Critical findings of the sixth assessment report (AR6) of working Group I of the intergovernmental panel on climate change (IPCC) for global climate change policymaking a summary for policymakers (SPM) analysis

Abstract

PurposeThe purpose of this study is to assess how intergovernmental panel on climate change’s (IPCC’s) sixth assessment report of Working Group I (WGI), a Summary for Policymakers (SPM), has evaluated the current climate change situation. The author uses the qualitative content analysis (QCA) method (i.e. summative content analysis [SCA]) to identify critical points of the SPM.Design/methodology/approachTo better understand the WGI report and its SPM, the author uses the thematic analysis, often called the QCA method. This study takes more steps and uses one of the main qualitative content analysis approaches (i.e. SCA). Therefore, QCA (SCA) can help the author count the occurrence of certain words using computer-assisted qualitative data analysis software that quantifies the words in the data. This process helps the author to understand codes and patterns (e.g. the concept in the results section).FindingsInterestingly, the AR6 says more about adaptation for policy makers in sections C (Climate information for risk assessment) and D (Mitigation of future climate change) than in sections A and D. Finally, this study concludes that the IPCC WGI SPM has addressed evidence on global climate change policymaking for SPMa, SPMd (mitigation-based strategies and mitigation policy [MP]) and SPMb, SPMc (adaptation policy and adaptation-based strategy).Research limitations/implicationsFirst, this study refers only to the contribution of WGI, a SPM. The findings of this study do not necessarily provide a full understanding of what the AR6 WGI SPM says about climate change. It points out that the QDA Miner software and Voyant tool do not include all variables and examples where mitigation and adaptation-based strategies are discussed. The guidance for coding is based on the approved version of IPCC AR6 WGI SPM. The final limitation is that the relatedness of key words (e.g. confidence, high and warming) is sometimes ambiguous; even experts may disagree on how the words are linked to form a concept. Thus, this method works at the keyword level. A more intelligent method would use more meaningful information than keywords.Originality/valueThis study used qualitative data analysis (SCA) to explore what was said about climate change in four sections of the IPCC AR6 WGI SPM, which may influence current and future global climate change policymaking.