from: IPCC-WG1 <ipcc-wg1atXYZxyznoaa.gov>
subject: [Wg1-ar4-las] Review process information
Dear Lead Authors,
Thanks for your very hard work in producing the First Order Draft of the WG1 AR4, which is
now under expert review. We are tremendously impressed with the drafts and look forward
to discussing the material with you.
Following some recent events regarding use of the unpublished material cited in the FOD
that is being made available to reviewers through the generosity of other kind colleagues,
we would like to summarize here some aspects of the IPCC procedure that should be clearly
understood by authors and reviewers alike.
As per IPCC procedures, unpublished "materials referenced" in the draft chapters are being
provided to the reviewers. This is done only on the strict condition that none of these
may be quoted, cited, or distributed without the prior consent of the original authors in
each case. Reviewers have been clearly informed of these provisions.
"Materials referenced" is unambiguously defined by the list of such "references" given at
the end of each chapter. It does not extend beyond those cited references to such material
as datasets, computer codes, or other sources of information that those papers may
themselves cite or use. Please be advised that it is inappropriate for reviewers to cite
their acting as reviewers in the IPCC process as entitling them to access to such
additional information from us, from you, or from the authors of cited papers.
Our review web site also makes it very clear that access to unpublished material for the
purposes of the IPCC review does not imply any role in reviewing those papers that have
been submitted to peer reviewed journals. The IPCC process can not supercede or alter the
practices related to scientific review of papers followed by individual scientific
journals. If you become aware of any attempts to use access to unpublished material to
influence its publication in any way please inform the TSU immediately.
Please also be advised that all IPCC reviewer comments are to be submitted through the
written review procedures, and must be collected and archived by the TSU. This is
essential to meet the need for a formal process that is open and transparent. Thus the IPCC
review process cannot operate via email exchanges among individuals.
Reviewers were given information on how to access the WG1 web site, where they can upload
their forms containing any comments. If they have technical difficulties they have been
advised to contact the TSU.
Lead Authors have no obligation to enter into communication with reviewers and there should
be no need to do so. While we recognize that this is an area in which you may have to make
your own judgments, we would suggest that you be cautious in your own interests and those
of the IPCC. If you receive emails or other communications from reviewers you may wish to
indicate that dialogue with individual reviewers during the review and drafting process
could compromise the requirements for transparency in the IPCC review process, and that
reviewers should provide all comments in the standard way to the TSU.
We hope this information is helpful to you. Thanks again and we look forward to seeing you
in New Zealand in a few months.
Susan Solomon and Martin Manning
_______________________________________________ Wg1-ar4-las mailing list