The IPCC AR5 guidance note on consistent treatment of uncertainties: a common approach across the working groups

Evaluation and communication of the relative degree of certainty in assessment findings are key cross-cutting issues for the three Working Groups of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change. A goal for the Fifth Assessment Report, which is currently under development, is the application of a common framework with associated calibrated uncertainty language that can be used to characterize findings of the assessment process. A guidance note for authors of the Fifth Assessment Report has been developed that describes this common approach and language, building upon the guidance employed in past Assessment Reports. Here, we introduce the main features of this guidance note, with a focus on how it has been designed for use by author teams. We also provide perspectives on considerations and challenges relevant to the application of this guidance in the contribution of each Working Group to the Fifth Assessment Report. Despite the wide spectrum of disciplines encompassed by the three Working Groups, we expect that the framework of the new uncertainties guidance will enable consistent communication of the degree of certainty in their policy-relevant assessment findings.     

Synthesizing a policy-relevant perspective from the three IPCC “Worlds”—A comparison of topics and frames in the SPMs of the Fifth Assessment Report

The paper investigates topics, emphases, frames and absences in the Summary for Policymakers parts of the three Working Group reports in the IPCC 5th Assessment Report and the Summary for Policymakers of the Synthesis Report. It explores similarities and differences by using various tools of lexical and discourse analysis, combining quantitative and qualitative methods. The main results are these: First, each Working Group’s Summary reflects not only the Working Group’s distinctive mandate but also a distinctive intellectual framing. Second, although there are some significant differences in the emphases given to different themes from the Working Groups, the Synthesis Summary covers the main topics of the three other Summaries, and constitutes a relatively integrated summary of the complete Assessment Report. Third, we find though that the Synthesis Summary centrally follows up the risk framing and language which are prominent in Working Group II but semi-absent in the other Working Groups, as part of constructing a policy-relevant statement from the three distinctive reports. In addition, the Synthesis Summary makes use of linguistic devices which contribute to ‘amplify’ the strength of statements, as part of transferring messages effectively from the scientific context to a policy-maker audience. Fourth, we find that the style and tone of the IPCC Summaries conduce also to important absences and imbalances in emphasis: main victims of climate change (particular groups of vulnerable people) remain virtually invisible in the Summaries, unlike the impacts in nature and ecological systems or the aggregate economic impacts, and correspondingly the challenges, options and opportunities for action remain relatively underdeveloped in the analysis.     

The latest iteration of IPCC uncertainty guidance—an author perspective

The latest iteration of Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) uncertainty guidance is simpler and easier to use than the previous version. However, its primary focus remains assessing “what is at risk” under climate change, thus is most suitable for dealing with the scientific uncertainties in Working Group I and part of Working Group II findings. I distinguish between tame and complex risks, arguing that the guidance is most suited to assessing tame risks. Climate change is a complex risk, and as such as can be divided into idealized, calculated and perceived risks. While science has claims to objectivity, risk has a specific value component: when measuring gain and loss, calculated risks compete with risky options to manage those risks. The IPCC is charged with calculating risk (IPCC 2007, p22) but the communication of key findings takes place in an environment of competing perceived risks. Recommendations for managing this complex environment include separating scientific and risk-based findings, treating uncertainties for each separately; strengthening the philosophical basis of uncertainty management; application of a methodical scientific research program; clearly communicating competing findings, especially in the social sciences; and application of multiple frame to policy-relevant findings as reflected in the literature.     

Treatment of uncertainties in IPCC Assessment Reports: past approaches and considerations for the Fifth Assessment Report

The assessments of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC), since the First Assessment Report, have involved calibrated uncertainty language and other methods aimed towards clear communication of the degree of certainty in findings of the assessment process. There has been a continuing tradition of iterative improvement of the treatment of uncertainties in these assessments. Here we consider the motivations for the most recent revision of the uncertainties guidance provided to author teams of the Fifth Assessment Report (AR5). We first review the history of usage of calibrated language in IPCC Assessment Reports, along with the frameworks for treatment of uncertainties that have been provided to IPCC author teams. Our primary focus is the interpretation and application of the guidance provided to author teams in the Fourth Assessment Report, with analysis of the successes and challenges in the application of this guidance and approaches taken in usage of its calibrated uncertainty language. We discuss the ways in which the AR5 Guidance Note attempts to refine the calibrated uncertainty metrics and formalize their interrelationships to improve the consistency of treatment of uncertainties across the Working Group contributions.     

