George C. Marshall Institute (GMI)
The George C. Marshall Institute (GMI) is a nonprofit organization established in 1984, focusing on the intersection of science and public policy, particularly concerning environmental issues and national security. Founded by prominent scientists Frederick Seitz and Robert Jastrow, GMI's mission is to enhance the role of scientific understanding in policymaking, emphasizing a rigorous assessment of scientific data and uncertainties. The institute has been involved in various activities, including publishing reports and hosting workshops, and collaborates with like-minded organizations to foster discussions on scientific and technological questions relevant to policymaking.
GMI has taken notable positions on controversial topics, such as climate change and bioterrorism, often expressing skepticism towards mainstream scientific consensus, particularly regarding global warming. It has published extensive critiques of the scientific models and policy implications related to climate change, including opposition to the Kyoto Protocol and advocacy for a careful evaluation of the uncertainties within scientific data. While GMI's conservative stance has drawn criticism from liberal groups and media, it maintains that thorough scientific scrutiny is essential before implementing major policy changes that could have significant economic repercussions. Through its work, GMI aims to ensure that policymakers are well-informed about the complexities and limitations of scientific understanding in formulating public policy.
George C. Marshall Institute (GMI)
- DATE: Established 1984
Mission
The George C. Marshall Institute is a nonprofit organization supported by foundations, industry, and the public to improve the use of science in making public policy. Its major emphasis is on issues of the environment and national security.
The mission of the George C. Marshall Institute (GMI) is to encourage the use of science in making public policy when science and technology are major components of that policy. The institute was founded in 1984 by two respected scientists, Frederick Seitz, the former president of the National Academy of Sciences, and Robert Jastrow, an astronomer and author. The institute differs from most other think tanks, because its board of directors includes a large proportion of leading scientists and the assessments it undertakes have a strong focus on the science used in making public policy. The activities of GMI in the environmental field include civic environmentalism and climate change and, in the national defense field, bioterrorism and missile defense.
GMI carries out its mission through published reports, workshops, roundtables, and collaboration with other organizations with similar goals, such as the Hoover Institution, Doctors for Disaster Preparedness, and Physicians for Civil Defense. It has a staff that organizes workshops and roundtables and also prepares assessments of issues connected to its mission.
The Washington Roundtable on Science and Public Policy was established by GMI to bring together scientific experts and government leaders to explore policy options connected to scientific and technological questions. Its aim is to insure that policymakers are aware of the science and the uncertainties involved in these questions.
GMI has a conservative bent and has been skeptical about many mainstream scientific assessments, including those of global warming. It was a strong supporter of the Strategic Defense Initiative and emphasized the uncertainties about the negative impacts of secondhand smoke. It gives more weight to the uncertainties in the scientific basis underlying public issues than do other think tanks. Many liberal organizations and the media have attacked GMI for the stands it has taken on these controversial policies.
Significance for Climate Change
Since it was established in 1984, GMI has published more than one hundred books, reports, roundtable discussions, and other documents on the science of climate change and its policy implications. Among these are assessments of the validity of some scientific measurements of global warming; policy implications of climate change, including arguments against the cap-and-trade policy supported by some members of Congress; and critiques of the reports of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC). Its emphasis on science and the limits of knowledge led GMI to cosponsor the Petition Project, through which more than thirty thousand scientists signed a petition urging the United States government to reject the Kyoto Protocol on global warming. While the United States signed but did not ratify the Kyoto Protocol, it joined the Paris Agreement in 2016, which superceded the Kyoto Protocol.
GMI reports have been instrumental in pointing out the scientific and statistical difficulties with the hockey stick model of global temperatures used in the third IPCC report. The model indicates that the global temperatures have risen in the shape of a hockey stick since the middle of the twentieth century and are expected to continue this rapid rise. A reevaluation by GMI shows that there are serious questions about both the data and the statistics used in this model.
The cap-and-trade policy would allow Congress to set an overall cap on greenhouse gases and allow industries to auction their allotments among themselves to meet the cap. The Marshall Institute has argued against this policy, because it would distort the economy by letting Congress arbitrarily set emission values for industries, and it could be susceptible to fraud.
Because many of these reports point out difficulties and uncertainties in the science and the policies advocated by other groups, GMI has been called a denier of global warming. GMI argues that before making catastrophic and possibly irreversible policy changes, the relevant science should be improved and its uncertainties reduced. It points out that there is no consensus among scientists about either the data or the models of global warming. There could be great danger to the economy and well-being of the world posed by setting controversial policies while the uncertainties remain high.
Bibliography
"About Marshall." George C. Marshall European Center for Security Studies, 2022, www.marshallcenter.org/en/about/about-marshall-center. Accessed 20 Dec. 2024.
Ball, Timothy. The Science Isn’t Settled: The Limitations of Global Climate Models. Washington, D.C.: George C. Marshall Institute, 2007.
George C. Marshall Institute. Climate Issues and Questions. 3d ed. Washington, D.C.: Author, 2008.
Gough, Michael. Politicizing Science: The Alchemy of Policymaking. Palo Alto, Calif.: Hoover Institution Press, 2003.
Michaels, Patrick J., ed. Shattered Consensus: The True State of Global Warming. Lanham, Md.: Rowman & Littlefield, 2006.