IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/spr/climat/v178y2025i2d10.1007_s10584-025-03866-y.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Unlearning modernity? A critical examination of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC)

Author

Listed:
  • Niklas Wagner

    (Rheinische Friedrich-Wilhelms-Universität Bonn)

  • Anna-Katharina Hornidge

    (IDOS German Institute for Sustainability Research)

Abstract

Modernity's ideals of progress through industrialisation, coupled with rationalist views of value-free and neutral science guiding policymaking, have been driving forces behind the climate crisis and related injustices. Post-colonial scholarship calls for unlearning this modernist paradigm. This study examines the extent to which the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC), the preeminent global authority on climate change knowledge, is both shaped by the procedural logic of Eurocentric modernity and the tendencies towards unlearning these modernist characteristics in favour of more pluralistic, co-productive approaches. Through an inductive-deductive qualitative methodology, including semi-structured interviews with IPCC authors and policymakers at international climate conferences, this paper finds the IPCC to be situated in a tension field between modernity and unlearning it. On the one hand, the IPCC is constrained by path-dependencies of Eurocentric modernity, manifested in the linear model of knowledge transfer, the differentiated systems logic of science and policy spheres, and the privileging of Western scientific expertise as universally valid and apolitical. On the other hand, the study also identifies emergent tendencies within the IPCC towards broadening disciplinary diversity, incorporating alternative epistemologies like Indigenous and Local Knowledge, and fostering co-productive collaborations between scientists and policymakers. These nascent "unlearning" efforts signal cracks in modernity's edifice, though limitations and potential risks caution against overstatement. By highlighting this critical juncture, the paper contributes empirical and conceptual insights into the IPCC's transition from modernist constraints towards more pluriversal climate responses. This analysis sheds light on the IPCC's evolving role in shaping global climate governance and the ongoing struggle to redefine climate knowledge production.