The interpretation and highlights on mitigation of climate change in IPCC AR6 WGIII report北大核心CSCD

2022年4月4日,IPCC第六次评估报告第三工作组《气候变化2022:减缓气候变化》报告和决策者摘要发布。报告全面评估了2010年以来减缓气候变化领域的最新科学进展,为国际社会深度认识和理解全球温室气体排放情况、不同温升水平下的减排路径以及可持续发展背景下的气候变化减缓和适应行动等提供了重要科学依据。基于报告主要结论,围绕温室气体排放的区域差异、减缓路径分类、与土地利用相关的排放评估及CO去除技术评估等方面的亮点,文中提出在应对气候变化减缓政策行动中,中国应坚定“双碳”战略目标,在综合考虑经济发展阶段和资源禀赋差异背景下,将可持续发展、公平和消除贫困植根于社会发展愿景中实施减缓路径,并加快提升气候变化综合评估核心科学技术的研发进度,以进一步提升国际影响力和话语权。     

IPCC SROCC的主要结论和启示

2019年9月,IPCC正式发布《气候变化中的海洋和冰冻圈特别报告》（SROCC）,这是IPCC首次以高山地区与极区冰冻圈和海洋为主题的评估报告。报告全面评估气候变化背景下海洋和冰冻圈变化及其广泛影响与风险,其核心结论包括：气候系统变暖背景下高山地区和极区的冰冻圈普遍退缩,未来冰冻圈将继续消融,高山地区和极区将面临更高的灾害风险;20世纪70年代以来全球海洋持续增暖,未来海洋将继续变暖、加速酸化,影响海洋生物多样性并危及海洋生态系统服务功能和人类社会;近几十年全球平均海平面加速上升,未来数百年海平面仍将持续上升,极端海面事件频发将加剧沿海地区社会-生态系统的灾害风险。报告强调,采取及时、积极、协调和持久的适应与减缓行动,是有效应对海洋和冰冻圈变化,实现气候恢复力发展路径和可持续发展目标的关键所在。本研究认为,需要高度重视海洋和冰冻圈在气候系统变化中的长期和不可逆影响,强化应对气候变化紧迫性认识;高度重视我国冰冻圈和沿海地区面临的气候风险,强化适应能力建设;推动我国牵头的国际大科学计划,强化跨学科、跨领域协同创新,持续提升我国在相关领域的国际影响力和科技支撑能力。     

The improvement of greenhouse gas inventory as a tool for reduction emission uncertainties for operations with oil in the Russian Federation

The high quality inventory is an important step to greenhouse gas emission mitigation. The inventory quality is estimated by means of the uncertainty analysis. The level of uncertainty depends upon the reliability of activity data and the parameters used. An attempt has been made to improve the accuracy of the estimates through a shift from production-based method (IPCC Tier 1) (IPCC 2000) to enhanced combination of production-based and mass balance methods (IPCC Tier 2) (IPCC 2006) in the estimation of emissions from operations with oil that are key in the national greenhouse gas inventory of the Russian Federation. The IPCC Tier 2 (IPCC 2006) was adapted for the national conditions. The greenhouse gas emissions were calculated for 1990 to 2009 with the use of both methods. The quantitative uncertainty assessment of the calculations was performed, and the outcomes were compared. The comparison showed that the estimates made with the use of higher tier method resulted in higher accuracy and lower uncertainties (26 % respectively compared to previously derived 54 %).     

对IPCC第五次评估报告中可持续发展与公平相关问题的解读

可持续发展和公平是IPCC第五次评估报告第三工作组报告中关键的框架性和交叉性问题,贯穿报告各章节。此次评估报告依据近年来最新研究成果,在以往评估报告的基础上,进一步拓展和深化了对气候变化、可持续发展与公平相互关系的认识,强调要在可持续发展与公平框架下综合评估气候政策,促进减缓气候变化与可持续发展和公平的多目标协同,防范和减少减缓行动带来的风险,努力实现发展路径的转型。     

Innovating the IPCC review process—the potential of young talent

There is significant potential in young talent for enhancing the credibility of the scientific assessments such as the IPCC’s by contributing to quality assurance and quality control. In this essay, we reflect on an experiment that was done by the Dutch government as part of its government review of a contribution to the IPCC’s Fifth Assessment Report (AR5). In an effort to review the entire Working Group II contribution to the AR5 within the official review period for the Second Order Draft (SOD), the PBL Netherlands Environmental Assessment Agency turned to PhD students. This article shows that a systematic review focusing on transparency and errors of a large scientific assessment document using young talented scientists can be successful if certain conditions are met. The reviewers need to have intrinsic motivation to conduct the review. There needs to be a communication plan that fosters engagement and a clear methodology to guide the reviewers through their task. Based on this experiment in review, we reflect on the wider potential for openness and crowdsourcing in scientific assessment processes such as the IPCC’s.     

