury, Ministry of Treasury\n3\nPRELIMINARY DELEGATION LIST\nPre-Conference Material\nfor Delegates\nMEXICO\n(tentative)\nName\nTitle\nLic. Patricio Chirinos\nSecretary of Urban Development and Ecology\nDr. Jose Sarukhan\nRector, National Autonomous University\nDr. Herminio Blanco\nUndersecretary for Foreign Commerce, Secretariat of Commerce and\nIndustrial Development\nIng. Alberto Escofet\nUndersecretary for Energy, Secretariat of Energy, Mines and Parastatal\nIndustries\nLic. Jose Angel Gurria\nUndersecretary for International Financial Affairs, Secretariat of the\nTreasury\nFis. Sergio Reyes\nUndersecretary for Ecology\nAmb. Alberto Szekely\nLegal Counsel, Secretariat of Foreign Affairs\nDr. Julian Adem\nDirector, Center for Atmospheric Studies, National Autonomous\nUniversity\nDr. Manuel Ortega\nDirector General, National Council for Science and Technology\nHector Santana\nStaff Aide to Secretary Chirinos\nTHE NETHERLANDS\n(tentative)\nName\nTitle\nHans Alders\nMinister for Housing, Physical Planning and Environment\nDr. B.C.J. Zoeteman\nDeputy Director-General for Environment\nDr. Pier Vellinga\nCoordinator for National Climate Programs\nN.D. Van Egmond\nDirector for Chemistry and Physics, State Institute for Public Health\nand Environmental Hygiene\nI.G. Roos\nDirectorate-General for European Cooperation, Ministry of Foreign\nAffairs\nDr. H.M. Fijnaut\nDirector of the Royal Dutch Meteorological Institute\nDr. A.P.M. Baede\nHead of the Department for Dynamical Meteorology\nD.F.W.T. Pietermaat\nEnvironmental Coordinator in the Directorate-General for Energy,\nMinistry of Economic Affairs\nProf. J.B. Opschoor\nProfessor of Ecology, Free University, Amsterdam\nThe White House Conference\n4\non Science and Economics Research\nRelated to Global Change\nNORWAY\n(confirmed)\nName\nTitle\nKristin Hille Valla\nMinister of Environment\nEinar Steensnaes\nMinister of Education and Research\nAmbassador Kjeld Vibe\nNorwegian Ambassador to the United States\nOddmund Graham\nSecretary General, Ministry of Environment\nKaare Bryn\nDirector General, Ministry of Foreign Affairs\nDr. Tore Olsen\nDirector General, Ministry of Education and Research\nPer M. Bakken\nCoordinator, Air Pollution, Ministry of Environment\nLorents Lorentsen\nDirector of Research, Central Bureau of Statistics\nProfessor Dr. Ivar Isaksen\nUniversity of Oslo\nLeif Westegaard\nScience Officer, Norwegian Embassy in Washington\nTHE OECD\n(tentative)\nName\nTitle\nRobert Cornell\nDeputy Secretary-General\nWilliam L. Long\nDirector for Environment\nJohn Ferriter\nDeputy Executive Director, International Energy Agency\nAndrew Dean\nAdministrator, Department for Economic Affairs and Statistics\nGeorge Kowalski\nHead of the Division of Economic Analysis, International Energy\nAgency\n5\nPRELIMINARY DELEGATION LIST\nPre-Conference Material\nfor Delegates\nPOLAND\n(tentative)\nName\nTitle\nJan Janowski\nDeputy Prime Minister; Head of the Office of Scientific and\nTechnological Progress\nAndreyewski\nDeputy Minister of the Environment\nTadeusz Diem\nDeputy Minister of Education\nRybicki\nCentral Planning Office\nKazimierz Duchowski\nDepartment of Economic Cooperation, Ministry of Foreign Affairs\nWiackowski\nChairman, Parliamentary Commission on Environmental Protection\nStakel\nProfessor, Polish Academy of Sciences\nSadowski\nInstitute of Metallurgy and Water Management\nWlodzimierz Bojarski\nSenator\nJan Kinast\nPolish Ambassador to the United States\nSOVIET UNION\n(tentative)\nName\nTitle\nNikolay P. Laverov\nChairman of the USSR State Committee on Science and Technology\nYuriy A. Izrael\nChairman of the State Committee on Hydrometeorology\nV.F. Kostin\nDeputy Chairman, State Committee for Nature Protection\nAleksander A. Metalnikov\nDeputy Chairman, State Committee for Hydrometeorology\nA.A. Troitsky\nDeputy Chairman, State Planning Committee\nV.M. Kotliakov\nDirector, Institute of Geography, USSR Academy of Sciences\nYu. L. Golubev\nAssistant to Chairman, State Committee for Hydrometeorology\nYu. V. Vakajuk\nChief, Division of Global Geophysical Problems, Climate Change\nand Economic Consequences, State Committee for Hydrometeorology\nYu. V. Pikhanov\nState Committee for Hydrometeorology, Department of International\nCooperation\nMrs. N. Yu. Vail\nState Department Committee for Hydrometeorology, Department of\nInternational Cooperation\nThe White House Conference\n6\non Science and Economics Research\nRelated to Global Change\nUNITED KINGDOM\n(tentative)\nName\nTitle\nDavid Trippier RD, JP, MP\nMinister for the Environment and Countryside\nSir John Fairclough\nChief Scientific Adviser, the Cabinet Office\nSir Crispin C.C. Tickell, GCMG, KCVO\nUnited Kingdom Permanent Representative to the United Nations\nDr. John T. Houghton CBE\nDirector-General, Meteorological Office\nJ.G. Odling-Smee\nDeputy Chief Economic Adviser; HM Treasury\nDr. David J. Fisk\nChief Scientist, Department of Environment\nDr. W. David Evans\nChief Scientist, Department of Energy\nDr. Eileen Buttle\nSecretary, Natural Environment Research Council\nUNITED STATES OF AMERICA\n(confirmed)\nName\nTitle\nNicholas F. Brady\nSecretary of the Treasury\nManuel Lujan, Jr.\nSecretary of the Interior\nClayton Yeutter\nSecretary of Agriculture\nRobert A. Mosbacher\nSecretary of Commerce\nAdmiral James D. Watkins (Ret)\nSecretary of Energy\nWilliam K. Reilly\nAdministrator, Environmental Protection Agency\nRichard H. Truly\nAdministrator, National Aeronautics and Space Administration\nJohn A. Knauss\nUnder Secretary of Commerce for Oceans and Atmosphere; and\nDirector, National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration\nErich Bloch\nDirector, National Science Foundation\nRichard Schmalensee\nMember, Council of Economic Advisers\nZAIRE\n(tentative)\nName\nTitle\nCitoyen Lobo Kanza Kanza\nSecretary of State (Deputy Minister); Ministry of Environment and\nConservation of Nature\n7\nPRELIMINARY DELEGATION LIST\nPre-Conference Material\nfor Delegates\nTHE WHITE HOUSE CONFERENCE\nON SCIENCE & ECONOMICS RESEARCH\nRELATED TO\nGLOBAL CHANGE\nCONFERENCE CO-CHAIRMEN BIOGRAPHIES\nMICHAEL J. BOSKIN\nD. ALLAN BROMLEY\nMICHAEL R. DELAND\nMichael J. Boskin\nChairman\nPresident's Council of\nEconomic Advisers\nMichael J. Boskin is the Chairman of the President's Council of Economic Advisers. He was appointed\nto this post by the President on February 2, 1989, following unanimous confirmation by the Senate. As\nChairman, he provides economic analysis and advice directly to the President and assists in formulating\nnational economic policies. Dr. Boskin is on leave from Stanford University, where he is the Burnet C.\nand Mildred Finley Wohlford Professor of Economics, and was the founder and Director of the Center\nfor Economic Policy Research. He is also on leave as a Research Associate of the National Bureau of\nEconomic Research.\nDr. Boskin is the recipient of numerous professional awards and citations, ranging from the\nChancellor's Award and the Department Citation as outstanding undergraduate at the University of\nCalifornia in 1967 and the first National Tax Association Outstanding Doctoral Dissertation Award in\n1971 to the Abramson Award for Outstanding Research from the National Association of Business\nEconomists in 1987 and Stanford University's Distinguished Teaching Award in 1988. He is the author\nof more than 80 books and articles in the areas of government spending, tax theory and policy, public\ndebt, Social Security, retirement patterns and behavior, U.S. saving behavior, capital formation, U.S.\neconomic growth, and the economic status of the elderly.\nDr. Boskin received his B.A. degree with highest honors in 1967 from the University of California at\nBerkeley, where he received his M.A. in 1968 and his Ph.D. in 1971.\nPreviously, Dr. Boskin had served as a consultant and adviser to the White House, Department of\nHealth and Human Services, Treasury Department, National Science Foundation, and other govern-\nment agencies, and various congressional committees.\nDr. Boskin is a member of the Economic Education Committee of the American Economic Association.\nHe and his wife Chris moved to Washington, D.C. from California. They both enjoy skiing and tennis.\nD. Allan Bromley\nAssistant to the President\nScience and Technology\nD. Allan Bromley is Assistant to the President for Science and Technology and Director of the Office of\nScience and Technology Policy (OSTP) in the Executive Office of the President. He is on leave from his\nformer position as Henry Ford II Professor of Physics at Yale University, where he was founder and\nDirector of the A.W. Wright Nuclear Structure Laboratory.\nOne of the world's leading nuclear physicists, he has carried out pioneering studies on both the struc-\nture and dynamics of nuclei and is considered the father of modern heavy ion science, one of the major\nareas of nuclear science. He has also played major roles in the development of accelerators, of detection\nsystems, and in computer-based data acquisition and analysis systems. An outstanding teacher, over\nthe past two decades his laboratory at Yale graduated more Ph.D.'s in experimental nuclear physics\nthan any other institution worldwide. He has published over 450 papers in science and technology as\nwell as edited eighteen books and has received numerous honors and awards, including the National\nMedal of Science.\nFor more than two decades, Dr. Bromley has been a leader in the national and international science and\nscience policy communities. As Chairman of the National Academy's Physics Survey in the early 1970s,\nhe contributed in a central way to charting the future of that science in the subsequent decade. As\nPresident of the American Association for the Advancement of Science, the world's largest scientific\nsociety, and the International Union of Pure and Applied Physics, the world coordinating body for that\nscience, he has been one of the leading spokesmen for U.S. science and for international scientific\ncooperation.\nPrior to his present appointment, Dr. Bromley served as a member of the White House Science Council\nthroughout the Reagan Administration and as a member of the National Science Board in 1988-1989. As\nthe U.S. chairman for both the Gandhi-Reagan, Indo/U.S. and the Sarney-Reagan, Brazil/U.S. Science\nand Technology Initiatives, he led four Presidential missions to conduct negotiations for bilateral\ncooperation in science and technology.\nBorn in Westmeath, Ontario, Canada, he received the B.Sc. degree with highest honors in 1948 in the\nFaculty of Engineering at Queen's University, Ontario, Canada. He received the M.Sc. degree from\nQueen's University in 1950 and the Ph.D. degree from the University of Rochester in 1952, both degrees\nin nuclear physics. He subsequently has been awarded ten honorary degrees from universities in\nCanada, France, Germany, Italy, South Africa, and the United States.\nDr. Bromley is married to the Former Patricia J. Brassor, and they have two children, David John and\nKaren Lynn.\nMichael R. Deland\nChairman\nWhite House Council\non Environmental Quality\nMichael R. Deland was appointed by President Bush to be Chairman of the White House Council on\nEnvironmental Quality on August 1, 1989, following unanimous confirmation by the United States\nSenate. In this capacity he serves as environmental adviser to the President as well as Director of the\nOffice of Environmental Quality which oversees the development of environmental policy, interagency\ncoordination of environmental quality programs and environmental data acquisition and assessment.\nIn addition, Mr. Deland is responsible for overseeing implementation of the National Environmental\nPolicy Act.\nPrior to Mr. Deland's appointment as CEQ Chairman, he was the New England Regional Administrator\nfor the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA). In that capacity, from 1983 to 1989, he admini-\nstered the federal government's programs dealing with air and water pollution control, hazardous\nwaste management, drinking water, toxic substances, radiation, and pesticides.\nMr. Deland was counsel at Environmental Research and Technology, Inc., a national firm headquar-\ntered in Concord, Massachusetts from 1976 to 1983. While in the private sector, Mr. Deland published\nnumerous papers and articles, including the Regulatory Focus monthly column in Environment, Science\nand Technology. Between 1971 and 1976, Mr. Deland served in EPA's Office of Regional Counsel in New\nEngland (Region I) in several capacities, including Chief of the Agency's Legal Review Section and\nChief of the Enforcement Branch.\nMr. Deland received his Bachelor of Arts degree from Harvard College in 1963 and served as an officer\nin the U.S. Navy before obtaining his law degree from Boston College in 1969. He is a member of the\nMassachusetts Bar and the American Bar Association and its Natural Resources Committee. Mr.\nDeland was President of the Business Associates Club (Boston) from 1981 to 1982 and is a former\nDirector of the Environmental Lobby of Massachusetts and the Center for Environmental Intern\nPrograms, a national non-profit organization headquartered in Boston.\nMr. Deland has received numerous awards and citations, including the Massachusetts Audubon Society\nAward for his leadership in cleaning up Boston Harbor and the New England Environment Leadership\nAward for the New England Environmental Network. In 1987, he was honored as \"Environmentalist of\nthe Year\" by the Massachusetts Association of Conservation Commissions. In March of 1989, he was\nawarded the National Wildlife Federation's Special Achievement Award for his role in prompting the\ncleanup of Boston Harbor, for his efforts at protecting valuable fishing areas from off-shore oil drilling,\nand for his early endorsement of environmentally-based growth controls on Cape Cod. Mr. Deland\nresides in Washington with his wife Jane and three children.\nTHE WHITE HOUSE CONFERENCE\nON SCIENCE & ECONOMICS RESEARCH\nRELATED TO\nGLOBAL CHANGE\nU.S. Delegation Biographies\nAs part of the Conference handout materials, we are\npreparing an information/reference booklet which will\ninclude:\none-page narrative biography of each delegate\nan 8\" x 10\" photograph of each delegate\nthe delegate's organization's logo/seal\nThe biographies, logos and photographs of the U.S.\ndelegation included in this section are representative of the\nmaterials we are seeking from each foreign delegation\nmember.\nPlease provide this information to the White House\nConference as soon as possible.\nTHE OF THE TREASURY\n1789\nNicholas F. Brady\nSecretary\nDepartment of the Treasury\nNicholas F. Brady became the 68th Secretary of the Treasury on September 15, 1988.\nSecretary Brady served in the United States Senate from April 20, 1982 through December 27, 1982.\nDuring that time he was a member of The Armed Services Committee and the Banking, Housing and\nUrban Affairs Committee.\nIn 1984 President Reagan appointed Secretary Brady Chairman of the President's Commission on\nExecutive, Legislative and Judicial Salaries. He has also served on the President's Commission on\nStrategic Forces (1983), the National Bipartisan Commission on Central America (1983), the Commis-\nsion on Security and Economic Assistance (1983), and the Blue Ribbon Commission on Defense\nManagement (1985). Most recently, Secretary Brady chaired the Presidential Task Force on Market\nMechanisms (1987).\nSecretary Brady's career in the banking industry spans 34 years. He joined Dillon, Read & Co., Inc. in\nNew York in 1954, rising to Chairman of the Board. He has been a Director of the NCR Corporation, the\nMITRE Corporation, and the H.J. Heinz Company, among others.\nHe has also served as a trustee of Rockefeller University and a member of the Board of the Economic\nClub of New York. He is a member of the Council on Foreign Relations, Inc. He is a former trustee of\nthe Boys' Club of Newark.\nMr. Brady was born April 11, 1930 in New York City. He was educated at Yale University (B.A., 1952)\nand Harvard University (M.B.A., 1954). He and his wife, Katherine, have four children.\nOF\nTHE\nDEP\nS.\nINTERIOR\nMarch\n3,\n1849\nManuel Lujan, Jr.\nSecretary\nDepartment of the Interior\nPOLITICAL\nPresident George Bush selected Manuel Lujan, Jr., who had just completed a 20-year career in the House of Repre-\nsentatives, to be his Secretary of the Interior. He was sworn in on February 3, 1989.\nThe 46th Secretary of the Interior, Lujan was first elected to the House of Representatives from New Mexico in 1968.\nWhen he left the Congress on January 3, 1989, he ranked 15th in seniority among all Republicans and 52nd in senior-\nity among all House members.\nA member of the House Interior and Insular Affairs Committee since 1969, Lujan was its second ranking Republican.\nThe Committee has jurisdiction over all activity in the U.S. Department of the Interior as well as the Nuclear Regu-\nlatory Commission. Lujan was also the senior Republican on the Energy and Environment Subcommittee.\nLujan was the Vice-Chairman of the House Science, Space and Technology Committee. As senior Republican,\nLujan was a member of all subcommittees, including Space Science and Applications which has oversight over\nNASA.\nPERSONAL\nBorn May 12, 1928 in San Ildefonso, New Mexico. Raised in Santa Fe where Lujan's father, Manuel Lujan, Sr.,\nserved three elected terms as Mayor.\nA graduate of the College of Santa Fe with a B.A. degree, Lujan also attended St. Mary's College in California.\nPrior to entering Congress, the Secretary was a partner in a family insurance and real estate business with three\noffices in New Mexico. His brother, Edward Lujan, is the managing partner of the business.\nMarried to the former Jean Couchman of Santa Fe, the Lujans have four children; Terra Everett, Jay, Barbara and Jeff.\nSecretary and Mrs. Lujan maintain residences in both Washington, D.C. and Albuquerque.\nLEGISLATIVE\nEconomy in Government: Lujan was a Congressional leader in the battle against wasteful government spending.\n\"The effort to stop inflation boils down to a fight against needless government intervention and spending,\" stated Lujan.\nEnvironmental Protection: Lujan has co-sponsored seven major environmental protection bills including the Clean\nAir Act of 1970 and the Clean Water Act. More recently, Lujan successfully sponsored legislation setting aside\nmore than 600,000 acres of New Mexico land as wilderness areas, ensuring its beauty and enjoyment for future\ngenerations.\nEducation: Lujan strongly supported student loan programs in the public and private sectors. His work led to New\nMexico adopting a student loan program that is a model for other states.\nTechnology: Lujan believes strongly that scientific research is the key to our future. \"Science and technology can help\nus meet the challenges of the 21st century,\" said Lujan.\nSTATES DEPARTMENTOF as OF\nClayton Yeutter\nSecretary\nDepartment of Agriculture\nClayton Yeutter was sworn in as the 23rd United States Secretary of Agriculture on February 8, 1989.\nYeutter's career includes distinguished public and private-sector service in agricultural policy develop-\nment, law, economics, marketing and trade.\nFrom July 1985 until shortly before his new cabinet appointment, Yeutter served as U.S. Trade Repre-\nsentative. His previous USDA posts include Assistant Secretary for International Affairs and Commod-\nity Programs from March 1974 to June 1975, Assistant Secretary for Marketing and Consumer Service\nfrom January 1973 to March 1974 and Administrator of the Consumer and Marketing Service from\nOctober 1970 to December 1971.\nYeutter's other career highlights: President and Chief Executive officer, Chicago Mercantile Exchange,\nJuly 1978 to June 1985; senior partner, law firm of Nelson, Harding, Yeutter & Leonard, Lincoln,\nNebraska, April 1977 to June 1978; Deputy U.S. Special Trade Representative, June 1975 to February\n1977; Director, University of Nebraska Mission in Colombia (a large agricultural technical assistance\nprogram), September 1968 to October 1970; executive assistant to the governor of Nebraska, January\n1966 to September 1968; faculty member, Department of Agricultural Economics, University of Ne-\nbraska, January 1960 to January 1966; operator of a 2,500 acre farming-ranching-cattle feeding enterprise\nin central Nebraska, 1957-1975; and enlistee, later commissioned officer, U.S. Air Force, 1952-1957.\nYeutter was graduated with high distinction from the University of Nebraska in 1952 with a Bachelor of\nScience degree in animal husbandry. In 1963, he obtained his law degree from the same university,\ngraduating cum laude and ranked first in his class. In 1966, he received his Ph.D. in agricultural\neconomics, again from the University of Nebraska, and was named outstanding graduate student in the\nprogram.\nYeutter is a former member or chairman of many private and public-sector boards of directors, councils\nand trusteeships, including: the President's Export Council; the Chicago Association of Commerce and\nIndustry; the Chicago-Tokyo Bank; the U.S. Meat Export Federation; the Chicago Council on Foreign\nRelations; the Farm Foundation, Oak Brook, Illinois; Tri-Valley Growers, San Francisco, California; and\nConAgra, Inc., Omaha, Nebraska.\nYeutter was born in Eustis, Nebraska, December 10, 1931. He and his wife, Jeanne Vierk Yeutter, have\nfour children. He retains ownership of his Nebraska farm, which is currently operated by a tenant.\nYeutter's permanent home is in Lincoln, Nebraska, but he currently resides in McLean, Virginia.\nDIPARTMENT OF COMMERCE\n*\nUNITED STATES OF AMERICA\nRobert A. Mosbacher\nSecretary\nDepartment of Commerce\nNominated Secretary of Commerce by President-Elect George Bush on December 6, 1988. He was\nconfirmed 100-0 by the United States Senate on January 31, 1989.\nFormerly:\nChief Executive Officer and Chairman of Mosbacher Energy Company\nDirector of Texas Commerce Bancshares, Houston, Texas\nDirector, Enron Corporation, Houston, Texas\nDirector, New York Life Insurance Company, New York\nPast Chairman of the National Petroleum Council\nCharter member and past Chairman of the All American Wildcatters Association\nMember of the Executive Committee and Board of Directors of the American Petroleum Institute\nPast Chairman of the Mid-Continent Oil and Gas Association\nTwice Past Chairman of the Board of Visitors of the Texas M.D. Anderson Cancer Institute\nFormer member of Board of Trustees of the Texas Heart Institute\nFormer National Trustee, Boys Clubs of America Southwest Region\nPast Active Trustee of the Aspen Institute for Humanistic Studies\nMember of Washington Roundtable and Co-Chair of Houston Roundtable of the Center for Strategic\nand International Studies\nNational Finance Chairman for George Bush for President\nNational Finance Chairman of the Fund for America's Future\nChairman of Victory 88'\nCo-Chairman of the Republican National Finance Committee\nMember of the Executive Committee for Reagan-Bush\nNational Finance Chairman for the President Ford Committee in 1976\nWon both the North American and World Sailing Championships in the Olympic classes (Dragon\nand Soling)\nWon the Southern Ocean Racing Circuit\nWon the Gold Cup twice\nBorn in White Plains, New York, Mosbacher has lived in Houston, Texas since 1948. He graduated from\nWashington and Lee University in Lexington, Virginia in 1947.\nMosbacher is married to the former Georgette Paulsin and is the father of four (Diane, Robert Jr.,\nKathryn and Lisa) and grandfather of five. The Mosbachers reside in Washington, D.C.\nOF STATES OF AMERICA DEPARTMENT ENERGY OF DETARTMENT\nJames D. Watkins\nSecretary\nDepartment of Energy\nJames David Watkins was nominated by the President to be the sixth Secretary of Energy on January 20,\n1989. Admiral Watkins was confirmed by the United States Senate and sworn into office on March 1,\n1989.\nAdmiral Watkins was born in California on March 7, 1927, and claims the city of Pasadena as his home.\nA 1949 graduate of the U.S. Naval Academy, his tours as flag officer included Chief of Naval Personnel;\nCommander of the Sixth Fleet; Vice Chief of Naval Operations; and Commander-in-Chief of the Pacific\nFleet. Admiral Watkins was selected by President Reagan to become the 22nd Chief of Naval Opera-\ntions on June 30, 1982. His military decorations include several Distinguished Service and Legion of\nMerit medals, the Bronze Star with combat \"V\" and other medals, campaign and service ribbons, and\ndecorations from many foreign nations.\nFollowing his retirement on June 30, 1986, Admiral Watkins devoted his time to issues regarding\nAmerica's youth, and worked with a number of philanthropic organizations to establish a national\nprogram for personal excellence. He also served as a member of advisory boards in both the education\nand energy fields and has received several honorary doctorates and public service awards.\nIn October 1987, Admiral Watkins was appointed Chairman of the Presidential Commission on the\nHuman Immunodeficiency Virus (AIDS) Epidemic, submitting the Commission's final report to the\nPresident on June 24, 1988.\nAdmiral Watkins received his master's degree in mechanical engineering in 1958, and is a graduate of\nthe reactor engineering course at the Oak Ridge National Laboratory. He was selected by Admiral\nHyman G. Rickover to enter the Navy's nuclear-powered submarine program in 1959, and was quali-\nfied as an Engineering Officer of the Watch at one of the Navy's land-based reactor plants. He served\nfor three years in the Atomic Energy Commission as Admiral Rickover's assistant for Naval Nuclear\nPropulsion and later, in a variety of assignments associated with the management of the nuclear navy.\nThese assignments included Commanding Officer of a nuclear-powered submarine and Executive\nOfficer of the world's first nuclear-powered cruiser.\nAdmiral Watkins married Sheila Jo McKinney of San Diego, California, in 1950. They have six children:\nKatherine Watkins Coopersmith, Laura Jo Watkins Kauffmann, Susan, Charles, James Jr., and Edward.\nAdmiral and Mrs. Watkins have eight grandchildren.\nUNITED\nSTATES.\nAGENCY\nPROTECTION\nWilliam K. Reilly\nAdministrator\nEnvironmental Protection Agency\nWilliam Kane Reilly was sworn in as Administrator of the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency by\nPresident Bush on February 8, 1989. The President announced his appointment on December 22, 1988,\nand officially nominated him on January 20, 1989. The U.S. Senate unanimously confirmed his nomina-\ntion on February 2, 1989.\nPrior to becoming EPA Administrator, Reilly held five environment-related positions during the\nprevious two decades. He was President of World Wildlife Fund-U.S. (1985-1989) and President of the\nConservation Foundation (1973-1989). Those two organizations joined in a formal affiliation in 1985\nand Reilly became President of both organizations. He was Executive Director of the Task Force on\nLand Use and Urban Growth from 1972-1973. From 1970 to 1972, he was on the staff of the President's\nCouncil on Environmental Quality and, from 1968 to 1970, was Associate Director, Urban Policy Center\nand the National Urban Coalition. He also served as Chairman of the Natural Resources Council of\nAmerica, an association of all major conservation groups, from 1981-1983.\nDuring his presidency of World Wildlife Fund-U.S., Reilly intensified his mission, the protection of the\ndiversity of life on earth. Between 1961 and 1989, the organization supported 1,371 wildlife and\nendangered habitat projects in 103 countries. At the Conservation Foundation, he continued its long-\nstanding interest in land programs and initiated new programs in environmental dispute resolution,\nwater toxic substances control, and urban conservation and energy. In 1976, Reilly began a program\nadvocating direct cooperation between business leaders and conservationists in resolving polarizing\nissues in resources and environmental policy, which resulted in several major consensus-building\npolicy dialogues, including the National Groundwater Policy Forum and the National Wetlands Policy\nForum.\nReilly has written and lectured extensively on environmental issues, has served on the boards of various\nprivate and public sector organizations and received the Horace Albright Medal for his contributions to\nnational parks and the Alfred B. LaGasse Medal for his contributions to environmental progress.\nAn alumnus of Yale University, Reilly holds a law degree from Harvard University and a master's\ndegree in urban planning from Columbia University. He was born in Decatur, Illinois on January 26,\n1940, grew up in Fall River, Massachusetts, and served as a U.S. Army captain (1966 to 1967).\nHe is married to Elizabeth \"Libbie\" Bennet Buxton Reilly. They have two daughters, Katherine Buxton\nReilly, age 19, and Margaret Mahalah Reilly, age 14. The family resides in Alexandria, Virginia.\nNASA\nRichard H. Truly\nAdministrator\nNational Aeronautics and\nSpace Administration\nRichard H. Truly became the eighth Administrator of NASA on July 1, 1989. One day earlier, he\nconcluded his naval career of more than 30 years, retiring as a Vice Admiral, United States Navy. He is\nthe first astronaut to head the nation's civilian space agency.\nTruly became NASA's associate administrator for space flight on February 20, 1986. In this position, he\nled the painstaking rebuilding of the Space Shuttle program. This was highlighted by NASA's cele-\nbrated \"return to flight\" on September 29, 1988, when Discovery lifted off from Kennedy Space Center,\nFlorida, on the first Shuttle mission in almost three years.\nBefore returning to NASA, the former Shuttle astronaut served as the first commander of the Naval\nSpace Command, Dahlgren, Virginia, established October 1, 1983. His career in the U.S. Navy began in\n1959, when he was commissioned an ensign. This coincided with his graduation from Georgia Institute\nof Technology, which he attended as a Naval R.O.T.C. midshipman and earned a bachelor's degree in\naeronautical engineering.\nFollowing flight school, he was designated a naval aviator in 1960. His initial tour of duty, Fighter\nSquadron 33, was aboard USS Intrepid and USS Enterprise, and he made more than 300 carrier land-\nings. From 1963 to 1965, he was a student and then instructor at the U.S. Air Force Aerospace Research\nPilot School, Edwards Air Force Base, California.\nIn 1965, Truly became one of the first military astronauts selected to the Air Force's Manned Orbiting\nLaboratory program in Los Angeles, California, and transferred to NASA as an astronaut in August\n1969. He served as capsule communicator for all three of the manned Skylab missions in 1973 and the\nApollo-Soyuz mission in 1975. As a naval aviator, test pilot, and astronaut, Truly has logged over 7,500\nhours in numerous military and civilian jet aircraft.\nHe was pilot for one of the two-man crews that flew the 747/Space Shuttle Enterprise approach and\nlanding test flights during 1977. He then served as backup pilot for STS-1, the first orbital test of the\nShuttle. His first flight in space was November 12-14, 1981, as pilot of Space Shuttle Columbia (STS-2),\nsignificant as the first manned spacecraft to be reflown in space. His second flight (STS-9, August\n30-September 5, 1983) was as commander of Space Shuttle Challenger, the first night launch and\nlanding in the Shuttle program.\nOn January 18, 1989, Truly was awarded the Presidential Citizen's Medal by President Reagan. His\nNASA awards include two NASA Distinguished Service Medals, the NASA Outstanding Leadership\nMedal, two NASA Exceptional Service Medals, and NASA Space Distinguished Service Medal, the\nDefense Superior Service Medal, two Legions of Merit, the Navy Distinguished Flying Cross, and the\nMeritorious Service Medal.\nTruly was born in Fayette, Mississippi, on November 12, 1937 and attended school in Fayette and\nMeridian, Mississippi. He is married to the former Colleen (Cody) Hanner of Milledgeville, Georgia.\nThey have three children: Mike, Dan and Lee, and three grandchildren: Ashley, Courtney and Peter.\nDIPARTMENT OF COMMERCE\n*\nUNITED STATES OF AMERICA\nJohn A. Knauss\nUnder Secretary\nDepartment of Commerce\nJohn A. Knauss, Under Secretary for Oceans and Atmosphere and Administrator of the Department's\nNational Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA), took office August 7, 1989.\nA noted oceanographer and educator, Knauss was a professor of oceanography at the Graduate School\nof Oceanography at the University of Rhode Island (URI). He also served as dean of the URI Gradu-\nate School of Oceanography from 1962 to 1987, and as the university's provost for marine affairs from\n1969 to 1982.