Revision as of 00:37, 30 December 2005 edit82.13.102.206 (talk) →Mörner on sea level← Previous edit | Latest revision as of 16:29, 14 December 2024 edit undoZutn (talk | contribs)19 editsm Added a further explanation and sources to the criticism of the IPCC | ||
Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
{{Short description|Scientific intergovernmental body}} | |||
:''IPCC directs here. For other uses see ]''. | |||
{{redirect|IPCC}} | |||
{{pp-move}} | |||
{{Use dmy dates|date=May 2022}} | |||
{{Infobox organization | |||
| name = Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change | |||
| image = Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change Logo.svg | |||
| type = Panel | |||
| abbreviation = IPCC | |||
| leader_title = Chair | |||
| leader_name = ] | |||
| leader_title2 = Vice-Chair | |||
| leader_name2 = ] | |||
| formation = {{start date and age|1988|df=yes}} | |||
| headquarters = ], Switzerland | |||
| website = {{official URL}} | |||
| parent_organization = ]<br />] | |||
}} | |||
{{IPCC}} | |||
The '''Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change''' ('''IPCC''') is an ] of the ]. Its job is to advance scientific knowledge about ] caused by human activities.<ref>{{cite web|title=About the IPCC|url=https://www.ipcc.ch/about/|access-date=22 February 2019|publisher=Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change}}</ref> The ] (WMO) and the ] (UNEP) set up the IPCC in 1988. The ] endorsed the creation of the IPCC later that year.<ref name="UNGA resolution endorsing IPCC">{{cite web |title=UN General Assembly Resolution 43/53 "Protection of global climate for present and future generations of mankind" |url=https://documents-dds-ny.un.org/doc/RESOLUTION/GEN/NR0/530/32/IMG/NR053032.pdf?OpenElement |website=UN General Assembly Resolutions 43rd Session 1988-1989 |publisher=United Nations |access-date=2 April 2022 |archive-date=8 December 2022 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20221208083351/https://documents-dds-ny.un.org/doc/RESOLUTION/GEN/NR0/530/32/IMG/NR053032.pdf?OpenElement |url-status=dead }}</ref> It has a secretariat in ], Switzerland, hosted by the WMO. It has 195 ] who govern the IPCC.<ref>{{cite web |title=Annex C to Appendix C to the Principles Governing IPCC Work |url=https://www.ipcc.ch/documentation/procedures/ |website=IPCC Procedures |publisher=IPCC}}</ref> The member states elect a bureau of scientists to serve through an assessment cycle. A cycle is usually six to seven years. The bureau selects experts in their fields to prepare IPCC reports.<ref name="Structure" /> There is a formal nomination process by governments and observer organizations to find these experts. The IPCC has three working groups and a task force, which carry out its scientific work.<ref name="Structure" /> | |||
The IPCC informs governments about the state of knowledge of climate change. It does this by examining all the relevant scientific literature on the subject. This includes the natural, ] and social impacts and ]. It also covers possible ] ]. The IPCC does not conduct its own original research. It aims to be objective and comprehensive. Thousands of scientists and other experts volunteer to ] the publications.<ref>{{Cite web |title=Procedures — IPCC |url=https://www.ipcc.ch/documentation/procedures/ |access-date=2022-11-28}}</ref> They compile key findings into "Assessment Reports" for policymakers and the general public;<ref name="Structure">{{cite web |title = Structure of the IPCC | url =https://www.ipcc.ch/about/structure/|publisher = Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change | access-date=22 February 2019}}</ref> Experts have described this work as the biggest ] process in the scientific community.<ref name="AFP unrivalled authority 2021">{{cite news |title=IPCC, the world's unrivalled authority on climate science |url=https://www.france24.com/en/live-news/20210809-ipcc-the-world-s-unrivalled-authority-on-climate-science |agency=AFP |date=9 August 2021}}</ref> | |||
] ]] | |||
Leading climate scientists and all member governments endorse the IPCC's findings.<ref>{{cite news | title=Scientists offered cash to dispute climate study | date=2 February 2007 | access-date=24 July 2007 | newspaper=Guardian | first=Ian | last=Sample | url=https://www.theguardian.com/frontpage/story/0,,2004399,00.html | quote=], the president of the ], Britain's most prestigious scientific institute, said: 'The IPCC is the world's leading authority on climate change...' | location=London}} | |||
The '''Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change''' (IPCC) was established in ] by two ] organizations, the ] (WMO) and the ] (UNEP) to assess the "risk of human-induced ]". The Panel is open to all members of the WMO and UNEP. | |||
</ref><ref name="AFP unrivalled authority 2021" /> This underscores that the IPCC is a well-respected authority on climate change. Governments, civil society organizations and the media regularly quote from its reports. IPCC reports play a key role in the annual climate negotiations held by the ] (UNFCCC).<ref name="UNFCCC intro">{{cite web |title=What is the UNFCCC? |url=https://unfccc.int/process-and-meetings/the-convention/what-is-the-united-nations-framework-convention-on-climate-change |website=UNFCCC }}</ref><ref name="Principles">IPCC. {{cite web |title=Principles Governing IPCC Work |url=https://www.ipcc.ch/documentation/procedures/}}. Approved 1–3 October 1998, last amended 14–18 October 2013.</ref> The IPCC ] was an important influence on the landmark ] in 2015.<ref name="Nature_Schleussner_20160725">{{Cite journal|last1=Schleussner|first1=Carl-Friedrich|last2=Rogelj|author2-link=Joeri Rogelj|first2=Joeri|last3=Schaeffer|first3=Michiel|last4=Lissner|first4=Tabea|last5=Licker|first5=Rachel|last6=Fischer|first6=Erich M.|last7=Knutti|first7=Reto|last8=Levermann|first8=Anders|last9=Frieler|first9=Katja|last10=Hare|first10=William|date=25 July 2016|title=Science and policy characteristics of the Paris Agreement temperature goal|url=http://pure.iiasa.ac.at/id/eprint/13431/1/nclimate3096.pdf|journal=Nature Climate Change|volume=6|issue=9|pages=827|bibcode=2016NatCC...6..827S|doi=10.1038/nclimate3096}}</ref> The IPCC shared the ] with ] for contributions to the understanding of climate change.<ref>{{cite web |title=The Nobel Peace Prize 2007 |url=https://www.nobelprize.org/prizes/peace/2007/summary/ |website=The Nobel Prize |publisher=Nobel Prize Outreach}}</ref> | |||
The seventh assessment cycle of the IPCC began in 2023. In August 2021, the IPCC published its Working Group I contribution to the ] (IPCC AR6) on the physical science basis of climate change.<ref name=":6">IPCC, 2021: ''. Contribution of Working Group I to the Sixth Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change''. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, United Kingdom and New York, New York, US, In press, doi:10.1017/9781009157896.</ref> '']'' described this report as the "starkest warning yet" of "major inevitable and irreversible climate changes".<ref name="Guardian 9Aug21">{{cite news |last=Harvey |first=Fiona |author-link=Fiona Harvey |date=9 August 2021 |title=Major climate changes inevitable and irreversible – IPCC's starkest warning yet |url=https://www.theguardian.com/science/2021/aug/09/humans-have-caused-unprecedented-and-irreversible-change-to-climate-scientists-warn |work=]}}</ref> Many newspapers around the world echoed this theme.<ref name="Guardian 10Aug21">{{cite news|last=Sullivan|first=Helen|date=10 August 2021|title='Code red for humanity': what the papers say about the IPCC report on the climate crisis|work=]|url=https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2021/aug/10/code-red-for-humanity-what-the-papers-say-about-the-ipcc-report-on-the-climate-crisis}}</ref> In February 2022, the IPCC released its Working Group II report on impacts and adaptation.<ref>{{Cite web|url=https://www.ipcc.ch/report/ar6/wg2/|title = Climate Change 2022: Impacts, Adaptation and Vulnerability}}</ref> It published Working Group III's "mitigation of climate change" contribution to the Sixth Assessment in April 2022.<ref>{{Cite web|url=http://www.ipcc.ch/report/ar6/wg3/resources/press/press-release |title= Mitigation of climate change }}</ref> The Sixth Assessment Report concluded with a Synthesis Report in March 2023. | |||
IPCC reports are widely cited in almost any debate related to climate change . The reports have been influential in forming national and international responses to climate change. A few of the scientists whose work is summarized in these reports have accused the IPCC of bias. | |||
During the period of the Sixth Assessment Report, the IPCC released three special reports. The first and most influential was the ] in 2018. In 2019 the ] (SRCCL), and the ] (SROCC) came out. The IPCC also updated its methodologies in 2019. So the sixth assessment cycle was the most ambitious in the IPCC's history.<ref>{{cite web |title=Decisions adopted by the 43rd Session of the Panel |url=https://www.ipcc.ch/site/assets/uploads/2018/05/p43_decisions.pdf |page= 11 decision 6}}</ref> | |||
==Aims== | |||
The principles of the IPCC operation are assigned by the relevant ] Executive Council and ] Governing Council resolutions and decisions as well as on actions in support of the UN ] process. | |||
{{TOC level|3}} | |||
:"The role of the IPCC is to assess on a comprehensive, objective, open and transparent basis the scientific, technical and socio-economic information relevant to understanding the scientific basis of risk of human-induced climate change, its potential impacts and options for adaptation and mitigation. IPCC reports should be neutral with respect to policy, although they may need to deal objectively with scientific, technical and socio-economic factors relevant to the application of particular policies. | |||
:Review is an essential part of the IPCC process. Since the IPCC is an intergovernmental body, review of IPCC documents should involve both peer review by experts and review by governments" . | |||
== Origins == | |||
<!-- The template generating the following text has been listed for deletion. Please see http://en.wikipedia.org/Wikipedia:Templates_for_deletion#Template:Editnote for discussion and voting --> | |||
The predecessor of the IPCC was the ] (AGGG).<ref>{{cite journal |last1=Potter |first1=Thomas D. |title=Advisory Group on Greenhouse Gases Established Jointly by WMO, UNEP, and ICSU |journal=Environmental Conservation |date=Winter 1986 |volume=13 |issue=4 |page=365 |doi=10.1017/S0376892900035505 |s2cid=84551617 |doi-access=free |bibcode=1986EnvCo..13..365P }}</ref> Three organizations set up the AGGG in 1986. These were the ], the ] (UNEP), and the ] (WMO). The AGGG reviewed scientific research on greenhouse gases. It also studied increases in greenhouse gases. ] was becoming more complicated and covering more disciplines. This small group of scientists lacked the resources to cover climate science. | |||
<!-- Editors Note: The "human-induced" phrase has been challenged several times. It is in the IPCC "About" page and the IPCC Principles, and indeed in the quote just above. --> | |||
The stated aims of the IPCC are to assess scientific information relevant to: | |||
# human-induced climate change, | |||
# the impacts of human-induced climate change, | |||
# options for adaptation and mitigation. | |||
The ] sought an international convention to restrict ]. The ] worried that independent scientists would have too much influence. The WMO and UNEP therefore created the IPCC as an intergovernmental body in 1988. Scientists take part in the IPCC as both experts and government representatives. The IPCC produces reports backed by all leading relevant scientists. Member governments must also endorse the reports by consensus agreement. So the IPCC is both a scientific body and an organization of governments.<ref>{{Cite book |last=Weart |first=Spencer R. |title=] |date=2008 |isbn=978-0-674-41755-7 |edition=Revised and expanded |location=Cambridge, Mass. |chapter=Democracy and Policy Advice (1980s) |oclc=872115457 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20131109135754/http://www.aip.org/history/climate/internat.htm#S9 |archive-date=9 November 2013 |chapter-url=http://www.aip.org/history/climate/internat.htm#S9}}</ref><ref>{{Cite web|url=https://www.ipcc.ch/site/assets/uploads/2021/07/AR6_FS_What_is_IPCC.pdf|title=IPCC Factsheet: What is the IPCC?}}</ref> Its job is to tell governments what scientists know about climate change. It also examines the ] and options for dealing with it. The IPCC does this by assessing peer-reviewed scientific literature.<ref>{{Cite journal |last1=Hulme |first1=Mike |last2=Mahony |first2=Martin |date=October 2010 |title=Climate change: What do we know about the IPCC? |url=http://journals.sagepub.com/doi/10.1177/0309133310373719 |journal=Progress in Physical Geography: Earth and Environment |language=en |volume=34 |issue=5 |pages=705–718 |doi=10.1177/0309133310373719 |bibcode=2010PrPG...34..705H |s2cid=130711399 |issn=0309-1333}}</ref> | |||
The history of the IPCC is described . | |||
The ] endorsed the creation of the IPCC in 1988. The ] noted that human activity could change the climate. This could lead to severe economic and social consequences. It said increasing concentrations of greenhouse gases could ]. This would cause the ]. The effects for humanity would be disastrous if timely steps were not taken.<ref name="UNGA resolution endorsing IPCC" /> | |||
==Operations== | |||
The current Chair of the IPCC is ], elected in May 2002; previously ] headed the IPCC. | |||
== Organization == | |||
The IPCC Panel is composed of representatives appointed by governments and organizations. Participation of delegates with appropriate expertise is encouraged. Plenary sessions of the IPCC and IPCC Working Groups are held at the level of government representatives. Non Governmental and Intergovernmental Organisations may be allowed to attend as observers. Sessions of the IPCC Bureau, workshops, expert and lead authors meetings are by invitation only . Attendance at the ] meeting was 350 government officials and climate change experts. After the opening ceremonies, plenary sessions are closed meetings . The meeting report states there were 322 persons in attendance at Sessions and with about seven-eighths of participants being from governmental organizations . | |||
] in 2018]] | |||
=== Way of working === | |||
The IPCC is led by government scientists, but also involves several hundred academic scientists and researchers. It synthesises the available information about ] and ], has published four major reports reviewing the latest climate science, as well as more specialized reports. | |||
The IPCC does not conduct original research.<ref>{{Cite web |title=What is the IPCC? |url=https://eciu.net/analysis/briefings/climate-science-the-basics/what-is-the-ipcc |access-date=2022-11-08 |website=Energy & Climate Intelligence Unit |date=18 October 2021 |language=en}}</ref> It produces comprehensive assessments on the state of knowledge of climate change. It prepares reports on special topics relevant to climate change. It also produces methodologies. These methodologies help countries estimate their greenhouse gas emissions and removals through sinks. Its assessments build on previous reports and scientific publications. Over the course of six assessments the reports reflect the growing evidence for a changing climate. And they show how this is due to human activity. | |||
=== Rules and governing principles === | |||
The IPCC does not carry out research nor does it monitor climate related data or other relevant parameters. It bases its assessment mainly on peer reviewed and published scientific/technical literature . | |||
The IPCC has adopted its rules of procedure in the "Principles Governing IPCC Work". These state that the IPCC will assess:<ref name="Principles"/> | |||
* the risk of ] caused by human activities, | |||
* its ], and | |||
* possible ]. | |||
Under IPCC rules its assessments are comprehensive, objective, open and transparent. They cover all the information relevant to the scientific understanding of climate change. This draws on scientific, technical and socioeconomic information. IPCC reports must be neutral regarding policy recommendations. However, they may address the objective factors relevant to enacting policies.<ref name="Principles"/> | |||
=== Structure === | |||
There are several major groups: | |||
The IPCC has the following structure: | |||
* IPCC Panel: Meets in plenary session about once a year and controls the organization's structure and procedures. The Panel is the IPCC corporate entity. | |||
* IPCC Panel: Meets in ] about twice a year. It may meet more often for the approval of reports.<ref name="Structure" /> It controls the IPCC's structure, procedures, work programme and budget. It accepts and approves IPCC reports. The Panel is the IPCC corporate entity.<ref name="Structure"/> | |||
* Chair: Elected by the Panel. | |||
* Chair: Elected by the Panel. Chairs the Bureau and other bodies. Represents the organization. | |||
* Secretariat: Oversees and manages all activities. Supported by ] and ]. | |||
* Bureau: Elected by the Panel. It currently has 34 members from different geographic regions. Besides the Chair and three IPCC Vice-Chairs, they provide the leadership for the IPCC's three Working Groups and Task Force.<ref name="IPCC Bureau">{{Cite web|url=https://www.ipcc.ch/bureau/|title=Bureau Portal — IPCC|access-date=9 August 2019}}</ref> It provides guidance to the Panel on the scientific and technical aspects of its work.<ref>{{cite web |title=The IPCC Bureau |url=https://www.ipcc.ch/bureau/ |website=The IPCC Bureau (see Terms of Reference) |publisher=IPCC}}</ref> | |||
* Bureau: Elected by the Panel. Chaired by the Chair. 30 members include IPCC Vice-Chairs, Co-Chairs and Vice-Chairs of Working Groups and Task Force. | |||
* Working Groups: Each has two Co-Chairs, one from |
* Working Groups: Each has two Co-Chairs, one from a developed and one from a developing country. A technical support unit supports each Working Group. Working Group sessions approve the Summary for Policymakers of assessment and special reports. Each Working Group has a Bureau. This consists of its Co-Chairs and Vice-Chairs, who are also members of the IPCC Bureau. | ||
** Working Group I: Assesses scientific aspects of the climate system and climate change. | ** Working Group I: Assesses scientific aspects of the climate system and climate change. Co-Chairs: Robert Vautard (France) and Xiaoye Zhang (China)<ref name=":9">{{Cite web |title=IPCC wraps up elections in Nairobi — IPCC |url=https://www.ipcc.ch/2023/07/28/ipcc-wraps-up-elections-in-nairobi/ |access-date=2023-07-29}}</ref> | ||
** Working Group II: Assesses |
** Working Group II: Assesses the impacts of climate change on human and natural systems. Assesses adaptation options. Co-Chairs: Bart van den Hurk (Netherlands) and Winston Chow (Singapore)<ref name=":9" /> | ||
** Working Group III: Assesses |
** Working Group III: Assesses how to stop climate change by limiting greenhouse gas emissions. (Known as "mitigation".) Co-Chairs: ] (United States) and Joy Jacqueline Pereira (Malaysia)<ref name=":9" /> | ||
* Task Force on National Greenhouse Gas Inventories.<ref name=":5">{{cite web |title=Task Force on National Greenhouse Gas Inventories |url=https://www.ipcc.ch/working-group/tfi/ |access-date=25 February 2019}}</ref> Develops methodologies for estimating greenhouse gas emissions. Co-Chairs: Takeshi Enoki (Japan) and Mazhar Hayat (Pakistan)<ref name=":9" /> | |||
* Task Force on National Greenhouse Gas Inventories | |||
** Task Force Bureau: Consists of two Co-Chairs, who are also members of the IPCC Bureau, and 12 members. | |||
* Executive Committee: Consists of the Chair, IPCC Vice-Chairs and the Co-Chairs of the Working Groups and Task Force. It addresses urgent issues that arise between sessions of the Panel.<ref>{{cite web |title=Structure of the IPCC - The Executive Committee |url=https://www.ipcc.ch/about/structure/ |website=Structure of the IPCC |ref=(see Terms of Reference of the Executive Committee)}}</ref> | |||
* Secretariat: Administers activities, supports the Chair and Bureau, point of contact for governments. Supported by UNEP and the WMO.<ref>{{Cite web|url=https://www.ipcc.ch/site/assets/uploads/2018/09/IAC_Secretariat_TSU.pdf|title=Terms of Reference of the IPCC Secretariat}}</ref> | |||
==== Chair ==== | |||
The IPCC receives funding from UNEP, WMO, and its own Trust Fund for which it solicits contributions from governments. | |||
The chair of the IPCC is British energy scientist ], who is hosted by the ] (IIED). Skea has served since 28 July 2023 with the election of the new IPCC Bureau.<ref>{{Cite web |title=IPCC elects Jim Skea as the new Chair — IPCC |url=https://www.ipcc.ch/2023/07/26/jim-skea-new-ipcc-chair/ |access-date=2023-07-29}}</ref><ref name=":9" /> His predecessor was Korean economist ], elected in 2015. The previous chairs were ], elected in 2002, ], elected in 1997, and ], elected in 1988.<ref>{{Cite web|url=https://www.ipcc.ch/site/assets/uploads/2019/03/16th-anniversary-brochure.pdf|title=16 Years of Scientific Assessment in Support of the Climate Convention}}</ref> | |||
== |
==== Panel ==== | ||
The Panel consists of representatives appointed by governments. They take part in plenary sessions of the IPCC and its Working Groups. Non-governmental and intergovernmental organizations may attend as observers.<ref>{{cite web |title=Structure of the IPCC - Observer Organizations |url=https://www.ipcc.ch/about/structure/ |website=IPCC }}</ref> Meetings of IPCC bodies are by invitation only.<ref name="Principles" /> About 500 people from 130 countries attended the 48th Session of the Panel in Incheon, Republic of Korea. This took place in October 2018. They included 290 government officials and 60 representatives of observer organizations. The opening ceremonies of sessions of the Panel and of Lead Author Meetings are open to media. Otherwise, IPCC meetings are closed. | |||
The IPCC concentrates its activities on the tasks allotted to it by the relevant ] Executive Council and ] Governing Council resolutions and decisions as well as on actions in support of the ] process . | |||
=== Funding === | |||
The IPCC is currently (May 2005) in the process of preparing the ''fourth assessment report'' or AR4 ; reports of the workshops held so far are available . | |||
