Workshop Acting as a Reviewer on the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change 7th Assessment Report

Also just to say if anyone would be aided by um by a transcription or by um captions, please do they are enabled for

this meeting. So please do just turn

this meeting. So please do just turn them on and use those captions if you would find them useful at all.

Um I'm going to say a few words of introduction. Um welcome our speakers

introduction. Um welcome our speakers for today. um tell you a little bit what

for today. um tell you a little bit what about what our agenda is and then I'm going to hand this meeting over um to my colleagues who are really the experts on

this but maybe just quickly to say thank you to all of you for being here um we've had an overwhelming response to

this workshop um which I think is just an indication of um of uh the important

work to be done um in supporting the IP PCC's um seventh assessment report.

Um so first of all on behalf of uh Joyce Kimai and uh Zimbabwe Chima and myself a

very warm welcome. Um we are very happy to have you here. Uh Z Joyce and I met because we were all involved in um the

um request that went to the African Court for Human and People's Rights for an advisory opinion on climate change.

Um and and we see this as as kind of part of that work, part of participating in important um national, regional, and international um uh climate change

activities. Um and so we've come back

activities. Um and so we've come back together for this workshop. Uh this

workshop is hosted by the sustainability and resilience institute at the University of Southampton, the African climate platform and by the home in crisis project. So a big thanks to all

crisis project. So a big thanks to all of our um hosts for making this possible. As I was saying, the

possible. As I was saying, the extraordinary response to this workshop, I think, demonstrates just the wide recognition of the incredible importance of the work of the Intergovernmental

Panel on Climate Change, as well as the importance of encouraging and facilitating and enabling people from lots of different areas of work and expertise and experience to support the

IPCC um through the review process. Um, my

colleagues will be talking more about that. So, I'm not going to take up um

that. So, I'm not going to take up um too much time today, but I thought I would just tell you what our plan is for the day. We have an hour um and we want

the day. We have an hour um and we want to make sure we have some time for questions and discussion. So, I'm going to be handing over to Joyce Kimai, who I

will introduce in a minute, who will be taking us through a little bit of an introduction, an overview of the IPCC's seventh assessment report, and we'll talk a little bit about the review

process.

Um and then um Joyce will introduce our next two speakers um who are who have both been directly

involved in um drafting aspects of this report and uh and and part of the of working group two um and and Jo will

introduce them um and tell you a little bit more about the work that they're involved in. So, all that's left for me

involved in. So, all that's left for me to do is to hand over to Joyce and um and I and I do just want to take a minute to tell you a little bit about

Joyce because she is a remarkable inspiring person and I'm so pleased to be able to do this with her. Dr. Joyce

Kimai is a climate attribution scientist at the Center for Environmental Policy and Imperial College in London. She's

also based at the Kenya Meteorological Services Authority and she co-chairs the climate resilience forum working group on loss and damage at the Oxford Sustainable Law Program where she

advises the African climate compensation lab. Joyce and I met when she was um

lab. Joyce and I met when she was um coordinating a team of African scientists and economists and legal scholars who worked on an independent amicus brief that went to the African

Court of Human Rights. It's an

incredibly um worthwhile brief. I

recommend reading it. And she's

currently the alternate intergovernmental panel on climate change focal point for Kenya and was a lead author for the IPCC special report

on climate change and land during the six assessment cycle. So a real expert in the IPCC process but also in some of the ways in which the IPCC fits into um

the sort of global picture of climate change responses.

Joyce, I see your presentation is up there. So I'm going to hand over to you

there. So I'm going to hand over to you unless there's anything I've forgotten to address.

No, thank you. Thank you very much uh Dina for the very kind introduction. Can

you hear me? I felt like my internet was breaking a bit. Can you hear me now?

Yes, we can hear you.

Thank you very much. Thank you, Dana.

Um, and I just wanted to start by really thanking everyone for joining. So, thank

you for the introduction. Uh, I wanted to thank everyone for joining um this webinar. uh the attendance that we've

webinar. uh the attendance that we've seen is uh as Dina says uh is really a reflection of the

um the interest uh that um that we all have to participate in the IPCC to contribute the work of the IPCC

um and we really appreciate um this. So

I I won't I won't take so much time but I wanted to take at least like 10 or 15 minutes of the um to introduce the work of the IPCC

uh and then uh my colleagues u my friends Aditi will uh speak a little bit about the details of the particular chapters and also we have um Dan Boy and

Ola who will take us through the the African chapter. So Adita will take us

African chapter. So Adita will take us on the chapter on the technical guidelines and um and then we'll also hear about the African chapter. So we

just chose those as um uh two illustrative chapters within the working group too that could help us that just could guide the discussion today and and

and open up um room for for for for questions and answers and discussions as well. So for me it's just to really give

well. So for me it's just to really give an overview of the process. So as Dina said, I am the alternate focal point for the IPCC uh for Kenya, but also I participated in

the sixth assessment cycle uh as a lead author. Uh so I have uh been fortunate

author. Uh so I have uh been fortunate very privileged actually to be part of the uh the two processes and I'll just show you when you look at the structure

of the IPCC there are like different functions uh or structures within the within the process.