\nKnauss has been a member of two presidential commissions on marine affairs: the Commission OR\nMarine Science, Resources, and Engineering (the Stratton Commission) in 1967 to 1968 and the National\nAdvisory Committee on Oceans and Atmosphere (NACOA), 1978 to 1985. He served as Chairman of\nNACOA from 1981 to 1985. He has been President of the Association of Sea Grant Program Instititions,\nChairman of the Ocean Science Committee of the National Academy of Sciences/National Research\nCouncil, and Chairman of the Marine Division of the National Association of State Universities and\nLand-Grant Colleges.\nHe has served as President of the oceanographic section of the American Geophysical Union (AGU),\nVice President of the Marine Technology Society (MTS), Vice Chairman of the American Association for\nthe Advancement of Science's (AAAS) Atmospheric and Hydrospheric Sciences Section, and a council\nmember of the American Meteorological Society. He was a co-founder of the Law of the Sea Institute\nand served on its governing board from 1965 to 1976 and 1981 to 1987. He has been elected a fellow of\nthe AAAS, the AGU, and the MTS.\nKnauss graduated from Massachusetts Institute of Technology (B.S., 1946), the University of Michigan\n(M.S., 1949), and the University of California, Scripps Institution of Oceanography (Ph.D., 1959).\nnsf\nErich Bloch\nDirector\nNational Science Foundation\nErich Bloch was confirmed by the Senate to be Director of the National Science Foundation on August 6,\n1984. As Director, he is responsible for an agency charged with strengthening the national scientific and\nengineering research potential and with improving science and engineering education at all levels. The\nFoundation has an annual budget exceeding $1.7 billion and the annual award of 12,000 to 14,000 grants\nfor research in all fields of natural, social sciences, and engineering.\nBefore joining NSF, Mr. Bloch was a corporate Vice President for Technical Personnel Development at\nIBM Corporation, which he joined in 1952 as an electrical engineer. During his career at IBM, Mr. Bloch\nwas the engineering manager of IBM's STRETCH supercomputer system in the late 1950's and early\n1960's. In 1962, he headed development of the Solid Logic Technology program, which provided IBM\nwith microelectronic technology for its System/360 computer. Subsequently, Mr. Bloch was appointed\na vice president of the company's Data Systems Division and general manager of the East Fishkill\nfacility, which is responsible for the development and manufacture of semiconductor components used\nin IBM's product line. He was elected an IBM vice president in 1981.\nFrom 1981 to 1984, Mr. Bloch served as Chairman of the Semi-conductor Research Cooperative, a group\nof leading computer and electronics firms that fund advanced research in universities and shares in the\nresults, and was the IBM representative on the board of the Semiconductor Industry Association.\nIn February 1985, Mr. Bloch was awarded the National Medal of Technology by President Reagan. The\naward was made for his part in pioneering developments related to the IBM/360 computer that\nrevolutionized the computer industry. In 1989, Mr. Bloch was the recipient of the IEEE United States\nActivities Board Award for Distinguished Public Service and the IEEE 1990 Founders Medal. He also\nreceived honorary Doctorate of Engineering degrees from the Colorado School of Mines, the University\nof Notre Dame, and Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute; honorary Doctorate of Science degrees from the\nUniversity of Massachusetts at Amherst, George Washington University, State University of New York\nat Buffalo, the University of Rochester, Oberlin College, and Washington College; and an honorary\nDoctorate of Science and Engineering degree from the Ohio State University.\nHe is a member of the National Academy of Engineering and is a Fellow of the American Association\nfor the Advancement of Science and of the Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers and a\nmember of its Computer Society. He received his education in electrical engineering at the Federal\nPolytechnic Institute of Zurich, Switzerland, and a Bachelor of Science degree in electrical engineering\nfrom the University of Buffalo in 1952.\nRichard Schmalensee\nCouncil of Economic Advisers\nOffice of the President\nRichard Schmalensee is a Member of the Council of Economic Advisers. He has primary responsibility\nfor the analysis of microeconomic and regulatory policy. Dr. Schmalensee is on leave from the Massa-\nchusetts Institute of Technology (MIT), where he is the Gordon Y. Billard Professor of Economics and\nManagement.\nDr. Schmalensee's research and teaching have focused on industrial organization and on anti-trust and\nregulatory policy. He has written numerous articles in professional journals and is the author of three\nbooks and co-author of three others. He has extensive consulting experience on anti-trust and regula-\ntory matters. He has served on the editorial boards of several economics journals, is co-editor of the\nHandbook of Industrial Organization, and is founding editor of the MIT Press Regulation of Economic\nActivity monograph series. Dr. Schmalensee has also served on various committees of the American\nEconomic Association and the Econometric Society, of which he is a Fellow.\nDr. Schmalensee attended the public schools of Belleville, Illinois and received his B.S. (Economics,\nPolitics and Science; 1965) and Ph.D. ( Economics; 1970) degrees from MIT. Prior to joining the MIT\nfaculty in 1977, he taught at the University of California, San Diego. He is married to the former Diane\nHawk; they have two sons.\nTHE WHITE HOUSE CONFERENCE\nON SCIENCE & ECONOMICS RESEARCH\nRELATED TO\nGLOBAL CHANGE\nHOTEL/TRANSPORTATION/LOGISTICS\nDr. Franmarie Keel\nWhite House Conference on Global Change\nSuite 615\n1019 19th Street, N.W.\nWashington, D.C. 20036\nPhone: (202) 653-5980\nFax: (202) 653-2034\nTelex: 249118SDAVISUR\nTelemail (OMNET): GLOBAL.CHANGE\nHOTEL\nThe White House Conference is being held at:\nThe J.W. Marriott Hotel\n1331 Pennsylvania Avenue, N.W.\nWashington, D.C. 20004\nTelephone: 202-393-2000\nThe White House Conference has reserved rooms for each official delegation member.\nCharges for the hotel room April 16th and 17th, 1990 and for Conference meals served\nApril 17 and 18, 1990, will be paid for by the White House Conference.\nHotel room check-in is 3:00 p.m. Conference registration begins at 12:00 noon, Sunday, April\n15, for delegates arriving in Washington early. Registration will continue Monday all day\nand until 12:00 noon on Tuesday, April 17. Special arrangements should be made with White\nHouse Conference coordinators for early or late arrivals/departures and check-in.\nTo cover any personal incidental expenditures (such as telephone calls, charges at the hotel\nrestaurants and gift shops, and additional room service), each delegation member must\npresent one of the following upon registration at the hotel to guarantee incidentals:\ncredit card (American Express, VISA, Master Card, Diners Club, JCV)\na letter received by April 14th, 1990 from the delegation's embassy\nstating embassy will cover its delegation's incidentals prior to\ndelegation's departure from the hotel\nTRANSPORTATION\nDelegations will be met by White House Conference personnel at Washington National\nAirport, Washington Dulles Airport, Baltimore-Washington International Airport, and\nAndrews Air Force Base and will be escorted to the hotel beginning Sunday, April 15.\nWhite House Conference personnel meeting flights can be identified by a White House\nConference sign. Delegations arriving in Washington domestically will be met at the gate.\nInternational arrivals will be met at the exit of the mobil lounge at the entrance to U.S.\nImmigration and Customs.\nProcedures have been established by the Conference to assist in the facilitation of U.S.\nCustoms.\n1\nHOTEL/TRANSPORTATION/LOGISTICS\nPre-Conference Material\nfor Delegates\nTransportation will be provided for delegations' return to those designated airports after the\nclose of the Conference Wednesday, April 18, through Thursday evening, April 19.\nAll transportation for official Conference events held outside of the J.W. Marriott Hotel will\nbe provided by the White House Conference.\nAll airline arrival and departure times must be confirmed as soon as possible with the\nWhite House Conference at 202/653-5980.\nPlease inform the White House Conference immediately if flight plans change at\ndeparture (i.e. cancelled flight, family emergency, etc.)\nSPECIAL REQUIREMENTS\nAny special room, bed, dietary, or medical requirements should be forwarded to White\nHouse Conference coordinators as soon as possible.\nMISCELLANEOUS\nSimultaneous interpretation in Russian, Spanish, and French will be provided during the\nConference meetings.\nPlease note the dinner at the State Department, on Tuesday, April 17, is business attire.\nThe White House Conference\n2\non Science and Economics Research\nRelated to Global Change\nWHITE HOUSE CONFERENCE ON SCIENCE AND ECONOMICS\nRESEARCH RELATED TO GLOBAL CHANGE\nDelegate Travel Accommodation Registration\nPLEASE PRINT OR TYPE\nName:\nTitle:\nCountry Delegation:\nHOTEL ACCOMMODATIONS:\nIn order to facilitate your registration upon arrival at the Conference site at the J.W. Marri-\nott Hotel, it will be necessary to provide the information requested in this form. The White\nHouse Conference provides each delegate with a hotel room from check-in April 16th to\ncheck-out on April 18th. The J.W. Marriott Hotel requires guarantee of payment for inci-\ndentals, such as telephone, room service, gift shop, laundry, restaurants, etc., with cash, a\ncredit card or a Letter of Guarantee from your Embassy. A Letter of Guarantee should in-\nclude delegate's name, check-in date, Embassy Financial Officer, and any stipulations, and\nmust be received by April 14, 1990.\nCredit Card #\nExpiration Date:\nType (American Express, Visa, Master Card, Diners Club, JCV):\nName as it appears on card:\nSignature:\nDate:\nThis should be completed and sent by fax (202-653-2034) to Susan Thoren at the White\nHouse Conference in Washington, D.C., or delivered by April 12th to 1019 19th Street NW,\nSuite 615, Washington D.C. 20036\n8\n7\n9\n6\n10\n3\n11\n5\n12\n1\n4\n13\n14\n2\nRendering by S. Finkenberg, New York.\n1. JW Marriott Hotel\n8. United States Capitol\n2. The White House\n9. Air and Space Museum\n3. Convention Center\n10. Hirshhorn Museum\n4. Museum of American History\n11. Smithsonian \"Castle\"\n5. Natural History Museum\n12. Freer Gallery\n6. National Gallery of Art\n13. Department of Agriculture\n7. National Gallery of Art East Wing\n14. Washington Monument\nPrinted on Recycled Paper\nPA\nTHE WHITE HOUSE CONFERENCE\nON SCIENCE & ECONOMICS RESEARCH\nRELATED TO\nGLOBAL CHANGE\nBriefing for U.S. Delegates\nto\nThe White House Conference on Science and Economics Research\nRelated to Global Change\nWednesday, April 11, 1990\n3:00 - 4:30 p.m.\nRoosevelt Room\nDr. D. Allan Bromley, Co-chairman\nMr. Michael R. Deland, Co-chairman\nDr. Robert W. Corell, Conference Director\nDr. Franmarie Keel, Conference Coordinator\nDr. Nancy Maynard, OSTP\nDr. Howard Gruenspecht, CEA\nMr. David Struhs, CEQ\nWilliam D. Harris, William Harris Company (DOB: 6/25/47)\nRick (Richard) Davis, Black, Manafort Stone & Kelly (DOB 8/9/57)\nDr. Fred Bernthal, NSF\nJohn Weiss, Senior Analyst, CIA (DOB: 3/21/58)\nRichard Stakem, Dir. of Global Issues, CIA (DOB: 6/16/48)\nAhmed Meer, White House Conference Office (DOB: 1-5-39)\nDelegates and/or their representatives\nSecretary Clayton Yeutter\nAdministrator William K. Reilly\nJohn Knauss, NOAA\nErich Bloch, National Science Foundation\nRichard Schmalensee, Council of Economic Advisers\nFred Bernthal, National Science Foundation\nJ. Clarence Davies, EPA\nLen Fisk, NASA\nColleen Getz\nCharles Hess, Department of Agriculture\nRichard Porter, Department of the Treasury\nJohn Schrote, Department of the Interior\nJ. R. Spradley, Department of Commerce\n1019 Nineteenth Street, NW\nSuite 615\nWashington, DC 20036\n202-653-5980\nFax: 202-653-2034\nAGENDA\nBriefing for U.S. Delegates\nto\nThe White House Conference on Science and Economics Research\nRelated to Global Change\nWednesday, April 11, 1990\n3:00 - 4:30 p.m.\nRoosevelt Room\n1. Strategy and U.S. Participation in the Conference\n-- Dr. D. Allan Bromley, Assistant to the President for\nScience and Technology\n2. Review of the U.S. Position on Policy Matters Concerning Global\nChange\n-- Dr. Frederick M. Bernthal, Deputy Director, National\nScience Foundation\n3. The White House Conference in the Context of International\nMeetings on Global Change -- Past, Present, and Future\n-- Dr. Bernthal\n4. Review of Conference Agenda and Logistics\n-- Dr. Robert W. Corell, Conference Director and Assistant\nDirector for Geosciences, National Science Foundation\n-- Dr. Franmarie Keel, Conference Coordinator\n5. Delegate Affairs\n-- Ahmed Meer, Conference Coordinator for Foreign\nDelegations and Senior Science Adviser, Department of\nState\n-- Country Briefings\nTABLE OF CONTENTS\n1.\nConference Agenda\n2.\nConference Overview\n3.\nScience and Economics Research for Global Stewardship\n4.\nDraft of Co-Chairmen's Conference Report\n5.\nHeads of Delegation List\n6.\nPreliminary Delegation List\n7.\nFor Future Insert Booklet of Plenary Presentations-- 2 POTUS Speeches)\n8.\nFor Future Insert (Test of Pres. Ltr to Delegates)\n9.\nMedia Questions and Answers\n10. Schematics of Conference Plenaries and Breakouts\n11. U.S. Response to Conference Questionnaire\n12. Climate Change Paper\n13. For Future Insert (Info Packett to Foreign Embassies)\n14. For Future Insert (Brochure on Global Stewardship)\n15. For Future Insert (Charter for Conference)\n16. For Future Insert (Statement of Principles)\n17. Secretary Baker's Speech to the IPCC, January 30, 1989\n18. IPCC Executive Summary\n19. IPCC Policymakers' Summary\n20. Draft Report of CEA Task Force on Economic Costs\n21. Environmental Portion of the Economic Declaration of the Paris\nSummit, July 16, 1989\n22. Fact Sheet on the President's Initiatives, U.S.-U.S.S.R.\nSummit at Malta, December 4, 1989\n23. \"The Economy and the Environment,\" Chapter 6, Economic Report\nof the President\n24. For Future Insert (Reilly Article)\n25. For Future Insert\nPRELIMINARY AGENDA\nFOR\nTHE WHITE HOUSE CONFERENCE\nON\nSCIENCE AND ECONOMICS RESEARCH RELATED\nTO\nGLOBAL CHANGE\nApril 17-18, 1990\nWashington, D.C.\nMONDAY - APRIL 16, 1990\n12:00 pm Early Registration\nJ.W. Marriott Hotel\n1331 Pennsylvania Avenue\nWashington, D.C.\n1:00 pm Pre-Conference Luncheon\nHosted by Ronald Roskens, Administrator\nAgency for International Development\n7:00 pm Reception\nNational Air and Space Museum\nIndependence Ave., Washington, D.C.\nHosts:\nRobert A. Mosbacher, Secretary of Commerce\nRichard H. Truly, Administrator of NASA\nMartin Harwit, Director, National Air\nand Space Museum\nTUESDAY, APRIL 17, 1990\n8:00 am Continental Breakfast\n9:30 am PLENARY SESSION I (Moderator: Michael J. Boskin)\nWelcoming Remarks:\nNicholas F. Brady - Secretary of the Treasury\nWelcome: President George Bush\nGoals and Expectations for the Conference -\nD. Allan Bromley\n1\nTUESDAY, APRIL 17, 1990 (Continued)\nOpening Remarks by Visiting Delegate -\nJ. Janowski, Deputy Prime Minister of Poland\n11:00 am PLENARY SESSION II (Moderator: Michael R. Deland)\nTheme I Presentation:\n\"The Science and Economics Research\nChallenge\" - D. Allan Bromley\nTheme II Presentation:\n\"Integrating Science and Economics Research\nin the Policy Process\" - Michael J. Boskin\nTheme III Presentation:\n\"Building Partnerships for Science and\nEconomics Research\" - Michael R. Deland\n12:00 pm Luncheon\nSpeaker: William Reilly, Administrator,\nEnvironmental Protection Agency\n1:45 pm WORKING GROUP SESSIONS\nWorking Group Session I:\nTwo Visiting Delegates serve as Co-Chairmen\nof each of the A, B, and C Working Groups\nWorking Group Session II:\nTwo Visiting Delegates serve as Co-Chairmen\nof each of the A, B, and C Working Groups\n5:30 pm Working Group Sessions End\n6:00 pm Reception at the National Academy of Sciences\nBuilding, hosted by Frank Press, President of the\nNational Academy of Sciences and Robert White,\nPresident of the National Academy of Engineering\n8:00 pm Dinner in the Diplomatic Suite of the State\nDepartment\nIPCC Address Bert Bolin, Chairman, IPCC\n2\nWEDNESDAY, APRIL 18, 1990\n8:00 am Continental Breakfast\n9:00 am WORKING GROUP SESSIONS\nWorking Group Session III:\nTwo visiting Delegates serve as Co-Chairmen\nof each of the A, B, and C Working Groups\n11:00 am Working Group Session IV:\nThree United States Delegates serve as\nChairmen of the A, B, and C Working Groups\n12:00 pm Luncheon\nSpeaker: Admiral James D. Watkins, Secretary\nDepartment of Energy\n1:45 pm CONCLUDING SESSION (Moderator: D. Allan Bromley)\nReview of Co-Chairmen's Report\nMichael R. Deland for\nthe Conference Co-Chairmen\nClosing Remarks President George Bush\n3:00 pm Conference Ends\n3\nOVERVIEW OF THE CONFERENCE\nGOALS AND OBJECTIVES OF THE CONFERENCE:\nPresident George Bush invited the Heads of State from seventeen nations and the leadership of the\nE.C. and the OECD to send ministerial-level delegations to the White House Conference on Science\nand Economics Research Related to Global Change. The Conference is designed to bring together\ngovernment leaders in science, economics, energy, and the environment concerned with the central\nresearch issues of Global Change. The Conference is designed to advance understanding of Global\nChange phenomena, to enhance international cooperation, and to build the basis for future efforts\namong nations to integrate more fully science and economics research into the policy process. The\nConference adds a new dimension to the international dialogue on Global Change - - the proposition\nthat economics, both analysis and research on economic policy and economic consequences, is an\nessential link between the science of Global Change and policy alternatives. Science and economics\nresearch can also serve to identify and develop technologies and policy instruments that relax the\ntension between growth and Global Change, allowing for greater progress on both fronts. To address\nthese broad goals, the Conference will:\nFocus on science and economics research issues relevant to policy on Global Change,\nAddress important next steps to substantially enhance and broaden international\nunderstanding of science and economics research issues that relate to Global Change,\nHighlight the special role that economics plays in integrating the science of Global Change\nwith the policy process,\nDemonstrate linkages between science and economics research and domestic and\ninternational policy processes, and\nSeek to take the initial steps to implement joint international science and economics\nresearch efforts.\nThe Conference is conceived as an integral part of the ongoing international process to understand\nthe science of and policy options relating to global environmental issues. The need to improve\nsubstantially understanding of both the science and economics of Global Change has been noted by\nmany world leaders. The Conference, therefore, focuses on science and economics research issues as\na complement to the ongoing Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) and other interna-\ntional forums that seek to address the issue of Global Change. It is hoped that the results of the Con-\nference will contribute to the IPCC process and other ongoing international debates and actions.\nThe Conference focuses on \"Global Change,\" an area of research concerned with understanding the\nfundamental processes that govern the Earth system functions. Global Change encompasses such\ndiverse and interrelated issues as ozone depletion, greenhouse gases, climate change, food security,\nwater supply, sea level changes, wetlands, deforestation, biodiversity, population change, and energy\ndemand.\nOVERVIEW\n1\nPre-Conference Material\nfor Delegates\nThe Conference will provide a forum for international leaders to address the complex science and\neconomics research issues central to the policy process, including:\nHow well can we predict temperature trends in the decades ahead?\nHow \"good\" are our global scale models, such as models to predict temperature changes?\nHow well can we predict the interconnections between global environmental change and the\nresulting social and economic impacts?\nWhat are the economic consequences of adapting to or mitigatinGlobal Change?\nHow \"good\" are the models used to assess these economic consequences and their impact on\nthe well-being of humanity?\nBy addressing such questions, it is hoped that the nations might pledge to enhance joint international\nresearch efforts that focus on rapid improvement of both scientific and economic knowledge and de-\nvelopment of the necessary infrastructure to implement such efforts.\nTo address these complex and interrelated issues, President Bush invited heads of state from a small\ngroup of nations to send delegations led by ministerial-level officials. The Conference was conceived\nwith the idea that a representative group of countries would be invited to participate. Their selection\nwas based on the simple criteria that the meeting should include countries or organizations of\ncountries that have substantial populations, large land masses, industrialized economies, heavy\nfuture energy needs, major research infrastructures, or have provided international leadership on\nissues related to climate and Global Change. These countries and organizations were selected:\n1.\nAustralia\n2.\nBrazil\n3.\nCanada\n4.\nFederal Republic of Germany\n5.\nFrance\n6.\nIndia\n7.\nIndonesia\n8.\nItaly\n9.\nJapan\n10.\nMexico\n11.\nNetherlands\n12.\nNigeria\n13.\nNorway\n14.\nPoland\n15.\nSoviet Union\n16.\nUnited Kingdom\n17.\nZaire\n18.\nEuropean Community\n19.\nOECD\n2\nThe White House Conference\non Science and Economics Research\nRelated to Global Change\nTHE EXPECTED RESULTS OF THE CONFERENCE\nThe Conference will provide an opportunity to address the science and economics research issues\nrelated to Global Change in the context of the policy process. To accomplish these goals, the Confer-\nence will focus on and seek to promote:\nA substantially enhanced understanding of science, economics, and environmental research\nagenda central to the needs of future Global Change policy development.\nA substantive understanding of the uncertainties in both science and economics knowledge of\nchanges in the global environment of the planet.\nIncreased mutual understanding of and sensitivity to the substance of science and economics\nresearch between both of those research communities.\nIncreased sensitivity by the two research communities to the policy needs evolving in such\nareas as environmental and energy policy, and vice versa.\nA solid and well implemented science and economics research effort as a prerequisite for a\ncomplement to evolving efforts by nations to address the international policy questions of\nglobal environmental changes.\nA communication network among national leaders concerned with, and responsible for, the\nresearch and policy agenda related to Global Change. More particularly, this Conference\nprovides a \"first-ever\" opportunity to forge a partnership between the science and economics\nresearch communities and the policy-makers.\nTo provide a vehicle to focus on these vital issues, the Conference will include two Plenary Sessions\nand several concurrent Working Groups, which will address the three major themes of the Confer-\nence:\nThe Science and Economics Research Challenge\nIntegrating Science and Economics Research in the Policy Process\nBuilding a Partnership for Science and Economics Research\nThe Conference is expected to produce a Co-Chairmen's Report, which will outline the deliberations\nof the Conference and set forth common actions designed to expand research and cooperation among\nnations.\nAs President Bush stated in his invitation letter, \"It is my hope that the expertise, experience, and\ndata available in our respective countries can be brought together in a more integrated and coherent\nfashion. By working together, our nations can enhance international cooperation in these vital areas\nand contribute to the success of the ongoing IPCC process.\"\nOVERVIEW\n3\nPre-Conference Material\nfor Delegates\nA Statement of The\nContext and Challenges Facing the\nWhite House Conference\na Science & Economics Research\nRelated To\nSCIENCE AND ECONOMICS RESEARCH\nGlobal Change\nFOR GLOBAL STEWARDSHIP\nGlobal stewardship is our shared responsibility and our shared\nopportunity. We must manage the Earth's natural resources in\nways that assure the sustainability of humanity on this planet\nand in ways that maximize our potential for growth and\nopportunity for all. Global stewardship is a continuing process\nof political, economic and social decision-making that meets the\nneeds of the present generation while expanding the\nopportunities of future generations.\nGlobal stewardship will become a dominant scientific, economic\nand environmental issue of the 21st century. The experience of\nthe past 45 years has shown that growth can be achieved only\nthrough the synergy of democratic political institutions and\nmarket economic systems. But just as democratic institutions\nare expanding, our ability to grow could be limited by changes\nin our already stressed environment. Solutions must be found\nwhich will protect the quality of our natural environment while\nallowing for the economic growth necessary to sustain and\nimprove the living standards of a growing world population.\nFor perhaps the first time in human history, we now understand\nthat our progress depends on accounting for our environmental\nresources and using them wisely. A new understanding of\ncomplex environmental systems is emerging. This\nunderstanding means that we are now called upon to create\nnew directions for our creative energies and technologies.\nGlobal stewardship is the key.\nTo exercise effective stewardship, we must advance our\nknowledge of natural and human systems. We must create\nsolutions that join economic growth with sound management of\nour environment. Meeting this challenge will require an\nintegration of scientific, economic, and environmental\nconcerns-an integration which moves global stewardship and\nhuman sustainability to center stage.\nWe need new tools to effectively evaluate how to respond to global\nenvironmental changes. Science and economics research can\nprovide some of the tools needed to understand and properly\nmanage our changing planet. Global change is concerned with\nsuch diverse but interrelated issues as ozone depletion,\ngreenhouse gases, climate change, food security, water supply, sea\nlevel changes, wetlands, deforestation, biodiversity, population\nchanges, and energy demands. A common ingredient in each of\nthese issues is the level of uncertainty about the scale at which\nthese changes are occurring and humanity's relative contribution\nto the change. There is also uncertainty regarding the social and\neconomic consequences of change itself and of policy measures\nwhich might be taken to address it. As global stewards we must\naddress these uncertainties by increasing our scientific and\neconomic knowledge and take justifiable actions to manage global\nchange with due consideration given to the uncertainties which\nexist.\nTherefore, the challenges of global stewardship require agreement\nin these three areas:\nScience and economics uncertainties-research challenges;\nStrategies for and challenges to integrating economics and\nscience research; and\nBuilding better international partnerships for economics and\nscience research.\nOur existence depends on our ability to draw sustenance from the\nnatural world while supporting the systems that regenerate that\nworld. Building an integrated program of economics and science\nresearch is the step we must take today. Global stewardship is not\na fixed state but a process of change in which environmental and\neconomic values are brought into balance to meet human needs\nand to expand human prospects. Let us join together and accept\nthe challenge of Global Stewardship.\nGeorge Bush\n90\n02\n357 9829\nOFFICIAL 10/05 USE\nONLY\nDRAFT\nREPORT.410\nTHE WHITE HOUSE\nWASHINGTON, D.C.\nThe White House Conference\non\nScience and Economics Research Related to Global Change\nDRAFT OF CO-CHAIRMEN'S CONFERENCE REPORT\nGOALS AND OBJECTIVES OF THE CONFERENCE:\nA White House Conference, initiated by President George Bush on Science and Economics Research Related\nis Global Change was held in Washington, D.C. April 16-18, 1990. Conference Co-Chairmen were, the\nChairman of the President's Council of Economic Advisers, Dr. Michael J. Boskin, the Assistant to the\nPresident for Science and Technology, Dr. D. Allan Bromley, and the Chairman of the White House Council\non Environmental Quality, Mr. Michael R Deland. Seventeen nations and the leadership of the E.C. and the\nOECD sent ministerial-level delegations to the Conference (See Appendix I for a List of Delegates). The\nConference sought to add a integrating focus for international thought on Global Change, by introducing the\nconcept of \"Global Stewardship\", and by adding a new dimension 5 the international dialogue on Global\nChange - the proposition that economics, both analysis and research on broad economic policy and on\neconomic consequences of policy options, is an essential link between the science or Global Change and policy\nalternatives.\nGLOBAL STEWARDSHIP\n(INSERT GLOBAL STEWARDSHIP TEXT HERE)\nTHE CONFERENCE AGENDA\nTO address the substantive Conference goals, the agenda focussed the presentations and discussions on:\nScience and economics research issues relevant to policy on giobal change,\nImportant next steps that substantially enhance and broaden international understanding of\nscience and economic research issues that relate to global change,\nThe special role that economics plays in integrating the science of Global Change with the\npolicy process,\nDemonstrating linkages between science and economics research results and both domestic\nand international policy processes, and\nFraming the initial steps towards stratagies for implementing joint international science and\neconomics research efforts\nTuesday\nApril 10, 1990\n1:15 pm\n1\n10/08 80 02\n. 367 ****\nThe Conference focussed on \"Global Change,' a scope of research interests that evolved out of the sciences\nthat are concerned with understanding the fundamental processes that govern the way the global Earth system\nfunctions. Global Change encompasses such diverse and interrelated issues as ozone depletion, greenhouse\ngases, climate change. food security, water supply, $00 level changes, wetlands, deforestation, biodiversiry,\npopulation changes, and energy demands.\nThe Conference was conceived as an integral part of the on-going international process to understand the\nscience of and policy options relating to global environment issues. The need to substantially improve\nunderstanding of both the science and economics of global change has been noted by virtually an world\nleaders. The Conference, therefore, focused on scientific and economic research issues as a complement to\nthe on-going Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) and other international forums that seek\nto address the research agenda for Global Change.\nThe Conference provided a forum of internadonal leaders 9 address a variety of complex science and\neconomics research issues central 5 the policy process, for example:\nHow well can we predict temperature trends in the decades ahead?\nHow \"good\" are our global-scale models, such as models to predict temperature changes?\nHow well can we predict the interconnections between global environmental change and the\nresulting social and economic impacts?\nWhat are the economic costs of adapting to or mitigating global change?\nHow \"good\" are the economic models used to compute these costs?\nBy having ministerial-level discussions of such questions, it was hoped that nations might join together to\nenhance cooperative international research programs that focus on rapid improvement of both scientific and\neconomic knowledge.