Transparency, trust, and integrated assessment models
An ethical consideration for the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change
Datos Bibliográficos
| ID | 12929532 |
|---|---|
| Autores | Simon Robertson (0000-0002-8008-2290, UNSW Sydney, autor de correspondencia) |
| Año | 2020 |
| Volumen | 12 |
| Número | 1 |
| Fecha de publicación | 2020-10-08 |
| Peer Reviewed | Sí |
| Open Access | Sí |
| Tipo | ARTICLE |
| Revista | Wiley Interdisciplinary Reviews Climate Change (JOURNAL) |
| Identificadores de la revista | ISSN: 1757-7780 • E-ISSN: 1757-7799 |
| Editorial | Wiley (PUBLISHER • GB) |
| DOI | 10.1002/wcc.679 |
| OpenAlex | W3091807977 |
| Idioma | EN |
| Citas recibidas | 14 |
| Referencias citadas | 29 |
Following the trenchant criticism of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) Fifth Assessment Report concerning the lack of transparency in integrated assessment models (IAMs), much attention has been given to addressing this issue in the preparation of the Sixth Assessment Report (AR6). The issue of IAM transparency has been an ongoing concern for approximately two decades regarding the cloaking of value‐laden assumptions and output uncertainties. Due to the opaque nature of IAMs, the credibility of modeling results and the associated policy recommendations are patently limited, with policymakers inevitably having reservations as to the robustness of modeling outcomes given the deficit of information regarding the underlying assumptions. In an attempt to address the issue of a lack of transparency concerning IAM usage by the IPCC, a database containing the climate mitigation scenario ensemble which underpinned the Special Report on Global Warming of 1.5°C was made publicly available, the IAMC 1.5°C Scenario Explorer database. Despite this database, the omission of critical model input data and accompanying supporting documentation from its content fails to fulfill its raison d'être , that is to say, to ensure reproducibility and transparency. If the issue of IAM transparency is not fully addressed in the upcoming AR6 with respect to the provision of IAM input data, accompanied by supporting documentation, then the IPCC will have failed to meet its own declared commitment for this assessment cycle. This article is categorized under: Integrated Assessment of Climate Change > Integrated Assessment Modeling
Business · Climate change · Computer security · Credibility · Documentation · Environmental resource management · Political science · Risk analysis (engineering · Robustness (evolution · Transparency (behavior · Climate Change and Geoengineering · Climate Change and Sustainable Development · Climate Change Policy and Economics · Computer Science · Environmental Science · Law
The technopolitics of grid modeling
(In)justice in modelled climate futures
Local governance and climate change adaptation
The Evaluation of Temporal and Spatial Trends of Global Warming and Extreme Ocean Surface Temperatures
Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change
Mapping the epistemic geography of the intergovernmental panel on climate change (1995–2022)
Imagining the corridor of climate mitigation – What is at stake in IPCC’s politics of anticipation
IPCC emission scenarios
Knowing like a global expert organization
Digital Twins of the Earth Between Vision and Fiction
Cost reductions in renewables can substantially erode the value of carbon capture and storage in mitigation pathways
Groundwater salinization in northwestern Germany
Models like heroes? Making Integrated Assessment Models (IAMs) ready for deep decarbonization and a socio-economic transformation
Varying Evidential Standards as a Matter of Justice
Five ways to ensure that models serve society
The politics of anticipation
Organising Policy-Relevant Knowledge for Climate Action
Between Tribalism and Trust
The epistemic, ethical, and political dimensions of uncertainty in integrated assessment modeling
Narrowing the Climate Field
The technique is never neutral. How methodological choices condition the generation of narratives for sustainability
The institutional context of science, models, and policy
A way out of the credibility crisis of models used in integrated environmental assessment
Map-makers and navigators of politicised terrain
Open Data for Science, Policy, and the Public Good
| Obras citantes distintas | 14 |
|---|---|
| Citas por año | 2,8 |
| Intervalo de citas | 2021 - 2026 (6) |
| Velocidad de citación | current |
| Altamente citado | No |
| Tipos de cita | Neutras: 12 |