Embracing uncertainty in climate change policy

Article metrics


The 'pledge and review' approach to reducing greenhouse-gas emissions presents an opportunity to link mitigation goals explicitly to the evolving climate response. This seems desirable because the progression from the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change's fourth to fifth assessment reports has seen little reduction in uncertainty. A common reaction to persistent uncertainties is to advocate mitigation policies that are robust even under worst-case scenarios, thereby focusing attention on upper extremes of both the climate response and the costs of impacts and mitigation, all of which are highly contestable. Here we ask whether those contributing to the formation of climate policies can learn from 'adaptive management' techniques. Recognizing that long-lived greenhouse gas emissions have to be net zero by the time temperatures reach a target stabilization level, such as 2 °C above pre-industrial levels, and anchoring commitments to an agreed index of attributable anthropogenic warming would provide a transparent approach to meeting such a temperature goal without prior consensus on the climate response.

Access options

Rent or Buy article

Get time limited or full article access on ReadCube.


All prices are NET prices.

Figure 1: An index of anthropogenic warming.


  1. 1

    Schelling, T. Some economics of global warming. Am. Econ. Rev. 82, 1–14 (1992).

  2. 2

    Barrett, S. The theory of international environmental agreements. Handbook Environ. Econ. 3, 1457–1516 (2005).

  3. 3

    Victor, D. G. Plan B for Copenhagen. Nature 461, 342–344 (2009).

  4. 4

    Pierson, P. The limits of design: explaining institutional origins and change. Governance 13, 475–499 (2000).

  5. 5

    Levin, K., Cashore, B., Berstein, S. & Auld, G. Overcoming the tragedy of super wicked problems: constraining our future selves to ameliorate global climate change Policy Sci. 45, 123–152 (2012).

  6. 6

    Weaver, K. Automatic Government (Brookings Institute, 1986).

  7. 7

    Patashnik, P. Reforms at Risk (Princeton Univ. Press, 2008).

  8. 8

    Holling, C. S. Adaptive Environmental Assessment and Management (Wiley, 1978).

  9. 9

    Taleb, N. N. Antifragile: Things That Gain From Disorder (Pengiun, 2012).

  10. 10

    United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UN, 1992); https://unfccc.int/files/essential_background/background_publications_htmlpdf/application/pdf/conveng.pdf.

  11. 11

    Stern, N. The structure of economic modeling of the potential impacts of climate change: grafting gross underestimation of risk onto already narrow science models. J. Econ. Lit. 51, 838–859 (2013).

  12. 12

    Schneider, S. H. & Mastrandrea, M. D. Probabilistic assessment of “dangerous” climate change and emissions pathways. Proc. Natl Acad. Sci. USA 102, 15728–15735 (2005).

  13. 13

    UNFCCC The Cancun Agreements http://cancun.unfccc.int/ (2010).

  14. 14

    Meinshausen, M. et al. Greenhouse-gas emission targets for limiting global warming to 2 °C. Nature 458, 1158–1162 (2009).

  15. 15

    Rogelj, J. et al. Emission pathways consistent with a 2 °C global temperature limit. Nature Clim. Change 1, 413–418 (2011).

  16. 16

    German Advisory Council on Global Change Solving the Climate Dilemma: The Budget Approach (WBGU, 2009).

  17. 17

    IPCC Climate Change 2013: The Physical Science Basis. (eds. Stocker, T. F. et al.) (Cambridge Univ. Press, 2013).

  18. 18

    UNFCCC The Lima Decision https://unfccc.int/files/meetings/lima_dec_2014/application/pdf/auv_cop20_lima_call_for_climate_action.pdf (2015).

  19. 19

    Weitzman, M. GHG targets as insurance against catastrophic climate damages. J. Public Econ. Theory 14, 221–244 (2012).

  20. 20

    Victor, D. G. & Kennel, C. F. Climate policy: ditch the 2 °C warming goal. Nature 514, 30–31 (2014).

  21. 21

    Jordan, A. et al. Going beyond two degrees? The risks and opportunities of alternative options. Clim. Policy 13, 751–769 (2013).

  22. 22

    Aldrin, M. et al. Bayesian estimation of climate sensitivity based on a simple climate model fitted to observations of hemispheric temperatures and global ocean heat content. Environmetrics 23, 253–271 (2012).

  23. 23

    Otto, A. et al. Energy budget constraints on climate response. Nature Geosci. 6, 415–416 (2013).

  24. 24

    Williams, B. K. Adaptive management of natural resources — framework and issues. J. Environ. Manage. 92, 1346–1353 (2011).

  25. 25

    Delta Programme 2015. Working on the Delta: The Decisions to Keep the Netherlands Safe and Liveable (Ministry of Infrastructure and the Environment, 2014).

  26. 26

    McKitrick, R. A simple state-contingent pricing rule for complex intertemporal externalities. Energ. Econ. 33, 111–120 (2011).

  27. 27

    Leach, A. J. The climate change learning curve. J. Econ. Dyn. Control, 31, 1728–1752 (2007).

  28. 28

    Hasselmann, K. Multi-pattern fingerprint method for detection and attribution of climate change. Clim. Dyn. 13, 601–611 (1997).

  29. 29

    Boucher, O. & Reddy, M. Climate trade-off between black carbon and carbon dioxide emissions. Energ. Policy, 36, 193–200 (2008).

  30. 30

    Myhre, G. et al. in Climate Change 2013: The Physical Science Basis (eds Stocker, T. F. et al.) Ch. 8 (Cambridge Univ. Press, 2013).

  31. 31

    Lazarus, R. Super wicked problems and climate change: restraining the present to liberate the future. Cornell Law Rev. 94, 1153–1233 (2009).

  32. 32

    Allen, M. R., Frame, D. J. & Mason, C. F. The case for mandatory sequestration. Nature Geosci. 2, 813–814 (2009).

  33. 33

    Morice, C. P., Kennedy, J. J., Rayner, N. A. & Jones, P. D. Quantifying uncertainties in global and regional temperature change using an ensemble of observational estimates: The HadCRUT4 data set. J. Geophys. Res. Atmos, 117, D08101 (2012).

  34. 34

    Meinshausen, M. et al. The RCP greenhouse gas concentration and their extensions from 1765 to 2300. Climatic Change, 109, 213–241 (2011).

  35. 35

    Boucher, O. & Reddy, M. Climate trade-off between black carbon and carbon dioxide emissions. Energy Policy 36, 193–200 (2008).

  36. 36

    Myhre, G. et al. in Climate Change 2013: The Physical Science Basis (eds Stocker, T. F. et al.) Ch. 8 (IPCC, Cambridge Univ. Press, 2013).

Download references


Myles Allen was supported by the Oxford Martin School.

Author information

All authors contributed extensively to the writing of the paper.

Correspondence to Friederike E. L. Otto.

Ethics declarations

Competing interests

The authors declare no competing financial interests.

Supplementary information

Supplementary Information

Supplementary information (XLSX 487 kb)

Rights and permissions

Reprints and Permissions

About this article

Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Otto, F., Frame, D., Otto, A. et al. Embracing uncertainty in climate change policy. Nature Clim Change 5, 917–920 (2015) doi:10.1038/nclimate2716

Download citation

Further reading