\nTo address these complex and interrelated issues. ministerial-level delegations were invited to the Conference\nfrom a representative group of nations. The Conference was conceived with the idea that a small representative should\nof countries would participate. Their selection was based on the simple criteria that the meeting\nbe group modest in size and include countries or organizations of countries that have substantial populations, large have\nland industrialized economies or heavy future energy needs, major research infestructures, or of\nprovided masses. international leadership on issues related to climate and global change A representative group\ncountries was selected. including:\n1 Australia\n2 Brazil\n3. Canada\n4. Federal Republic of Germany\n5. France\n6. India\n7. Indonesia\n& Italy\n9. Japan\n10. Mexico\n11. Netherlands\nTuesday\nApril 10, 1990\n1:55 FEE\n2\n12 Nigeria\n13. Norway\n14. Poland\n15. Soviet Union\n16. United Kingdom\n17. Zaire\n18. European Community\n19. OECD\nCONFERENCE PLENARY AND WORKING GROUP SESSIONS\nThe Conference Plenary and Working Group Sessions provided an opportunity for delegates to address the\ncritical science and economics research issues related to Global Change. The agenda was designed to provide\na forum to:\nSubstantially increase collective understanding of the critical scientific, economic. and environmental\nresearch agenda central to the needs of future global change policy development\nIdentify the uncertainties in both scientific and economics knowledge critical understanding changes\nin the global environment of the planet,\nIncrease mutual understanding of and sensitivity to scientific and economic research efforts between\nboth of those research communities.\nIncrease sensitivity by the two research communities to the policy needs in the environmental and\nenergy arena, and visa versa.\nFoster the concept of the importance of a solid and well implemented scientific and economics\nresearch effort as a pre-requisite for and parallel complement to, the evolving efforts by nations to\naddress the international policy questions of global environmental changes.\nEnhance communications and establish a broader \"network\" of among nadonal leaders, concerned with\nand responsible for, the research and policy agends related to global change. The Conference communities sought\nto provide a forum to forge partnerships between the scientific and technical research\nand the policy-makers.\nTo provide a vehicle to focus on these vital issues, the Conference Program was designed around themes: a balance\nbetween several Plenary Sessions and concurrent Working Groups that addressed three major\nTheme L: The Science and Economics Research Challenge\nTheme II: Integrating Science and Economics Research in the Policy Process\nTheme III: Building Partnerships for Science and Economics Research\nPLENARY SESSIONS\nTuesday\nApril 10, 1990\n1:35 R.\n3\n10/05 80 02\n. JST 8829\nThe program for the Conference was divided into three broad components. (1) Cose half day of Opening\nPlenary Sessions, (ii) two half days of Working Groups Sessions, and (iii) 2 half day of integrating and\nSummary Plenary Sessions\nOPENING PLENARY SESSIONS\nOpening: The Conference was opened with a presentation by Secretary of the Treasury, Nicholas F.\nBrady. The welcome addressed focussed on Include Summary of Brady's Remarks.\nAddress by President George Bushs The President of the United States, George Bush spoke to the\nConference and his central messages was\nInclude a Summary of President Bush's\nSpeech Full Text of the President's Speech is appended in Appendix A.\n, Delegate from\n. The Honorable\n, from\nRemarks by\n,\nprovided the Conference with a visiting delegation perspective on the Conference, during\nwhich\nInclude a Summary of his remarks. Include full ICXI if available in the Appendices.\nCentral Themes of the Conference The Three Conference Co-Chairmen gave major addresses on the\nthree Conference Themes, the purpose of which was to outline the central issues of the Conference\nand to provide a focus on each Theme for the Working Group Sessions. The full text of these three\nspeeches is appended to Appendix B.\nTheme I: The Science and Economics Research Challenge. Dr. D. Allan Bromley -\n- Include a Summary of Bromley's Speech_\nTheme II: Integrating Science and Economics Research in the Policy Process.\nDr. Michael J. Boskin - Include a Summary of Boskin's Speech\nTheme III: Building Partnerships for Science and Economics Research.\nMr. Michael R Deland - Include a Summary of Deland Speech.\nVisiting Delegations Perspectives on the Themes. Three delegates formed a Panel to discuss\nthe Themes and to give several visiting delegations views on the Themes of the\nConference\nForeign Delegate - Include Short Summary Here\nForeign Delegate - Include Short Summary Here\nForeign Delegate - Include Short Summary Here\n(Include full text if available in Appendices)\nMAJOR ADDRESSES\nThere were two major addresses given during the Conference Luncheons.\no\nAdmin William Reflly - Include a Summary of that Address\nSec. James D. Watkins - Include s Summary of that Address\nTuesday\nApril 10. 1990\n1:35 pm.\n4\nThe full taxt of both of these address is included in Appendix C\nWORKING GROUP SESSIONS\nThe Conference agenda was organized so that delegates were divided into three Working Groups (Working\nGroups A. B, and of each of which consisted of a mix of ministerial-level delegates from science, economics,\nand the environment agencies or government, and in some cases from energy agencies. All countries were\nrepresented to each Working Group. The list of Working Groups is contained in Appendix D. Four Working\nGroup Sessions met sequentially, two on Tuesday afternoon of April 17 and two on Wednesday morning of\nApril 18. The first sessions were devoted to the three Conference Themes and the fourth was designed as 1\nsession to integrate the discussions and 5 prepare a written summary of the Working Group deliberations as\na contribution to the Co-Chairmen's Conference Report Those reports are summarized herein.\nWorking Group A: Summary Report of Working Group \"A\"\nWorking Group B: Summary Report of Working Group \"B\"\nWorking Group C: Summary Report of Working Group °C\nSUMMARY PLENARY SESSIONS\nSUMMARIES OF CONCLUDING ADDRESSES AND PRESENTATIONS\n1.)\nForeign Delegations Summary of Conference: Three visiting delegates reviewed the results\nof the Conference from their perspective, a summary of those remarks follow. Include the\ncomments here. (Include full LEXI if available in Appendices)\n2)\nWorking Group Leader Summaries of the Conference: The three Working Groups gave\nsummaries of their deliberations, 2 summary of which follows.\nInclude it here\n(Include full text if available in Appendices)\n3.)\nConference Co-Chairmen Summaries of the Conferences The three Conference Co-Chairmen\noutlined their summary views on the Conference, a summary of those comments follow\nInclude those here. (Include full text if svailable in Appendices)\n4.)\nClosing Remarks by President George Bush: The President of the United States, George\nBush presented his closing remarks to the Conference. Include a Summary of President\nBush's Speech Full Text of the President's Remarks is appeaded in Appendix A with the\nOpening Address.\nSUMMARIES OF PROPOSALS FOR ACTION OFFERED DURING THE CONFERENCE\nThe delegates of the Conference concluded that several specific actions. developed during the\nConference should be addressed in the period immediately after the Conference. These include:\n1.)\nThe Working Groups considered a proposal by the U.S. to endorse the principles contained\nin a \"Charter for Cooperation in Science and Economics Research Related to Global\nChange', the draft of which is contained in Appendix E. The general consensus of the\nConference was\nInclude the specific results of discussions on this topic here.\nTuesday\nApril 10. 1990\n1.35 R\n5\nincluding any recommended action steps.\n2)\nThe U.S. proposed an initiative designed to initiate international and jointly sponsored\nresearch \"centers\" that focus research on the science and economics of global change. The\npurpose of these centers. which might be called International Institutes for Research on the\nScience and Economics of Global Change, is to develop internationally recognized \"Center\nof Excellence\" where both tesident and visiting scholars address key research topics that\ncontribute research results to the international policy process. A draft of the U.S. proposal\nis contained in Appendix F. The Working Groups discussed this proposal and concluded\nInclude the results of those discussions here\n3.)\nThe U.S. proposed an initiative to increase communications among nations engaged in\nresearch on global change. The U.S. proposal suggested that nations join together in what\nmight be called a 'Global Change Communications Network\". The proposal suggested that\na joint offort be undertaken that builds on the svailable technology for data and information\ntransfer, electronic mail, and other telecommunications technologies. A draft of the concept\nis enclosed in Appendix G. The Working Groups discussed this matter and concluded\nthat\nInclude the results of those discussions here.\n4.)\nThe U.S. proposed that the Conference consider endorsing a Statement of Principle' for\ndeveloping SEI international Strategy for Cooperation in Scientific and Economic Research\nin Global Change The draft \"Statement\" is attached in Appendix H. The 'Statement or\nPrinciples outlines the basts for developing a strategy among nations for 1 cooperative\ninternational effor LO implement jotnt scientific and economics research programs, including\nsharing of scientific and economic data, coordinating the development of international global\nobserving systems, and factificating joint research efforts to substantially\nimprove the capabilities of models to predict controlling global and regional environmental\nprocess (Le GCM'S). The \"Statement\" outlines the essential ingredients for an overall\nstrategy to implement cooperative research internationally. The focus would be on research\nefforts that can be substantially enhanced by joint efforts that build on the expertise,\nexperience, and data available of each participating country. The U.S. suggested that if the\n\"Statement of Principles\" is endorsed by the Conference, then a Task Team of interested\nnations would prepare a Draft Strategy, within a few months, for consideration by\ngovernment agencies responsible for implementing Global Change research programs and\nprojects. The proposal suggested that such a Strategy then could lead to what might be\ncalled, an International Global Change Research Program\". The proposal suggested that\nsuch a more fully coordinated international research effort could substantially assist the on-\ngoing policy debate and could support other up-coming international meetings, such as the\nIPCC and the Second World Climate Conference. The proposal builds upon existing\ndiscussions initiated by the International Council of Scientific Unions (ICSU) during its\nrecent Annual Meeting in Lisbon. in October. 1989. The proposal is intended to fully\nfacilitate the implementation of the research programs of the World Climate Research\nProgram (WCRP). the International Geosphere-Biosphere Program (IGBP), and others The\nWorking Groups considered the proposal and concluded\nInclude the results of the\nWorking Group discussions here\n5.)\nOther proposals . include here.\nFile I REPORT.410\nTuesday\nApril 10, 1990\n6\n1:33 R.\nGEO\n10/06 90 02.18 0. . 167 9629\nAPPENDIX A\nPRESIDENTS TWO SPEECHES\n(To be Added ai conference)\nTuesday\nApril 10. 1990\n1:35 B.\n7\nAPPENDIX C\nLUNCHEON SPEECHES\n(By Wm Reflly and James Watkins)\n(To be Added at Conference)\nTuesday\nApril 10, 1990\n145 H.\n9\nAPPENDIX D\nWORKING GROUPS MEMBERSHIP LISTS\n(To be Added at Conference)\nTuesday\nApril 10, 1990\n1:55 B\n10\nAPPENDIX E\nCHARTER FOR COOPERATION\nto the\nScience and Economics Research Related to Global Change'\nGovernment officials of Science. Economics, and the Environment from eighteen nations, the European\nCommunity (EC), and the Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD) gathered in\nWashington, D.C. on April 16-18, 1990, 9 artend a White House Conference on Science and Economics\nResearch Related to Global Change The Conference was designed to address important next steps for\nsubstantially enhancing and broadening international understanding of science and economic research related\nto Global Change. The delegates to the Conference noted that;\nWHEREAS:\nScientific evidence demonstrates that the Earth and its environment are changing on time\nand spacial scales unknown to humankind,\nScientific uncertainty remains as to the contributions made by natural variability in Earth\nsystem processes and those made by impacts from anthropogenic sources. hence limiting the\nability of science to predict. with acceptable accuracy. the future behavior of the Earth system\nGaps in scientific understanding substantially limit the abilities of nations to determine the\neconomic and societal impacts of global changes in the environment,\nWorld leaders are considering unprecedented postures and actions to address the potential\neconomic and social implications of these changes, and\nThese national and international developments, taken in total, have placed global\nenvironmental issues central on the agenda of international affairs.\nTHEREFORE\nThe nations gathered at the White House Conference on Science and Economics Research Related to Global\nChange will seek to:\nIncrease and coordinate their science and economics research programs with internationally\nplanned research efforts,\nWork together to develop national science and economic research programs that complement\nand contribute to a coherent internarional errort,\nWork to enhance existing international mechanisms for planning and implementing science\nand economics research programs, and to foster, when necessary and appropriate new\nmechanisms to foster cooperation among the world's governments and international agencies,\nWork toward full participation of all nations in the formulation. refining and implementation\nof the science and economics research agenda,\nEncourage the nations of the world to contribute resources and personnel to the research\nagenda in measure and kind reflecting national capabilities,\nTuenday\nApril 10, 1990\n1:55 B.\n11\n10.05 80 02.21 JS, 8020\no\nCollaborate with other nations in support of education, training and human resources\ndevelopment that is focussed on the research agenda and that supports full participation by\ndeveloping countries, and\no\nWork toward developing cooperative access to pertinent research facilities and research data\nand information by all nations and toward developing indigenous research activities relevant\nto the global environment change research program in all participating nations.\nFILE R CHARTER.410\nTuesday\nApril 10, 1990\n1:55 P.\n12\n10,05 90 02.22 or . 367 ****\nAPPENDIX G\nGLOBAL CHANGE COMMUNICATIONS NETWORK CONCEPT PAPER\nTuesday\nAppll 10, 1990\n155 pm\n14\nAD GEO\n...\nacc.\n10/05 90 02:22 8 357 8628\nAPPENDIX H\nSTATEMENT OF PRINCIPLES\nFOR\nIMPLEMENTATION STRATEGIES FOR COOPERATIVE RESEARCH PROGRAMS\nTuesday\nApril 10, 1990\n1:55 pm\n15\n10/05 90 02.22 @ JUT 9828\naD GEO\n... ACCL\nAPPENDIXI\nLIST OF DELEGATIONS\n(To be Added at Conference)\nTuesday\nApril 10. 1990\n1:55 B.\n16\nAs of 4/9; Noon\nHEADS\nOF DELEGATIONS\nCOUNTRY\nNAME OF DELEGATE\nTITLE\nAustralia\nNeal Blewett\nMinister for Trade Negotiations\nBrazil\nJose Lutzenberger (Tentative)\nSecretary of Environment\nCanada\nLucien Bouchard\nFederal Environment Minister\nFederal Republic of Germany\nKlaus Toepfer\nFederal Environment Minister\nFrance\nHubert Curien\nMinister of Research & Technology\nIndia\nManeka Gandhi\nMin. of State for Environment\nIndonesia\nB.J. Habibie\nMin. of State for Res. & Tech.\nItaly\nAdolfo Battaglia\nMinister of Industry\nJapan\nIshimatsu Kitagawa\nMinister of Environment\nMexico\nPatricio Chirinos\nSec. of Urban Dev. & Ecology\nNetherlands\nHans Alders\nMinister of Environment\nNigeria\nMaj. Genl. Mamman Kontagora\nMinister of Works and Housing\nNorway\nKristin Hille Valla\nMinister of Environment\n(also Head of S&T Cooperation)\nPoland\nJan Janowski\nDeputy Prime Minister\nSoviet Union\nNikolay Laverov\nChmn. St. Cmte. Sci. & Tech.\nUnited Kingdom\nDavid Trippier\nMinister for Environment\nUnited States\nNicholas Brady\nSecretary of Treasury\nZaire\nCitoyen Lobo Kanza Kanza\nDepty. Minister of Environment\nEuropean Community (EC)\n**Laurens Jan Brinkhorst\nDirector-General for Environment\nOECD\nRobert Cornell\nDeputy Secretary-General\n**Some confusion between EC and Irish. We now have 14 names;\nalso indications that delegation head might be Filippo Maria\nPandolfi, Commissioner (Vice President) in charge of Science,\nResearch and Development.\nHeads of Delegation/Minister-level\nReception/Photo-up\nAustralia\nNeal Blewett\nMember of Parliment, Minister\nfor Trade Negotiations\nBrazil\nJose Lutzenberger\nEnvironment Secretary\nJose Goldemberg\nScience Secretary\nLucien Bouchard\nFederal Environment Minister\nCanada\nFederal Energy Minister\nJak Epp\nFrance\nHubert Curien\nMinister of Research and\nTechnology\nBrice Lalonde\nSecretary of State for the\nEnvironment\nGermany\nProfessor Dr. Klaus Topfer\nFederal Minister for the\nEnvironment, Nature Protection\nand Nuclear Safety\nMs. Maneka Gandhi\nMinister of State for\nIndia\nEnvironment and Forests\nIndonesia\nProf. Dr. Ing. B.J. Habibie\nMinister of State for Research\nand Technology; Chairman of\nthe Agency for the Assessment\nand Application of Technology\nItaly\nHon. Adolfo Battaglia\nMinister of Industry, Head of\nDelegation\nJapan\nIshimatsu Kitagawa\nMinister of State, Director\nGeneral of Environment Agency\nShigeto Nagano\nParliamentary Vice Minister of\nScience and Technology\nMexico\nLic. Patricio Chirinos\nSecretary of Urban Development\nand Ecology\nJ.G.M. Alders\nMinister, Ministry of Housing,\nNetherlands\nPhysical Planning and\nEnvironment\nNigeria\nMajor General Mamman Kontagora\nMinister of Works and Housing\nMinister of Science and\nGordian Ezekwe\nTechnology\nKristin Hille Valla\nMinister of Environment\nNorway\nMinister of Education and\nEinar Steensnaes\nScience\nJan Janowski\nDeputy Prime Minister; Head of\nPoland\nthe Agency for Science and\nTechnological Progress and\nApplication\nNikolay Pavlovich Laviorov\nChairman of the U.S.S.R. State\nU.S.S.R.\nCommittee on Science and\nTechnology\nChairman of the U.S.S.R. State\nJuriy Antonievich Israel\nCommittee on Hydrometeorology\nUnited Kingdom\nDavid Trippier RD, JP, MP\nMinister for the Environment\nand Countryside\nZaire\nCitoyen Lobo Kanza Kanza\nSecretary of State (Deputy\nMinister) ; Ministry of\nEnvironment and Conservation\nof Nature\nEC\nLaurens Jan Brinkhorst\nDirector-General for\nEnvironment, Nuclear Safety\nand Civil Protection\nPadraig Flynn\nIrish Minister for\nEnvironmnent\nOECD\nRobert Cornell\nDeputy Secretary-General\nPRELIMINARY\nDELEGATION LIST\nCURRENT AS OF\nAPRIL 10, 1990; 3:00 P.M.\nAdditions: Netherlands confirmed\nRevised Japanese names\nIndia confirmed/additional names\nZaire final names\nBrazil additional name\nOECD additional name\nPoland confirmation\nFRG name change\nAUSTRALIA\n(tentative)\nName\nTitle\nNeal Blewett\nMember of Parliment,\nMinister for Trade\nNegotiations\nProfessor Ralph Slatyer\nChief Scientist,\nDepartment of Prime\nMinister and Cabinet\nDr. McGregor Tegart\nSecretary, Australian\nScience and Technology\nCouncil\nAlan Brown\nFirst Assistant\nSecretary, Department of\nForeign Affairs and Trade\nNelson Quinn\nFirst Assistant\nSecretary, Department of\nArts, Sport, Environment,\nTourism and Territories\nDr. John Zillman\nDirector, Bureau of\nMeteorology\nRod Shogren\nAssistant Secretary,\nTreasury\nRobert Allan\nActing Assistant\nSecretary, Department of\nPrimary Industries and\nEnergy\n(Official from Department of Industry, Technology and Commerce)\nMichael Lumb\nVictorian State\nGovernment\nApril 10, 1990\nBRAZIL\n(tentative)\nName\nTitle\nJose Lutzenberger\nEnvironment Secretary\nJose Goldemberg\nScience Secretary\nMarcos Gianetti\nFonseca, National\nSecretary of Planning,\nMinistry of Economics\nApril 10, 1990\nCANADA\n(tentative)\nName\nTitle\nLucien Bouchard\nFederal Environment\nMinister\nJak Epp\nFederal Energy Minister\nDr. Geraldine Kenney Wallace\nChair, Science Council of\nCanada\nDr. Arthur W. May\nPresident, Natural\nSciences and Engineering\nResearch Council\nDr. Anne White\nChair, Canadian IGBP\nCommittee\nLiz Dowdswell\nAssistant Deputy\nMinister, Atmospheric\nEnvironment Service,\nEnvironment Canada\nJudith Maxwell\nChair, Economic Council\nof Canada\nMr. Olton\nAssistant Deputy\nMinister, Energy Policy\nDepartment of Energy\nMines and Resources\nGeorge Anderson\nAssistant Deputy\nMinister, Department of\nFinance\nHis Excellency Derek Burney\nAmbassador to the United\nStates\nApril 10, 1990\nEUROPEAN COMMUNITY\n(tentative)\nName\nTitle\nLaurens Jan Brinkhorst\nDirector-General for\nEnvironment, Nuclear\nSafety and Civil\nProtection\nJurgen Henningsen\nDirector for\nEnvironmental Quality and\nNatural Resources\nMichael Emerson\nDirector for Economic\nEvaluation of Community\nPolicies, Directorate-\nGeneral for Economic and\nFinancial Affairs\nPhilippe Bourdeau\nDirector for Environment\nand Non-Nuclear Energy\nSources, Directorate-\nGeneral for Science,\nResearch and Development\nStanley Johnson\nDirector for Energy\nPolicy, Directorate-\nGeneral for Energy\nDavid Wright\nCentral Advisory Group,\nSecretariat-General of\nthe Commission\nApril 10, 1990\nFEDERAL REPUBLIC OF GERMANY\n(confirmed)\nName\nTitle\nProfessor Dr. Klaus Topfer\nFederal Minister for the\nEnvironment, Nature Protection\nand Nuclear Safety\nDr. Gebhard Ziller\nState Secretary, Ministry for\nResearch and Technology\nDr. Heinz Sandhager\nDirector General, Federal\nMinistry of Transport\nBaldur Wagner\nAssistant Secretary, Federal\nChancellery\nDr. Mario Graf von Matuschka\nAssistant Secretary, Foreign\nMinistry\nDr. Horst Glatzel\nDeputy Assistant Secretary,\nFederal Chancellery\nWalter Lotz\nDeputy Assistant Secretary,\nMinistry of Economics\nProfessor Dr. Ansgar Vogel\nDeputy Assistant Secretary,\nMinistry for Environment,\nNature Protection, and Nuclear\nSafety\nDietrich Kupfer\nDirector, Office of\nInternational Cooperation,\nMinistry for Environment,\nNature Protection and Nuclear\nSafety\nProfessor Dr. Hartmut Gross\nScientist, Max Planck Society,\nHamburg\nApril 10, 1990\nFRANCE\n(tentative)\nName\nTitle\nHubert Curien\nMinister of Research and\nTechnology\nBrice Lalonde\nSecretary of State for the\nEnvironment\nJean Audouze\nScience Advisor to the\nPresident\nClaude Alegre\nSpecial Advisor to the\nMinister of Education\nAmbassador Jean Ripert\nMinistry of Foreign Affairs\n(Environment)\nYves Martin\nChairman of the Interministry\nCommittee on Greenhouse\nDelphine Borione\nMinistry of Foreign Affairs\nAndre LeBeau\nGeneral Director of the\nMeteorological Center\nPhilippe Nasse\nMinistry of Economy and Budget\nSylvie Faucheux\nProfessor of Economy at\nParis I\nApril 10, 1990\nINDIA\n(confirmed)\nName\nTitle\nMrs. Maneka Gandhi\nMinister of State for\nEnvironment and Forests\nMahesh Prasad\nSecretary of Ministry of\nEnvironment and Forests\nDr. A.P. Mitra\nDirector-General, Council\nfor Science and\nIndustrial Research\nPrabhakar Menon\nDeputy Permanent\nRepresentative to the\nUnited Nations\nLalit Man Singh\nDeputy Chief of Mission,\nIndian Embassy in\nWashington\nAnil Kumar\nEconomics Minister,\nIndian Embassy in\nWashington\nJ.P. Gupta\nScience Counselor, Indian\nEmbassy in Washington\nApril 10, 1990\nINDONESIA\n(confirmed)\nName\nTitle\nProfessor Dr. Ing. B.J. Habibie\nMinister of State for\nResearch and Technology;\nChairman of the Agency\nfor the Assessment and\nApplication of Technology\nProfessor Dr. Samaun Samadikun\nChairman of the\nIndonesian Institute of\nSciences\nProfessor Dr. John A. Katili\nVice Chairman of the\nNational Research Council\nProfessor Dr. Gunawan Satari\nPermanent Secretary,\nOffice of the Minister of\nState for Research and\nTechnology\nMr. Poedji Kuntarso, MA\nDirector General for\nForeign Economic\nRelations; Ministry of\nForeign Affairs\nProfessor Dr. Rustam Didong\nDeputy Chairman for\nEconomic Affairs,\nNational Development\nPlanning Agency\nProfessor Dr. Harsono Wiryosumarto\nDeputy Chairman for\nTechnology Development;\nAgency for the Assessment\nand Application of\nTechnology\nProfessor Dr. S.B. Joedono\nAssistant Minister IV\n(Industry, Energy and\nMining), Office of the\nCoordinating Minister for\nthe Economy, Finance,\nIndustry and Development\nSupervision\nApril 10, 1990\nINDONESIA\n(continued)\nName\nTitle\nDr. M. Alwi Dahlan\nAssistant Minister I\n(Population), Office of\nthe Minister of State for\nPopulation and the\nEnvironment\nHis Excellency Abdulrachman Ramly\nAmbassador of the\nRepublic of Indonesia to\nthe United States of\nAmerica\nApril 10, 1990\nITALY\n(tentative)\nName\nTitle\nHon. Adolfo Battaglia\nMinister of Industry,\nHead of Delegation\nProfessor Umberto Colombo\nDirector of the National\nAgency for Nuclear and\nRenewable Energies\nProfessor Giuseppe Biorci\nVice President of the\nNational Research Council\nProfessor Giuseppe Bianchi\nDirector General for\nEnergy Sources, Ministry\nof Industry\nProfessor Antonio Praturlon\nPresident of the CNR\nCommittee on Geological\nSciences\nProfessor Roberto Frassetto\nCNR Institute of the\nDynamics of Great Masses\nProfessor Emilio Gerelli\nEconomic Counselor to the\nMinister of Environment\nDr. Corrado Clini\nDirector General for\nPollution Prevention,\nMinistry of Environment\nProfessor Guido Visconti\nDepartment of Physics,\nUniversity of L'Aquila\nDr. Giovanni Sacco\nVice Director General of\nTreasury, Ministry of\nTreasury\nApril 10, 1990\nJAPAN\n(tentative)\nName\nTitle\nIshimatsu Kitagawa\nMinister of State,\nDirector General of\nEnvironment Agency\nShigeto Nagano\nParliamentary Vice\nMinister of Science and\nTechnology\nKoji Watanabe\nDeputy Minister, Ministry\nof Foreign Affairs\nTadashi Yasuhara\nDirector General,\nPlanning and Coordination\nBureau, Environment\nAgency\nSousaburo Okamatsu\nDirector General,\nIndustrial Location and\nEnvironmental Protection\nBureau, Ministry of\nInternational Trade and\nIndustry\nJun Yoshikawa\nDeputy Director General,\nCoordination Bureau,\nEconomic Planning Agency\nYuji Ikeda\nDeputy Director General,\nUnited Nations Bureau,\nMinistry of Foreign\nAffairs\nKeiichi Yokobori\nExecutive Director,\nResearch Institute of\nInternational Trade and\nIndustry, Ministry of\nInternational Trade and\nIndustry\nHiroto Ishida\nDeputy Director General,\nDirector General's\nSecretariat, Science and\nTechnology Agency\nDr. Michio Hashimoto\nSpecial Advisor to the\nMinister, Environment\nAgency\nApril 10, 1990\nMEXICO\n(tentative)\nName\nTitle\nLic. Patricio Chirinos\nSecretary of Urban\nDevelopment and Ecology\nDr. Jose Sarukhan\nRector, National\nAutonomous University\nDr. Herminio Blanco\nUndersecretary for\nForeign Commerce,\nSecretariat of Commerce\nand Industrial\nDevelopment\nIng. Alberto Escofet\nUndersecretary for\nEnergy, Secretariat of\nEnergy, Mines and\nParastatal Industries\nLic. Jose Angel Gurria\nUndersecretary for\nInternational Financial\nAffairs, Secretariat of\nthe Treasury\nFis. Sergio Reyes\nUndersecretary for\nEcology\nAmb. Alberto Szekely\nLegal Counsel,\nSecretariat of Foreign\nAffairs\nDr. Julian Adem\nDirector, Center for\nAtmospheric Studies,\nNational Autonomous\nUniversity\nDr. Manuel Ortega\nDirector General,\nNational Council for\nScience and Technology\nHector Santana\nStaff Aide to Secretary\nChirinos\nApril 10, 1990\nTHE NETHERLANDS\n(confirmed)\nName\nTitle\nJ.G.M. Alders\nMinister, Ministry of\nHousing, Physical\nPlanning and Environment\nDr. B.C.J. Zoeteman\nDeputy Director-General,\nDirectorate-General for\nEnvironment, Ministry of\nHousing, Physical\nPlanning and Environment\nDr. H.M. Fijnaut\nDirector-in-Chief, Royal\nNetherlands\nMeteorological Institute,\nMinistry of Transport and\nPublic Works\nDr. Pier Vellinga\nDirector, National\nClimate Change Programme,\nDirectorate-General for\nEnvironment, Ministry of\nHousing, Physical\nPlanning and Environment\nN.D. van Egmond\nDirector, Environment,\nNational Institute for\nPublic Health and\nEnvironmental Protection\nDr. P.A.J. Tindemans\nDirector, Analysis and\nEvaluation, Directorate-\nGeneral for Science\nPolicy, Ministry of\nEducation and Science\nProfessor Hans Opschoor\nChairman, Advisory\nCouncil for Research on\nNature and Environment\nDr. P. Winsemius\nDirector, McKinsey and\nCompany\nApril 10, 1990\nNETHERLANDS\n(continued)\nD. Pietermaat\nEnvironmental\nCoordinator, Directorate-\nGeneral of Energy,\nMinistry of Economic\nAffairs\nI.G. Roos\nPrincipal Assistant of\nDirector, Economic\nCooperation Department,\nMinistry of Foreign\nAffairs\nApril 10, 1990\nNIGERIA\n(tentative)\nNAME\nTITLE\nMajor General Mamman Kontagora\nMinister of Works and\nHousing\nGordian Ezekwe\nMinister of Science and\nTechnology\nDr. Bukar Shais\nChairman of Federal\nEnvironmental Protection\nAgency\nDr. E. O. Aina\nDirector and Chief\nExecutive of Federal\nEnvironmental Protection\nAgency\nDr. J. A. Adejokun\nDirector, Department of\nMeteorological Services,\nMinistry of Aviation\nProfessor Tudor\nDirector of Nigerian\nInstitute of\nOceanographic and Marine\nResearch\n(one unnamed official from Ministry of Justice)\nAlhaj i Ahmed Abubakar\nDirector General, Federal\nMinistry of Finance and\nEconomic Development\nApril 10, 1990\nNORWAY\n(confirmed)\nName\nTitle\nKristin Hille Valla\nMinister of Environment\nEinar Steensnaes\nMinister of Education and\nScience\nHis Excellency Kjeld Vibe\nNorwegian Ambassador to\nthe United States\nOddmund Graham\nSecretary General,\nMinistry of Environment\nKaare Bryn\nDirector General,\nMinistry of Foreign\nAffairs\nDr. Tore Olsen\nDirector General,\nMinistry of Education and\nResearch\nPer M. Bakken\nCoordinator, Air\nPollution, Ministry of\nEnvironment\nLorents Lorentsen\nDirector of Research,\nCentral Bureau of\nStatistics\nProfessor Dr. Ivar Isaksen\nUniversity of Oslo\nLeif Westegaard\nScience Officer,\nNorwegian Embassy in\nWashington\nApril 10, 1990\nTHE OECD\n(confirmed)\nName\nTitle\nRobert Cornell\nDeputy Secretary-General\nJohn Ferriter\nDeputy Executive\nDirector, International\nEnergy Agency\nBill L. Long\nDirector for Environment\nGeorge Kowalski\nSenior Advisor for Energy\nEconomics and Head of the\nEconomic Analysis Staff,\nInternational Energy\nAgency\nAndrew Dean\nHead, General Economic\nDivision, Economic and\nStatistics Department\nMichael W. Moynihan\nHead of the Washington\nPublications and\nInformation Center\nApril 10, 1990\nPOLAND*\n(confirmed)\nName\nTitle\nProfessor Jan Janowski\nDeputy Prime Minister,\nHead of the Office of\nScientific and\nTechnological Progress\nand Application\nProfessor Dr. Roman Andrzejewski\nDeputy Minister of the\nEnvironment\nDr. Tadeusz Diem\nDeputy Minister of\nNational Education\nDr. Marcin Rybicki\nDeputy Minister, Central\nPlanning Office\nKazimierz Duchowski\nDirector of the Office\nIII, Ministry of Foreign\nAffairs\nProfessor Stanislaw Wiackowski\nChairman, Parliamentary\nCommission on\nEnvironmental Protection\nDr. Wlodzimierz Bojarski\nMember of the Senate\nCommission on National\nEconomy\nProfessor Maciej Sadowski\nInstitute of Meteorology\nand Water Management\nProfessor Leszek Starkel\nPolish Academy of\nSciences\nHis Excellency Jan Kinast\nPolish Ambassador to the\nUnited States\n* All English speaking\nApril 10, 1990\nSOVIET UNION\n(confirmed)\nName\nTitle\nNikolay Pavlovich Laviorov\nChairman of the U.S.S.R.\nState Committee on\nScience and Technology\nJuriy Antonievich Israel\nChairman of the U.S.S.R.\nState Committee on\nHydrometeorology\nArtem Andreevich Troizkiy\nDeputy Chairman of the\nU.S.S.R. State Planning\nCommittee\nVictor Fedorovich Kostin\nDeputy Chairman of the\nU.S.S.R. State Committee\non Nature Protection\nAlexandr Petrovich Metalnikov\nDeputy Chairman of the\nU.S.S.R. State Committee\non Hydrometeorology\nVladimir Mihailovich Kotliakov\nDirector of the Institute\nof Geography, U.S.S.R.\nAcademy of Sciences\nJuriy Vladimirovich Vakaluyk\nChief, Division of Global\nGeophysical Problems,\nClimate Change and\nEconomic Consequences,\nState Committee on\nHydrometeorology\nJuriy Leonidovich Golubev\nAssistant to the\nChairman, State Committee\non Hydrometeorology\nBoris Vladimirovich Pihanov\nState Committee on\nHydrometeorology,\nDepartment of\nInternational Cooperation\nNataliy Jur'yevna Vail\nState Committee on\nHydrometeorology,\nDepartment of\nInternational Cooperation\nApril 10, 1990\nUNITED KINGDOM\n(tentative)\nName\nTitle\nDavid Trippier RD, JP, MP\nMinister for the\nEnvironment and\nCountryside\nSir John Fairclough\nChief Scientific Adviser,\nthe Cabinet Office\nSir Crispin C.C. Tickell, GCMG, KCVO\nUnited Kingdom Permanent\nRepresentative to the\nUnited Nations\nDr. John T. Houghton CBE\nDirector-General,\nMeteorological Office\nJ.G. Odling-Smee\nDeputy Chief Economic\nAdviser; HM Treasury\nDr. David J. Fisk\nChief Scientist,\nDepartment of Environment\nDr. W. David Evans\nChief Scientist,\nDepartment of Energy\nDr. Eileen Buttle\nSecretary, Natural\nEnvironment Research\nCouncil\nApril 10, 1990\nUNITED STATES OF AMERICA\n(confirmed)\nName\nTitle\nNicholas F. Brady\nSecretary of the Treasury\nManuel Lujan, Jr.