The IPCC, WWF and climate change
The IPCC, WWF and climate change
The IPCC – the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change – has been the focus of considerable media coverage over the past couple of weeks. Much of the coverage focuses on the role and processes of the IPCC. As one of a large number of organisations whose information has been used by the panel, WWF has also come under scrutiny.
Two particular instances where our work has been used by the IPCC have recently been criticised. In one case, a 2005 report about the possible future of Himalayan glaciers repeated predictions which proved to be incorrect. We have acknowledged the error and expressed our regret. More recently, some commentators have criticised our 2000 report on forest fires. This criticism is misplaced and we stand by the report. Some commentators are taking this opportunity to try to discredit climate science as a whole. These recent incidents give no cause to doubt the basic science that underpins the case for climate change, which is grounded in an overwhelming body of research by literally thousands of scientists over the last 2 decades.
Two particular instances where our work has been used by the IPCC have recently been criticised. In one case, a 2005 report about the possible future of Himalayan glaciers repeated predictions which proved to be incorrect. We have acknowledged the error and expressed our regret. More recently, some commentators have criticised our 2000 report on forest fires. This criticism is misplaced and we stand by the report. Some commentators are taking this opportunity to try to discredit climate science as a whole. These recent incidents give no cause to doubt the basic science that underpins the case for climate change, which is grounded in an overwhelming body of research by literally thousands of scientists over the last 2 decades.
The IPCC
The main activity of the IPCC is to provide, at regular intervals, Assessment Reports of the state of knowledge on climate change. The most recent is Climate Change 2007, the IPCC's Fourth Assessment Report.
Procedures agreed by the Panel are meant to govern the preparation of all IPCC reports, with the work guided by the IPCC Chair and the Working Group and Task Force Co-chairs. Hundreds of experts from all over the world contribute to the preparation of IPCC reports as authors, contributors and reviewers. The composition of author teams reflects a range of views, expertise and geographical representation. Review by governments and experts is an essential element of the preparation of IPCC reports.
The IPCC has stated that its procedures were not followed in respect of the Himalayan glaciers reference, and WWF welcomes IPCC’s renewed commitment to its procedures and standards of evidence for the next round of reporting.
WWF reports
As part of its process, the IPCC has referenced information from several WWF reports and studies. In relation to the two cited in media reports:
- The 2005 report An Overview of Glaciers, Glacier Retreat, and Subsequent Impacts in Nepal, India and China was in error in repeating a prediction of high probability of Himalayan glacier melt by 2035 and in ascribing this prediction to the International Commission for Snow and Ice (ICSI). WWF sourced this prediction to an article published in New Scientist in 1999. As soon as we were made aware of this error, we acknowledged this and published our correction. Scientists remain concerned about glacier retreat globally.
- The WWF/IUCN Global Review of Forest Fires (2000) has also been the subject of comment as a source for the IPCC. The Review, co-written by an internationally recognized wildfire expert says that “up to 40% of the Brazilian forest is extremely sensitive to small reductions in the amount of rainfall.” That statement was drawn from a 1999 Amazon fires overview published by the respected Instituto de Pesquisa Ambiental da Amazônia (IPAM – Amazon Environmental Research Institute). We stand by it.
A more recent, peer-reviewed WWF report The Amazon’s Vicious Cycles (WWF 2007) looks at the Amazon in greater detail. This report – and much other recent research - supports the conclusion that the Amazon is at risk from factors which include, and are compounded by, climate change.
Conclusion
As a science-based conservation organisation, we do our best to ensure the information we provide to the public meets high standards of accuracy. If we are alerted to a possible error in one of our reports, we investigate the matter and make corrections where appropriate.
Given the overwhelming mass of findings on the reality, causes and likely impacts of climate change it is vital that we continue to tackle climate change to safeguard the natural world and protect human lives and livelihoods.
James P. Leape
Director General WWF International
