I thought that it was interesting to hear a scientist like Dan Kammen speak about the importance of behavioral economics and psychology and go so far as to say that climate science itself has been overanalyzed. The former is extremely important as although climate science can tell us what must be done, ultimately the people helping resolve climate change and curb the effects are the people, and it is crucial to be able to convince them in an effective manner to contribute to the welfare of our society. One thing I have seen is that many countries face a Prisoner's Dilemma when it comes to climate change -- people think that other countries are emitting high levels of CO2, and thus it is in the country's best interest to also emit these high levels, but actually if both emitted less it would be the best outcome. This is an example of why game theory applied to climate is very important.
One question I would ask is regarding climate change in rural areas and how to reach out to villages and other rural factories to reduce emissions there. Often things like brick factories or high-emission plants are overlooked when they are not in the city and especially when they are in third-world countries. How can we apply prediction mechanisms to best understand these factories' emissions, which are not publicly available? In addition, how can we effectively ensure that these plants have less emissions?