A special report on system transitions would make IPCC science more actionable
Carl-Friedrich Schleussner, Christopher Trisos, Aditi Mukherji
The IPCC reporting cycle is out of step with the international climate policy process. A special report on system transitions could help make IPCC science more actionable.
The Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) has just completed its Sixth Assessment Report cycle (AR6) and discussions on the needs and key products of the forthcoming seventh cycle (AR7) are in full swing.
In its new cycle, the IPCC needs to navigate a rapidly changing climate discourse landscape. The world is not on track to achieve the goals of the Paris Agreement. Yet, climate action, both mitigation and adaptation, is happening worldwide on all levels of government, in industry, business and societies.
Insufficient as many of these actions still are to date, they have taken very high estimates of future global warming off the table, and we are clearly in implementation mode. Understandably, there is a growing appetite for scientific assessments in the climate solution space to understand what works, where and how.
This is the critical decade
Very significant political and investment decisions need to be taken in this critical decade that will determine the fate of the Paris Agreement and the global ambition to keep 1.5°C within reach and achieve climate resilient development. This has a number of implications for the design of the next IPCC cycle and its ambition to be policy relevant.
Firstly, a shorter cycle seems highly desirable. There is a clear need for the IPCC to align its cycle with the Global Stocktake, aiming to inform the second Stocktake (2026-2028). If it fails to do so during AR7, it would continue to be out of sync going forward. But the Global Stocktake process is really just a small part of a much bigger picture.
A wide range of policy and investment decisions will be taken before the end of this decade, including on the development of National Determined Contributions (NDCs) under the Paris Agreement setting targets up to 2040, as well as the setting of adaptation targets aligned with the outcome of ongoing discussions on the Global Goal on Adaptation, for which discussions seem to be moving towards a set of concrete targets.
These decisions need to be informed by the best available science. Enabling the IPCC to do that requires a critical reflection not just on what products to focus on (Special Reports, Methodology Reports, Assessment Reports), but also the scope and length of these reports.
Secondly, the AR6 Synthesis Report identified a portfolio of mitigation and adaptation actions across sectors and systems necessary to achieve deep and sustained emissions reductions and secure a sustainable future for all. However, there is a strong need for more actionable information in climate science and policy on the transformative changes for mitigation and adaptation that are needed to achieve systems transitions across: energy systems; cities, settlements and infrastructure; land, oceans, food and water; health and nutrition; and society, livelihoods and economies.
A focus on ‘what works,’ ‘where,’ and under ‘what enabling conditions,’ is urgently needed to inform, in concrete implementable terms, how to achieve these transitions and transformations across these key systems and sectors. One key system, urban environments, is already on the list to be covered in a Special Report in the next IPCC cycle, showing that there is demand for the type of scientific assessment that takes a system transition lens.
Crucially, implementation relevant assessments on system transitions need to integrate all dimensions of climate action, mitigation and adaptation alike. This is because there is a strong demand from policymakers to understand the co-benefits and trade-offs of mitigation and adaptation actions. In the AR6, this information was scattered across the Working Group II report on impacts and adaptation and the Working Group III report on mitigation – only the Synthesis Report provided for some integrated analysis. However, given the scope and nature of the Synthesis Report, this could only go so far.
A Special Report on System Transitions
Based on these considerations, we want to propose a report on system transitions in the upcoming IPCC Assessment Cycle (for example, a dedicated Special Report) encompassing mitigation, impacts, and adaptation-relevant information for diverse sectors and systems like cities, agriculture, health, transport and industry. Such a report, inspired by Section C.3 of the AR6 Synthesis Report, could cover elements of the AR6 Working Group III report, including energy systems, agriculture, cities and transport (chapters 5-11), and WGII report on agriculture, water, cities, infrastructure and health (chapters 3-8).
One avenue for such a report would be to extend the scope of the already envisioned Special Report on Cities to a multi-sector report. Alternatively, an additional product beyond this could be envisioned, being mindful of the time-constraints for the AR7 cycle, as outlined above. We would then recommend removing the respective chapters from the second and third working group reports, thereby allowing for shorter and more targeted assessment reports. These reports could then focus on cross-sectoral, cross-system and global pathway assessments.