The IPCC receives funding through a dedicated ]. UNEP and the WMO established the fund in 1989. The trust fund receives annual financial contributions from member governments. The WMO, UNEP and other organizations also contribute. Payments are voluntary and there is no set amount required. The WMO covers the operating costs of the secretariat. It also sets the IPCC's financial regulations and rules.<ref>{{cite web |title=IPCC Procedures - Appendix B to the Principles Governing IPCC Work: Financial Procedures for the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change |url=https://www.ipcc.ch/documentation/procedures/ |website=IPCC Procedures |publisher=IPCC}}</ref> The Panel sets the annual budget. | |||
* Working Group I : | |||
** Report is due to be finalised during the first quarter of ]. | |||
** As of ], there have been 3 AR4 meetings, with only public information being meeting locations, an author list, one invitation, one agenda, and one list of presentation titles. | |||
* Working Group II : | |||
** Report is due to be finalised in mid-]. | |||
** As of ], there have been 2 AR4 meetings, with no public information released. | |||
** One shared meeting with WG III has taken place, with a published summary. | |||
* Working Group III : | |||
** Report is due to be finalized in mid-]. | |||
** As of ], there has been 1 AR4 meeting, with no public information released. | |||
In 2021, the IPCC's annual budget amounts to approximately six million euros, financed by the 195 UN Member states, who contribute "independently and voluntarily".<ref name=":8">{{Cite web |last=Beaujon |first=Agathe |date=2021-08-09 |title=Changement climatique: Le Giec quésaco? |url=https://www.challenges.fr/green-economie/changement-climatique-5-chiffres-pour-comprendre-comment-fonctionne-le-giec_776157 |access-date=2023-07-02 |website=Challenges |language=fr}}</ref><ref>{{Cite web |title=Comprendre le GIEC |url=https://www.ecologie.gouv.fr/comprendre-giec |access-date=2023-07-02 |website=Ministères Écologie Énergie Territoires |language=fr}}</ref> In 2021, the countries giving the most money include the United States, Japan, France, Germany and Norway.<ref name=":8" /> Other countries, often developing ones, give an "in-kind contribution, by hosting IPCC meetings".<ref name=":8" /> In 2022, this budget was a little less than eight million euros.<ref name=":8" /> | |||
If it is decided to prepare one the AR4 Synthesis Report (SYR) would be finalised during the last quarter of 2007. Documentation on the scoping meetings for the AR4 are available as are the outlines for the WG I report and a provisional author list . | |||
=== List of all reports === | |||
While the preparation of the assessment reports is a major IPCC function, it also supports other activities, such as the Data Distribution Centre and the National Greenhouse Gas Inventories Programme , required under the ]. This involves publishing default ]s, which are factors used to derive emissions estimates based on the levels of fuel consumption, industrial production and so on. | |||
{| class="wikitable sortable" | |||
!Year | |||
!Name of report | |||
!Type of report | |||
|- | |||
|2023 | |||
|AR6 Synthesis Report: ''Climate Change 2023'' (March 2023) | |||
|Synthesis Report | |||
|- | |||
|2021 and 2022 | |||
|] (AR6): ''Climate Change 2021: The Physical Science Basis'' (Working Group I, August 2021), ''Climate Change 2022: Impacts, Adaptation and Vulnerability'' (Working Group II, February 2022), ''Mitigation of Climate Change'' (Working Group III, April 2022) | |||
|Assessment Report (Working Group contributions) | |||
|- | |||
|2019 | |||
|] (SROCC) | |||
|Special Report | |||
|- | |||
|2019 | |||
|] (SRCCL) | |||
|Special Report | |||
|- | |||
|2019 | |||
|2019 Refinement to the 2006 IPCC Guidelines for National Greenhouse Gas Inventories<ref>IPCC 2019, 2019 Refinement to the 2006 IPCC Guidelines for National Greenhouse Gas Inventories, Calvo Buendia, E., Tanabe, K., Kranjc, A., Baasansuren, J., Fukuda, M., Ngarize, S., Osako, A., Pyrozhenko, Y., Shermanau, P. and Federici, S. (eds). Published: IPCC, Switzerland.</ref> | |||
|Methodology Report | |||
|- | |||
|2018 | |||
|] (SR15) | |||
|Special Report | |||
|- | |||
|2014 | |||
|AR5 Synthesis Report: ''Climate Change 2014''<ref>IPCC, 2014: Climate Change 2014: Synthesis Report. Contribution of Working Groups I, II and III to the Fifth Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change . IPCC, Geneva, Switzerland, 151 pp.</ref> | |||
|Synthesis Report | |||
|- | |||
|2013 and 2014 | |||
|] (AR5) ''Climate Change 2013: The Physical Science Basis'' (Working Group I, September 2013), ''Climate Change 2014: Impacts, Adaptation and Vulnerability'' (Working Group II, March 2014), ''Climate Change 2014: Mitigation of Climate Change'' (Working Group III, April 2014) | |||
|Assessment (Working Group contributions) | |||
|- | |||
|2013 | |||
|2013 Supplement to the 2006 IPCC Guidelines for National Greenhouse Gas Inventories: Wetlands<ref>IPCC 2014, 2013 Supplement to the 2006 IPCC Guidelines for National Greenhouse Gas Inventories: Wetlands, Hiraishi, T., Krug, T., Tanabe, K., Srivastava, N., Baasansuren, J., Fukuda, M. and Troxler, T.G. (eds). Published: IPCC, Switzerland.</ref> | |||
|Methodology Report | |||
|- | |||
|2013 | |||
|2013 Revised Supplementary Methods and Good Practice Guidance Arising from the Kyoto Protocol<ref>IPCC 2014, 2013 Revised Supplementary Methods and Good Practice Guidance Arising from the Kyoto Protocol, Hiraishi, T., Krug, T., Tanabe, K., Srivastava, N., Baasansuren, J., Fukuda, M. and Troxler, T.G. (eds) Published: IPCC, Switzerland.</ref> | |||
|Methodology Report | |||
|- | |||
|2011 | |||
|Managing the Risks of Extreme Events and Disasters to Advance Climate Change Adaptation (SREX)<ref>IPCC, 2012: . Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, UK, and New York, New York, US, 582 pp.</ref> | |||
|Special Report | |||
|- | |||
|2011 | |||
|Renewable Energy Sources and Climate Change Mitigation (SRREN)<ref>IPCC, 2011 – Ottmar Edenhofer, Ramón Pichs-Madruga, Youba Sokona, Kristin Seyboth, Patrick Matschoss, Susanne Kadner, Timm Zwickel, Patrick Eickemeier, Gerrit Hansen, Steffen Schloemer, Christoph von Stechow (Eds.) | |||
Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, United Kingdom and New York, New York, US, 1075 pp.</ref> | |||
The IPCC also often answers inquiries from the UNFCCC '''Subsidiary Body for Scientific and Technological Advice (SBSTA)'''. | |||
|Special Report | |||
|- | |||
|2007 | |||
|AR4 Synthesis Report: ''Climate Change 2007'' | |||
|Synthesis Report | |||
|- | |||
|2007 | |||
|] (AR4) ''Climate Change 2007: The Physical Science Basis'' (Working Group I, February 2007), ''Climate Change 2007: Impacts, Adaptation, and Vulnerability'' (Working Group II, April 2007), ''Climate Change 2007: Mitigation of Climate Change'' (Working Group III, May 2007) | |||
|Assessment Report (Working Group contributions) | |||
|- | |||
|2006 | |||
|2006 IPCC Guidelines for National Greenhouse Gas Inventories | |||
|Methodology Report | |||
|- | |||
|2005 | |||
|Safeguarding the Ozone Layer and the Global Climate System | |||
|Special Report | |||
|- | |||
|2005 | |||
|Carbon Dioxide Capture and Storage<ref name=":02">IPCC, 2005: . Prepared by Working Group III of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change . Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, United Kingdom and New York, New York, US, 442 pp.</ref> | |||
|Special Report | |||
|- | |||
|2003 | |||
|Good Practice Guidance for Land Use, Land-Use Change and Forestry | |||
|Methodology Report | |||
|- | |||
|2003 | |||
|Definitions and Methodological Options to Inventory Emissions from Direct Human-induced Degradation of Forests and Devegatation of Other Vegetation Types | |||
|Methodology Report | |||
|- | |||
|2001 | |||
|TAR Synthesis Report: ''Climate Change 2001'' | |||
|Synthesis Report | |||
|- | |||
|2001 | |||
|] (TAR) ''Climate Change 2001: The Scientific Basis'' (Working Group I), ''Climate Change 2001: Impacts, Adaptation, and Vulnerability'' (Working Group II), ''Climate Change 2001: Mitigation'' (Working Group III) | |||
|Assessment Report (Working Group contributions) | |||
|- | |||
|2000 | |||
|Good Practice Guidance and Uncertainty Management in National Greenhouse Gas Inventories | |||
|Methodology Report | |||
|- | |||
|2000 | |||
|Methodological and Technological Issues in Technology Transfer | |||
|Special Report | |||
|- | |||
|2000 | |||
|Land Use, Land-Use Change, and Forestry | |||
|Special Report | |||
|- | |||
|2000 | |||
|] (SRES) | |||
|Special Report | |||
|- | |||
|1999 | |||
|Aviation and the Global Atmosphere | |||
|Special Report | |||
|- | |||
|1997 | |||
|The Regional Impacts of Climate Change: An Assessment of Vulnerability | |||
|Special Report | |||
|- | |||
|1996 | |||
|Revised 1996 IPCC Guidelines for National Greenhouse Gas Inventories | |||
|Methodology Report | |||
|- | |||
|1996 | |||
|SAR Synthesis Report: ''Climate Change 1995'' | |||
|Synthesis Report | |||
|- | |||
|1995 | |||
|] (SAR) ''Climate Change 1995: The Science of Climate Change'' (Working Group I), ''Climate Change 1995: Impacts, Adaptations and Mitigation of Climate Change: Scientific-Technical Analyses'' (Working Group II), ''Climate Change 1995: Economic and Social Dimensions of Climate Change'' (Working Group III) | |||
|Assessment Report (Working Group contributions) | |||
|- | |||
|1994 | |||
|IPCC Guidelines for National Greenhouse Gas Inventories | |||
|Methodology Report | |||
|- | |||
|1994 | |||
|Climate Change 1994: Radiative Forcing of Climate Change and An Evaluation of the IPCC IS92 Emission Scenarios | |||
|Special Report | |||
|- | |||
|1994 | |||
|IPCC Technical Guidelines for Assessing Climate Change Impacts and Adaptations | |||
|Special Report | |||
|- | |||
|1992 | |||
|FAR ''Climate Change: The IPCC 1990 and 1992 Assessments'' (June 1992) (includes an Overview of the whole report) | |||
|Assessment Report (Working Group contributions)/Synthesis Report | |||
|- | |||
|1992 | |||
|FAR ''Climate Change 1992: The Supplementary Report to the IPCC Scientific Assessment'' (Working Group I, February 2022), ''Climate Change 1992: The Supplementary Report to the IPCC Impacts Assessment'' (Working Group II, February 2022) | |||
|Assessment Report (Working Group contributions) | |||
|- | |||
|1990 | |||
|] (FAR) ''Climate Change: The IPCC Scientific Assessment'' (Working Group I), ''Climate Change: The IPCC Impacts Assessment'' (Working Group II), ''Climate Change: The IPCC Response Strategies'' (Working Group III) | |||
|Assessment Report (Working Group contributions) | |||
|} | |||
=== Activities other than report preparation === | |||
== Publications == | |||
The IPCC bases its work on the decisions of the WMO and UNEP, which established the IPCC. It also supports the work of the UNFCCC.<ref name="Principles" /> The main work of the IPCC is to prepare assessment and other reports. It also supports other activities such as the Data Distribution Centre.<ref>{{cite web |title=Welcome to the IPCC Data Distribution Centre |url=http://www.ipcc-data.org/ |access-date=25 June 2012 |publisher=Ipcc-data.org |archive-date=19 May 2016 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20160519152028/http://www.ipcc-data.org/ |url-status=dead }}</ref> This helps manage data related to IPCC reports. | |||
The IPCC reports are a compendium of ]ed and published science. Each subsequent IPCC report notes areas where the science has improved since the previous report and also notes areas where further research is required. | |||
The IPCC has a "Gender Policy and Implementation Plan" to pay attention to gender in its work. It aims to carry out its work in an inclusive and respectful manner. The IPCC aims for balance in participation in IPCC work. This should offer all participants equal opportunity.<ref>{{Cite web |title=Gender — IPCC |url=https://www.ipcc.ch/about/gender/ |access-date=2022-10-21}}</ref> | |||
Authors for the IPCC reports are chosen from a list of researchers prepared by governments, and participating organisations and the Working Group/Task Force Bureaux, and other experts as appropriate, known through their publications and works (, 4.2.1,2). The composition of the group of Coordinating Lead Authors and Lead Authors for a section or chapter of a Report is intended to reflect the need to aim for a range of views, expertise and geographical representation (ensuring appropriate representation of experts from developing and developed countries and countries with economies in transition). | |||
==== Communications and dissemination activities ==== | |||
There are generally three stages in the review process : | |||
The IPCC enhanced its communications activities for the Fifth Assessment Report. For instance it made the approved report and press release available to registered media under embargo before the release.<ref>{{cite web |date=21 February 2014 |title=IPCC Media Advisory: IPCC Working Group II and Working Group III Reports, 2014 |url=https://www.ipcc.ch/2014/02/21/ipcc-working-group-ii-and-working-group-iii-reports/ |access-date=24 March 2022}}</ref> And it expanded its outreach activities with an outreach calendar.<ref>{{Cite web|url=https://archive.ipcc.ch/apps/outreach/index.php|title=Outreach - Programme|website=archive.ipcc.ch}}</ref> The IPCC held an Expert Meeting on Communication in February 2016, at the start of the Sixth Assessment Report cycle. Members of the old and new Bureaus worked with communications experts and practitioners at this meeting. This meeting produced a series of recommendations.<ref>{{Cite web|url=https://www.ipcc.ch/event/ipcc-expert-meeting-on-communication/|title=IPCC Expert Meeting on Communication — IPCC}}</ref> The IPCC adopted many of them. One was to bring people with communications expertise into the Working Group Technical Support Units. Another was to consider communications questions early on in the preparation of reports. | |||
* Expert review (6-8 weeks) | |||
* Government/expert review | |||
* Government review of: | |||
** Summaries for Policymakers | |||
** Overview Chapters | |||
** Synthesis Report | |||
Review comments are in an open archive for at least five years. | |||
Following these steps in communications, the IPCC saw a significant increase in media coverage of its reports. This was particularly the case with the '']'' in 2018 and ''Climate Change 2021: The Physical Science Basis'', the Working Group I contribution to the ], in 2021. There was also much greater public interest, reflected in the youth and other movements that emerged in 2018.<ref name=":4">{{Cite web|url=https://www.ipcc.ch/site/assets/uploads/2019/01/010520190905-INF.-9Coms.pdf|title=Progress Report on Communication and Outreach Activities to the 49th Session of the IPCC, 2019}}</ref> | |||
There are several types of endorsement which documents receive : | |||
* '''approval''': Material has been subjected to detailed, line by line discussion and agreement. | |||
** Working Group Summaries for Policymakers are ''approved'' by their Working Groups. | |||
** Synthesis Report Summary for Policymakers is ''approved'' by Panel. | |||
* '''adoption''': Endorsed section by section (and not line by line). | |||
** Panel ''adopts'' Overview Chapters of Methodology Reports. | |||
** Panel ''adopts'' IPCC Synthesis Report. | |||
* '''acceptance''': Not been subject to line by line discussion and agreement, but presents a comprehensive, objective, and balanced view of the subject matter. | |||
** Working Groups ''accepts'' their reports. | |||
** Task Force Reports are ''accepted'' by the Panel. | |||
** Working Group Summaries for Policymakers are ''accepted'' by the Panel after group ''approval''. | |||
IPCC reports are important for ] and related policymaking. This has led to a number of academic studies of IPCC communications, for example in 2021.<ref>{{cite web |last=O'Neill |first=Saffron |date=5 October 2021 |title=Launch of the Topical Collection: Climate change communication and the IPCC, 2021 |url=https://saffrononeill.com/research_projects/si_cc_comms_ipcc/ |publisher=}}</ref><ref>{{Cite journal |last1=O'Neill |first1=Saffron |last2=Pidcock |first2=Roz |date=2021 |title=Introducing the Topical Collection: 'Climate change communication and the IPCC' |url=https://doi.org/10.1007/s10584-021-03253-3 |journal=Climatic Change |language=en |volume=169 |issue=3 |pages=19 |bibcode=2021ClCh..169...19O |doi=10.1007/s10584-021-03253-3 |issn=1573-1480 |pmc=8638646 |pmid=34876762}}</ref> | |||
The Panel is responsible for the IPCC and its endorsement of Reports allows it to ensure they meet IPCC standards. The Panel's ''approval'' process has been criticized for changing the product of the experts who create the Reports. On the other hand, not requiring Panel re-endorsement of Reports has also been criticized, after changes required by the approval process were made to Reports. | |||
== |
==== Archiving ==== | ||
The IPCC archives its reports and electronic files on its website. They include the review comments on drafts of reports. The Environmental Science and Public Policy Archives in the ] also archives them.<ref>{{Cite web |date=2010-04-27 |title=Papers of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change - Harvard College Library |url=http://hcl.harvard.edu/collections/ipcc/ |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20100427023820/http://hcl.harvard.edu/collections/ipcc/ |archive-date=2010-04-27 |access-date=2022-10-27}}</ref> | |||
The IPCC published a first assessment report in 1990, a supplementary report in 1992, a second assessment report (SAR) in 1995, and a third assessment report (TAR) in 2001. Each of the assessment reports is in three volumes from the working groups I, II and III. Unqualified, "the IPCC report" is often used to mean the WG I report. | |||
== |
==Assessment reports== | ||
IPCC Reports attempt to present a scientific consensus view. The general approach of identifying consensus among a group of climate scientists means that areas where there remains considerable uncertainty tend to be automatically deemphasized or simply omitted . Another means of handling consensus problems was used in the SRES scenarios, where due to a lack of consensus there were many variations included with no indication of which are more probable {{doi|10.1038/35075167}}. | |||
{{Main|IPCC First Assessment Report|IPCC Second Assessment Report|IPCC Third Assessment Report|IPCC Fourth Assessment Report|IPCC Fifth Assessment Report|IPCC Sixth Assessment Report}} | |||
"Firstly, the Panel as a whole must always respect and consider the specific perspectives of each member. But, more importantly, each member must respect and consider the perspectives of the entire Panel. Consensus is not something that happens by itself. It is an outcome that has to be shaped, and the only basis for shaping it is to follow the two cardinal rules that I have just mentioned" — Dr Rajendra K. Pachauri, Chairman of the IPCC. | |||
] | |||
Between 1990 and 2023, the IPCC has published six comprehensive assessment reports reviewing the latest climate science. The IPCC has also produced 14 special reports on particular topics.<ref name="UCS IPCC Who are they?">{{cite web |title=The IPCC: Who Are They and Why Do Their Climate Reports Matter? |url=https://www.ucsusa.org/resources/ipcc-who-are-they |website=Union of Concerned Scientists: Reports & Multimedia - Activist Resources: Explainers |publisher=Union of Concerned Scientists |date=11 October 2018}}</ref> Each assessment report has four parts. These are a contribution from each of the three working groups, plus a synthesis report. The synthesis report integrates the working group contributions. It also integrates any special reports produced in that assessment cycle. | |||
=== |
=== Review process of scientific literature === | ||
The IPCC does not carry out its own research. It does not monitor climate-related data. The reports by IPCC assess scientific papers and independent results from other scientific bodies. The IPCC sets a deadline for publication of scientific papers that a report will cover. That report will not include new information that emerges after this deadline. However, there is a steady evolution of key findings and levels of ] from one assessment report to the next.<ref>{{Cite news |date=9 August 2021 |title=Climate change: Five things we have learned from the IPCC report |work=BBC News |url=https://www.bbc.com/news/science-environment-58138714 |access-date=12 August 2021}}</ref> Each IPCC report notes areas where the science has improved since the previous report. It also notes areas that would benefit from further research. | |||
The ] was published in 1990 and received an update in 1992.<ref>{{Cite web |title=Climate Change: The IPCC 1990 and 1992 Assessments — IPCC |url=https://www.ipcc.ch/report/climate-change-the-ipcc-1990-and-1992-assessments/ |url-status=live |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20210904134132/https://www.ipcc.ch/report/climate-change-the-ipcc-1990-and-1992-assessments/ |archive-date=2021-09-04 |access-date=2021-09-04}}</ref> In intervals of about six years, new editions of IPCC Assessment Report followed. | |||
Work on the fourth assessment report (AR4) is well underway . Author lists and a chapter outline of the WGI report is available . | |||
===Selection and role of authors=== | |||
=== IPCC Third Assessment Report: Climate Change 2001=== | |||
The focal points of the Member states — the individual appointed by each state to liaise with the IPCC — and the observer organizations submit to the IPCC Bureau a list of personalities, which they have freely constituted. The Bureau (more precisely, the co-chairs of the relevant working group, with the help of its technical support unit) uses these lists as a basis for appointing authors, while retaining the possibility of appointing people who are not on the list, primarily on the basis of scientific excellence and diversity of viewpoints, and to a lesser extent by ensuring geographical diversity, experience within the IPCC and gender. Authors may include, in addition to researchers, personalities from the private sector and experts from NGOs.<ref>{{Cite web |title=Q&A: How IPCC reports get written, why they matter and what role governments play in them |url=https://www.sei.org/featured/faq-ipcc-report/ |access-date=2023-07-02 |website=SEI |language=en-GB}}</ref><ref>{{Cite web |title=IPCC Factsheet: How does the IPCC select its authors? |url=https://www.ipcc.ch/site/assets/uploads/2018/02/FS_select_authors.pdf |website=IPCC}}</ref><ref>{{Cite book |first=Adam |last=Standring|title=A critical assessment of the intergovernmental panel on climate change |chapter=Participant Selection|date=2023 |publisher=Cambridge University Press |isbn=978-1-316-51427-6 |editor-last=De Pryck |editor-first=Kari |location=Cambridge New York, NY Port Melbourne, VIC New Delhi Singapore |pages=63–66 |editor-last2=Hulme |editor-first2=Mike}}</ref><ref>{{Cite book |last=De Pryck |first=Kari |title=GIEC, la voix du climat |date=2022 |publisher=Sciences po, les presses |isbn=978-2-7246-3870-7 |series=Collection académique |location=Paris |pages=43, 66–69}}</ref> | |||
