by Christel Dorothee Hansen, Chukwuma Moses Anoruo, Deniz Vural, et al., The Conversation
Credit: CC0 Public Domain
Scientific research is essential for addressing the climate crisis. The Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC), a United Nations body, assesses the science on climate change through its regular assessment reports. These reports reflect scientific consensus on the causes and impacts of and possible solutions to climate change.The reports are not only scientific publications. They inform environmental policy at global, regional and country level relating to anthropogenic (human-caused) climate change and the state of the environment.The reports also undergo rigorous peer review to ensure their scientific merit and credibility before they are finally published.Researchers from high-income countries and established researchers dominate the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change process. But early career scientists and researchers (generally known as those who’ve completed a Ph.D. within the last eight years) are important in research into how to prevent a climate catastrophe.They help produce more balanced scientific reports because they bring new perspectives. This can counteract some of the biases that senior researchers have, which improves the quality of scientific publishing.Including early career researchers in the peer review process also enhances critical skills and professional development for these researchers. It benefits science and is crucial for creating fair and inclusive climate discussions.We are scientists and geographers who studied peer reviews made by early career researchers to global climate change reports between 2018 and 2021. We surveyed over 600 early career researchers from over 70 countries and found that early career researchers generated on average 2,400 comments per review.Each Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change report can receive between 78,000 and 140,000 peer review comments in total. So the contribution of early career researchers is negligible. Yet, about 36% of the early career researchers’ review comments improved the science and merit of the reports by highlighting inaccurate research, incorrect interpretations of data, and other mistakes.
Discover the latest in science, tech, and space with over 100,000 subscribers who rely on Phys.org for daily insights.
Sign up for our free newsletter and get updates on breakthroughs,
innovations, and research that matter—daily or weekly.
This is why peer review is so important. Without the reviews, the scientific merit of the reports would be negatively affected. Without the scientific merit, governments would be unlikely to give credence to the reports.We also found that including early career researchers in the peer review process enhances their review skills and provides opportunity for professional growth.However, our survey also found t