Richard Tol offers his views of decisions that may have been made about the future of the IPCC in response to the IAC Review:
The IPCC meeting in Busan is over.It would be extremely useful for the IPCC to provide a simple report indicating its response to each of the IAC recommendations. For those who may have missed it, here is a list of those recommendations. Perhaps an intrepid reporter will ask the IPCC to provide this information.
The first message was from Chris Field, co-chair of WG2, reassuring all authors that the decisions made were in the best interest of the IPCC -- without even explaining what those decisions were. Although one could interpret this as a classic example of paternalism, let's give Chris the benefit of doubt and assume that he was tired after an intense meeting and in a rush to the airport.
BBC and Reuters offer some detail into the decisions made: a committee was formed to look into the matter.
Another day, another farce in climate land.
Cheers in all the wrong places.
In my opinion, absent this information, along with a justification for why the IPCC decided to ignore advice that the IAC provided, the institution will remain deeply troubled.