The curve: An ethnography of projecting sea level rise under uncertainty

Drawing from a multiyear series of interviews with sea level rise assessors during the development of IPCC's Working Group I volume of the Sixth Assessment Report—the first time access had been granted to researchers to observe the IPCC process—this article analyzes the social and epistemic challenges and tools (both technical and social) involved in assessing complex, uncertain science questions. This study shows that “the curve”, a representation of future sea level rise, is an example of the human dimensions of the science/policy interaction in three ways. First, IPCC authors’ experiences demonstrate that it is not just the communicative outcomes or political feedback from assessment reports that matter, but also the social and expert processes that produce these assessments. Attempting new assessment techniques to improve understandings of climate science can also improve broader society's understanding of climate science, impacts and solutions. Second, the human side of global environmental assessments influences the credibility of these organizations. Expert authors accept these volunteer jobs for multiple reasons but their perception of the social experience of assessment influences their buy-in, and ultimately, the legitimacy of the organization. Third, the IPCC is increasingly formalizing its procedures for figure design and generally supports author experimentation with figures. However, less is known about how the social dynamics of chapter teams influences figure design and other assessment elements: we demonstrate this through our ethnographic analysis of the creation of curve figure and text box. The IPCC is a living, breathing organization: assessment work is not formulaic. To understand the science decisions in the report, we must understand how these decisions were made.