Title Top climate scientist: I put myself through hell as an IPCC convening lead author, but it was worth it Degree of recognition International Media name/outlet The Conversation Media type Web Country United Kingdom Date 15/08/19 Description In my day job, I am a scientist at the University of Aberdeen in Scotland studying things such as how agriculture contributes to climate change and what we can do about it. Recently, though, I found myself in Geneva, to take part in my fourth “adoption plenary” for a report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC).
The report in question was the recent Special Report on Climate Change and Land, and I was one of its 15 convening lead authors, responsible along with two others for a 300-page chapter on links between desertification, land degradation, food security and climate change. The adoption plenary is the process by which the 195 governments who are part of the IPCC reach consensus on the wording of a much shorter (40 or so page) “Summary for Policymakers” (SPM) of an entire IPCC report, and thereby adopt its findings.
The process of approval is gruelling for all concerned: it’s allocated five days, with an additional reserve day allocated which is often used. During this period, every word of the policymakers’ summary has to be agreed and approved, line-by-line, with delegates from all governments in the room.
Producer/Author Pete Smith URL https://theconversation.com/top-climate-scientist-i-put-myself-through-hell-as-an-ipcc-convening-lead-author-but-it-was-worth-it-121855 Persons Pete Smith