Um so the intergovernmental panel on climate change is um is uh is a body that is meant to um to give uh

information on the best available science. Um it's uh it assesses the

science. Um it's uh it assesses the comprehensive and the objective and sort of the transparent basis of uh science, the technical and the soio economic

information that can really support um the uh support governments in making decisions. Uh and it's looking at the

decisions. Uh and it's looking at the role of of climate change. So our planet having um warmed particularly from the last century to this century um on the

impacts and options for adaptation and mitigation. So the IPCC was established

mitigation. So the IPCC was established in 1988.

Um so it's close to 40 uh close to almost 38 years now of existence and has been supporting governments in assessing the best available um uh science uh to

uh to support policy particularly for for governments and as I said um the um there are three structural components of the IPCC. So we have the

the IPCC. So we have the intergovernmental the panel itself which has uh 195 uh member states and each of

these as a focal as a focal point um and these members participate in uh plenary se uh sessions uh executive committee

meetings and also being part of the bureau and then we have the working groups and um the technical um force or national greenhouse gas inventories. So

these are the sort of the working groups or the the the the groups that are actually formed to to do the uh the core work of the of of of the panel which is

uh of of the IPCC which is the the assessment. So we have the working group

assessment. So we have the working group one, working group two, working group three and the TFI and these are supported by technical support units. So

these are uh members that are hired to uh to work with the co-chairs of each of the working groups in supporting them on the technical aspects of of the working

groups. And then we have now people like

groups. And then we have now people like you. So the scientists uh and the

you. So the scientists uh and the experts who are from around the world I are involved uh in the preparation and the review of the reports. Um so yeah so

basically this is sort of the structure of the IPCC and so you so the secretariat sort of oversees the process and provides support for the entire

structure. So um you will find that in a

structure. So um you will find that in a cycle so now we in the seventh assessment cycle in a cycle you will have um uh meetings like parallel

meetings of uh of panel members uh working groups mainly for working groups it would be um uh the lead author meetings which they uh each each working

group would meet uh to discuss about the progress or the reviews uh on on the writing of the reports and Then

now if you look at sort of the making of the report itself uh what goes into that is is is a process. So it starts with uh

the scoping of the report. Uh so really trying to understand what is uh what is the new information that it's required by governments to make decisions. Uh

what what is the what are the critical sort of thematic themes that needs to be assessed. So in this coping meeting uh

assessed. So in this coping meeting uh expert would meet to think about what would uh what would uh sort of uh be uh important information to to be part of

the report in that cycle. So that is the first initial step. So this starts uh at the very start of the cycle the the start of each cycle. This is what

happens and then uh those experts will um suggest uh an outline as and then that outline goes to governments. So it

goes to these 195 governments where they will agree on that outline and then once that outline is agreed uh the the next step is now to nominate authors to work

on that outline. So basically to actually write the reports themselves and then so there'll be an author selection uh after which authors will start now having their meetings which is

called the lead author meetings uh commonly called lambs. Uh so authors would meet to work on the report and the first report uh that um goes uh for

review is called the first order draft and this is what we are um uh we're discussing today. So this is the the

discussing today. So this is the the draft that you will be reviewing uh in these in this period uh which so this the first order draft is mainly open for

expert reviews only and then that will go into so the experts so so the authors will meet to review uh these comments to address

these comments from experts and those comments would go into developing the second order draft and that draft will go through uh government and expert

review. So basically it's governments uh

review. So basically it's governments uh looking at uh that draft to uh provide their comments. Uh but in parallel uh

their comments. Uh but in parallel uh experts like you will also be providing uh comments and then after that it goes to the final uh report or or rather the

final draft report and what we call the summary for policy makers. uh and this is the summary for polypsy makers is basically just sort of the eye level

messages from the reports and this is uh given in a way that uh can be palatable for policy makers uh for them to really

consume and use it to make decisions. Um

and that so before that uh is accepted uh it first goes through the government review of the SPM. So the government would review that SPM. So authors will

suggest that SPM will make those highle statements uh thinking about what are the key messages from the reports and then that will go through the government review where they will look through that

and provide their comments.

After that then uh it goes through approval and acceptance and then the reports are published. So basically this is just like how the uh the process of

the IPCC uh the making of the report of the IPCC is um and in each of these reports you have the uh you have author authors who have

different roles within those reports.

