190 likes | 261 Views
Symposium ‘IPCC na 2007’ KNMI 10 oktober 22007. Leo Meyer Head TSU IPCC Milieu en Natuur Planbureau. About IPCC. Established by WMO and UNEP (1988): 180 UN governments
E N D
Symposium ‘IPCC na 2007’KNMI 10 oktober 22007 Leo Meyer Head TSU IPCC Milieu en Natuur Planbureau
About IPCC Established by WMO and UNEP (1988): • 180 UN governments • Assesses scientific information on climate change, impacts and options for adaptation and mitigation from (peer reviewed) literature • No research, no monitoring, no recommendations • Key messages - policy relevant but not policy prescriptive • Include incertainties, gaps in knowledge
About IPCC and UNFCCC • 1990: First Assessment Report • 1992: Framework Convention Climate Change • 1995: Second Assessment Report • 1997: Kyoto Protocol • 2001: Third Assessment Report • 2005: Kyoto Protocol being ratified • 2007: Fourth Assessment Report • 2008: post Kyoto agreement ?
IPCC SecretariatWMO/UNEP IPCC chair IPCC Bureau Working Group I The Physical Science basis WGI co-chairs Working Group III Mitigation WGIII co-chairs Working Group II Impacts ,vul-nerability and adaptation WGII co-chairs Task force on National GHG Inventories NGGIP co-chairs Technical Support Unit USA Technical Support Unit Japan Technical Support Unit Netherlands Technical Support Unit UK Experts, Authors, Contributors, Reviewers
The IPCC AR4 process 2003-2007 • 2003: • scoping meetings by invited experts on outline • Panel decision on outline of WG I, II, III reports • 2003 -2004: • Nominations of authors by govts and institutes • Selection of authors
How were authors selected • Governments/institutes submitted CVs - over thousand nominations received • IPCC Bureau/TSU matched CVs against required expertise for chapters and sections in approved outline • Balance of geography and ‘schools’ • Academics, NGO and industry representation • Ca 15 lead authors per chapter selected • WG Cochairs invited authors to fill in gaps in expertise, keeping geogr. balance • Lead Authors appointed Contributing Authors
The writing process 2003-2007 • 1th Lead Author meeting • ‘Zero order draft’ (ZOD) • 2th Lead Author meeting • First Order Draft (FOD) • 3th Lead Author meeting • Second Order Draft (SOD) • 4th Lead Author meeting • Final draft
The review process (1) • Expert reviewers nominated by countries , institutions or volunteers • Submit their comments on drafts to author team • Author teams address all comments at Lead Author Meetings; • Review Editors ensure appropriate treatment ( written approval at end)
The review process (2) • Informal review; • First order draft (FOD) review by experts; • Second order draft (SOD) review by experts and governments; • Final Draft, and review (govts only) of draft Summary for Policy Makers (SPM)
The SPM approval session • Authors prepare text proposal based on govt review of SPM • In a plenary WG session of IPCC , line-by-line approval of SPM until • Concensus by all countries • Lead authors approve changes • Formal acceptance of underlying report (without changes) by IPCC at plenary meeting
Timeline WG 3 LA meetings 1 2 2004 2005 2006 3 4 2007 June 2005 October 2004 February 2006 October 2006 ZOD FOD SOD Final draft Expert Review Gov/Expert Review Informal Review May 2007:Approval of the report SPM Review
IPCC after 2007 If it is not broken, don’t fix it ‘, but: • IPCC structure and products need to adapt to changing circumstances • More public exposure • Adaptation and mitigation: yes but how? • IPCC review process OK but objectivity and transparency could be improved • Quality of writing can (always) be improved
Improvements of the review process (1) • Make expert review AR5 anonymous (NB Govt review: not anonymous) • Enhances objectivity of authors • Positive experience with IPCC Special Report On Carbon Dioxide Capture and Storage 2005 • Was proposed to Bureau by WG III
Improvements of the review process (2) • More Review editors needed • Further improve treatment of comments • but no content report to Plenary 3. Responses to review comments to be published directly after LA meeting • (now: only after completion report) • increases transparency
Improve writing process WG III • Problem: overcommitted authors – all volunteers - but deadlines don’t move • Solution: • Pay (Coordinating) Lead Authors ? • Pay support staff to writing teams? • Add paid editors to TSU’s/cochairs?
IPCC structure and products (1) • Working Group structure (I,II,III methodology) needs to be reviewed • IPCC clients are better served with shorter, more frequent and more focused reports • But periodic assessment of climate system observations, projections, and impacts and vulnerability should be maintained
IPCC structure and products (2) • ‘Special Reports’ take 2-3 years - long for policy makers; ‘Technical Papers’: quicker but no news • Suggestion: ‘Fast Track Special Report’: like T.P. but with new literature • Possible subjects: sectoral mitigation; specific technologies; regional adaptation; extreme events; …
Fast Track Special Report Procedure almost identical to TP: • Request by UNFCCC or Panel • Selection of authors through govt and institute nominations • Allow new literature • expert & govt review first draft • government review final draft • Approval by IPCC Bureau • Notes differences in views if needed
Other wishes • More authors and reviewers from Private Sector and NGO’s • More authors needed from Developing Countries and Economies in transition: capacity building needed • More products for outreach ( popularized versions, presentations, courses …)