Suggested Citation

  • Niklas Wagner & Anna-Katharina Hornidge, 2025. "Unlearning modernity? A critical examination of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC)," Climatic Change, Springer, vol. 178(2), pages 1-29, February.
    • Handle: RePEc:spr:climat:v:178:y:2025:i:2:d:10.1007_s10584-025-03866-y
    DOI: 10.1007/s10584-025-03866-y
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://link.springer.com/10.1007/s10584-025-03866-y
    File Function: Abstract
    Download Restriction: Access to the full text of the articles in this series is restricted.
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1007/s10584-025-03866-y?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. repec:sae:envval:v:16:y:2007:i:2:p:233-252 is not listed on IDEAS
    2. Bård Lahn, 2018. "In the light of equity and science: scientific expertise and climate justice after Paris," International Environmental Agreements: Politics, Law and Economics, Springer, vol. 18(1), pages 29-43, February.
    3. James Ford & Will Vanderbilt & Lea Berrang-Ford, 2012. "Authorship in IPCC AR5 and its implications for content: climate change and Indigenous populations in WGII," Climatic Change, Springer, vol. 113(2), pages 201-213, July.
    4. Richard G. Newell & William A. Pizer & Daniel Raimi, 2013. "Carbon Markets 15 Years after Kyoto: Lessons Learned, New Challenges," Journal of Economic Perspectives, American Economic Association, vol. 27(1), pages 123-146, Winter.
    5. Susanne Durst & Ilka Heinze & Thomas Henschel & Nishad Nawaz, 2020. "Unlearning: a systematic literature review," International Journal of Business and Globalisation, Inderscience Enterprises Ltd, vol. 24(4), pages 472-495.
    6. Shinichiro Asayama & Kari Pryck & Silke Beck & Béatrice Cointe & Paul N. Edwards & Hélène Guillemot & Karin M. Gustafsson & Friederike Hartz & Hannah Hughes & Bård Lahn & Olivier Leclerc & Rolf Lidsko, 2023. "Three institutional pathways to envision the future of the IPCC," Nature Climate Change, Nature, vol. 13(9), pages 877-880, September.
    7. E. Lisa F. Schipper & Navroz K. Dubash & Yacob Mulugetta, 2021. "Climate change research and the search for solutions: rethinking interdisciplinarity," Climatic Change, Springer, vol. 168(3), pages 1-11, October.
    8. Simon Lumsden, 2021. "Sustainable Development is a Dead-End: The Logic of Modernity and Ecological Crisis," Environmental Values, , vol. 30(3), pages 277-296, June.
    9. Nicola Jones, 2013. "Climate assessments: 25 years of the IPCC," Nature, Nature, vol. 501(7467), pages 298-299, September.
    10. Cathleen Fogel, 2005. "Biotic Carbon Sequestration and the Kyoto Protocol: The Construction of Global Knowledge by the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change," International Environmental Agreements: Politics, Law and Economics, Springer, vol. 5(2), pages 191-210, June.
    11. Martina Angela Caretta & Shobha Maharaj, 2024. "Diversity in IPCC author’s composition does not equate to inclusion," Nature Climate Change, Nature, vol. 14(10), pages 1013-1014, October.
    12. James D. Ford & Laura Cameron & Jennifer Rubis & Michelle Maillet & Douglas Nakashima & Ashlee Cunsolo Willox & Tristan Pearce, 2016. "Including indigenous knowledge and experience in IPCC assessment reports," Nature Climate Change, Nature, vol. 6(4), pages 349-353, April.
    13. Esther Turnhout & Marian Stuiver & Judith Klostermann & Bette Harms & Cees Leeuwis, 2013. "New roles of science in society: Different repertoires of knowledge brokering," Science and Public Policy, Oxford University Press, vol. 40(3), pages 354-365, February.
    14. Peter Weingart, 1999. "Scientific expertise and political accountability: paradoxes of science in politics," Science and Public Policy, Oxford University Press, vol. 26(3), pages 151-161, June.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Kate Dooley & Aarti Gupta, 2017. "Governing by expertise: the contested politics of (accounting for) land-based mitigation in a new climate agreement," International Environmental Agreements: Politics, Law and Economics, Springer, vol. 17(4), pages 483-500, August.
    2. Friederike Hartz, 2024. "“We are not droids”– IPCC participants’ senses of responsibility and affective experiences across the production, assessment, communication and enactment of climate science," Climatic Change, Springer, vol. 177(6), pages 1-21, June.
    3. Tian-Yuan Huang & Liangping Ding & Yong-Qiang Yu & Lei Huang & Liying Yang, 2023. "From AR5 to AR6: exploring research advancement in climate change based on scientific evidence from IPCC WGI reports," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 128(9), pages 5227-5245, September.
    4. Wim Carton & Adeniyi Asiyanbi & Silke Beck & Holly J. Buck & Jens F. Lund, 2020. "Negative emissions and the long history of carbon removal," Wiley Interdisciplinary Reviews: Climate Change, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 11(6), November.
    5. Markus Dressel, 2022. "Models of science and society: transcending the antagonism," Palgrave Communications, Palgrave Macmillan, vol. 9(1), pages 1-15, December.
    6. Karin M. Gustafsson, 2019. "Learning from the Experiences of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change: Balancing Science and Policy to Enable Trustworthy Knowledge," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(23), pages 1-14, November.
    7. Bauer, Anja & Kastenhofer, Karen, 2019. "Policy advice in technology assessment: Shifting roles, principles and boundaries," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 139(C), pages 32-41.
    8. Chukwumerije Okereke, 2017. "A six-component model for assessing procedural fairness in the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC)," Climatic Change, Springer, vol. 145(3), pages 509-522, December.
    9. Serhat Burmaoglu & Ozcan Saritas, 2019. "An evolutionary analysis of the innovation policy domain: Is there a paradigm shift?," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 118(3), pages 823-847, March.
    10. Matthew Ranson & Robert N. Stavins, 2016. "Linkage of greenhouse gas emissions trading systems: learning from experience," Climate Policy, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 16(3), pages 284-300, April.
    11. Peifang Yang & Daniel T. Kaffine, 2016. "Community-Based Tradable Permits for Localized Pollution," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 65(4), pages 773-788, December.
    12. Amy A. Quark & Rachel Lienesch, 2017. "Scientific boundary work and food regime transitions: the double movement and the science of food safety regulation," Agriculture and Human Values, Springer;The Agriculture, Food, & Human Values Society (AFHVS), vol. 34(3), pages 645-661, September.
    13. Stranlund, John K. & Murphy, James J. & Spraggon, John M. & Zirogiannis, Nikolaos, 2019. "Tying enforcement to prices in emissions markets: An experimental evaluation," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 98(C).
    14. Bart Rijken & Edwin Buitelaar & Lianne van Duinen, 2020. "Exploring the feasibility of future housing development within existing cities," Environment and Planning B, , vol. 47(2), pages 336-351, February.
    15. Frédéric Branger & Oskar Lecuyer & Philippe Quirion, 2015. "The European Union Emissions Trading Scheme: should we throw the flagship out with the bathwater?," Wiley Interdisciplinary Reviews: Climate Change, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 6(1), pages 9-16, January.
    16. Cong, Ren & Lo, Alex Y., 2017. "Emission trading and carbon market performance in Shenzhen, China," Applied Energy, Elsevier, vol. 193(C), pages 414-425.
    17. V. Savo & K. E. Kohfeld & J. Sillmann & C. Morton & J. Bailey & A. S. Haslerud & C. Le Quéré & D. Lepofsky, 2024. "Using human observations with instrument-based metrics to understand changing rainfall patterns," Nature Communications, Nature, vol. 15(1), pages 1-12, December.
    18. Melathopoulos, Andony P. & Stoner, Alexander M., 2015. "Critique and transformation: On the hypothetical nature of ecosystem service value and its neo-Marxist, liberal and pragmatist criticisms," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 117(C), pages 173-181.
    19. Mehling, Michael A. & Metcalf, Gilbert E. & Stavins, Robert N., 2017. "Linking Heterogeneous Climate Policies (Consistent with the Paris Agreement)," MITP: Mitigation, Innovation and Transformation Pathways 266282, Fondazione Eni Enrico Mattei (FEEM).
    20. Frédéric Branger & Oskar Lecuyer & Philippe Quirion, 2013. "The European Union Emissions Trading System : should we throw the flagship out with the bathwater ?," Working Papers hal-00866408, HAL.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:spr:climat:v:178:y:2025:i:2:d:10.1007_s10584-025-03866-y. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Sonal Shukla or Springer Nature Abstracting and Indexing (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.springer.com .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.