Such integration across mitigation, impacts, and adaptation dimensions not only enables the development of robust, adaptable solutions but also fosters informed, comprehensive strategies in various sectors, thus allowing for the creation of climate-resilient policies that are practical and actionable, and therefore more policy relevant.
By distilling and focusing content from the original Working Group II and III reports, this approach enhances the accessibility and user-friendliness of crucial information, and meets the demand from a wide range of end-users (including national governments) on actionable information. It also encourages interdisciplinary collaboration, synthesising varied perspectives and expertise to address the multifaceted challenges posed by climate change.
Clearly, there are downsides to this suggestion that need to be carefully considered. Firstly, such a product would be quite comprehensive in scope, which might be challenging to do. However, overall such an approach would have the potential to substantially reduce the workload over the whole cycle by shortening the assessment reports, cutting redundancies and increasing cross-working group synergies, while also making the reports more user-friendly. This would build on the efforts of increased integration that had already been undertaken for AR6.
Secondly, a sectoral perspective alone can lead to inefficient responses or negative trade-offs from a society-wide or economy-wide perspective. This is in particular the case for mitigation where an integrated whole-economy perspective is crucial. Providing such a cross-sectoral, economy-wide perspective should therefore continue to be a focus of working group two and three reports. The Synthesis Report could then play an enhanced role here in truly bringing together insights from special and assessment reports that are not repetitive in content, but rather additive.
Such a system transition product could be a crucial innovation for the IPCC in its next assessment cycle, responding to the growing demand for concise, integrated and actionable climate solutions.
COP28: social and economic metrics could serve as stepping stone for Global Goal on Adaptation
As work on shaping the Global Goal on Adaptation culminates this week at COP28, we explore if social and economic metrics could be used as proxies for a country’s ability to adapt.
Safeguards and exit points for the World Bank as host of the Loss and Damage Fund
An agreement was reached to establish the World Bank as the interim host of the Loss and Damage Fund. Developing countries signed up to this on certain conditions. We unpack the safeguards put in place and look at the three points at which the Fund could exit the World Bank.
Beetaloo gas field is a climate bomb. How did CSIRO modelling make it look otherwise?
The fossil gas industry is gearing up for a truly enormous new fracking project in the Northern Territory’s Beetaloo Basin that could undo all Australia's efforts to cut emissions.
From droughts to floods: how Eastern African countries are responding to the rising El Niño and Indian Ocean Dipole
The Horn of Africa looks set to go from one disaster to another as floods intensified by a rising El Niño and a positive Indian Ocean Dipole are predicted to follow a prolonged drought. We take a look at climate policies in the region and what countries are doing to prepare for compound extreme events.
The just transition looks different for small islands – their voices must be heard
The concept of a just transition is gaining momentum, yet it’s too often viewed through a developed country lens in international climate talks and discussions often ignore the links to climate justice. The unique concerns of small islands must be heard to ensure the just transition works for all.
Overshoot Commission’s veneer of neutrality is solar radiation modification PR by stealth
Calls for a moratorium on solar radiation modification (SRM) today by the Overshoot Commission seem sensible – such sun-blocking technologies are highly risky. Yet in the same breath, the Commission appears to encourage moratorium-busting SRM testing, begging the question – is their new report a trojan horse?
G20 renewables target is no substitute for a clear fossil fuel phase out
The G20's new target of tripling renewables by 2030 is welcome, but the world will only meet its climate goals if this is coupled with a fossil fuel phaseout.
El Niño is contributing to the hottest temperatures ever recorded – what does this mean for the Paris Agreement’s 1.5°C limit?
Extreme weather is raging across the northern hemisphere. Our experts explain the implications of the emerging El Niño for our changing climate.
What the new IMO climate targets mean for shipping emissions
The International Maritime Organization has agreed new 2030 and 2050 climate targets for the shipping sector. We take a look at what this means for shipping emissions.
Climate models underestimate food security risk from ‘compound’ extreme weather
Climate change poses a risk to global food security. Weather and climate extremes, such as prolonged drought, heavy rainfall and heatwaves, can lead to harvest failures. These are occurring with increased magnitude and frequency on a warming planet. In addition, such events can disrupt supply chains, decreasing food supply and leading to price spikes.