The most recent IPCC report is ''Climate Change 2001'', the Third Assessment Report (TAR). | |||
The IPCC Bureau or Working Group Bureau selects the authors of the reports from government nominations. Lead authors of IPCC reports assess the available information about climate change based on published sources.<ref name="Appendix A to the Principles Governing IPCC Work">{{Cite web |title=Procedures — IPCC |url=https://www.ipcc.ch/documentation/procedures/ |access-date=2022-10-04}} | |||
The TAR consists of four reports, three of them from the Working Groups: | |||
</ref><ref>IPCC. </ref> According to IPCC guidelines, authors should give priority to ] sources.<ref name="Appendix A to the Principles Governing IPCC Work" /> Authors may refer to non-peer-reviewed sources ("grey literature"), if they are of sufficient quality.<ref name="Appendix A to the Principles Governing IPCC Work" /> These could include reports from government agencies and non-governmental organizations. Industry journals and ] are other examples of non-peer-reviewed sources.<ref name="Appendix A to the Principles Governing IPCC Work" /> | |||
* Working Group I: The Scientific Basis | |||
* Working Group II: Impacts, Adaptation and Vulnerability | |||
* Working Group III: Mitigation | |||
* Synthesis Report | |||
Authors prepare drafts of a full report divided into chapters. They also prepare a technical summary of the report, and a ].<ref name="Appendix A to the Principles Governing IPCC Work" /> | |||
The "headlines" from the summary for policymakers in ''The Scientific Basis'' were: | |||
Each chapter has a number of authors to write and edit the material. A typical chapter has two coordinating lead authors, ten to fifteen lead authors and a larger number of contributing authors. The coordinating lead authors assemble the contributions of the other authors. They ensure that contributions meet stylistic and formatting requirements. They report to the Working Group co-chairs. Lead authors write sections of chapters. They invite contributing authors to prepare text, graphs or data for inclusion.<ref name=":3">{{cite web | |||
#An increasing body of observations gives a collective picture of a warming world and other changes in the climate system (The global average surface temperature has increased over the 20th century by about 0.6°C; Temperatures have risen during the past four decades in the lowest 8 kilometres of the atmosphere; Snow cover and ice extent have decreased) | |||
|url= https://www.ipcc.ch/site/assets/uploads/2018/02/FS_select_authors.pdf | |||
#Emissions of greenhouse gases and aerosols due to human activities continue to alter the atmosphere in ways that are expected to affect the climate (Anthropogenic aerosols are short-lived and mostly produce negative radiative forcing; Natural factors have made small contributions to radiative forcing over the past century) | |||
|title= IPCC Factsheet: How does the IPCC select its authors? | |||
#Confidence in the ability of models to project future climate has increased (Complex physically-based climate models are required to provide detailed estimates of feedbacks and of regional features. Such models cannot yet simulate all aspects of climate (e.g., they still cannot account fully for the observed trend in the surface-troposphere temperature difference since 1979) and there are particular uncertainties associated with clouds and their interaction with radiation and aerosols. Nevertheless, confidence in the ability of these models to provide useful projections of future climate has improved due to their demonstrated performance on a range of space and time-scales .) | |||
|date= 30 August 2013 | |||
#There is new and stronger evidence that most of the warming observed over the last 50 years is attributable to human activities | |||
|access-date= 12 October 2018 | |||
#Human influences will continue to change atmospheric composition throughout the 21st century | |||
}}</ref> Review editors must ensure that authors respond to comments received during the two stages of drafts review: the first is only open to external experts and researchers, while the second is also open to government representatives.<ref>{{Cite web |title=Guidance Note of the Role of Review Editors of the Working Group I Sixth Assessment Report (WGI AR6) |url=https://www.ipcc.ch/site/assets/uploads/2017/08/AR6_WGI_Guidance_note_Role_REs.pdf |website=IPCC}}</ref><ref>{{Cite web |title=Registration opens for Expert Review of IPCC Working Group II contribution to IPCC Sixth Assessment Report — IPCC |url=https://www.ipcc.ch/2019/10/11/wg2-ar6-first-order-draft-expert-review/ |access-date=2023-07-01}}</ref> | |||
#Global average temperature and sea level are projected to rise under all IPCC SRES scenarios | |||
The Bureau aims for a range of views, expertise and geographical representation in its choice of authors. This ensures the author team includes experts from both developing and developed countries. The Bureau also seeks a balance between male and female authors. And it aims for a balance between those who have worked previously on IPCC reports and those new to the process.<ref name=":3" /> | |||
The TAR estimate for the ] is 1.5 to 4.5 °C; and the average surface temperature is projected to increase by 1.4 to 5.8 Celsius degrees over the period 1990 to 2100, and the sea level is projected to rise by 0.1 to 0.9 metres over the same period. The wide range in predictions is based upon several different scenarios that assume different levels of future CO<sub>2</sub> emissions. Each scenario then has a range of possible outcomes associated with it. The most optimistic outcome assumes an aggressive campaign to reduce CO<sub>2</sub> emissions, while the most pessimistic is a "business as usual" scenario. The more realistic scenarios fall in between. | |||
Scientists who work as authors on IPCC reports do not receive any compensation for this work, and all work on a voluntary basis.<ref name=":7">{{Cite book |last=De Pryck |first=Kari |title=GIEC, la voix du climat |date=2022 |publisher=Sciences po, les presses |isbn=978-2-7246-3870-7 |series=Collection académique |location=Paris |pages=65–66}}</ref> They depend on the salaries they receive from their home institutions or other work. The work is labour-intensive with a big time commitment. It can disrupt participating scientists' research. This has led to concern that the IPCC process may discourage qualified scientists from participating.<ref>{{Cite book |author1=Committee on Analysis of Global Change Assessments |url=http://www.nap.edu/catalog/11868.html#toc |title=Analysis of Global Change Assessments: Lessons Learned |author2=Board on Atmospheric Sciences and Climate |author3=Division of Earth and Life Sciences |publisher=] |year=2007 |isbn=978-0309104852 |access-date=24 July 2007}}</ref><ref>{{Cite book |url=https://www.worldcat.org/oclc/52816599 |title=Climate change science : an analysis of some key questions |date=2001 |publisher=National Academy Press |others=National Research Council. Committee on the Science of Climate Change |isbn=0-309-52872-0 |location=Washington, D.C. |oclc=52816599}}</ref> More than 3,000 authors (coordinating lead authors, lead authors, review editors) have participated in the drafting of IPCC reports since its creation.<ref name=":7" /> | |||
IPCC predictions are based on the same models used to establish the importance of the different factors in global warming. | |||
These models need data about anthropogenic emissions of greenhouse gases and aerosols. | |||
These data are predicted from ]s based on 35 different scenarios. | |||
Scenarios go from pessimistic to optimistic, and predictions of global warming depend on the kind of scenario considered. | |||
=== Review process for assessment reports === | |||
IPCC uses the best available predictions and their reports are under strong scientific scrutiny. | |||
Expert reviewers comment at different stages on the drafts.<ref>{{cite web |last1=IPCC |title=IPCC Factsheet: How does the IPCC review process work? |url=https://www.ipcc.ch/site/assets/uploads/2018/02/FS_review_process.pdf |access-date=18 January 2018 |website=Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change |publisher=IPCC}}</ref> Reviewers come from member governments and IPCC observers. Also, anyone may become an IPCC reviewer by stating they have the relevant expertise. | |||
The IPCC concedes that there is a need for better models and better scientific understanding of some climate phenomena, as well as the uncertainties involved. | |||
Critics assert that the available data is not sufficient to determine the real importance of ]es in climate change. | |||
Sensitivity of climate to greenhouse gases may be overestimated or underestimated because of some flaws in the models and because the importance of some external factors may be misestimated. The predictions are based on scenarios, and the IPCC did not assign any probability to the 35 scenarios used. | |||
There are generally three stages in the review process.<ref name="Appendix A to the Principles Governing IPCC Work" /> First comes expert review of the first draft of the chapters. The next stage is a review by governments and experts of the revised draft of the chapters and the first draft of the Summary for Policymakers. The third stage is a government review of the revised Summary for Policymakers. Review comments and author responses remain in an open archive for at least five years. Finally government representatives together with the authors review the Summary for Policymakers. They go through the Summary for Policymakers line by line to ensure it is a good summary for the underlying report. This final review of the Summary of Policymakers takes place at sessions of the responsible working group or of the Panel. | |||
==== Debate over Climate Change 2001 ==== | |||
===== Economic growth estimates ===== | |||
Castles and Henderson asserted that the IPCC has been using inflated economic growth rates, which result in increased emission estimates . This was incorrect because IPCC growth and emissions rates were based upon several factors and not only ], as rebutted by | |||
There are several types of endorsement which documents receive: | |||
===== Physical modeling ===== | |||
* Approval - Material has been subject to detailed, line-by-line discussion and agreement. (The relevant Working Groups ''approve'' Working Group Summaries for Policymakers. The Panel ''approves'' the Synthesis Report Summary for Policymakers.) | |||
A few participants in IPCC Working Group I (Science) do not agree with the IPCC reports (of the 120 lead authors, 2 have complained ). | |||
* Adoption - Endorsed section by section (not line by line). (The Panel ''adopts'' the full IPCC Synthesis Report. It also ''adopts'' Overview Chapters of Methodology Reports.) | |||
* Acceptance - Not been subject to line-by-line discussion and agreement. But it presents a comprehensive, objective and balanced view of the subject matter. (Working Groups ''accept'' their reports. The Panel ''accepts'' Working Group Summaries for Policymakers after working group approval. The Panel ''accepts'' Methodology Reports.) | |||
=== Key findings and impacts === | |||
A particularly active critic, ] physicist ], expressed his unhappiness about those portions in the Executive Summary based on his contributions in ] before the ]: | |||
==== Assessment reports one to five (1990 to 2014) ==== | |||
] Working Group I Co-chair Sir ] showing a figure that was included in the "Summary for Policymakers" of that report ("]") at a climate conference in 2005]] | |||
* The IPCC's ] (FAR) appeared in 1990. The report gave a broad overview of climate change science. It discussed uncertainties and provided evidence of warming. The authors said they are certain that greenhouse gases are increasing in the atmosphere because of human activity. This is resulting in more warming of the ]'s surface.<ref>{{Cite web |title=FAR Climate Change: Scientific Assessment of Climate Change — IPCC |url=https://www.ipcc.ch/report/ar1/wg1/ |access-date=2022-11-10}}</ref><ref>{{Cite web |date=1990 |title=Climate Change: The IPCC Scientific Assessment: Policymaker Summary - Executive Summary |url=https://www.ipcc.ch/site/assets/uploads/2018/03/ipcc_far_wg_I_spm.pdf |website=ipcc.ch}}</ref> The report led to the establishment of the ] (UNFCCC).<ref name="UCS IPCC Who are they?" /> | |||
* The ] (SAR), was published in 1995. It strengthened the findings of the First Assessment Report. The evidence suggests that there is a discernible human influence on the global climate, it said.<ref>{{Cite web |date=1995 |title=Climate Change 1995: Second Assessment Synthesis |url=https://www.ipcc.ch/site/assets/uploads/2018/05/2nd-assessment-en-1.pdf |website=ipcc.ch}}</ref> The Second Assessment Report provided important material for the negotiations leading to the UNFCCC's ].<ref>{{Cite web |date=2012 |title=Convention on Biological Diversity: Working Relationship Between the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change and the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change |url=https://www.cbd.int/doc/meetings/cop/cop-11/information/cop-11-inf-14-en.doc}}</ref> | |||
* The ] (TAR) was completed in 2001. It found more evidence that most of the global warming seen over the previous 50 years was due to human activity.<ref>{{Cite web |date=1995 |title=Climate Change 1995: Synthesis Report |url=https://www.ipcc.ch/site/assets/uploads/2018/05/SYR_TAR_full_report.pdf |website=ipcc.ch}}</ref> The report includes a graph reconstructing global temperature since the year 1000. The sharp rise in temperature in recent years gave it the name "]". This became a powerful image of how temperature is soaring with climate change. The report also shows how adaptation to the effects of climate change can reduce some of its ill effects. | |||
* The IPCC's ] (AR4) was published in 2007. It gives much greater certainty about climate change. It states: "Warming of the climate system is unequivocal..."<ref>{{Cite web |title=Climate Change 2007: The Physical Science Basis - Summary for Policymakers |url=https://www.ipcc.ch/site/assets/uploads/2018/02/ar4-wg1-spm-1.pdf |website=ipcc.ch}}</ref> The report helped make people around the world aware of climate change. The IPCC shared the ] in the year of the report's publication for this work (see below). | |||
* The ] (AR5) was published in 2013 and 2014. This report again stated the fact of climate change. It warned of the dangerous risks. And it emphasized how the world can counter climate change. Three key findings were for example: Firstly, human influence on the ] is clear. Secondly, the more we disrupt our climate, the more we risk severe, pervasive and irreversible ]. And thirdly, we have the means to limit climate change and build a more prosperous, ] future.<ref>{{Cite web |title=IPCC 5th Assessment Report published |url=https://ieaghg.org/conferences/2-uncategorised/511-ipcc-5th-assessment-report-published |access-date=2022-11-10 |website=ieaghg.org |archive-date=10 November 2022 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20221110173512/https://ieaghg.org/conferences/2-uncategorised/511-ipcc-5th-assessment-report-published |url-status=dead }}</ref> The report's findings were the scientific foundation of the UNFCCC's 2015 ].<ref>{{Cite web |title=IPCC (AR5) report - the foundation for the Paris Agreement |url=https://www.ed.ac.uk/geosciences/research/impact/ipcc/ar5-report |access-date=2022-11-10 |website=The University of Edinburgh |date=7 November 2021 |language=en}}</ref> | |||
====Sixth assessment report (2021/2022)==== | |||
:"The summary does not reflect the full document... For example, I worked on Chapter 7, Physical Processes. This chapter dealt with the nature of the basic processes which determine the response of climate, and found numerous problems with model treatments – including those of clouds and water vapor. The chapter was summarized with the following sentence: 'Understanding of climate processes and their incorporation in climate models have improved, including water vapour, sea-ice dynamics, and ocean heat transport.'" | |||
The IPCC's most recent report is the ]. The first three instalments of AR6 appeared in 2021 and 2022. The final synthesis report was completed in March 2023. | |||
The IPCC published the Working Group I report, ''Climate Change 2021: The Physical Science Basis'', in August 2021.<ref name=":6" /> It confirms that the climate is already changing in every region. Many of these changes have not been seen in thousands of years. Many of them such as ] are irreversible over hundreds of thousands of years. Strong reductions in greenhouse gas emissions would limit climate change. But it could take 20–30 years for the climate to stabilize.<ref>{{Cite web |date=9 August 2021 |title=IPCC Press Release - Working Group I contribution to Sixth Assessment Report |url=https://www.ipcc.ch/site/assets/uploads/2021/08/IPCC_WGI-AR6-Press-Release_en.pdf |website=ipcc.ch}}</ref> This report attracted enormous media and public attention. U.N. Secretary-General ] described it as "code red for humanity".<ref>{{Cite web |date=9 August 2021 |title=IPCC report: 'Code red' for human driven global heating, warns UN chief |url=https://news.un.org/en/story/2021/08/1097362 |website=UN News}}</ref> | |||
The "Summary for Policymakers" of the WG1 reports ''does'' include caveats on model treatments: ''Such models cannot yet simulate all aspects of climate (e.g., they still cannot account fully for the observed trend in the surface-troposphere temperature difference since 1979) and there are particular uncertainties associated with clouds and their interaction with radiation and aerosols. Nevertheless, confidence in the ability of these models to provide useful projections of future climate has improved due to their demonstrated performance on a range of space and time-scales.'' . | |||
The IPCC published the Working Group II report, ''Climate Change 2022: Impacts, Adaptation and Vulnerability'', in February 2022.<ref>IPCC, 2022: ''.'' Contribution of Working Group II to the Sixth Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change . Cambridge University Press. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, UK and New York, New York, US, 3056 pp., doi:10.1017/9781009325844.</ref> Climate change due to human activities is already affecting the lives of billions of people, it said. It is disrupting nature. The world faces unavoidable hazards over the next two decades even with global warming of 1.5 °C, it said.<ref>{{Cite web |title=Press release |url=https://www.ipcc.ch/report/ar6/wg2/resources/press/press-release/ |access-date=2022-11-11 |website=www.ipcc.ch |language=en}}</ref> | |||
These statements are in turn supported by the executive summary of chapter 8 of the report, which includes: | |||
The IPCC published the Working Group III report, ''Climate Change 2022: Mitigation of Climate Change'', in April 2022.<ref>IPCC, 2022'': . Contribution of Working Group III to the Sixth Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change'' . Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, UK and New York, New York, US. doi: 10.1017/9781009157926</ref> It will be impossible to limit warming to 1.5 °C without immediate and deep cuts in greenhouse gas emissions. It is still possible to halve emissions by 2050, it said.<ref>{{Cite web |title=Press release |url=https://www.ipcc.ch/report/ar6/wg3/resources/press/press-release/ |access-date=2022-11-11 |website=www.ipcc.ch |language=en}}</ref> | |||
* ''Coupled models can provide credible simulations of both the present annual mean climate and the climatological seasonal cycle over broad continental scales for most variables of interest for climate change. Clouds and humidity remain sources of significant uncertainty but there have been incremental improvements in simulations of these quantities''. | |||
== Other reports == | |||
* ''Confidence in the ability of models to project future climates is increased by the ability of several models to reproduce the warming trend in 20th century surface air temperature when driven by radiative forcing due to increasing greenhouse gases and sulphate aerosols. However, only idealised scenarios of only sulphate aerosols have been used''. | |||
===Special reports=== | |||
{{main|global climate model}} | |||
The IPCC also publishes other types of reports. It produces Special Reports on topics proposed by governments or observer organizations. Between 1994 and 2019 the IPCC published 14 special reports. Now usually more than one working group cooperates to produce a special report. The preparation and approval process is the same as for assessment reports.<ref name="Appendix A to the Principles Governing IPCC Work" /> | |||
==== Special reports in 2011 ==== | |||
=== IPCC Second Assessment Report: Climate Change 1995 === | |||
During the fifth assessment cycle the IPCC produced two special reports. It completed the Special Report on Renewable Energy Sources and Climate Change Mitigation (SRREN) in 2011. Working Group III prepared this report. The report examined options to use different types of renewable energy to replace fossil fuels. The report noted that the cost of most renewables technologies had fallen. It was likely to fall even more with further advances in technology. It said renewables could increase access to energy. The report reviewed 164 scenarios that examine how renewables could help stop climate change. In more than half of these scenarios, renewables would contribute more than 27% of primary energy supply in mid-century. This would be more than double the 13% share in 2008. In the scenarios with the highest shares for renewable energy, it contributes 77% by 2050.<ref>{{Cite web |title=Renewable Energy Sources and Climate Change Mitigation — IPCC |url=https://www.ipcc.ch/report/renewable-energy-sources-and-climate-change-mitigation/ |access-date=2022-11-16}}</ref> | |||
