* Next US Administration has to define a plan for climate change
  * Quickly
  * Has to get it right
* Traditional way: convene high-level commission to make recommendation after N days
  * Then Pres. tries to sell to public/internationally
  * Experience with that is not great
* Better options given modern electronic/social technology?
* Analogy: crowdsourcing patent checking
  * Need to bring it to the public: can you do something?
* But: will local community action be enough?  Will it have an impact?
  * Will not get 80% C reduction by 2050
  * Maybe this one _has_ to go top-down
* How many have taken part in political campaigns?
  * 1/6
* Signaling mechanism: environmental futures market
  * Ex: Iowa Electronic Markets (http://www.biz.uiowa.edu/iem/)
  * Lloyds already does this
  * A principal value of markets is to reveal information to the public
* Top-down vs. bottom-up: each has strengths and weaknesses
  * Bottom-up avoids bottleneck of forming gov't policy: lots of ideas in parallel
* Instance of blatant heightism
* There isn't going to be "one thing" that brings about the reduction
  * No one strategy meets 80% by 2050
  * Ex: local community groups saving cute little bandicoots in Australia
* Political will: bottom-up to build support for larger (top-down?) policies
* Politics of climate change: data is not widely trusted or understood
  * Make progress there?
* Climate change actually low on next Admin's priority list
  * Scientists do a terrible job of scaring the public
  * People treat IGCC report as end result
  * Montreal Treaty on CFCs is positive example
* Next President has ~1 year to choose carbon tax, cap'n'trade, or XXX (unknown)
  * Ditto for Canada
  * How can public participation help facilitate that decision?
* What can we as a group with special skills offer to these problems?
* Structure is fixed: 12-person committee, proposal, pretence at consultation, boo
  * Not an academic question in this case...
* U of Oregon allows new faculty to choose 25/50/75% research/teaching
  * Can public engagement be added to the list?
  * E.g., NIH requires public communication for grant renewal
  * Use top-down mandate to drive bottom-up experiments
* AIP funds fellowships: scientists as advisers
  * E.g. Norm Neureiter as first science adviser to State Dept.
  * Run on a shoestring with AAAS --- expand?
  * UK wrinkle: "Take a Scientist to Work" Day
* Set of 10% solutions that might be effective
  * Overlaps with the set of solutions that might get political support
* Historical disanalogy (is that a real word?)
  * Widespread fear of nuclear weapons after WW2
  * Low-level scientists/engineers formed a lobby group
  * Why (doesn't) that model hold?
  * Counter-example to disanalogy: realclimate.org
  * Counter-counter-argument: not enough horrible photos yet
* Want something that isn't a traditional committee, but needs to have official sanction
* Would you want science advisory boards to have to engage in their own consultative process?
  * Yes, if you want an answer that is transparent and credible
* If you need an answer quickly, and it has to have community support, and it has to be sensible and coherent, offer high-profile prize for essay on best response to climate change
  * Counter-argument: sceptics will say the game is rigged
* Ditto for examples (e.g. island in Denmark)
  * Scalability?
* Example of First Gulf War: hearings, debate, open decision making, public vote
  * Q: how to get it high enough up the agenda to focus attention of Congress?
* George Monbiot: get people to organize their own plebiscite
  * Counter-example: California's Proposition 13
* Town halls, etc., will now be interactive instead of one-way
  * Prime Minister's question time on the net
  * National Academies as the League of Women Voters
* Is any of this stuff great at generating plans or shifting opinions?
  * Crowdsourcing is better at filtering large quantities of information
  * E.g. Dover Creationism trial
  * Can filtering be applied to climate change problems?
  * E.g. beefing up EPA directives (look for loopholes, post all data, etc.)
* Do we have to separate "science advisory" from "political"
  * State institutions' employees can't engage in political activity on paid time
* Back to crowdsourcing: presupposes someone can frame the question
  * How you frame the question shapes the answer you get
* Peer-to-patent didn't attract crowds, it attracted teams (micro-elites of 6-12 people)
  * Create communities of practice within government around specific questions
* Problem with most attempts to achieve small expert communities is that scientists don't contribute
* There are processes by which large experimental collaborations agree to publish a paper
  * Can climate scientists borrow those social techniques?
* "We are science... we will be in a position to make decisions about hiring, tenure, etc."
  * Make the case for the incentives you'd like to see
* Visibility is what's missing: in campaigns, in community, etc.
* If a university consortium was started to give advice, would faculty volunteer?
  * Many would
* System has to be engineered to survive a hostile administration