The recent Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) meeting in Hangzhou, China brought together delegates from nearly 190 nations to discuss the crucial 7th assessment cycle. The goal of the IPCC is to provide policy-relevant science in the face of advancing climate change. However, the meeting highlighted some concerning trends, such as weakening scientific language, delayed deadlines, and a failure to reach consensus on key research areas.
The main objectives of the Hangzhou Plenary included approving outlines for the three major working group reports and an additional methodology report on carbon dioxide removal (CDR), setting report timelines, approving expert meetings, and passing the budget. While these reports are a synthesis of scientific literature, the Plenary meetings are more about negotiations where member countries review plans and make decisions about the structure and process of IPCC reports.
Key discussions and outcomes from the meeting included the approval of outlines for the working group reports, with Working Group I focusing on the Physical Science Basis, Working Group II on Impacts, Adaptation, and Vulnerability, and Working Group III on Mitigation of Climate Change. However, there was a failure to achieve consensus on the CDR Methodology Report, leading to delays in the approval process.
The decision on report timelines was also postponed, raising concerns about whether the reports will be ready in time to inform the UNFCCC Global Stocktake in 2028. Additionally, discussions on scientific language, plain-language summaries, and equity in decision-making highlighted challenges within the IPCC process.
Moving forward, the IPCC will focus on selecting authors for the reports, ensuring diverse expertise and backgrounds are represented. Despite the challenges faced during the Plenary meeting, the IPCC remains a critical player in global climate science, shaping the foundation for climate policy and action worldwide. Scientists must continue to engage in the process to ensure that the reports reflect the best available evidence and maintain scientific rigor. The strength of the IPCC lies in its collective expertise, scientific rigor, and global collaboration.
