Science for transformative change: the IPCC, boundary work and the making of useable knowledge

While there has been much discussion about what kind of expertise the IPCC needs to develop to (better) guide climate policy, little has been said about how the experts themselves assess the challenges of making science policy-relevant. The paper aims to address this gap by exploring how leading IPCC experts reflect on and evaluate their work. The empirical material consists of an interview study with experts currently or recently involved in the IPCC. The selection strategy aimed to achieve a broad range of experience among those with key roles in the assessment work, including experts from all three working groups, from different regions, and of different genders. Data from the interviews was analyzed thematically using NVivo. The concept of boundary work was used to analyze the distinctions and boundaries in this work; how the IPCC experts draw boundaries between science and policy, between policy-relevance and policy-prescriptiveness, and between certain and uncertain knowledge. By analyzing the experts’ own experiences and ideas about what makes science relevant to policy-making, the paper contributes to the discussion about current and future challenges for the IPCC.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
Frontiers in Climate
Published
2024-10-03
DOI
https://doi.org/10.3389/fclim.2024.1408513
Citations
6
Primary Topic
Climate Change Communication and Perception
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
6.79

Funders

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

Science for transformative change: the IPCC, boundary work and the making of useable knowledge

Rolf Lidskog
6 citations
Frontiers in Climate
Climate Change Communication and Perception
6.79
article

Science for transformative change: the IPCC, boundary work and the making of useable knowledge

Rolf Lidskog
article en
6 citations

Abstract

While there has been much discussion about what kind of expertise the IPCC needs to develop to (better) guide climate policy, little has been said about how the experts themselves assess the challenges of making science policy-relevant. The paper aims to address this gap by exploring how leading IPCC experts reflect on and evaluate their work. The empirical material consists of an interview study with experts currently or recently involved in the IPCC. The selection strategy aimed to achieve a broad range of experience among those with key roles in the assessment work, including experts from all three working groups, from different regions, and of different genders. Data from the interviews was analyzed thematically using NVivo. The concept of boundary work was used to analyze the distinctions and boundaries in this work; how the IPCC experts draw boundaries between science and policy, between policy-relevance and policy-prescriptiveness, and between certain and uncertain knowledge. By analyzing the experts’ own experiences and ideas about what makes science relevant to policy-making, the paper contributes to the discussion about current and future challenges for the IPCC.

Frontiers in ClimateVol. 6
Örebro University (SE)
Svenska Forskningsrådet Formas, Vetenskapsrådet, Riksbankens Jubileumsfond, Mittuniversitetet, Universidade de Lisboa
Openalex Percentile: Top 3%
Climate Change Communication and Perception
6.79
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.