\nSecretary of the Interior\nClayton Yeutter\nSecretary of Agriculture\nRobert A. Mosbacher\nSecretary of Commerce\nAdmiral James D. Watkins (Ret)\nSecretary of Energy\nWilliam K. Reilly\nAdministrator,\nEnvironmental Protection\nAgency\nRichard H. Truly\nAdministrator, National\nAeronautics and Space\nAdministration\nJohn A. Knauss\nUnder Secretary of\nCommerce for Oceans and\nAtmosphere; and Director,\nNational Oceanic and\nAtmospheric\nAdministration\nErich Bloch\nDirector, National\nScience Foundation\nRichard Schmalensee\nMember, Council of\nEconomic Advisers\nApril 10, 1990\nZAIRE\n(tentative)\nName\nTitle\nProfessor Lobo Kanza-Kanza\nSecretary of State,\nDepartment of the\nEnvironment and\nConservation of Nature\nProfessor Ilashi Ushwengo\nEconomic Counselor,\nBureau of the President\nof the Republic\nCitizen Mankota Ma Mbaele\nPresident-Delegue General\nChief Executive Officer,\nZairian Institute for the\nConservation of Nature,\nDepartment of the\nEnvironment and\nConservation of Nature\nCitizen Logo Yvara Loy\nSpecial Secretary to the\nSecretary of State,\nDepartment of the\nEnvironment and\nConservation of Nature\nApril 10, 1990\nPresident's two\nRaily speech\nspeeches are\nin this book\nis in here,\ntoo.\nDocument Originally\nAttached to\nFollowing Page\nOF\nPRESIDERF THE OF SEAL THE STATES THE UNITEDS UNITED\nV\nTHE WHITE HOUSE CONFERENCE\nON SCIENCE AND ECONOMICS RESEARCH\nRELATED TO GLOBAL CHANGE\nApril 17-18, 1990\nWashington, D.C.\nPLENARY PRESENTATIONS\nTHE WHITE HOUSE CONFERENCE\nON SCIENCE & ECONOMICS RESEARCH\nRELATED TO\nGLOBAL CHANGE\nTHE WHITE HOUSE CONFERENCE\nON SCIENCE & ECONOMICS RESEARCH\nRELATED TO\nGLOBAL CHANGE\nThe following is a compilation of plenary session and\nluncheon speeches delivered at The White House Conference\non Global Change April 17-18, 1990:\nWelcoming Remarks - Nicholas F. Brady, Secretary\nof the Treasury\nIntroductory Remarks - President George Bush\nGoals and Expectations for the Conference - D. Allan\nBromley, Assistant to the President for Science\nand Technology\nRemarks by Visiting Delegate - Jan Janowski, Deputy\nPrime Minister of Poland, Director of the State\nOffice for Science and Technology Development\nUncertain Change: The Scientific and Economic\nResearch Challenge - D. Allan Bromley, Assistant to\nthe President for Science and Technology\nEconomics and Global Change: Links to the Policy\nProcess and Science Research - Michael J. Boskin,\nChairman, President's Council of Economic Advisers\nBreaking Down the Barriers: Building Partnerships\nfor a Better Future - Michael R. Deland, Chairman,\nPresident's Council on Environmental Quality\nGlobal Change: A Commitment to Action - William\nK. Reilly, Administrator, U.S. Environmental\nProtection Agency\nLuncheon Speech of Admiral James D. Watkins, U.S.\nNavy (Retired), U.S. Secretary of Energy\nReview of the Co-Chairmen's Report - presented by\nMichael R. Deland on behalf of the Conference Co-\nchairmen\nClosing Remarks by President George Bush\n1019 Nineteenth Street, NW\nSuite 615\nWashington, DC 20036\n202-653-5980\nFax: 202-653-2034\nTREASURY NEWS\nDEPARTMENT OF The\nTHE TRAVALER\n1789\nDepartment of the Treasury\nWashington, D.C.\nTelephone 566-2041\nFOR RELEASE UPON DELIVERY\nEXPECTED AT 9:30 A.M.\nOPENING REMARKS TO\nWHITE HOUSE CONFERENCE ON SCIENCE AND ECONOMICS\nRESEARCH\nRELATED TO GLOBAL CHANGE\nTUESDAY, APRIL 17, 1990\nGood Morning. I am pleased to welcome this distinguished\nassembly of delegates to the White House conference on global\nchange.\nThis is the first international conference to bring together\nexperts in the disciplines of economics, science and the\nenvironment. Over the next two days we will have the opportunity\nto explore and discuss the relationship of these disciplines\nto the issue of global change.\nWe meet here to acknowledge and explore our common interest\nin improving and preserving the environment in the face of ever-\nincreasing demands placed on it by the forces of expanding\npopulations, economic growth and development and technological\nadvances. We have gathered here because we recognize that\nsuccess in managing global environmental issues will only be\nattained when we have developed coherent policies which fully\nintegrate environmental solutions with economic realities. Only\nwhen we have achieved this integration of science and economics\ncan we be assured that we are pursuing policies in the best\ninterest of the peoples of the world.\nOur challenge is made all the greater by a lack of consensus\namong experts as to the true nature, rate and extent of changes\nin the global climate projected for the future. We cannot\nresolve these issues in the next two days, but we can advance and\nclarify the world's understanding of the relationship between the\nscientific and economic aspects of the environmental challenges\nwe face.\n2\nOur work here is the natural extension of work we have\nalready begun in other forums. Our purpose is to complement the\nefforts of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change as it\nstrives to identify what is known and what is still uncertain in\nthe science of global change.\nHere in the United States President Bush has taken the lead\nin focusing national attention on global climate change issues--\n\"We face,\" he said, \"The prospect of being trapped on a boat\nthat we have irreparably damaged -- not by the cataclysm of war,\nbut by the slow neglect of a vessel we believed to be impervious\nto our abuse.\"\nThe Bush Administration has formulated general guidelines on\nissues concerning global change. First, nations can't afford to\nwait for a final resolution of the scientific uncertainties\nbefore they act. Second, while we wait for scientific advances,\nnations should take those actions already justified on economic\nand other grounds. Third, any action considered should be\nspecific, focused on a clear goal, and cost-effective. Fourth,\nthe most effective actions will be those that both protect the\nenvironment and allow continued economic development.\nHere in the United States we are pursuing this policy\nframework with concrete actions. The President has asked\nCongress for $1 billion in the next fiscal year to study global\nchange. We estimate this represents more than half of all the\nmoney spent on global change research worldwide. A key element\nof this research is an ambitious 15-year program to gather more\naccurate data. This includes plans to develop new polar\norbiting satellites that will improve our understanding of\noceans, clouds and land masses.\nThe U.S. National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration of\nthe Department of Commerce also supports a range of work in\ninternational climate monitoring and modeling, under The World\nMeteorological Organization -- work that holds the potential for\ngreater accuracy in predictions of climate trends.\nThe United States is committed to phasing out\nchlorofluorocarbons by the year 2000. The U.S. Environmental\nProtection Agency is working with industry to find alternatives\nto CFC's and to control emissions of carbon tetrachloride and\nmethyl chloroform. EPA has also extended its assistance to\nseveral developing countries who are seeking to reduce their CFC\nemissions, in conformance with the Montreal Protocol.\n3\nBy the year 2050, well over half of greenhouse gas emissions\nare expected to come from developing countries. It is clear that\nthese countries must be a part of any solution to global climate\nproblems. The United States has urged their attention to these\nissues -- and we welcome developing countries to this\nconference. We have sought to promote the integration of\nenvironmental considerations into the lending programs of the\nWorld Bank and the regional development banks. We have\nencouraged the completion of environmental impact assessments for\nprojects financed by the banks.\nAt the September 1989 annual meetings of the World Bank and\nIMF, President Bush called for more emphasis on the environment\nin national policy making, especially in promoting energy\nforests. efficiency and conservation and greater protection of tropical\nIn keeping with the President's instructions, U.S. officials\nhave pursued environmental reforms with the OECD, World Bank, the\nregional development banks, the UNEP and UNDP. In addition, the\nU.S. has strongly advocated an environmental emphasis for the\nprograms of the European Bank for Reconstruction and Development.\nThe United States has also supported the use of debt-for-nature\nswaps to preserve forests and wetlands. In the recent past, such\nswaps have been signed in Ecuador, Costa Rica, the Philippines,\nand Madagascar. A swap recently arranged in Zambia will help\nprotect two of Africa's most important wetlands. While the\ndollar amounts involved in these swaps have been small, an\nimportant principle has been established. We have encouraged the\nWorld Bank to play a more active role in facilitating these\nswaps. We hope the Bank will do so. We believe debt-for-nature\nswaps can be used more innovatively to help address climate\nchange issues.\nAs these initiatives demonstrate, economic issues are\nintrinsically and inextricably linked to environmental concerns.\nWe wish to preserve the environment to improve and sustain a\ncertain quality of life for all the peoples of the world. But we\nmust recogniže that a great part of that quality of life also\nrests on economic development and growth. It is largely through\neconomic growth that we can bring the nations of the world\nfreedom from hunger, lower infant mortality, longer life\nexpectancy and liberation from oppressive poverty. Thus we must\ncarefully balance and evaluate the relationship between proposals\npolicies. to address global climate change and economic activities and\n4\nOur meetings here can make a valuable contribution to\nestablishing a common understanding and assessment of the issues.\nLet us work together to establish a consensus that will allow us\nto advance our ability to make the important decisions in the\nfuture. Let us reach agreement on areas of opportunity for\ncooperative action in scientific and economic research. Let us\nplan to integrate scientific and economic research into the\npolicy process. Let us begin to build partnerships for pursuing\nthat research. If we can achieve agreement on these issues we\nwill have taken an important step towards meeting the challenge\nof global climate change.\nAnd as we pursue these goals, let us do so in the spirit of\nthe words spoken by an American Indian chief, \"We do not inherit\nthe children.\" earth from our ancestors; rather, we borrow it from our\nI welcome you and look forward to what we can achieve\ntogether.\no0o\nTHE WHITE HOUSE\nOffice of the Press Secretary\nFor Immediate Release\nApril 17, 1990\nREMARKS BY THE PRESIDENT\nIN THE OPENING ADDRESS\nTO THE WHITE HOUSE CONFERENCE ON SCIENCE\nAND ECONOMICS RESEARCH RELATED TO GLOBAL CHANGE\nThe Grand Ballroom\nThe J.W. Marriott Hotel\nWashington, D.C.\n10:06 A.M. EDT\nTHE PRESIDENT: Thank you very much. Please be seated,\nand welcome. Thank you very much for the welcome. I apologize for\nthe slight delay in there. Thank you, Secretary Brady, and members\nof the U.S. delegation, members of my Cabinet and the cochairmen of\nthis conference, Michael Boskin and Allan Bromley; Michael Deland.\nAnd I'm pleased to welcome this international field of distinguished\nhigh-level officials -- experts all on the environment, economics,\nChange. science and energy. Welcome to the White House Conference on Global\nTwo months ago I had the honor of addressing the\nIntergovernmental Panel on Climate Change. And let me recognize Bert\nBolin who is here, IPCC Chairman, here with us this morning. I see\nthis conference helping to accelerate the IPCC's agenda as it\nsearches for understanding of some very critical questions,\nbroadening the dialogue by exploring the link between scientific\nresearch and economic analysis in the study of global change.\nthe growing importance of the environment on the international\nAnd of course, this conference is itself another sign of\nagenda. Here in the United States we've moved one step closer to a\ngreat victory for the environment, strengthening our own clean air\nof new clean air initiatives.\nstatutes, already the world's toughest, with a comprehensive package\nTen months ago we renewed momentum lost in legislative\nstalemate for 12 years. Just this month, a clean air package cleared\nthe United States Senate with House action hopefully possible in May.\nWe're moving forward on clean air legislation because it is in\nAmerica's interest. But like so many of the environmental issues\nenvironment. that concern us, we aren't the only beneficiary of a better\nWhen it comes to the environment, we are learning that\nlocal actions can have global consequences. Understanding the\neffects of our actions on our Earth system is the first step to a\nhere is just exactly that.\nsound environment. And the subject that led me to invite all of you\nI want to speak just briefly this morning so you can get\non about your work. But I want to speak about what we can do over\nthe course of the next couple of days to advance our understanding of\nglobal change. This conference will help in three ways. First, it\nprovides an opportunity to help sort out the science on this complex\nissue, to start with what we know about the Earth, and this home we\nshare. About the factors, natural as well as man-made, that cause\nour environment to change, and to work from what we know toward\nanswers to the many uncertainties that abound.\nPerhaps it's not surprising when the subject is global\nMORE\n- 2 -\nchange that the debate often generates more heat than light. Some of\nyou may have seen two sides -- on one of our talk shows on Sunday\nrespected men debating global change. One scientist argued that if\nwe keep burning fossil fuels at today's rate, and I quote, \"By the\nend of the next century, Earth could be nine degrees Fahrenheit\nchange and warned against a drastic reordering of our economy that\nwarmer than today.\" And the other scientist saw no evidence of rapid\ncould cause us, in his words, \"to end up the impoverished nation\nawaiting a warming that never comes.\" Two scientists, two\ndiametrically opposed points of view. Now, where does that leave us?\nWhat we need are facts, the stuff that science is made\nof. A better understanding of the basic processes at work in\nwhole world -- better Earth system models that enable us to calculate our\nthe complex interaction between man and our environment. And that's\nwhy I've asked Congress, our Congress, to approve a 60 percent\nincrease in our budget for the global change research program -- an\naggressive research program for which we budgeted more than $1\nbillion in 1991 to reduce the uncertainties surrounding global\nchange. To advance the scientific understanding we need if we are to\nmake decisions to maximize benefits and minimize the unintended\nconsequences.\nThe second way this gathering can advance our\nunderstanding is to address the economic factor and environmental\nquestions. We know that cleaning up our environment costs money -- a\nlot of money -- and we know it means changes in the way we work and\nlive. Here, in the United States, we're already making those\nchanges, moving forward on clean air, planting trees through our\n\"America the Beautiful\" initiative, and working with other nations to\nfind ways to halt deforestation, phasing out the use of CFCs,\nencouraging conservation, exploring alternative sources of fuel and\nenergy, and market-based incentives for pollution control.\nAnd yet, as we move forward, all of us must make certain\nwe preserve our environmental well-being and our economic welfare.\nWe know that these are not separate concerns. They are two sides of\nthe same coin. Recognizing this fact is in the interest of every\nnation here today. It's in the interest of the developed world, and\nthe developing world alike.\nLet me focus for just a moment on the developing world.\nIn a climate of poverty or persistent economic struggle, protecting\nthe environment becomes a far more difficult challenge. Cold\nstatistics don't begin to capture the harsh realities that are at\nstake. Development doesn't mean just another point in the gross\nnational product, the GNP; it's measured in human lives, an end to\nhunger, lower infant mortality, longer life expectancy. Not just\nquality of life, but life itself.\nEnvironmental policies that ignore the economic factor,\nthe human factor, are destined to fail. But there's another reason\nto consider the economic factor when the issue is the environment.\nThere is no better ally in service of our environment than strong\neconomies. Economies that make possible the increased efficiencies\nthat enable us to make environmental gains. Economies that generate\nthe new technologies that help us arrest and reverse the damage that\nwe've done to our environment. We need new economies that allow us\nto make vital investments in our common future.\nAnd that brings me to the third way this conference\ncontributes to a net gain in knowledge. The fact that it provides us\nthe opportunity to form a partnership between nations and across the\nmany disciplines represented here. Few subjects offer a greater\nchallenge to the understanding of man than global change. And yet,\ntoo often the different disciplines focusing on this question have\nworked information. in isolation with little interchange of ideas, analysis,\nThis conference is a new departure because it brings\nMORE\n- 3 -\ntogether environmentalists and economists, experts on energy and\nscience to search for common ground. To search the expertise each\ndiscipline can bring to this difficult and demanding concern. And\nthis new partnership must bind nations as well. The fact of the\nmatter is, no one nation acting alone can safeguard our Earth\nenvironment. Success requires a sense of global stewardship, an\nunderstanding that it is the Earth that endures, and that all of us\nare no more than tenants in temporary possession of a sacred trust.\nwith the questions, the fundamental questions of global stewardship;\nFor the next two days, you, in essence, will be grappling\nquestions of global consequence. I know there's a debate raging out\nthere, but I am confident that this approach that brings all of you\nexperts together is the way to go.\nI thank you very much for joining us here. I will be\nover after digesting the product of your work tomorrow, to have a few\nmore words to say. But from the bottom of my heart, I thank you for\ncoming. There have been a lot of these environmenal conferences\naround the world, but this one, I think, approaches the fundamentals.\nAnd we are fortunate to have here in America you experts from all\naround the world.\nThank you for coming. I look forward to hearing the\nresults (Applause.) of your work. God bless you all. Thank you very much.\nEND\n10:17 A.M. EDT\nEXECUTIVE OFFICE OF THE PRESIDENT\nOFFICE OF SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY POLICY\nWASHINGTON, D.C. 20506\nGOALS AND OBJECTIVES OF THE CONFERENCE\nD. ALLAN BROMLEY\nAssistant to the President for Science and Technology\nExecutive Office of the President\nWhite House Conference\non Science and Economics Research\nRelated to Global Change\nWashington, D.C.\nApril 17, 1990\n1\nI would like to add my welcome to those of Secretary Brady and President\nBush. Working together with you, we look forward to very real accomplishments over\nthe next two days. In a moment, I will describe what the President views as some of\nthe objectives of the conference.\nGLOBAL STEWARDSHIP\nBut first let me elaborate briefly upon the conferences's theme, that of Global\nStewardship. As President Bush has stated, Global Stewardship is not a fixed state.\nIt is a process of continual change that balances environmental and economic values\nto meet human needs and expand human prospects.\nGlobal Stewardship is a complex, multifaceted concept, yet I believe that it can\nbe summed up in remarkably succinct fashion. On December 22, 1968, as the crew of\nApollo 8 became the first humans to leave Earth orbit and head toward the Moon,\nthey turned their frail spacecraft back toward the Earth and took the first\nphotographs of our planet from deep space. I firmly believe that thousands of years\nin the future perhaps the one most lasting thing for which our age will be\nremembered will be those photographs. They show the Earth as a beautiful blue and\nwhite sphere floating quietly in the immense blackness of space. They emphasize that\nthis planet is mankind's common heritage. It is ours to cherish; it is ours to destroy.\nWe are all truly in this together.\nWe will achieve Global Stewardship in the same way that we achieve scientific\nknowledge - through careful study of the environment and of ourselves, coupled with\neffective and timely action. We must come to understand the extent and limits of the\nresources available to us on this planet. And we must come to understand how\nhumans can use those resources in a sustainable fashion to achieve a more\nprosperous and productive future.\nWe are not here to make a global warming policy. That will emerge from the\nbroad array of research and policy reviews now ongoing. Rather, we are here to try\nto determine what will be required in order that such policies be based on sound\nfeasible. scientific understanding and that they be both technologically and economically\nTHE LINK BETWEEN SCIENCE AND POLICY\nMuch has been written and said during the past few months about the\nscientific understanding of global change and about policy responses to global\nenvironmental concerns. But conspicuous by its absence in almost all of these\ndiscussions has been a careful and detailed analysis of the economic causes or\nconsequences of global change. For example, we will talk at length over the next two\ndays about various ways of taking out insurance policies against possible adverse\n2\neffects of global warming. But there are good insurance policies and bad ones, and\nwe very much need the input and expertise of economists to discriminate between\nthem.\nIn a very real sense, we should perhaps look on economics as the glue that\nbinds scientific understanding of global change phenomena to the policies both\nnational and international - that we adopt to address this issue.\nIn general, the social sciences - economics, psychology, sociology - must be an\nintegral part of any approach to the understanding of global change. Even when the\nphysical and biological aspects of a problem are understood, all too often agreement\nis lacking on the underlying social, behavioral, and economic causes and consequences\nof an action. This conference will focus as much on these aspects of global change as\non the purely scientific aspects. In this way, we hope to add a new dimension to the\ninternational dialogue on global change.\nGOALS OF THE CONFERENCE\nAs President Bush noted, the foundation of this conference is what we do know\nand what we do not know about the science and economics of global change. At a\nmore detailed level, we seek to determine which uncertainties might be reducible in\nthe foreseeable future and which are not, and to understand how scientific\nuncertainties affect our economic modeling and vice versa.\nThe conference is designed to achieve several other objectives. Among them are\nthe following:\n0\nTo increase the mutual understanding and sensitivity of the scientific\nand economic research communities to each other's needs and to the\nneeds of the policy makers who look to them for guidance.\n0\nTo foster a solid and well-implemented international research effort that\ncan address the scientific, economic, and policy questions of global\nchange, drawing on the expertise, experience, and data of all the world's\nnations.\n0\nTo forge a worldwide communications network among the researchers\nand policymakers concerned with global change.\nREVIEW OF THE AGENDA\nTo achieve these objectives, the conference is organized around three themes.\no\nThe science and economics research challenge.\n0\nIntegrating science and economics research in the policy process.\n3\n0\nBuilding a partnership for science and economics research.\nLater this morning, I shall speak on the first of these themes. My cochairmen\nMichael Boskin and Michael Deland will speak on the second and third.\nFollowing those presentations, the agenda calls for us to divide into three\nWorking Groups that will then meet in four sequential sessions. Each of the Working\nGroups will have about 25 members, with roughly equal representation from the three\ndisciplines of science, economics, and the environment.\nThe first three Working Group sessions will be devoted to the three themes of\nthe conference. The fourth will be devoted to integration of the discussions and\npreparation of a summary report of each Working Group's deliberations.\nThese summaries will form part of a Cochairmen's report, which we would\nsuggest as the primary product of the conference. In this report, we would expect to\noutline the deliberations of the conference and set forth agreed-upon common actions\ndesigned to expand research and cooperation among nations.\nCONCLUSION\nThis conference is only one of many national and international actions being\ntaken to address issues of global change. We must therefore seek to integrate the\naccomplishments of the next two days into these ongoing efforts -- and, in particular,\ninto the deliberations of the IPCC, the international research programs of the World\nMeteorological Organization and International Council of Scientific Unions, and the\nprograms of individual countries focused on the global environment. At the same\ntime, we will work to coordinate the many activities now going on in the United States\nand abroad. They will all be stronger if carried forward in a unified, coherent\nfashion.\nWe want to emphasize that the President has instructed us from the outset of\nour planning to design this conference with a primary goal of complementing,\nstrengthening, and supporting the entire IPCC process, which he considers to be the\ncentral and appropriate forum for our joint efforts toward understanding of, and\nresponding to, the questions of Global Stewardship.\nLouis Pasteur wrote that, \"Science knows no country because knowledge belongs\nto humanity and is the torch which illuminates the world.\" We will be the carriers of\nthat torch for the next two days. And we must keep it burning as we leave to face\nthe great challenges that lie ahead.\nRemarks by Visiting Delegate: Jan Janowski\nDeputy Prime Minister of Poland,\nDirector of the State Office for Science and Technology Development\nWHC 4.17.90\nDRAFT COPY CHECK AGAINST DELIVERY\nMr. President & Ladies Gentlemen:\nAllow me to begin by expressing, on behalf of the government of the Republic of Poland, our sin-\ncere appreciaton for inviting Polish delegation to participate in this importance conference, for\nhospitality of the American government and the American people.\nI think that our feelings in this respect are shared by other participants. Poles perceive ties between\nus and the American people to be particularly close. A monument in front of our hotel, dedicated to\nthe hero of both nations, Kazimierz Pulaski, a Pole who gave his life for independence for independ-\nence of this great country, is but one example of that. Almost every Polish family has got relatives\nliving in America.\nToday, when Poland and other countries of East and Central Europe rejoin the commonwealth of\nfree nations, we look to America with trust and hope.\nRecent experiences have confirmed our belief that America was right in her attachment to the ideas\nof freedom, democracy and human rights and in her conviction that there was a co-dependence\nbetween democracy and effective marketi economy.\nMoreover, these experiences proved that democracy and healthy economy were of crucial impor-\ntance for the protection of the environment.\nIn not SO distant past, previous Polish governments have not encouraged concern for the natural\nenvironment. The attitude of our society, which demanded more information and direct participation\nin the economic decision making, has stimualted our democractic revolution.\nThe so-called command economy, with its one-sided concept of industrialization, has proven to be\ndamaging, both from the point of view of increasing living standards as well in guaranteeing the\nquality of life. In the planning process, it did envisage possibilities to provide adequate financial\nresources for environmental protection and repair of already existing damages. The degradation of\nour environment and public health is as a sad legacy of that policy.\nThe disintegration of totalitarian systems creates conditions for international cooperation in a new,\nunprecedented dimension.\nIt also depends on Western Civilizations, whether they decide to make available new technologies to\novercome the negative affects of global change. To this end, we deem it imperative to build new\ninternational alliances in order to jointly adjust to new circumstances.\nDRAFT COPY CHECK AGAINST DELIVERY\nIn our opinion, the fact that this conference has been convened demonstrates that America feels\nparticularly responsible for the future of the world. This future clearly has to be our common con-\ncern and responsibility.\nMr. President,\nI think that your initiative to stage today's conference and ponder upon a question: \"How are we to\nachieve necessary economic development without damaging the earth and life, which are a gift of\nGod to us?\", has come at the right moment.\nYou have kindly invited us to reflect jointly on scientific and economic research connected to the\nGlobal Change.\nTh e implications of the Green House Effect are clear to everybody. It is also evident that there is a\nneed to protect the ozone layer. Attempts to lower environmentally harmful emissions, however,\nhave encountered certain barriers. One of them are the costs involved.\nAllow me to use the example from my own area of research as a scientist and engineer. It is possible\nnowadays to dramatically reduce the negative ecological effects of steel production. It is feasible but\nvery costly. The cost of special equipment to protect environment constititutes approximately 25%\nof the total costs involved in the technological process of steel production. Similar dilemmas exist in\nother areas.\nI think that we should consider how to better utilize the results of basic scientific research for the\npurposes of enviromental protection engineering. It is possible that such results already exist or will\nbecome available in the foreseeable future.\nWhen W.H. Carothers conducted research on molecular structures he had clearly not thought of the\ninvention of nylon. When C. Shannon, working at the Bell Laboratories, advanced his theory of\ncommunications, numerous pracitical applications of his abstract ideas were not yet recognized.\nTherefore, I think that it would be advisable to carefully examine the results of basic scientific\nresearch to determine possibilities of their practical use in constructing totally new equipment and\nobtaining new technologies, which would serve the purposes of environmental protection at a greatly\nreduced cost. This is a problem which pervades me and my Polish colleagues since in our country\ntechnological innovation advances much slower than elsewhere.\nAs far as I know, also in other countries of East and Central Europe, there exist a disturbing discrep-\nancies between the results of basic scientific research and the pace and scope of their practical\ntechnical implementation.\nDRAFT COPY CHECK AGAINST DELIVERY\nDue to a difficult economic situation in Poland, a country which has implemented drastic measures\naimed at curbing inflation, we are not able at this moment to take up obligations to reduce carbon\ndioxide emissions, as suggested during the ministerial conference in Noordiwijk in November of last\nyear. CO2 emissions reduction remains, however, one of our major goals and it will be taken into\nconsideration the process of implementing restructurization of our economy. In the current situation\nUS help through debt-to-environmental protection investment swap would be of significant impor-\ntance. I believe that the American administration would consider this issue in a favorable way.\nMr. President,\nInternational cooperation is of fundamental importance for effective response to Global Change.\nTherefore, we welcome by lateral efforts in this area, such as Polish/American project to improve\nenvironmental conditions in Krakow and other projects in which countries like Sweden, United\nKingdom, Federal Republic of Germany, as well as EEC and other partners participate.