The university at the centre of a climate change row today appointed a former civil servant to head an inquiry into claims of misconduct by its scientists.
Sir Muir Russell, chairman of the Judicial Appointments Board for Scotland, who has no previous links with the climate science community, will lead the investigation into allegations that leading academics at the University of East Anglia mainipulated data on global warming.
He will also look at whether the university’s Climate Research Unit (CRU) was in compliance with its Freedom of Information (FOI) policies and the Environmental Information Regulations for the release of data.
Professor Phil Jones, director of the CRU, on Tuesday that he would stand down for the duration of the inquiry.
The controversy was sparked by the publication of hacked e-mails between Professor Jones and other scientists, which sceptics claim were evidence that data was manipulated and alternative views suppressed.
Advertisement
Sir Muir said today: “Given the nature of the allegations it is right that someone who has no links to either the university or the climate science community looks at the evidence and makes recommendations based on what they find.”
Announcing the review, Professor Edward Acton, the UEA vice-chancellor, said: “The reputation and integrity of UEA is of the upmost importance to us all. We want these allegations about CRU to be examined fully and independently.”
Benny Peiser, director of the “sceptic” thinktank the Global Warming Policy Foundation, welcomed the choice of Sir Muir, saying that it was essential that the university chose someone without connections to the climate science community.
“We’re not giving the inquiry a blank cheque, we will be monitoring it very carefully,” he said. “If the inquiry is done properly and the scientists are cleared we welcome their restoration into their jobs.”
Bob Ward, policy and communications director at the Grantham Research Institute on Climate Change and the Environment at London School of Economics, welcomed Sir Muir’s appointment and the terms of reference of the inquiry.
Advertisement
However, he said that the anticipated spring 2010 publication date was a concern. “This is probably necessary to allow a thorough investigation, but it does mean that those who are using ‘climategate’ as a propaganda tool for their own political ends might be able to enjoy many more weeks of mischief-making,” he said.
Kevin Trenberth, a senior climate scientist at the US National Centre for Atmospheric Research, whose correspondence with Professor Jones was among the e-mails posted online, questioned the justification for the inquiry.
“Phil Jones and CRU are being punished and subjected to tremendous harassment stemming from illegal acts of others. Where is the counterpoint about the misrepresentation and downright lies about Jones and CRU, and who is going after those people?”
Dr Trenberth said that no matter what the outcome of the inquiry, the affair had been deeply damaging for the public perception of climate science. “From the recent vote in Australia, to statements from the Saudi rep about how he will use this to block things in Copenhagen,” he said. “Politicians have to be strong and bold to go against their voters, and the political will is diminished by this.”
The inquiry will also make recommendations on appropriate data management and security for CRU.