text:
International Seabed Authority

The International Seabed Authority (ISA) (Autorité internationale des fonds marins) is a Kingston, Jamaica-based intergovernmental body of 167 member states and the European Union established under the 1982 UN Convention on the Law of the Sea (UNCLOS) and its 1994 Agreement on Implementation. The ISA's dual mission is to authorize and control development of mineral related operations in the international seabed considered the "common heritage of all mankind" and also protect the ecosystem of the seabed, ocean floor and subsoil in "The Area" beyond national jurisdiction. The ISA is to safeguard the international deep sea, the waters below 200 meters or 656 feet, where photosynthesis is hampered by inadequate light. Governing approximately half of the total area of the world's oceans, the ISA is to exercise oversight of activities that might threaten biological diversity and harm the marine environment. The Authority operates as an autonomous international organization with its own Assembly, Council and Secretariat.

Since the ISA's inception in 1994, the Authority has approved over two dozen ocean floor mining exploration contracts in the Atlantic, Pacific and Indian Oceans, with the majority of contracts for exploration in the Clarion-Clipperton Zone between Hawaii and Mexico, where polymetallic nodules contain copper, cobalt and other minerals used to power electric batteries. To date, the Authority has not authorized any commercial mining contracts as it deliberates over regulations amid global calls for a moratorium on deep sea mining. Scientists and environmentalists warn such mining could wreak havoc on the ocean as a carbon sink home to rare and diverse species. The ISA is funded by UNCLOS members and mining contractors and led by Secretary-General Michael Lodge, a British barrister who oversees a 47-member administrative body and has come under criticism for close ties to the mining industry and support for deep sea robotic exploration to develop renewable energy.

Origin
The Authority held its inaugural meeting in its host country, Jamaica, on 16 November 1994, the day the Convention came into force. The articles governing the Authority have been made "noting the political and economic changes, including market-oriented approaches, affecting the implementation" of the convention. The Authority obtained its observer status to the United Nations in October 1996. The Authority has 167 members and the European Union, composed of all parties to the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea. The Authority operates by contracting with private and public corporations and other entities authorizing them to explore, and potentially exploit, specified areas on the deep seabed for mineral resources, such as cobalt, nickel and manganese.

"Common Heritage of All Mankind"
Under UNCLOS, Part XI, Section 2. "The Area and its resources are the common heritage of mankind." As a result, ISA must ensure that activities in the Area are undertaken only for peaceful purposes and for the benefit of all humankind, with economic benefits shared equitably and special consideration given to the needs of developing nations.

Governance and operations
Along with a Secretary-General, two principal organs establish the policies and govern the work of the Authority: the Assembly, in which all UNCLOS parties are represented, and a 36-member Council elected by the Assembly.

Secretary-General
The Assembly elects a Secretary-General to serve a four-year term as the ISA's chief administrative officer, oversee Authority staff and issue an annual report to the Assembly. The Secretary-General is prohibited from holding a financial interest in any mining operations authorized by the Authority.

In July 2016, the Assembly of the Authority elected Michael Lodge of the United Kingdom, for a four-year term as Secretary-General beginning 1 January 2017. He succeeds Nii Allotey Odunton of Ghana, who had served two consecutive four-year terms since 2008.

Assembly
The Assembly, which consists of all members of the Authority, elects the 36-member Council, as well as the Secretary-General from among candidates the Council recommends. The Assembly also has the power to approve or reject the council's recommendations for the following: rules and regulations governing seabed mining, distribution of financial benefits accrued from authorized mining and the Authority's annual budget.

Council
The 36-member Council, elected by the Assembly, authorizes contracts with governments and private corporations to explore and mine the international seabed and sets rules and procedures, subject to the Assembly's approval, for ISA governance. The council also nominates a Secretary-General, who then must be elected by the full Assembly to serve a four-year term. The ISA's annual plenary sessions, which usually last two weeks, are held in Kingston.

Advisory bodies
Also established is a 30-member Legal and Technical Commission which advises the Council and a 15-member Finance Committee that deals with budgetary and related matters. All members are experts nominated by governments and elected to serve in their individual capacity.

Enterprise
The convention also established a body called the Enterprise which is to serve as the Authority's own mining operator, potentially generating "hundreds of millions of dollars in royalties" to be shared with developing nations." The environmental organization Greenpeace has expressed concerns over the ISA's alleged conflict of interest as both regulator and business operator, though the ISA denies the conflict of interest charge.

Status
The Authority has a Secretariat of 37 authorized posts and a 2022 biennial budget of approximately $10,000,000.

Jurisdiction
UNCLOS defines the international seabed area—the part under ISA jurisdiction—as "the seabed and ocean floor and the subsoil thereof, beyond the limits of national jurisdiction" UNCLOS outlines the areas of national jurisdiction as a "12 nautical-mile territorial sea; an exclusive economic zone of up to 200 nautical miles and a continental shelf", unless a nation can demonstrate that its continental shelf is naturally prolonged beyond that limit, in which case it may claim up to 350 nmi. ISA has no role in determining this boundary. Rather, this task is left to another body established by UNCLOS, the Commission on the Limits of the Continental Shelf, which examines scientific data submitted by coastal states that claim a broader reach.

Commercial
Although the ISA has yet to approve commercial mining contracts, the Authority anticipates commercial mining could begin as early as 2023–2024 with the completion of much-debated ISA regulations. In 2021, the Pacific Island nation of Nauru triggered a deadline that requires the ISA to approve final commercial mining regulations by July 2023 or allow contractors to mine under existing draft regulations.

Exploratory
Exploratory mining involves "deep-sea mapping, manned submersibles or remotely-operated vehicles, photographic and video systems, and drilling devices."

Clarion-Clipperton Zone
Most areas of exploration are in the Clarion-Clipperton Zone (CCZ), in the Equatorial North Pacific Ocean, south and southeast of Hawaii, between Hawaii and Mexico. The quiet CCZ, as wide as the continental U.S., is home to polymetallic nodules or trillions of potato-size lumps of matter formed over millions of years that contain nickel, manganese, copper, zinc and cobalt, as well as deep water coral, sponges and unusual species ("ghost octopus", crustaceans, worms and sea cucumbers) that in a near light-less environment attach to the rock-like nodules for shelter. Contractors want to mine polymetallic nodules for battery storage for electric vehicles, smartphones, and solar and wind energy.

Other areas of exploration
Exploration contracts for polymetallic nodules have also been issued for contractors operating in the Central Indian Ocean Basin and Western Pacific Ocean. The ISA has issued exploration contracts for polymetallic sulphides in the South West Indian Ridge, Central Indian Ridge and the Mid-Atlantic Ridge, and contracts for exploration for cobalt-rich crusts in the Western Pacific Ocean.

Requirements of contractors
Each contractor is required to develop a contingency plan should something go wrong during exploration, report annually on its activities in its assigned area and propose a training program for developing countries.

List of exploratory contractors
The ISA has signed 15-year contracts for exploration with 22 contractors seeking polymetallic nodules, polymetallic sulphides and cobalt-rich ferromanganese crusts in the deep seabed.

In 2001-2002 the ISA signed contracts with Yuzhmorgeologya (Russian Federation); Interoceanmetal Joint Organization (IOM) (Bulgaria, Cuba, Slovakia, Czech Republic, Poland and Russian Federation); the Government of the Republic of Korea; China Ocean Minerals Research and Development Association (COMRA) (China); Deep Ocean Resources Development Company (DORD) (Japan); Institut français de recherche pour l’exploitation de la mer (IFREMER) (France); the Government of India. In 2006, the Authority signed a 15-year contract with the Federal Institute for Geosciences and Natural Resources of Germany.

In 2008, the Authority received two new applications for authorization to explore for polymetallic nodules, coming for the first time from private firms in developing island nations of the Pacific. Sponsored by their respective governments, they were submitted by Nauru Ocean Resources Inc. and Tonga Offshore Mining Limited. A 15-year exploration contract was granted by the Authority to Nauru Ocean Resources Inc. on 22 July 2011 and to Tonga Offshore Mining Limited on 12 January 2012.