\nThe Polish side can provide significant contribution to the research conducted on the international\nscale, by the: (1) International Institute for Applied System Analysis, (2) The Intergovernmental\nPanel on Climatic Change and (3) IGBP - Global Change Program and others.\nBearing in mind Polish experiences, I would like to advance the following message to other coun-\ntries, which find themselves at the comparable level of development:\n- Wherever there is economic growth, environmental protection is possible\n- Wherever there is poverty, competititon for resources is much greater\n- We cannot reduce our options to a misguided choice between\n-\neconomical growth and environmental protection\nOur country, despite great economic difficulties, sees a necessity of sustainable development\nas a basic aim of our economy.\n- Leaders of developing countries should promote economic growth through most effective\nmeans, and should include ecological considerations in their economic policy decisions.\nLadies and Gentlemen,\nI think that we can expect this conference to promote our common interest in economic develop-\nment, so that we can:\n- further the growth of welfare of all nations,\n- provide the protection of our global resources,\n- lay down a common program of research that would serve the purposes of the\npreviously stated goals,\nThank you for your attention,\nUNCERTAIN CHANGE:\nTHE SCIENTIFIC AND ECONOMIC RESEARCH CHALLENGE\nD. ALLAN BROMLEY\nAssistant to the President for Science and Technology\nExecutive Office of the President\nWhite House Conference\non Science and Economics Research\nRelated to Global Change\nWashington, D.C.\nApril 17, 1990\n1\nThe global environment has been changing throughout human history, and\nindeed throughout the entire history of our planet. At the peak of the last ice age\n18,000 years ago just a few thousand years before the first substantial human\ncivilizations came together in the river valleys of the Middle and Far East -- a glacier\nover two kilometers high covered much of the northern United States and Europe.\nSea level was 100 meters lower than at present, so that the future sites of many of\ntoday's port cities were perched on the edges of deep ravines. Then, rather abruptly\nabout 10,000 years ago, the world warmed, the ice retreated, and sea level rose to\nabout its present level. These natural changes in the Earth's climate have occurred\nthroughout its history, and they will continue to occur in the future.\nDuring the past century, human society has entered into a new and momentous\nrelationship with the global environment. For the first time in history, we have\nbecome a geological agent capable of influencing our entire planet. We have altered\nthe face of the Earth by clearing forests, building cities, and converting wild lands to\nagriculture. We have changed the composition of the Earth's atmosphere by burning\nfossil fuels, expanding agriculture, and producing and releasing industrial compounds.\nWe have embarked on an enormous, virtually unplanned, planetary experiment that\nposes unprecedented challenges to our wisdom, our foresight, and our scientific\ncapability.\nThe first theme of this White House Conference is the scientific and economic\nresearch challenge related to global change. Properly speaking, global change\nencompasses not only global warming but such issues as ozone depletion, the\nadequacy of food and water supplies, changes in sea level, deforestation, levels of\nbiodiversity, and population change. Indeed, any of these issues could turn out to be\nmore serious in terms of human impact than global warming. Yet much of the\nworld's attention has focused on the possibility of increased global temperatures, and\nthat will inevitably be the main topic of discussion at this conference.\nSCIENTIFIC KNOWNS AND UNKNOWNS\nIn light of the Earth's daunting complexity, it is easy to be overwhelmed by\nhow much we do not know about the Earth's components and how they interact. But\nit is always important to keep in mind how much we do know about the Earth and\nour influence on it.\nWe know, based on a sophisticated set of chemical measurements, that humans\nhave raised the level of carbon dioxide in the atmosphere by 25 percent since\npreindustrial times. This is the single largest impact that our species has had on the\nplanet. We know that atmospheric levels of methane have doubled over the same\nperiod. We know that chlorofluorocarbons produced by human beings are\ncatalytically destroying ozone in the atmosphere above Antarctica and possibly\nelsewhere around the globe.\n2\nBy analyzing sediments and ice cores, geoscientists have traced levels of\natmospheric gases and temperatures many thousands of years into the past. Using\nlarge computers, researchers have modeled the complex eddies and flows of the global\natmosphere with considerable accuracy. These are all remarkable accomplishments.\nBased on this work, scientists now generally agree that continued loading of the\natmosphere with greenhouse gases could lead to global warming. However, neither\ncomputer models nor paleoclimatic data have been able to specify with any certainty\nthe magnitude, rate, or timing of any future warming.\nGeneral circulation models will continue to improve in the future as computer\npower increases, as the modeling of the Earth system becomes more sophisticated, and\nas more complete data inputs become available. For example, coupled ocean-\natmosphere models will shed more light on the possible regional effects of climate\nchange. Also, an important example of better data inputs is the very recent\ndemonstration that satellite measurements are capable of providing precise\ntemperature data over the entire globe at various levels in the atmosphere.\nWe will also learn more about Earth's past climates by continuing to study the\ngeological and paleoecological record. But in general we should probably expect\nincremental rather than revolutionary advances in our understanding of global change\nover the next 10 years.\nAnother area of consensus concerns global temperatures: scientists now\ngenerally agree that the planet has warmed up by about 0.5 C during the past\ncentury. But very few scientists would claim that they are yet able to determine\nwhether any of that warming can be attributed to an enhanced greenhouse effect or\nwhether it represents a natural fluctuation. We are also only beginning to understand\nwhat the impacts of a potential warming might be on agricultural productivity, sea\nlevel changes, biological productivity in the oceans, shifting vegetation patterns, storm\npatterns and severity, droughts, and the like.\nFurthermore, we are totally unable, with present models, to make reliable\nclimate predictions on the regional and local bases that are essential to improved\nunderstanding of these impacts. This difficulty arises partly from the fact that we\nhave, at present, neither the computer capacity and speed, nor the resources,\nnecessary to reduce the grid size and increase the number of model levels in the\natmosphere, both of which are essential to regional predictions. Current grid sizes\ninevitably average over the climatic effects of mountain ranges and of such oceanic\nfeatures as the Gulf Stream.\nTHE SCIENTIFIC RESEARCH CHALLENGE\nThere are several other outstanding difficulties in understanding and modeling\nthe Earth's climate. Perhaps the most notable involve the Earth's clouds, oceans, and\nice. Until recently, geoscientists did not even know whether clouds warm or cool the\n3\nEarth. It is still uncertain whether the increased cloudiness associated with a warmer\nEarth would augment or counteract a greenhouse effect. It depends on the nature\nand altitude of the clouds.\nRegarding the oceans, we know that only about half of the carbon dioxide\nreleased through fossil fuel combustion and deforestation remains in the atmosphere.\nFor many years, essentially all researchers assumed that the rest was being\nsequestered in the oceans, but recent studies indicate that no more than a quarter\nprobably ends up there. Where does the rest go? We appear to have lost 25 percent\nof our anthropogenic carbon emissions. We still have not located this missing carbon,\nalthough some suggest that it is in temperate latitude biomass.\nFinally, we still do not fully understand how the world's ice caps and other\nmajor bodies of ice would respond to greenhouse forcing. Present models predict that\nwarming should be intensified at high latitudes, leading to some melting of ice and a\nhigher sea level. But recent observations indicate instead an increase in ice\naccumulations.\nIt has not escaped notice that six of the hottest years in the last century in the\nUnited States occurred in the 1980s, and some have associated this with the\ngreenhouse effect. But over this same decade, precise satellite temperature\nmeasurements have shown that away from the actual surface, where a number of\nperturbations are expected, there was no change whatsoever in global average\ntemperatures. While the northern hemisphere showed a slight increase in\ntemperature, the southern one showed a corresponding decrease, and the major\nfluctuations globally were associated with the El Nino phenomenon in the Southern\nPacific. We need to understand these surface temperature perturbations much better\nthan we do at present.\nThere is growing suspicion from the paleoecological data - but as yet no more\nthan that that the atmosphere-ocean interface may harbor the possibility of\nsurprises. It bears emphasis that the top 3 meters of the ocean surface contains the\nsame thermal energy as the entire atmosphere. If it should turn out that relatively\nsmall, and not as yet understood, mechanisms could trigger ocean circulation patterns\nfrom one stable configuration to another, the potential impacts could be large. We\nneed a careful program of observing and monitoring the Earth to detect any such\nsurprises caused by our emission of greenhouse gases.\nIn general, we must remain aware of the potential for surprises. The\ndevelopment of the ozone hole over Antarctica was such a surprise. The hole develops\nthrough a mechanism that was not included in earlier models of ozone destruction,\nalthough scientists quickly came to understand how it formed and have incorporated\nthat understanding into their models.\nWhat the ozone hole has demonstrated beyond question, however, is that,\ncontrary to long-held assumptions, our atmosphere is not so large, nor its inertia so\ngreat, that human activities cannot affect it on human time scales. Human release of\n4\nchlorofluorocarbons, combined with unique meteorological conditions, has indeed\ncreated the ozone hole in only a few decades at most.\nIn recent years, a number of scientists have compared the Earth, in its\ncomplexity, to a living organism. The comparison is certainly apt in this regard: as\nmuch as we still have to learn about the nature of life, about how it developed and\nwhere it is going, we have as much to learn about the nature of the Earth.\nTHE ECONOMIC RESEARCH CHALLENGE\nThe comparison is apt in another sense. The behavior of human beings,\neconomically and politically, will be a major determinant of future changes in the\nglobal environment. My cochairmen will be speaking in a moment about some of the\nwork that has been done on the economics of global change and about the many\neconomic questions that remain to be answered.\nBut I would emphasize that in many cases these economic questions are of\neven greater importance and much farther from resolution than the scientific\nquestions. Science-based models of global change need economic trends as inputs.\nYet these economic inputs are often so uncertain that they hamstring the model\nresults. For example, one recent analysis was able to conclude only that emissions of\ncarbon dioxide in the year 2050 are likely to be between 1.5 and 12 times what they\nare today. We must find ways to reduce such uncertainties or, if they are\nunavoidable, to accommodate them in our projections.\nA major influence on future economic trends is the state of technology. To\ntake the case of emissions, for example, the development of more efficient power\nplants, biomass and solar energy, inherently safe nuclear reactors - even something\nas mundane as lower cost and more efficient insulation -- could both reduce\nemissions and increase our flexibility when deciding on policies related to global\nchange. In essence, we can hedge our bets on the possibility of future global warming\nby investing in these technologies today.\nTechnology development is also crucial if we are to be fully prepared for the\npossibility of global change. Basic and applied research on ecosystems, agriculture,\nwater supplies, and other important environmental and societal systems can\ndemonstrate both the ability of society to adapt to different climates and the pressure\npoints where adaptation becomes prohibitively expensive. Furthermore, the\ntechnologies that emerge from such research -- such as plants that grow under a\nwider variety of climatic conditions -- will have great benefits even if the climate does\nnot change.\nThe future of technology is as difficult to forecast as economic trends. Yet new\ntechnologies will inevitably reshape our world in the coming decades . just as they\nhave throughout the twentieth century and we must explore the possible ways in\nwhich this will affect the global environment.\n5\nOne way to increase the reliability of economic and technological forecasts --\nand I see this as a major goal of this conference -- is to increase the sensitivity of\nboth scientists and economists to each other's data needs. We must agree upon the\nuncertainties in our scientific understanding that cause the greatest uncertainties in\nour economic models, and vice versa. In this way, resources can be focused on\nreducing the uncertainties of greatest importance.\nBy working together to understand both the scientific and economic aspects of\nglobal change, we will be better able to assess the costs not only of action but of\ninaction. We will enable all nations to respond sooner and more effectively to the\npossibility of different climates. And we will build a flexibility into our environmental\nstewardship that will serve us well no matter how climate changes.\nU.S. RESEARCH PROGRAMS\nReturning for a moment to our scientific understanding, the U.S. government is\nnow engaged in a large-scale, integrated program to develop the scientific knowledge\nthat will guide our future policy decisions and contribute to those of all nations.\nThat program is known as the U.S. Global Change Research Program and was\nestablished through a working group of our interagency Committee on Earth Sciences.\nAs the President noted earlier, his Administration has requested over $1 billion\nin funding for this program during our next fiscal year. Such a request for what is\nadmittedly a long-term and complex research program demonstrates the President's\nvery real commitment to dealing decisively with the possibility of global change.\nCURRENT ACTIONS\nIt is clear that we and other nations are accelerating research in the face of\nuncertainty. But what bears emphasis as being even more important is decision\nmaking in the face of uncertainty. We are not -- despite our best efforts -- going to\nachieve scientific certainty about global change in the near future. Yet we must move\nforward on the basis of the information available to us.\nThe Bush Administration has already instituted a number of policies that will\nreduce greenhouse emissions while being fully justified for other reasons. I think of\nthem as an \"insurance policy\" against possible adverse effects of global warming.\nAmong these policies are the following:\n0\nThe United States is committed to phasing out the manufacturing and\nuse of CFC's by the year 2000 to protect the stratospheric ozone layer --\nahead of the requirements of the Montreal protocol provided safe\nsubstitutes are available. If not controlled, CFC's would account for as\nmuch as 25 percent of the enhanced greenhouse forcing over the next\ncentury.\n6\n0\nThe Clean Air Act now being debated in Congress will provide for\nsubstantial reductions in the emissions of greenhouse gases by fostering\nmore efficient use of energy. It has been estimated that the acid rain\nprovisions of this legislation alone will have an effect comparable to that\nof removing fully one fifth of the U.S. automotive fleet (22 million\nautomobiles) from our highways for a period of 10 years.\n0\nThe U.S. Department of Energy is developing a National Energy Strategy\nthat will focus, in particular, on an aggressive commitment to energy\nconservation and on the development of non-fossil-fuel sources of energy.\nThese initiatives address the source component of the greenhouse gas question;\nturning to the sink component, this country is again taking concrete steps.\n0\nThe U.S. Department of Agriculture is proposing to plant a billion trees\non private land across America, trees that will eventually absorb 13\nmillion tons of carbon annually.\no\nDiplomatic discussions are being conducted aimed at protecting the\nremaining tropical forests through such mechanisms as debt-for-nature\nswaps.\nAn underlying theme in all of the United States' policies related to global\nchange is that they be based on the best possible science and that they be technically\nand economically sound. These are criteria that we will continue to apply as we\nconsider policies in the future. We will do ourselves a great disservice if we adopt\npremature policies that later prove to be unnecessary or counterproductive.\nINTERNATIONAL RESEARCH PROGRAMS\nAs I mentioned in my opening remarks, the President has instructed us to\ndesign this conference to complement and support the Intergovernmental Panel on\nClimate Change by emphasizing the importance of economic as well as scientific\nconsiderations in the development of global change policies. The United States\nsupports the IPCC process as an appropriate international approach to the global\nunderstanding and response to a question that knows neither national nor political\nboundaries.\nAt the same time, we would like this conference to be a contributing factor to\nthe development of an international research program that can provide us with the\nknowledge, both scientific and economic, needed to understand and respond to global\nchange. The first of the three Working Group sessions will give us an opportunity to\nexplore the dimensions of the scientific and economic research challenge and sketch\nthe outlines of an international program of science and economic research related to\nglobal change.\n7\nCONCLUSION\nWe face a great challenge in the next two days. We must merge science and\neconomics with policy to a degree that has not been done before. The uncertainties\nthat surround us are daunting. But humans have never been hindered -- at least not\nfor long -- by uncertainties. The explorers who we know from history did not let\nuncertainties stand in their way. Rather, they saw uncertainties as opportunities, and\nin following those opportunities they opened new worlds.\nLet me close with a brief vignette about one of those explorers. The year after\nnext we will be celebrating the 500th anniversary of Columbus's discovery of the new\nworld, an event of unsurpassed importance in world history. As might be expected,\nColumbus was an astute observer of the natural world. While he was anchored off\nthe coast of Jamaica, Columbus noted in his journal that it rained for about an hour\nevery afternoon. Columbus also pointed out that the same thing used to occur in the\nCanary and Azores Islands, but that the rain had stopped since the trees on those\nislands were cut down. In other words, Columbus was one of the first people to\nobserve the effects of human beings on climate.\nI think it very appropriate that Columbus should have done so, because he was\nengaged on a great voyage of discovery, and today we find ourselves engaged on a\nsimilar voyage. We are changing the world in ways that it has never been changed\nworld. before. And yet human beings, by their very nature, cannot help but change the\nWe have no reason to fear such changes. But we must keep our eyes open,\nand try to understand where we are going, and change course when we have good\nreasons to do so. We need not sail blindly into our future. But we must keep\nmoving forward if we are to achieve the complementary goals of an economically\nhealthy and environmentally sound world.\nTHE CHAIRMAN OF THE\nCOUNCIL OF ECONOMIC ADVISERS\nWASHINGTON\nEconomics and Global Change:\nLinks to the Policy Process and Science Research\nMichael J. Boskin\nChairman\nPresident's Council of Economic Advisers\nApril 17, 1990\nGood morning. Let me add my own welcome to those you\nhave already received. In my role as Chairman of the\nPresident's Council of Economic Advisers, I regularly\nconfront a diverse set of economic issues involving monetary,\nbudget, regulatory, and trade policies. While all of these\nare important, global change and our response to it may be\njust as economically significant in the long run. Beginning\nan international effort to coordinate and enhance science and\neconomics research related to global change, as we hope to do\nhere today, is an essential step toward making the idea of\nglobal stewardship a reality. In this area, as in the others\neach of us confront every day, knowledge and understanding\nare critical to sound decision-making.\nThe United States comes to this conference as a leader\nin environmental action in both the domestic and global\narenas. The President's recent Clean Air proposal, which\nbroke a logjam that blocked Congressional action in this\ncritical area for more than a decade, his tree planting\ninitiative, and his support of solar and conservation\nresearch and development are examples of his strong\ncommitment to the environment -- a commitment that is shared\nby the American people. The President is looking forward to\nsigning a sound Clean Air bill that meets his key\nenvironmental objectives -- even though such a bill would\nimpose costs of about $20 billion annually on the U.S.\neconomy when its provisions are fully phased in.\nWe have a similar strong commitment to protect the\nglobal environment. The United States was the first nation\nto ban the use of CFCs as aerosol propellants -- over a\ndecade ago -- and we have since been in the vanguard of\nefforts to implement and strengthen the Montreal Protocol on\nozone-depleting substances. We strongly support the\nintegration of environmental concerns into the programs of\nthe international institutions -- including the World Bank.\n2\nMany countries have yet to adopt or are only now\nadopting the stringent environmental controls on automobile\nand industrial emissions that have been in place in the\nUnited States for many years. The President is continuing\nthis leadership. For example, his Clean Air proposals will\ndramatically reduce acid rain, even though our most recent\nscientific studies show much less severe impacts on U.S.\nforests and lakes than those apparent in other parts of the\nworld.\nThis conference reflects our interest in resolving the\nmajor scientific and economic uncertainties that surround\ndebates about global change policy and our concern with the\neconomic and human consequences of proposed mitigation\nmeasures. In light of U.S. leadership in environomental\npolicy, attempts to portray expressions of this interest and\nconcern as a delaying tactic are clearly misplaced. Rather,\nthese interests and concerns reflect view that realistic and\nresponisble leadership means seeking out and adopting\nsensible policies -- policies that recognize that both\neconomic growth and environmental quality are important to\nhuman well-being.\nThe extensive U.S. experience with environmental\nregulation has shown clearly -- and sometimes painfully --\nthat one cannot design policies that will produce both a\nhealthy environment and a sound economy without careful,\nintegrated use of science and economics research. Careful\nuse of all available information is nowhere more important\nthan in the context of possible global warming induced by\nhuman activities. The development and evaluation of climate\nmodels, an area where much progress has been made but many\nuncertainties remain, falls clearly within the purview of the\nphysical sciences. But it is important to recognize that\neconomics plays a critical role in determining the inputs and\ninterpreting the outputs of these climate models, as well as\nin evaluating the consequences of alternative policy\nresponses.\nOn the input side, we all know that no model can produce\nresults that are better than the data and assumptions on\nwhich they rest. Emissions of the multiple greenhouse gases\nassociated with human activities depend on the overall level\nof economic activity, its division across sectors of the\neconomy, and on the choice of technology within each sector.\nGlobal emissions forecasts on the time-scale needed here --\nseveral decades -- thus require extraordinarily detailed,\nlong-term economic forecasts for many nations. I know well\nhow hard it is to forecast the GNP of a single nation a year\n3\nor two ahead, and I share with all economists in the audience\nthe knowledge of how much harder it is to make sector-by-\nsector forecasts for many nations decades in the future. As\na humbling exercise, think back to the early 1970s and ask\nyourselves whether any forecaster -- economist or not --\npredicted that emissions of carbon dioxide by the OECD\ncountries would be stable from 1973 to 1985. Reliable\nforecasts of future climates certainly require advances in\nthe earth sciences, but they also require advances in our\nability to forecast emissions of greenhouse gases.\nEconomics also plays a critical role in evaluating the\nconsequences of the output of climate models -- that is, in\nassessing the costs of adapting to any possible future\nwarming. We know that most of the world's economic activity,\ncertainly well over 90 percent, would not be directly\naffected by any widely-discussed climate change scenarios.\nAutomobiles can be produced as efficiently in warm weather as\nin cold weather, after all. Detailed analysis of those\nsectors that could be affected is necessary for estimation of\nadaptation costs, but little of this has been done.\nPreliminary U.S. studies show surprisingly small agricultural\nimpacts of widely-discussed climate change scenarios -- plus\nor minus a few billion dollars as of the middle of the next\ncentury. We are aware of very little systematic work on the\nimpacts of sea level change, human health effects (if any),\nor the effects of possible climate change on forestry,\nfisheries, water resources, or biodiversity. Technological\nprogress will likely have a strong effect on the costs of any\nnecessary adaptation, but forecasting the rate and direction\nof technical change over a half-century or more is extremely\ndifficult.\nFinally, economic analysis is essential to the\nevaluation of the economic costs and human consequences of\ntaking actions to curb net emissions of the main greenhouse\ngases. Detailed studies support the conclusion that CFCs can\nbe phased out at relatively low cost. At the other end of\nthe analytical spectrum, almost nothing appears to be known\nabout the costs of reducing methane or nitrous oxide\nemissions from agriculture -- or even about how such\nreductions might efficiently be obtained. Preliminary\nstudies of the costs of large-scale forestation and its\nimpact on atmospheric carbon dioxide have produced a wide\nrange of estimates.\nPerhaps the most-studied aspect of the economics of\nglobal change -- at least in the U.S. -- is the economic cost\nof reducing carbon dioxide emissions. The oil shocks of the\n4\n1970s have shown us that these emissions can be stabilized,\nas they were in the U.S. and the OECD as a whole between 1973\nand 1985, or even reduced. But this history also makes plain\nthe cost: slower economic growth and rising unemployment.\nMaintaining a constant or declining emissions profile on a\nmore permanent basis may well require correspondingly greater\neconomic dislocation. Available studies suggest that it\nwould cost at least 1 percent of annual U.S. GNP, or perhaps\nseveral times that amount, to meet widely-discussed CO2\nreduction targets and that economic growth could slow\nsignificantly. Much more work needs to be done to develop\nand refine national and global economic models that can\nassess these costs and to analyze more carefully the possible\ncontributions of new energy technologies. However, the cost\nestimates obtained so far make clear the importance of doing\nthat work, for other nations as well as ours, so that\npotentially important economic and human consequences can be\nadequately considered in decision-making.\nIt is worth a few minutes, I think, to discuss the\nimportance of costs and economic growth. Those who are most\nfearful of possible future global warming are often impatient\nwith discussions of mitigation costs. They sometimes contend\nthat no price is too high to pay for actions that might\nprevent even the slightest warming. With respect, my view of\nthe concept of global stewardship is much broader -- and does\nnot allow me to agree.\nWhen the costs of a policy are small relative to the\nsize of the overall economy, as a CFC phaseout by the\nindustrialized nations would likely be, it may be adequate to\nthink about those costs in purely monetary terms. But when\ncosts are large enough to be measured in percentages of GNP\nor in significantly slower economic growth, that simply will\nnot do. Let us remember that half the world's people today\nstill have a life expectancy of less than 60 years. In much\nof the world, the reality of infant mortality is grim: ten of\nevery 100 babies born die before they reach their first\nbirthday. In the poorest nations of Africa and parts of\nSoutheast Asia, a healthy life cannot be taken for granted --\nnot when there is only one physician for nearly 18,000\npeople.\nCurrent emissions projections suggest that India, China,\nand other developing countries will become increasingly\ndominant sources of carbon dioxide and other greenhouse gas\nemissions over the coming decades. For developing countries,\nslower economic growth does not mean making do with last\nyear's model car -- rather, it is a goal worth life itself to\n5\nmany. Those of us who have made it to the top of the\neconomic mountain must be careful not to create obstacles\nthat would prevent others from making the same climb. Global\nstewardship requires us to consider the health and nutrition\nof the earth's children, not just the temperature of their\nenvironment. We must find policies that will bequeath to\nthem both a healthy environment and a sound world economy\ncapable of sustained growth. And we must recognize that\nthese goals are not inevitably in conflict: rising incomes\nboth increase concern for the environment and provide\nresources that can be used to protect it.\nIt is also important to recognize that the world economy\nhas grown increasingly integrated. Economic progress in the\ndeveloping countries depends to a significant extent on the\nperformance of the industrialized economies. The IMF has\nestimated that a 1 percentage point reduction in the growth\nrate of the industrialized nations results in a 1/2\npercentage point reduction in the growth rate in the\ndeveloping world. Therefore, emissions curbs that slow\ngrowth in industrialized nations can damage developing\neconomies even if the developing world is not immediately\nasked to curb its own greenhouse emissions. International\neconomic linkages and the reality of a changing distribution\nof emissions must both be carefully considered to insure that\nwe do not inadvertently drift in directions that have little\nimpact on the composition of the world's atmosphere but cause\nreal, human suffering in the developing world.\nPlease understand -- I am not arguing that we should be\nunconcerned about possible global warming, or that no actions\nto limit greenhouse emissions make sense. My point is simply\nthat the stakes are high in terms of the well-being of real\nhuman beings, as well as in terms of the global environment.\nWe face complex decisions with potentially huge consequences.\nIt would be irresponsible to pretend that the huge\nuncertainties we face do not exist. It would be equally\nirresponsible not to invest in research that can reduce those\nuncertainties.