''Climate Change 1995'', the IPCC Second Assessment Report (SAR) was finished in ]. It is split into four parts: | |||
* A synthesis to help interpret ] article 2. | |||
* ''The Science of Climate Change'' (WG I) | |||
* ''Impacts, Adaptations and Mitigation of Climate Change'' (WG II) | |||
* ''Economic and Social Dimensions of Climate Change'' (WG III) | |||
Later in 2011 the IPCC released the Special Report on Managing the Risks of Extreme Events and Disasters to Advance Climate Change Adaptation (SREX). This was a collaboration between Working Groups I and II. It was the first time two IPCC working groups worked together on a special report. The report shows how climate change has contributed to changes in extreme weather. And it show how policies to avoid and prepare for extreme weather events can reduce their impact. In the same way policies to respond to events and recover from them can make societies more resilient.<ref>{{Cite web |title=Managing the Risks of Extreme Events and Disasters to Advance Climate Change Adaptation — IPCC |url=https://www.ipcc.ch/report/managing-the-risks-of-extreme-events-and-disasters-to-advance-climate-change-adaptation/ |access-date=2022-11-16}}</ref><ref>{{Cite web |date=28 March 2012 |title=PRESS RELEASE: IPCC releases full report on Managing the Risks of Extreme Events and Disasters to Advance Climate Change Adaptation (SREX) |url=https://www.ipcc.ch/site/assets/uploads/2018/06/srex_press_release.pdf |website=ipcc.ch}}</ref> | |||
Each of the last three parts was completed by a separate working group, and each has a Summary for Policymakers (SfP) that represents a consensus of national representatives. The SfP of the WG I report contains headings: | |||
==== Special reports 2018-2019 ==== | |||
# Greenhouse gas concentrations have continued to increase | |||
During the sixth assessment cycle the IPCC produced three special reports. This made it the most ambitious cycle in IPCC history. The ] set a goal of keeping global warming well below 2 °C while trying to hold it at 1.5 °C, when it reached the ] at ] in 2015. But at the time there was little understanding of what warming of 1.5 °C meant. There was little scientific research explaining how the impacts of 1.5 °C would differ from 2 °C. And there was little understanding about how to keep warming to 1.5 °C. So the UNFCCC invited the IPCC to prepare a report on global warming of 1.5 °C. The IPCC subsequently released the ] (SR15) in 2018.<ref>{{Cite web |title=Global Warming of 1.5 °C — |url=https://www.ipcc.ch/sr15/ |access-date=2022-11-17}}</ref> The report showed that it was possible to keep warming below 1.5 °C during the 21st century. But this would mean deep cuts in emissions. It would also mean rapid, far-reaching changes in all aspects of society.<ref>{{Cite web |date=8 October 2018 |title=IPCC Press Release: Summary for Policymakers of IPCC Special Report on Global Warming of 1.5 °C approved by governments |url=https://www.ipcc.ch/site/assets/uploads/sites/2/2019/05/pr_181008_P48_spm_en.pdf |website=ipcc.ch}}</ref> The report showed warming of 2 °C would have much more severe impacts than 1.5 °C. In other words: every bit of warming matters. SR15 had an unprecedented impact for an IPCC report in the media and with the public.<ref name=":4" /> It put the 1.5 °C target at the centre of ].<ref>{{Cite news |date=21 January 2020 |title=Greta Thunberg tells leaders at Davos to heed global heating science |work=The Guardian |url=https://www.theguardian.com/business/2020/jan/21/greta-thunberg-calls-on-world-leaders-to-heed-global-heating-science-davos}}</ref> | |||
# Anthropogenic aerosols tend to produce negative radiative forcings | |||
# Climate has changed over the past century (air temperature has increased by between 0.3 and 0.6 °C since the late 19th century; this estimate has not significantly changed since the 1990 report). | |||
# The balance of evidence suggests a discernible human influence on global climate (considerable progress since the 1990 report in distinguishing between natural and anthropogenic influences on climate, because of: including aerosols; coupled models; pattern-based studies) | |||
# Climate is expected to continue to change in the future (increasing realism of simulations increases confidence; important uncertainties remain but are taken into account in the range of model projections) | |||
# There are still many uncertainties (estimates of future emissions and biogeochemical cycling; models; instrument data for model testing, assessment of variability, and detection studies) | |||
In 2019 the IPCC released two more special reports that examine different parts of the climate system. The ] (SRCCL) examined how the way we use land affects the climate. It looked at emissions from activities such as farming and forestry rather than from energy and transport. It also looked at how climate change is affecting land. All three IPCC working groups and its Task Force on National Greenhouse Gas Inventories collaborated on the report. The report found that climate change is adding to the pressures we are putting on our land we use to live on and grow our food.<ref>{{Cite web |title=Special Report on Climate Change and Land — IPCC site |url=https://www.ipcc.ch/srccl/ |access-date=2022-11-17}}</ref> It will only be possible to keep warming well below 2 °C if we reduce emissions from all sectors including land and food, it said.<ref>{{Cite web |title=Land is a Critical Resource, IPCC report says — IPCC |url=https://www.ipcc.ch/2019/08/08/land-is-a-critical-resource_srccl/ |access-date=2022-11-17}}</ref> | |||
==== Debate over Climate Change 1995 ==== | |||
Most scientists involved in climate research believe that the IPCC reports accurately summarise the state of knowledge. Few scientists have objected and made public comments to that effect. | |||
The ] (SROCC) examined how the ocean and frozen parts of the planet interact with climate change. (The ] includes frozen systems such as ice sheets, glaciers and permafrost.) IPCC Working Groups I and II prepared the report. The report highlighted the need to tackle unprecedented changes in the ocean and cryosphere.<ref>{{Cite web |title=Special Report on the Ocean and Cryosphere in a Changing Climate — |url=https://www.ipcc.ch/srocc/ |access-date=2022-11-17}}</ref> It also showed how ] could help ]. | |||
The report formed the basis of negotiations over the ]. | |||
The IPCC will prepare a special report on climate change and cities during the seventh assessment cycle. | |||
A ], ], Reuters report quoted British scientist ], one of IPCC's lead authors, discussing the Policymakers' Summary. He said: "We produce a draft, and then the policymakers go through it line by line and change the way it is presented.... It's peculiar that they have the final say in what goes into a scientists' report". It is not clear, in this case, whether Shine was complaining that the report had been changed to be more skeptical, or less, or something else entirely. | |||
===Methodology Reports=== | |||
Dr. ], president emeritus of Rockefeller University and past president of the National Academy of Sciences, has publicly denounced the IPCC report, writing "I have never witnessed a more disturbing corruption of the peer-review process than the events that led to this IPCC report". He opposed it in the ] of his ]. | |||
The IPCC has a National Greenhouse Gas Inventories Programme. It develops methodologies and software for countries to report their ] emissions. The IPCC's Task Force on National Greenhouse Gas Inventories (TFI) has managed the program since 1998.<ref name=":5" /> Japan's Institute for Global Environmental Strategies (IGES)<ref>{{Cite web |title=Institute for Global Environmental Strategies (IGES) |url=https://www.iges.or.jp/en |access-date=2022-11-17 |website=IGES |language=en}}</ref> hosts the TFI's Technical Support Unit. | |||
The IPCC approves its methodology reports at sessions of the Panel. The Panel adopts the Methodology Report's Overview Chapter by endorsing it section by section. | |||
In turn, Seitz's comments were vigourously opposed by the presidents of the ] and ], who wrote about a ''systematic effort by some individuals to undermine and discredit the scientific process that has led many scientists working on understanding climate to conclude that there is a very real possibility that humans are modifying Earth's climate on a global scale. Rather than carrying out a legitimate scientific debate... they are waging in the public media a vocal campaign against scientific results with which they disagree'' . | |||
==== Revised 1996 IPCC Guidelines ==== | |||
] disseminated a letter about what he learned about changes to Chapter 8, interpretations of the IPCC Summary's key conclusion, and some policy implications : | |||
The IPCC released its first Methodology Report, the IPCC ''Guidelines for National Greenhouse Gas Inventories'', in 1994. The ''Revised 1996 IPCC Guidelines for National Greenhouse Gas Inventories'' updated this report.<ref>{{Cite web |title=Revised 1996 IPCC Guidelines for National Greenhouse Gas Inventories — IPCC |url=https://www.ipcc.ch/report/revised-1996-ipcc-guidelines-for-national-greenhouse-gas-inventories/ |access-date=2022-11-17}}</ref> Two "good practice reports" complete these guidelines. These are the ''Good Practice Guidance'' ''and Uncertainty Management in National Greenhouse Gas Inventories'' and ''Good Practice Guidance for Land Use, Land-Use Change and Forestry''. Parties to the ] and its ] use the 1996 guidelines and two good practice reports for their annual submissions of inventories. | |||
# Chapter 8 was altered substantially in order to make it conform to the Summary; | |||
# Three key clauses-- expressing the consensus of authors, contributors, and reviewers-- should have been placed into the Summary instead of being deleted from the approved draft chapter; | |||
# The ambiguous phrase "the balance of evidence suggests a discernible human influence on global climate" has been (mis)interpreted by policymakers to mean that a major global warming catastrophe will soon be upon us; | |||
# The IPCC report and its authors are being (mis)used by politicians and others to push an ideologically based agenda. | |||
==== 2006 IPCC Guidelines ==== | |||
Dr. ], Convening Lead Author of Chapter 8 of 1995 IPCC Working Group I Report, replied : | |||
The ''2006 IPCC Guidelines for National Greenhouse Gas Inventories'' further update these methodologies.<ref>{{Cite web |title=2006 IPCC Guidelines for National Greenhouse Gas Inventories — IPCC |url=https://www.ipcc.ch/report/2006-ipcc-guidelines-for-national-greenhouse-gas-inventories/ |access-date=2022-11-17}}</ref> They include a large number of "default emission factors". These are factors to estimate the amount of emissions for an activity. The IPCC prepared this new version of the guidelines at the request of the UNFCCC.<ref>{{Cite web |title=Reporting requirements |url=https://unfccc.int/process-and-meetings/transparency-and-reporting/reporting-and-review-under-the-convention/greenhouse-gas-inventories-annex-i-parties/reporting-requirements |access-date=2022-11-17 |website=unfccc.int}}</ref> The UNFCCC accepted them for use at its ], COP19, in Warsaw. The IPCC added further material in its ''2019 Refinement to the 2006 IPCC Guidelines for National Greenhouse Gas Inventories''.<ref>{{Cite web |title=2019 Refinement to the 2006 IPCC Guidelines for National Greenhouse Gas Inventories — IPCC |url=https://www.ipcc.ch/report/2019-refinement-to-the-2006-ipcc-guidelines-for-national-greenhouse-gas-inventories/ |access-date=2022-11-17}}</ref> | |||
# All revisions were made with the sole purpose of producing the best-possible and most clearly-explained assessment of the science, and were under the full scientific control of the Convening Lead Author of Chapter 8. | |||
#* Changes were made in direct response to: | |||
#** Written comments made by governments and non-governmental organizations (NGOs) during October and November 1995. | |||
#** Comments made by governments and NGOs during the plenary sessions of the IPCC meeting that was held in ] from ]-29th, ]. | |||
#* Post-Madrid changes to Chapter 8 were made solely in response to review comments and/or in order to clarify scientific points. | |||
# After receiving much criticism of the redundancy of a concluding summary (Section 8.7) in October and November 1995, the Convening Lead Author of Chapter 8 decided to remove it. About half of the information in the concluding summary was integrated with material in Section 8.6. | |||
# The bottom-line assessment of the science in the ]th draft of Chapter 8 was "Taken together, these results point towards a human influence on climate". | |||
#* The final assessment in the now-published Summary for Policymakers is that "the balance of evidence suggests that there is a discernible human influence on global climate". | |||
#** The latter sentence, which is entirely consistent with the earlier Oct. 9th sentence, was unanimously approved at the Madrid meeting by delegates from nearly 100 countries. | |||
# None of the changes were politically motivated. | |||
The TFI has started preparations for a methodology report on short-lived climate forcers (SLCFs).<ref>{{Cite web |date=13 September 2022 |title=PROGRESS REPORTS: Task Force on National Greenhouse Gas Inventories |url=https://apps.ipcc.ch/eventmanager/documents/75/140920220535-INF.%205,%20Rev.1%20%20Progress%20Report%20TFI.pdf |website=ipcc.ch}}</ref><ref>{{Cite web |title=Short-Lived Climate Pollutants |url=https://www.worldbank.org/en/topic/climatechange/brief/short-lived-climate-pollutants |access-date=2022-11-17 |website=World Bank |language=en}}</ref> It will complete this report in the next assessment cycle, the seventh. | |||
=== IPCC supplementary report, 1992 === | |||
The 1992 supplementary report was an update, requested in the context of the negotiations on the ] at the ] (United Nations Conference on Environment and Development) in ] in ]. | |||
== Challenges and controversies == | |||
The major conclusion was that research since ] did "not affect our fundamental understanding of the science of the greenhouse effect and either confirm or do not justify alteration of the major conclusions of the first IPCC scientific assessment". It noted that transient (time-dependent) simulations, which had been very preliminary in the FAR, were now improved, but did not include aerosol or ozone changes. | |||
IPCC reports also attract criticism. Criticisms come from both people who say the reports exaggerate the risks and people who say they understate them.<ref name=":2">{{Cite web |last=Scherer |first=Glenn |date=2012-12-06 |title=Climate Science Predictions Prove Too Conservative |url=https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/climate-science-predictions-prove-too-conservative/ |access-date=2022-10-27 |website=Scientific American |language=en}}</ref> The IPCC consensus approach has faced internal and external challenges.<ref name="ess"> 2011</ref><ref name="MO">{{cite journal |last1=Oppenheimer |first1=Michael |author1-link=Michael Oppenheimer |last2=O'Neill |first2=Brian C. |last3=Webster |first3=Mort |last4=Agrawal |first4=Shardul |year=2007 |title=Climate Change, The Limits of Consensus |journal=] |volume=317 |issue=5844 |pages=1505–1506 |doi=10.1126/science.1144831 |pmid=17872430 |s2cid=129837694}}</ref> | |||
===Conservative nature of IPCC reports=== | |||
=== IPCC First Assessment Report: 1990 === | |||
Some critics have argued that IPCC reports tend to be too conservative in their assessments of climate risk. In 2012, it was reported that the IPCC has been criticized by some scientists, who argue that the reports consistently underestimate the pace and impacts of global warming.<ref name=":2" /> As a result, they believe this leads to findings that are the "lowest common denominator".<ref>{{cite journal|last=McKibben|first=Bill |date=15 March 2007 |title=Warning on Warming|journal=The New York Review of Books|volume=54|issue=4|page=18|url=http://www.nybooks.com/articles/19981|access-date=21 February 2010|bibcode=2004Natur.427..197S|doi=10.1038/427197a|doi-access=free}}</ref> {{Clarify|reason=The use of phrase "lowest common denominator" is somewhat ambiguous|date=April 2023}} Similar claims have also been made by scientists who found that for the last several assessment reports, the focus of the IPCC reports skewed more and more towards lower temperatures, especially 1.5°C.<ref>{{cite journal |last1=Jehn |first1=Florian U. |last2=Kemp |first2=Luke |last3=Ilin |first3=Ekaterina |last4=Funk |first4=Christoph |last5=Wang |first5=Jason R. |last6=Breuer |first6=Lutz |title=Focus of the IPCC Assessment Reports Has Shifted to Lower Temperatures |journal=Earth's Future |date=May 2022 |volume=10 |issue=5 |doi=10.1029/2022EF002876}}</ref> Temperatures above 2°C however, have seen much less attention, even though they seem more likely given current emission trajectories.<ref>{{cite journal |last1=Jehn |first1=Florian U |last2=Schneider |first2=Marie |last3=Wang |first3=Jason R |last4=Kemp |first4=Luke |last5=Breuer |first5=Lutz |title=Betting on the best case: higher end warming is underrepresented in research |journal=Environmental Research Letters |date=1 August 2021 |volume=16 |issue=8 |pages=084036 |doi=10.1088/1748-9326/ac13ef}}</ref> | |||
The IPCC first assessment report was completed in 1990, and served as the basis of the ] (UNFCCC). | |||
David Biello, writing in the ], argues that, because of the need to secure consensus among governmental representatives, the IPCC reports give conservative estimates of the likely extent and effects of global warming.<ref>{{cite journal |author=Biello D |date=April 2007 |title=Conservative Climate |journal=Scientific American |volume=296 |issue=4 |pages=16–19 |bibcode=2007SciAm.296d..16B |doi=10.1038/scientificamerican0407-16 |pmid=17479619}}</ref> '']'' editor Brooks Hanson states in a 2010 editorial: "The IPCC reports have underestimated the pace of climate change while overestimating societies' abilities to curb greenhouse gas emissions."<ref name="AAAS">{{cite journal |last=Hanson |first=Brooks |date=7 May 2010 |title=Stepping Back; Moving Forward |journal=] |volume=328 |issue=5979 |pages=667 |bibcode=2010Sci...328..667H |doi=10.1126/science.1190790 |pmid=20448154 |doi-access=free}}</ref> | |||
The executive summary of the policymakers summary of the WG I report includes: | |||
Climate scientist ] argues that the IPCC's conservativeness seriously underestimates the risk of ] on the order of meters—enough to inundate many low-lying areas, such as the southern third of Florida.<ref>{{cite journal |author=Hansen JE |date=April–June 2007 |title=Scientific reticence and sea level rise |journal=Environmental Research Letters |volume=2 |issue=2 |page=024002 |arxiv=physics/0703220 |bibcode=2007ERL.....2b4002H |doi=10.1088/1748-9326/2/2/024002 |s2cid=59929933}}</ref> In January 2024, he told the Guardian, "We are now in the process of moving into the 1.5C world." He added that "passing through the 1.5C world is a significant milestone because it shows that the story being told by the United Nations, with the acquiescence of its scientific advisory body, the IPCC, is a load of bullshit."<ref>, Guardian, 8 January 2023</ref> | |||
*We are certain of the following: there is a natural greenhouse effect...; emissions resulting from human activities are substantially increasing the atmospheric concentrations of the greenhouse gases: CO<sub>2</sub>, methane, CFCs and nitrous oxide. These increases will enhance the greenhouse effect, resulting on average in an additional warming of the Earth's surface. The main greenhouse gas, water vapour, will increase in response to global warming and further enhance it. | |||
] has also stated "Humans are significantly altering the global climate, but in a variety of diverse ways beyond the radiative effect of carbon dioxide. The IPCC assessments have been too conservative in recognizing the importance of these human climate forcings as they alter regional and global climate."<ref>{{cite web |title=Climate Science: Main Conclusions |url=http://climatesci.org/main-conclusions/ |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20081211205600/http://climatesci.org/main-conclusions/ |archive-date=11 December 2008 |access-date=11 December 2008}}</ref> | |||
*We calculate with confidence that: ...CO<sub>2</sub> has been responsible for over half the enhanced greenhouse effect; long-lived gases would require immeadiate reductions in emissions from human activities of over 60% to stabilise their concentrations at today's levels... | |||
], a professor of physics and oceanography at ], argued in 2007 that the IPCC's tendency to make conservative risk assessments had benefits. Rahmstorf argued that "In a way, it is one of the strengths of the IPCC to be very conservative and cautious and not overstate any climate change risk".<ref>{{cite web|title=Climate change: The scientific basis |date=5 February 2007 |access-date=24 July 2007 |url=http://www.ctv.ca/servlet/ArticleNews/story/CTVNews/20070129/ipcc_faq_070129/20070129?hub=SciTech |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20070205051907/http://www.ctv.ca/servlet/ArticleNews/story/CTVNews/20070129/ipcc_faq_070129/20070129?hub=SciTech |url-status=dead |archive-date=5 February 2007 |publisher=]}}</ref> IPCC reports aim to inform policymakers about the state of knowledge on climate change. They do this by assessing the findings of the thousands of scientific papers available on the subject at a given time. Individual publications may have different conclusions to IPCC reports. This includes those appearing just after the release of an IPCC report. This can lead to criticism that the IPCC is either alarmist or conservative. New findings must wait for the next assessment for consideration.<ref>{{Cite web |title=New climate report actually understates threat, some researchers argue |url=https://www.science.org/content/article/new-climate-report-actually-understates-threat-some-researchers-argue |access-date=2022-10-28 |website=www.science.org |language=en}}</ref><ref>{{Cite web |title=How the IPCC is more likely to underestimate the climate response |url=https://skepticalscience.com/print.php?r=51 |access-date=2022-10-28 |website=skepticalscience.com}}</ref> | |||
