IG research reveals contradictions and implications in the context of the process
The scientific practice of climate modeling has become central in recent decades, influenced by the scenario of changes in the planet's climate and environment. But developing computational models that allow daily forecasts, such as those on television news, or even long-term forecasts, require cutting-edge infrastructure and strong scientific capacity. For researcher Jean Carlos Hochsprung Miguel, who studied the topic at Unicamp, few research centers in the world have the capacity to represent atmospheric processes in computer models. This is the case, according to him, of National Institute for Space Research (INPE).
“With the development of computational models and focusing on this type of science, INPE has become a protagonist in research networks on climate change in Brazil. The institute received more resources, with which it was possible to build centers for studying climate change. At the moment, INPE aims to be part of the select group of global research centers that develop climate models”, points out the researcher.
Jean Miguel recently defended his doctoral thesis on the policies and infrastructures of atmospheric sciences, developing a case study on INPE. At work, he investigated how climate models became central tools in meteorological research and operations networks and in national science and climate policy. Conducted together with the Department of Scientific and Technological Policy (DPCT) of the Institute of Geosciences (IG), the research was guided by the professor Marko Synésio Alves Monteiro.
Global governance networks
The researcher states that INPE passed on to exercise greater hierarchy on climate issues graces to the production of knowledge around of modeling. He adds that o Brazilian institute achieved not only scientific but also political performance in climate networks. With INPE, for example, Brazil was the first of the emerging countries to have a model in the IPCC (Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change). Currently, only 11 nations, including Brazil, have climate models with the international body.
“By developing these models, INPE repositioned the country in global climate governance networks. If there is the capacity to produce models and modeling studies, there is a way to effectively contribute to this panel on a scientific basis. It is clear that this is associated not only with scientific development, but to political arrangements that created conditions for INPE to achieve new research conditions. "
Jean Miguel clarifies that the IPCC brings together the scientific basis of climate change on the planet, while the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC) constitutes a political arena. “My work points precisely to this association between infrastructure for research, production of relevant knowledge and the possibility of setting agendas in this area, as happens with INPE.” Contradictions and implications The work supervisor, Marko Monteiro, explains that after gaining national prominence, INPE has sought global hegemony in this scientific field. Monteiro points, however, to contradictions and implications in the context of this process.
“The main finding of the research reveals that INPE manages to hegemonize climate science in Brazil, investing in modeling. At this moment, the organization is participating in a dispute on the global stage. But on the other hand, with the height of the financial crisis in the country, there is a lack of money to cover, for example, the costs of Tupã, the supercomputer acquired by the institute in 2011.”
Jean Miguel adds, in turn, that climate modeling requires high-cost and constantly updated research infrastructure. “INPE’s supercomputer, when purchased, was among the 20 most powerful in the world. Today he is already on that list. The country that wants to stay at the forefront has to constantly update its infrastructure. Furthermore, the search for hegemonization of such an expensive science ends up creating a centralization in the production of knowledge in just one area of research.”
