or the five IPCC Vice-Chairs: Meira, Izrael, Pachauri, Odingo and Seiki; the six WG Co-Chairs: Ding, Houghton, Canziani, McCarthy, Davidson and Metz; nine lead authors: three from each WG - to be nominated by WG Bureaus (at least one developing country expert per WG). A writing team of 15 and 6 review editors comprising of: the IPCC Chair; two IPCC Vice-Chairs; three WG Co-Chairs ; nine lead authors: three from each WG - to be nominated by WG Bureaus (at least one developing country expert per WG). The remaining Vice-Chairs and WG Co-Chairs would be the Review Editors. The IPCC Secretary, the heads of each of the Working Group TSUS and the technical advisor to the IPCC Chair shall be resource persons to the writing team. 8. 8a. Development Process The IPCC Chairman and the Working Group Co-Chairs will develop a list of key policy-relevant scientific questions in consultation with the President of the Conference of the Parties (COP) and the chairs of the subsidiary, and other, bodies of the COP, using the mechanism of the IPCC/FCCC Joint Working Group. The list will be circulated to governments for comment and the IPCC will approve the list at its Fourteenth Session. This list can be revised at a later date under the responsibility of the IPCC Chair, and with the approval of the IPCC (decision 4.2). 8b. Last year, the IPCC requested input from governments through SBSTA and SBI and received a number of useful suggestions. Additional suggestions were requested by the IPCC Chair at the SBSTA meeting this year. Introduction to place the document in context of other elements of the Third Key Conclusions from WGs I, II and III - highlight some of the key conclusions from each of the Working Groups, emphasizing where possible the regional Key Policy-Relevant Scientific Questions - to highlight the key policy-relevant findings in the form of providing scientific and technical information to a short series of policy-relevant scientific questions that are mostly not WG-specific - 45 pages. 10. Policy Relevant Scientific Questions 10a. The suggested list of policy-relevant scientific questions are based on the excellent input IPCC received from a large number of governments through SBSTA, and should provide the scientific and technical input required by governments. Some of the suggested questions were too detailed for the Synthesis Report and will be addressed in the relevant Working Group SPM. Given that many of the government suggestions were similar, an attempt has been made to combine them as appropriate, hence some (government) original wording has been changed. In addition, the wording of some questions has been modified given they were worded as policy questions rather than policy-relevant questions. A few of the questions only require information from a single IPCC Working Group, while most of them require information from more than one Working Group. Q1: What further progress has been made in the detection and attribution of climate change, at both the regional and global scale? (WG I) Q2: Q3: Q4: Q5: Q6: Q7: What progress has been made in determining the possible interactions of anthropogenic climate change with major causes of climate variability such as the El Niño-Southern Oscillation? (WG I) What are the implications of rapid rates of warming? (WGs I & II) What is the potential for positive feedbacks from climate change to increase greenhouse gas concentrations and climate change beyond the range identified in the non-intervention scenarios provided to the TAR by the Special Report on Emissions Scenarios? (WGs I & II) Given the possibility of positive feedbacks, what insight can IPCC provide in the risks associated with the range of global emission trajectories to allow decision-makers to place these in the context of "dangerous anthropogenic interference with the climate system"? (WGs I & II) Where possible, identify the risks of "surprises" in particular in the form of rapid and or irreversible changes to the climate system. Can thresholds for severe impacts, climate instability etc. be identified for different greenhouse gas concentrations and rates of change, which might give some insight into consideration by decision-makers of "dangerous levels" of greenhouse gas concentrations? (WGs I & II) What policies and steps should be taken by developed countries for the transfer of technologies to developing countries and how can such transfers be accomplished? (WG III and the Special Report on Methodological and Technological Issues Related Q8: 09: What new insights have emerged in order to evaluate the economic and social impacts of climate change response options (energy and non-energy mitigation and adaptation), taking into account different decision-making frameworks, such as costbenefit analysis? (WG III and Special Report on Land Use, Land Use Change and Forestry) What is projected to occur with no action (Kyoto Protocol not ratified), implemented actions, and agreed and proposed targets and timetables (e.g., Kyoto Protocol ratified) to mitigate climate change (WGs I, II & III): emissions of greenhouse gases and aerosols (WG III); projected changes in atmospheric concentration, radiative