*Based on current models, we predict: under increase of global mean temperature during the century of about 0.3 <sup>o</sup>C per decade (with an uncertainty range of 0.2 to 0.5 <sup>o</sup>C per decade); this is greater than that seen over the past 10,000 years; under other ... scenarios which assume progressively increasing levels of controls, rates of increase in global mean temperature of about 0.2 <sup>o</sup>C about 0.1 <sup>o</sup>C per decade. | |||
=== Potential industry and political influence === | |||
*There are many uncertainties in our predictions particularly with regard to the timing, magnitude and regional patterns of climate change, due to our incomplete understanding of: sources and sinks of GHGs; clouds; oceans; polar ice sheets. | |||
A memo by ] to the ] in the United States in 2002 was an example of possible political influence on the IPCC. The memo led to strong Bush administration lobbying to oust ], a climate scientist, as IPCC chair. They sought to replace him with ]. Many considered Pachauri at the time as more mild-mannered and industry-friendly.<ref name = "Common Dreams">{{cite news | title=US and Oil Lobby Oust Climate Change Scientist | date=20 April 2002 | access-date=24 July 2007 | first=Julian | last=Borger | url=https://www.theguardian.com/bush/story/0,7369,687650,00.html | newspaper=Guardian | location=London}}</ref> | |||
Governments form the membership of the IPCC. They are the prime audience for IPCC reports. IPCC rules give them a formal role in the scoping, preparation and approval of reports.<ref>{{Cite web |title=Preparing Reports — IPCC |url=https://www.ipcc.ch/about/preparingreports/ |access-date=2022-10-28}}</ref> For instance governments take part in the review process and work with authors to approve the Summary for Policymakers of reports. But some activists have argued that governments abuse this role to influence the outcome of reports.<ref>{{Cite web |title=Leaks show attempts to water down UN climate report – DW – 10/21/2021 |url=https://www.dw.com/en/leaks-show-attempts-to-water-down-un-climate-report-greenpeace-says/a-59570391 |access-date=2022-10-28 |website=dw.com |language=en}}</ref> | |||
*Our judgement is that: global mean surface air temperature has increased by 0.3 to 0.6 <sup>o</sup>C over the last 100 years...; The size of this warming is broadly consistent with predicion of climate models, but it is also of the same magnitude as natural climate variability. Thus the observed increase could be largely due to this natural variability; alternatively this variability and other human factors could have offset a still larger human-induced greenhouse warming. The unequivocal detection of the enhanced greenhouse effect is not likely for a decade or more. | |||
In 2023, it was reported that pressure from ] and ], two countries with large beef industries, caused the IPCC to abandon text recommending the adoption of plant-based diets. An earlier draft of the report, which noted "plant-based diets can reduce GHG emissions by up to 50% compared to the average emission-intensive Western diet", was leaked online in March 2023.<ref>{{Cite web |last=Almendral |first=Aurora |date=2023-03-24 |title=The meat industry blocked the IPCC's attempt to recommend a plant-based diet |url=https://qz.com/ipcc-report-on-climate-change-meat-industry-1850261179 |access-date=2023-03-29 |website=Quartz |language=en}}</ref> | |||
==== Debate over IPCC First Assessment Report: 1990 ==== | |||
In 1991, the ] (The Science & Environmental Policy Project) surveyed IPCC contributors and researchers, along with a comparison group of global warming skeptics who had not contributed . The responses showed that 40% of the IPCC group did not agree with the IPCC FAR summary, and felt that it might convey a misleading message to the public with its emphasis on the certainty about the natural greenhouse effect. The responses also showed that the majority of respondents thought that models had not been adequately validated with observational data, and that attribution of observed warming to an enhanced greenhouse effect had not been shown using only observational data. 60% of respondents also thought that the climate models used did not accurately represent the physical atmosphere-ocean system. | |||
=== Controversy and review after Fourth Assessment Report in 2007 === | |||
== Criticism of IPCC == | |||
The IPCC came under unprecedented media scrutiny in 2009 in the run-up to the ]. This "]" involved the leak of emails from climate scientists. Many of these scientists were authors of the ] which came out in 2007. The discovery of an error in this report that the Himalayan glaciers would melt by 2035 put the IPCC under further pressure.<ref>{{Cite web |last=Pearce |first=Fred |date=21 January 2010 |title=Climate chief admits error over Himalayan glaciers |url=https://www.newscientist.com/article/dn18420-climate-chief-admits-error-over-himalayan-glaciers/ |access-date=2022-10-27 |website=New Scientist |language=en-US}}</ref> Scientific bodies upheld the general findings of the Fourth Assessment Report and the IPCC's approach.<ref>{{Cite web |last=ICSU |date=2011-01-27 |title=ICSU releases statement on the controversy around the 4th IPCC Assessment |url=https://council.science/current/news/icsu-releases-statement-on-the-controversy-around-the-4th-ipcc-assessment/ |access-date=2022-10-27 |website=International Science Council |language=en-US}}</ref><ref>{{Cite web |last=PBL |date=2010-07-06 |title=Assessing an IPCC assessment. An analysis of statements on projected regional impacts in the 2007 report |url=https://www.pbl.nl/en/publications/Assessing-an-IPCC-assessment.-An-analysis-of-statements-on-projected-regional-impacts-in-the-2007-report |access-date=2022-10-27 |website=PBL Netherlands Environmental Assessment Agency |language=en}}</ref> But many people thought the IPCC should review the way it works.<ref name=":1">{{cite news |last=Black |first=Richard |date=10 March 2010 |title=Scientists to review climate body |work=BBC News |url=http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/science/nature/8561004.stm |access-date=4 April 2010}}</ref> | |||
=== Landsea === | |||
In January of 2005 Christopher Landsea resigned from work on the IPCC AR4, saying: | |||
==== InterAcademy Council review in 2010 ==== | |||
:"I personally cannot in good faith continue to contribute to a process that I view as both being motivated by pre-conceived agendas and being scientifically unsound. As the IPCC leadership has seen no wrong in Dr. Trenberth's actions and have retained him as a Lead Author for the AR4, I have decided to no longer participate in the IPCC AR4" . | |||
Public debate after the publication of AR4 in 2009 put the IPCC under scrutiny, with controversies over alleged bias and inaccuracy in its reports. In 2010, this prompted U.N. Secretary-General ] and IPCC chair ] to request that the ] (IAC) review the IPCC and recommend ways to strengthen its processes and procedures for the preparation of AR5. The IAC report made recommendations to fortify IPCC's management structure, to further develop its conflict-of-interest policy, to strengthen the review process, to clarify the guidelines on the use of so-called ], to ensure consistency in the use of probabilities for the likelihood of outcomes, and to improve its communications strategy especially regarding transparency and rapidity of response.<ref>{{cite web |title=InterAcademy Council Report Recommends Fundamental Reform of IPCC Management Structure |url=http://reviewipcc.interacademycouncil.net/ReportNewsRelease.html |url-status=dead |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20130806073912/http://reviewipcc.interacademycouncil.net/ReportNewsRelease.html |archive-date=2013-08-06 |access-date=30 August 2013 |publisher=InterAcademy Council}}</ref> | |||
The United Nations Secretary-General and the Chair of the IPCC asked the InterAcademy Council (IAC) in March 2010 to review the IPCC's processes for preparing its reports.<ref name=":1" /><ref name="IAC report">{{Cite web|url=https://www.interacademies.org/news/interacademy-council-report-recommends-fundamental-reform-ipcc-management-structure|title=InterAcademy Council Report Recommends Fundamental Reform of IPCC Management Structure|first=the InterAcademy|last=Partnership (IAP)|website=www.interacademies.org|date=30 August 2011 }}</ref> The IAC panel, chaired by ], released its report on 1 September 2010.<ref name=":0">{{Cite journal |last=Tollefson |first=J. |year=2010 |title=Climate panel must adapt to survive |journal=Nature |volume=467 |issue=7311 |page=14 |doi=10.1038/467014a |pmid=20811426 |doi-access=free}}</ref> The IAC panel made seven formal recommendations for improving the IPCC's assessment process. The IPCC implemented most of the review's recommendations by 2012. One of these was the introduction of a protocol to handle errors in reports.<ref>{{Cite web |title=Procedures — IPCC |url=https://www.ipcc.ch/documentation/procedures/ |access-date=2022-10-28}}</ref><ref>{{Cite web|url=https://www.ipcc.ch/site/assets/uploads/2018/09/ipcc_error_protocol_en.pdf|title=IPCC Error Protocol}}</ref> Other recommendations included strengthening the science-review process and improving communications. But the IPCC did not adopt the proposal to appoint a full-time executive secretary.<ref name=":0" /><ref>{{Cite web |last=IPCC - Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change |title=REVIEW OF IPCC PROCESSES AND PROCEDURES |url=https://archive.ipcc.ch/organization/organization_review.shtml |access-date=2022-10-27 |website=archive.ipcc.ch}}</ref> | |||
=== Mörner on sea level=== | |||
] has been critical of the . | |||
=== Issues with consensual approach === | |||
Mörner, at the time president of the ] Commission on ''Sea Level Changes and Coastal Evolution'' "reviewed" the IPCC TAR in ]. Morner disagrees with the IPCC estimate of 0.09 to 0.88 metres between ] and ] and prefers his own figure of 0.10 m ±0.10 m". Morner believes that "All handling by IPCC of the Sea Level questions have been done in a way that cannot be accepted and that certainly not concur with modern knowledge of the mode and mechanism of sea level changes". | |||
], a long-time participant in the IPCC, has said the IPCC consensus approach has some limitations. Oppenheimer, a coordinating lead author of the ], called for concurring, smaller assessments of special problems instead of the large-scale approach of previous IPCC assessments.<ref name="MO" /> Others see "mixed blessings" in the drive for consensus within the IPCC. They suggest including dissenting or minority positions.<ref name=hu> ], in (eds.) Doubelday, R. and Willesden, J. March 2013, pp, 142 ff</ref> Others suggest improving statements about uncertainties.<ref name=nocon> Curry, JA and PJ Webster, 2012: Climate change: no consensus on consensus. CAB Reviews, in press, 2012</ref><ref>{{cite journal | url = http://www.nature.com/news/2010/101101/full/news.2010.577.html | title=Climate heretic: Judith Curry turns on her colleagues | journal=Nature | date=1 November 2010 | access-date=22 December 2010| doi=10.1038/news.2010.577 | last1=Lemonick | first1=Michael D. }}</ref> | |||
{{main|sea level rise}} | |||
=== IPCC |
=== Criticism by experts involved with the IPCC process === | ||
Some of the criticism has originated from experts invited by the IPCC to submit reports or serve on its panels. For example, ], a contributing author who works at the ], explained in 2007 the difficulties of establishing scientific consensus on the precise extent of human action on climate change. "Contributing authors essentially are asked to contribute a little text at the beginning and to review the first two drafts. We have no control over editing decisions. Even less influence is granted the 2,000 or so reviewers. Thus, to say that 800 contributing authors or 2,000 reviewers reached consensus on anything describes a situation that is not reality", he wrote.<ref name="Christy-2007">{{cite web|url=http://www.nsstc.uah.edu/atmos/christy/ChristyJR_07EC_subEAQ_written.pdf|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20071128074622/http://www.nsstc.uah.edu/atmos/christy/ChristyJR_07EC_subEAQ_written.pdf |archive-date=2007-11-28|title=Written testimony of John R. Christy Ph.D. before House Committee on Energy and Commerce on March 7, 2007|access-date=29 December 2008}}</ref> ], a hurricane researcher, said of "the part of the IPCC to which my expertise is relevant" that "I personally cannot in good faith continue to contribute to a process that I view as both being motivated by pre-conceived agendas and being scientifically unsound,"<ref>{{cite web |title=An Open Letter to the Community from Chris Landsea |url=http://www.lavoisier.com.au/papers/articles/landsea.html |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20070218131946/http://www.lavoisier.com.au/papers/articles/landsea.html |archive-date=18 February 2007 |access-date=28 April 2007}}</ref> because of comments made at a press conference by ] of which Landsea disapproved. Trenberth said "Landsea's comments were not correct";<ref name="Colorodo.edu-Hurricanes-Prometheus">{{cite web |date=14 February 2007 |title=Prometheus: Final Chapter, Hurricanes and IPCC, Book IV Archives |url=http://sciencepolicy.colorado.edu/prometheus/archives/climate_change/001105final_chapter_hurri.html |access-date=29 August 2010 |publisher=Sciencepolicy.colorado.edu}}</ref> the IPCC replied "individual scientists can do what they wish in their own rights, as long as they are not saying anything on behalf of the IPCC".<ref>{{cite news |date=21 October 2004 |title=Hurricanes and Global Warming for IPCC |agency=Reuters |location=Washington |url=http://sciencepolicy.colorado.edu/prometheus/archives/ipcc-correspondence.pdf |access-date=30 December 2008}}</ref> | |||
== Endorsements and awards == | |||
* "It is strange that the climate reconstruction of Mann has passed both peer review rounds of the IPCC without anyone ever really having checked it. I think this issue will be on the agenda of the next IPCC meeting in Peking in May" (Rob van Dorland, Royal Netherlands Meteorological Institute, ] ]). | |||
=== Endorsements from scientific bodies === | |||
* "The IPCC is monolithic and complacent, and it is conceivable that they are exaggerating the speed of change" (John Maddox, a former editor of the journal Nature, quoted by David Adam in The Guardian, ] ]). | |||
IPCC reports are the benchmark for ].<ref>{{Citation |last1=Paglia |first1=Eric |title=The Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change: Guardian of Climate Science |date=2021 |work=Guardians of Public Value |pages=295–321 |editor-last=Boin |editor-first=Arjen |place=Cham |publisher=Springer International Publishing |language=en |doi=10.1007/978-3-030-51701-4_12 |isbn=978-3-030-51700-7 |last2=Parker |first2=Charles |s2cid=228892648 |editor2-last=Fahy |editor2-first=Lauren A. |editor3-last='t Hart |editor3-first=Paul|doi-access=free }}</ref> There is widespread support for the IPCC in the ]. Publications by other scientific bodies and experts show this.<ref>* {{cite web |title=Scientists Send Letter to Congress and Federal Agencies Supporting IPCC |url=http://www.agu.org/sci_pol/events/2010-03-12_ScientistsLetter_Congress.shtml |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20111024142639/http://www.agu.org/sci_pol/events/2010-03-12_ScientistsLetter_Congress.shtml |archive-date=24 October 2011 |access-date=28 March 2011 |publisher=American Geophysical Union}} | |||
* {{cite web |author=Yohe, G.W. |display-authors=etal |title=An Open Letter from Scientists in the United States on the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change and Errors Contained in the Fourth Assessment Report: Climate Change 2007 |url=http://www.openletterfromscientists.com/ |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20100315155535/http://www.openletterfromscientists.com/ |archive-date=15 March 2010}}. Note: According to Yohe ''et al.'' (2010), more than 250 scientists have signed the statement. | |||
</ref><ref name="2001 science academies statement">{{citation |others=Joint statement by 16 national science academies |title=The Science of Climate Change |date=17 May 2001 |url=http://royalsociety.org/uploadedFiles/Royal_Society_Content/policy/publications/2001/10029.pdf |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20150419074652/https://royalsociety.org/~/media/Royal_Society_Content/policy/publications/2001/10029.pdf |location=London |publisher=Royal Society |isbn=978-0854035588 |archive-date=19 April 2015}}</ref> Many scientific bodies have issued official statements that endorse the findings of the IPCC. For example: | |||
* For the ] in 2001 endorsements came from the ],<ref name="cfcas tar endorsement">{{Cite web|url=http://www.cfcas.org/LettertoPM19apr06e.pdf|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20100821222002/http://www.cfcas.org/LettertoPM19apr06e.pdf|url-status=dead|title=CFCAS Letter to PM, November 25, 2005|archive-date=21 August 2010|access-date=9 August 2019}}</ref> ]<ref>{{Cite book |url=https://nap.nationalacademies.org/catalog/10139/climate-change-science-an-analysis-of-some-key-questions |title=Climate Change Science: An Analysis of Some Key Questions |date=2001 |publisher=National Academies Press |isbn=978-0-309-07574-9 |location=Washington, D.C. |chapter=Summary |doi=10.17226/10139 |chapter-url=https://nap.nationalacademies.org/read/10139/chapter/2}}</ref> and ].<ref>{{Cite web|url=https://cdn.egu.eu/media/filer_public/10/78/10784a01-d4e6-4093-9c8f-8de0ffc3d13b/climate_change.pdf|title=European Geosciences Union (EGU): Position Statements|access-date=1 November 2022|archive-date=10 June 2023|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20230610033148/https://cdn.egu.eu/media/filer_public/10/78/10784a01-d4e6-4093-9c8f-8de0ffc3d13b/climate_change.pdf|url-status=dead}}</ref> | |||
* For the ] in 2007 endorsements came from the ] (ICSU),<ref>{{Cite web |last=admin |date=2011-01-27 |title=ICSU releases statement on the controversy around the 4th IPCC Assessment |url=https://council.science/current/news/icsu-releases-statement-on-the-controversy-around-the-4th-ipcc-assessment/ |access-date=2022-11-01 |website=International Science Council |language=en-US}}</ref> and the ].<ref name="autogenerated1">{{cite web |year=2007 |title=Joint statement by the Network of African Science Academies (NASAC) |url=http://www.interacademies.net/Object.File/Master/4/825/NASAC%20G8%20statement%2007%20-%20low%20res.pdf |url-status=dead |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20080910214452/http://www.interacademies.net/Object.File/Master/4/825/NASAC%20G8%20statement%2007%20-%20low%20res.pdf |archive-date=10 September 2008 |access-date=29 March 2008 |publisher=]}}</ref> | |||
=== Nobel Peace Prize in 2007 === | |||
* UK House of Lords Science and Economic Analysis and Report on IPCC for the G-8 Summit, July 2005: "We have some concerns about the objectivity of the IPCC process, with some of its emissions scenarios and summary documentation apparently influenced by political considerations. There are significant doubts about some aspects of the IPCC’s emissions scenario exercise, in particular, the high emissions scenarios. The Government should press the IPCC to change their approach. There are some positive aspects to global warming and these appear to have been played down in the IPCC reports; the Government should press the IPCC to reflect in a more balanced way the costs and benefits of climate change. The Government should press the IPCC for better estimates of the monetary costs of global warming damage and for explicit monetary comparisons between the costs of measures to control warming and their benefits. Since warming will continue, regardless of action now, due to the lengthy time lags." | |||
{{main|2007 Nobel Peace Prize}} | |||
{{wikisource|Al Gore's Nobel Peace Prize acceptance speech}} | |||
In December 2007, the IPCC received the ] "for their efforts to build up and disseminate greater knowledge about man-made climate change, and to lay the foundations for the measures that are needed to counteract such change". It shared the award with former U.S. Vice-president ] for his work on climate change and the documentary '']''.<ref name="nobelpeaceprize">{{cite web |title=2007 Nobel Peace Prize Laureates |url=http://nobelprize.org/nobel_prizes/peace/laureates/2007/ |access-date=11 October 2007}}</ref> | |||
===Gulbenkian Prize for Humanity in 2022=== | |||
In October 2022, the IPCC and ] shared the ]. The two intergovernmental bodies won the prize because they "produce scientific knowledge, alert society, and inform decision-makers to make better choices for combatting climate change and the loss of biodiversity".<ref name="GulbenkianPrize">{{cite web |title=2022 Gulbenkian Prize for Humanity distinguishes IPBES and IPCC |date=13 October 2022 |url=https://gulbenkian.pt/en/news/2022-gulbenkian-prize-for-humanity-distinguishes-ipbes-and-ipcc/ |access-date=13 October 2022}}</ref> | |||
== See also == | == See also == | ||
{{portal|border=no|Environment|Politics|Renewable energy|Global warming|World}} | |||
* ] | |||
* {{Annotated link |Intergovernmental Science-Policy Platform on Biodiversity and Ecosystem Services}} | |||
* {{Annotated link |United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change}} | |||
{{Clear}} | |||
== References == | |||
{{Reflist}} | |||
== |
==External links== | ||
* {{Official website}} | |||
* | |||
* {{official website|https://www.ipcc-data.org/}} of IPCC Data Distribution Centre (Climate data and guidance on its use) | |||
** | |||
** | |||
** | |||
** from the Working Group 1 (Science) Report. | |||
** | |||
* - from the ] | |||
* by Jean-Marc Jancovici | |||
{{Climate change}} | |||
] | |||
{{United Nations}} | |||
] | |||
{{Authority control}} | |||
] | |||
] | |||
] | |||
] | ] | ||
] | |||
] | |||
] | |||
] | |||
] | |||
] | |||
] | |||
] | |||
] | |||
] | |||
] | |||
] | |||
] | |||
] | |||
] | |||
] | |||
] |
Latest revision as of 16:29, 14 December 2024
Scientific intergovernmental body "IPCC" redirects here. For other uses, see IPCC (disambiguation).
