date: Mon Oct 18 21:01:29 1999
from: Mike Hulme <m.hulme@uea.ac.uk>
subject: Re: peer-review
to: Adam Markham <Adam.Markham@WWFUS.ORG>

Adam,

See answers below ...........

At 11:01 18/10/99 -0400, you wrote:
>Starting to get questions from journalists. To wit:
>
>1. Is this research/study, are these scenarios being published in a
>journal.

No, not as such.  All the component parts to the scenarios (observed data, simple model, GCM results, etc.) have been previously published.  The SRES emissions scenarios are on a public domain web site.  What is new is the linking of these pieces together in this way.  The approach has been used in a current CC assessment for the European Union (called ACACIA) and this will be published in due course.

>
>2. Have these scenarios been peer-reviewed.
>

Not formally, but several colleagues have informally commented on the method and the presentation (Pittock from Australia, Carter from Finland, Barrow from Canada, Arnell from UK).  And my approach comes out of years of working in this field.

I do not want to say this (and please do not say it either), but the approach used here is quite similar to one that Tim Carter and I have used to characterise the SRES emissions scenarios for IPCC WGII - but this has *not* yet been peer-reviewed so *DO NOT* use the IPCC word in this context - please!!!!


>What's the most helpful response you can give to these (my answer so
>far is" no" to number 1 and "no, but" to number two.
>
>Adam
>