forcing, climate, and sea level at the regional and global level (WG I); the impacts of the projected changes in climate and sea level on human health, ecological systems and socio-economic sectors (particularly agriculture and water) at the regional and global level (in the context of other socio-economic changes), and options for adaptation (WG II); the development, sustainability and equity issues associated with the projected impacts and adaptation options for developed and developing countries at a regional level (WG II); the technologies, policies and measures that can be used for agreed and proposed targets and timetables (WG III); the development, sustainability and equity issues for developed and developing countries at a regional level associated with mitigation (WG III); what are the effects of Annex I obligations (policies and measures) on all countries, e.g., taking into account trade effects within and outside Annex I countries and production and prices of fuels and energy intensive goods (WG III)? Q10: What are the climatic, impact, environmental, social and economic consequences of different stabilization levels of greenhouse gas concentrations (between 350 and 750 ppm) and what are the technologies, policies and measures for emissions and sinks that can be used (and at what cost) to realize different stabilization levels? For each stabilization level of greenhouse gases, taking into consideration aerosols, and for different time profiles, taking into account different rates of change (WGs I, II & III) discuss: - projected changes in climate and sea level at the regional and global level (WG the impacts of the projected changes in climate and sea level on human health, the combination of technologies, policies and measures for emissions and sinks the development, sustainability and equity issues associated with achieving stabilization of greenhouse gas concentrations at different levels and for different constraints on rates of change, including, what would be the effects of potential Annex I obligations (policies and measures) on all countries, e.g., taking into account trade effects within and outside Annex I countries and production and prices of fuels and energy intensive goods (WG II). Q11: What are the significant interactions between climate change and other local (e.g., urban pollution), regional (e.g., acid deposition) and global (e.g., loss of biological diversity and land degradation/desertification) environmental changes, and what are the implications of these interactions for policy response strategies and economic and social costs? (WGs I, II & III) Q12: How can optimal emissions pathways be defined using different decision-making frameworks? (WGs I, II & III) Q13: Which findings are the most robust, and what are the main uncertainties and factors in quantifying the projected changes in climate, the impacts of climate change, and the consequences of different mitigation and adaptation policies? (WGs I, II & III) 57-717 99-14 Changes to Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) Procedural Rules Q37. I also understand that IPCC has agreed that the Synthesis Report should consist of a short Summary For Policy Makers (SPM) and a longer report, but that, due to opposition by China, Kenya, the Russian Federation and others—but not the U.S.— over proposals to limit the line-by-line approval to the short SPM only, no decision has been made on the issue of line-by-line approval by the IPCC even though the IPCC procedural rules require such line-by-line approval. Q37.1 Is my understanding as stated above correct, and if not, what is the correct information? A37.1 Please see the response to your letter of August 7, 1998 on this issue. Q37.2 Please explain the reasons why the U.S. delegation did not apparently support fully the views of these other governments that the entire Synthesis Report, which is a governmental document with political overtones, be subject to line-by-line approval. A37.2 Please see the response to your letter of August 7, 1998, on this issue. Q37.3 I understand that Dr. Robert Watson, the current Chair of the IPCC has objected to a line-by-line review of the entire Synthesis Report because of length of time such a review could require. Why should the time required for an adequate line-by-line review of the entire Synthesis Report be a sound basis for the U.S. not joining China and other nations in insisting on a lineby-line approval, given past IPCC controversies and given the potential for significant governmental and public policy impacts? A37.3 Please see the response to your letter of August 7, 1998, on this issue. Q37.4 Does the U.S. support or oppose any changes to the IPCC rules? A37.4 As a general matter, the United States supports many of the proposed changes to the IPCC rules, which were first adopted in late 1992 when the IPCC began work on its Second Assessment Report, and which have been amended from time to time since then. In our view, certain changes are necessary to streamline the procedures and adapt them to the approach that the IPCC will follow in preparing its Third Assessment Report, which will be completed in mid- to late 2001. |