Fifteen-year exploration contracts for polymetallic nodules were also granted to G-TECH Sea Mineral Resources NV (Belgium) on 14 January 2013; Marawa Research and Exploration Ltd (Kiribati) on 19 January 2015; Ocean Mineral Singapore Pte Ltd on 22 January 2015; UK Seabed Resources Ltd (two contracts on 8 February 2013 and 29 March 2016 respectively); Cook Islands Investment Corporation on 15 July 2016 and more recently China Minmetals Corporation on 12 May 2017.

The Authority has signed seven contracts for the exploration for polymetallic sulphides in the South West Indian Ridge, Central Indian Ridge and Mid-Atlantic Ridge with China Ocean Mineral Resources Research and Development Association (18 November 2011); the Government of Russia (29 October 2012); Government of the Republic of Korea (24 June 2014); Institut français de recherche pour l’exploitation de la mer (Ifremer, France, 18 November 2014); the Federal Institute for Geosciences and Natural Resources of Germany (6 May 2015); and the Government of India (26 September 2016) and the Government of the Republic of Poland (12 February 2018).

The Authority holds five contracts for the exploration of cobalt-rich ferromanganese crusts in the Western Pacific Ocean with China Ocean Mineral Resources Research and Development Association (29 April 2014); Japan Oil Gas and Metals National Corporation (JOGMEC, 27 January 2014); Ministry of Natural Resources and Environment of the Russian Federation (10 March 2015), Companhia De Pesquisa de Recursos Minerais (9 November 2015) and the Government of the Republic of Korea (27 March 2018).

Environmental concerns and climate crisis
Environmentalists, scientists from 44 countries, Google, BMW and Volvo, World Wildlife Fund and several Pacific nations, including Fiji and Papua New Guinea, have called for a moratorium on deep-sea mining until more scientific research is conducted on its impact on the marine environment.

Advocates for deep sea mining argue extraction of rare metals is critical for electric car batteries necessary to develop a fossil-free economy.

Opponents argue seabed mining could wreak havoc on the world's oceans, which act as a carbon sink absorbing a quarter of the world's carbon emissions each year. The environmental organization Greenpeace has raised objections about deep seabed mining disrupting the habitats of newly reported species, from crabs to whales to snails that survive without eating and congregate near bioluminescent thermal vents. Greenpeace has urged the ISA to further develop UNCLOS' foundational Article 136 principle "of common heritage to all mankind" to revise regulations and set conservation targets. In a 2018 Greenpeace Research Laboratories report the organization stressed the importance of protecting marine biodiversity from toxins released during seabed mining for natural gas and rare metals for photovoltaic cells. Greenpeace maintains the "pro-exploitation" ISA is not the appropriate authority to regulate deep sea mining (DSM). In 2019 Greenpeace activists protested outside the annual meeting of the International Seabed Authority in Jamaica, calling for a global ocean treaty to ban deep sea mining in ocean sanctuaries. Some of the activists had sailed to Jamaica aboard Greenpeace's ship, the Esperanza, which travelled from the "Lost City in the mid-Atlantic", an area Greenpeace says is threatened by exploratory mining the ISA authorized.

ISA Secretary-General Michael Lodge said Greenpeace's support for a global ocean treaty, not the ISA, to control deep sea mining did not make sense.

Concern over transparency issues
In 2022, The Guardian reported the ISA failed to renew the contract for Earth Negotiations Bulletin (ENB), a division of the International Institute for Sustainable Development (IISD), which covered past proceedings to maintain an independent record of the ISA. The decision came amid warnings from scientists that commercial ocean floor mining "would be “dangerous”, “reckless” and “irreversible” in its harm to the ecosystem. In its defense, the ISA said ENB's non-renewal was triggered by budget cuts. The Guardian also reported that Germany and environmentalists had raised questions about the lack of transparency by the ISA's Legal and Technical Commission (LTC), which conducts closed meetings to set standards and issue guidelines for seabed mining.

In response to criticism, ISA Secretary-General Michael Lodge defended ISA as a "transparent public forum of consensus-building."

Charges of conflict of interest
In 2022, the Los Angeles Times reported that the International Seabed Authority faced criticisms over conflicts of interest. The LA Times reported that the ISA was scheduled to approve seabed mining, despite concerns by scientists and environmentalists about the environmental impact. ISA head Michael Lodge had criticized these groups, saying there was "a growing environmental absolutism and dogmatism bordering on fanaticism" and arguing that seabed mining was "predictable and manageable". Scientists and members of Lodge's staff objected to Lodge's appearance in a mining company video seeking investments in robotic exploration for minerals to manufacture electric vehicles. In the video, Lodge said his agency supported a 15-year exploration contract because "land-based resources are becoming increasingly difficult to access."

United States' non-ratification of UNCLOS
The exact nature of the ISA's mission and authority has been questioned by opponents of the Law of the Sea Treaty who are generally skeptical of multilateral engagement by the United States. In 2007, although the US Senate Foreign Relations Committee voted in favor of treaty ratification, the full Senate failed to ratify the treaty, with some Republicans arguing UNCLOS might threaten national security by interfering with ocean military operations and hinder seabed mining corporations by imposing environmental regulations.

One of the main anti-ratification arguments being a charge that the ISA is flawed or unnecessary. In its original form, the Convention included certain provisions that some found objectionable, such as:
 * Use of collected money for wealth redistribution in addition to ISA administration
 * Mandatory technology transfer

Because of these concerns, the United States pushed for modification of the Convention, obtaining a 1994 Agreement on Implementation that somewhat mitigates them and thus modifies the ISA's authority. Despite this change the United States has not ratified the Convention and so is not a member of ISA, although it sends sizable delegations to participate in meetings as an observer.

As an observer, not an UNCLOS signatory, the U.S. will not be allowed to vote on approval of final commercial mining regulations and will be unable to sponsor companies to apply for contracts in international waters. This is because the ISA requires contractors be sponsored by a state that is a signatory to UNCLOS. U.S.-based military contractor Lockheed Martin, however, is participating in two British deep sea mining projects.

Legislative
The Authority's main legislative accomplishment has been the adoption, in the year 2000, of regulations governing exploration for polymetallic nodules. These resources, also called manganese nodules, contain varying amounts of manganese, cobalt, copper and nickel. They occur as potato-sized lumps scattered about on the surface of the ocean floor, mainly in the central Pacific Ocean in the Clarion-Clipperton Zone but with some deposits in the Indian Ocean.

In 2013, the ISA approved amendments to its Mining Code on deep sea exploration, stating a prospector should take a precautionary approach to avoid polluting the ocean and should immediately inform the Secretary-General of any prospect-related incidents that threaten the marine environment. The amended regulations also said a contractor can recover "a reasonable amount of material" for testing but not for sale.

In July 2019, the ISA's Legal and Trade Commission prepared "Draft regulations on exploitation of mineral resources in the Area."

In 2010, the ISA adopted Regulations on Prospecting and Exploration for Polymetallic Sulphides.

In 2012, the Authority adopted Regulations on Prospecting and Exploration for Cobalt-Rich Ferromanganese Crusts.

The Council of the Authority began work in August 2002 on another set of regulations, covering polymetallic sulfides and cobalt-rich ferromanganese crusts, which are rich sources of such minerals as copper, iron, zinc, silver and gold, as well as cobalt. The sulphides are found around volcanic hot springs, especially in the western Pacific Ocean, while the crusts occur on oceanic ridges and elsewhere at several locations around the world. The Council decided in 2006 to prepare separate sets of regulations for sulphides and for crusts, with priority given to sulphides. It devoted most of its sessions in 2007 and 2008 to this task, but several issues remained unresolved. Chief among these were the definition and configuration of the area to be allocated to contractors for exploration, the fees to be paid to the Authority and the question of how to deal with any overlapping claims that might arise. Meanwhile, the Legal and Technical Commission reported progress on ferromanganese crusts.

Workshops and research
In addition to its legislative work, the Authority organizes annual workshops on various aspects of seabed exploration, with emphasis on measures to protect the marine environment from any harmful consequences. It disseminates the results of these meetings through publications. Studies over several years covering the key mineral area of the Central Pacific resulted in a technical study on biodiversity, species ranges and gene flow in the abyssal Pacific nodule province, with emphasis on predicting and managing the impacts of deep seabed mining A workshop at Manoa, Hawaii, in October 2007 produced a rationale and recommendations for the establishment of "preservation reference areas" in the Clarion-Clipperton Zone, where nodule mining would be prohibited in order to leave the natural environment intact. In recent years, the ISA hosted workshops on enhancing the role of women in conducting deep-sea scientific studies, sustainable management of deep seabed resources, a series for Africa on resources and technologies for DSM and a session on sharing the economic benefits of DSM.

