The Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) is a unique international scientific organization which plays a pivotal role in deciding international and national climate policies.Reflecting its preeminent authority to frame climate change and how it is tackled (or not), the IPCC has attracted plenty of close attention from both academic and policy commentators, with questions of participation, integrity of procedures, trust, legitimacy and accountability receiving considerable attention (Beck ).
The Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) is a unique international scientific organization which plays a pivotal role in deciding international and national climate policies.Reflecting its preeminent authority to frame climate change and how it is tackled (or not), the IPCC has attracted plenty of close attention from both academic and policy commentators, with questions of participation, integrity of procedures, trust, legitimacy and accountability receiving considerable attention (Beck ).Tags: Examples Of A Good Research PaperDissertation Table Of Contents Apa 6thShort Essays For Middle SchoolersBeyond Reasonable Doubt EssayHarry Potter And The Order Of The Phoenix Book ReportWrite Good Political Science EssayMarking Essays Quickly
If you have access to a journal via a society or association membership, please browse to your society journal, select an article to view, and follow the instructions in this box.In doing so, the IPCC can frame—(indeed has often framed)—climate science and policy in ways that provide legitimacy for one approach over competing alternatives (Fløttum et al. For example, the IPCC has been criticized for promoting a utilitarian economic frame for climate policy with its emphasis on cost-benefit analyses and underappreciation of ethical considerations (Bjurström and Polk ).More recently, in the AR5, the IPCC appears to have made a concerted attempt to frame climate change in terms of risk rather than, for example, as a challenge warranting fundamental changes in the values and structure of societies (Fløttum et al. Furthermore, while the IPCC strives hard to stick to its mandate to provide policy-relevant information without being policy prescriptive, they have, in the past, perhaps unavoidably, made pronouncements on very controversial social and political issues such as luxury emissions, historical responsibility for emissions, value of life, discount rates and division of country groups some of which have been viewed as validating worldviews that promote climate policies that marginalize poor countries (Khanna and Chapman ).) suggests that IPCC reports affect national policy, constructions of climate equity and donor-driven research in India.Occupying its commanding position as the world’s most authoritative voice on climate science, the IPCC has important “symbolic power” (Hughes ) and far-reaching influence in shaping the tenor, urgency and political decisions of climate change.As the sixth IPCC assessment cycle gets underway, it is vital to continue to explore how best to analyse and strengthen procedural fairness in the IPCC with a view to enhancing the organization’s ability to meet its objectives of producing sound, balanced and comprehensive reports that can drive effective and equitable global response to climate change. In the next section, I review the basis for possible sentiment against procedural justice in the IPCC and I demonstrate how, to what end, and with what effects questions of fairness and procedural justice matter in the IPCC work.In Section , I combine scholarship from psychology, conflict management and legal procedures with IPCC literature, to develop a six-component framework for assessing and improving procedural justice in the IPCC.Obviously, in the United Nations Framework Convention (UNFCCC) or any other substantive governance initiative, one could explore procedural justice in terms of the outcome because there are clear distributive effects, such as who has to reduce emissions, and how an unjust process might create or exacerbate existing unfairness (Grasso and Sacchi ).Since it seems that an IPCC report cannot be just or unjust in this manner, and perhaps only scientifically accurate or inaccurate, some might suggest that the emphasis of IPCC procedure should not be on justice, with its strong moral and ethical connotations, but rather on ensuring rigorous and comprehensive scientific review and selecting authors and input materials that can help to achieve such an outcome.With its mandate to produce comprehensive, objective and balanced reviews that are politically relevant, the IPCC has to reconcile the requirement of scientific integrity with political demands for fairness, geopolitical representation and public accountability.The challenge is, therefore, to explicate how and why justice matters, as well as an ideal of procedural fairness that enhances the ability of the IPCC to achieve these multiple, complex and potentially conflicting objectives.