\nTo this point, I have emphasized a division of labor\nbetween science and economics. There is also a clear need\nfor cross-fertilization between the disciplines in the\nsetting of research priorities for each of them. Thus, for\ninstance, in order for economists to set research priorities\nfor improving emissions forecasting, they must learn from\nscientists what components of those forecasts have the\ngreatest impact on climate model predictions. Conversely,\n6\neconomists can suggest which components of climate change\npredictions have the greatest potential human importance.\nTechnology is another key intersection between science\nand economics research. New technologies hold the prospect\nof lowering the costs of both human adaptation to global\nchange and of emissions reductions. Technologies with strong\neconomic potential, such as recent advances in gas turbine\ntechnology that significantly increase the efficiency of the\nconversion from fossil energy to electrical energy are\nparticularly valuable. The world wants real answers, not\nsymbolic commitments. Technology research in science and\neconomics holds the potential to provide such answers.\nScience alone can serve to identify technical\npossibilities, but economics plays a key role in assessing\nthe prospects of individual technologies in the marketplace\nand their speed of adoption. Both science and economics\nhave a role to play in assigning research priorities among\npotential technologies that may lower the costs of reducing\ngreenhouse gas emissions and of coping with possible warming\n-- as well as in forecasting the likely cost and availability\nof promising future technologies.\nAlmost 200 years ago, Thomas Malthus argued that the\nindustrialized nations would be unable to feed a\ngeometrically growing population with a fixed supply of land.\nOnly twenty years ago, the neo-Malthusian notion that\nworldwide shortages of fuels and materials posed imminent and\ninsurmountable limits to growth was widely discussed. Time\nhas proven both these forecasts to be hollow. New\ntechnologies and progress have circumvented what had appeared\nto be impenetrable barriers to human progress. I am\noptimistic and confident that human progress will not be\nhalted by global change, or by the sensible policy actions\nthat we take to address it. Instead, I believe we can and\nwill meet this new challenge and that we will give our\nchildren a better world than our parents gave us.\nBut this will not happen automatically. We have much\nwork to do to understand better the choices we face and to\ndevelop new technologies to improve those choices. We can do\nthis work most effectively and expeditiously if we work\ntogether. There are many challenges awaiting us. There is a\nwide variance of opinion surrounding the costs and future\navailability of particular nuclear, solar, and biomass\nalternatives to fossil fuels. The extent of possibilities\nfor cost-effective conservation are also controversial.\nPossible adaptation technologies have barely been explored,\n7\neven though many believe that some degree of global change is\ninevitable. We can all lament the crudity of current world-\nscale long run economic forecasts, and the limited depth of\nour understanding of linkages between the developed and\ndeveloping economies. And I have not even mentioned the\nscience uncertainties outlined by Dr. Bromley.\nDoesn't it make sense to get the research community\ntogether to discuss these matters? of course, consensus\nwill not be immediate. We can start by identifying the key\nreasons that researchers differs, and then concentrate\nresources on these areas. In this regard, the establishment\nof one or more international institutes devoted to a program\nof science and economics research on global change might\nserve to enhance our efforts significantly.\nI look forward to attending future meetings of\nscientists, economists, and environmentalists, not only to\nmarvel at how much we have all learned, but also to hear\nscientists, economists, and environmentalists say that our\ngeneration met the challenge of global change wisely and that\neconomic growth continued in all the nations of the world.\n\"BREAKING DOWN THE BARRIERS:\nBUILDING PARTNERSHIPS FOR A BETTER FUTURE\"\nREMARKS OF MICHAEL R. DELAND, CHAIRMAN\nPRESIDENT'S COUNCIL ON ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY\nOPENING THE\nWHITE HOUSE CONFERENCE ON SCIENCE AND ECONOMICS RESEARCH\nRELATED TO GLOBAL CHANGE\nWASHINGTON, D. C.\nAPRIL 17, 1990\nGOOD MORNING AND AGAIN WELCOME TO THE WHITE HOUSE\nCONFERENCE.\nWE ARE MEETING HERE TODAY ON VERY SERIOUS BUSINESS. THE\nPOPULAR PRESS OFTEN CHARACTERIZES THE POSSIBLE EFFECTS OF GLOBAL\nCHANGE IN THE MOST DIRE TERMS: RISING SEA LEVELS, ADVANCING\nDESERTS, EXPOSURE TO HARMFUL SOLAR RAYS, FOOD AND ENERGY\nSHORTAGES, THE LOSS OF BIOLOGICAL DIVERSITY. MAN'S IMPACT ON THE\nGLOBAL ENVIRONMENT HAS BEEN LIKENED TO AN ENORMOUS \"EXPERIMENT,\"\nOF UNCERTAIN OUTCOME. MY TWO COCHAIRMEN HAVE AMPLIFIED ON THE\nSCIENTIFIC UNCERTAINTIES AND THE ECONOMIC DOUBTS ASSOCIATED WITH\nTHAT EXPERIMENT. WITH A LITANY LIKE THAT, ONE IS REMINDED OF THE\nOBSERVATION OF THE AMERICAN FILM DIRECTOR, WOODY ALLEN, WHO\nSAID. \"MORE THAN AT ANY TIME IN HISTORY, MANKIND TODAY FACES A\nCROSSROADS. ONE PATH LEADS TO DESPAIR AND UTTER HOPELESSNESS,\nTHE OTHER TO TOTAL EXTINCTION. LET US PRAY THAT WE HAVE THE\nWISDOM TO CHOOSE CORRECTLY... \" BUT SERIOUSLY, THE PUBLIC IS\nWORRIED AND THE PUBLIC'S WORRIES MUST BE OUR OWN.\nFROM MY VANTAGE POINT, AS THE PRESIDENT'S WHITE HOUSE\nENVIRONMENTAL ADVISOR, THE CHALLENGES CONFRONTING US ARE INDEED\nDAUNTING; BUT OUR RESULTING CONCERN IS TEMPERED BY A FULL MEASURE\nOF GOOD NEWS.\nTHE FACTS ARE PLAIN: WHILE TODAY'S ENVIRONMENTAL CHALLENGES\nARE UNSURPASSED, NEVER BEFORE IN HUMAN HISTORY HAVE WE BEEN SO\nCAPABLE OF ANTICIPATING AND RESPONDING TO THOSE CHALLENGES.\n2\nAS MANY OF YOU MAY KNOW, THIS SUNDAY, APRIL 22, IS THE\nTWENTIETH ANNIVERSARY OF \"EARTH DAY,\" A DAY OF NATIONAL AND\nINTERNATIONAL REFLECTION ON GOD'S GIFT OF NATURE, AND OUR PLACE\nIN IT. MUCH HAS CHANGED SINCE EARTH DAY 1970, AND IN THESE\nCHANGES I SEE GREAT HOPE FOR THE FUTURE:\nO\nWE HAVE SEEN THE GROWTH OF THE ENVIRONMENTAL\nETHIC, A SENSITIVITY REACHING FROM THE HEARTS\nOF INDIVIDUAL PEOPLE TO THE VERY HIGHEST\nLEVELS OF GOVERNMENT.\nO\nWE HAVE PROVEN THAT THE LINKAGE BETWEEN\nECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT AND ENVIRONMENTAL\nDEGRADATION CAN BE BROKEN. IT IS POSSIBLE TO\nGROW ECONOMICALLY AND REDUCE POLLUTION AT THE\nSAME TIME.\nO\nFINALLY, AND MOST IMPORTANT, WE HAVE BEGUN TO REDEEM\nTHE TWENTIETH CENTURY BY REJECTING THE NARROW VIEWS OF\nNATION-STATES, IN FAVOR OF MORE UNIVERSAL VALUES. WE\nARE SEEING THE BEGINNINGS OF A GLOBAL STEWARDSHIP\nFOR GLOBAL QUALITY OF LIFE.\nTWENTY YEARS AGO, WE WERE DIVIDED AND LIMITED IN so MANY\nWAYS. YET, AS OUR VIEW OF THE WORLD HAS GROWN AND MATURED, so\n3\nHAS OUR ABILITY TO BRUSH AWAY OBSTACLES THAT DIVIDE US FROM EACH\nOTHER.\nAS OUR WILLINGNESS TO WORK TOGETHER HAS GROWN, SO TOO HAS\nOUR ABILITY TO ACT. FROM COMPUTERS TO TELECOMMUNICATIONS TO\nSATELLITES CAPABLE OF MEASURING THE TEMPERATURE OF THE ENTIRE\nGLOBE, WE HAVE VASTLY IMPROVED OUR ABILITY TO COMMUNICATE,\nINTEGRATE AND UNDERSTAND. TECHNOLOGY ALONE CANNOT SOLVE OUR\nPROBLEMS BUT, MARRIED WITH IMAGINATION AND WILL, TECHNOLOGY WILL\nBE A MAJOR PORT OF OUR SOLUTIONS.\nLET ME BE CANDID. THIS CONFERENCE WILL NOT LEAD TO\nUNANIMITY. WE HAVE DISAGREED ON THE QUESTION OF GLOBAL CHANGE,\nAND WE WILL DISAGREE AGAIN. BUT ON ONE POINT WE DO AGREE: THE\nNEED TO WORK TOGETHER -- OPENLY, DILIGENTLY, RESPECTFULLY -- IN\nOUR COMMON CAUSE. WE MUST INCREASE OUR UNDERSTANDING -- BOTH OF\nEACH OTHER AND OF OUR SHARED PROBLEMS. AND WE MUST ACT.\nTHERE ARE MANY COMMON-SENSE ACTIONS WE CAN TAKE -- IN FACT\nWE ARE TAKING ACTIONS -- WHICH WILL PERFORM \"DOUBLE DUTY\" --\nIMPROVING THE QUALITY OF LIFE IN THE NEAR TERM, WHILE REDUCING\nTHE EMISSIONS THAT MIGHT CAUSE GLOBAL CLIMATE CHANGE IN THE\nFUTURE. THE KINDS OF STEPS I HAVE IN MIND INCLUDE POLLUTION\nPREVENTION, PLANTING TREES, CLEANING UP OUR AIR, AND OFFERING\nASSISTANCE TO DEVELOPING NATIONS.\n4\nFORGING AHEAD REQUIRES PARTNERSHIPS. FOR US, BUILDING\nPARTNERSHIPS SHOULD BE THE EASY PART. IT IS OUR BUSINESS. WE\nALL KNOW FULL WELL THAT WE MUST BUILD COALITIONS TO ACHIEVE OUR\nGOALS.\nCLEARLY, NO NATION, INSTITUTION OR WAY OF THINKING CAN\nADDRESS SINGLE-HANDEDLY GLOBAL CHANGE. TO UNDERSTAND AND REACT\nTO GLOBAL CLIMATE CHANGE WE MUST REACH ACROSS INTELLECTUAL\nDISCIPLINES, AND ACROSS NATIONAL BORDERS.\nJUST AS WE ARE BREAKING DOWN THE PHYSICAL, ECONOMIC AND\nPOLITICAL BARRIERS BETWEEN OUR NATIONS, MEETING THE CHALLENGE OF\nGLOBAL CHANGE WILL REQUIRE BREAKING DOWN BARRIERS BETWEEN ENERGY,\nECONOMICS AND ENVIRONMENTAL PERSPECTIVES. AS THE PRESIDENT HAS\nSTATED, \"GLOBAL STEWARDSHIP IS NOT A FIXED STATE BUT A PROCESS OF\nCHANGE.\" ACCELERATING THAT PROCESS OF CHANGE IS THE PURPOSE OF\nTHIS CONFERENCE.\nWE ALREADY HAVE CONSIDERABLE EXPERIENCE IN BUILDING AND\nUSING EFFECTIVE PARTNERSHIPS. FOR EXAMPLE, DR. BROMLEY DESCRIBED\nTHE U.S. GLOBAL CHANGE RESEARCH PROGRAM, OUR COUNTRY'S EFFORT TO\nINCREASE INTERDISCIPLINARY AND INTERAGENCY COOPERATION IN GLOBAL\nCHANGE RESEARCH.\nANOTHER EFFECTIVE PARTNERSHIP IS THE INTERGOVERNMENTAL PANEL\nON CLIMATE CHANGE. DR. BERT BOLIN HAS HELPED TO MAKE THE IPCC\n5\nTHE INTERNATIONAL FORUM FOR ASSESSING THE NATURE, EXTENT AND\nPOSSIBLE RESPONSES TO GLOBAL CLIMATE CHANGE. THE IPCC INVOLVES\nSCIENTISTS AND GOVERNMENT OFFICIALS FROM ALL OVER THE WORLD,\nSUPPORTED BY THE FINANCIAL AND DATA MANAGEMENT RESOURCES OF THE\nUNITED NATIONS ENVIRONMENT PROGRAMME, THE WORLD METEOROLOGICAL\nORGANIZATION AND THE INTERGOVERNMENTAL OCEANOGRAPHIC COMMISSION.\nOUR WORK AT THIS CONFERENCE WILL ACCELERATE THE IPCC PROCESS, BY\nFOCUSING THE RESEARCH AGENDA AND BUILDING MECHANISMS FOR WORKING\nTOGETHER MORE EFFECTIVELY.\nTHIS CONFERENCE ALSO WILL EMPHASIZE A CONSTRUCTIVE ROLE FOR\nECONOMIC PARTNERSHIPS INVOLVING GOVERNMENTS AND PRIVATE\nENTERPRISE.\nFOR EXAMPLE, BY HARMONIZING INTERNATIONAL TRADE RULES, THE\n96-NATION GENERAL AGREEMENT ON TRADE AND TARIFFS (GATT) HAS\nCONTRIBUTED SIGNIFICANTLY TO A RISE IN THE GLOBAL STANDARD OF\nLIVING. THE WORLD BANK IS A MAJOR FORCE IN GLOBAL ECONOMIC\nDEVELOPMENT. ECONOMIC CONSULTATION AND COORDINATION HAS REACHED\nNEW HEIGHTS WITHIN THE EUROPEAN COMMUNITY AND AMONG THE \"G-7\"\nNATIONS. WE MUST FIND NEW WAYS OF USING SUCH ECONOMIC\nPARTNERSHIPS TO PROTECT THE GLOBAL ENVIRONMENT.\nAND, CONSIDER THE EXTENT AND GROWTH OF NON-GOVERNMENTAL,\nPRIVATE SECTOR PARTNERSHIPS. NON-GOVERNMENTAL ORGANIZATIONS HAVE\nGROWN IN NUMBER AND IN SIZE AND ARE NOW REACHING AROUND THE GLOBE\n6\nTO SHARE HUMAN AND FINANCIAL RESOURCES IN CREATIVE WAYS. THE\nVERY EXISTENCE OF DEBT FOR NATURE SWAPS IS AN EXAMPLE OF THAT\nCREATIVITY.\nTHE RELATIONS BETWEEN BUSINESS AND THE ENVIRONMENT ARE\nCHANGING AS WELL. IN OUR COUNTRY AND ABROAD, BUSINESSES ARE\nRETOOLING TO CAPITALIZE ON ENVIRONMENTALLY-INDUCED ECONOMIC\nOPPORTUNITIES. JAPAN'S MINISTRY OF INTERNATIONAL TRADE AND\nINDUSTRY HAS ESTABLISHED A PROGRAM FUNDED AT $60 MILLION IN 1990\nFOR THE PURPOSE OF DEVELOPING ENVIRONMENTALLY-SUSTAINABLE\nTECHNOLOGIES. AMERICAN, JAPANESE AND EUROPEAN CORPORATIONS ARE\nSCRAMBLING TO ASSIST EASTERN EUROPEANS WITH THEIR MONUMENTAL\nCLEAN-UP CHALLENGE. PARTNERSHIPS AMONG GOVERNMENTS, SCIENTISTS\nAND INDUSTRY MADE IT POSSIBLE TO ACHIEVE AGREEMENT ON THE PHASE-\nOUT OF CFC PRODUCTION. ALL THIS MAY BE DRIVEN BY THE PROFIT\nMOTIVE, BUT CAPITALISTS BELIEVE THAT PRIVATE PROFIT CAN BE A TOOL\nFOR PUBLIC GOOD.\nPARTNERSHIPS IN THE SHARING OF TECHNOLOGY ARE ESPECIALLY\nCRUCIAL. NATIONS WITH TECHNOLOGICAL AND ACADEMIC RESOURCES MUST\nFIND WAYS TO SHARE THOSE RESOURCES. FOR EXAMPLE, THE UNITED\nSTATES IS WORKING WITH MEXICO TO FIND ALTERNATIVES -- COST\nEFFECTIVE ALTERNATIVES -- TO CFCS AND HALONS THAT MEET THE NEEDS\nOF MEXICAN INDUSTRY AND CONSUMERS. IN POLAND, WE ARE WORKING TO\nENSURE THAT THE TECHNOLOGY TO BURN COAL MORE CLEANLY IS MADE\nAVAILABLE. AND IN HUNGARY, WE HAVE BEGUN WORK ON A REGIONAL\n7\nENVIRONMENTAL CENTER THAT WILL SHARE KNOWLEDGE AND TECHNOLOGY\nWITH THE PUBLIC AND PRIVATE SECTORS.\nIN ANY ENDEAVOR, IT IS IMPORTANT NOT TO CONFUSE MOTION WITH\nPROGRESS. MAKE NO MISTAKE: THE CREATION OF NEW PARTNERSHIPS IS\nNOT JUST AIMLESS MOTION. RATHER, IT REFLECTS A MORE MATURE\nUNDERSTANDING OF THE SCOPE OF OUR PROBLEMS AND HOW THEY MUST BE\nSOLVED.\nIN THE EARLY DAYS OF ENVIRONMENTAL CONCERN, WE DISCOVERED\nSPECIFIC PROBLEMS IN SPECIFIC PLACES. FOR EXAMPLE, WE SAW SMOKE\nCOMING OUT OF A STACK, AND WE CONTROLLED THAT STACK. THEN WE\nDISCOVERED THAT POINT-SOURCE SOLUTIONS MAY DISPERSE POLLUTION\nFROM A SPECIFIC LOCALE TO THE BROADER REGION, OR EVEN MANY\nHUNDREDS OF MILES AWAY. AND POINT-SOURCE SOLUTIONS MAY CREATE\nUNWANTED BYPRODUCTS AND SHIFT THE PROBLEM FROM AIR TO LAND.\nRECOGNIZING THIS, WE SAW THE NEED TO ADDRESS POLLUTION\nAFFECTING ALL MEDIA -- AIR, WATER AND LAND. WE RECOGNIZED THE\nVALUE OF PREVENTING POLLUTION, RATHER THAN RESPONDING TO IT. WE\nDISCOVERED THE NEED TO UNDERSTAND THE INTERACTION OF MANMADE\nCHEMICALS WITH LARGE-SCALE CLIMATIC PROCESSES. WE BEGAN TO THINK\nABOUT HOW MACRO-ECONOMIC BEHAVIOR AFFECTS THESE LARGE SYSTEMS.\nAND THEN, OF COURSE, WE BEGAN TO DEVELOP DIPLOMATIC EFFORTS TO\nDEAL WITH TRANSBOUNDARY EFFECTS. IN SHORT, OUR POLICIES EVOLVED\nAS OUR PERSPECTIVES BROADENED.\n8\nOUR WORK OVER THE NEXT TWO DAYS MUST INCORPORATE AN EVEN\nBROADER PERSPECTIVE. ECONOMIC ANALYSIS CAN HELP US UNDERSTAND\nTHE COSTS OF ENVIRONMENTAL DAMAGE, AND MAY SHOW US THAT ADAPTING\nTO CHANGE COULD COST MORE THAN PREVENTING THAT CHANGE.\nSCIENTIFIC ADVANCES CAN HELP US SEE WHETHER AND HOW FAST OUR\nTECHNOLOGY MAY EVOLVE -- OR WHERE WE MUST FOCUS OUR EFFORTS TO\nENSURE THAT IT DOES EVOLVE. DEALING WITH GLOBAL CHANGE MAY\nREQUIRE BROADER VISION AND GREATER INTEGRATION THAN ANY OTHER\nPROBLEM IN HUMAN HISTORY.\nBUT WE HAVE A MODEL FOR THAT KIND OF VISION AND INTEGRATION\nAND WE SHOULD NOT LOSE SIGHT OF IT. THE MONTREAL PROTOCOL,\nSIGNED IN SEPTEMBER 1987, IS THE FIRST MULTI-LATERAL AGREEMENT TO\nCONTROL GLOBAL POLLUTION IN ANTICIPATION OF AN ENVIRONMENTAL\nPROBLEM. IT WAS THE OUTCOME OF CAREFUL, COMPLEX DISCUSSIONS, IN\nWHICH WE FIRST ACHIEVED AGREEMENT ON THE SCIENTIFIC AGENDA, AND\nTHEN FORMED CROSS-CUTTING PARTNERSHIPS TO PERFORM AND REVIEW THE\nSCIENCE. THE SCALE OF UNCERTAINTY WAS GRADUALLY REDUCED.\nPARTNERSHIPS SPRANG UP BETWEEN GOVERNMENT BODIES, PRIVATE\nCOMPANIES, SCIENTISTS AND ENVIRONMENTALISTS. A FRAMEWORK\nCONVENTION WAS NEGOTIATED AT VIENNA TO PROVIDE A STRUCTURE FOR\nPOLICY ACTIONS, AND WHEN THE SCIENTIFIC AND ECONOMIC REALITIES\nEMERGED, A PROTOCOL WAS NEGOTIATED WITH SPECIFIC TARGETS AND\nPROVISION FOR FUTURE AMENDMENTS.\n9\nTHAT PROCESS WORKED VERY WELL. WE WOULD BE FOOLISH TO\nDISREGARD IT.\nIN THE LONG RUN, ALL OF US MUST UNDERSTAND THE\nENVIRONMENTAL AND ECONOMIC IMPLICATIONS OF A CHANGING WORLD, AND\nWE MUST UNDERSTAND HOW BEST TO RESPOND. IN THE NEXT TWO DAYS, WE\nCAN FORGE THE PARTNERSHIPS THAT WILL ENHANCE THAT UNDERSTANDING.\nWE SHOULD STRIVE FOR AGREEMENT ON OVERALL GOALS, FOR TO BE\nEFFECTIVE, OUR EFFORTS MUST HAVE A COMMON DIRECTION. WE NEED TO\nREINFORCE OUR COMMUNICATION MECHANISMS BECAUSE SHARED\nPERSPECTIVES AND KNOWLEDGE OFFER HOPE FOR THE FUTURE. WE NEED TO\nLOOK BEYOND THE BORDERS OF OUR DISCIPLINES, FOR IF ECONOMISTS DO\nNOT UNDERSTAND THE NEEDS OF SCIENTISTS, AND SCIENTISTS DO NOT\nUNDERSTAND THE PERSPECTIVES OF ECONOMISTS, AND IF POLICYMAKERS DO\nNOT LISTEN CAREFULLY TO BOTH, OUR SOLUTIONS CANNOT BE COMPLETE.\nIN THE FINAL ANALYSIS, IT IS PROGRESS THAT COUNTS. THE\nPROGRESS OF RESEARCH, THE PROGRESS OF DIPLOMACY, AND THE PROGRESS\nOF ACTION. PROGRESS THAT CAN ONLY EMERGE FROM THE PARTNERSHIPS\nTHAT WE CAN BUILD OVER THE NEXT TWO DAYS. THAT IS OUR COMMON\nCHALLENGE.\nTHANK YOU.\nPROTECTION TRINK Aut ! NCY UNITED STATES\nUNITED STATES ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY\nWASHINGTON. D.C. 20450\nTHE ADMINISTRATOR\nGLOBAL CHANGE: A COMMITMENT TO ACTION\nRemarks by\nWILLIAM K. REILLY\nAdministrator\nU.S. Environmental Protection Agency\nWHITE HOUSE CONFERENCE ON SCIENCE AND ECONOMICS RESEARCH\nRELATED TO GLOBAL CHANGE\nJ.W. Mariott Hotel\nWashington, DC\nApril 17, 1990\nO\nYOU HAVE HEARD THIS MORNING ABOUT RESEARCH NEEDS --\nSCIENTIFIC RESEARCH AND ECONOMIC RESEARCH\nI AM HERE TO TALK ABOUT SOMETHING ELSE\nI AM HERE TO TALK ABOUT ACTION: ACTION IN THE FACE OF\nINCONCLUSIVE INFORMATION; POLICY-MAKING IN THE FACE OF\nUNCERTAINTY\nNEITHER WE IN THE UNITED STATES NOR THOSE OF YOU FROM\nOTHER COUNTRIES WILL BE ABLE TO WAIT FOR TOTAL\nENLIGHTENMENT TO INFORM OUR POLICY DECISIONS\nSO LET ME DESCRIBE SOME OF THE IMPORTANT ACTIONS WE CAN\nTAKE -- WE ARE TAKING -- RIGHT NOW, EVEN AS WE\nAGGRESSIVELY PURSUE THE SEARCH FOR ANSWERS TO CLIMATE\nQUESTIONS\nO\nFIRST, IT'S CLEAR THAT WE MUST WORK TOGETHER; NO ONE OF\nOUR COUNTRIES IS ALONE, AND NONE CAN EFFECTIVELY\nADDRESS GLOBAL CLIMATE PROBLEMS APART FROM THE OTHERS\nACCORDINGLY, WE ATTACH GREAT VALUE TO OUR\nINTERNATIONAL COLLABORATION\nTHE VEHICLE FOR THAT COLLABORATION IS THE IPCC -- THE\nINTERGOVERNMENTAL PANEL ON CLIMATE CHANGE\nTHE IPCC IS ASKING THE RIGHT QUESTIONS, IT IS PULLING\nTOGETHER A GREAT DEAL OF RELEVANT INFORMATION, AND WE\nIN THE UNITED STATES ARE PLAYING A KEY ROLE AS CHAIR OF\nTHE RESPONSE STRATEGIES WORKING GROUP\nAMONG THE U.S. CONTRIBUTIONS TO THE IPCC PROCESS HAVE\nBEEN TWO IMPORTANT REPORTS TO CONGRESS BY THE U.S.\nENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY, MY OWN AGENCY: ONE\nON EFFECTS, AND ANOTHER, STILL IN DRAFT, ON THE POLICY\nOPTIONS FOR STABILIZING CLIMATE CHANGE\nWE WILL CONTINUE TO DO THIS KIND OF TECHNICAL WORK AND\nANALYSIS TO HELP LAY THE GROUNDWORK FOR THE NEXT\nPHASE OF THE IPCC PROCESS -- TREATY NEGOTIATIONS ON\nCLIMATE CHANGE\n- 2 -\n--\nAND WE ENCOURAGE OTHER COUNTRIES, AS WELL, TO CONTINUE\nTO CONTRIBUTE TO THE GROWING BODY OF KNOWLEDGE AND\nINFORMATION\n--\nTHE UNITES STATES HAS ALSO PARTICIPATED IN THE FULL\nRANGE OF DISCUSSIONS THAT HAVE TAKEN PLACE ON THIS ISSUE,\nINCLUDING THE CONFERENCES IN CANADA, THE NETHERLANDS\nAND EGYPT\nO\nSECOND, WE MUST DEVOTE SUBSTANTIAL RESOURCES TO\nSTRENGTHENING THE SCIENCE OF CLIMATE CHANGE AND TO\nBROADENING OUR KNOWLEDGE OF THE ECONOMIC IMPACTS\n--\nSOUND SCIENCE IS CRITICAL TO CONSENSUS-BUILDING; WITHOUT\nIT, WE WILL HAVE ONLY CONTROVERSY AND CONFUSION\n--\nPRESIDENT BUSH HAS PROPOSED A 57 PERCENT INCREASE IN\nFUNDING FOR GLOBAL CHANGE RESEARCH FOR THE NEXT\nFISCAL YEAR\n--\nTHIS INCLUDES A SUBSTANTIAL BOOST IN THE FUNDING FOR\nATMOSPHERIC MONITORING BY THE SATELLITES OF NASA\n--\nU.S. SCIENCE IS MAKING A CRITICAL CONTRIBUTION TO THE\nDEBATE ON GLOBAL CLIMATE CHANGE\n--\nNOAA, NASA, NCAR, NAS, EPA, TO NAME A FEW, ARE FULLY\nENGAGED IN ADVANCING OUR KNOWLEDGE AND IN CLOSING THE\nCIRCLE OF UNCERTAINTY\n--\nA LONG-TERM COMMITMENT TO RESEARCH AND DEVELOPMENT\nCAN BRING DOWN THE COST OF EXISTING OPTIONS, AND\nDEVELOP NEW OPTIONS AS WELL\n--\nAND DOING OUR HOMEWORK ON THE RANGE OF RESPONSE\nSTRATEGIES AVAILABLE - AND THE COST OF THESE OPTIONS - IS\nABSOLUTELY CRITICAL AT THIS JUNCTURE OF OUR\nDELIBERATIONS\n--\nECONOMICS HAVE NOT RECEIVED MUCH ATTENTION AT\nPREVIOUS MEETINGS ON CLIMATE CHANGE\n- 3 -\n--\nECONOMIC ANALYSIS IS CRITICAL TO ENSURING THAT THE\nFRAMEWORK CONVENTION DISCUSSIONS WHICH WE HOPE WILL\nBEGIN AT THE END OF THE YEAR ARE PURPOSEFUL AND TO THE\nPOINT\n--\nIT IS CRITICAL TO ENSURING THAT THE MANY CONSEQUENCES\nASSOCIATED WITH GLOBAL CHANGE ARE FULLY UNDERSTOOD\nAND ACCOUNTED FOR\nIT IS CRITICAL TO ENSURING THAT THE POLICIES AND PROGRAMS\nWHICH MAY ULTIMATELY BE DEEMED NECESSARY -- ESPECIALLY\nIF THEY ENTAIL SIGNIFICANT ECONOMIC DISRUPTIONS - WILL BE\nPOLITICALLY ACCEPTABLE\n--\nIN SHORT, LAYING PROPER GROUNDWORK, DOING OUR\nHOMEWORK, BUILDING CONSENSUS, REDUCING CONFUSION AND\nCONTROVERSY TODAY, WILL SAVE TIME IN THE LONG RUN\nO\nTHIRD, WE HAVE LEARNED MANY VALUABLE LESSONS ABOUT\nHOW TO PUT TOGETHER AN INTERNATIONAL RESPONSE TO A\nGLOBAL ENVIRONMENTAL ISSUE THROUGH OUR EFFORTS TO\nPROTECT THE STRATOSPHERIC OZONE LAYER, AND WE SHOULD\nPAY ATTENTION TO THESE LESSONS\n--\nTHE UNITED STATES FIRST ACTED TO REDUCE EMISSIONS OF\nOZONE-DEPLETING CHLOROFLUOROCARBONS IN 1978\n--\nNINE YEARS LATER, THE MONTREAL PROTOCOL ESTABLISHED AN\nINTERNATIONAL REGIME REQUIRING A 50 PERCENT REDUCTION\nIN CFC PRODUCTION AND USE BY 1998\n--\nMEANWHILE, THE DEVELOPMENT OF SUBSTITUTES IS\nPROCEEDING MUCH MORE RAPIDLY THAN WE HAD ANTICIPATED\n--\nALL OF THIS HAS COME ABOUT BECAUSE OF UNPRECEDENTED\nINTERNATIONAL COOPERATION, AND BUSINESS-GOVERNMENT\nCOOPERATION, TO ADDRESS WHAT SCIENCE TELLS US IS A CLEAR\nAND PRESENT THREAT TO THE WELL-BEING OF OUR PLANET\n--\nTHE IMPORTANCE OF INTERNATIONAL AND INTERSECTORAL\nCOOPERATION IS ONLY ONE OF THE LESSONS WE ARE LEARNING\nFROM THE OZONE DEPLETION MODEL. HERE ARE SOME OTHERS:\n- 4\n--\nPERIODIC ASSESSMENT AND REVISION IS IMPORTANT WHEN\nDEALING WITH ISSUES ON THE CUTTING EDGE OF SCIENCE\n--\nSINCE THE PROTOCOL WAS SIGNED, THE LINK BETWEEN\nCFCS AND THE OZONE HOLE HAS BEEN CONFIRMED; AND\nNEW EVIDENCE INDICATES THAT OZONE DEPLETION IS\nMORE SEVERE AND OCCURRING AT A FASTER RATE THAN\nWAS ORIGINALLY THOUGHT\n--\nAS A RESULT, WHEN THE PROTOCOL IS RENEGOTIATED THIS\nJUNE, WE HOPE AND EXPECT IT WILL BE STRENGTHENED\nTO REQUIRE A FULL PHASE-OUT OF CFCS BY THE END OF\nTHE CENTURY\n--\nNOW, I RECOGNIZE THAT THE CLIMATE CHANGE ISSUE\nINVOLVES EMISSIONS THAT ARE MORE FUNDAMENTAL TO\nTHE BASIC OPERATION OF THE ECONOMY THAN CFC'S\n--\nLESSON TWO: IT'S WISE TO TAKE WHAT SCIENCE GIVES YOU:\nA RESPONSE THAT IS SUPPORTED BY EXISTING KNOWLEDGE.\nAND THUS ABLE TO GENERATE CONSENSUS, IS PREFERABLE\nTO ONE THAT GOES BEYOND ACCEPTED SCIENCE AND\nGAINS ONLY LIMITED PARTICIPATION\n--\nBY ADOPTING AN APPROACH BASED ON PERIODIC\nASSESSMENT AND REVIEW, THE MONTREAL PROTOCOL HAS\nGATHERED WIDE INTERNATIONAL PARTICIPATION AND\nSUPPORT - NOT ONLY FOR THE ORIGINAL PROTOCOL BUT\nALSO FOR CURRENT EFFORTS TO STRENGTHEN THE TERMS\nOF THE AGREEMENT\n--\nLESSON THREE: THE CONCERNS OF THE DEVELOPING\nNATIONS MUST BE ADDRESSED: INTERNATIONAL\nENVIRONMENTAL PROBLEMS CANNOT BE SOLVED WITHOUT\nTHEIR PARTICIPATION\n--\nDEVELOPING COUNTRIES TODAY ACCOUNT FOR LESS THAN\n15 PERCENT OF TOTAL CFC CONSUMPTION\n--\nYET THEIR CONTINUED USE OF THESE CHEMICALS WOULD\nOFFSET EVEN A COMPLETE ELIMINATION OF OZONE-\nDEPLETING CHEMICALS IN THE DEVELOPED WORLD\n- 5 -\n--\nALTHOUGH 23 DEVELOPING NATIONS HAVE SIGNED THE\nMONTREAL PROTOCOL, MANY OTHERS HAVE NOT,\nINCLUDING CHINA AND INDIA\n--\nWAYS MUST BE FOUND TO ENSURE THAT THE ECONOMIC\nASPIRATIONS OF THE WORLD'S POOREST PEOPLE ARE\nREALIZED, EVEN WHILE NATURE IS KEPT HEALTHFUL AND\nPRODUCTIVE\n--\nTHE MONTREAL PROTOCOL ADDRESSES THESE CONCERNS\nBY GIVING DEVELOPING COUNTRIES A TEN-YEAR GRACE\nPERIOD BEFORE THEY MUST BEGIN REDUCING CFC USE;\nAND BY COMMITTING THE DEVELOPED WORLD TO\nPROVIDING ASSISTANCE TO DEVELOPING NATIONS THAT\nJOIN THE PROTOCOL\n--\nI SHOULD NOTE THAT ALONG WITH PROVIDING USEFUL LESSONS\nFOR ADDRESSING GLOBAL CHANGE, THE ELIMINATION OF CFCS\nWILL, OF COURSE, ALSO HELP TO COMBAT CLIMATE CHANGE, FOR\nCFC'S ARE A SIGNIFICANT GREENHOUSE GAS\nO\nTHE FOURTH ACTION I WANT TO MENTION IS PRESIDENT BUSH'S\nPROPOSAL FOR A MAJOR REFORESTATION INITIATIVE CALLED\n\"AMERICA THE BEAUTIFUL,\" WHICH ANTICIPATES THE PLANTING\nOF ONE BILLION TREES A YEAR OVER THE NEXT 10 TO 15 YEARS\n--\nTHAT'S FOUR TREES PER PERSON IN THIS COUNTRY EACH YEAR\n--\nWE ESTIMATE THAT THE TREES PLANTED UNDER THIS PROGRAM\nWILL ABSORB TWO TO FOUR PERCENT OF THE CARBON DIOXIDE\nNOW BEING EMITTED INTO THE ATMOSPHERE BY THE UNITED\nSTATES\nO\nFIFTH, THE PRESIDENT HAS PROPOSED - AND OUR CONGRESS IS\nON THE VERGE OF ADOPTING -- A SIGNIFICANT STRENGTHENING\nOF OUR CLEAN AIR ACT\n--\nTHESE AMENDMENTS WILL REDUCE THIS NATION'S SULFUR\nDIOXIDE EMISSIONS FROM UTILITIES BY ABOUT HALF AND\nSTABILIZE THEM AT THAT LEVEL; ALL FUTURE GROWTH OF\nENERGY WILL HAVE TO OCCUR WITHIN THE CEILING OF THIS\nREDUCED SULFUR DIOXIDE EMISSION LIMIT\n- 6 -\n--\nTHE NEW CLEAN AIR ACT WILL REDUCE NITROGEN OXIDE\nEMISSIONS BY AT LEAST TWO MILLION TONS A YEAR AND\nREDUCE HYDROCARBON EMISSIONS FROM VEHICLES BY 40\nPERCENT\n--\nVOLATILE ORGANIC CHEMICALS FROM INDUSTRIAL FACILITIES\nWILL DROP BY MORE THAN 30 PERCENT; AND TOXIC AIR\nEMISSIONS WILL BE REDUCED BY 75 TO 90 PERCENT\n--\nTHE PRESIDENT'S PROPOSALS ALSO ENCOURAGE THE\nDEVELOPMENT OF LESS-POLLUTING FUELS, SUCH AS COMPRESSED\nNATURAL GAS IN AUTOMOBILE FLEETS AND ETHANOL AND\nMETHANOL FUELS IN PRIVATE AUTOMOBILES\n--\nMANY OF THESE PROVISIONS WILL BRING ABOUT REDUCTIONS IN\nCARBON DIOXIDE AND OTHER GASES THAT CONTRIBUTE TO\nCLIMATE CHANGE\n--\nFOR EXAMPLE, THE PROPOSED CAP ON TOTAL SULFUR DIOXIDE\nEMISSIONS ENCOURAGES UTILITIES TO UNDERTAKE MORE\nENERGY EFFICIENCY; IT ALSO CREATES INCENTIVES FOR\nINDUSTRY TO BE MORE EFFICIENT\n--\nTHE PROPOSED CHANGES REDUCE CARBON MONOXIDE\nEMISSIONS, WHICH DECREASES THE LIFETIME OF METHANE;\n--\nAND REDUCTIONS IN NITROGEN OXIDE AND VOLATILE ORGANICS\nGENERALLY REDUCE TROPOSPHERIC OZONE, ANOTHER CLIMATE-\nALTERING GAS\nO\nSIXTH ON OUR ACTION AGENDA, WE ARE PURSUING A VARIETY\nOF ENERGY CONSERVATION INITIATIVES, ALL OF WHICH ARE\nIMPORTANT IN COMBATTING CLIMATE CHANGE:\n--\nTHE U.S. DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY IS IMPLEMENTING EFFICIENCY\nSTANDARDS FOR MAJOR HOUSEHOLD APPLIANCES, SUCH AS\nDISHWASHERS, CLOTHES WASHERS AND CLOTHES DRYERS\n--\nOUR STATES ARE LOOKING AT WAYS TO GIVE UTILITIES\nINCENTIVES TO PROMOTE ENERGY EFFICIENCY, BY ALLOWING\nTHEM TO PROFIT FROM CONSERVING ENERGY AS WELL AS\nSELLING ENERGY\n- 7 -\n--\nTHE ELECTRIC POWER RESEARCH INSTITUTE ESTIMATES THAT\nTHESE PROGRAMS COULD CUT OUR NATION'S ELECTRICITY\nNEEDS BY 20 PERCENT IN THE YEAR 2010\n--\nSOME STATES, SUCH AS CALIFORNIA, ARE ALSO CHANGING THEIR\nBUILDING CODES TO INCREASE ENERGY EFFICIENCY IN NEW\nCONSTRUCTION; THE CALIFORNIA ENERGY COMMISSION\nESTIMATES THAT ITS BUILDING STANDARDS WILL REDUCE\nELECTRICITY USE BY SIX PERCENT IN THE YEAR 2007\n--\nWE'RE ALSO VIGOROUSLY PURSUING AUTOMOBILE FUEL\nEFFICIENCY: THE ENERGY POLICY AND CONSERVATION ACT OF\n1976 HAS INCREASED FUEL EFFICIENCY FOR OUR NEW CARS BY\nABOUT 80 PERCENT IN THE LAST 13 YEARS\nFINALLY, WE ARE CONDUCTING RESEARCH ON VARIOUS FORMS\nOF NONFOSSIL ENERGY, INCLUDING RENEWABLES AND NUCLEAR;\nTHE ADMINISTRATION HAS REQUESTED A 27 PERCENT INCREASE\nIN THE 1991 BUDGET FOR RENEWABLE ENERGY\n--\nWE STILL HAVE A LONG WAY TO GO ON ENERGY CONSERVATION:\nAND WE WILL GO A LONG WAY\n--\nI WANT TO MAKE SPECIAL MENTION OF JAPAN'S NEW CONCEPT\nFOR A PLAN OF RESEARCH AND DEVELOPMENT ON NEW\nTECHNOLOGIES; THIS PLAN LOOKS 100 YEARS AHEAD AND MAKES\nAMBITIOUS AND IMAGINATIVE COMMITMENTS\n--\nTHAT IS THE KIND OF INITIATIVE THIS CONFERENCE IS INTENDED\nTO ADDRESS AND CONSIDER\nO\nOVER THE PAST 20 YEARS, WE HAVE LEARNED A GREAT DEAL\nFROM OUR EXPERIENCE SINCE THE FIRST EARTH DAY IN 1970\nUSHERED IN THE ENVIRONMENTAL REVOLUTION\nMANY OF THESE LESSONS CAN BE APPLIED NOW TO ISSUES OF\nGLOBAL CLIMATE CHANGE\n--\nFOR ONE THING, WE HAVE LEARNED THAT GREAT\nIMPROVEMENTS ARE POSSIBLE WITH COMMITMENT AND\nSUSTAINED INVESTMENT\n- 8 -\n--\nTHE GAINS WE HAVE MADE IN REDUCING AIR AND WATER\nPOLLUTION IN THIS COUNTRY ARE MEASURABLE, THEY ARE\nSIGNIFICANT, AND THEY ARE INDISPUTABLE\n--\nIN EVERY MAJOR CATEGORY OF AIR POLLUTION EXCEPT\nNITROGEN OXIDES, EMISSIONS ON A NATIONAL BASIS HAVE\nEITHER LEVELED OFF OR DECLINED SINCE 1970\n--\nEMISSIONS OF PARTICULATES ARE DOWN 64 PERCENT; SULFUR\nOXIDES, DOWN 25 PERCENT; VOLATILE ORGANICS, DOWN 29\nPERCENT; CARBON MONOXIDE, DOWN 38 PERCENT; AND LEAD, A\nMAJOR SUCCESS STORY THANKS TO OUR SWITCH TO UNLEADED\nGASOLINE, DOWN 96 PERCENT\n--\nWE BEGAN TO CONTROL AUTOMOBILE TAILPIPE EMISSIONS IN\n1970. BACK THEN, I DON'T RECALL ANYONE WHO ADVOCATED\nANYTHING CLOSE TO THE 96 PERCENT REDUCTION WE HAVE\nSINCE ACHIEVED\n--\nAND THE PENDING CLEAN AIR ACT WILL BRING THE REDUCTIONS\nTO 98 PERCENT HYDROCARBON REMOVAL\n--\nOVERALL WATER POLLUTION TRENDS ARE MORE MIXED\nBECAUSE OF POPULATION AND INDUSTRIAL GROWTH; BUT WE\nHAVE HAD SUBSTANTIAL SUCCESS IN REDUCING POLLUTANTS IN\nMANY SPECIFIC AREAS\n--\nIN THE GREAT LAKES, FOR EXAMPLE, FECAL COLIFORM IS DOWN,\nNUTRIENTS ARE DOWN, ALGAE ARE DOWN, BIOLOGICAL OXYGEN\nDEMAND IS DOWN\n--\nTWENTY YEARS AGO IT LOOKED DOUBTFUL THERE WOULD BE\nANY FISH AT ALL IN LAKE ERIE; NOW THERE ARE PLENTY. OUR\nOWN POTOMAC RIVER WAS ONCE SO POLLUTED THAT PEOPLE\nWHO CAME INTO CONTACT WITH IT WERE ADVISED TO GET AN\nINOCULATION FOR TETANUS\n--\nNOW ON A WARM DAY, IT BELONGS TO THE WINDSURFERS\n--\nIF WE WORK TOGETHER, I AM CONFIDENT THAT OUR REMAINING\nENVIRONMENTAL PROBLEMS, WHETHER LOCAL, NATIONAL, OR\nGLOBAL, CAN ALSO BE BROUGHT UNDER CONTROL\n- 9 -\nTWENTY YEARS AGO ENVIRONMENTALISTS BELIEVED THAT THE\nECONOMICS WOULD ALWAYS BE AGAINST US; ENVIRONMENTAL\nREGULATORS BELIEVED THAT, TOO\n--\nSINCE THEN, WE HAVE LEARNED THAT WE NEED TO ARRANGE A\nMARRIAGE BETWEEN ENVIRONMENTAL AND ECONOMIC\nCONSIDERATIONS\n--\nWE NEED TO INTEGRATE ECONOMIC POLICY WITH ENERGY\nPOLICY WITH ENVIRONMENTAL POLICY\nAND WE NEED TO PROVIDE THE RIGHT ECONOMIC INCENTIVES\nTO PROMOTE ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION\n--\nTHE SAME FLEXIBLE, MARKET-BASED SYSTEMS THAT HAVE\nPROVED EFFECTIVE IN PRODUCING GOODS AND SERVICES CAN\nALSO HELP PROTECT THE ENVIRONMENT\n:\nTHE ACID RAIN PROVISIONS OF THE PRESIDENT'S CLEAN AIR ACT\nPROPOSALS ARE AN EXAMPLE OF THE USE OF MARKET\nINCENTIVES TO ACHIEVE ENVIRONMENTAL GAINS AT THE\nLOWEST COST\n--\nTHE PRESCRIPTIVE, COMMAND-AND-CONTROL APPROACH OF THE\nORIGINAL CLEAN AIR ACT WAS SUCCESSFUL UP TO A POINT -- AS\nINDICATED BY THE IMPROVEMENTS IN AIR QUALITY I JUST\nMENTIONED\n--\nBUT THIS APPROACH IS MUCH MORE DIFFICULT TO APPLY TO\nDIFFUSE, DIVERSE SOURCES OF POLLUTION - SUCH AS MANY OF\nTHOSE THAT CONTRIBUTE TO CLIMATE CHANGE\n--\nTO GET AT THESE SOURCES, WE SEE THE NEED TO INCORPORATE\nMARKET INCENTIVES INTO THE NEW CLEAN AIR LAW -- TO SEND\nA SIGNAL TO THE MARKETPLACE THAT \"THE ENVIRONMENT IS AN\nISSUE THAT WON'T GO AWAY; YOU'D BE WISE TO ADDRESS IT\"\n- 10 -\n--\nUNDER THE NEW LAW, ELECTRIC UTILITIES EMITTING HIGH\nAMOUNTS OF SULFUR DIOXIDES WILL BE GIVEN ALLOWANCES\nDESIGNED TO REDUCE THEIR SULFUR DIOXIDE EMISSIONS BY\nABOUT HALF; THEY WILL BE FREE TO BUY EMISSION\nALLOWANCES FROM OTHERS IF CUTTING BACK ON EMISSIONS\nWOULD COST MORE THAN THE ALLOWANCES DO\n--\nON THE OTHER HAND, THE COMPANIES COULD REDUCE\nEMISSIONS SO FAR THAT THEY WOULD BE ABLE TO BANK OR\nSELL THEIR EXTRA ALLOWANCES; AND THEY'LL BE FREE TO\nPURSUE THE CHEAPEST METHOD OF POLLUTION CONTROL - --\nENERGY CONSERVATION, DIFFERENT FUELS, NEW TECHNOLOGY,\nLITTLE MEN IN THEIR SMOKESTACKS WEARING MITTENS --\nPROVIDED ONLY THAT THEY GET THE POLLUTION REDUCTIONS\nTHE COUNTRY NEEDS\n--\nEPA WILL SIMPLY MONITOR EMISSIONS AND MAKE SURE THAT\nFOR EVERY TON OF SULFUR DIOXIDE EMITTED, A POLLUTER HAS\nTHE REQUIRED ALLOWANCE\n--\nAND OVER THE PAST 20 YEARS, WE ALSO HAVE LEARNED THAT\nTHERE IS A POTENTIALLY CRITICAL ROLE FOR TAX POLICY IN\nENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION\n--\nMANY NATIONS HAVE BEEN EXPERIMENTING WITH TAX\nINCENTIVES AND DISINCENTIVES TO REDUCE EMISSIONS RELATED\nTO CLIMATE CHANGE\n--\nIN THIS COUNTRY, WE ARE TAXING CFC'S, AND WE WILL TAKE IN\n$400 MILLION FROM THIS TAX THIS YEAR, $5 BILLION OVER THE\nNEXT FIVE YEARS\n--\n(I SUSPECT THAT THIS IS THE HIGHEST TAX IMPOSED ON ANY\nGREENHOUSE GAS, ANYWHERE)\n--\nWE ALSO HAVE LEARNED OVER TWO DECADES OF\nENVIRONMENTAL PROGRAMS, AS I MENTIONED WITH RESPECT TO\nCFCS, THAT THE SPECIAL NEEDS OF DEVELOPING COUNTRIES\nMUST BE ADDRESSED\n--\nWE IN THE UNITED STATES WILL HELP TO DO THIS, AND SO MUST\nTHE MULTILATERAL AID AND LENDING INSTITUTIONS\n- 11 -\n--\nWE WILL CONTINUE AND STRENGTHEN OUR PROGRAMS OF\nTECHNOLOGY TRANSFER, AND WE WILL STRONGLY EMPHASIZE\nTHE WORK OF OUR INTERNATIONAL ENVIRONMENTAL\nTECHNICAL TRANSFER ADVISORY BOARD, SET UP TO ADVISE EPA\nON THESE VERY TIMELY ISSUES\n--\nTECHNOLOGY TRANSFER AND TECHNICAL ASSISTANCE PROGRAMS\nTO DEVELOPING COUNTRIES ARE IMPORTANT OPTIONS FOR\nENCOURAGING THE ADOPTION OF ENERGY EFFICIENCY AND\nRENEWABLE ENERGY TECHNOLOGIES\n--\nBUT THE DEVELOPING NATIONS THEMSELVES MUST BE WILLING\nTO PARTICIPATE; THEY CANNOT HAVE A PASS -- THEY MUST BE\nPART OF THE SOLUTION\n--\nTHEIR FOREST POLICIES AND THEIR ENERGY POLICIES MUST\nCHANGE; THEY MUST BE WILLING TO PURSUE DEVELOPMENT\nTHAT IS SUSTAINABLE, DEVELOPMENT THAT IS\nENVIRONMENTALLY SOUND\n--\nAND FINALLY, FROM 20 YEARS OF EXPERIENCE WE HAVE\nLEARNED THAT WE MUST BE FLEXIBLE IN OUR SEARCH FOR\nSOLUTIONS\n--\nRATHER THAN INSISTING ON TIGHTLY PRESCRIBED, \"QUICK-FIX\"\nREMEDIES, WE MUST SET LONG-TERM GOALS AND ALLOW\nNATIONS AND INDUSTRIES THE SPACE TO WORK OUT SOLUTIONS\nBEST SUITED TO THEIR PARTICULAR SITUATION\n:\nTHE IPCC PROCESS WILL LET US TAKE A LONGER-TERM\nPERSPECTIVE ON CLIMATE CHANGE, THROUGH ITS EXCHANGE OF\nINFORMATION ON THE SCIENCE, THE ECONOMICS AND THE\nENVIRONMENTAL EFFECTS\nO\nIN SUMMARY, THEN, MY CENTRAL MESSAGE TO YOU TODAY IS\nTHIS:\n--\nWHILE THE IPCC PROCESS IS DOING ITS WORK, MANY OTHER\nTHINGS CAN BE DONE TO REDUCE EMISSIONS RELATED TO\nCLIMATE CHANGE THAT ARE GOOD PUBLIC POLICY REGARDLESS\nOF ANY ASSUMPTIONS WE MIGHT MAKE ABOUT THE DEGREE OR\nTIMING OR CONSEQUENCES OF CLIMATE CHANGE\n- 11 -\n--\nWE WILL CONTINUE AND STRENGTHEN OUR PROGRAMS OF\nTECHNOLOGY TRANSFER, AND WE WILL STRONGLY EMPHASIZE\nTHE WORK OF OUR INTERNATIONAL ENVIRONMENTAL\nTECHNICAL TRANSFER ADVISORY BOARD, SET UP TO ADVISE EPA\nON THESE VERY TIMELY ISSUES\n--\nTECHNOLOGY TRANSFER AND TECHNICAL ASSISTANCE PROGRAMS\nTO DEVELOPING COUNTRIES ARE IMPORTANT OPTIONS FOR\nENCOURAGING THE ADOPTION OF ENERGY EFFICIENCY AND\nRENEWABLE ENERGY TECHNOLOGIES\n--\nBUT THE DEVELOPING NATIONS THEMSELVES MUST BE WILLING\nTO PARTICIPATE; THEY CANNOT HAVE A PASS -- THEY MUST BE\nPART OF THE SOLUTION\n--\nTHEIR FOREST POLICIES AND THEIR ENERGY POLICIES MUST\nCHANGE; THEY MUST BE WILLING TO PURSUE DEVELOPMENT\nTHAT IS SUSTAINABLE, DEVELOPMENT THAT IS\nENVIRONMENTALLY SOUND\n--\nAND FINALLY, FROM 20 YEARS OF EXPERIENCE WE HAVE\nLEARNED THAT WE MUST BE FLEXIBLE IN OUR SEARCH FOR\nSOLUTIONS\n--\nRATHER THAN INSISTING ON TIGHTLY PRESCRIBED, \"QUICK-FIX\"\nREMEDIES, WE MUST SET LONG-TERM GOALS AND ALLOW\nNATIONS AND INDUSTRIES THE SPACE TO WORK OUT SOLUTIONS\nBEST SUITED TO THEIR PARTICULAR SITUATION\n--\nTHE IPCC PROCESS WILL LET US TAKE A LONGER-TERM\nPERSPECTIVE ON CLIMATE CHANGE, THROUGH ITS EXCHANGE OF\nINFORMATION ON THE SCIENCE, THE ECONOMICS AND THE\nENVIRONMENTAL EFFECTS\nO\nIN SUMMARY, THEN, MY CENTRAL MESSAGE TO YOU TODAY IS\nTHIS:\n--\nWHILE THE IPCC PROCESS IS DOING ITS WORK, MANY OTHER\nTHINGS CAN BE DONE TO REDUCE EMISSIONS RELATED TO\nCLIMATE CHANGE THAT ARE GOOD PUBLIC POLICY REGARDLESS\nOF ANY ASSUMPTIONS WE MIGHT MAKE ABOUT THE DEGREE OR\nTIMING OR CONSEQUENCES OF CLIMATE CHANGE\n- 12 -\n--\nTHE UNITED STATES IS TAKING MANY SUCH \"CLIMATE\nCONSCIOUS\" STEPS; I'VE SUMMARIZED THEM\n--\nTHE MEASURES ALREADY UNDERWAY, INCLUDING THE\nPHASEOUT OF CFCS, REFORESTATION AND CONSERVATION, WILL\nREDUCE THE U.S. CONTRIBUTION OF CLIMATE-ALTERING GASES\nBY MORE THAN 15 PERCENT BELOW WHAT THEY OTHERWISE\nWOULD HAVE BEEN BY THE YEAR 2000\n-- MEANWHILE RESEARCH ON GLOBAL CHANGE, ON THE LIKELY\nEFFECTS OF SUCH CHANGE, AND ON THE COSTS AND\nCONSEQUENCES OF POLICY MEASURES IS NECESSARY TO GUIDE\nFUTURE ACTIONS; WE ARE INTENSELY PURSUING SUCH\nRESEARCH AND ENCOURAGE OTHER NATIONS TO JOIN US\n--\nTHE IPCC HAS SET A MODEL FOR SUCH COOPERATION; LET'S GIVE\nIT A CHANCE TO COMPLETE ITS WORK\nO\nCLEARLY, THE GLOBAL CLIMATE IS A MATTER OF PROFOUND\nIMPORTANCE\n--\nTHE ENVELOPE THAT SUSTAINS LIFE IS VERY THIN; THOSE OF\nYOU WHO CAME TO THIS CONFERENCE BY AIRPLANE FLEW\nABOVE 90 PERCENT OF THE EARTH'S ATMOSPHERE\n--\nAND, AS WE HAVE SEEN WITH THE ANTARCTIC OZONE HOLE, THE\nATMOSPHERE IS FRAGILE AND VULNERABLE TO DESTABILIZATION\nBY HUMAN ACTIVITY\n--\nMORE THAN AT ANY PREVIOUS MOMENT IN HUMAN HISTORY,\nNATURE AND NATURAL SYSTEMS ARE IN HUMAN HANDS,\nDEPENDENT ON HUMAN EFFORTS\n--\nOUR SITUATION TODAY GIVES A NEW MEANING TO\nSTEWARDSHIP, AND A NEW SIGNIFICANCE TO THE CONCEPT OF\nGLOBAL ENVIRONMENTAL COOPERATION\n:\nWE ARE COMMITTED TO ACTION TO ADDRESS THE PROBLEM OF\nCLIMATE CHANGE\n- 13\n--\nFOR 20 YEARS, THE UNITED STATES HAS BEEN A LEADER ON\nENVIRONMENTAL ISSUES - AND WE INTEND TO CONTINUE THIS\nLEADERSHIP\n--\nWE ARE LOOKING FORWARD TO WORKING WITH YOU -- AND THE\nENTIRE INTERNATIONAL COMMUNITY - ON THE CHALLENGES\nTHAT LIE AHEAD\n--\nTHANK YOU\nDOE\nNEWS\nSpeech of Admiral James D. Watkins, U.S. Navy (Retired)\nU.S. Secretary of Energy\nbefore\nThe White House Conference\non\nScience and Economics Research Related\nto Global Change\nWednesday, April 18, 1990\nGood afternoon, ladies and gentlemen. It is a pleasure to\nhave the opportunity to speak to you on energy policy as it\nrelates to the theme of this conference, including scientific and\neconomic research, decision-making strategies, energy\ntechnologies, and future partnerships.