National trends in seabed mining
In recent years, however, interest in deep sea mining, especially with regard to ferromanganese crusts and polymetallic sulphides, has picked up among several firms now operating in waters within the national zones of Papua New Guinea, Fiji and Tonga. Papua New Guinea was the first country in the world to grant commercial exploration licenses for seafloor massive sulphide deposits when it granted the initial license to Nautilus Minerals in 1997. Japan's new ocean policy emphasizes the need to develop methane hydrate and hydrothermal deposits within Japan's exclusive economic zone and calls for the commercialization of these resources within the next 10 years. Reporting on these developments in his annual report to the Authority in April 2008, Secretary-General Nandan referred also to the upward trend in demand and prices for cobalt, copper, nickel and manganese, the main metals that would be derived from seabed mining, and he noted that technologies being developed for offshore extraction could be adapted for deep sea mining.

Recently, there has been much interest in the possibility of exploiting seabed resources in the Arctic Ocean, bordered by Canada, Denmark, Iceland, Norway, Russia and the United States (see Territorial claims in the Arctic). In 2020, an international coalition of environmental groups urged the government of Norway to not only abandon plans for deep sea mining under national jurisdiction, but to also speak out against DSM Arctic mining before the International Seaboard Authority.

Endowment fund
In 2006 the Authority established an Endowment Fund to Support Collaborative Marine Scientific Research on the International Seabed Area. The Fund will aid experienced scientists and technicians from developing countries to participate in deep-sea research organized by international and national institutions. A campaign was launched in February 2008 to identify participants, establish a network of cooperating bodies and seek outside funds to augment the initial $3 million endowment from the Authority.

Voluntary commitments
In 2017, the Authority registered seven voluntary commitments with the UN Oceans Conference for Sustainable Development Goal 14. These were:
 * 1) OceanAction15467 – Enhancing the role of women in marine scientific research through capacity building
 * 2) OceanAction15796 – Encouraging dissemination of research results through the ISA Secretary-General Award for Excellence in Deep-Sea Research
 * 3) OceanAction16538 – Abyssal Initiative for Blue Growth (with UN-DESA)
 * 4) OceanAction16494 – Fostering cooperation to promote the sustainable development of Africa's deep seabed resources in support of Africas Blue Economy
 * 5) OceanAction17746 – Enhancing the assessment of essential ecological functions of the deep sea oceans through long-term underwater oceanographic observatories in the Area;
 * 6) OceanAction17776 – Enhancing deep sea marine biodiversity assessment through the creation of online taxonomic atlases linked to deep sea mining activities in the Area

title: International Seabed Authority


text:
Industry Standard Architecture

Industry Standard Architecture (ISA) is the 16-bit internal bus of IBM PC/AT and similar computers based on the Intel 80286 and its immediate successors during the 1980s. The bus was (largely) backward compatible with the 8-bit bus of the 8088-based IBM PC, including the IBM PC/XT as well as IBM PC compatibles.

Originally referred to as the PC bus (8-bit) or AT bus (16-bit), it was also termed I/O Channel by IBM. The ISA term was coined as a retronym by IBM PC clone manufacturers in the late 1980s or early 1990s as a reaction to IBM attempts to replace the AT-bus with its new and incompatible Micro Channel architecture.

The 16-bit ISA bus was also used with 32-bit processors for several years. An attempt to extend it to 32 bits, called Extended Industry Standard Architecture (EISA), was not very successful, however. Later buses such as VESA Local Bus and PCI were used instead, often along with ISA slots on the same mainboard. Derivatives of the AT bus structure were and still are used in ATA/IDE, the PCMCIA standard, CompactFlash, the PC/104 bus, and internally within Super I/O chips.

Even though ISA disappeared from consumer desktops many years ago, it is still used in industrial PCs, where certain specialized expansion cards that never transitioned to PCI and PCI Express are used.

History

The original PC bus was developed by a team led by Mark Dean at IBM as part of the IBM PC project in 1981. It was an 8-bit bus based on the I/O bus of the IBM System/23 Datamaster system - it used the same physical connector, and a similar signal protocol and pinout. A 16-bit version, the IBM AT bus, was introduced with the release of the IBM PC/AT in 1984. The AT bus was a mostly backward compatible extension of the PC bus—the AT bus connector was a superset of the PC bus connector. In 1988, the 32-bit EISA standard was proposed by the "Gang of Nine" group of PC-compatible manufacturers that included Compaq. Compaq created the term "Industry Standard Architecture" (ISA) to replace "PC compatible". In the process, they retroactively renamed the AT bus to "ISA" to avoid infringing IBM's trademark on its PC and PC/AT systems (and to avoid giving their major competitor, IBM, free advertisement).

IBM designed the 8-bit version as a buffered interface to the motherboard buses of the Intel 8088 (16/8 bit) CPU in the IBM PC and PC/XT, augmented with prioritized interrupts and DMA channels. The 16-bit version was an upgrade for the motherboard buses of the Intel 80286 CPU (and expanded interrupt and DMA facilities) used in the IBM AT, with improved support for bus mastering. The ISA bus was therefore synchronous with the CPU clock, until sophisticated buffering methods were implemented by chipsets to interface ISA to much faster CPUs.

ISA was designed to connect peripheral cards to the motherboard and allows for bus mastering. Only the first 16 MB of main memory is addressable. The original 8-bit bus ran from the 4.77 MHz clock of the 8088 CPU in the IBM PC and PC/XT. The original 16-bit bus ran from the CPU clock of the 80286 in IBM PC/AT computers, which was 6 MHz in the first models and 8 MHz in later models. The IBM RT PC also used the 16-bit bus. ISA was also used in some non-IBM compatible machines such as Motorola 68k-based Apollo (68020) and Amiga 3000 (68030) workstations, the short-lived AT&T Hobbit and the later PowerPC-based BeBox.

Companies like Dell improved the AT bus's performance but in 1987, IBM replaced the AT bus with its proprietary Micro Channel Architecture (MCA). MCA overcame many of the limitations then apparent in ISA but was also an effort by IBM to regain control of the PC architecture and the PC market. MCA was far more advanced than ISA and had many features that would later appear in PCI. However, MCA was also a closed standard whereas IBM had released full specifications and circuit schematics for ISA. Computer manufacturers responded to MCA by developing the Extended Industry Standard Architecture (EISA) and the later VESA Local Bus (VLB). VLB used some electronic parts originally intended for MCA because component manufacturers already were equipped to manufacture them. Both EISA and VLB were backward compatible expansions of the AT (ISA) bus.

Users of ISA-based machines had to know special information about the hardware they were adding to the system. While a handful of devices were essentially "plug-n-play", this was rare. Users frequently had to configure parameters when adding a new device, such as the IRQ line, I/O address, or DMA channel. MCA had done away with this complication and PCI actually incorporated many of the ideas first explored with MCA, though it was more directly descended from EISA.

This trouble with configuration eventually led to the creation of ISA PnP, a plug-n-play system that used a combination of modifications to hardware, the system BIOS, and operating system software to automatically manage resource allocations. In reality, ISA PnP could be troublesome and did not become well-supported until the architecture was in its final days.

A PnP ISA, EISA or VLB device may have a 5-byte EISA ID (3-byte manufacturer ID + 2-byte hex number) to identify the device. For example, CTL0044 corresponds to Creative Sound Blaster 16 / 32 PnP.

PCI slots were the first physically-incompatible expansion ports to directly squeeze ISA off the motherboard. At first, motherboards were largely ISA, including a few PCI slots. By the mid-1990s, the two slot types were roughly balanced, and ISA slots soon were in the minority of consumer systems. Microsoft's PC-99 specification recommended that ISA slots be removed entirely, though the system architecture still required ISA to be present in some vestigial way internally to handle the floppy drive, serial ports, etc., which was why the software compatible LPC bus was created. ISA slots remained for a few more years, and towards the turn of the century it was common to see systems with an Accelerated Graphics Port (AGP) sitting near the central processing unit, an array of PCI slots, and one or two ISA slots near the end. In late 2008, even floppy disk drives and serial ports were disappearing, and the extinction of vestigial ISA (by then the LPC bus) from chipsets was on the horizon.

