@article{Chan:232218,
      recid = {232218},
      author = {Chan, Gabriel and Carraro, Carlo and Edenhofer, Ottmar and  Kolstad, Charles and Stavins, Robert},
      title = {Reforming the IPCC’s Assessment of Climate Change  Economics},
      address = {2016-03-01},
      number = {839-2016-55890},
      series = {MITP},
      pages = {23},
      month = {Mar},
      year = {2016},
      abstract = {The Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) is  broadly viewed as the world’s most legitimate scientific  assessment body that periodically assesses the economics of  climate change (among many other topics) for policy  audiences. However, growing procedural inefficiencies and  limitations to substantive coverage have made the IPCC an  increasingly unattractive forum for the most qualified  climate economists. Drawing on our observations and  personal experience working on the most recent IPCC report,  published last year, we propose four reforms to the IPCC’s  process that we believe will lower the cost for  volunteering as an IPCC author: improving interactions  between governments and academics, making IPCC operations  more efficient, clarifying and strengthening conflict of  interest rules, and expanding outreach. We also propose  three reforms to the IPCC’s substantive coverage to clarify  the IPCC’s role and to make participation as an author more  intellectually rewarding: complementing the IPCC with other  initiatives, improving the integration of economics with  other disciplines, and providing complete data for  policymakers to make decisions. Despite the distinct  characteristics of the IPCC that create challenges for  authors unlike those in any other review body, we continue  to believe in the importance of the IPCC for providing the  most visible line of public communication between the  scholarly community and policymakers.},
      url = {http://ageconsearch.umn.edu/record/232218},
      doi = {https://doi.org/10.22004/ag.econ.232218},
}