24 May 2011 | Ethan Nechin
Climate Change

 

The Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) announced last week (13 May) a major overhaul to the panel’s executive body. This came after the panel have received major criticism for its operations.

The Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC), announced it will undertake a major reform recommended by the InterAcademic Council. The panel, which was established in 1988 as UN body and received the Nobel Prize in 2007, have come under scrutiny in the past couple of years for major errors; notably for a  substantial inaccuracy in estimating the Himalayan glacial melting rate. This came parallel to the University of East Anglia's Climatic Research Unit’s email fiasco, which brought fierce criticism to the environmental panel’s work.  

The InterAcademic council’s main concern was the breakdown in the executive body which enabled these errors to occur. In a press release they said: “[The IPCC were] ...successful overall, but it needs to fundamentally reform its management structure and strengthen its procedures to handle ever larger and increasingly complex climate assessments, as well as the more intense public scrutiny.”
These failures lead to a problem with the panel’s transparency which has damaged its credibility. Last October the IPCC introduced some minor changes to its' governance, but last week’s summit signified a massive shift in the panel’s approach.

The laconic press release stated that the reform called for “a clear and timely procedure for evaluating and correcting genuine errors” but did not convey the underlying tension in the panel’s executive leadership.

The issue of conflict of interest in many handlings of the panel put IPCC chairman Rajendra Pachauri under pressure and he was even faced with calls to quit. The report found many errors in how the executive body dealt with scientists and climatologists, leaving a trail of inconsistencies in their reports and using non-peer-reviewed literature from NGO’s and climate activists. Additionally the council called for disclosure of financial reports with Pachauri himself being criticised for conflict of interest in 2009.

A complete overhaul in the panel’s leadership was avoided because delegates postponed decision on the term dates for Pachauri, meaning that Pachauri could stay in office until 2014 or longer. Replying to these accusations Pachauri simply stated: "My job is to successfully complete the next assessment. That's what I'm solely focused on."

With the major overhaul seemingly underway and the panel’s resolve to reform itself, key changes should be apparent in the near future.


Zero Emission Resource Organisation| Flickr 

blog comments powered by Disqus