PCI slots are "rotated" compared to their ISA counterparts—PCI cards were essentially inserted "upside-down," allowing ISA and PCI connectors to squeeze together on the motherboard. Only one of the two connectors can be used in each slot at a time, but this allowed for greater flexibility.

The AT Attachment (ATA) hard disk interface is directly descended from the 16-bit ISA of the PC/AT. ATA has its origins in the IBM Personal Computer Fixed Disk and Diskette Adapter, the standard dual-function floppy disk controller and hard disk controller card for the IBM PC AT; the fixed disk controller on this card implemented the register set and the basic command set which became the basis of the ATA interface (and which differed greatly from the interface of IBM's fixed disk controller card for the PC XT). Direct precursors to ATA were third-party ISA hardcards that integrated a hard disk drive (HDD) and a hard disk controller (HDC) onto one card. This was at best awkward and at worst damaging to the motherboard, as ISA slots were not designed to support such heavy devices as HDDs. The next generation of Integrated Drive Electronics drives moved both the drive and controller to a drive bay and used a ribbon cable and a very simple interface board to connect it to an ISA slot. ATA is basically a standardization of this arrangement plus a uniform command structure for software to interface with the HDC within the drive. ATA has since been separated from the ISA bus and connected directly to the local bus, usually by integration into the chipset, for much higher clock rates and data throughput than ISA could support. ATA has clear characteristics of 16-bit ISA, such as a 16-bit transfer size, signal timing in the PIO modes and the interrupt and DMA mechanisms.

ISA bus architecture
The PC/XT-bus is an eight-bit ISA bus used by Intel 8086 and Intel 8088 systems in the IBM PC and IBM PC XT in the 1980s. Among its 62 pins were demultiplexed and electrically buffered versions of the 8 data and 20 address lines of the 8088 processor, along with power lines, clocks, read/write strobes, interrupt lines, etc. Power lines included −5 V and ±12 V in order to directly support pMOS and enhancement mode nMOS circuits such as dynamic RAMs among other things. The XT bus architecture uses a single Intel 8259 PIC, giving eight vectorized and prioritized interrupt lines. It has four DMA channels originally provided by the Intel 8237. Three of the DMA channels are brought out to the XT bus expansion slots; of these, 2 are normally already allocated to machine functions (diskette drive and hard disk controller):

The PC/AT-bus, a 16-bit (or 80286-) version of the PC/XT bus, was introduced with the IBM PC/AT. This bus was officially termed I/O Channel by IBM. It extends the XT-bus by adding a second shorter edge connector in-line with the eight-bit XT-bus connector, which is unchanged, retaining compatibility with most 8-bit cards. The second connector adds four additional address lines for a total of 24, and 8 additional data lines for a total of 16. It also adds new interrupt lines connected to a second 8259 PIC (connected to one of the lines of the first) and 4 × 16-bit DMA channels, as well as control lines to select 8- or 16-bit transfers.

The 16-bit AT bus slot originally used two standard edge connector sockets in early IBM PC/AT machines. However, with the popularity of the AT-architecture and the 16-bit ISA bus, manufacturers introduced specialized 98-pin connectors that integrated the two sockets into one unit. These can be found in almost every AT-class PC manufactured after the mid-1980s. The ISA slot connector is typically black (distinguishing it from the brown EISA connectors and white PCI connectors).

Number of devices
Motherboard devices have dedicated IRQs (not present in the slots). 16-bit devices can use either PC-bus or PC/AT-bus IRQs. It is therefore possible to connect up to 6 devices that use one 8-bit IRQ each and up to 5 devices that use one 16-bit IRQ each. At the same time, up to 4 devices may use one 8-bit DMA channel each, while up to 3 devices can use one 16-bit DMA channel each.

Varying bus speeds
Originally, the bus clock was synchronous with the CPU clock, resulting in varying bus clock frequencies among the many different IBM "clones" on the market (sometimes as high as 16 or 20 MHz), leading to software or electrical timing problems for certain ISA cards at bus speeds they were not designed for. Later motherboards or integrated chipsets used a separate clock generator, or a clock divider which either fixed the ISA bus frequency at 4, 6, or 8 MHz or allowed the user to adjust the frequency via the BIOS setup. When used at a higher bus frequency, some ISA cards (certain Hercules-compatible video cards, for instance), could show significant performance improvements.

8/16-bit incompatibilities
Memory address decoding for the selection of 8 or 16-bit transfer mode was limited to 128 KiB sections, leading to problems when mixing 8- and 16-bit cards as they could not co-exist in the same 128 KiB area. This is because the MEMCS16 line is required to be set based on the value of LA17-23 only.

Past and current use
ISA is still used today for specialized industrial purposes. In 2008 IEI Technologies released a modern motherboard for Intel Core 2 Duo processors which, in addition to other special I/O features, is equipped with two ISA slots. It is marketed to industrial and military users who have invested in expensive specialized ISA bus adaptors, which are not available in PCI bus versions.

Similarly, ADEK Industrial Computers is releasing a motherboard in early 2013 for Intel Core i3/i5/i7 processors, which contains one (non-DMA) ISA slot.

The PC/104 bus, used in industrial and embedded applications, is a derivative of the ISA bus, utilizing the same signal lines with different connectors. The LPC bus has replaced the ISA bus as the connection to the legacy I/O devices on recent motherboards; while physically quite different, LPC looks just like ISA to software, so that the peculiarities of ISA such as the 16 MiB DMA limit (which corresponds to the full address space of the Intel 80286 CPU used in the original IBM AT) are likely to stick around for a while.

ATA
As explained in the History section, ISA was the basis for development of the ATA interface, used for ATA (a.k.a. IDE) hard disks. Physically, ATA is essentially a simple subset of ISA, with 16 data bits, support for exactly one IRQ and one DMA channel, and 3 address bits. To this ISA subset, ATA adds two IDE address select ("chip select") lines (i.e. address decodes, effectively equivalent to address bits) and a few unique signal lines specific to ATA/IDE hard disks (such as the Cable Select/Spindle Sync. line.) In addition to the physical interface channel, ATA goes beyond and far outside the scope of ISA by also specifying a set of physical device registers to be implemented on every ATA (IDE) drive and a full set of protocols and device commands for controlling fixed disk drives using these registers. The ATA device registers are accessed using the address bits and address select signals in the ATA physical interface channel, and all operations of ATA hard disks are performed using the ATA-specified protocols through the ATA command set. The earliest versions of the ATA standard featured a few simple protocols and a basic command set comparable to the command sets of MFM and RLL controllers (which preceded ATA controllers), but the latest ATA standards have much more complex protocols and instruction sets that include optional commands and protocols providing such advanced optional-use features as sizable hidden system storage areas, password security locking, and programmable geometry translation.

A further deviation between ISA and ATA is that while the ISA bus remained locked into a single standard clock rate (for backward hardware compatibility), the ATA interface offered many different speed modes, could select among them to match the maximum speed supported by the attached drives, and kept adding faster speeds with later versions of the ATA standard (up to 133 MB/s for ATA-6, the latest.) In most forms, ATA ran much faster than ISA, provided it was connected directly to a local bus (e.g. southbridge-integrated IDE interfaces) faster than the ISA bus.

XT-IDE
Before the 16-bit ATA/IDE interface, there was an 8-bit XT-IDE (also known as XTA) interface for hard disks. It was not nearly as popular as ATA has become, and XT-IDE hardware is now fairly hard to find. Some XT-IDE adapters were available as 8-bit ISA cards, and XTA sockets were also present on the motherboards of Amstrad's later XT clones as well as a short-lived line of Philips units. The XTA pinout was very similar to ATA, but only eight data lines and two address lines were used, and the physical device registers had completely different meanings. A few hard drives (such as the Seagate ST351A/X) could support either type of interface, selected with a jumper.