Abbreviation | IPCC |
---|---|
Formation | 1988; 37 years ago (1988) |
Type | Panel |
Headquarters | Geneva, Switzerland |
Chair | Jim Skea |
Vice-Chair | Youba Sokona |
Parent organization | World Meteorological Organization United Nations Environment Program |
Website | www |
Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change |
---|
IPCC Assessment Reports |
IPCC Special Reports |
The Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) is an intergovernmental body of the United Nations. Its job is to advance scientific knowledge about climate change caused by human activities. The World Meteorological Organization (WMO) and the United Nations Environment Programme (UNEP) set up the IPCC in 1988. The United Nations endorsed the creation of the IPCC later that year. It has a secretariat in Geneva, Switzerland, hosted by the WMO. It has 195 member states who govern the IPCC. The member states elect a bureau of scientists to serve through an assessment cycle. A cycle is usually six to seven years. The bureau selects experts in their fields to prepare IPCC reports. There is a formal nomination process by governments and observer organizations to find these experts. The IPCC has three working groups and a task force, which carry out its scientific work.
The IPCC informs governments about the state of knowledge of climate change. It does this by examining all the relevant scientific literature on the subject. This includes the natural, economic and social impacts and risks. It also covers possible response options. The IPCC does not conduct its own original research. It aims to be objective and comprehensive. Thousands of scientists and other experts volunteer to review the publications. They compile key findings into "Assessment Reports" for policymakers and the general public; Experts have described this work as the biggest peer review process in the scientific community.
Leading climate scientists and all member governments endorse the IPCC's findings. This underscores that the IPCC is a well-respected authority on climate change. Governments, civil society organizations and the media regularly quote from its reports. IPCC reports play a key role in the annual climate negotiations held by the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC). The IPCC Fifth Assessment Report was an important influence on the landmark Paris Agreement in 2015. The IPCC shared the 2007 Nobel Peace Prize with Al Gore for contributions to the understanding of climate change.
The seventh assessment cycle of the IPCC began in 2023. In August 2021, the IPCC published its Working Group I contribution to the Sixth Assessment Report (IPCC AR6) on the physical science basis of climate change. The Guardian described this report as the "starkest warning yet" of "major inevitable and irreversible climate changes". Many newspapers around the world echoed this theme. In February 2022, the IPCC released its Working Group II report on impacts and adaptation. It published Working Group III's "mitigation of climate change" contribution to the Sixth Assessment in April 2022. The Sixth Assessment Report concluded with a Synthesis Report in March 2023.
During the period of the Sixth Assessment Report, the IPCC released three special reports. The first and most influential was the Special Report on Global Warming of 1.5°C in 2018. In 2019 the Special Report on Climate Change and Land (SRCCL), and the Special Report on the Ocean and Cryosphere in a Changing Climate (SROCC) came out. The IPCC also updated its methodologies in 2019. So the sixth assessment cycle was the most ambitious in the IPCC's history.
Origins
The predecessor of the IPCC was the Advisory Group on Greenhouse Gases (AGGG). Three organizations set up the AGGG in 1986. These were the International Council of Scientific Unions, the United Nations Environment Programme (UNEP), and the World Meteorological Organization (WMO). The AGGG reviewed scientific research on greenhouse gases. It also studied increases in greenhouse gases. Climate science was becoming more complicated and covering more disciplines. This small group of scientists lacked the resources to cover climate science.
The United States Environmental Protection Agency sought an international convention to restrict greenhouse gas emissions. The Reagan Administration worried that independent scientists would have too much influence. The WMO and UNEP therefore created the IPCC as an intergovernmental body in 1988. Scientists take part in the IPCC as both experts and government representatives. The IPCC produces reports backed by all leading relevant scientists. Member governments must also endorse the reports by consensus agreement. So the IPCC is both a scientific body and an organization of governments. Its job is to tell governments what scientists know about climate change. It also examines the impacts of climate change and options for dealing with it. The IPCC does this by assessing peer-reviewed scientific literature.
The United Nations endorsed the creation of the IPCC in 1988. The General Assembly resolution noted that human activity could change the climate. This could lead to severe economic and social consequences. It said increasing concentrations of greenhouse gases could warm the planet. This would cause the sea level to rise. The effects for humanity would be disastrous if timely steps were not taken.
Organization
Way of working
The IPCC does not conduct original research. It produces comprehensive assessments on the state of knowledge of climate change. It prepares reports on special topics relevant to climate change. It also produces methodologies. These methodologies help countries estimate their greenhouse gas emissions and removals through sinks. Its assessments build on previous reports and scientific publications. Over the course of six assessments the reports reflect the growing evidence for a changing climate. And they show how this is due to human activity.
Rules and governing principles
The IPCC has adopted its rules of procedure in the "Principles Governing IPCC Work". These state that the IPCC will assess:
- the risk of climate change caused by human activities,
- its potential impacts, and
- possible options for prevention.
Under IPCC rules its assessments are comprehensive, objective, open and transparent. They cover all the information relevant to the scientific understanding of climate change. This draws on scientific, technical and socioeconomic information. IPCC reports must be neutral regarding policy recommendations. However, they may address the objective factors relevant to enacting policies.
Structure
The IPCC has the following structure:
- IPCC Panel: Meets in plenary session about twice a year. It may meet more often for the approval of reports. It controls the IPCC's structure, procedures, work programme and budget. It accepts and approves IPCC reports. The Panel is the IPCC corporate entity.
- Chair: Elected by the Panel. Chairs the Bureau and other bodies. Represents the organization.
- Bureau: Elected by the Panel. It currently has 34 members from different geographic regions. Besides the Chair and three IPCC Vice-Chairs, they provide the leadership for the IPCC's three Working Groups and Task Force. It provides guidance to the Panel on the scientific and technical aspects of its work.
- Working Groups: Each has two Co-Chairs, one from a developed and one from a developing country. A technical support unit supports each Working Group. Working Group sessions approve the Summary for Policymakers of assessment and special reports. Each Working Group has a Bureau. This consists of its Co-Chairs and Vice-Chairs, who are also members of the IPCC Bureau.
- Working Group I: Assesses scientific aspects of the climate system and climate change. Co-Chairs: Robert Vautard (France) and Xiaoye Zhang (China)
- Working Group II: Assesses the impacts of climate change on human and natural systems. Assesses adaptation options. Co-Chairs: Bart van den Hurk (Netherlands) and Winston Chow (Singapore)
- Working Group III: Assesses how to stop climate change by limiting greenhouse gas emissions. (Known as "mitigation".) Co-Chairs: Katherine Calvin (United States) and Joy Jacqueline Pereira (Malaysia)
- Task Force on National Greenhouse Gas Inventories. Develops methodologies for estimating greenhouse gas emissions. Co-Chairs: Takeshi Enoki (Japan) and Mazhar Hayat (Pakistan)
- Task Force Bureau: Consists of two Co-Chairs, who are also members of the IPCC Bureau, and 12 members.
- Executive Committee: Consists of the Chair, IPCC Vice-Chairs and the Co-Chairs of the Working Groups and Task Force. It addresses urgent issues that arise between sessions of the Panel.
- Secretariat: Administers activities, supports the Chair and Bureau, point of contact for governments. Supported by UNEP and the WMO.
Chair
The chair of the IPCC is British energy scientist Jim Skea, who is hosted by the International Institute for Environment and Development (IIED). Skea has served since 28 July 2023 with the election of the new IPCC Bureau. His predecessor was Korean economist Hoesung Lee, elected in 2015. The previous chairs were Rajendra K. Pachauri, elected in 2002, Robert Watson, elected in 1997, and Bert Bolin, elected in 1988.
Panel
The Panel consists of representatives appointed by governments. They take part in plenary sessions of the IPCC and its Working Groups. Non-governmental and intergovernmental organizations may attend as observers. Meetings of IPCC bodies are by invitation only. About 500 people from 130 countries attended the 48th Session of the Panel in Incheon, Republic of Korea. This took place in October 2018. They included 290 government officials and 60 representatives of observer organizations. The opening ceremonies of sessions of the Panel and of Lead Author Meetings are open to media. Otherwise, IPCC meetings are closed.
Funding
The IPCC receives funding through a dedicated trust fund. UNEP and the WMO established the fund in 1989. The trust fund receives annual financial contributions from member governments. The WMO, UNEP and other organizations also contribute. Payments are voluntary and there is no set amount required. The WMO covers the operating costs of the secretariat. It also sets the IPCC's financial regulations and rules. The Panel sets the annual budget.
In 2021, the IPCC's annual budget amounts to approximately six million euros, financed by the 195 UN Member states, who contribute "independently and voluntarily". In 2021, the countries giving the most money include the United States, Japan, France, Germany and Norway. Other countries, often developing ones, give an "in-kind contribution, by hosting IPCC meetings". In 2022, this budget was a little less than eight million euros.
List of all reports
Year | Name of report | Type of report |
---|---|---|
2023 | AR6 Synthesis Report: Climate Change 2023 (March 2023) | Synthesis Report |
2021 and 2022 | Sixth Assessment Report (AR6): Climate Change 2021: The Physical Science Basis (Working Group I, August 2021), Climate Change 2022: Impacts, Adaptation and Vulnerability (Working Group II, February 2022), Mitigation of Climate Change (Working Group III, April 2022) | Assessment Report (Working Group contributions) |
2019 | Special Report on the Ocean and Cryosphere in a Changing Climate (SROCC) | Special Report |
2019 | Special Report on Climate Change and Land (SRCCL) | Special Report |
2019 | 2019 Refinement to the 2006 IPCC Guidelines for National Greenhouse Gas Inventories | Methodology Report |
2018 | Special Report on Global Warming of 1.5 °C (SR15) | Special Report |
2014 | AR5 Synthesis Report: Climate Change 2014 | Synthesis Report |
2013 and 2014 | Fifth Assessment Report (AR5) Climate Change 2013: The Physical Science Basis (Working Group I, September 2013), Climate Change 2014: Impacts, Adaptation and Vulnerability (Working Group II, March 2014), Climate Change 2014: Mitigation of Climate Change (Working Group III, April 2014) | Assessment (Working Group contributions) |
2013 | 2013 Supplement to the 2006 IPCC Guidelines for National Greenhouse Gas Inventories: Wetlands | Methodology Report |
2013 | 2013 Revised Supplementary Methods and Good Practice Guidance Arising from the Kyoto Protocol | Methodology Report |
2011 | Managing the Risks of Extreme Events and Disasters to Advance Climate Change Adaptation (SREX) | Special Report |
2011 | Renewable Energy Sources and Climate Change Mitigation (SRREN) | Special Report |
2007 | AR4 Synthesis Report: Climate Change 2007 | Synthesis Report |
2007 | Fourth Assessment Report (AR4) Climate Change 2007: The Physical Science Basis (Working Group I, February 2007), Climate Change 2007: Impacts, Adaptation, and Vulnerability (Working Group II, April 2007), Climate Change 2007: Mitigation of Climate Change (Working Group III, May 2007) | Assessment Report (Working Group contributions) |
2006 | 2006 IPCC Guidelines for National Greenhouse Gas Inventories | Methodology Report |
2005 | Safeguarding the Ozone Layer and the Global Climate System | Special Report |
2005 | Carbon Dioxide Capture and Storage | Special Report |
2003 | Good Practice Guidance for Land Use, Land-Use Change and Forestry | Methodology Report |
2003 | Definitions and Methodological Options to Inventory Emissions from Direct Human-induced Degradation of Forests and Devegatation of Other Vegetation Types | Methodology Report |
2001 | TAR Synthesis Report: Climate Change 2001 | Synthesis Report |
2001 | Third Assessment Report (TAR) Climate Change 2001: The Scientific Basis (Working Group I), Climate Change 2001: Impacts, Adaptation, and Vulnerability (Working Group II), Climate Change 2001: Mitigation (Working Group III) | Assessment Report (Working Group contributions) |
2000 | Good Practice Guidance and Uncertainty Management in National Greenhouse Gas Inventories | Methodology Report |
2000 | Methodological and Technological Issues in Technology Transfer | Special Report |
2000 | Land Use, Land-Use Change, and Forestry | Special Report |
2000 | Special Report on Emissions Scenarios (SRES) | Special Report |
1999 | Aviation and the Global Atmosphere | Special Report |
1997 | The Regional Impacts of Climate Change: An Assessment of Vulnerability | Special Report |
1996 | Revised 1996 IPCC Guidelines for National Greenhouse Gas Inventories | Methodology Report |
1996 | SAR Synthesis Report: Climate Change 1995 | Synthesis Report |
1995 | Second Assessment Report (SAR) Climate Change 1995: The Science of Climate Change (Working Group I), Climate Change 1995: Impacts, Adaptations and Mitigation of Climate Change: Scientific-Technical Analyses (Working Group II), Climate Change 1995: Economic and Social Dimensions of Climate Change (Working Group III) | Assessment Report (Working Group contributions) |
1994 | IPCC Guidelines for National Greenhouse Gas Inventories | Methodology Report |
1994 | Climate Change 1994: Radiative Forcing of Climate Change and An Evaluation of the IPCC IS92 Emission Scenarios | Special Report |
1994 | IPCC Technical Guidelines for Assessing Climate Change Impacts and Adaptations | Special Report |
1992 | FAR Climate Change: The IPCC 1990 and 1992 Assessments (June 1992) (includes an Overview of the whole report) | Assessment Report (Working Group contributions)/Synthesis Report |
1992 | FAR Climate Change 1992: The Supplementary Report to the IPCC Scientific Assessment (Working Group I, February 2022), Climate Change 1992: The Supplementary Report to the IPCC Impacts Assessment (Working Group II, February 2022) | Assessment Report (Working Group contributions) |
1990 | First Assessment Report (FAR) Climate Change: The IPCC Scientific Assessment (Working Group I), Climate Change: The IPCC Impacts Assessment (Working Group II), Climate Change: The IPCC Response Strategies (Working Group III) | Assessment Report (Working Group contributions) |
Activities other than report preparation
The IPCC bases its work on the decisions of the WMO and UNEP, which established the IPCC. It also supports the work of the UNFCCC. The main work of the IPCC is to prepare assessment and other reports. It also supports other activities such as the Data Distribution Centre. This helps manage data related to IPCC reports.
The IPCC has a "Gender Policy and Implementation Plan" to pay attention to gender in its work. It aims to carry out its work in an inclusive and respectful manner. The IPCC aims for balance in participation in IPCC work. This should offer all participants equal opportunity.
Communications and dissemination activities
The IPCC enhanced its communications activities for the Fifth Assessment Report. For instance it made the approved report and press release available to registered media under embargo before the release. And it expanded its outreach activities with an outreach calendar. The IPCC held an Expert Meeting on Communication in February 2016, at the start of the Sixth Assessment Report cycle. Members of the old and new Bureaus worked with communications experts and practitioners at this meeting. This meeting produced a series of recommendations. The IPCC adopted many of them. One was to bring people with communications expertise into the Working Group Technical Support Units. Another was to consider communications questions early on in the preparation of reports.
Following these steps in communications, the IPCC saw a significant increase in media coverage of its reports. This was particularly the case with the Special Report on Global Warming of 1.5 °C in 2018 and Climate Change 2021: The Physical Science Basis, the Working Group I contribution to the Sixth Assessment Report, in 2021. There was also much greater public interest, reflected in the youth and other movements that emerged in 2018.
IPCC reports are important for public awareness of climate change and related policymaking. This has led to a number of academic studies of IPCC communications, for example in 2021.
Archiving
The IPCC archives its reports and electronic files on its website. They include the review comments on drafts of reports. The Environmental Science and Public Policy Archives in the Harvard Library also archives them.
Assessment reports
Main articles: IPCC First Assessment Report, IPCC Second Assessment Report, IPCC Third Assessment Report, IPCC Fourth Assessment Report, IPCC Fifth Assessment Report, and IPCC Sixth Assessment ReportBetween 1990 and 2023, the IPCC has published six comprehensive assessment reports reviewing the latest climate science. The IPCC has also produced 14 special reports on particular topics. Each assessment report has four parts. These are a contribution from each of the three working groups, plus a synthesis report. The synthesis report integrates the working group contributions. It also integrates any special reports produced in that assessment cycle.
Review process of scientific literature
The IPCC does not carry out its own research. It does not monitor climate-related data. The reports by IPCC assess scientific papers and independent results from other scientific bodies. The IPCC sets a deadline for publication of scientific papers that a report will cover. That report will not include new information that emerges after this deadline. However, there is a steady evolution of key findings and levels of scientific confidence from one assessment report to the next. Each IPCC report notes areas where the science has improved since the previous report. It also notes areas that would benefit from further research.
The First Assessment Report was published in 1990 and received an update in 1992. In intervals of about six years, new editions of IPCC Assessment Report followed.
Selection and role of authors
The focal points of the Member states — the individual appointed by each state to liaise with the IPCC — and the observer organizations submit to the IPCC Bureau a list of personalities, which they have freely constituted. The Bureau (more precisely, the co-chairs of the relevant working group, with the help of its technical support unit) uses these lists as a basis for appointing authors, while retaining the possibility of appointing people who are not on the list, primarily on the basis of scientific excellence and diversity of viewpoints, and to a lesser extent by ensuring geographical diversity, experience within the IPCC and gender. Authors may include, in addition to researchers, personalities from the private sector and experts from NGOs.
The IPCC Bureau or Working Group Bureau selects the authors of the reports from government nominations. Lead authors of IPCC reports assess the available information about climate change based on published sources. According to IPCC guidelines, authors should give priority to peer-reviewed sources. Authors may refer to non-peer-reviewed sources ("grey literature"), if they are of sufficient quality. These could include reports from government agencies and non-governmental organizations. Industry journals and model results are other examples of non-peer-reviewed sources.
Authors prepare drafts of a full report divided into chapters. They also prepare a technical summary of the report, and a summary for policymakers.
