Comments and Responses
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
SROCC First Order Draft Expert Review Comments - Chapter 1 Comment Chapter From From To To Comment Chapter Team Response id page line page line 1664 1 0 0 Please also consider to include relevant findings from the SR15, for consistency among the Taken into account: SR 1.5 report is referred in section 1.1; 1.3; IPCC products. [Aurora Stenmark, Norway] CCB1; section 1.6; section 1.9.1.2; 1.9.1.3 and section 1.10 2774 1 0 0 A lot of material has been gathered but I don’t think it is presented well enough to capture Taken into account: The chapter has been revised. the attention of the reader and with enough scientific accuracy. [Anne Guillaume, France] 2776 1 0 0 English is badly used. More than once, error in the use of the language is turning into a Taken into account: The chapter has been revised. scientific error or into a statement that cannot be understood. I have the greatest doubt that editorial alone will be enough. [Anne Guillaume, France] 2778 1 0 0 This whole chapter need major restructuring and rewriting to put put forward what is Taken into account: The chapter has been extensively revised, and important and to limit the content to what must be in an introductory chapter. Here, the restructured in some places reader is lost between definitions and results that one cannot understand (and that will be explained in the next chapters). In the present state, this chapter is all very confusing and undermining the strength of the incredible effort that has been made. It is very important that sentences be short and complex ideas identified to be treated accordingly. [Anne Guillaume, France] 2780 1 0 0 I have found the chapter title and many of the sections titles more off-putting than Taken into account: The chapter subheadings have been partly informative. About the content of the sections, one has to read several times nearly the revised. See table of contents. same thing, not quite, as if sections were written by different people. These should identified and done once with greater scientific accuracy and in a form and in a language more precise and more appropriate for a reader. This is very important to get people to read such an important report and get the feeling that this is good science. I understand that this is an introduction to the report (and not a summary). Please make it an INTRODUCTION (avoiding text better placed in the next chapters) [Anne Guillaume, France] 2782 1 0 0 There are far too many sections and a lot of redundancies. I would suggest that Box 1., Taken into account: Duplication is removed (between box 1.1 and section 1.2 and section 1.3.1 and a few others pieces be merged in one section « Ocean, section 1.2.1) and made consistent with other chapters. Section Cryosphere and Climate Change » for the physical sciences elements. Next a section such headings were also changed. as « Interactions with Human and Nature ». And last, a section that gathers 1.7 and 1.8, insisting on the novelty to include Indigenous and local knowledge (this is part of the methodology too).This later section should also mention the previous IPCC reports (highlighting the « outside natural variability ») together with the many social concerns expressed by so many countries during previous IPCC Conference that resulted in the demand to produce THIS report. The « Why this special report? », line 1, is not quite that « The ocean and cryosphere play fundamental roles » as the opening phase reads but because the demand has built to ask for it. From the very beginning, the authors should define and insist on « outside natural variability » and on « urgency ». One may consider moving this later section higher to the beginning. [Anne Guillaume, France] Do not Cite, Quote or Distribute Page 1 of 176 SROCC First Order Draft Expert Review Comments - Chapter 1 Comment Chapter From From To To Comment Chapter Team Response id page line page line 2784 1 0 0 This chapter should aim at becoming broadly accessible and should avoid using IPCC Rejected: The term "storyline" was part of the approved outline for internal phrasing or at least introduce them with a clear definition. I would also urge the this special report and will be retained. authors to pay great attention to the interpretation a reader may have based on everyday language practices. Example, « storyline » should be avoided in this introductory chapter : are we reading a story (i.e. fakenews) or a scientific report?; The use of technical terms should be standardized, with the easiest to be preferred. Example, acidification to be used and preferred to « Ph decreasing », « natural » to « unforced »… [Anne Guillaume, France] 2786 1 0 0 About the use of « services ». This