you have what we call the CLS. These are

the coordinating lead authors who are responsible for coordinating the work of uh of the sections uh really bringing the authors together

uh to uh just coordinate them and and work together in in drafting the reports and then they will have the lead authors uh working uh with them or under them

who are responsible for now the like the production of the sections. Uh so uh so this is really uh the how they split their task or the work here is very is

is is uh is just very dependent on how the clas and the authors would want to organize their work. So there's no particular prescription of uh the way in which reports need to be written or how

the work is coordinated but it's really a very cooperative exercise between the clas and the of the team uh sorry of the

report uh to coordinate and uh on how to produce uh the different sections of the report. Um and then you have the review

report. Um and then you have the review the review editors. So the work of the review editors is to identify reviewers and ensure that all the comments that

have been provided by uh by you experts or by governments are afforded um um the right consideration because every

comment needs to be to be addressed and and and and to make sure that authors or the the CLAs and the LS are able to handle all the all the issues uh with

controversial or not. Um and so within within a report as well, you would have contributing authors who would provide specific expertise in a in a in a given

area cuz uh cuz uh they are um quite diverse issues within each chapters or within se which within each sections which lead authors might not be able to

to address or to handle and they might not have the all the expertise to do that. So what they do is that they

that. So what they do is that they invite authors to support them. Um and

then you have chapter scientists who uh help uh the authors to provide the technical and logistical support. Um and

uh they are mainly recruited by the by the CLS. Actually most of them sit with

the CLS. Actually most of them sit with in with CLS. Um and they work very closely with the with the technical support unit of the of the working

group. And then the expert reviewers who

group. And then the expert reviewers who are now assigned uh can sign up. So this

is actually you. So you sign up to comment on it section of the of the chapters. And as I said all of your

chapters. And as I said all of your comments will be addressed by the authors.

um uh the uh so the uniqueness the uniqueness of the IPCC um being um as as we've all seen is that it has

this sort of unique position where it provides it supports um it sits in the science for policy uh bridge or interface where it's actually meant to

support governments to make decision. So

in that case then um it's it's meant to be neutral. So it's it's not um it's not

be neutral. So it's it's not um it's not policy prescriptive but it has to be policy uh it has to support decision of policy. Uh so um an IPCC do not carry

policy. Uh so um an IPCC do not carry its own research. So what it does of course it assesses the evidence uh from published literature uh synthesizes that

information to give um uh to to give synthesized information that would support decision making and that is a very unique role of the IPCC

and then um uh in in that process you find that uh there's the co-design so actually there's a co-design of the entire

process the government representatives.

So for example for me where I sit uh in this cycle I am part of the government representative. So I'm supporting the

representative. So I'm supporting the government of Kenya as an expert uh to uh to help in sort of uh co-designing

uh the reports with with the authors and you could see from that uh uh from that that um that track of process that I showed from from scoping all the way to

approval you see that there are places where a lot of co-designing is happening for example in um looking at the outline line. So agreement with the outline. So

line. So agreement with the outline. So

governments after after experts uh scope the reports uh sorry scope the outline the governments will go through that outline and they will sit together in a

oneweek meeting to approve that outline.

So really looking through the outline and government saying these are particular elements of the report that can help us.

Sorry. So, um

I think if we can mute our our um our mics that would be great. So, yeah.

So, I was saying that it's a process that there's a huge code design with government representatives in making sure that um these reports uh support

policy and I was just wanted to give an example. This is an example of um uh one

example. This is an example of um uh one of the shapes or one of the lines from the SPM. So summary for policy makers

the SPM. So summary for policy makers from the 1.5 report uh where so before approval that was the first uh the first this before the approval this is what

the authors had suggested as in the in the SPM and then after um a series of discussions and uh with with government

representatives this was amended and basically this was um for concerns on um precision for use

of terms. Um so for example stated global mean temperature in the first sentence um wasn't in the first sentence and then it was put in the second

sentence and then um so basically giving details to to support clarity uh and also to revise confidence in the

statements to to uh to reflect uh sort of traceability down the reports. So

basically whatever that comes in the SPM should be traced back to the main assessment and that is what governments do. So they work in these uh co-design

do. So they work in these uh co-design with authors uh with bureau members or the with with working group coaches uh

to uh to to to co-design the report uh or rather to um for this particular case was really to to co-design the SPM the summary for policy makers uh and this is

what what happened. So this is the approval uh for this is one of the approvals for the um um working group one um uh so it's it was actually a

joint session of working group one and working group two um and this is how governments would work with with bureau members coaches and the chair of the IPCC

uh to approve uh in approving during the approval of the reports. So basically

it's a series of discussions, engagements, coming together, handling um uh sitting in plenaries discussing um the the outcomes of the report to

make sure that uh the policy makers can understand the reports particularly the main messages on the SPM uh to ensure that it can support them in decision making. So basically if there are

making. So basically if there are aspects of the report or aspects of the SPM that are not clear uh government representatives would be seeking for clarifi clarifications and they would

want sometimes to have some statements in the in the SPMS that support that clarification to enable them um use the

report. Um yeah so this is uh also just

report. Um yeah so this is uh also just an example of um this is one of the um uh one of the sessions

um so really uh in this is in the past uh cycle AR6 so you can see from that screen that there's line by line uh so

there's line by line approval um to make sure that all the words are clear uh all the terms that are used are clear the

meaning um the relevance for policy is clear and this is done uh by the uh the authors the bureau the working group chairs uh with the governments during

approvals.