Each chapter has a number of authors to write and edit the material. A typical chapter has two coordinating lead authors, ten to fifteen lead authors and a larger number of contributing authors. The coordinating lead authors assemble the contributions of the other authors. They ensure that contributions meet stylistic and formatting requirements. They report to the Working Group co-chairs. Lead authors write sections of chapters. They invite contributing authors to prepare text, graphs or data for inclusion. Review editors must ensure that authors respond to comments received during the two stages of drafts review: the first is only open to external experts and researchers, while the second is also open to government representatives.
The Bureau aims for a range of views, expertise and geographical representation in its choice of authors. This ensures the author team includes experts from both developing and developed countries. The Bureau also seeks a balance between male and female authors. And it aims for a balance between those who have worked previously on IPCC reports and those new to the process.
Scientists who work as authors on IPCC reports do not receive any compensation for this work, and all work on a voluntary basis. They depend on the salaries they receive from their home institutions or other work. The work is labour-intensive with a big time commitment. It can disrupt participating scientists' research. This has led to concern that the IPCC process may discourage qualified scientists from participating. More than 3,000 authors (coordinating lead authors, lead authors, review editors) have participated in the drafting of IPCC reports since its creation.
Review process for assessment reports
Expert reviewers comment at different stages on the drafts. Reviewers come from member governments and IPCC observers. Also, anyone may become an IPCC reviewer by stating they have the relevant expertise.
There are generally three stages in the review process. First comes expert review of the first draft of the chapters. The next stage is a review by governments and experts of the revised draft of the chapters and the first draft of the Summary for Policymakers. The third stage is a government review of the revised Summary for Policymakers. Review comments and author responses remain in an open archive for at least five years. Finally government representatives together with the authors review the Summary for Policymakers. They go through the Summary for Policymakers line by line to ensure it is a good summary for the underlying report. This final review of the Summary of Policymakers takes place at sessions of the responsible working group or of the Panel.
There are several types of endorsement which documents receive:
- Approval - Material has been subject to detailed, line-by-line discussion and agreement. (The relevant Working Groups approve Working Group Summaries for Policymakers. The Panel approves the Synthesis Report Summary for Policymakers.)
- Adoption - Endorsed section by section (not line by line). (The Panel adopts the full IPCC Synthesis Report. It also adopts Overview Chapters of Methodology Reports.)
- Acceptance - Not been subject to line-by-line discussion and agreement. But it presents a comprehensive, objective and balanced view of the subject matter. (Working Groups accept their reports. The Panel accepts Working Group Summaries for Policymakers after working group approval. The Panel accepts Methodology Reports.)
Key findings and impacts
Assessment reports one to five (1990 to 2014)
- The IPCC's First Assessment Report (FAR) appeared in 1990. The report gave a broad overview of climate change science. It discussed uncertainties and provided evidence of warming. The authors said they are certain that greenhouse gases are increasing in the atmosphere because of human activity. This is resulting in more warming of the Earth's surface. The report led to the establishment of the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC).
- The Second Assessment Report (SAR), was published in 1995. It strengthened the findings of the First Assessment Report. The evidence suggests that there is a discernible human influence on the global climate, it said. The Second Assessment Report provided important material for the negotiations leading to the UNFCCC's Kyoto Protocol.
- The Third Assessment Report (TAR) was completed in 2001. It found more evidence that most of the global warming seen over the previous 50 years was due to human activity. The report includes a graph reconstructing global temperature since the year 1000. The sharp rise in temperature in recent years gave it the name "hockey stick". This became a powerful image of how temperature is soaring with climate change. The report also shows how adaptation to the effects of climate change can reduce some of its ill effects.
- The IPCC's Fourth Assessment Report (AR4) was published in 2007. It gives much greater certainty about climate change. It states: "Warming of the climate system is unequivocal..." The report helped make people around the world aware of climate change. The IPCC shared the Nobel Peace Prize in the year of the report's publication for this work (see below).
- The Fifth Assessment Report (AR5) was published in 2013 and 2014. This report again stated the fact of climate change. It warned of the dangerous risks. And it emphasized how the world can counter climate change. Three key findings were for example: Firstly, human influence on the climate system is clear. Secondly, the more we disrupt our climate, the more we risk severe, pervasive and irreversible impacts. And thirdly, we have the means to limit climate change and build a more prosperous, sustainable future. The report's findings were the scientific foundation of the UNFCCC's 2015 Paris Agreement.
Sixth assessment report (2021/2022)
The IPCC's most recent report is the Sixth Assessment Report (AR6). The first three instalments of AR6 appeared in 2021 and 2022. The final synthesis report was completed in March 2023.
The IPCC published the Working Group I report, Climate Change 2021: The Physical Science Basis, in August 2021. It confirms that the climate is already changing in every region. Many of these changes have not been seen in thousands of years. Many of them such as sea-level rise are irreversible over hundreds of thousands of years. Strong reductions in greenhouse gas emissions would limit climate change. But it could take 20–30 years for the climate to stabilize. This report attracted enormous media and public attention. U.N. Secretary-General António Guterres described it as "code red for humanity".
The IPCC published the Working Group II report, Climate Change 2022: Impacts, Adaptation and Vulnerability, in February 2022. Climate change due to human activities is already affecting the lives of billions of people, it said. It is disrupting nature. The world faces unavoidable hazards over the next two decades even with global warming of 1.5 °C, it said.
The IPCC published the Working Group III report, Climate Change 2022: Mitigation of Climate Change, in April 2022. It will be impossible to limit warming to 1.5 °C without immediate and deep cuts in greenhouse gas emissions. It is still possible to halve emissions by 2050, it said.
Other reports
Special reports
The IPCC also publishes other types of reports. It produces Special Reports on topics proposed by governments or observer organizations. Between 1994 and 2019 the IPCC published 14 special reports. Now usually more than one working group cooperates to produce a special report. The preparation and approval process is the same as for assessment reports.
Special reports in 2011
During the fifth assessment cycle the IPCC produced two special reports. It completed the Special Report on Renewable Energy Sources and Climate Change Mitigation (SRREN) in 2011. Working Group III prepared this report. The report examined options to use different types of renewable energy to replace fossil fuels. The report noted that the cost of most renewables technologies had fallen. It was likely to fall even more with further advances in technology. It said renewables could increase access to energy. The report reviewed 164 scenarios that examine how renewables could help stop climate change. In more than half of these scenarios, renewables would contribute more than 27% of primary energy supply in mid-century. This would be more than double the 13% share in 2008. In the scenarios with the highest shares for renewable energy, it contributes 77% by 2050.
Later in 2011 the IPCC released the Special Report on Managing the Risks of Extreme Events and Disasters to Advance Climate Change Adaptation (SREX). This was a collaboration between Working Groups I and II. It was the first time two IPCC working groups worked together on a special report. The report shows how climate change has contributed to changes in extreme weather. And it show how policies to avoid and prepare for extreme weather events can reduce their impact. In the same way policies to respond to events and recover from them can make societies more resilient.
Special reports 2018-2019
During the sixth assessment cycle the IPCC produced three special reports. This made it the most ambitious cycle in IPCC history. The UNFCCC set a goal of keeping global warming well below 2 °C while trying to hold it at 1.5 °C, when it reached the Paris Agreement at COP21 in 2015. But at the time there was little understanding of what warming of 1.5 °C meant. There was little scientific research explaining how the impacts of 1.5 °C would differ from 2 °C. And there was little understanding about how to keep warming to 1.5 °C. So the UNFCCC invited the IPCC to prepare a report on global warming of 1.5 °C. The IPCC subsequently released the Special Report on Global Warming of 1.5 °C (SR15) in 2018. The report showed that it was possible to keep warming below 1.5 °C during the 21st century. But this would mean deep cuts in emissions. It would also mean rapid, far-reaching changes in all aspects of society. The report showed warming of 2 °C would have much more severe impacts than 1.5 °C. In other words: every bit of warming matters. SR15 had an unprecedented impact for an IPCC report in the media and with the public. It put the 1.5 °C target at the centre of climate activism.
In 2019 the IPCC released two more special reports that examine different parts of the climate system. The Special Report on Climate Change and Land (SRCCL) examined how the way we use land affects the climate. It looked at emissions from activities such as farming and forestry rather than from energy and transport. It also looked at how climate change is affecting land. All three IPCC working groups and its Task Force on National Greenhouse Gas Inventories collaborated on the report. The report found that climate change is adding to the pressures we are putting on our land we use to live on and grow our food. It will only be possible to keep warming well below 2 °C if we reduce emissions from all sectors including land and food, it said.
The Special Report on the Ocean and Cryosphere in a Changing Climate (SROCC) examined how the ocean and frozen parts of the planet interact with climate change. (The cryosphere includes frozen systems such as ice sheets, glaciers and permafrost.) IPCC Working Groups I and II prepared the report. The report highlighted the need to tackle unprecedented changes in the ocean and cryosphere. It also showed how adaptation could help sustainable development.
The IPCC will prepare a special report on climate change and cities during the seventh assessment cycle.
Methodology Reports
The IPCC has a National Greenhouse Gas Inventories Programme. It develops methodologies and software for countries to report their greenhouse gas emissions. The IPCC's Task Force on National Greenhouse Gas Inventories (TFI) has managed the program since 1998. Japan's Institute for Global Environmental Strategies (IGES) hosts the TFI's Technical Support Unit.
The IPCC approves its methodology reports at sessions of the Panel. The Panel adopts the Methodology Report's Overview Chapter by endorsing it section by section.
Revised 1996 IPCC Guidelines
The IPCC released its first Methodology Report, the IPCC Guidelines for National Greenhouse Gas Inventories, in 1994. The Revised 1996 IPCC Guidelines for National Greenhouse Gas Inventories updated this report. Two "good practice reports" complete these guidelines. These are the Good Practice Guidance and Uncertainty Management in National Greenhouse Gas Inventories and Good Practice Guidance for Land Use, Land-Use Change and Forestry. Parties to the UNFCCC and its Kyoto Protocol use the 1996 guidelines and two good practice reports for their annual submissions of inventories.
2006 IPCC Guidelines
The 2006 IPCC Guidelines for National Greenhouse Gas Inventories further update these methodologies. They include a large number of "default emission factors". These are factors to estimate the amount of emissions for an activity. The IPCC prepared this new version of the guidelines at the request of the UNFCCC. The UNFCCC accepted them for use at its 2013 Climate Change Conference, COP19, in Warsaw. The IPCC added further material in its 2019 Refinement to the 2006 IPCC Guidelines for National Greenhouse Gas Inventories.
The TFI has started preparations for a methodology report on short-lived climate forcers (SLCFs). It will complete this report in the next assessment cycle, the seventh.
Challenges and controversies
IPCC reports also attract criticism. Criticisms come from both people who say the reports exaggerate the risks and people who say they understate them. The IPCC consensus approach has faced internal and external challenges.
Conservative nature of IPCC reports
Some critics have argued that IPCC reports tend to be too conservative in their assessments of climate risk. In 2012, it was reported that the IPCC has been criticized by some scientists, who argue that the reports consistently underestimate the pace and impacts of global warming. As a result, they believe this leads to findings that are the "lowest common denominator". Similar claims have also been made by scientists who found that for the last several assessment reports, the focus of the IPCC reports skewed more and more towards lower temperatures, especially 1.5°C. Temperatures above 2°C however, have seen much less attention, even though they seem more likely given current emission trajectories.
David Biello, writing in the Scientific American, argues that, because of the need to secure consensus among governmental representatives, the IPCC reports give conservative estimates of the likely extent and effects of global warming. Science editor Brooks Hanson states in a 2010 editorial: "The IPCC reports have underestimated the pace of climate change while overestimating societies' abilities to curb greenhouse gas emissions."
Climate scientist James E. Hansen argues that the IPCC's conservativeness seriously underestimates the risk of sea-level rise on the order of meters—enough to inundate many low-lying areas, such as the southern third of Florida. In January 2024, he told the Guardian, "We are now in the process of moving into the 1.5C world." He added that "passing through the 1.5C world is a significant milestone because it shows that the story being told by the United Nations, with the acquiescence of its scientific advisory body, the IPCC, is a load of bullshit."
Roger A. Pielke Sr. has also stated "Humans are significantly altering the global climate, but in a variety of diverse ways beyond the radiative effect of carbon dioxide. The IPCC assessments have been too conservative in recognizing the importance of these human climate forcings as they alter regional and global climate."
Stefan Rahmstorf, a professor of physics and oceanography at University of Potsdam, argued in 2007 that the IPCC's tendency to make conservative risk assessments had benefits. Rahmstorf argued that "In a way, it is one of the strengths of the IPCC to be very conservative and cautious and not overstate any climate change risk". IPCC reports aim to inform policymakers about the state of knowledge on climate change. They do this by assessing the findings of the thousands of scientific papers available on the subject at a given time. Individual publications may have different conclusions to IPCC reports. This includes those appearing just after the release of an IPCC report. This can lead to criticism that the IPCC is either alarmist or conservative. New findings must wait for the next assessment for consideration.
Potential industry and political influence
A memo by ExxonMobil to the Bush administration in the United States in 2002 was an example of possible political influence on the IPCC. The memo led to strong Bush administration lobbying to oust Robert Watson, a climate scientist, as IPCC chair. They sought to replace him with Rajendra Pachauri. Many considered Pachauri at the time as more mild-mannered and industry-friendly.
Governments form the membership of the IPCC. They are the prime audience for IPCC reports. IPCC rules give them a formal role in the scoping, preparation and approval of reports. For instance governments take part in the review process and work with authors to approve the Summary for Policymakers of reports. But some activists have argued that governments abuse this role to influence the outcome of reports.
In 2023, it was reported that pressure from Brazil and Argentina, two countries with large beef industries, caused the IPCC to abandon text recommending the adoption of plant-based diets. An earlier draft of the report, which noted "plant-based diets can reduce GHG emissions by up to 50% compared to the average emission-intensive Western diet", was leaked online in March 2023.
Controversy and review after Fourth Assessment Report in 2007
The IPCC came under unprecedented media scrutiny in 2009 in the run-up to the Copenhagen climate conference. This "Climatic Research Unit email controversy" involved the leak of emails from climate scientists. Many of these scientists were authors of the Fourth Assessment Report which came out in 2007. The discovery of an error in this report that the Himalayan glaciers would melt by 2035 put the IPCC under further pressure. Scientific bodies upheld the general findings of the Fourth Assessment Report and the IPCC's approach. But many people thought the IPCC should review the way it works.
InterAcademy Council review in 2010
Public debate after the publication of AR4 in 2009 put the IPCC under scrutiny, with controversies over alleged bias and inaccuracy in its reports. In 2010, this prompted U.N. Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon and IPCC chair Rajendra K. Pachauri to request that the InterAcademy Council (IAC) review the IPCC and recommend ways to strengthen its processes and procedures for the preparation of AR5. The IAC report made recommendations to fortify IPCC's management structure, to further develop its conflict-of-interest policy, to strengthen the review process, to clarify the guidelines on the use of so-called gray literature, to ensure consistency in the use of probabilities for the likelihood of outcomes, and to improve its communications strategy especially regarding transparency and rapidity of response.
The United Nations Secretary-General and the Chair of the IPCC asked the InterAcademy Council (IAC) in March 2010 to review the IPCC's processes for preparing its reports. The IAC panel, chaired by Harold Tafler Shapiro, released its report on 1 September 2010. The IAC panel made seven formal recommendations for improving the IPCC's assessment process. The IPCC implemented most of the review's recommendations by 2012. One of these was the introduction of a protocol to handle errors in reports. Other recommendations included strengthening the science-review process and improving communications. But the IPCC did not adopt the proposal to appoint a full-time executive secretary.
Issues with consensual approach
Michael Oppenheimer, a long-time participant in the IPCC, has said the IPCC consensus approach has some limitations. Oppenheimer, a coordinating lead author of the Fifth Assessment Report, called for concurring, smaller assessments of special problems instead of the large-scale approach of previous IPCC assessments. Others see "mixed blessings" in the drive for consensus within the IPCC. They suggest including dissenting or minority positions. Others suggest improving statements about uncertainties.
Criticism by experts involved with the IPCC process
Some of the criticism has originated from experts invited by the IPCC to submit reports or serve on its panels. For example, John Christy, a contributing author who works at the University of Alabama in Huntsville, explained in 2007 the difficulties of establishing scientific consensus on the precise extent of human action on climate change. "Contributing authors essentially are asked to contribute a little text at the beginning and to review the first two drafts. We have no control over editing decisions. Even less influence is granted the 2,000 or so reviewers. Thus, to say that 800 contributing authors or 2,000 reviewers reached consensus on anything describes a situation that is not reality", he wrote. Christopher Landsea, a hurricane researcher, said of "the part of the IPCC to which my expertise is relevant" that "I personally cannot in good faith continue to contribute to a process that I view as both being motivated by pre-conceived agendas and being scientifically unsound," because of comments made at a press conference by Kevin Trenberth of which Landsea disapproved. Trenberth said "Landsea's comments were not correct"; the IPCC replied "individual scientists can do what they wish in their own rights, as long as they are not saying anything on behalf of the IPCC".
Endorsements and awards
Endorsements from scientific bodies
IPCC reports are the benchmark for climate science. There is widespread support for the IPCC in the scientific community. Publications by other scientific bodies and experts show this. Many scientific bodies have issued official statements that endorse the findings of the IPCC. For example:
- For the Third Assessment Report in 2001 endorsements came from the Canadian Foundation for Climate and Atmospheric Sciences, United States National Research Council and European Geosciences Union.
- For the Fourth Assessment Report in 2007 endorsements came from the International Council for Science (ICSU), and the Network of African Science Academies.
Nobel Peace Prize in 2007
Main article: 2007 Nobel Peace PrizeIn December 2007, the IPCC received the Nobel Peace Prize "for their efforts to build up and disseminate greater knowledge about man-made climate change, and to lay the foundations for the measures that are needed to counteract such change". It shared the award with former U.S. Vice-president Al Gore for his work on climate change and the documentary An Inconvenient Truth.
Gulbenkian Prize for Humanity in 2022
In October 2022, the IPCC and IPBES shared the Gulbenkian Prize for Humanity. The two intergovernmental bodies won the prize because they "produce scientific knowledge, alert society, and inform decision-makers to make better choices for combatting climate change and the loss of biodiversity".
See also
- Intergovernmental Science-Policy Platform on Biodiversity and Ecosystem Services – Intergovernmental organization in science and policy
- United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change – International environmental treaty
References
- "About the IPCC". Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change. Retrieved 22 February 2019.
- ^ "UN General Assembly Resolution 43/53 "Protection of global climate for present and future generations of mankind"" (PDF). UN General Assembly Resolutions 43rd Session 1988-1989. United Nations. Archived from the original (PDF) on 8 December 2022. Retrieved 2 April 2022.
- "Annex C to Appendix C to the Principles Governing IPCC Work". IPCC Procedures. IPCC.
- ^ "Structure of the IPCC". Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change. Retrieved 22 February 2019.
- "Procedures — IPCC". Retrieved 28 November 2022.
- ^ "IPCC, the world's unrivalled authority on climate science". AFP. 9 August 2021.
- Sample, Ian (2 February 2007). "Scientists offered cash to dispute climate study". Guardian. London. Retrieved 24 July 2007.
Lord Rees of Ludlow, the president of the Royal Society, Britain's most prestigious scientific institute, said: 'The IPCC is the world's leading authority on climate change...'
- "What is the UNFCCC?". UNFCCC.
- ^ IPCC. "Principles Governing IPCC Work".. Approved 1–3 October 1998, last amended 14–18 October 2013.
- Schleussner, Carl-Friedrich; Rogelj, Joeri; Schaeffer, Michiel; Lissner, Tabea; Licker, Rachel; Fischer, Erich M.; Knutti, Reto; Levermann, Anders; Frieler, Katja; Hare, William (25 July 2016). "Science and policy characteristics of the Paris Agreement temperature goal" (PDF). Nature Climate Change. 6 (9): 827. Bibcode:2016NatCC...6..827S. doi:10.1038/nclimate3096.
- "The Nobel Peace Prize 2007". The Nobel Prize. Nobel Prize Outreach.
- ^ IPCC, 2021: Climate Change 2021: The Physical Science Basis. Contribution of Working Group I to the Sixth Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, United Kingdom and New York, New York, US, In press, doi:10.1017/9781009157896.
- Harvey, Fiona (9 August 2021). "Major climate changes inevitable and irreversible – IPCC's starkest warning yet". The Guardian.