Many later AT (and AT successor) motherboards had no integrated hard drive interface but relied on a separate hard drive interface plugged into an ISA/EISA/VLB slot. There were even a few 80486 based units shipped with MFM/RLL interfaces and drives instead of the increasingly common AT-IDE.

Commodore built the XT-IDE based peripheral hard drive / memory expansion unit A590 for their Amiga 500 and 500+ computers that also supported a SCSI drive. Later models – the A600, A1200, and the Amiga 4000 series – use AT-IDE drives.

PCMCIA
The PCMCIA specification can be seen as a superset of ATA. The standard for PCMCIA hard disk interfaces, which included PCMCIA flash drives, allows for the mutual configuration of the port and the drive in an ATA mode. As a de facto extension, most PCMCIA flash drives additionally allow for a simple ATA mode that is enabled by pulling a single pin low, so that PCMCIA hardware and firmware are unnecessary to use them as an ATA drive connected to an ATA port. PCMCIA flash drive to ATA adapters are thus simple and inexpensive, but are not guaranteed to work with any and every standard PCMCIA flash drive. Further, such adapters cannot be used as generic PCMCIA ports, as the PCMCIA interface is much more complex than ATA.

Emulation by embedded chips
Although most modern computers do not have physical ISA buses, almost all PCs — IA-32, and x86-64 — have ISA buses allocated in physical address space. Some Southbridges and some CPUs themselves provide services such as temperature monitoring and voltage readings through ISA buses as ISA devices.

Standardization
IEEE started a standardization of the ISA bus in 1985, called the P996 specification. However, despite books being published on the P996 specification, it never officially progressed past draft status.

Modern ISA cards
There still is an existing user base with old computers, so some ISA cards are still manufactured, e.g. with USB ports or complete single-board computers based on modern processors, USB 3.0, and SATA.

license: Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/4.0/

title: Industry Standard Architecture


text:
Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change

The Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) is an intergovernmental body of the United Nations. Its job is to advance scientific knowledge about climate change caused by human activities. The World Meteorological Organization (WMO) and the United Nations Environment Programme (UNEP) set up the IPCC in 1988. The United Nations endorsed the creation of the IPCC later that year. It has a secretariat in Geneva, Switzerland, hosted by the WMO. It has 195 member states who govern the IPCC. The member states elect a bureau of scientists to serve through an assessment cycle. A cycle is usually six to seven years. The bureau selects experts in their fields to prepare IPCC reports. There is a formal nomination process by governments and observer organizations to find these experts. The IPCC has three working groups and a task force, which carry out its scientific work.

The IPCC informs governments about the state of knowledge of climate change. It does this by examining all the relevant scientific literature on the subject. This includes the natural, economic and social impacts and risks. It also covers possible response options. The IPCC does not conduct its own original research. It aims to be objective and comprehensive. Thousands of scientists and other experts volunteer to review the publications. They compile key findings into "Assessment Reports" for policymakers and the general public; Experts have described this work as the biggest peer review process in the scientific community.

The IPCC is a well-respected authority on climate change. Leading climate scientists and all member governments endorse its findings. Governments, civil society organizations and the media regularly quote from its reports. IPCC reports play a key role in the annual climate negotiations held by the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC). The IPCC Fifth Assessment Report was an important influence on the landmark Paris Agreement in 2015. The IPCC shared the 2007 Nobel Peace Prize with Al Gore for contributions to the understanding of climate change.

The IPCC began its seventh assessment cycle in 2023. In August 2021, the IPCC published its Working Group I contribution to the Sixth Assessment Report (IPCC AR6) on the physical science basis of climate change. The Guardian described this report as the "starkest warning yet" of "major inevitable and irreversible climate changes". Many newspapers around the world echoed this theme. In February 2022, the IPCC released its Working Group II report on impacts and adaptation. It published Working Group III's "mitigation of climate change" contribution to the Sixth Assessment in April 2022. The Sixth Assessment Report concluded with a Synthesis Report in March 2023.

During the period of the Sixth Assessment Report, the IPCC released three special reports. The first and most influential was the Special Report on Global Warming of 1.5°C in 2018. In 2019 the Special Report on Climate Change and Land (SRCCL), and the Special Report on the Ocean and Cryosphere in a Changing Climate (SROCC) came out. The IPCC also updated its methodologies in 2019. So the sixth assessment cycle was the most ambitious in the IPCC's history.

Origins
The predecessor of the IPCC was the Advisory Group on Greenhouse Gases (AGGG). Three organizations set up the AGGG in 1986. These were the International Council of Scientific Unions, the United Nations Environment Programme (UNEP), and the World Meteorological Organization (WMO). The AGGG reviewed scientific research on greenhouse gases. It also studied increases in greenhouse gases. Climate science was becoming more complicated and covering more disciplines. This small group of scientists lacked the resources to cover climate science.

The United States Environmental Protection Agency sought an international convention to restrict greenhouse gas emissions. The Reagan Administration worried that independent scientists would have too much influence. The WMO and UNEP therefore created the IPCC as an intergovernmental body in 1988. Scientists take part in the IPCC as both experts and government representatives. The IPCC produces reports backed by all leading relevant scientists. Member governments must also endorse the reports by consensus agreement. So the IPCC is both a scientific body and an organization of governments. Its job is to tell governments what scientists know about climate change. It also examines the impacts of climate change and options for dealing with it. The IPCC does this by assessing peer-reviewed scientific literature.

The United Nations endorsed the creation of the IPCC in 1988. The General Assembly resolution noted that human activity could change the climate. This could lead to severe economic and social consequences. It said increasing concentrations of greenhouse gases could warm the planet. This would cause the sea level to rise. The effects for humanity would be disastrous if timely steps were not taken.

Way of working
The IPCC does not conduct original research. It produces comprehensive assessments on the state of knowledge of climate change. It prepares reports on special topics relevant to climate change. It also produces methodologies. These methodologies help countries estimate their greenhouse gas emissions and removals through sinks. Its assessments build on previous reports and scientific publications. Over the course of six assessments the reports reflect the growing evidence for a changing climate. And they show how this is due to human activity.

Rules and governing principles
The IPCC has adopted its rules of procedure in the "Principles Governing IPCC Work". These state that the IPCC will assess: Under IPCC rules its assessments are comprehensive, objective, open and transparent. They cover all the information relevant to the scientific understanding of climate change. This draws on scientific, technical and socioeconomic information. IPCC reports must be neutral regarding policy recommendations. However, they may address the objective factors relevant to enacting policies.
 * the risk of climate change caused by human activities,
 * its potential impacts, and
 * possible options for prevention.

Structure
The IPCC has the following structure:
 * IPCC Panel: Meets in plenary session about twice a year. It may meet more often for the approval of reports. It controls the IPCC's structure, procedures, work programme and budget. It accepts and approves IPCC reports. The Panel is the IPCC corporate entity.
 * Chair: Elected by the Panel. Chairs the Bureau and other bodies. Represents the organization.
 * Bureau: Elected by the Panel. It currently has 34 members from different geographic regions. Besides the Chair and three IPCC Vice-Chairs, they provide the leadership for the IPCC's three Working Groups and Task Force. It provides guidance to the Panel on the scientific and technical aspects of its work.
 * Working Groups: Each has two Co-Chairs, one from a developed and one from a developing country. A technical support unit supports each Working Group. Working Group sessions approve the Summary for Policymakers of assessment and special reports. Each Working Group has a Bureau. This consists of its Co-Chairs and Vice-Chairs, who are also members of the IPCC Bureau.
 * Working Group I: Assesses scientific aspects of the climate system and climate change. Co-Chairs: Robert Vautard (France) and Xiaoye Zhang (China)
 * Working Group II: Assesses the impacts of climate change on human and natural systems. Assesses adaptation options. Co-Chairs: Bart van den Hurk (Netherlands) and Winston Chow (Singapore)
 * Working Group III: Assesses how to stop climate change by limiting greenhouse gas emissions. (Known as "mitigation".) Co-Chairs: Katherine Calvin (United States) and Joy Jacqueline Pereira (Malaysia)
 * Task Force on National Greenhouse Gas Inventories. Develops methodologies for estimating greenhouse gas emissions. Co-Chairs: Takeshi Enoki (Japan) and Mazhar Hayat (Pakistan)
 * Task Force Bureau: Consists of two Co-Chairs, who are also members of the IPCC Bureau, and 12 members.
 * Executive Committee: Consists of the Chair, IPCC Vice-Chairs and the Co-Chairs of the Working Groups and Task Force. It addresses urgent issues that arise between sessions of the Panel.
 * Secretariat: Administers activities, supports the Chair and Bureau, point of contact for governments. Supported by UNEP and the WMO.