So uh for AR7 uh I think the big ambitions for this cycle has been to make sure that the reports actually speak to uh speak to all stakeholders to find uh to make sure that they find it

policy relevant to support them in decision making and in that uh is really to make sure that this is uh policy relevant but not policy prescriptive. So

basically not telling governments you should do this, you should not do this but saying this is what the science says and uh these are the recommendations that are coming from from literature or

this is what has been assessed in the literature. This is what the best

literature. This is what the best available science is telling us about mitigation about adaptation about loss and damage uh to enable governments use

the report. And then uh the other big

the report. And then uh the other big ambition for for this cycle also has been the um to showcase sort of the uh the joint the intersection of the

different issues. So looking at uh

different issues. So looking at uh hazards impacts adaptation coming together to make sure there's a strong um uh integration ac across working

groups and a good example was the first lead author meetings uh was jointly done for all the working groups. So one to

three working groups came together uh in France uh last year December to uh think about what would uh to to to meet for their first lead author meetings to

think about how can we make uh the reports have a very strong uh working group um integration and cross fertilization. So that's a very strong

fertilization. So that's a very strong ambition for work uh for AR7 uh which is happening and I hope it continues to happen throughout the cycle.

And then issues on uh inclusivity which is really to reflect the the sort of the the the diversity of knowledge uh the um diversity of stakeholders, audiences and

perspectives.

uh and uh this has been shown for example in improvement in author selection especially authors from the global south and women an early career

scientist but also the other issues within um the process uh that are still under discussion now on inclusivity making sure that governments especially

governments from lowincome countries um can participate meaningfully in the process um so I just wanted quickly Before I

hand over to uh to Aditi um just to give a quick outline uh not not going into the details of the outline of working group two but just basically giving sort

of a a general outline. So we have uh sort of the global chapters which give us like sort of the bigger picture of risks and drivers and

um and talking about actions and responses to loss and damage uh role of finance. So these are more like global

finance. So these are more like global chapters that give us a very global overview and then you have now the regional chapters

uh which focus on thematic areas and topics. Um and um there was an

topics. Um and um there was an additional uh sort of chapter or sort of an additional um spin to this uh cycle

was the technical guidelines so to to guide us on assessment and planning for adaptation. So the

adaptation. So the uh the last uh technical guidelines for adaptation that uh that was produced by the IPCC that are meant to be used by

governments uh was last done in 1994.

uh so that is definitely not speaking to the climate of now and so it was uh very important uh in AR7 to revise uh those

guidelines and so we have an additional chapter on the technical guidelines which are meant to um refine um to give

uh to to guide parties or to show um guidance on assessment planning implementation and learning for adaptation.

Um yeah so I think this is just the same information that we have these global chapters and each of the global chapters um we have assessment on vulnerability

impacts and risks looking at progress in adaptation and time yes I have just one more slide two more

slides sorry um and the adaptation options responses to loss and damage and then now we have the regional jutters which um our colleagues will

Uh so I think this is just like um on the regional chapters I don't need to go through all these um so steps of becoming a reviewer is anyone can

actually be a reviewer. You just need to um so anyone with relevant expertise can register to become a reviewer. Um and

there are forms to be registered and uh sorry there are forms to be filled to register for these and and you as you might know it closes it closes on the

4th of December. Uh and comments will be submitted via the IPCC portal using the official template that will be provided and as I said all comments will be

published uh in the final report and an annex uh and all expert reviewers will be listed on that annex.

Um and I think uh just to go through this very quickly but I think Aditi will touch on this is um it's important to review the work of the IPCC because then

you're really providing your uh expertise but that is also how we um the expertise and the views get balanced and then um

um it's it benefits in shaping the report uh also to gain the valuable IPCC um uh experience experience in the

process uh and to uh really support the authors especially in pointing to uh to to to literature or uh to reports that you think would be important to be

incorporated in the IPCC. I'll stop

there. Thank you very much.

Thank you. Do you want to introduce Aditi while I get her slides up? Or Adi,

did you want to share your own slides?

No worries.

Hi. Am I visible? Yes,

I can go in.

You can go in.

Yeah, sure. Yeah.

Yeah. Because of time, Adi, I think I'm happy for you to introduce yourself.

Thank you.

Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Hi. say hi. Thank

you. Thank you, Joyce. Thank you, Dina.

And I have not been in webinars of late that has got this many huge number of participants. So well done in the

participants. So well done in the organization. And obviously this shows

organization. And obviously this shows how hugely um of relevance the IPCC reports are. My name is Dr. Aditi

reports are. My name is Dr. Aditi Mukharji. I work with one of the CGI

Mukharji. I work with one of the CGI agriculture centers. I work with the

agriculture centers. I work with the International Livestock Research Institute. I'm based in Nairobi. Um and

Institute. I'm based in Nairobi. Um and

uh my my uh specialization is climate change adaptation uh from various context mostly low and middle inome countries and in the

context of agriculture.