全球变暖中的科学问题

2013年各国政府间气候变化专门委员会（IPCC）第一工作组发布了第五次气候变化科学评估报告,以大量的观测分析和气候模式模拟证据,继续强调由于人类排放增加,全球正在变暖,未来将继续变暖的观点。本文综述研究全球变暖的几个深层次的科学问题,即多套全球气温观测资料的差异、不同标准气候态时段的作用、20世纪全球变暖的检测和归因及未来全球气温变化的走向,以此提出需进一步研究的科学问题。结果表明;需要进一步提高观测资料的质量;注意不同标准气候态时段对应的数值的不同;应进一步改善气候模式模拟年代际变率的能力及研究近15 a全球变暖减缓和停滞的原因,从而改善气候模式的模拟效果;造成预估未来全球气候变化的不确定性主要来自气候模式的差异、未来排放情景的差异及气候系统内部变率影响和自然外强迫的作用。     

Key themes in the Working Group II contribution to the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change 5th assessment report

Assessments conducted by the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) are significant undertakings that require input from experts and practitioners in multiple scientific disciplines, integrating local to international information across spatial and temporal scales. An IPCC report is a unique collaboration between the scientific community and policymakers, with governments (through their Focal Points) providing guidance and input to the scientists conducting an assessment at several stages during the process. This commentary reviews the IPCC mandate and process; summarizes key themes to be addressed in the Working Group II contribution to the 5th assessment report; discusses challenges for the WGII report when assessing qualitative literature, incorporating local knowledge, and identifying particularly vulnerable groups; and touches on the expertise and commitment of the WGII authors. Active engagement of the wider scientific community in IPCC assessments through publication and review will enhance their relevance to decision- and policy-makers.     

An antipodean climate of uncertainty?

Climatic impact assessment is generally conducted by reference to numerical models, from which most estimates of climatic change are derived, and to the policy developers, by whom the impact assessments are demanded. The propagation of estimates derived from numerical climate model predictions of greenhouse-induced climate change through impact models into policy advice is a precariously uncertain process which compounds the considerable uncertainties already inherent in policy development. Clear statements of scientific confidence in the greenhouse phenomenon in the mid-1980s prompted demands for policy, and hence for policy advice. In Australia, as in many other countries, public and political awareness of the possibility of greenhouse-induced climatic change increased. These developments led to the formation of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC); to the Framework Convention on Climate Change, signed at the United Nations Conference on Environment and Development (UNCED) in June 1992; and to the review of the World Climate Programme in April 1993. This special issue ofClimatic Change illustrates some aspects of the difficulties surrounding projections of climatic impacts at a national scale where policy development almost always occurs under conditions of uncertainty. It may be valuable to identify uncertainty issues which could benefit from additional research and also sensitive points in the policy development process at which uncertainty can be used and abused. In this paper, the role of uncertainty in the greenhouse debate is reviewed from the perspective of a natural scientist working in a developed country. The aim is to offer a framework for the rest of this special issue ofClimatic Change. Uncertainty is by no means the only factor which influences views on climate change but increased understanding and more informed debate of all aspects of the uncertainties relating greenhouse-induced climatic change to policy development and implementation would be beneficial.     

未来气候变化科学研究的主要方向和挑战

2014年9月,IPCC联合世界气候研究计划（WCRP）,在瑞士伯尔尼大学召开了一次特别的研讨会,总结过去几年气候变化科学研究中所取得的经验教训。此次会议针对IPCC最新评估报告中的关键不确定性,梳理并总结了未来气候变化研究的主要科学方向和面临的主要挑战,讨论了如何与WCRP计划结合并解决这些问题,以期在未来更好地应对这些挑战。在此次会议上,与会专家提出,未来气候变化科学研究的重大挑战应包括如下8个主题。云、环流与气候敏感度;理解和预测极端天气气候事件;冰冻圈变化;区域气候信息;区域海平面上升及其对沿海地区的影响;水资源可利用量;生物地球化学、气溶胶和大气化学;理解年代际变化：归因与预测。这些主题涵盖了WCRP计划的六大挑战和其他被认为具有挑战性的主题。本文将在此次会议报告的基础上,对相关内容进行介绍,以供当前的气候变化工作参考。     

