Abstract
AbstractThis article explores the reception of the IPCC reports on a national scale, focusing on the case of the Sixth Assessment Report (AR6) in France and Switzerland. It sheds light on the orchestration processes of national reception by the actors involved in the two science-policy interfaces, and introduces the theoretical concept of “landing” for the comparative analysis. Using mixed qualitative methods, it reveals that in both case studies, the domestic science-policy interactions stemming from the landing deviated significantly from expectations. Unusual actors different from the IPCC National Focal Points got involved in framing the conditions of the report’s domestic reception, and AR6 faced challenges when entering national Parliament. The results are discussed within the broader context of a global reflection on the imperative to enhance the dissemination channels of the IPCC scientific results to political audiences.
Publisher
Springer Science and Business Media LLC
Reference29 articles.
1. Asayama, S., Bellamy, R., Geden, O., Pearce, W. & Hulme, M. Why setting a climate deadline is dangerous. Nat. Clim. Change 9, 570–572 (2019).
2. Pearce, W. & Lindemer, A. Communications. in A Critical Assessment of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (eds De Pryck, K. & Hulme, M.) 244-252 (Cambridge University Press, 2022).
3. De Pryck, K. Expertise under Controversy. The case of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC). (Sciences Po Paris - University of Geneva, 2018).
4. Hermansen, E. A. T. et al. Fra symfoni til kakofoni: Rapportene fra FNs klimapanel og reisen mot relevans [From symphony to cacophony - The reports of the UN climate panel and the journey towards relevance]. In Rapporten: Sjanger og styringsverktøy (ed. Bjørkdahl, K.) 127–155 (2018).
5. Standring, A. & Lidskog, R. (How) Does Diversity Still Matter for the IPCC? Instrumental, Substantive and Co-Productive Logics of Diversity in Global Environmental Assessments. Climate 9, 1–15 (2021).