Climate Change Assessments Review of the Processes and Procedures of the IPCC

In March 2010, the InterAcademy Council (IAC) was requested by the United Nations Secretary-General and the Chair of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) to conduct an independent review of IPCC processes and procedures. The purpose of this review was to help guide the processes and procedures of the IPCC’s fifth report and future assessments of climate change.The IAC was asked to establish an ad hoc review committee of experts from relevant fields to conduct the review and to present recommendations on possible revisions of IPCC processes and procedures for strengthening the capacity of IPCC to respond to future challenges and ensuring the ongoing quality of its reports.

Recognizing that the issue of climate change is of great importance to humanity, is complex in regard to scientific uncertainty, and has potential long-term consequences, the IAC Board agreed to undertake this review. The IAC invited the scientific and engineering academies of the world to nominate candidates for performing a review of IPCC.

In May 2010 the IAC Board appointed a Review Committee of twelve experts from several countries and a variety of disciplines. Harold T. Shapiro, president emeritus and a professor of economics and public affairs at Princeton University in the United States served as chair of the Review Committee.  Roseanne Diab, executive officer of the Academy of Science of South Africa and professor emeritus of environmental sciences and honorary senior research associate at the University of KwaZulu-Natal in Durban, served as vice-chair of the committee. From May through July 2010, the Review Committee convened three times—in The Netherlands, Canada, and the United Kingdom.

The committee received information through public sessions where presentations were made by IPCC and UN officials, as well as experts with different perspectives on IPCC processes and procedures. Committee members also convened meetings with groups of experts in Brazil, China, and the United States. Input was also gathered via extensive interviews and a widely circulated questionnaire that was posted on the WWW so the public could comment.The document that follows is the result.

First written in draft form, the final report incorporates the committee’s response to an extensive IAC report review process during August 2010 that involved twelve experts plus two distinguished scientists who served as review monitors. Upon the satisfactory completion of the report review process, the IAC Board approved publication of this final report.The Review Committee makes recommendations in several key areas.

The committee urges that the IPCC management structure be fortified and that the IPCC communications strategy emphasizes transparency, including a plan for rapid but thoughtful response to crises. It also stresses that because intense scrutiny from policymakers and the public is likely to continue, IPCC needs to be as transparent as possible in detailing its processes, particularly its criteria for selecting participants and the type of scientific and technical information to be assessed. More consistency is called for in how IPCC Working Groups characterize uncertainty.

The committee emphasizes that in the end the quality of the assessment process and results depends on the quality of the leadership at all levels.

(Read the whole report by downloading the PDF below.)