Chair
The chair of the IPCC is British energy scientist Jim Skea, who is hosted by the International Institute for Environment and Development (IIED). Skea has served since 28 July 2023 with the election of the new IPCC Bureau. His predecessor was Korean economist Hoesung Lee, elected in 2015. The previous chairs were Rajendra K. Pachauri, elected in 2002, Robert Watson, elected in 1997, and Bert Bolin, elected in 1988.

Panel
The Panel consists of representatives appointed by governments. They take part in plenary sessions of the IPCC and its Working Groups. Non-governmental and intergovernmental organizations may attend as observers. Meetings of IPCC bodies are by invitation only. About 500 people from 130 countries attended the 48th Session of the Panel in Incheon, Republic of Korea. This took place in October 2018. They included 290 government officials and 60 representatives of observer organizations. The opening ceremonies of sessions of the Panel and of Lead Author Meetings are open to media. Otherwise, IPCC meetings are closed.

Funding
The IPCC receives funding through a dedicated trust fund. UNEP and the WMO established the fund in 1989. The trust fund receives annual financial contributions from member governments. The WMO, UNEP and other organizations also contribute. Payments are voluntary and there is no set amount required. The WMO covers the operating costs of the secretariat. It also sets the IPCC's financial regulations and rules. The Panel sets the annual budget.

In 2021, the IPCC's annual budget amounts to approximately six million euros, financed by the 195 UN Member states, who contribute "independently and voluntarily". In 2021, the countries giving the most money include the United States, Japan, France, Germany and Norway. Other countries, often developing ones, give an "in-kind contribution, by hosting IPCC meetings". In 2022, this budget was a little less than eight million euros.

Activities other than report preparation
The IPCC bases its work on the decisions of the WMO and UNEP, which established the IPCC. It also supports the work of the UNFCCC. The main work of the IPCC is to prepare assessment and other reports. It also supports other activities such as the Data Distribution Centre. This helps manage data related to IPCC reports.

The IPCC has a "Gender Policy and Implementation Plan" to pay attention to gender in its work. It aims to carry out its work in an inclusive and respectful manner. The IPCC aims for balance in participation in IPCC work. This should offer all participants equal opportunity.

Communications and dissemination activities
The IPCC enhanced its communications activities for the Fifth Assessment Report. For instance it made the approved report and press release available to registered media under embargo before the release. And it expanded its outreach activities with an outreach calendar. The IPCC held an Expert Meeting on Communication in February 2016, at the start of the Sixth Assessment Report cycle. Members of the old and new Bureaus worked with communications experts and practitioners at this meeting. This meeting produced a series of recommendations. The IPCC adopted many of them. One was to bring people with communications expertise into the Working Group Technical Support Units. Another was to consider communications questions early on in the preparation of reports.

Following these steps in communications, the IPCC saw a significant increase in media coverage of its reports. This was particularly the case with the Special Report on Global Warming of 1.5 °C in 2018 and Climate Change 2021: The Physical Science Basis, the Working Group I contribution to the Sixth Assessment Report, in 2021. There was also much greater public interest, reflected in the youth and other movements that emerged in 2018.

IPCC reports are important for public awareness of climate change and related policymaking. This has led to a number of academic studies of IPCC communications, for example in 2021.

Archiving
The IPCC archives its reports and electronic files on its website. They include the review comments on drafts of reports. The Environmental Science and Public Policy Archives in the Harvard Library also archives them..

Assessment reports
Between 1990 and 2023, the IPCC has published six comprehensive assessment reports reviewing the latest climate science. The IPCC has also produced 14 special reports on particular topics. Each assessment report has four parts. These are a contribution from each of the three working groups, plus a synthesis report. The synthesis report integrates the working group contributions. It also integrates any special reports produced in that assessment cycle.

The First Assessment Report was published in 1990 and received an update in 1992. In intervals of about six years, new editions of IPCC Assessment Report followed.

Review process of scientific literature
The IPCC does not carry out its own research. It does not monitor climate-related data. The reports by IPCC assess scientific papers and independent results from other scientific bodies. The IPCC sets a deadline for publication of scientific papers that a report will cover. That report will not include new information that emerges after this deadline. However, there is a steady evolution of key findings and levels of scientific confidence from one assessment report to the next. Each IPCC report notes areas where the science has improved since the previous report. It also notes areas that would benefit from further research.

Selection and role of authors
The focal points of the Member states — the individual appointed by each state to liaise with the IPCC — and the observer organizations submit to the IPCC Bureau a list of personalities, which they have freely constituted. The Bureau (more precisely, the co-chairs of the relevant working group, with the help of its technical support unit) uses these lists as a basis for appointing authors, while retaining the possibility of appointing people who are not on the list, primarily on the basis of scientific excellence and diversity of viewpoints, and to a lesser extent by ensuring geographical diversity, experience within the IPCC and gender. Authors may include, in addition to researchers, personalities from the private sector and experts from NGOs.

The IPCC Bureau or Working Group Bureau selects the authors of the reports from government nominations. Lead authors of IPCC reports assess the available information about climate change based on published sources. According to IPCC guidelines, authors should give priority to peer-reviewed sources. Authors may refer to non-peer-reviewed sources ("grey literature"), if they are of sufficient quality. These could include reports from government agencies and non-governmental organizations. Industry journals and model results are other examples of non-peer-reviewed sources.

Authors prepare drafts of a full report divided into chapters. They also prepare a technical summary of the report, and a summary for policymakers.

Each chapter has a number of authors to write and edit the material. A typical chapter has two coordinating lead authors, ten to fifteen lead authors and a larger number of contributing authors. The coordinating lead authors assemble the contributions of the other authors. They ensure that contributions meet stylistic and formatting requirements. They report to the Working Group co-chairs. Lead authors write sections of chapters. They invite contributing authors to prepare text, graphs or data for inclusion. Review editors must ensure that authors respond to comments received during the two stages of drafts review: the first is only open to external experts and researchers, while the second is also open to government representatives.

The Bureau aims for a range of views, expertise and geographical representation in its choice of authors. This ensures the author team includes experts from both developing and developed countries. The Bureau also seeks a balance between male and female authors. And it aims for a balance between those who have worked previously on IPCC reports and those new to the process.

Scientists who work as authors on IPCC reports do not receive any compensation for this work, and all work on a voluntary basis. They depend on the salaries they receive from their home institutions or other work. The work is labour-intensive with a big time commitment. It can disrupt participating scientists' research. This has led to concern that the IPCC process may discourage qualified scientists from participating. More than 3,000 authors (coordinating lead authors, lead authors, review editors) have participated in the drafting of IPCC reports since its creation.

Review process for assessment reports
Expert reviewers comment at different stages on the drafts. Reviewers come from member governments and IPCC observers. Also, anyone may become an IPCC reviewer by stating they have the relevant expertise.

There are generally three stages in the review process. First comes expert review of the first draft of the chapters. The next stage is a review by governments and experts of the revised draft of the chapters and the first draft of the Summary for Policymakers. The third stage is a government review of the revised Summary for Policymakers. Review comments and author responses remain in an open archive for at least five years. Finally government representatives together with the authors review the Summary for Policymakers. They go through the Summary for Policymakers line by line to ensure it is a good summary for the underlying report. This final review of the Summary of Policymakers takes place at sessions of the responsible working group or of the Panel.

There are several types of endorsement which documents receive:
 * Approval - Material has been subject to detailed, line-by-line discussion and agreement. (The relevant Working Groups approve Working Group Summaries for Policymakers. The Panel approves the Synthesis Report Summary for Policymakers.)
 * Adoption - Endorsed section by section (not line by line). (The Panel adopts the full IPCC Synthesis Report. It also adopts Overview Chapters of Methodology Reports.)
 * Acceptance - Not been subject to line-by-line discussion and agreement. But it presents a comprehensive, objective and balanced view of the subject matter. (Working Groups accept their reports. The Panel accepts Working Group Summaries for Policymakers after working group approval. The Panel accepts Methodology Reports.)