Um I uh this is my second time being an IPCC author. I was a coordinating lead

IPCC author. I was a coordinating lead author in working group 2 in AR6. I led

the what chapter and now I'm leading this product within the working group too. um called the technical guidelines

too. um called the technical guidelines for assisting climate change impacts and adaptation or TGIA in short. I am a coordinating lead author and my friend

Joyce explained the role of the CLA's um somewhat at the beginning. So in that role as a CLA and as a member of the team I would really really appreciate

getting some good solid feedback from all of you as expert reviewers. So the

purpose of the technical guideline and later my colleague Edmund would also come in for the Africa chapter. But the

technical guideline TGIA is a bit different from the rest of the scientific assessment because in the TGIA we are not assessing the scientific

literature on climate change impacts adaptation. Those are all happening in

adaptation. Those are all happening in the main volume of the AR7 uh working group two. What we are assessing in this

group two. What we are assessing in this chapter is actually the technical guidelines on how to implement adaptation, how to plan adaptation, how

to monitor adaptation. Basically, this

is a guideline on how to do adaptation.

This is not a typical scientific product of the IPCC. This is more of a how to guideline. However, because it is a part

guideline. However, because it is a part of the IPCC cycle and we know that all IPCC products have to be underpinned by

scientific assessment, this also is underpinned by and scientific assessment of existing guidelines, not existing journal articles per se, but whatever

guidelines that already exist and you know various donors, various um uh implementing organizations, various there are various adaptation guidelines

how to do adaptation. So that's a bit of a background. This was done first in

a background. This was done first in 1994. That is really many many years

1994. That is really many many years ago. I'm sure before many of you were

ago. I'm sure before many of you were born. I was in high school at that time.

born. I was in high school at that time.

So really long time ago and after so many years this has been actually uh in this cycle we are updating it. But

because it the first one was written so early it's like lot of it has been completely rewritten because in 30 years the the evidence that we have on climate change the knowledge we have on climate

change has completely changed. So next

slide Dina please.

Um so what content I think Joyce uh touched upon it a little bit. The

outline for the entire report was uh was sanctioned was approved in in Hanza in February 2025.

Within that TGIA has four sections. One

section is on Yeah, you can go to the next slide that's fine. Yeah,

it has four section. The first section is around introduction all these things and highlight and we are happy to say share the slides if it helps but these are all from the from the approved

outline. So we have a first section

outline. So we have a first section which is quite short uh very succinct I think four or five pages followed by section two which kind of underlines

what are the principles approaches that we kind of uh use in the whole uh guideline. Here we also talk about how

guideline. Here we also talk about how adaptation is deeply related to societal development to SDG. So this is pretty

much a bit of a theory section very short again uh but it goes through some of the basic principles that the TGIA

has um uh underlying the whole report.

If you go to the next slide, section three and four are kind of where all the guidelines are. Section three guideline

guidelines are. Section three guideline is based on the five steps or five components of an adaptation process.

When you start doing adaptation, you have adaptation project, adaptation um whatever plan, we start with the scoping goal setting. So we provide kind

of steps and guidance on how to scope your adaptation, how to do impact, vulnerability and risk assessment. So

the focus really is on how to and in in order to to come to how to we do uh do assess we assess uh the existing

guidelines. So it is in some ways an

guidelines. So it is in some ways an assessment of guidelines to inform new guidelines. So we are doing uh the

guidelines. So we are doing uh the second component is uh IVR. The third

component of adaptation process is the planning process. The fourth component

planning process. The fourth component is around implementation and the final component is around me monitoring, evaluation and learning. So

we kind of provide steps or components or elements for each of these. If you

now go to the final section which is section four. In section four it's

section four. In section four it's really about tools, building blocks and enablers including a lot of cross cutting issues. So when you are doing

cutting issues. So when you are doing those five components of the adaptation cycle or the adaptation process, we realize that we need finance. So there

is also a guideline on how to uh how to access finance, how to cost uh adaptation projects um and all those different kind of guidelines. Similarly,

many of the adaptation components require co-creation or co-development.

We need to co-develop with the communities. we need to use indigenous

communities. we need to use indigenous knowledge or local knowledge. So this

section also includes those different enablers and how to incorporate those enablers. So this is also quite on how

enablers. So this is also quite on how to do it. Then we also provide some preliminary surfacing of the various tools and methods that we have for these

different steps which we will of course improve after the first order draft. So

first order draft as most authors would tell you has produced often under a lot of uh time constraint. So we could not do everything that we set out to do. So

when you review that so please tell us what else we could have done or what other documents we might have got. And

if you go to the next slide I think I have just two more left. Uh so we kind of draw on multiple sources of evidence and we are also looking for guidance on

evidence from you. Uh we are looking for guidelines that you as a community may be aware of that you would want us to assess and again we are assessing

guidelines to inform the new guideline.

So I would put a link here. we have a LinkedIn post and a Google um a Google site where you can go and post the the guidelines that we should be assessing.