IPCC AR6报告解读：未来的全球气候——基于情景的预估和近期信息

依据IPCC第六次评估报告（AR6）第一工作组报告第四章的内容,对未来全球气候的预估结果进行解读。报告对21世纪全球表面气温、降水、大尺度环流和变率模态、冰冻圈和海洋圈的可能变化进行了系统评估,并对2100年以后的气候变化做了合理估计。评估指出全球平均表面气温将在未来20年内达到或超过1.5℃,平均降水也将增加,但随季节和区域而异,同时变率将增大。大尺度环流和变率模态受内部变率影响较大。到21世纪末,北冰洋可能出现无冰期;全球海洋会继续酸化,平均海平面将持续上升,百年内上升幅度依赖不同排放情景,都在2100年后继续升高。在最新的评估中采用多种约束方法,减小了预估不确定性的范围。AR6对于低排放情景以及“小概率高增暖情节”的关注为应对气候变化提供了更多、更完整的信息。综合报告的评估结果指出,未来需要进一步减小区域,特别是季风区气候预估的不确定性,并从科学研究和模式发展两方面加强我国气候预估能力的建设。     

Unleashing expert judgment in assessment

Assessment evaluates accumulated knowledge and its limits. It informs and ideally empowers decisions and actions on complex, contested issues with persistent uncertainties. Applying rigorous expert judgment is an important dimension of assessment. Here we evaluate advances and challenges in approaches to expert judgment in the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change's Fifth Assessment Report (IPCC AR5). We find that revised guidance for author teams improved the development of balanced judgments on scientific evidence across disciplines. In particular, expert judgments underpinning conclusions are more extensively, transparently, and consistently communicated: degree-of-certainty terms are more abundant in AR5 policymaker summaries; wider ranges of possible outcomes are presented with greater inclusion of lower-certainty, decision-relevant findings; and expert judgments supporting conclusions are more comparable across working groups. But challenges in developing and communicating assessment conclusions persist, especially for findings with substantial uncertainties and for subjective aspects of judgments. Based on our evaluations and AR5 lessons learned, we propose a simpler, more rigorous framework for developing and communicating expert judgments in environmental assessment. We also describe practices for reducing expert-judgment biases, for advancing integration of evidence and expert judgment, and for addressing subjective dimensions of expert opinion directly and proactively.     

减缓气候变化社会经济评价研究的最新进展——对IPCC第五次评估报告第三工作组报告的评述

IPCC第五次评估报告第三工作组报告是在世界经济、能源、温室气体排放、技术、全球气候治理等战略格局经历着深刻调整,新一轮国际气候谈判正在进行期间完成的。本文从IPCC第五次评估报告第三工作组报告的主线思路论争,减缓气候变化社会经济评价的概念体系构建,温室气体排放的历史趋势与动因,实现2℃温升控制目标的转型路径,支持路径转型的体制与政策选择和减缓气候变化知识体系与方法学发展等方面,对该报告进行了评述,并从中国低碳发展战略方向与政策取向、未来如何正确解读与应用该报告的科学信息和结论等方面提出了建议。     

IPCC《气候变化与土地特别报告》对陆气相互作用的新认知

IPCC向全球正式发布了其最新的《气候变化与土地特别报告》（SRCCL）,从陆气相互作用、荒漠化、土地退化、粮食安全、综合变化和协同性、可持续土地管理等方面评估气候变化与土地的相互关联。报告是在IPCC 3个工作组共同主导下,首次系统评估气候变化与陆面过程和土地利用/土地管理之间的相关作用。报告的评估结果表明,全球陆地增温幅度接近全球海陆平均值的两倍,气候变化加重了综合土地压力,并严重影响全球粮食安全,而全球很多区域的极端天气气候事件频率/强度持续增加,加重了农业生产的灾害风险和损失。采取行业间和国家间协同一致的行动,通过可持续土地管理,可以有效地适应和减缓气候变化,同时减轻土地退化、荒漠化和粮食安全的压力。     

Climate uncertainties and their discontents: increasing the impact of assessments on public understanding of climate risks and choices

US public awareness of the reality and risks of human-caused climate change remains limited, despite strong evidence presented in the IPCC and other major climate assessments. One contributing factor may be that the immense collective effort to produce periodic climate assessments is typically not well matched with public communication and outreach efforts for these reports, leaving a vacuum to be filled by less authoritative sources. Print and online media coverage provides one metric of the US public reach of selected climate assessments between 2000 and 2010. The number of Lexis-Nexis articles for the search terms “climate change” or “global warming” within 14 days of each report’s release varied significantly over time with a peak occurring in 2007. When compared to background “chatter” relating to climate change, each assessment had widely diverse penetration in the US media (~4% for US National Climate Assessment in 2000; ~17% for Arctic Climate Impacts Assessment in 2004; ~19% and ~10% for Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) Fourth Assessment Report Working Group I and Working Group II respectively in 2007; ~4% for the US Global Change Research Program (USGCRP) assessment report in 2009; and ~5% for US National Research Council’s America’s Climate Choices reports in 2010). We propose ways to improve the public reach of climate assessments, focusing in particular on approaches to more effectively characterize and communicate the role of uncertainty in human actions as distinct from other sources of uncertainty across the range of possible climate futures.