4/13/16

1

GEOG 401 Climate Change

The IPCC

IPCC

Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change

FAQ 2. 1, Fi gur e 1

•  Scientific body •  Intergovernmental

organization of the UN •  IPCC is the leading

body for the assessment of climate change

4/13/16

2

Founding of IPCC Established in 1988 by the World

Meteorological Organization (WMO) and the United Nations Environment Programme

(UNEP)

UN General Assembly Resolution 43/53 6 December 1988

Prepare comprehensive review and recommendations of:

1. The state of knowledge of the science of climate change

à WG1 ß 2. Social and economic impacts of climate change

à WG2 ß 3. Possible response strategies

à WG3 ß 4. Elements for inclusion in a possible future international

convention on climate à UNFCCC ß

4/13/16

3

From Talk by Carola Saibante, IPCC Information Officer

From Talk by John Houghton, Former Co-Chair of IPCC WG1

4/13/16

4

2013 - AR5

UNFCCC

a.k.a. “UNF-Triple C” United Nations Framework Convention on Climate

Change

•  International treaty signed by 192 countries •  Entered into force 21 March 1994 •  To consider what can be done to reduce (mitigate) global

warming and cope with (adapt to) inevitable change •  Many nations signed an addition to the treaty: the Kyoto

Protocol

4/13/16

5

Kyoto Protocol •  Text adopted at the 3rd COP session in Kyoto, Japan on 11 December

1997

•  Difference between UNFCCC and Kyoto Protocol: –  Convention encouraged countries to stabilize GHG emissions –  Protocol commits them to do so

•  84 countries signed the Protocol including the USA •  Entered into force on 16 February 2005, 90 days after ratification by at

least 55 parties to the Convention, which accounted for at least 55% of the total carbon dioxide emissions for 1990

•  Ratified by 189 countries. One signatory country has not ratified: USA

4/13/16

6

Ratification Status

Ratified by 189 countries. Only one signatory country has not ratified: USA

Green: signed and ratified

Grey: not yet decided

Red: No intention of ratifying

COP21: Paris Agreement

•  32-page document •  You can read it on the UNFCCC website: https://unfccc.int/resource/docs/2015/cop21/eng/l09r01.pdf •  Sets binding limits on emissions •  Not yet ratified •  Not enough

4/13/16

7

Role of IPCC

•  First Assessment Report served as the basis for negotiating UNFCCC

•  Relationship between IPCC and UNFCCC has continued and serves as a model for interaction between science and policy makers

IPCC’s Keys to Success

•  Policy relevant, but not policy prescriptive

•  Emphasis on scientific integrity, openness, and transparency

•  Rigorous review process involving many experts and open to all member governments

•  Enthusiasm and cooperation of thousands of experts who serve as authors and reviewers

Source: IPCC. 2004. 16 Years of Scientific Assessment in Support of the Climate Convention.

4/13/16

8

From Talk by Carola Saibante, IPCC Information Officer

Review Process

4/13/16

9

From Talk by Carola Saibante, IPCC Information Officer

Reaction to IPCC

•  Widely praised as a model of scientific collaboration

•  Lauded for unprecedented achievement

•  Nobel Peace Prize 2007

•  IPCC has also been criticized

4/13/16

10

Criticisms and Controversies

•  Current approach not effective: warnings have attracted attention and the work garnered awards, but has not to led to effective action

•  Assessment reports watered down to lowest common denominator: member governments must approve line by line

•  Can’t keep pace: explosion of climate research cannot be quickly assimilated under current IPCC procedures

Not Doing Enough

Criticisms and Controversies

•  Cherry-picking studies to play down uncertainties: a relatively small group of scientists feel that studies opposing the mainstream view are not given enough weight –  Hurricane (typhoon) activity

–  Hockey stick graph

Doing Too Much

4/13/16

11

Criticisms and Controversies

•  Political interference: objectivity has been called into question because of vetting of reports by governments

•  Too conservative: reports tend to understate dangers; fail to report on issues of potentially great importance, because of scientific uncertainty

•  Reports are immediately outdated: mandate for periodic comprehensive report and the thorough review process delay the release until well after the original research

Approach Flawed

AR5 and Beyond •  Refocusing scientific priorities

(See: IPCC. 2009. Chairman’s Vision Paper. AR5 Scoping Meeting, July 2009. http://www.ipcc.ch/scoping_meeting_ar5 /documents/doc02.pdf )

•  Continuing march toward improved understanding

•  Gradual reduction in uncertainty •  Structural changes?

–  More focused, expeditious reports? –  Report dangers that are still highly uncertain? –  Constant updating using Wikipedia-style

system? –  More attention to psychology/sociology of risk

response?

4/13/16

12

Risk Response

How Are We Doing?

•  Kyoto countries are having a hard time meeting commitments

•  Emissions and concentrations continue to rise

Fi gur e 2. 3

4/13/16

13

IPCC: Evidence of Global Warming is Overwhelming

Yet public perception and political will lag. Why?

Fi gur e 2. 21

FAQ 2. 1, Fi gur e 1

IPCC: Evidence of the Impacts of Global Warming Accumulates

Yet public perception and political will lag. Why?

4/13/16

14

IPCC: Future Changes May Be Catastrophic If We Continue On

Present Course

Yet public perception and political will lag. Why?

Why No Significant Response •  Science is hard •  Powerful interests feel threatened by

possible response strategies; try to confuse issue

•  Scientists need to do a better job of explaining complex issues

•  Media need to do a better job of informing public and reducing bias in coverage

What Needs To Be Done

4/13/16

15

Journalistic Balance •  Journalistic fairness requires presentation of

competing points of view

•  Works well to check biased reporting of political or social issues

•  For scientific reporting, it demands that competing views be presented as though they had equal scientific validity, when they actually do not

•  Results in systematic informational bias

See: Jules & Maxwell Boykoff, Journalistic Balance as Global Warming Bias. Fair, http://www.fair.org/index.php?page=1978

Concluding Thoughts

•  Science will continue to improve understanding

•  Uncertainties will remain

•  Public must recognize the urgency, but also understand that acting soon will make a difference

•  Policy makers must find the will to act, despite uncertainties

•  Journalists are key players who need to be knowledgeable about climate change

4/13/16

16

Something to Ponder

To what degree should scientists become activists for policy changes to combat global warming?

THANK YOU FOR YOUR COMMITMENT TO BETTER

UNDERSTAND THIS CRITICALLY IMPORTANT PROBLEM

thomas@hawaii.edu