This study offered an independent peer review for a synthetic document being produced for the CCSP. It found the draft document to be in a fairly early stage of development and noted several issues needing attention in the revision. The draft was inconsistent across sections with respect to whether or not it accepted two assumptions: that more skillful forecasts necessarily have greater value, and that the most useful form of information is a projected future value of an outcome parameter with an uncertainty distribution. Available scientific evidence gives reason to question these assumptions, and the draft did not discuss the evidence. Among other issues needing attention, the review called for the revised draft to do more to substantiate its claims of the potential benefits of knowledge-action networks and to give more careful consideration to the appropriate balance of roles between governmental and private efforts.

This study offered an independent peer review for a synthetic document being produced for the CCSP. It found the draft document to be in a fairly early stage of development and noted several issues needing attention in the revision. The draft was inconsistent across sections with respect to whether or not it accepted two assumptions: that more skillful forecasts necessarily have greater value, and that the most useful form of information is a projected future value of an outcome parameter with an uncertainty distribution. Available scientific evidence gives reason to question these assumptions, and the draft did not discuss the evidence. Among other issues needing attention, the review called for the revised draft to do more to substantiate its claims of the potential benefits of knowledge-action networks and to give more careful consideration to the appropriate balance of roles between governmental and private efforts.

This report reviews the U.S. Climate Change Science Program's new draft assessment product on characterizing and communicating uncertainty information for climate change decision making, one of 21 climate change assessment products that the program is developing to meet the requirements of the 1990 Global Change Research Act. Although the draft assessment is effective in discussing methods of characterizing uncertainty, it falls short in several ways. It is written for researchers involved in assessment efforts and will likely be of use to them, but does not address other key audiences, particularly policymakers, decision-makers, and members of the media and general public. In addition, it does not assess the full range of "best practice approaches" for characterizing, incorporating, and communicating uncertainty. These weaknesses were due in part to a change in the prospectus after the process had begun to include new target audiences and a different scope of work. It will take a substantial revision of the current draft or production of a companion document, both requiring additional authors, to address these issues.

The U.S. Climate Change Science Program is in the process of producing 21 draft assessments that investigate changes in the Earth's climate and related systems. These assessments are designed to inform decisionmakers about the scientific underpinnings of a range of environmental issues, such as stratospheric ozone. This National Research Council report reviews one of these assessments, Synthesis and Assessment Product (SAP) 2.4, Trends in Emissions of Ozone Depletion Substances, Ozone Layer Recovery, and Implications for Ultraviolet Radiation Exposure. This assessment is noted as being the first-ever attempt to look at the United States contribution to ozone-depleting substances and ozone recovery. This National Research Council book commends the assessment's authoring team for comprehensively covering the scientific basis of ozone and ozone-depleting substances, but recommends several ways that the assessment could be improved. Suggestions include clarifying the discussion on climate effects of ozone and revising the approach to estimating U.S. contributions to production, consumption, and emission of ozone-depleting substances. The assessment could also be improved by reorganizing and editing to accommodate intended audiences.

The U.S. Climate Change Science Program (CCSP), established in 2002 to coordinate climate and global change research conducted in the United States and to support decision-making on climate-related issues, is producing twenty-one synthesis and assessment reports that address its research, observation, and decision-support needs. The first report, produced by the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) in coordination with other agencies, focuses on understanding reported differences between independently produced data sets of temperature trends for the surface through the lower stratosphere and comparing these data sets to model simulations. To ensure credibility and quality, NOAA asked the National Research Council to conduct an independent review of the report. The committee concluded that the report Temperature Trends in the Lower Atmosphere: Understanding and Reconciling Differences is a good first draft that covers an appropriate range of issues, but that it could be strengthened in a number of ways.