Assessment reports one to five (1990 to 2014)

 * The IPCC's First Assessment Report (FAR) appeared in 1990. The report gave a broad overview of climate change science. It discussed uncertainties and provided evidence of warming. The authors said they are certain that greenhouse gases are increasing in the atmosphere because of human activity. This is resulting in more warming of the Earth's surface. The report led to the establishment of the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC).
 * The Second Assessment Report (SAR), was published in 1995. It strengthened the findings of the First Assessment Report. The evidence suggests that there is a discernible human influence on the global climate, it said. The Second Assessment Report provided important material for the negotiations leading to the UNFCCC's Kyoto Protocol.
 * The Third Assessment Report (TAR) was completed in 2001. It found more evidence that most of the global warming seen over the previous 50 years was due to human activity. The report includes a graph reconstructing global temperature since the year 1000. The sharp rise in temperature in recent years gave it the name "hockey stick". This became a powerful image of how temperature is soaring with climate change. The report also shows how adaptation to the effects of climate change can reduce some of its ill effects.
 * The IPCC's Fourth Assessment Report (AR4) was published in 2007. It gives much greater certainty about climate change. It states: "Warming of the climate system is unequivocal..." The report helped make people around the world aware of climate change. The IPCC shared the Nobel Peace Prize in the year of the report's publication for this work (see below).
 * The Fifth Assessment Report (AR5) was published in 2013 and 2014. This report again stated the fact of climate change. It warned of the dangerous risks. And it emphasized how the world can counter climate change. Three key findings were for example: Firstly, human influence on the climate system is clear. Secondly, the more we disrupt our climate, the more we risk severe, pervasive and irreversible impacts. And thirdly, we have the means to limit climate change and build a more prosperous, sustainable future. The report's findings were the scientific foundation of the UNFCCC's 2015 Paris Agreement.

Sixth assessment report (2021/2022)
The IPCC's most recent report is the Sixth Assessment Report (AR6). The first three instalments of AR6 appeared in 2021 and 2022. The final synthesis report was completed in March 2023.

The IPCC published the Working Group I report, Climate Change 2021: The Physical Science Basis, in August 2021. It confirms that the climate is already changing in every region. Many of these changes have not been seen in thousands of years. Many of them such as sea-level rise are irreversible over hundreds of thousands of years. Strong reductions in greenhouse gas emissions would limit climate change. But it could take 20-30 years for the climate to stabilize. This report attracted enormous media and public attention. U.N. Secretary-General António Guterres described it as "code red for humanity".

The IPCC published the Working Group II report, Climate Change 2022: Impacts, Adaptation and Vulnerability, in February 2022. Climate change due to human activities is already affecting the lives of billions of people, it said. It is disrupting nature. The world faces unavoidable hazards over the next two decades even with global warming of 1.5°C, it said.

The IPCC published the Working Group III report, Climate Change 2022: Mitigation of Climate Change, in April 2022. It will be impossible to limit warming to 1.5°C without immediate and deep cuts in greenhouse gas emissions. It is still possible to halve emissions by 2050, it said.

Special reports
The IPCC also publishes other types of reports. It produces Special Reports on topics proposed by governments or observer organizations. Between 1994 and 2019 the IPCC published 14 special reports. Now usually more than one working group cooperates to produce a special report. The preparation and approval process is the same as for assessment reports.

Special reports in 2011
During the fifth assessment cycle the IPCC produced two special reports. It completed the Special Report on Renewable Energy Sources and Climate Change Mitigation (SRREN) in 2011. Working Group III prepared this report. The report examined options to use different types of renewable energy to replace fossil fuels. The report noted that the cost of most renewables technologies had fallen. It was likely to fall even more with further advances in technology. It said renewables could increase access to energy. The report reviewed 164 scenarios that examine how renewables could help stop climate change. In more than half of these scenarios, renewables would contribute more than 27% of primary energy supply in mid-century. This would be more than double the 13% share in 2008. In the scenarios with the highest shares for renewable energy, it contributes 77% by 2050.

Later in 2011 the IPCC released the Special Report on Managing the Risks of Extreme Events and Disasters to Advance Climate Change Adaptation (SREX). This was a collaboration between Working Groups I and II. It was the first time two IPCC working groups worked together on a special report. The report shows how climate change has contributed to changes in extreme weather. And it show how policies to avoid and prepare for extreme weather events can reduce their impact. In the same way policies to respond to events and recover from them can make societies more resilient.

Special reports 2018-2019
During the sixth assessment cycle the IPCC produced three special reports. This made it the most ambitious cycle in IPCC history. The UNFCCC set a goal of keeping global warming well below 2°C while trying to hold it at 1.5°C, when it reached the Paris Agreement at COP21 in 2015. But at the time there was little understanding of what warming of 1.5°C meant. There was little scientific research explaining how the impacts of 1.5°C would differ from 2°C. And there was little understanding about how to keep warming to 1.5°C. So the UNFCCC invited the IPCC to prepare a report on global warming of 1.5°C. The IPCC subsequently released the Special Report on Global Warming of 1.5 °C (SR15) in 2018. The report showed that it was possible to keep warming below 1.5°C during the 21st century. But this would mean deep cuts in emissions. It would also mean rapid, far-reaching changes in all aspects of society. The report showed warming of 2°C would have much more severe impacts than 1.5°C. In other words: every bit of warming matters. SR15 had an unprecedented impact for an IPCC report in the media and with the public. It put the 1.5°C target at the centre of climate activism.

In 2019 the IPCC released two more special reports that examine different parts of the climate system. The Special Report on Climate Change and Land (SRCCL) examined how the way we use land affects the climate. It looked at emissions from activities such as farming and forestry rather than from energy and transport. It also looked at how climate change is affecting land. All three IPCC working groups and its Task Force on National Greenhouse Gas Inventories collaborated on the report. The report found that climate change is adding to the pressures we are putting on our land we use to live on and grow our food. It will only be possible to keep warming well below 2°C if we reduce emissions from all sectors including land and food, it said.

The Special Report on the Ocean and Cryosphere in a Changing Climate (SROCC) examined how the ocean and frozen parts of the planet interact with climate change. (The cryosphere includes frozen systems such as ice sheets, glaciers and permafrost.) IPCC Working Groups I and II prepared the report. The report highlighted the need to tackle unprecedented changes in the ocean and cryosphere. It also showed how adaptation could help sustainable development.

The IPCC will prepare a special report on climate change and cities during the seventh assessment cycle.

Methodology Reports
The IPCC has a National Greenhouse Gas Inventories Programme. It develops methodologies and software for countries to report their greenhouse gas emissions. The IPCC's Task Force on National Greenhouse Gas Inventories (TFI) has managed the program since 1998. Japan's Institute for Global Environmental Strategies (IGES) hosts the TFI's Technical Support Unit.

The IPCC approves its methodology reports at sessions of the Panel. The Panel adopts the Methodology Report's Overview Chapter by endorsing it section by section.

Revised 1996 IPCC Guidelines
The IPCC released its first Methodology Report, the IPCC Guidelines for National Greenhouse Gas Inventories, in 1994. The Revised 1996 IPCC Guidelines for National Greenhouse Gas Inventories updated this report. Two "good practice reports" complete these guidelines. These are the Good Practice Guidance and Uncertainty Management in National Greenhouse Gas Inventories and Good Practice Guidance for Land Use, Land-Use Change and Forestry. Parties to the UNFCCC and its Kyoto Protocol use the 1996 guidelines and two good practice reports for their annual submissions of inventories.

2006 IPCC Guidelines
The 2006 IPCC Guidelines for National Greenhouse Gas Inventories further update these methodologies. They include a large number of "default emission factors". These are factors to estimate the amount of emissions for an activity. The IPCC prepared this new version of the guidelines at the request of the UNFCCC. The UNFCCC accepted them for use at its 2013 Climate Change Conference, COP19, in Warsaw. The IPCC added further material in its 2019 Refinement to the 2006 IPCC Guidelines for National Greenhouse Gas Inventories.

