IPCC opens expert review of Working Group I’s First Order Draft for AR7

The Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) has opened registration for experts who wish to review the First Order Draft (FOD) of Working Group I’s (WG I) contribution to the Seventh Assessment Report (AR7). WG I addresses the physical science basis of climate change — from observations and processes to projections.

Who can participate? Qualified experts from research and teaching, government agencies, non-governmental organizations and other relevant fields with specific expertise related to the chapter topics are invited to participate. Broad international participation is sought. Submissions from the Global South are particularly welcome to bring diverse data situations and perspectives into the review.

Review process

In the first review phase, experts examine the complete draft: statements, methods, citations, tables and figures. Comments are submitted in a structured form and linked to the relevant parts of the text. Author teams evaluate the feedback, revise the text and justify changes or the retention of original wording. Later rounds will include government reviewers; combined reviews by the expert community and governments follow. The objective is scientific rigor, traceability and error correction.

Formal requirements and transparency

Participation requires registration, information on professional qualifications and a declaration of possible conflicts of interest. Comments are submitted via the platform provided by the IPCC. The IPCC typically publishes overviews of comments and author responses to make the path from objections to revisions transparent.

Why this phase matters

The FOD forms the basis for subsequent, more policy-relevant parts of the report. WG I’s physical findings are fundamental for attribution studies, emissions pathways and risk assessments. Broad, qualified review increases the likelihood that uncertainties are described correctly and that new research is appropriately placed in context.

Relevance for practice and policy

Statements about heat extremes, sea-level rise, ice cover or atmospheric feedbacks later feed into risk analyses, adaptation plans and mitigation strategies. The more robust the physical basis, the more reliable decisions can be for administration, business and policy.

Diversity and regional coverage

Data and research gaps remain in some world regions. A diverse reviewer base helps bring in regional expertise, sharpen interpretations and better represent observation programs. Participation also offers especially early-career researchers insight into international assessment processes.

How interested parties can get involved

Required steps include registration on the IPCC platform, providing information on qualifications and disclosing potential conflicts of interest. The IPCC supplies guidance so that comments are precise, evidence-based and chapter-specific. Clear references to manuscript sections and sources are recommended so author teams can respond effectively.

Next steps

After the expert comments are evaluated, further review rounds follow, including government participation. The iterative process spans multiple stages and concludes with the approval of the report contributions by the relevant IPCC bodies.

Why participation is worthwhile

Reviewing offers the opportunity to sharpen how scientific findings are presented. Researchers can refine results or propose alternative explanations; practitioners and policymakers can ensure that central decision questions are addressed. Thorough review increases the report’s robustness — and thus its utility for long-term climate mitigation and adaptation decisions.