Recommendations extracted from the Conclusions of the IAC report into the IPCC.

1. Establishment of an Executive Committee of the IPCC Chair, the Working Group Co-chairs, the senior member of the Secretariat, and 3 independent members, including some from outside of the climate community.

2. Appointment of a senior scientist as Executive Director. The term limited to one assessment.

3. Institution of conflict of interest policies

4. Define roles and responsibilities of key participants, including the IPCC Chair.

5. Limit of one term for key IPCC leaders, including the IPCC Chair, Working Group Co-chairs, and the proposed Executive Director

6. Review Editors must exercise their authority to ensure that reviewers’ comments are adequately considered by the authors and that genuine controversies are adequately reflected in the report.

7. Adopt a more targeted and effective process for responding to reviewer comments. Authors would be required to provide detailed written responses to the most significant review issues identified by the Review Editors, abbreviated responses to all non-editorial comments, and no written responses to editorial comments.

8. Use the qualitative level-of-understanding scale in their Summary for Policy Makers and Technical Summary, this scale may be supplemented by a quantitative probability scale, if appropriate. The confidence scale should not be used to assign subjective probabilities to ill-defined outcomes.

9. Quantitative probabilities (as in the likelihood scale) should be used to describe the probability of well-defined outcomes only when there is sufficient evidence. Authors should indicate the basis for assigning a probability to an outcome or event

10. The likelihood scale should be stated in terms of probabilities (numbers) in addition to words

11. Lead Authors should provide a traceable account of how they arrived at their ratings for level of scientific understanding and likelihood that an outcome will occur.

12. Formal expert elicitation procedures should be used to obtain subjective probabilities for key results.

13. Implement a communications strategy that emphasizes transparency, rapid and thoughtful responses, and relevance to stakeholders,

14. Make the process and criteria for selecting participants for scoping meetings more transparent.

15. Adopt formal qualifications and formally articulate the roles and responsibilities for all Bureau members, including the IPCC Chair, to ensure that they have both the highest scholarly qualifications and proven leadership skills.

16. Establish a formal set of criteria and processes for selecting Coordinating Lead Authors and Lead Authors.

17. Lead Authors should explicitly document that a range of scientific viewpoints has been considered, and Coordinating Lead Authors and Review Editors should satisfy themselves that due consideration was given to properly documented alternative views.

18. Strengthen and enforce its procedure for the use of unpublished and non-peer-reviewed literature,

19. Engaging the best regional experts. make every effort to engage local experts on the author teams of the regional chapters of the Working Group II report, but should also engage experts from countries outside of the region when they can provide an essential contribution to the assessment.

20. In the Summary for Policy Makers, reduce opportunities for political interference with the scientific results and improve the efficiency of the approval process.