So I think that's it. I have one more slide but uh that's the kind of repetition. Um so some core IPCC

repetition. Um so some core IPCC principles to keep in mind while you are reviewing we cannot be prescriptive. We

have to be based on the best available science for us in our case TGIA. we have

to be ba based on the best available guideline evidence that exists. Uh then

uh the rigorous process that Joyce as well said. Uh and TGIA is a part of

well said. Uh and TGIA is a part of working group two but we would also have a separate SPM that's the summary for policy makers. So so the TGIA would be

policy makers. So so the TGIA would be approved along with the overall working group too but with his own SPM. Happy to

answer more questions and more importantly happy to receive your review comments and finally provide us with additional uh guidelines that you are

aware of that may improve our own uh understanding of the guidelines piece and back to you Dina and Joyce. Thank

you.

Thank you so much Aditi. That was um fantastic.

um our last speaker today and I should say we're running over time. It's going

to eat into our Q&A session. So, what

I'm going to suggest is people please put their questions into the chat and if I could ask our scientists to respond to those as we go in the chat, I know you

started doing that. That would be fantastic. Um our last speaker we have

fantastic. Um our last speaker we have to um be particularly grateful for. Um,

Demo stepped in today because Edmund is unfortunately not well. Um, Demo, I'm going to I'm going to share the slides in the meantime, but maybe you can turn

on your camera and let us know that you're here.

I am I'm also here with Demboy. I think

Demboy is here as well.

So, thank you. Thank you. Thank you.

thank you. Thank you. Thank you.

If you can that would be great. Thank

you.

Yeah.

Okay. You want me to share this slide?

Yes, please.

Okay. Yeah, I will share now. Um

or I can if that's easier.

I can do that.

Okay.

Yes. I hope you can see my screen.

Yes. Perfect. Thank

okay yeah thank you very much uh for organizing this event uh Demboy and hi we are standing in for Edmund my name is

Kamya Bola I'm a senior researcher at United Nations University uh based in Bourne um Dboy do you want to quickly introduce yourself

uh thank you hola and uh hello everyone My name is Deno.

I work for group chapter 7 at the Africa chapter as a chapter scientist and I'm also based here at the University of

Cape Town, South Africa as a postto research fellow. Over to you.

research fellow. Over to you.

Okay. Yeah, thank you very much. I

forgot to also mention that I'm also one of the chapter scientist for the chapter 7 of the AR7. So let me briefly walk you through the um uh we will briefly

introduce the chapter scope and highlight where your knowledge and experience can uh can help strengthening the assessment and we hope this uh will give you a helpful starting point for

reviewing particularly if this is your first time participating in an IPCC review. So uh let me briefly walk you

review. So uh let me briefly walk you through the outline shown here for the chapter 7. This gives us a sense of

chapter 7. This gives us a sense of questions covered and provides a starting uh a starting point for thinking uh about where your expertise

could contribute to uh to the review.

The first two elements are the executive summary and frequently asked question.

So the executive summary brings together the chapter's main uh assessment messages. when reviewing it. A a useful

messages. when reviewing it. A a useful question is whether those messages accurately reflect the uh evidence and qualification in the underlying chapter.

The frequently uh asked questions serves uh serve a different purpose. They help

explain important issues to a wider audience. Here clarify uh clarity

audience. Here clarify uh clarity matters. Can someone who is unfamiliar

matters. Can someone who is unfamiliar with the subject understand the explanation without uh losing the scientific meaning? The next point on the slide

meaning? The next point on the slide concerns regions and the spatial and temporal scales of analysis. In simple

terms, this means asking uh where we are looking and over what period. A

continental picture can be uh can be useful but it may conceal important uh differences between regions and

locality. Similarly, a long-term trend

locality. Similarly, a long-term trend may uh may not fully explain the changes that matters over the next decades.

Reviewers can help identify where the geograph where the geographical coverage or time uh period needs to be clearer

and where a broad uh statement uh needs to be more uh needs more qualification.

We then move to the projected regional and local uh changes in average condition variability and seasonality.

This goes beyond asking whether a place becomes warmer or whether uh weather on average. It also considers how

average. It also considers how conditions fluctuate and how seasonal patterns may change. For example,

changes in the timing or duration of rainy season can matter along changes in the total rainfall. So when reviewing you can consider where this distinction

are explained clearly and whether the evidence support the scale of the statement being made. The following

point addresses extreme and compounding event on land and in the oceans. So

compounding event involves uh involves combination of hazard or conditions that can intensify the overall risk. For

example, heat and drought may may occur together or coastal flooding may involve several interacting physical drivers. A

useful review contribution would be to identify where this interaction need clearer explanation where relevant evidence is missing or where the text

implies greater uh certainty than the study supports. The outline also

study supports. The outline also considers natural and human influences on regional changes together with the with their feedback. So the question here is what drives the projected

changes and how different processes interact. So reviewers can look at

interact. So reviewers can look at whether the explanations distinguish these influences appropriately and whether the language accurately uh reflect the the evidence. So the next

point reminds us the regional climate are connected. Processes occurring

are connected. Processes occurring outside a particular region can influence conditions within it.

