[go: up one dir, main page]
IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/tpr/glenvp/v21y2021i1p108-129.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Intergovernmental Expert Consensus in the Making: The Case of the Summary for Policy Makers of the IPCC 2014 Synthesis Report

Author

Listed:
  • Kari De Pryck
Abstract
This article investigates the practices through which consensus is reached on policy-relevant scientific conclusions in intergovernmental assessment bodies. Using the case of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change and the production of the Summary for Policymakers (SPM) of the Synthesis Report published in 2014, it sheds light on the procedural, visual, and rhetorical arrangements in the weaving of an intergovernmental expert consensus. Drawing on ethnographic methods, the main point of the article is that the consensus emerging from the approval of the SPM is best understood as an accumulation and juxtaposition of scientific/diplomatic consensuses. It shows that these consensuses result from a layering of compromises negotiated at various stages in the assessment process and contingent on the issues at stake and the strategies of actors. In this context, consensus is not reached on individual statements but on the document as a whole, as both authors and governments seek to have their perspectives reflected. Finally, the article draws attention to the entanglement between the scientific and diplomatic rhetoric in the fabric of the SPM, which tends to construct climate change as a decontextualized and nonpolitical problem.

Suggested Citation

  • Kari De Pryck, 2021. "Intergovernmental Expert Consensus in the Making: The Case of the Summary for Policy Makers of the IPCC 2014 Synthesis Report," Global Environmental Politics, MIT Press, vol. 21(1), pages 108-129, Winter.
    • Handle: RePEc:tpr:glenvp:v:21:y:2021:i:1:p:108-129
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.mitpressjournals.org/doi/pdf/10.1162/glep_a_00574
    Download Restriction: Access to PDF is restricted to subscribers.
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. David Victor, 2015. "Climate change: Embed the social sciences in climate policy," Nature, Nature, vol. 520(7545), pages 27-29, April.
    2. Riousset, Pauline & Flachsland, Christian & Kowarsch, Martin, 2017. "Global environmental assessments: Impact mechanisms," Environmental Science & Policy, Elsevier, vol. 77(C), pages 260-267.
    3. Lahn, Bård & Sundqvist, Göran, 2017. "Science as a “fixed point”? Quantification and boundary objects in international climate politics," Environmental Science & Policy, Elsevier, vol. 67(C), pages 8-15.
    4. Haas, Peter M., 1992. "Introduction: epistemic communities and international policy coordination," International Organization, Cambridge University Press, vol. 46(1), pages 1-35, January.
    5. Charlotte Epstein, 2008. "The Power of Words in International Relations: Birth of an Anti-Whaling Discourse," MIT Press Books, The MIT Press, edition 1, volume 1, number 0262550695, April.
    6. Charlotte Epstein, 2008. "The Power of Words in International Relations: Birth of an Anti-Whaling Discourse," MIT Press Books, The MIT Press, edition 1, volume 1, number 0262050927, April.
    7. Cathleen Fogel, 2005. "Biotic Carbon Sequestration and the Kyoto Protocol: The Construction of Global Knowledge by the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change," International Environmental Agreements: Politics, Law and Economics, Springer, vol. 5(2), pages 191-210, June.
    8. Hannah Hughes & Alice B. M. Vadrot, 2019. "Weighting the World: IPBES and the Struggle over Biocultural Diversity," Global Environmental Politics, MIT Press, vol. 19(2), pages 14-37, May.
    9. Rolf Lidskog & Göran Sundqvist, 2015. "When Does Science Matter? International Relations Meets Science and Technology Studies," Global Environmental Politics, MIT Press, vol. 15(1), pages 1-20, February.
    10. Gerrit Hansen & Wolfgang Cramer, 2015. "Global distribution of observed climate change impacts," Nature Climate Change, Nature, vol. 5(3), pages 182-185, March.
    11. Alejandro Esguerra & Silke Beck & Rolf Lidskog, 2017. "Stakeholder Engagement in the Making: IPBES Legitimization Politics," Global Environmental Politics, MIT Press, vol. 17(1), pages 59-76, February.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Shinichiro Asayama, 2021. "Threshold, budget and deadline: beyond the discourse of climate scarcity and control," Climatic Change, Springer, vol. 167(3), pages 1-16, August.
    2. Patrick Bayer & Lorenzo Crippa & Hannah Hughes & Erlend Hermansen, 2024. "Government participation in virtual negotiations: evidence from IPCC approval sessions," Climatic Change, Springer, vol. 177(8), pages 1-18, August.
    3. Shinichiro Asayama, 2024. "The history and future of IPCC special reports: A dual role of politicisation and normalisation," Climatic Change, Springer, vol. 177(9), pages 1-27, September.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Alejandro Esguerra & Sandra van der Hel, 2021. "Participatory Designs and Epistemic Authority in Knowledge Platforms for Sustainability," Global Environmental Politics, MIT Press, vol. 21(1), pages 130-151, Winter.
