Alan Peacock: A Personal Record
In the last decade of his life, Alan Peacock was closely involved with issues relating to climate change: these indeed became his chief single professional concern. As a result, he and I worked closely together, and on three occasions we were actually co-authors.Our first joint piece was written in the summer of 2005, when together with two other economist colleagues, Ian Byatt and Colin Robinson, we submitted evidence to Sir Nicholas (later Lord) Stern in connection with the preparation of the Stern Review on the economics of climate change. (The views and ideas we put forward in our memorandum of evidence fell on stony ground).A further collaborative initiative came about in early 2006, when Stern brought out the text of a public lecture he had given, together with two accompanying documents. I then assembled a team of nine economists, and we published in the journal World Economics a joint article criticising these documents: it was entitled ‘Climate Change: The Stern Review “Oxonia Papers”’. Alongside the four of us just mentioned, the other five authors of the article were Ian Castles, Nigel Lawson, Ross McKitrick, Julian Morris and Robert Skidelsky. The journal published in the same issue a reply by Stern.When the Stern Review itself appeared in late 2006, the nine of us, again including Alan, published a full review article in World Economics: it appeared there as Part II of a dual critique, with Part I written by a team of scientists and engineers which I had put together. (This latter team comprised Robert Carter, Chris de Freitas, Indur Goklany, David Holland and Richard Lindzen). In the introduction to the two papers, representing all 14 authors, we wrote that
‘In relation to both scientific and economic issues, we question the accuracy and completeness of the Review’s analysis and the objectivity of its treatment.’
In 2008 the Institute of Economic Affairs brought out a book of essays, edited by Colin Robinson, entitled Climate Change Policy: Challenging the Activists. Alan contributed a chapter entitled ‘Climate Change, Religion and Human Freedom’. His concluding words were that
‘… we should be wary of the dangers to individual freedom inherent in the present consensus about prospective climate change and how to deal with it’.
Byatt, Morris, Robinson and I were fellow-contributors to this volume.In 2009 Nigel Lawson established the Global Warming Policy Foundation, with the object of making a distinctive and informed contribution to a climate change debate which from the outset, not least in Britain, had been one-sided and unbalanced (as it still is). Lawson is Chairman of the Foundation’s trustees; while its Director is Benny Peiser.Lawson’s cause was one which Alan Peacock was happy to make his own: he was involved with the Foundation from its inception till his death.The Foundation provides a continuing news service and commentary on climate change issues, and sponsors a range of publications from briefing notes to major reports. In the latter context, Lawson established an Academic Advisory Council, of which he has written:
‘It is a group of eminent academics and quasi-academics from a number of disciplines and with a range of views, scattered around the world, who can be called on to advise the Director (and whose advice we welcome even if it has not been sought!), to peer review the GWPF reports we are planning to publish, and to contribute to our website as and when they are able to do so.’
Peacock was a founding member of the Council (which I chair), and one of its most active participants. Right through these years, up to his last illness, he was a regular source of ideas and comments which were unfailingly informed, judicious, fair-minded and to the point.As advisor, commentator, author and collaborator, Alan made over the last years of his life an outstanding contribution to the quality of the climate change debate in Britain. All of us who worked closely with him in this cause will miss him greatly and treasure his memory.David Henderson14 August 2014