\nThe production and consumption of energy is obviously a\nprimary contributor to carbon dioxide emissions worldwide, and is\nat the focus of a number of other environmental concerns. Yet\nenergy is also the primary contributor to worldwide economic\ngrowth and development. If we are to achieve economic growth in\nan environmentally sound fashion, we must develop and deploy\nenergy technologies that contribute to the global stewardship\nthat President Bush has eloquently called for.\nOver the past day and a half, you have had the-opportunity\nto hear from many of the leading figures in the U.S. government,\nfrom the President on down. Dr. Allan Bromley has described the\nscientific knowns and unknowns in the science of climate change,\nand the research challenges that lie before us. Secretary Brady\nand Michael Boskin have described our efforts to integrate\nscientific and environmental considerations with economic\nprograms. Michael Deland has described the partnerships the\nUnited States and other countries are forging to protect our\nglobal environment. Yesterday at lunch, Bill Reilly of our\nEnvironmental Protection Agency detailed specific steps already\nbeing taken by the United States that will help ameliorate the\nthreat of global climate change.\nU.S. Department of Energy\nOffice of the Press Secretary\nWashington, DC 20585\nWe have also heard a number of impressive presentations from\nother delegations to this Conference.\nI found the Japanese vision of \"New Earth 21\" particularly\ncompelling. Their action program for the 21st century is\ntruly progressive and comprehensive, with stages of\nenvironmental responses keyed to increases in basic\nunderstanding and the development of improved energy\ntechnologies.\nI think we can all also agree with the call for stronger\nefforts and cooperation in scientific and economic research,\ncoupled with investments in technology development and\ninternational technology transfer.\nAnd the working group that I participated in yesterday\nafternoon was very impressed with OECD efforts to develop\neconomic simulation models that will provide more\nsophisticated cost estimates of various emission control\nalternatives. This latter program of cooperative economic\nresearch is a very positive step towards new and necessary\nanalytical tools. I think it deserves the wholehearted\nsupport of this Conference.\nAll these themes find strong resonances with the underlying\nintellectual framework that we are developing for future U.S.\nenergy policy. The development of this framework--our first\ncomprehensive National Energy Strategy--is an effort of the\nentire U.S. government that is being coordinated by the\nDepartment of Energy which I head. We have provided each\ndelegation here with a copy of an Interim Report on the\ndevelopment of this Strategy, and your embassies here in\nWashington were briefed on that Interim Report earlier this\nmonth.\nOur new National Energy Strategy represents a real departure\nfrom past efforts, both in its scope and in its execution. Like\n2\nthe IPCC process, the National Energy Strategy is based on the\nfollowing key elements:\nBroad participation by interested parties as a basis\nfor building public understanding of the issue and\nconsensus on the outcome;\nCareful assessment of the underlying science and\ntechnology and the costs of response options;\nRobust analysis of the impacts of our policies on our\ndomestic economy and on international economic, trade,\nand development goals.\nSuccess in integrating these components into a consolidated\nframework is crucial to both efforts. In the case of the IPCC,\nwe need to lay a comprehensive foundation for continued future\naction, action to which the United States is fully committed.\nAnd our success in developing a comprehensive National Energy\nStrategy will be crucial to the U.S. ability to address global\nclimate change issues.\nOne of the principal differences in scope between our\ndeveloping National Energy Strategy and previous energy planning\nexercises is the integration of environmental and economic policy\nwith energy policy. For many years, the energy-environmental\npolicy debate in the United States has been polarized and\nunproductive. We have attempted to resolve perceived conflicts\nbetween energy and environment in a piecemeal manner--leaving the\nfield open for narrow interests to dominate the agenda. The\nUnited States has not been uniquely afflicted by such a lack of\nconnection between energy and environment. Yesterday, Deputy\nPrime Minister Janowski gave a moving description of the sad\nlegacy left behind in Eastern Europe from a one-dimensional\napproach to energy production.\nThe National Energy Strategy we are building will provide a\nframe of reference for the United States to examine its policy\noptions, taking into full account their potential effects of our\nchoices on the environment, on energy supplies, and on the\n3\neconomy. The integration of these elements into a unified\nstrategy may give us the foresight to avoid past mistakes in\nenergy and industrial planning.\nAt the core of our National Energy Strategy is a process of\npublic consultation that is without precedent in U. S. energy\nplanning. The public record established by this process SO far\nis the result of 15 public hearings, nearly 400 invited\npresentations, and over 1000 written submissions. More public\nhearings and much more public comment will take place before we\nconclude this process at the end of this year. This approach to\nthe National Energy Strategy has served a number of purposes.\no\nThe first purpose served has been public education. By\nthe time we are through, there should be a fresh\nappreciation of the fact that there are no easy answers\nor quick fixes to the problems we face in the energy\nand environmental arenas.\nThe second purpose has been to define the major issues\nwith clarity. Already a range of views--frequently\ncontradictory but often surprisingly convergent--has\nbeen offered concerning possible solutions.\nFinally, we believe that our approach to the National\nEnergy Strategy is laying the foundation of public\nconsensus necessary to make the Strategy an action\nplan.\nLet me share with you four key points that we have learned\nSO far in assessing the public record. They are: respecting the\nenvironment, improving energy efficiency, securing future energy\nsupplies, and building strong foundations in science, technology,\nand education.\n0\nThere is a clear public consensus in the United States\nthat energy and environmental policies must be mutually\nsustaining. Our economic well-being cannot be\nsustained if the environment is in ruins. And only a\nvibrant economy will make available the investment\n4\nneeded to achieve the environmental quality that\nAmericans are demanding.\nThe desirability of energy efficiency from both an\nenvironmental and economic point of view is clear. The\nkey questions in improving energy efficiency are:\n-- What is achievable and at what cost?\n-- Who needs to be involved?\n-- How can the federal government facilitate progress?\nI believe that greater energy efficiency will be achieved\nonly if a large number of players act in concert. The U.S.\ngovernment has already begun to move aggressively to pursue\nenergy efficiency improvements, and I think it is fair to\ncharacterize our efforts in this area as some of the first\nconcrete results from our National Energy Strategy process.\nOur accomplishments to date include:\n-- Announcement of a new set of energy efficiency and\nrenewables initiatives in January of this year. These\ninitiatives, if fully implemented, will reduce expected U.S.\ncarbon dioxide emissions by the end of this decade.\n-- Strong encouragement for State governments to create\nincentives for utilities to treat energy conservation on an\nequal par with energy supply. Our private Electric Power\nResearch Institute estimates that such incentives could cut\nU.S. electricity needs by 20 percent before the year 2010.\n-- Increases in automobile efficiency standards that will be\nin addition to the 80 percent gain in fuel efficiency for\nnew cars that we have achieved over the last 13 years.\n-- Significantly increased refrigerator efficiency standards\npromulgated last December and improvements in other\nappliance efficiency standards that are now under review.\nIn addition to improved energy efficiency, ensuring\nfuture supplies of energy for our U.S. economy are a\nmajor source of public concern. There are some very\n5\ndifficult decisions ahead for the United States\nregarding energy supply--decisions that cannot be\npostponed much longer. As one example, electricity\ndemand in the United States--which has consistently\ntracked economic growth--will likely grow by about 100\nbillion watts within the next decade. At this point in\ntime, only 40 percent of the needed capacity to meet\nthis demand is either under construction or the object\nof firm plans. How will the remaining 60 percent be\nsupplied? No one knows yet.\nFinally, maintaining U.S. vitality in fundamental\nscience and engineering research, strengthening U.S.\neducation, and building new capabilities in technology\ntransfer are perceived by a wide swath of the U.S.\npublic as key for assuring both our energy future and\nour broader future as a leading nation in the world.\nI would like to focus for a minute on the critical role of\nscientific and engineering research in responding to global\nchange.\nDr. Bromley mentioned yesterday an interagency committee in\nthe U.S. government called the Committee on Earth Sciences, or\nCES. CES has become a paradigm of national and international\ncooperation in dealing with both scientific certainties and\nuncertainties of global change. Every agency of the U.S. federal\ngovernment has joined forces to put in place comprehensive and\nmultidisciplinary research programs addressing global change. As\nthe President told you yesterday, he has pledged more than one\nbillion dollars to this program for the next year. These funds\nwill support international research activities including the\nstudy of global ocean circulations and the launching of\nsatellites to observe and analyze the earth system. Just last\nweek I visited the NASA scientists in Alabama who have developed\na promising new method to accurately record atmospheric\ntemperatures from satellite-based instruments. If verified, the\nmethod may give us an excellent global thermometer of the earth's\natmosphere and remove the guesswork out of whether we are\nentering a warming or a cooling trend.\n6\nThe CES Program has highlighted the importance of clouds in\na changing climate. Clouds may accelerate the rate of a possible\nwarming or act to retard the process. My Department has joined\nother CES partners in starting a major research study to quantify\nthe feedbacks of clouds in the climate system. Yesterday, you\nheard the President call for better Earth system models that\nenable us to calculate the complex interaction between man and\nour environment. The Department of Energy is rising to this\nchallenge by placing our arsenal of sophisticated supercomputers\nat the service of global change research. We have just placed\non-line the most powerful Cray-2 supercomputer in the world and\nare making it available to the scientific community for climate\nmodeling. We are forcing the pace of climate change prediction\nwith a program to increase computing speeds by a factor of ten\nthousand. And we are building the data management systems to\nhandle the vast amounts of data from satellites, research ships\nand ground-based instruments.\nOf course, research simply to study the problems of global\nclimate change is not enough. At the heart of any regime of\ncost-effective actions to address the threat of global warming\nwill be a panoply of new technologies--technologies both to\nprovide the services we demand and to supply energy to end-use\ntechnologies more efficiently than in the past. Focusing efforts\nat scientific discovery on areas of potentially high, if long-\nrange, economic payoff is a principal mission of my department.\nFor example, it is clear that finding ways to more\nefficiently use our fossil fuels, especially in the near-term,\nwill be an essential ingredient of any strategy to attenuate\ncarbon dioxide emissions. Substituting natural gas for other\nfossil fuels is one approach to achieving such emission\nreductions. Another crucial resource on which we must focus is\ncoal. In the United States we have set our national will and our\ntechnology expertise to the task of improving the efficiency and\nenvironmental acceptability of our coal use. We have done that\nthrough a $5 billion commitment to demonstrating new clean coal\ntechnologies. Many of these technologies improve efficiencies by\n20 to 40 percent compared to conventional ones and have the added\nbenefits of reducing carbon dioxide, sulfur dioxide and nitrogen\noxide emissions.\n7\nNuclear energy emits no greenhouse gases. However, in many\ncountries, including the United States, nuclear energy is beset\nwith problems of public acceptance. I believe that every\ngovernment has a major responsibility to address legitimate\npublic concerns about nuclear energy. In the United States, we\nare working hard to develop safer, more cost-effective reactor\ndesigns and to resolve waste disposal issues.\nRenewables also offer considerable promise of\nenvironmentally safe and secure energy. Indeed, renewables have\nalready served us well in the past in the form of biomass and\nhydroelectric energy. We can expect its role to expand,\nespecially in key sectors such as transportation, residential,\nand commercial energy use. For example, alternative fuels--\nbased in part on agricultural crops--will play an increasing role\nin protecting our urban air quality in a manner that also\npromotes energy security. In 1988, the renewables share of U.S.\nenergy production was 5 percent. In the longer run, solar, wind,\nand additional hydroelectric resources will provide additional\ninexpensive, sustainable energy needed to meet the demands of\neconomic growth.\nIn our search for new technologies, we must look at\nopportunities in all sectors and in all nations. The sources of\ngreenhouse gas emissions are many and diverse--as diverse as our\nnational economies. Virtually no major economic sector can be\nomitted from the list of contributors to greenhouse has\nemissions, or the list of potential opportunity targets for\ntechnology development. Agriculture, energy production,\npetrochemicals, ferrous and nonferrous metals, pulp and paper,\ntransportation and even electronics--all these areas have\nopenings for sound and cost-effective emission reduction\ntechnologies.\nI have described our domestic actions to maximize the\nopportunities available to us to deploy sound science and\nadvanced technology in the effort to respond to global climate\nchange. Many of you have similar actions underway in your\nnations. We are fortunate to have the opportunity during this\nConference to share our experiences. If there is one underlying\n8\ntheme which is common to all our discussions here, it has been\nthat no one country alone can significantly impact global\nconcentrations of greenhouse gases. For that matter, no one\ncountry alone can resolve the scientific uncertainties, monitor\nthe global climate, or ensure the worldwide deployment of the\ntechnical expertise and technology needed to ensure global\nstewardship. Moving us closer to global stewardship will require\nintensified international cooperation--cooperation in our science\nand economic research programs, cooperation in providing\ntechnical information and training to the developing countries,\nand cooperation in assessing and implementing environmentally\nsound technologies.\nAs our discussions at this conference indicate, the time is\nripe for the world community to commit its scientific and\neconomic resources both to resolve the uncertainties and to\ndevelop the technologies needed to meet the challenge of global\nclimate change. Several nations have proposed hemispheric or\ninternational research institutes that would focus on reducing\nscientific uncertainties about global climate. I think these are\npromising proposals.\nAnother theme that has come out is the need to develop an\ninternational strategy for forming a global partnership on\nclimate issues. The IPCC is the starting point for developing\nthat strategy, and I believe this conference has helped identify\nsome key issues. Our discussions here have brought out the need\nto help developing and other countries achieve their rightful\neconomic prosperity, while also ensuring that our common\nresponsibilities for global stewardship are not compromised.\nTechnology transfer will be essential to any global consensus\naddressing climate change.\nFinally, our discussions have manifested the broad range of\npossible approaches to reducing greenhouse gas emissions. Some\ncountries have indicated a commitment to taking certain response\nactions now, even in the face of the uncertainties. As\nAdministrator Reilly indicated in his speech yesterday, the\nUnited States strongly supports taking action now in areas that\nmake sense both for potential mitigation of greenhouse gases and\n9\nfor promoting the sound economy needed to make progress on other\nenvironmental and social imperatives.\nThe President's Science Advisor, Dr. Allan Bromley, told us\nyesterday that one of the primary objectives of this conference\nwas to increase mutual understanding and sensitivity of the\ninternational scientific and economic research communities to\neach other's needs and those of the policy makers who seek\nguidance from them. In this light, I think this conference has\nbeen a success. I am optimistic that a global consensus on\nresponses--scientific, technological and economic--will result\nfrom the IPCC process. The remaining challenges facing us are\nsignificant. But the spirit of this Conference--forging ahead\ntogether to achieve the common goals of economic growth,\nenvironmental protection, and global stewardship--augurs well for\nthe final success of the IPCC process.\nThank you.\n10\nREVIEW OF THE CO-CHAIRMEN'S REPORT\nWHITE HOUSE CONFERENCE\nON SCIENCE AND ECONOMICS RESEARCH\nRELATED TO GLOBAL CHANGE\nWashington, DC -- April 18, 1990\npresented by\nMICHAEL R. DELAND, CHAIRMAN\nPRESIDENT'S COUNCIL ON ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY\nCONFERENCE CO-CHAIRMEN:\nD. Allan Bromley\nAssistant to the President for Science and Technology\nMichael J. Boskin\nChairman, President's Council of Economic Advisers\nMichael R. Deland\nChairman, President's Council on Environmental Quality\nColleagues and guests, good afternoon. I have been given an\nenormous privilege-- and an enormous challenge.\nThe privilege of presenting a summary report is enhanced by\nthe fact that I represent not only myself, but also my two\ndistinguished colleagues and Co-Chairs, Drs. Bromley and Boskin.\nWe commend you for your unique talents and deep commitment to\nglobal stewardship, which have been so evident here this week.\nWe have been honored and enriched by your attendance, and on\nbehalf of the Co-Chairs, I am privileged to extend our thanks.\nMy enormous challenge this afternoon is no less than\npresenting our summary of the events of the past two-and-a-half\ndays. Such a summary would be a challenge at any conference, but\nit is especially daunting in this instance, where the free, open\nand candid exchange of ideas goes on. No doubt the give-and-take\ncontinues even now, and will continue as you wend your way home.\nAs you should know by now, draft summaries of our working\nsessions have been circulated to every delegation, and will be\nprovided to the press. We welcome your comments and suggestions\nto ensure that those summaries are faithful representations of\nour discussions.\n2\nThe challenge of presenting the Co-Chairs' summary is also\nmade difficult by the depth and breadth of your contributions,\nand the practical limits of time and space. We Co-Chairs have\nspoken a great deal about \"integrating,\" \"cross-fertilizing,\" or\n\"coordinating\" the very best thinking from a variety of\ndisciplines: science, economics, energy and the environment. But\nwe Co-Chairs are likely the first to do just that-- and under\ndemanding time constraints as well. So I hope we have done\njustice to you; your comments on the Co-Chairs' report are as\nwelcome as your other comments on the working group summaries.\nOur agenda set several objectives. For example, we sought\nto focus more sharply the science and economic research issues\nrelevant to policy on global change. We discussed what is known\nand the urgent challenge of what is unknown. Second, as Dr.\nBoskin and others outlined, we sought to highlight economic\nanalysis as a tool to understand human inputs to global change\nfrom economic activity, the environmental impacts of global\nchange, and the implications of potential responses. It has been\nsaid many times, but bears repeating, that this conference\nbrought scientists and economists together for the first time for\n\"cross-fertilization.\" Dr. Bromley described economics as \"the\nglue\" that binds scientific analysis to policy decisions, and\nindeed many delegates agreed on the need for better linkages\nbetween the science and economic disciplines and policy-makers.\n3\nFinally, and perhaps most important, we sought to frame the\nnext steps for implementing joint international efforts to\nunderstand and respond to global change.\nThose were our objectives. The Co-Chairs submit to you our\nbelief that the conference successfully met those objectives. In\naddition, we were pleasantly surprised by the degree of consensus\nin the delegates' responses to the conference objectives.\nAs the delegates exchanged thoughts over the last two days,\nthe area of greatest agreement was on the need for global\nstewardship. We speak with one voice that human actions can have\na profound impact on our fragile. and beautiful planet. Each of\nus has a special responsibility to ensure that those actions are\nwise and gentle. As I alluded in my remarks yesterday, we have\nbegun to redeem the harmful legacy of the Twentieth Century by\nembracing more universal values: a global stewardship for global\nquality of life.\nIn this regard, we were most pleased to listen to the\nperspective of Dr. Jan Janowski, Deputy Prime Minister of the\nRepublic of Poland, who very frankly evaluated his nation's\npresent environmental and economic imperatives. Dr. Janowski\nurged us not to reduce our options to what he called a false\nchoice between environmental protection and economic development.\n4\nThere was a second area of unanimity, which in my opinion\nwas one of the most useful accomplishments of the conference. In\nshort, delegates from the United States and all nations\nreiterated in the strongest terms a commitment to continuing and\naccelerating those actions which make common sense now: that is,\nthere are certain actions which offer known environmental\nbenefits, which are known to have low or modest costs, and which\nwe know will help stabilize or reduce the emissions of greenhouse\ngases. As representatives of our respective countries, we sell\nourselves short if we do not recognize the pro-active\ncontribution that we are already making.\nIn areas where there was less than total unanimity, there\nwas nonetheless a stimulating and useful exchange of ideas. Dr.\nBromley, Dr. Bolin and the scientists who assisted us in the\nworking sessions provided an excellent review of what is known at\nthis point, which can only be described as \"the fundamentals.\" \"\nLast evening we heard remarks by the distinguished Dr. Bert\nBolin, chairman of the IPCC, who previewed the initial assessment\nof what will be a decades-long international research effort on\nglobal climate change. Dr. Bolin stressed the critical balancing\nact of policy-making in the face of uncertainty, and offered\nprovocative comments on making decisions with the information\nprovided to us by the current IPCC process.\n5\nIn my remarks yesterday, I said that for our solutions to\nenvironmental challenges to be complete, scientists must listen\ncarefully to the concerns and priorities of economists, and\neconomists must to likewise with their scientific colleagues. In\nthat context, the conference discussion identified remaining\nunresolved questions.\nThese begin with uncertainties about the phenomenon itself:\nfor example, the role of clouds as an agent of warming or\ncooling, or the ocean-atmosphere interface. We agreed on the\nneed to reduce uncertainties about the impact of global change on\nspecific regions. We need better predictions of the rate of\nchange -- especially for the southern hemisphere -- and to\nestimate the potential for sudden surprises. There is\nconsiderable uncertainty over the role of man-made sources of\nchange versus ongoing natural sources of change and many\nquestions about carbon dioxide \"sinks.\"\nEven if by waving some magic wand, we were to answer all of\nour questions about Earth systems, we still would have many\nquestions about the impact of change on other systems-- both\nhuman and natural. How much change can our agricultural system\nadapt to, and at what rate? How will changes in solar radiation\naffect the productivity of the oceans? How will rapid climatic\n6\nchanges affect biodiversity? So many scientific questions remain\nunanswered.\nFrom our economist colleagues, we heard comments on the many\nuncertainties about human inputs, impacts and responses to global\nchange. We do not fully comprehend either costs of action or the\ncosts of inaction. We have no clear measures of the cost-\neffectiveness of competing options; we are unsure whether it will\nbe cheaper to adapt to or prevent change. We heard that there\nare considerable differences among economists in different\nnations over how to model relationships between environmental and\neconomic factors. The developing countries spoke about the human\ndimension of economic growth as a means of fulfilling the basic\nhuman needs of growing populations. I appreciated Dr. Boskin's\nreminder that we have difficulty predicting national GNP one year\nin advance, much less modeling global economic systems on the\ntime scale of many decades. Economists need to develop ways to\nvalue things that do not have monetary value but which are\nprecious to us all. We need to resolve uncertainty about\neconomic factors in the evolution of technology.\nGiven our need for more knowledge, I believe there was\ngenuine consensus on the need to accelerate scientific and\neconomic research efforts to reduce these uncertainties.\n7\nThere is also a need to coordinate better our ongoing\nscientific and economic research efforts at the national,\nregional and global levels. One concrete proposal which emerged\nfrom our discussions was that of enhancing the very mechanisms\nfor communication among scientists and researchers -- a global\nchange communications network, if you will. There is an enormous\narray of technology for sharing information and communicating\naround the globe. Let us use this technology it to its fullest\nextent. The benefits to all nations of improving access to the\nfruits of our research argues strongly for integrating existing\nnetworks, adding new networks and technologies such as voice\nmail, and extending access to many more nations and individuals.\nFrom sharing our thoughts and insights about specific\nquestions, our discussions turned to the need for integration\nacross disciplines and across national boundaries. From the\neconomics perspective, standard approaches exist for balancing\nbenefits and costs of proposed actions, such as managing risk\nthrough insurance and diversification, flexibility in\ncommitments, prudent decision-making and continuing research. It\nis crucial to integrate these approaches into the decision making\nprocess.\nThere is a need to establish research and other cooperative\nnetworks across national boundaries, between industrialized and\ndeveloping nations, and across disciplines. No nation,\n8\ninstitution or discipline can address single-handedly the issue\nof global change, nor the challenge of harmonizing environmental\nand economic imperatives. We must not forget that developing\nnations can ill afford to devote scarce resources to addressing\nglobal climate change, when the press of poverty creates more\nurgent agendas. That fact creates a profound responsibility on\nthe part of those nations which have climbed higher on the\neconomic ladder to lend a helping hand.