- Sullivan, Helen (10 August 2021). "'Code red for humanity': what the papers say about the IPCC report on the climate crisis". The Guardian.
- "Climate Change 2022: Impacts, Adaptation and Vulnerability".
- "Mitigation of climate change".
- "Decisions adopted by the 43rd Session of the Panel" (PDF). p. 11 decision 6.
- Potter, Thomas D. (Winter 1986). "Advisory Group on Greenhouse Gases Established Jointly by WMO, UNEP, and ICSU". Environmental Conservation. 13 (4): 365. Bibcode:1986EnvCo..13..365P. doi:10.1017/S0376892900035505. S2CID 84551617.
- Weart, Spencer R. (2008). "Democracy and Policy Advice (1980s)". The Discovery of Global Warming (Revised and expanded ed.). Cambridge, Mass. ISBN 978-0-674-41755-7. OCLC 872115457. Archived from the original on 9 November 2013.
{{cite book}}
: CS1 maint: location missing publisher (link) - "IPCC Factsheet: What is the IPCC?" (PDF).
- Hulme, Mike; Mahony, Martin (October 2010). "Climate change: What do we know about the IPCC?". Progress in Physical Geography: Earth and Environment. 34 (5): 705–718. Bibcode:2010PrPG...34..705H. doi:10.1177/0309133310373719. ISSN 0309-1333. S2CID 130711399.
- "What is the IPCC?". Energy & Climate Intelligence Unit. 18 October 2021. Retrieved 8 November 2022.
- "Bureau Portal — IPCC". Retrieved 9 August 2019.
- "The IPCC Bureau". The IPCC Bureau (see Terms of Reference). IPCC.
- ^ "IPCC wraps up elections in Nairobi — IPCC". Retrieved 29 July 2023.
- ^ "Task Force on National Greenhouse Gas Inventories". Retrieved 25 February 2019.
- "Structure of the IPCC - The Executive Committee". Structure of the IPCC.
- "Terms of Reference of the IPCC Secretariat" (PDF).
- "IPCC elects Jim Skea as the new Chair — IPCC". Retrieved 29 July 2023.
- "16 Years of Scientific Assessment in Support of the Climate Convention" (PDF).
- "Structure of the IPCC - Observer Organizations". IPCC.
- "IPCC Procedures - Appendix B to the Principles Governing IPCC Work: Financial Procedures for the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change". IPCC Procedures. IPCC.
- ^ Beaujon, Agathe (9 August 2021). "Changement climatique: Le Giec quésaco?". Challenges (in French). Retrieved 2 July 2023.
- "Comprendre le GIEC". Ministères Écologie Énergie Territoires (in French). Retrieved 2 July 2023.
- IPCC 2019, 2019 Refinement to the 2006 IPCC Guidelines for National Greenhouse Gas Inventories, Calvo Buendia, E., Tanabe, K., Kranjc, A., Baasansuren, J., Fukuda, M., Ngarize, S., Osako, A., Pyrozhenko, Y., Shermanau, P. and Federici, S. (eds). Published: IPCC, Switzerland.
- IPCC, 2014: Climate Change 2014: Synthesis Report. Contribution of Working Groups I, II and III to the Fifth Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change . IPCC, Geneva, Switzerland, 151 pp.
- IPCC 2014, 2013 Supplement to the 2006 IPCC Guidelines for National Greenhouse Gas Inventories: Wetlands, Hiraishi, T., Krug, T., Tanabe, K., Srivastava, N., Baasansuren, J., Fukuda, M. and Troxler, T.G. (eds). Published: IPCC, Switzerland.
- IPCC 2014, 2013 Revised Supplementary Methods and Good Practice Guidance Arising from the Kyoto Protocol, Hiraishi, T., Krug, T., Tanabe, K., Srivastava, N., Baasansuren, J., Fukuda, M. and Troxler, T.G. (eds) Published: IPCC, Switzerland.
- IPCC, 2012: Managing the Risks of Extreme Events and Disasters to Advance Climate Change Adaptation. A Special Report of Working Groups I and II of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change . Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, UK, and New York, New York, US, 582 pp.
- IPCC, 2011 – Ottmar Edenhofer, Ramón Pichs-Madruga, Youba Sokona, Kristin Seyboth, Patrick Matschoss, Susanne Kadner, Timm Zwickel, Patrick Eickemeier, Gerrit Hansen, Steffen Schloemer, Christoph von Stechow (Eds.) Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, United Kingdom and New York, New York, US, 1075 pp.
- IPCC, 2005: IPCC Special Report on Carbon Dioxide Capture and Storage. Prepared by Working Group III of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change . Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, United Kingdom and New York, New York, US, 442 pp.
- "Welcome to the IPCC Data Distribution Centre". Ipcc-data.org. Archived from the original on 19 May 2016. Retrieved 25 June 2012.
- "Gender — IPCC". Retrieved 21 October 2022.
- "IPCC Media Advisory: IPCC Working Group II and Working Group III Reports, 2014". 21 February 2014. Retrieved 24 March 2022.
- "Outreach - Programme". archive.ipcc.ch.
- "IPCC Expert Meeting on Communication — IPCC".
- ^ "Progress Report on Communication and Outreach Activities to the 49th Session of the IPCC, 2019" (PDF).
- O'Neill, Saffron (5 October 2021). "Launch of the Topical Collection: Climate change communication and the IPCC, 2021".
- O'Neill, Saffron; Pidcock, Roz (2021). "Introducing the Topical Collection: 'Climate change communication and the IPCC'". Climatic Change. 169 (3): 19. Bibcode:2021ClCh..169...19O. doi:10.1007/s10584-021-03253-3. ISSN 1573-1480. PMC 8638646. PMID 34876762.
- "Papers of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change - Harvard College Library". 27 April 2010. Archived from the original on 27 April 2010. Retrieved 27 October 2022.
- ^ "The IPCC: Who Are They and Why Do Their Climate Reports Matter?". Union of Concerned Scientists: Reports & Multimedia - Activist Resources: Explainers. Union of Concerned Scientists. 11 October 2018.
- "Climate change: Five things we have learned from the IPCC report". BBC News. 9 August 2021. Retrieved 12 August 2021.
- "Climate Change: The IPCC 1990 and 1992 Assessments — IPCC". Archived from the original on 4 September 2021. Retrieved 4 September 2021.
- "Q&A: How IPCC reports get written, why they matter and what role governments play in them". SEI. Retrieved 2 July 2023.
- "IPCC Factsheet: How does the IPCC select its authors?" (PDF). IPCC.
- Standring, Adam (2023). "Participant Selection". In De Pryck, Kari; Hulme, Mike (eds.). A critical assessment of the intergovernmental panel on climate change. Cambridge New York, NY Port Melbourne, VIC New Delhi Singapore: Cambridge University Press. pp. 63–66. ISBN 978-1-316-51427-6.
- De Pryck, Kari (2022). GIEC, la voix du climat. Collection académique. Paris: Sciences po, les presses. pp. 43, 66–69. ISBN 978-2-7246-3870-7.
- ^ "Procedures — IPCC". Retrieved 4 October 2022.
- IPCC. About the IPCC
- ^ "IPCC Factsheet: How does the IPCC select its authors?" (PDF). 30 August 2013. Retrieved 12 October 2018.
- "Guidance Note of the Role of Review Editors of the Working Group I Sixth Assessment Report (WGI AR6)" (PDF). IPCC.
- "Registration opens for Expert Review of IPCC Working Group II contribution to IPCC Sixth Assessment Report — IPCC". Retrieved 1 July 2023.
- ^ De Pryck, Kari (2022). GIEC, la voix du climat. Collection académique. Paris: Sciences po, les presses. pp. 65–66. ISBN 978-2-7246-3870-7.
- Committee on Analysis of Global Change Assessments; Board on Atmospheric Sciences and Climate; Division of Earth and Life Sciences (2007). Analysis of Global Change Assessments: Lessons Learned. National Academies Press. ISBN 978-0309104852. Retrieved 24 July 2007.
- Climate change science : an analysis of some key questions. National Research Council. Committee on the Science of Climate Change. Washington, D.C.: National Academy Press. 2001. ISBN 0-309-52872-0. OCLC 52816599.
{{cite book}}
: CS1 maint: others (link) - IPCC. "IPCC Factsheet: How does the IPCC review process work?" (PDF). Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change. IPCC. Retrieved 18 January 2018.
- "FAR Climate Change: Scientific Assessment of Climate Change — IPCC". Retrieved 10 November 2022.
- "Climate Change: The IPCC Scientific Assessment: Policymaker Summary - Executive Summary" (PDF). ipcc.ch. 1990.
- "Climate Change 1995: Second Assessment Synthesis" (PDF). ipcc.ch. 1995.
- "Convention on Biological Diversity: Working Relationship Between the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change and the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change". 2012.
- "Climate Change 1995: Synthesis Report" (PDF). ipcc.ch. 1995.
- "Climate Change 2007: The Physical Science Basis - Summary for Policymakers" (PDF). ipcc.ch.
- "IPCC 5th Assessment Report published". ieaghg.org. Archived from the original on 10 November 2022. Retrieved 10 November 2022.
- "IPCC (AR5) report - the foundation for the Paris Agreement". The University of Edinburgh. 7 November 2021. Retrieved 10 November 2022.
- "IPCC Press Release - Working Group I contribution to Sixth Assessment Report" (PDF). ipcc.ch. 9 August 2021.
- "IPCC report: 'Code red' for human driven global heating, warns UN chief". UN News. 9 August 2021.
- IPCC, 2022: Climate Change 2022: Impacts, Adaptation, and Vulnerability. Contribution of Working Group II to the Sixth Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change . Cambridge University Press. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, UK and New York, New York, US, 3056 pp., doi:10.1017/9781009325844.
- "Press release". www.ipcc.ch. Retrieved 11 November 2022.
- IPCC, 2022: Climate Change 2022: Mitigation of Climate Change. Contribution of Working Group III to the Sixth Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change . Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, UK and New York, New York, US. doi: 10.1017/9781009157926
- "Press release". www.ipcc.ch. Retrieved 11 November 2022.
- "Renewable Energy Sources and Climate Change Mitigation — IPCC". Retrieved 16 November 2022.
- "Managing the Risks of Extreme Events and Disasters to Advance Climate Change Adaptation — IPCC". Retrieved 16 November 2022.
- "PRESS RELEASE: IPCC releases full report on Managing the Risks of Extreme Events and Disasters to Advance Climate Change Adaptation (SREX)" (PDF). ipcc.ch. 28 March 2012.
- "Global Warming of 1.5 °C —". Retrieved 17 November 2022.
- "IPCC Press Release: Summary for Policymakers of IPCC Special Report on Global Warming of 1.5 °C approved by governments" (PDF). ipcc.ch. 8 October 2018.
- "Greta Thunberg tells leaders at Davos to heed global heating science". The Guardian. 21 January 2020.
- "Special Report on Climate Change and Land — IPCC site". Retrieved 17 November 2022.
- "Land is a Critical Resource, IPCC report says — IPCC". Retrieved 17 November 2022.
- "Special Report on the Ocean and Cryosphere in a Changing Climate —". Retrieved 17 November 2022.
- "Institute for Global Environmental Strategies (IGES)". IGES. Retrieved 17 November 2022.
- "Revised 1996 IPCC Guidelines for National Greenhouse Gas Inventories — IPCC". Retrieved 17 November 2022.
- "2006 IPCC Guidelines for National Greenhouse Gas Inventories — IPCC". Retrieved 17 November 2022.
- "Reporting requirements". unfccc.int. Retrieved 17 November 2022.
- "2019 Refinement to the 2006 IPCC Guidelines for National Greenhouse Gas Inventories — IPCC". Retrieved 17 November 2022.
- "PROGRESS REPORTS: Task Force on National Greenhouse Gas Inventories" (PDF). ipcc.ch. 13 September 2022.
- "Short-Lived Climate Pollutants". World Bank. Retrieved 17 November 2022.
- ^ Scherer, Glenn (6 December 2012). "Climate Science Predictions Prove Too Conservative". Scientific American. Retrieved 27 October 2022.
- Evaluation, characterization, and communication of uncertainty by the intergovernmental panel on climate change—an introductory essay. Climatic Change An Interdisciplinary, International Journal Devoted to the Description, Causes and Implications of Climatic Change, Gary Yohe and Michael Oppenheimer 2011
- ^ Oppenheimer, Michael; O'Neill, Brian C.; Webster, Mort; Agrawal, Shardul (2007). "Climate Change, The Limits of Consensus". Science. 317 (5844): 1505–1506. doi:10.1126/science.1144831. PMID 17872430. S2CID 129837694.
- McKibben, Bill (15 March 2007). "Warning on Warming". The New York Review of Books. 54 (4): 18. Bibcode:2004Natur.427..197S. doi:10.1038/427197a. Retrieved 21 February 2010.
- Jehn, Florian U.; Kemp, Luke; Ilin, Ekaterina; Funk, Christoph; Wang, Jason R.; Breuer, Lutz (May 2022). "Focus of the IPCC Assessment Reports Has Shifted to Lower Temperatures". Earth's Future. 10 (5). doi:10.1029/2022EF002876.
- Jehn, Florian U; Schneider, Marie; Wang, Jason R; Kemp, Luke; Breuer, Lutz (1 August 2021). "Betting on the best case: higher end warming is underrepresented in research". Environmental Research Letters. 16 (8): 084036. doi:10.1088/1748-9326/ac13ef.
- Biello D (April 2007). "Conservative Climate". Scientific American. 296 (4): 16–19. Bibcode:2007SciAm.296d..16B. doi:10.1038/scientificamerican0407-16. PMID 17479619.
- Hanson, Brooks (7 May 2010). "Stepping Back; Moving Forward". Science. 328 (5979): 667. Bibcode:2010Sci...328..667H. doi:10.1126/science.1190790. PMID 20448154.
- Hansen JE (April–June 2007). "Scientific reticence and sea level rise". Environmental Research Letters. 2 (2): 024002. arXiv:physics/0703220. Bibcode:2007ERL.....2b4002H. doi:10.1088/1748-9326/2/2/024002. S2CID 59929933.
- Global heating will pass 1.5C threshold this year, top ex-Nasa scientist says, Guardian, 8 January 2023
- "Climate Science: Main Conclusions". Archived from the original on 11 December 2008. Retrieved 11 December 2008.
- "Climate change: The scientific basis". CTV Television Network. 5 February 2007. Archived from the original on 5 February 2007. Retrieved 24 July 2007.
- "New climate report actually understates threat, some researchers argue". www.science.org. Retrieved 28 October 2022.
- "How the IPCC is more likely to underestimate the climate response". skepticalscience.com. Retrieved 28 October 2022.
- Borger, Julian (20 April 2002). "US and Oil Lobby Oust Climate Change Scientist". Guardian. London. Retrieved 24 July 2007.
- "Preparing Reports — IPCC". Retrieved 28 October 2022.
- "Leaks show attempts to water down UN climate report – DW – 10/21/2021". dw.com. Retrieved 28 October 2022.
- Almendral, Aurora (24 March 2023). "The meat industry blocked the IPCC's attempt to recommend a plant-based diet". Quartz. Retrieved 29 March 2023.
- Pearce, Fred (21 January 2010). "Climate chief admits error over Himalayan glaciers". New Scientist. Retrieved 27 October 2022.
- ICSU (27 January 2011). "ICSU releases statement on the controversy around the 4th IPCC Assessment". International Science Council. Retrieved 27 October 2022.
- PBL (6 July 2010). "Assessing an IPCC assessment. An analysis of statements on projected regional impacts in the 2007 report". PBL Netherlands Environmental Assessment Agency. Retrieved 27 October 2022.
- ^ Black, Richard (10 March 2010). "Scientists to review climate body". BBC News. Retrieved 4 April 2010.
- "InterAcademy Council Report Recommends Fundamental Reform of IPCC Management Structure". InterAcademy Council. Archived from the original on 6 August 2013. Retrieved 30 August 2013.
- Partnership (IAP), the InterAcademy (30 August 2011). "InterAcademy Council Report Recommends Fundamental Reform of IPCC Management Structure". www.interacademies.org.
- ^ Tollefson, J. (2010). "Climate panel must adapt to survive". Nature. 467 (7311): 14. doi:10.1038/467014a. PMID 20811426.
- "Procedures — IPCC". Retrieved 28 October 2022.
- "IPCC Error Protocol" (PDF).
- IPCC - Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change. "REVIEW OF IPCC PROCESSES AND PROCEDURES". archive.ipcc.ch. Retrieved 27 October 2022.
- Lessons from the IPCC: do scientific assessments need to be consensual to be authoritative? Mike Hulme, in (eds.) Doubelday, R. and Willesden, J. March 2013, pp, 142 ff
- Do scientific assessments need to be consensual to be authoritative? Curry, JA and PJ Webster, 2012: Climate change: no consensus on consensus. CAB Reviews, in press, 2012
- Lemonick, Michael D. (1 November 2010). "Climate heretic: Judith Curry turns on her colleagues". Nature. doi:10.1038/news.2010.577. Retrieved 22 December 2010.
- "Written testimony of John R. Christy Ph.D. before House Committee on Energy and Commerce on March 7, 2007" (PDF). Archived from the original (PDF) on 28 November 2007. Retrieved 29 December 2008.
- "An Open Letter to the Community from Chris Landsea". Archived from the original on 18 February 2007. Retrieved 28 April 2007.
- "Prometheus: Final Chapter, Hurricanes and IPCC, Book IV Archives". Sciencepolicy.colorado.edu. 14 February 2007. Retrieved 29 August 2010.
- "Hurricanes and Global Warming for IPCC" (PDF). Washington. Reuters. 21 October 2004. Retrieved 30 December 2008.
- Paglia, Eric; Parker, Charles (2021), Boin, Arjen; Fahy, Lauren A.; 't Hart, Paul (eds.), "The Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change: Guardian of Climate Science", Guardians of Public Value, Cham: Springer International Publishing, pp. 295–321, doi:10.1007/978-3-030-51701-4_12, ISBN 978-3-030-51700-7, S2CID 228892648
- * "Scientists Send Letter to Congress and Federal Agencies Supporting IPCC". American Geophysical Union. Archived from the original on 24 October 2011. Retrieved 28 March 2011.
- Yohe, G.W.; et al. "An Open Letter from Scientists in the United States on the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change and Errors Contained in the Fourth Assessment Report: Climate Change 2007". Archived from the original on 15 March 2010.. Note: According to Yohe et al. (2010), more than 250 scientists have signed the statement.
- The Science of Climate Change (PDF), Joint statement by 16 national science academies, London: Royal Society, 17 May 2001, ISBN 978-0854035588, archived from the original (PDF) on 19 April 2015
{{citation}}
: CS1 maint: others (link) - "CFCAS Letter to PM, November 25, 2005" (PDF). Archived from the original (PDF) on 21 August 2010. Retrieved 9 August 2019.
- "Summary". Climate Change Science: An Analysis of Some Key Questions. Washington, D.C.: National Academies Press. 2001. doi:10.17226/10139. ISBN 978-0-309-07574-9.
- "European Geosciences Union (EGU): Position Statements" (PDF). Archived from the original (PDF) on 10 June 2023. Retrieved 1 November 2022.
- admin (27 January 2011). "ICSU releases statement on the controversy around the 4th IPCC Assessment". International Science Council. Retrieved 1 November 2022.
- "Joint statement by the Network of African Science Academies (NASAC)" (PDF). Network of African Science Academies. 2007. Archived from the original (PDF) on 10 September 2008. Retrieved 29 March 2008.
- "2007 Nobel Peace Prize Laureates". Retrieved 11 October 2007.
- "2022 Gulbenkian Prize for Humanity distinguishes IPBES and IPCC". 13 October 2022. Retrieved 13 October 2022.
External links
- Official website
- Official website of IPCC Data Distribution Centre (Climate data and guidance on its use)
United Nations | |||||||||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
UN System |
| ||||||||||
Members and observers | |||||||||||
History |
| ||||||||||
Resolutions | |||||||||||
Elections |
| ||||||||||
Related |
| ||||||||||
World portal |
- Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change
- International climate change organizations
- Organizations awarded Nobel Peace Prizes
- United Nations Environment Programme
- Working groups
- World Meteorological Organization
- Environmental organizations established in 1988
- Scientific organizations established in 1988
- Organisations based in Geneva
- Swiss Nobel laureates