Nila Kartika Wati
GENEVA, Oct 7 — The Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) has officially opened the global expert review process for the First Order Draft (FOD) of the Working Group II contribution to the Seventh Assessment Report (AR7). This critical milestone marks a pivotal moment in the development of the world’s most authoritative assessment on climate change vulnerability, consequences, and adaptation strategies.
The IPCC is calling upon the international scientific community, practitioners, and climate experts to scrutinize the document, ensuring that the final report reflects the highest standards of scientific rigor, balance, and comprehensiveness.
The Core Mandate: Assessing Our Changing World
The Working Group II report serves as the global blueprint for understanding how socio-economic and natural systems are currently faring in an era of rapid climatic shifts. As the climate crisis intensifies, the role of Working Group II becomes increasingly vital; it does not merely document the damage, but provides the evidence-based framework necessary for governments and communities to adapt and build resilience.
The draft currently under review is the culmination of months of intense labor following the Second Lead Author Meeting held in May 2026. Comprising 20 distinct chapters, the report also integrates the updated IPCC Technical Guidelines for Assessing Climate Change Impacts and Adaptation (TGIA). This inclusion is highly anticipated, as the TGIA provides the essential indicators, metrics, and methodologies that practitioners require to measure the effectiveness of adaptation projects on the ground.
Chronology of the Review Process
The timeline for this consultation is strict, reflecting the urgency of the IPCC’s reporting cycle. Experts wishing to contribute their expertise must adhere to the following schedule:
- Registration Window: Now open, concluding on 20 November 2026.
- Expert Review Period: The review window commences on 9 October 2026 and remains open until 4 December 2026.
The IPCC emphasizes that this is the first of several planned review stages. Each stage is designed to introduce new layers of oversight, ensuring that the report is not only scientifically accurate but also representative of a vast array of global perspectives. Once the review closes, every submitted comment—whether from individual scientists or sovereign governments—must be addressed by the authors. These comments and the corresponding author responses are archived and published publicly after the final report is released, ensuring a transparent and accountable process.
Expert Contributions: A Call for Scientific Rigor
The IPCC is not looking for a simple endorsement of the text. Instead, they are seeking constructive criticism that challenges, refines, and improves the document. Experts are invited to evaluate the draft based on four primary criteria:
- Accuracy: Ensuring all data and scientific assertions are correct.
- Balance: Confirming that the report presents multiple perspectives and accounts for regional variations.
- Clarity: Improving the accessibility of complex scientific concepts for policymakers.
- Comprehensiveness: Identifying any gaps in the literature or critical thematic areas that may have been overlooked.
Participants are encouraged to propose specific revisions, suggest the inclusion of overlooked scientific literature (with full citations), and refine the presentation of complex data through figures and tables. The goal is to produce a document that is as concise as it is profound, maintaining scientific integrity while maximizing its utility for decision-makers.
Official Responses and Perspectives
The leadership of Working Group II has underscored the gravity of this phase. Bart van den Hurk, Co-Chair of Working Group II, emphasized the importance of the global "evidence base" in his recent statement.
"The impact of climate change is becoming clear all over the world," said Van den Hurk. "IPCC is committed to providing a solid and relevant evidence base for all experts, practitioners, and communities around the world that are continuously working on climate impacts, adaptation, and vulnerability. We would like to invite all working on these issues to review this report and lend your voice to reflect the many critical issues of our time."
Winston Chow, also a Co-Chair of Working Group II, highlighted the technical depth of the current draft. "With 20 chapters as well as the IPCC Technical Guidelines… our authors worked hard to reflect the wide diversity of topics to present a first draft of this report," Chow noted. "The TGIA is highly anticipated by governments and practitioners around the world as a framework to measure and assess the progress of adaptation projects. A report of this depth strongly benefits from comments of global practitioners, and we encourage all to register and engage."
The Broader Context: The Seventh Assessment Cycle (AR7)
The Seventh Assessment Cycle represents a monumental effort to provide the scientific bedrock for international climate negotiations. Since its formal inception in July 2023, the cycle has been characterized by a structured, ambitious work plan.
Key Milestones in the AR7 Cycle
- July 2023: Official launch of the cycle with the election of new IPCC and Task Force Bureaus in Nairobi.
- January 2024: The 60th Plenary Session in Istanbul, Türkiye, where the Panel agreed to produce the three core Working Group reports, culminating in a Synthesis Report due by late 2029.
- July 2024: The 61st Plenary Session in Sofia, Bulgaria, established the outlines for the Special Report on Climate Change and Cities and a methodology report on short-lived climate forcers.
- February 2025: The 62nd Plenary Session in Hangzhou, China, finalized the outlines for the three primary Working Group contributions.
- October 2025: The 63rd Plenary Session in Lima, Peru, approved the scientific content for the 2027 Methodology Report on Carbon Dioxide Removal (CDR) and finalized the 2026 workplan.
This systemic approach ensures that the IPCC remains the gold standard for climate policy, providing the necessary data for the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC) and its ongoing Global Stocktake processes.
Implications: Why This Matters
The importance of this review cannot be overstated. IPCC reports are the primary source of information for governments at all levels—from local municipal leaders planning flood defenses to national ministries drafting carbon-neutral legislation.
By participating in the review of the Working Group II draft, experts are not merely reviewing a document; they are helping to define the global response to the climate crisis. The inclusion of the revised Technical Guidelines for Assessing Climate Change Impacts and Adaptation (TGIA) is particularly consequential, as it will likely become the standard metric used by international funding bodies and development banks to evaluate the success of climate adaptation projects in the coming decade.
Furthermore, the transparency of the review process—where every comment is tracked and addressed—serves as a defense against the misinformation that often surrounds climate science. It transforms the report into a collaborative, global product, insulating it from political bias and ensuring that it remains a neutral, objective arbiter of scientific truth.
How to Get Involved
For those interested in contributing their expertise, the IPCC has streamlined the process. Registration for the review can be completed via the official IPCC portal.
To assist reviewers, the Working Group II Technical Support Unit has curated a suite of resources, including Frequently Asked Questions and technical guidance, available via this link.
For specific inquiries regarding the review process, please contact:
- Woo Qiyun, Senior Communications Manager, IPCC Working Group II Technical Support Unit: [email protected].
For general media inquiries, the IPCC Press Office remains the primary point of contact:
- Email: [email protected]
- Contacts: Andrej Mahecic (+41 22 730 8516) or Werani Zabula (+41 22 730 8120).
As the window for the First Order Draft review progresses, the global community waits to see how the scientific consensus will evolve. In an era of record-breaking temperatures and extreme weather, the work of these authors—and the rigorous scrutiny of their peers—remains our best hope for an evidence-based future.
For more information on the ongoing work of the IPCC, visit www.ipcc.ch.
Siti Muinah
