Investigate how international scientific bodies such as the IPCC translate science into policy advice, including the role of Australian contributions

What this dot point is asking

NESA wants you to use the IPCC as a case study of how international scientific bodies translate research into policy advice, identify Australian contributions and evaluate the effectiveness of the process. This dot point connects Module 7 (Fact or Fallacy) and Module 8 (Science and Society) and is increasingly examined.

The answer

The Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change is the leading example of how scientific evidence is systematically synthesised and translated into policy advice for governments worldwide. Its structure, process and Australian contributions illustrate the science-policy interface at its most rigorous.

What the IPCC is

The IPCC was established in 1988 jointly by the World Meteorological Organization (WMO) and the United Nations Environment Programme (UNEP). Membership now includes 195 countries.

The IPCC does not conduct original research. Its function is to assess the existing peer-reviewed literature. Researchers around the world publish climate findings; the IPCC synthesises them.

Structure

Three working groups address different aspects of climate change.

Working Group I

Physical Science Basis. The physics and chemistry of climate change: atmospheric CO2, temperature, ocean heat, ice and sea level.

Working Group II

Impacts, Adaptation and Vulnerability. How climate change affects ecosystems, agriculture, water, health and human settlements. Adaptation strategies.

Working Group III

Mitigation of Climate Change. Pathways to reducing greenhouse gas emissions, energy transitions, policy options.

Each working group operates with its own bureau, lead authors and reviewers.

The assessment cycle

Every 5 to 7 years, each working group produces an Assessment Report.

Lead authors

Hundreds of climate scientists from member countries are selected as Coordinating Lead Authors (CLAs) and Lead Authors (LAs). The selection follows nomination by countries and IPCC bureau decisions.

Drafting

Authors write chapters based on the existing peer-reviewed literature, with explicit consideration of confidence levels (high, medium, low) and the level of agreement across studies.

Expert review

Drafts are reviewed by hundreds more expert reviewers from around the world.

Government review

Member governments review the drafts and have the right to comment on every line.

Summary for Policymakers (SPM)

The most policy-relevant findings are summarised. Governments review and agree on the SPM language line by line in a plenary session. The full technical chapters cannot be modified by governments, but the SPM language is negotiated to ensure all member countries can endorse it.

Publication

Full reports plus SPM are released. The SPM is widely cited in policy; the technical chapters provide the underlying detail.

The Sixth Assessment Report (AR6, 2021 to 2023)

The most recent full assessment cycle.

Working Group I report (2021)

Concluded that human influence on the climate system is "unequivocal" and that some impacts (sea level rise) are already locked in for centuries.

Working Group II report (2022)

Adaptation has become as urgent as mitigation. Loss and damage from climate change is occurring now.

Working Group III report (2022)

Limiting warming to 1.5 degrees Celsius requires global emissions to peak by 2025 and fall by 43 per cent by 2030.

Synthesis Report (2023)

Final integrated assessment. Cited approximately 14,000 peer-reviewed papers.

Australian contributions

Australian researchers have been lead authors on every Working Group across every Assessment Report since 1990.

Major institutions.

• CSIRO. Atmospheric monitoring at Cape Grim, Tasmania. Climate modelling.
• Bureau of Meteorology. Surface temperature record, sea-level, ocean monitoring.
• Australian Antarctic Division. Ice-core analysis (Vostok, Law Dome, Dome C).
• Australian universities. Modelling, impacts research, adaptation studies.

Major individuals.

• Will Steffen (deceased 2023). Earth-system science pioneer, multiple IPCC roles.
• Mark Howden. AR6 Vice-Chair, agriculture and adaptation specialist at ANU.
• Lesley Hughes. AR4, AR5, AR6 contributor, Macquarie University.
• Penny Whetton, Lisa Alexander, Nathan Bindoff, Trevor McDougall, Joelle Gergis. Australian Lead Authors across multiple Assessment Reports.

Specific Australian data.

• Cape Grim, Tasmania. Continuous southern hemisphere atmospheric monitoring since 1976. Critical reference station for global CO2 and methane records.
• Australian Antarctic Division ice cores. Provide pre-industrial CO2 baseline (180 to 280 ppm) and last 800,000 years of climate history.
• BOM surface temperature. Independent confirmation of global warming patterns over the Australian continent.
• CSIRO modelling. Australian Community Climate and Earth-System Simulator (ACCESS) is one of the climate models contributing to IPCC scenarios.

Why the IPCC model works

Comprehensiveness

Every relevant peer-reviewed paper is considered.

Transparency

The process is open. Drafts are publicly available.

Diverse review

Hundreds of experts plus member governments review each report.

Conservatism

The IPCC tends to underestimate rather than overestimate climate impacts; its findings are typically the lower bound of plausible scenarios.

Confidence language

Explicit (e.g. "very likely," "high confidence") rather than vague.

Independence within structure

Authors do not represent their governments; they represent their scientific expertise.

Why the IPCC has been criticised

Pace

Five to seven years between reports is slow given the urgency.

Conservatism

The IPCC's conservative bias has been criticised as understating the threat. Polar ice loss has consistently outpaced IPCC projections.

SPM political dilution

Member governments can negotiate the Summary for Policymakers to soften wording (Saudi Arabia, Russia and the US under some administrations have done this).

Implementation gap

IPCC findings have not been matched by policy action sufficient to limit warming to 1.5 degrees Celsius.

Diversity

Lead authors have historically been concentrated in higher-income countries. AR6 made progress on inclusion of lower-income country and Indigenous voices.

What happens after a report

National policy

Member countries reference IPCC findings in national policy documents. Australia's Climate Change Act 2022 explicitly aligns with IPCC findings.

UN climate negotiations

The IPCC reports anchor the UNFCCC and Paris Agreement negotiations. The 2023 UAE Consensus at COP28 cited AR6 extensively.

Media coverage

Major reports generate global media attention and shape public understanding.

Industry

Major companies (energy, finance, agriculture) use IPCC scenarios for risk assessment and planning.

The science-policy gap

Despite the IPCC's rigour, actual policy has lagged the scientific findings. Global emissions have continued rising; the world is on track for 2.5 to 3 degrees Celsius warming by 2100 on current policies, not 1.5 or 2 degrees Celsius.

The IPCC provides the evidence; policymakers and citizens must act on it. This is the central challenge of science communication and democratic decision-making in the 21st century.

Other international scientific bodies

The IPCC is the most visible but not the only example.

• Intergovernmental Science-Policy Platform on Biodiversity and Ecosystem Services (IPBES). Biodiversity equivalent of the IPCC.
• The World Health Organization. Synthesises global health evidence.
• The Codex Alimentarius Commission. Food safety standards.

Australia participates in all of these.