Atmospheric and oceanic conditions as well and as the transport of substances uh such as dust and aerosols can matter for understanding regional changes. So

another important element is the assessment of cascading uncertainties.

Here cascading refers to how uncertainties can carry through uh successful stages of analysis. It should

not be confused with cascading impact where a disruption in one system affect another. Finally, the outline considers

another. Finally, the outline considers uh advances and limitation in the approaches used for regional climate assessment. Uh this includes asking what

assessment. Uh this includes asking what different methods can tell us and where the uh where they perform well and where

limitations remain. A useful comment

limitations remain. A useful comment might identify a methodological weakness and overlook approach or a mismatch between the details of conclusion and

the evidence available to support it. So

uh before I close I would also like to mention that our chapter is also looking at uh uh loss and damage information regarding to loss and damage um about uh

changing hazard providing an important but also understanding harm requires evidence about uh exposure vulnerability and people's circumstances. We're also

looking at the governance aspect of it.

Moreo we are taking a look at uh the finance. For finance, it is how that

finance. For finance, it is how that information helps identify needs, assess risk and inform the allocation of resources. So those working on

resources. So those working on litigation may also find this connection relevant when examined how scientific evidence is interpreted and used.

However, evidence about a changing hazard should be distinguished uh carefully from conclusions about a particular loss or legal responsibilities.

So I would like to hand over to my colleague uh Debot who will quickly take us through the expectations for the reviewers. Thank you very much.

reviewers. Thank you very much.

Uh thank you Ola. Uh this is just a summary of uh what Ola has uh talked about but briefly what are our

expectations uh as you review this chapter.

So at this point we are not really looking at editorial comments but substantive comments that helps us to

strengthen the chapter. So firstly we want to hear from you uh what is missing at this stage as you look throughout the chapter and also the themes that are

addressed in the chapter. Please help us identify key themes that you feel are important within the African context but are missing. But also

are missing. But also we want to hear from you some of the emerging dimensions that have not been

adequately addressed or captured in the chapter. Uh on that point I should say

chapter. Uh on that point I should say that as you see the chapter there are areas which are still uh which still

have uh uh placeholders. Uh this is something that we are going to be working on. But if you please you feel

working on. But if you please you feel that there are areas that need to be addressed, please kindly help us know.

Uh we also request you to provide us with suggestions for references and materials that you feel we can uh that you feel

can help us to strengthen the chapter.

And uh given the themes that Ola has talked about, you might have uh as additional uh contributing authors that

you feel expertise to contribute to the Africa chapter, please do uh know do let us know. Then we have proposed some

us know. Then we have proposed some graphics in the chapter. Uh we need your help to

to to review them. Uh let us know how they are readable. Uh also let us know if they are clear and uh if you have any

suggestions of improving them. We

greatly appreciate.

We also want your suggestions finally on uh how to make the chapter more impactful and relevant for policy

practice and research. So I guess that uh as you review the chapter, you will have this in mind and help us to uh

achieve the goal of uh strengthening the Africa chapter and also ensuring that the Africa voice is heard across uh the

the world. Uh thank you so much with

the world. Uh thank you so much with this uh viewers and I hand over back to Dina.

Thank you very much. Um I really um I really appreciate it. I'm conscious that we only have um five minutes left. Uh

there've been lots of great questions in the chat which which we're going to keep answering. Um, I want to be before we uh

answering. Um, I want to be before we uh begin to leave, I just want to say a really big thank you um to our four

scientists for being here and for presenting the work that they've been doing, the chapters they've been working on, to Joyce, to DT, to Ola, to Devoy.

It's really been incredibly interesting and um and I think uh we've all learned a huge amount about this. Um

I um also wanted to say our focus today has been you were seen with the chapter that presented on the Africa chapter. As

Joyce said at the beginning there are chapters from each of the regions. The

reason why we wanted to talk about the Africa chapter is because um uh because of the uh submission that went to the African court and we see this as sort of interconnected to that.

But this was just meant to give you a sense of some of the chapters. There are

many others. It wasn't ever going to be comprehensive. Um, I'm going to we are

comprehensive. Um, I'm going to we are going to we do have a hard close at 2:00, but if anyone has a question that they would like to ask by raising their

hand um and asking the question to us verbally, please do feel free to do that. Otherwise, if you would rather

do that. Otherwise, if you would rather keep adding questions to the chat, I'm going to ask our four scientists if you

wouldn't mind um uh looking at them and and answering them as you go. Um it's I think important to say we've put the

link to register a couple of times into the chat. I will put it again one more

the chat. I will put it again one more time at the end of this. Uh the deadline for registration is uh the 20th of November. You can't get access to the

November. You can't get access to the draft reports unless you are uh registered as an expert reviewer which is why we are unable to share today. Um

but but please do use that link and then you'll be able to once you are um as a reviewer you'll be able to um

uh see the reports. There were a couple of questions that I thought maybe we could have a look at. Joyce, I don't know if any jumped out at you in

particular that you wanted to address that have come up a few times.