The TFI has started preparations for a methodology report on short-lived climate forcers (SLCFs). It will complete this report in the next assessment cycle, the seventh.

Challenges and controversies
IPCC reports also attract criticism. Criticisms come from both people who say the reports exaggerate the risks and people who say they understate them. The IPCC consensus approach has faced internal and external challenges.

Conservative nature of IPCC reports
Some critics have argued that IPCC reports tend to be too conservative in their assessments of climate risk. In 2012, it was reported that the IPCC has been criticized by some scientists, who argue that the reports consistently underestimate the pace and impacts of global warming. As a result, they believe this leads to findings that are the "lowest common denominator".

David Biello, writing in the Scientific American, argues that, because of the need to secure consensus among governmental representatives, the IPCC reports give conservative estimates of the likely extent and effects of global warming. Science editor Brooks Hanson states in a 2010 editorial: "The IPCC reports have underestimated the pace of climate change while overestimating societies' abilities to curb greenhouse gas emissions."

Climate scientist James E. Hansen argues that the IPCC's conservativeness seriously underestimates the risk of sea-level rise on the order of meters—enough to inundate many low-lying areas, such as the southern third of Florida. In January 2024, he told the Guardian, "We are now in the process of moving into the 1.5C world." He added that "passing through the 1.5C world is a significant milestone because it shows that the story being told by the United Nations, with the acquiescence of its scientific advisory body, the IPCC, is a load of bullshit."

Roger A. Pielke Sr. has also stated "Humans are significantly altering the global climate, but in a variety of diverse ways beyond the radiative effect of carbon dioxide. The IPCC assessments have been too conservative in recognizing the importance of these human climate forcings as they alter regional and global climate."

Stefan Rahmstorf, a professor of physics and oceanography at University of Potsdam, argued in 2007 that the IPCC's tendency to make conservative risk assessments had benefits. Rahmstorf argued that "In a way, it is one of the strengths of the IPCC to be very conservative and cautious and not overstate any climate change risk". IPCC reports aim to inform policymakers about the state of knowledge on climate change. They do this by assessing the findings of the thousands of scientific papers available on the subject at a given time. Individual publications may have different conclusions to IPCC reports. This includes those appearing just after the release of an IPCC report. This can lead to criticism that the IPCC is either alarmist or conservative. New findings must wait for the next assessment for consideration.

Potential industry and political influence
A memo by ExxonMobil to the Bush administration in the United States in 2002 was an example of possible political influence on the IPCC. The memo led to strong Bush administration lobbying to oust Robert Watson, a climate scientist, as IPCC chair. They sought to replace him with Rajendra Pachauri. Many considered Pachauri at the time as more mild-mannered and industry-friendly.

Governments form the membership of the IPCC. They are the prime audience for IPCC reports. IPCC rules give them a formal role in the scoping, preparation and approval of reports. For instance governments take part in the review process and work with authors to approve the Summary for Policymakers of reports. But some activists have argued that governments abuse this role to influence the outcome of reports.

In 2023, it was reported that pressure from Brazil and Argentina, two countries with large beef industries, caused the IPCC to abandon text recommending the adoption of plant-based diets. An earlier draft of the report, which noted "plant-based diets can reduce GHG emissions by up to 50% compared to the average emission-intensive Western diet", was leaked online in March 2023.

Controversy and review after Fourth Assessment Report in 2007
The IPCC came under unprecedented media scrutiny in 2009 in the run-up to the Copenhagen climate conference. This "Climatic Research Unit email controversy" involved the leak of emails from climate scientists. Many of these scientists were authors of the Fourth Assessment Report which came out in 2007. The discovery of an error in this report that the Himalayan glaciers would melt by 2035 put the IPCC under further pressure. Scientific bodies upheld the general findings of the Fourth Assessment Report and the IPCC's approach. But many people thought the IPCC should review the way it works.

InterAcademy Council review in 2010
Public debate after the publication of AR4 in 2009 put the IPCC under scrutiny, with controversies over alleged bias and inaccuracy in its reports. In 2010, this prompted U.N. Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon and IPCC chair Rajendra K. Pachauri to request that the InterAcademy Council (IAC) review the IPCC and recommend ways to strengthen its processes and procedures for the preparation of AR5. The IAC report made recommendations to fortify IPCC's management structure, to further develop its conflict-of-interest policy, to strengthen the review process, to clarify the guidelines on the use of so-called gray literature, to ensure consistency in the use of probabilities for the likelihood of outcomes, and to improve its communications strategy especially regarding transparency and rapidity of response.

The United Nations Secretary-General and the Chair of the IPCC asked the InterAcademy Council (IAC) in March 2010 to review the IPCC's processes for preparing its reports. The IAC panel, chaired by Harold Tafler Shapiro, released its report on 1 September 2010. The IAC panel made seven formal recommendations for improving the IPCC's assessment process. The IPCC implemented most of the review's recommendations by 2012. One of these was the introduction of a protocol to handle errors in reports. Other recommendations included strengthening the science-review process and improving communications. But the IPCC did not adopt the proposal to appoint a full-time executive secretary.

Issues with consensual approach
Michael Oppenheimer, a long-time participant in the IPCC, has said the IPCC consensus approach has some limitations. Oppenheimer, a coordinating lead author of the Fifth Assessment Report, called for concurring, smaller assessments of special problems instead of the large-scale approach of previous IPCC assessments. Others see "mixed blessings" in the drive for consensus within the IPCC. They suggest including dissenting or minority positions. Others suggest improving statements about uncertainties.

Criticism by experts involved with the IPCC process
Some of the criticism has originated from experts invited by the IPCC to submit reports or serve on its panels. For example, John Christy, a contributing author who works at the University of Alabama in Huntsville, explained in 2007 the difficulties of establishing scientific consensus on the precise extent of human action on climate change. "Contributing authors essentially are asked to contribute a little text at the beginning and to review the first two drafts. We have no control over editing decisions. Even less influence is granted the 2,000 or so reviewers. Thus, to say that 800 contributing authors or 2,000 reviewers reached consensus on anything describes a situation that is not reality", he wrote. Christopher Landsea, a hurricane researcher, said of "the part of the IPCC to which my expertise is relevant" that "I personally cannot in good faith continue to contribute to a process that I view as both being motivated by pre-conceived agendas and being scientifically unsound," because of comments made at a press conference by Kevin Trenberth of which Landsea disapproved. Trenberth said "Landsea's comments were not correct"; the IPCC replied "individual scientists can do what they wish in their own rights, as long as they are not saying anything on behalf of the IPCC".

Endorsements and awards
IPCC reports are the benchmark for climate science. There is widespread support for the IPCC in the scientific community. Publications by other scientific bodies and experts show this. Many scientific bodies have issued official statements that endorse the findings of the IPCC. For example:
 * For the Third Assessment Report in 2001 endorsements came from the Canadian Foundation for Climate and Atmospheric Sciences, United States National Research Council and European Geosciences Union.
 * For the Fourth Assessment Report in 2007 endorsements came from the International Council for Science (ICSU), and the Network of African Science Academies.

Nobel Peace Prize in 2007
In December 2007, the IPCC received the Nobel Peace Prize "for their efforts to build up and disseminate greater knowledge about man-made climate change, and to lay the foundations for the measures that are needed to counteract such change". It shared the award with former U.S. Vice-president Al Gore for his work on climate change and the documentary An Inconvenient Truth.

Gulbenkian Prize for Humanity in 2022
In October 2022, the IPCC and IPBES shared the Gulbenkian Prize for Humanity. The two intergovernmental bodies won the prize because they "produce scientific knowledge, alert society, and inform decision-makers to make better choices for combatting climate change and the loss of biodiversity".


text:
IPCC (disambiguation)

The IPCC, or Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, is a scientific body under the auspices of the United Nations.

IPCC may also refer to:

Other organisations

 * Independent Police Complaints Commission, defunct public body in England and Wales
 * Independent Police Complaints Council of the Hong Kong Government
 * Independent Police Conduct Commission, Malaysian oversight body
 * Irish Peatland Conservation Council, charity to preserve bogs

Other uses

 * Integrated Professional Competency Course, a course of the Institute of Chartered Accountants of India
 * Interworld Police Coordinating Company, a fictional organization in Jack Vance's novels

title: IPCC (disambiguation)