As you know, the IPCC’s own rules state that it should only use and refer to credible, peer-reviewed scientific studies, as stated in it’s mandate: [quote]
""The IPCC mandate is to assess, on a comprehensive, objective, open and transparent basis, the available scientific information in peer-reviewed literature.""
However, the following references given by the IPCC do not appear to be from peer-reviewed scientific studies. If anyone can point out where the have been published in a peer-reviewed scientific journal (with links if poss.) i would be grateful.
From the references of the IPCC AR4 WGII: mitigation of climate change, available at: http://www.ipcc.ch/publications_and_data/ar4/wg2/en/ch10s10-references.html
Bhadra, B., 2002: Regional cooperation for sustainable development of Hindu Kush Himalaya region: opportunities and challenges. Paper presented at the Alpine Experience – An Approach for other Mountain Regions, Berchtesgaden.
( i can find a reference to this on Springerlink, but it’s to a book, not a scientific journal)
————————————————————————————————————–
Allianz and World Wildlife Fund, 2006: Climate change and the financial sector: an agenda for action, 59 pp. [Accessed 03.05.07: http://www.wwf.org.uk/ filelibrary/pdf/allianz_rep_0605.pdf]
——————————————————
Austin, G., A. Williams, G. Morris, R. Spalding-Feche, and R. Worthington, 2003: Employment potential of renewable energy in South Africa. Earthlife Africa, Johannesburg and World Wildlife Fund (WWF), Denmark, November, 104 pp.
——————————————————————
Andrews, S. and R. Udal, 2003: Oil prophets: looking at world oil studies over time. Association for Study of Peak Oil Conference, Paris.
———————————————————————-
Aringhoff, R., C. Aubrey, G. Brakmann, and S. Teske, 2003: Solar thermal power 2020, Greenpeace International/European Solar Thermal Power Industry Association, Netherlands
—————————————————————–
Austin, G., A. Williams, G. Morris, R. Spalding-Feche, and R. Worthington, 2003: Employment potential of renewable energy in South Africa. Earthlife Africa, Johannesburg and World Wildlife Fund (WWF), Denmark, November, 104 pp
———————————————————————-
As you can probably tell, the ones above are just those under ‘A’ and ‘B’ in the references index! There are lots more that don’t seem to be peer-reviewed science as mandated by the IPCC. Does anyone know which journals they have been published in. Or, if not, why the IPCC has been contravening it’s own mandate and relying on non peer-reviewed literature.
.
They’re not relying on Greenpeace, the WWF and whatever the "Association for Study of Peak Oil" is are they?
.
– Andy. That’s a good analogy. LOL. Impartial scientific references from Greenpeace and the Association for the Study of Peak Oil. Maybe Earth First will be referenced in there as well.
.
.
EDIT –
Umm, Benjamin i’m not referring to that particular debacle (Himalayan glaciers), but to the reports as sampled above.
They have not said anything about using these non-peer-reviewed sources. Yet.
.