\nDeveloping countries are under-represented in world\nscientific research efforts. That must change. New systems are\nneeded for developing and sharing both basic science and emerging\nclean technologies, for if these new technologies are not created\nand shared, it is estimated that 80% of the world's population\nwill continue to rely upon outdated and inefficient technology.\nOther delegates stressed the need for and value of public\neducation, including curriculum in both lower schools and in\nhigher education. There is clearly a need for networking among\nsimilar organizations in different regions and among neighbors\nfor managing shared resources. The Zairean example of regional\nefforts to protect and wisely manage African tropical forests\nshould be replicated for other common resources. Finally,\ninternational monitoring and measurement of both environmental\nand economic parameters is necessary to establish baselines and\nto complement global modeling. For example, the development and\n9\nuse of economic and environmental indicators is essential. The\nOECD was held out as an example of an organization which has\nundertaken important work in the assignment of values to natural\nresources.\nWhile the IPCC is the forum for policy development, several\ncountries suggested establishing regional or international\ncooperative research centers to provide bridges between\nresearchers, between disciplines, and between academics and\npolicymakers. Such centers would also reflect that global\nchange, the subject of this conference, is broader than climate\nchange and includes additional issues such as population growth,\nland degradation, wetlands, sea level rise, loss of biodiversity\nand changes in energy demand and use.\nResearch on these matters must be integrated to create\nmodels allowing us to understand and predict the effects of our\nactions. The USA proposed creation of international institutes\nfor research in order to focus cross-national, cross-disciplinary\nefforts and resolve the uncertainties policy-makers face.\nBut there must be more to our deliberations than agreeing on\na set of research questions and providing a vehicle for policy-\nmakers to hear the answers to those questions. The challenge of\nglobal stewardship in the face of global change demands that we\ndo more.\n10\nAs President Bush stated in his opening remarks and on\nseveral occasions, research is no substitute for action. We find\nthis to be a sentiment shared by almost all participants at this\nconference. We have provided during this conference a\nsubstantial number of suggested action items which require\nfurther elaboration. We have also been told of the actions many\nof your nations are taking, just as you have heard from us the\nmany steps the United States is taking.\nWe spoke among ourselves, in our working sessions and in our\nmany informal conversations, of the need for new partnerships to\nhelp us advance toward our common goals.\nI spoke a few moments ago on our support for the concept of\nglobal stewardship. But we have no fundamental statement of what\nthat concept means. I believe that it would serve all of our\ninterests to consider the creation of a statement of principles\non the meaning and focus of Global Stewardship. And while we\nhave agreed on the existence of gaps in our understanding of\nglobal change, we have no overall plan for filling those gaps and\nanswering those questions.\nThe Japanese delegation made a proposal, which stimulated\nmuch thought, on the creation of long-term over-arching plans to\nguide our efforts. The USA proposal, while somewhat more modest\n11\nby comparison, is still quite ambitious. A common research\nagenda, and international agreement on a plan of action for\nimplementing that agenda would be a major step forward. We must\nprovide a forum for developing such an agenda, for integrating\nthe required research efforts into existing national and\ninternational programs. Our proposal is for development of a\ncharter for cooperation in science and economics research related\nto global change. Such a charter could provide a blueprint for\nconcerted action on every aspect of global change. The US has\nalso offered to provide a venue -- later this year -- the first\nnegotiating session of a framework convention on climate change.\nOur colleagues from the Federal Republic of Germany built upon\nthis initiative by suggesting that the 1992 Brazil conference be\nused as the forum for the signing of a world climate convention.\nThat concludes the substance of my presentation. I only\nhope that I have done justice to the diversity and sophistication\nof the comments we have heard. This was an exceptional challenge\nand we look forward to your comments on this summary.\nLet me reiterate on behalf of the Co-Chairs our thanks for\nyour active and constructive participation in making this\nconference a success. We hope that in these working sessions, we\nhave broken down some of the barriers that divide and limit us.\nBecause in the final analysis, it is action that counts. Active\n12\nresearch, active diplomacy, and pro-active policies which blend\nscientific and economic realities.\nProgress toward a better quality of life for all people is\nour goal. If we have any faith in the partnerships and\nintegration which have been stimulated here this week, and we do,\nthen I believe that progress is our mission and indeed our\ndestiny.\nThank you.\n13\nTHE WHITE HOUSE\nOffice of the Press Secretary\nFor Immediate Release\nApril 18, 1990\nREMARKS BY THE PRESIDENT\nIN THE CLOSING ADDRESS\nTO THE WHITE HOUSE CONFERENCE\nON SCIENCE AND ECONOMICS RESEARCH\nRELATED TO GLOBAL CHANGE\nThe J.W. Marriott\n2:32 P.M. EDT\nTHE PRESIDENT: Thank you, ladies and gentlemen. Thank\nyou, Dr. Bromley, very much. Dr. Boskin, Mr. Deland and Secretaries\nWatkins and Lujan of our Cabinet. Dr. Bolin, and distinguished\ndelegates to this truly unprecedented conference.\nAfter all of the hard work that's taken place here -- in\nwhat I know was an atmosphere of lively debate -- I would begin with\nthanks, and a moment of perspective: for your purpose here is\nprofoundly important to the state of nature, and the fate of mankind.\nYour presence has offered hope for a new era of environmental\ncooperation around the world and the promise of a quieter, more\nthoughtful, more careful tenancy of nature's legacy to humanity.\nYou know, during these last two days we've listened and\nlearned -- and I've been briefed thoroughly on some of the\ncommittee's works -- learned about Brazil's new initiatives to\nprotect the Amazon rain forest, about Nigeria's plans to remove lead\nfrom gasoline, about Mexico's promising efforts to reduce the Mexico\nCity air pollution.\nA year ago I participated in an American education\nsummit, and found the most productive sessions were those working\ngroups. This conference was structured with that lesson in mind. So\nmy thanks go to all the delegates who played such an integral role in\nthose working groups -- particularly the foreign delegates who served\nas co-chairmen.\nA growing sense of global stewardship prompted us to host\nthis conference. It's a sense of stewardship shared by all of you\nand by the nations you represent. And it arises out of a natural\nsense of obligation. An understanding that we owe our existence, all\nthat we know and are, to this miraculous sphere that sustains us.\nSomebody told me that the evening you had over at the museum brought\nthis into very, very clear perspective when you heard from some of\nthe NASA people.\nSuch stewardship finds expression in many ways -- from\npublic demonstration to landmark legislation. But it is also\nrewarded in many ways, in moments unexpected and unforgettable.\nNature's beauty has a special power -- a resonance that at once\nelevates the mind's eye, and yet humbles us as well.\n- 2 -\nBefore nature, the works of humanity seem somehow small.\nWe may build cathedrals, temples, mosques, monuments and mausoleums\nto great men and women and high ideals. And still we know we can\nbuild no monuments to compare with nature. Our greatest creations\nreally can't equal God's smallest.\nYet as our tools and intellect advance, we've learned of\nour power to alter the Earth. We understand that small actions,\ntaken together, can have profound global consequences for the\nenvironment we share and the humanity we share it with. The\nimportance of global stewardship can be best understood in human\nterms.\nWe also recognize that ours is an increasingly prosperous\nplanet with greater hopes now than ever before that more of our\npeople, in every nation, may come to know an enduring peace and an\nunprecedented quality of life.\nso we're called upon to ensure that the Earth's integrity\nis preserved and that mankind's prospects for prosperity, peace, and\nin some regions, even survival, are not put at risk by the unintended\nconsequences of noble intentions.\nThat's the reason we've held this conference.\nThe minds at work here are among the very best we have\nand they are the best insurance that our actions are sound. We've\ngathered talent from around the world -- scientists, economists,\nenvironmentalists, energy ministers, policymakers -- to address the\nenvironmental and developmental future of the planet. An\nunprecedented cross-fertilization of disciplines and of nations.\nThat alone, I think, is reason for hope.\nBut if diversity of perspective is expected, unity of\npurpose is crucial. In an atmosphere of uncertainty, we must foster\na climate of goodwill and a stubborn hope that we might forge\nsolutions without the excessive heat of politics.\nAmong all the challenges in our tenancy of this planet,\nclimate change is, of course, foremost in your minds. We're leading\nthe search for response strategies and working through the\nuncertainty of both the science and the economics of climate change.\nBut there is one area where we will allow for no uncertainty -- and\nthat is our commitment to action -- to sound analyses and sound\npolicies.\nTo those who suggest we're only trying to balance\neconomic growth and environmental protection, I say they miss the\npoint. We are calling for an early new way of thinking to achieve the\nboth while compromising neither. By applying the power of\nmarketplace in the service of the environment.\nAnd we cannot allow a question like climate change to be\ncharacterized as a debate between economists versus\nenvironmentalists. To say that this issue has sides is about as\nproductive as saying that the Earth is flat. It may simplify things, The\nbut it just doesn't do justice to the facts or to our future.\ntruth is, strong economies allow nations to fulfill the obligations to\nof stewardship. And environmental stewardship is crucial\nsustaining strong economies. If we lose sight of the forest for the\ntrees we risk losing both.\n- 3 -\nBut above all, the climate change debate is not about\nresearch versus action, for we've never considered research a\nsubstitute for action. Over the last two days, you've heard,\nformally and informally, that the United States is already taking\naction to stabilize and reduce emissions through our clean air\nlegislation, our use of market-based incentives to control pollution,\nour search for alternative energy sources, our emphasis on energy\nefficiency, our reforestation initiatives, and our technical\nassistance programs to developing nations.\nThese policies were developed to address a broad range of\nenvironmental concerns, in particular our phaseout of CFCs, the\nimpact of our Clean Air Act on emissions, our tree-planting\ninitiative, and other strategies will produce reductions in\ngreenhouse gas emissions that will reach 15 percent in 10 years --\nand considerably more later on.\nWe're also making a leading investment in climate change\nresearch absolutely essential because it will tell us what to do\n-\nnext. But what bears emphasis is that we are committed to domestic\nand international policies that are environmentally aggressive,\neffective, and efficient.\nAnd we are deeply committed to an international\npartnership, through the IPCC process. We look forward to its\ninterim assessment. And we would encourage a framework convention as\na part of a comprehensive approach to address the system, sources,\nand sinks as a whole if a decision is made that environmental action\nis needed to reduce net emissions. We hope to provide a venue for\nthe first negotiating sessions here in the United States.\nAnd finally, here in conference working groups, we've\noffered four new ideas -- a charter for cooperation in science and\neconomic research related to global change; possible creation of\ninternational institutes for research on the science and economics of\nglobal change; data and information transfers through a global change\ncommunications network; and a statement of principles for\nimplementing international cooperation in scientific and economic\nresearch related to global change.\nI call on you to support these suggestions. All of you\nhere today understand climate change as one of many challenges in the\ncall to global stewardship. Ozone depletion, water supply, ocean\npollution, wetlands, deforestation, biological diversity, population\nchange, hunger, energy demand -- in short, all the interrelated\nissues of the global environment. Each demands our attention. Each\nwill have great impact.\nAnd some we can predict, and regrettably and frankly,\nsome can't be easily anticipated. But each has a human dimension we\nmust never forget. Understand the choices we are making. They\naffect us all, but in profoundly different ways. We have many paths\nto choose from, and some of them are fraught with risk to precious\nand life-giving resources. Risk to geopolitical stability. And\ncertainly, man-made limits to prosperity -- most painfully reflected\nin the hollow eyes of hungry children and their prospects for\nsurvival.\nIf developed nations ignore the growth needs of\ndeveloping nations it will imperil us all. We know that even small\nchanges in GNP growth rate often threaten adequate shelter, food, and\nhealth care for millions and millions of people. And to bear this in\nmind is no barrier to action. Those who have ascended the economic\nhill must break down the barriers to progress and assist others now\nmaking the climb. But this will only be possible if the nations of\nthe world are linked in partnerships of every kind: scientific,\neconomic, technical, agricultural, environmental.\nPollution is not, as we once believed, the inevitable\nby-product of progress. True global stewardship will be achieved not\nby seeking limits to growth, which are contrary to human nature, but\nby achieving environmental protection through more informed, more\nefficient, and cleaner growth.\nThose who value environmental quality the most, should be\nthe most ardent supporters of strategies that tap the power of free\nwills and free markets; strategies that turn human nature to\nenvironmental advantage. Equally, those who value economic\ndevelopment most highly should be the most ardent defenders of the\nenvironment, which provides the basis for a healthy economy.\nEfficient strategies are the only realistic hope for developing\nnations to save themselves from the mistakes that developed nations\nhave already made.\nAnd we have made mistakes. But over the past century,\nwe've made tremendous progress in this country, especially in the\nlast 20 years. In the United States, automotive emission controls\nhave brought about a new generation of cars that emit only four\npercent as much pollution as the typical 1970 model. We've cut\nairborne particulates by 60 percent, carbon monoxide by about 40\npercent, cut sulfur emissions, and virtually eliminated lead from the\nair -- all during a period of population growth and economic\nexpansion. And now we want to share that knowledge -- our\ntechnologies, new processes, and pollution prevention techniques --\nwith the developing world.\nTwo decades ago, America -- holding to its birthright of\nfree expression -- was home to a movement symbolized by Earth Day.\nIt motivated President Nixon to sign into law a national policy to\nencourage productive and enjoyable harmony between man and the\nenvironment. And it set in motion a new sense of conscience that a\nfew idealists hoped would change the world.\nAnd it did. What began as an isolated American movement\n20 years ago is now shared by over 130 countries on seven continents.\nAnd while many thought this experiment in environmental protection\nwould prove impossible, that you couldn't maintain both a productive\neconomy and a healthy environment, we've learned that economic\nprosperity and environmental protection go hand in hand. And we've\nlearned that worldwide, united action is essential and possible, as\nthe Montreal Protocol proved.\nAmerica and other nations must now extend an offered hand\nto emerging democracies in Eastern Europe and to developing societies\naround the world. In some, the raging fires of forests and\ngrasslands burned for compelling but devastating economic reasons\nhave been visible to astronauts in space. Other nations, in the\nstruggle to support life, have been virtually stripped of the\nresources that sustain life.\n- ;\nAnd in Eastern Europe, whether through the tyranny of\nneglect or the neglect of tyrants, pollution has been unveiled as one\nof the Old World's cruelest dictators; an oppressor. Not man, but\nman-made.\nIn the majestic city of Krakow, that I visited a couple\nof years ago, monuments to great men, statues that survived countless\ninvasions by kings and emperors, by Hitler and by Stalin, have been\ndefaced by pollution; their medieval majesty reduced to shapeloss\nlumps of stone.\nIf mankind's greatest creations cannot equal God's\nsmallest, some may grieve that our greatest destruction is turned at\ntimes upon ourselves.\nLet us neither grieve nor quarrel, but act on what we\nknow can help, and act in good faith. Our challenge is global\nstewardship. To work together to find long-term strategies that will\nmeet the needs of the entire world, and all therein.\nOur convictions, and my sincere belief, is that\nenvironmental protection and economic growth, well-managed,\ncomplement one another. And that we can serve this generation while\npreserving the Earth for the next and all that follow. It is an\nuncommon opportunity we share. And so let us seize the moment. And\ntogether, we will succeed.\nThank you for what, I believe, is a significant\ncontribution to environmental progress in the world. Thank you for\ncoming our way. Thank you very much. (Applause.)\nEND\n2:50 P.M. EDT\nApril 16, 1990\nDear Delegate :\nI am pleased to welcome you- as a delegate to the White\nHouse Conference on Science and Economics Research Related\nto Global Change. Many members of my Cabinet will be\nparticipating with you during this important meeting,\nand I have asked the principal White House advisers for\nscience, economics, and the environment to serve as the\nco-chairs of the Conference. This unique integration\nof the major elements of my Administration is evidence\nof the U.S. desire to encourage the international dialogue\non global change research. I am happy that you have\naccepted my invitation to join us.\nI believe in the importance of exploring more fully the\nrelationship that exists between the science and economic\ndisciplines as they relate to the environment. Our hope\nis that this Conference will lead to increased\ninternational cooperation and partnership in global change\nresearch. In addition, we hope the Conference will\ncomplement ongoing international efforts, such as those\nof the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, in\ndeveloping an agenda for the future.\nBecause global change research is an important area of\nfocus for my Administration, I have committed to a budget\nof over one billion dollars for a program of global change\nresearch for fiscal year 1991. I anticipate that you\nwill receive an overview of our program during the\nConference.\nI hope your distinguished delegation will find this meeting\nto be an important step toward global stewardship of our\nearth's natural resources. The co-chairs and I look\nforward to a successful Conference.\nSincerely,\nQUESTIONS AND ANSWERS\nQ. WHY HAS CHINA NOT BEEN INVITED TO THE GLOBAL CHANGE CONFERENCE?\nWE HAVE SEEN A CABLE SENT OUT BY THE U.S. TO ITS EMBASSIES\nINDICATING \"DELETE CHINA.\" WHY WAS THIS DONE?\nA. We are still in a sensitive period in our relations with China.\nThe internal situation there remains unsatisfactory, but we are\nseeing signs that the President's policy is working. Invitations\nto the Global Change conference were made in light of that policy.\nThe cable language reflects a clerical error.\nQ. IS THERE A RIFT WITHIN THE ADMINISTRATION ON THE GLOBAL CHANGE\nISSUE? DIDN'T WHITE HOUSE CHIEF OF STAFF SUNUNU CHANGE THE\nPRESIDENT'S RECENT SPEECH ON THE ENVIRONMENT TO \"WATER DOWN\"\nPOSITIONS PREVIOUSLY AGREED TO WITHIN THE ADMINISTRATION?\nA. There is no rift within the Administration. The Chief of Staff\nand involved agency and departmental heads, including William\nReilly of EPA and Admiral James Watkins of DOE participated in the\ndevelopment of the strong environmental position reflected in the\nPresident's speech before the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate\nChange. This involved significant discussions on the staff level\nwhere one should expect varying viewpoints to be aired. The\nAdministration stands solidly behind the policies and perspectives\noutlined in the President's remarks.\nQ. DOES THE WHITE HOUSE CONSIDER THIS CONFERENCE IMPORTANT? IF so,\nWHY IS THERE SO LITTLE ADVANCE INFORMATION AVAILABLE ON THE AGENDA\nAND SPECIAL SESSIONS? ARE YOU ENCOURAGING MEDIA COVERAGE?\nA. Yes, this conference is very important to the Administration.\nThe President formalized his idea for this conference during his\nSummit meetings with President Gorbachev on December 4, 1989, and\nlater, on Monday, February 5, 1990, during his speech to the United\nNations Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change. The agenda is\nreceiving priority attention within the Administration to assure\nthat the proceedings reflect our most current understandings\nregarding the climate change issue. Information on the agenda,\nworking group sessions, and opportunities for news media coverage\nwill be provided shortly.\nQ.\nWILL THIS CONFERENCE RESULT IN A RECOMMENDATION FOR LONG-TERM\nGOALS TO MEET CHALLENGES SUCH AS HOW THE MAJOR SECTORS OF THE U.S.\nECONOMY--MANUFACTURING AGRICULTURE, TRANSPORTATION, HOUSING AND\nENERGY CAN BE REDESIGNED IN THE FUTURE SO THAT ECONOMIC CONCERNS\nDO NOT DESTROY NATIONAL AND GLOBAL ENVIRONMENTS?\nA. The results of the conference will help the U.S. and\nrepresentatives to the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change\n(IPCC) and other international global change meetings and forums,\nby providing information on issues relating to global change that\nhave never been addressed. The topics will include: uncertain\nchange, the research challenges of science and economics;\nintegrating science and economic research in the policy process;\nand building international partnerships for science and economic\nresearch.\nQ. WILL THIS CONFERENCE SERVE TO PROVIDE THE GROUNDWORK FOR NEW,\nCOMPREHENSIVE LEGISLATION THAT WOULD CONTAIN THE FINDINGS OF THE\nCONFERENCE REGARDING THE NATURE AND SERIOUSNESS OF THE PRINCIPAL\nINTERNATIONAL ENVIRONMENTAL THREATS?\nA. No, the conference was designed to bring together, for the\nfirst time, the disciplines of science and economic research\nrelated to global change. While this debate will lay the\ngroundwork for future discussions, it is not intended to draft\nlegislative proposals.\nQ. DOES THE ADMINISTRATION HAVE A POSITION ON SEN. LEAHY'S\nPROPOSAL TO ESTABLISH AN OFFICE OF CLIMATE CHANGE IN USDA TO\nCOORDINATE EFFORTS, SHARE INFORMATION AND HELP RESEARCH THE\nVIABILITY OF TEMPERATURE AND DROUGHT-RESISTANT PLANT STRAINS?\nA. Not at this time. The President has just submitted a budget\nfor Fiscal Year 1991. It includes over $2 billion in new spending\nto protect the environment. Further, fund ing for the U.S. Global\nChange Research Program will increase by nearly 60 percent, to over\n$1 billion. The President's commitment, by far the largest ever\nmade by any nation, reflects the administration's determination to\nincrease our understanding of the science of climate change. We\ndo not believe this is the time to establish a new federal office.\nQ. WILL THIS CONFERENCE ALLOW THE UNITED STATES TO LAUNCH A\nMULTI-PRONGED EFFORT TO MAKE EXPERTISE, TECHNOLOGY AND RESOURCES\nAVAILABLE TO HELP REVERSE THE RESOURCE DETERIORATION THAT IS\nUNDERMINING DEVELOPMENT PROSPECTS IN THE THIRD WORLD?\nA. Yes, this conference will reinforce and complement the\nimportant work of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change\n(IPCC). The President strongly believes the U.S. must do\neverything in our power to promote global cooperation, for\nenvironmental protection, economic growth, and for sustainable and\nenvironmentally sensitive development around the world. Economic\ngrowth and environmental integrity need not be contradictory\npriorities.\nQ. NOW THAT THE BUSH ADMINISTRATION HAS RECOGNIZED THE GLOBAL\nCHANGE PROBLEM, IS THE ADMINISTRATION WILLING TO REVIEW ALL U.S.\nDEVELOPMENT ASSISTANCE, TRADE AND TAX POLICY, AND THIRD WORLD DEBT\nWITH AN EYE ON HOW THEY CAN STOP THE DESTRUCTION OF THE WORLD'S\nREMAINING TROPICAL FORESTS AND THE EXTINCTION OF COUNTLESS PLANT\nAND ANIMAL SPECIES?\nA. Yes, for example, the Administration is constantly working\nthrough diplomatic channels for innovative measures like debt-for-\nnature swaps, to not only reduce global deforestation, but to\nreverse it. President Bush is looking toward options from a more\nscientific-oriented approach rather than an approach that could\nlead to an economic disaster. The President has said where there\nis economic strength, environmental protection is possible. But\nwhere there is poverty, the competition for resources gets much\ntougher. Therefore, President Bush strongly encourages an orderly,\ndisciplined and rational approach to reconcile environmental\nprotection with economic development without compromising either.\nQ. WHEN WILL THE ADMINISTRATION PROVIDE A CLEAR MANDATE TO ALL\nGOVERNMENT AGENCIES TO ASSURE THAT ALL GOVERNMENT PROGRAMS GIVE\nPRIORITY ATTENTION TO GLOBAL ENVIRONMENTAL CONCERNS?\nA. President Bush believes that we should make use of what we\nknow. But in many cases we don't know what the economic\nramifications are, nor do we know whether the science is there to\nsupport it. The Administration wants to do it right, and to be\naggressive, but we do not want to encourage actions that are more\npolitically driven than those derived from logical debate. The\nPresident's budget commitment is the largest ever made by any\nnation and reflects our determination to improve our understanding\nof the science of climate change.\nQ. SINCE THIS CONFERENCE WILL COMBINE THE SCIENTIFIC, ECONOMIC\nAND ENVIRONMENTAL ISSUES, IS THE ADMINISTRATION LOOKING FOR NEW\nWAYS TO ALLOW FREE MARKET INCENTIVES TO HELP REDUCE POLLUTION THAT\nAFFECTS THE GLOBAL CLIMATE, SUCH AS EMISSIONS TRADING AND POLLUTION\nTAXES?\nA. The President has said his goal is to create policy and\nagreements on action with the most creative and effective\napproaches. Whenever possible, we believe that market mechanisms\nshould be applied and that our policies must be consistent with\neconomic growth and free market principles in all countries. But\nmeasures such as the taxes tend to raise a lot of expectation\nwithout an proper analysis or preparation. Further, we believe it\nwould be extremely expensive for the country, on top of all the\nthings we're trying to do with child care and clean air.\nQ. IN THAT SAME VEIN, THE VARIOUS FEDERAL SUBSIDIES TEND TO\nRESULT IN GROSS UNDER-INVESTMENT IN LOWER COST EFFICIENCY OPTIONS.\nFOR EXAMPLE, OF THE MORE THAN $40 BILLION IN FEDERAL ENERGY\nSUBSIDIES, LESS THAN ONE PERCENT GOES TO ENERGY EFFICIENCY. WILL\nPRESIDENT BUSH CALL UPON THE CHAIRS OF THE CONFERENCE TO REVIEW\nSUCH SUBSIDIES?\nA. No, however, we continue to work on a new comprehensive review\nand revision of our National Energy Strategy, with initiatives to\nincrease energy efficiency and the use of renewable sources. These\nefforts are at the heart of a $336 million Department of Energy\nprogram and are expected to produce energy savings through the year\n2000 of over $30 billion - while achieving significant pollution\nreduction.\nQ. PRESIDENT BUSH HAS OSCILLATED BETWEEN A STRONGLY\nENVIRONMENTALIST POSITION AND A MORE TRADITIONAL BUSINESS-ORIENTED\nVIEW. SINCE MOST OBSERVERS BELIEVE THAT THE BUSINESS AND CORPORATE\nCOMMUNITY IS BECOMING MORE AND MORE GLOBAL IN NATURE, SHOULD THEY\nHAVE BEEN INCLUDED IN THE CONFERENCE?\nA. This conference was designed to help the U.S. and other\nnations by providing information on research issues relating to\nglobal change that have not received such high level international\nfocus.\nHowever, with regard to industry, the President knows that it\nis important not to work in conflict but with our industrial\nsectors. That means moving beyond the practice of command, control\nand compliance and toward a new kind of environmental cooperation -\n- toward an emphasis on pollution prevention, rather than mere\nmitigation and litigation.\nQ. DOES THE TIMING OF THE CONFERENCE COINCIDE WITH BUDGET AND\nAPPROPRIATION REQUESTS IN CONGRESS FOR PERTINENT AGENCIES SUCH AS\nNOAA, NASA AND EPA?\nA. No, the President submitted his budget in late January. It\nincludes over $2 billion in new spending to protect the\nenvironment. The program will allow NASA and her sister agencies\nand all our international partners to move forward with the\n\"Mission to Planet Earth\". That will initiate the U.S. Earth\nObserving System in cooperation with Europe and Japan, to advance\nthe state of knowledge about the planet we share.\nQ. WORKING GROUP I OF THE IPCC ISSUED A DRAFT EXECUTIVE SUMMARY\nFOLLOWING ITS MARCH MEETING, WHICH MADE SOME CONSENSUS SCIENTIFIC\nCONCLUSIONS, INCLUDING PREDICTIONS OF FAIRLY SUBSTANTIAL GREENHOUSE\nWARMING BY THE YEAR 2020, ALONG WITH GLOBAL PRECIPITATION AND\nEVAPORATION INCREASES OF 3 PERCENT. THE IPCC SUMMARY ESTIMATES\nTHAT BY 2070, GLOBAL TEMPERATURE INCREASE WILL BE A \"BEST ESTIMATE\"\nOF 3.5 DEGREES C HIGHER AND PRECIPITATION WILL BE 7% GREATER. THE\nSUMMARY ALSO PREDICTS THAT AREAS OF SNOW AND SEA ICE COVER WILL BE\nSMALLER. WHAT IS YOUR REACTION TO THE IPCC SUMMARY STATEMENT?\nA. The conclusions are preliminary and are contained in a draft\nexecutive summary. They are currently being reviewed by hundreds\nof scientists around the world. The IPCC plans to adopt a\nconsensus assessment report in late August of this year that will\nbe presented to the United Nations Environment Program and the\nWorld Meteorological Organization in the Fall.\nThe White House Conference on Science and Economics Research\nRelated to Global Change seeks to explore in more depth the\nintegration of science and economic research in the policy process\nwhile attempting to build international partnerships for science\nand economic research.\nPlenary Tuesday\nThe President's\nWhite House Conference\nOn\nScience & Economics Research\nSalon 2\nSalon 3\nSalon 4\nRelated to Global Change\nSalon 1\n*****\nT- Screen\nApril 17-18, 1990\nReporter\n&\nX\nButter\nWhite House Staff\nJW Marriott Hotel\nMicrophone\nWashington, DC\n0\nII\nProjection\nirs\nSetup for Plenary\nTuesday\nby: Robert Yates\n& Associates, Inc\nScale: 1/8\"=1\"\nInterpreter's Booths\nInterpreter's Booths\nApril 10, 1990\nhterpreter's Booths\nActive Booths\nSound Board\nfor Plenary Sessions\n0\n10'\n20'\n30'\nPlenary Wednesday\nThe President's\nWhite House Conference\nOn\nScience & Economics Research\nSalon 1\nSalon 2\nSalon 3\nSalon 4\nRelated to Global Change\nXXXXX\nTx7 Screen\nReporter\nAND\nX\nA\nApril 17-18, 1990\nButter\nWhite House Staff\nJW Marriott I totel\nMorophones\nWashington, DC\nΦ\nProjection\nirs\nSetup for Plenary\nWednesday\nby: Robert Yates\n& Associates, Inc\nFrain\nScale: 1/8\"=1'\nhterpreter's Booths\nInterpreter's Booths\nInterpreter's Booths\nApril 10, 1990\nActive Booths\nSound Board\nfor Plenary Sessions\n0\n10\n20\n30'\nBreak outs\nThe President's\nWhite House Conference\nOn\nScience & Economics Research\nSalon 1\nSalon 2\nSalon 3\nSalon 4\nRelated to Global Change\n******\n@@@@\nXXXXX\nTx Screen\nTxT Screen\n7x Screen\nMorophone\n&\nMicrophone\nHOW\nMicrophone\nApril 17-18, 1990\nPeporter\nReporter\nHaporter\n(D\n0\n-\n0\nButter\nJW Marriott Hotel\nWashington, DC\nProjection\nProjection\nProjection\nSetup for Breakouts\nby Robert Yates\n& Associates, Inc\nPress Platform\nScale 1/8\"=1'\n24°\nhterpreter's Booths\nInterpreter's Booths\nInterpreter's Booths\nApril 10, 1990\n0\n10'\n20'\n30'"
}