The Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) at the June adopted new procedures work — began their review after two years in the report of the Nobel winners, errors were detected solutions IPCC published on its website.
Winter 2010 IPCC publicly acknowledged that the text of the Fourth Assessment Report (AR4) in 2007 have errors. The most famous of which is the assertion that the glaciers in the Himalayas are retreating faster than anywhere else, and that they may disappear by 2035. The source of these data were not articles in scientific journals, and the report WWF, which, in turn, cited an article from the popular science magazine New Scientist. In the latter the author made a mistake — at the source, to become director of the Institute of Geography RAS, Academician Vladimir Kotlyakov of 1996, it was about the year 2350.
A special commission of the Council of Academies of Sciences (IAC), including those created on the initiative of IPCC, at the end of August 2010 presented the results of an independent review of the procedures of the group. The Commission has issued a series of recommendations for reform of the working process, the founders considered the IPCC meeting in October of that year in South Korea Busan.
Decisions taken (in session June 6-9) in Geneva, include, in particular, the adoption of the Strategy for Communication IPCC with politicians, other stakeholders and the media, new steps to implement the policy on conflicts of interest, as well as revision procedures for election of office IPCC, including to enhance the representation of the Pacific region, the report said.
"Now that the review of procedures completed, IPCC can focus on their main task — to complete, objective, open and transparent analysis of the scientific, technical and socio-economic information needed to understand the scientific basis of risk of climate change, its potential impacts and our ability to mitigate or adapt it, "- said the head of IPCC, Rajendra Pachauri (Rajendra Pachauri), whose words are reported group.
Earlier in June portal New Scientist published an article in which a number of unnamed experts expressed concern that some of the decisions of the June IPCC "puts politics over science." In particular, the article mentioned the decision to strengthen the role of the so-called "gray" sources — material not published in peer-reviewed journals. Report by WWF, the source of "glacial" typos, belongs to this group of sources.
IPCC later made an official statement, explaining that it was not to strengthen the role of these sources, and to tighten the rules work in general with all sources, including those with "gray." In particular, now all such materials will necessarily be published on the Internet to IPCC reports, reviewers can assess their quality.
Co-chair of a working group of IPCC Thelma Krug (Thelma Krug) told New Scientist, that such measures would "correct the imbalance" in the sources used in the preparation of reports — now, she said, a large number of high quality materials, which train scientists from developing countries that can not get into peer-reviewed journals.