is introduced as early as page 5 line 5, without a proper Rejected: "Services" are extensively used in the natural and social definition. I would like to emphasis that it not only has an IPCC meaning, but it is a sciences and does not always cayy an ideological conotation or an language that carries an ideological background (economic thinking, capitalistic view,…) economic thinking. It was defined (for example ecosystem services) that clashes with the aim, and novelty of this report, to bring in indigenous and local in IPCC AR5. We have also moved the section on ecosystem knowledge. Authors should be more aware of this in their writing. Extremely important in this services framework to be it's own sub-section in 1.5.1, to make this first chapter. [Anne Guillaume, France] concept more visible. 5066 1 0 0 0 0 General Comment: To use the abbreviation "IPCCAR5" instead of "AR5" to avoid any Taken into account: We have brought consistency of terms used. misunderstanding or conflict. [Essam Hassan Mohamed Ahmed, USA] 5226 1 0 0 Chapter 1 reads well and provides a good introduction to SROCC, with some good Figures - Thank you. thanks! [Pauline Midgley, Germany] 6750 1 0 0 Consistency of the "Oxford comma" - there are a few examples in sections 1.4-1.7 where Taken into account: This is a good suggestion. We have tried to fix one should be added to match the rest of the report. Pg 20, lines 1, 2, 6 and 40 for the problem in the entire document example. [APECS Group Review, Germany] 11032 1 0 0 While this chapter represents Indigenous and Local Knowledge fairly (especially in section Taken into account: We have done significant rewriting for the SOD. 1.7) it makes no direct reference to the action potential arising from Local and Indigenous Please see the revised sections 1.8.2 and 1.8.3 and CCB-3. autonomous governance norms and systems that generally are fully integrated with the respective ILK ways of knowing. Part of the difficulty of integrating ILK and Scientific Knowledge precisely arises from this difference in orientation, insofar as ILK is not necessarily any the less ‘objective’ than Scientific Knowledge but tends to be more interwoven with normative assumptions. See for example, Crate and Nuttall (2009). Also Ulloa (2010). Crate, S. A. and M. Nuttall, 2009: Anthropology and Climate Change: From Encounters to Actions. Left Coast Press, Walnut Creek. Ulloa Cubillos, A. (ed.), 2009: Perspectivas Culturales Del Clima. Ilsa, Universidad Nacional De Colombia, Bogotá, Colombia. ISBN: 978-958-719-735-8. [Thomas Heyd, Canada] 11746 1 0 0 0 0 It was convenient [Hanieh Zargarlellahi, Iran] Rejected: comment unclear 17176 1 0 0 While the terms 'coastal' or 'low-lying costal areas' represents an aspect of islands, neither Accepted; Text changed in CCB 2 to include this comment. term sufficiently subsumes small island context when considering the potential scale of impacts (economic or otherwise) may, in some cases, affect the entire nation State, in the case of small island State. Suggest adding small isalnds context along the listing of low- lying coastal areas, polar and mountaneous areas. [Iulian Florin Vladu, Germany] 18364 1 0 0 Please check: Few placeholders are there to be addressed in SOD [Suvadip Neogi, India] Accepted: all placeholders have been completed or removed for the SOD Do not Cite, Quote or Distribute Page 2 of 176 SROCC First Order Draft Expert Review Comments - Chapter 1 Comment Chapter From From To To Comment Chapter Team Response id page line page line 18366 1 0 0 Please check: Style/format of sections/sub-sections, captions, tables, figures and Accepted. Changes done accordingly. citations/references as per the style guide of thspecial report SROCC [Suvadip Neogi, India] 18368 1 0 0 Please check: This chapter contains little information on greenhouse gas emissions from Accepted: This has been developed as a case study for Cross permafrost thawing, contribution to global warming and positive feedback to climate change. Chapter Box 4 that is associated with chapter 1 This might be relevant and worth mentioning. [Suvadip Neogi, India] 18500 1 0 0 0 0 There seems to be a lot of repetition with pretty much the same statements repeated in Accepted: text changed different parts of Chapter 1.2 and to a degree in Box 1.1, e.g. Connection of ocean and land ice through snow melt, sea ice formation and deep circulation, etc. [Angelika Renner, Norway] 19068 1 0 0 By focusing on oceans and cryosphere, this special report like almost no other deals with Accepted -- Loss and damage has been integrated to now play a often irreversible impacts of climate change that already have or will almost certainly much stronger role in the framing of chapter 1 and the assessment exceed the limits to adaptation.