    2. Ina Tessnow-von Wysocki & Alice B. M. Vadrot, 2024. "Pathways of scientific input into intergovernmental negotiations: a new agreement on marine biodiversity," International Environmental Agreements: Politics, Law and Economics, Springer, vol. 24(2), pages 325-348, September.
    3. Schmidt, Vivien A., 2013. "Does discourse matter in the politics of building social pacts on social protection?: international experiences," Políticas Sociales 6194, Naciones Unidas Comisión Económica para América Latina y el Caribe (CEPAL).
    4. Camille Parguel & Jean-Christophe Graz, 2021. "Food Can’t Be Traded: Civil Society’s Discursive Power in the Context of Agricultural Liberalisation in India," Indian Council for Research on International Economic Relations (ICRIER) Working Paper 405, Indian Council for Research on International Economic Relations (ICRIER), New Delhi, India.
    5. Jeanie Bukowski, 2017. "A “new water culture†on the Iberian Peninsula? Evaluating epistemic community impact on water resources management policy," Environment and Planning C, , vol. 35(2), pages 239-264, March.
    6. Mark Bevir & Oliver Daddow & Pauline Schnapper, 2015. "JCMS Special Issue 2015: Interpreting British European Policy. Guest Editors: Mark Bevir, Oliver Daddow and Pauline Schnapper," Journal of Common Market Studies, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 53(1), pages 1-17, January.
    7. Thor Olav Iversen, 2023. "Boundary experts: Science and politics in measuring the Sustainable Development Goals," Global Policy, London School of Economics and Political Science, vol. 14(4), pages 600-610, September.
    8. Jessica F Green, 2017. "Policy entrepreneurship in climate governance: Toward a comparative approach," Environment and Planning C, , vol. 35(8), pages 1471-1482, December.
    9. Monika Berg & Rolf Lidskog, 2018. "Pathways to deliberative capacity: the role of the IPCC," Climatic Change, Springer, vol. 148(1), pages 11-24, May.
    10. Ian Wash, 2020. "Interpreting public policy dilemmas: discourse analytical insights," Palgrave Communications, Palgrave Macmillan, vol. 7(1), pages 1-12, December.
    11. Kenji Otsuka, 2022. "Co‐optation in co‐production: Maintaining credibility and legitimacy in transboundary environmental governance in East Asia," Review of Policy Research, Policy Studies Organization, vol. 39(6), pages 771-797, November.
    12. Bradley Tatar, 2023. "Advocacy, Ecotourism, and Biopolitics of Whale Conservation in Ecuador," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 15(15), pages 1-15, July.
    13. Anders Blok, 2014. "Articulating Social Science in the Wild of Global Natures? On Economics and Anthropology in Transnational Environmental Politics," Environment and Planning A, , vol. 46(9), pages 2125-2142, September.
    14. Holzscheiter, Anna, 2017. "Was vom arguing übrigblieb… Der Nachhall der kommunikativen Wende in den Internationalen Beziehungen," EconStor Open Access Articles and Book Chapters, ZBW - Leibniz Information Centre for Economics, vol. 24(1), pages 143-159.
    15. Rolf Lidskog & Monika Berg & Karin M. Gustafsson & Erik Löfmarck, 2020. "Cold Science Meets Hot Weather: Environmental Threats, Emotional Messages and Scientific Storytelling," Media and Communication, Cogitatio Press, vol. 8(1), pages 118-128.
    16. Campbell-Verduyn Malcolm, 2016. "Merely TINCering around: the shifting private authority of technology, information and news corporations," Business and Politics, De Gruyter, vol. 18(2), pages 143-170, August.
    17. Kemi Fuentes-George, 2017. "Consensus, Certainty, and Catastrophe: Discourse, Governance, and Ocean Iron Fertilization," Global Environmental Politics, MIT Press, vol. 17(2), pages 125-143, May.
    18. Holzscheiter, Anna & Gholiagha, Sassan & Liese, Andrea, 2022. "Advocacy Coalition Constellations and Norm Collisions: Insights from International Drug Control, Human Trafficking, and Child Labour," EconStor Open Access Articles and Book Chapters, ZBW - Leibniz Information Centre for Economics, vol. 36(1), pages 25-48.
    19. Gholiagha, Sassan & Holzscheiter, Anna & Liese, Andrea, 2020. "Activating norm collisions: Interface conflicts in international drug control," EconStor Open Access Articles and Book Chapters, ZBW - Leibniz Information Centre for Economics, vol. 9(2), pages 290-317.
    20. Jennifer Garard & Martin Kowarsch, 2017. "Objectives for Stakeholder Engagement in Global Environmental Assessments," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 9(9), pages 1-21, September.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:tpr:glenvp:v:21:y:2021:i:1:p:108-129. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Kelly McDougall (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://direct.mit.edu/journals .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.