I think there was the particular point on expertise and I think uh Adit and I have addressed and I just thought it was important to reiterate some of a point that Adita made saying that you do not

have to uh review an entire chapter or even an entire section but just really look at uh particular parts of the chapter of the sections that you think your expertise is more relevant and you

can actually you have the time to provide substantive comments to those.

So really don't think that you need to read like 400 pages of a report or a thousand pages to to give comments but just focus on sections uh where you want

to where your expertise fits and you're comfortable to to review.

I think that's a really important point and maybe also to say um there have been a couple of questions about how for example lawyers can contribute since this is a scientific report. This is

very much a report that speaks to policy makers. So the ability for kind of

makers. So the ability for kind of science to communicate to lawyers with lawyers um is a very important part of it. But one of the things that might be

it. But one of the things that might be and so there are many ways in which I think lawyers can engage with this material and make useful um expert inputs into the report. But maybe

something that might be particularly useful for some lawyers in the room to look at is to have a look at some of the concepts that are being used within the

kind of IPCC framework such as vulnerability among many others um and have a look at how that is being used and how that is consistent with or inconsistent with its sort of legal

applications. That's that's just one

applications. That's that's just one example. But I think um also providing

example. But I think um also providing expert input into the sort of legal frameworks in which um these decisions are being made I think would also be

very valuable. So providing legal

very valuable. So providing legal context and interpretation in itself would be helpful. Um and so if you are if that is your background um I would

encourage you to go and have a look at the reports to register as a reviewer have a look at the reports and I think you'll find um that there's lots of need

and input for um for from followers too. Um

and I think our last one as well.

Yes.

Yeah. Sorry, I was just going to I think I saw I saw a comment on the chat about like when can the experts ear back and I'm saying this is the first order draft. It means

you can still be involved in the second order draft and the final order draft.

So you still have uh so it's still like there's there's still a journey like there's still a process to be involved in the report. So this is just the first draft that you can provide comments. Uh

maybe Dina and I can organize to have a webinar before the next review of the next draft if possible. But um just to say that there's still room to look at sections that you contributed to see how

your comments were reflected and whether you want to give additional comments.

Thank you Joyce. Um I see a raised hand in the last um seconds. Uh is it Gamal?

Would you like to just give us your question? Hi Dina. So I don't have a

question? Hi Dina. So I don't have a question. I just wanted to have a

question. I just wanted to have a comment first of all like thank you so much for you and Joyce and Aditi and the rest of the panel like for like bringing this up and to be honest it's quite

informative to see how it's been built up like the IPCC reports because we use it as well in courts like as an evidence and it has been really quite effective

to kind of making the link between the climate harm and vulnerability and it it was quite persuasive. So I'm looking forward I might actually register as well and looking forward to read the

report. Um I don't know if you are able

report. Um I don't know if you are able to kind of give one of like your biggest concerns here or we cannot then I will just read the report but it would be really nice to hear from your thoughts

what would be like your biggest challenge let's say that way so far.

Thank you.

biggest challenge would any of the scientists Joyce I think you're muted.

Yeah, I think there are um thank you very much for the uh for the very positive remarks. Um I think because of

positive remarks. Um I think because of time Jamaal maybe we can have time either you want if you look so they will so I think depending on if you just can

can can register and like skim through the report and the other sections of the report that you think you want to contribute maybe you can reach out either to me and I can point you I can

point you to like a CLA or someone in that chapter who can sort of support you in uh so for example if it's DT's chapter or the African chapter Maybe you

can have a chat with the CLA or even a mail and I can I can help to connect you with with the um with the with the authors who can answer some of the very

uh particular questions cuz I think now like we it's um as Dina said I think they will as lawyers there might be like particular things you would want to see

um reflected clearly or even for your own understanding and clarification even for you to say how can I actually use an IPC report to support the work that I do. So are there particular sections of

do. So are there particular sections of the chapter that actually you think the language needs to be clarified or you need more information or if the authors

can sort of um improve that would be great I think. Yeah.

Thank you Joyce. Thank you Gamal.

I I can see hands going up and and lots of questions in the chat. I feel mean doing this but but we are at time. I'm

I'm sorry we didn't have more time for Q&A that we we really wanted to just give the time to the presentations as well. Um I will still be on here for for

well. Um I will still be on here for for a minute or two. I will put the link back up. Um but I wonder if I could just

back up. Um but I wonder if I could just um just again extend an enormous thank you to Joyce Aditi Anna and Denboy Deadboy for stepping in at the very last

minute. Um there's been requests for

minute. Um there's been requests for more of these sorts of workshops. we we

really get get we understand that there's a desire for this and and Joyce and I will turn our minds to that I think Joyce um but thank you very much

um Aditi Ola Demo if you have time to stay for a few minutes and answer some of the questions in the chat um I know Joyce has another meeting um that would be wonderful but but I'm going to now

close this webinar and say thank you very much to everyone for being here and a big thank you um to our presenters Thank you.

Bye.

Thank you.

Thank you. Bye-bye.

Thank