The history and future of IPCC special reports: A dual role of politicisation and normalisation

Abstract The special reports of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) have a unique character in IPCC scientific assessment. Their main purpose is to address specific timely issues of policy relevance. This article explores the nature and role of IPCC special reports along the lines of three questions: (1) the history (‘where they come from’); (2) the function (‘what they are doing’); and (3) the future (‘where they are going’). In earlier assessment cycles, special reports were characterised mostly as a direct channel for quickly responding to the request from the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC). The conduct of special reports has been gradually institutionalised to embed its planning in the overall scoping of the entire assessment cycle. More recently, they have become a vehicle to consolidate cross-cutting scientific perspectives and serve the diverse needs of the international policy community, not only the UNFCCC. This historical evolution is, in a sense, the result of striving for greater policy relevance. Special reports have a dual political function—namely, turning into the site or object of politicised debates on science (politicisation) and serving as ‘de facto governance’ with the effect of normalising politically contested ideas (normalisation). This dual function is two different faces emerging from the process into which the IPCC is brought to deal with political controversy. The duality of the two functions also manifests inherent tensions that lie behind the IPCC’s ‘policy-relevant but not policy-prescriptive’ principle. For the future of special reports, the IPCC could reconsider the role of special reports in light of the priority over comprehensive assessment reports, the responsiveness to the UNFCCC request and the selection and scope definition of timely topics. However, there will remain a trade-off between provisional science and lasting political impact caused by the future undertaking of IPCC special reports on any topic.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
Climatic Change
Published
2024-08-21
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1007/s10584-024-03788-1
Citations
10
Primary Topic
Climate Change Policy and Economics
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
11.29

Funders

Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

The history and future of IPCC special reports: A dual role of politicisation and normalisation

Shinichiro Asayama
10 citations
Climatic Change
Climate Change Policy and Economics
11.29
article

The history and future of IPCC special reports: A dual role of politicisation and normalisation

Shinichiro Asayama
article en
10 citations

Abstract

Abstract The special reports of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) have a unique character in IPCC scientific assessment. Their main purpose is to address specific timely issues of policy relevance. This article explores the nature and role of IPCC special reports along the lines of three questions: (1) the history (‘where they come from’); (2) the function (‘what they are doing’); and (3) the future (‘where they are going’). In earlier assessment cycles, special reports were characterised mostly as a direct channel for quickly responding to the request from the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC). The conduct of special reports has been gradually institutionalised to embed its planning in the overall scoping of the entire assessment cycle. More recently, they have become a vehicle to consolidate cross-cutting scientific perspectives and serve the diverse needs of the international policy community, not only the UNFCCC. This historical evolution is, in a sense, the result of striving for greater policy relevance. Special reports have a dual political function—namely, turning into the site or object of politicised debates on science (politicisation) and serving as ‘de facto governance’ with the effect of normalising politically contested ideas (normalisation). This dual function is two different faces emerging from the process into which the IPCC is brought to deal with political controversy. The duality of the two functions also manifests inherent tensions that lie behind the IPCC’s ‘policy-relevant but not policy-prescriptive’ principle. For the future of special reports, the IPCC could reconsider the role of special reports in light of the priority over comprehensive assessment reports, the responsiveness to the UNFCCC request and the selection and scope definition of timely topics. However, there will remain a trade-off between provisional science and lasting political impact caused by the future undertaking of IPCC special reports on any topic.

Climatic ChangeVol. 177(9)
National Institute for Environmental Studies (JP)
Japan Society for the Promotion of Science
Climate action
Openalex Percentile: Top 2%
Climate Change Policy and Economics
11.29
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.