As international diplomats and climate delegations gather for the United Nations COP31 climate summit in Antalya, Turkey, the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) confronts acute budget constraints and sharp divisions over its Seventh Assessment Report (AR7) delivery schedule. The IPCC's 65th plenary session (IPCC-65), convened in Addis Ababa, Ethiopia, suspended proceedings without approving the panel's operational budgets or resolving disagreements over the final publication timeline. In response to mounting political gridlock threatening global climate science, nearly 120 contributing IPCC authors released an open letter on October 19, pledging to advance the assessment cycle with rigorous dedication while urging member governments to overcome geopolitical differences. Operating Budget Stalled Amid Deficits and Financial Impasse The IPCC functions on an annual operating budget of approximately $9.7 million, a figure comparable to the cost of producing a single commercial motion picture. This funding supports plenary operations, technical workshops, scientific secretariats, and travel stipends for delegates and researchers from developing countries. Historically, the United States provided up to one-third of the panel's regular funding. However, the withdrawal of federal funding and disengagement from the IPCC over the past two years under the Trump administration created a pronounced revenue shortfall. Although the American Geophysical Union established the U.S. Academic Alliance for the IPCC in 2025—helping American scientists maintain roughly 7.5 percent of contributing authors, the highest national share—academic philanthropy cannot completely offset the absence of sovereign contributions.
Dispute Over AR7 Timeline and 2028 Stocktake
Financial tensions surfaced sharply on the final evening of negotiations in Addis Ababa. Attempting to ensure core operations continued uninterrupted, IPCC Chair Jim Skea asked delegations to adopt proposed operating budgets for 2026 and 2027. Delegates from Saudi Arabia, India, and Russia objected to approving the financial plan. Deadlocks also emerged over funding allocations intended to sponsor two representatives rather than one from developing nations at future approval sessions. A delegate from the Democratic Republic of the Congo cautioned that postponing budget approval posed an immediate danger to the viability of the panel. Disputed Timetables Threaten Integration with Global Stocktake The budgetary impasse is closely linked to diplomatic conflict over synchronizing AR7 working group reports with the second Global Stocktake under the Paris Agreement, scheduled for late 2028 at COP33. A scientific proposal supported by European nations, small island developing states, and vulnerable developing economies aimed to conclude all three Working Group assessments by August 2028. Proponents stressed that countries reviewing collective climate progress need updated, peer-reviewed findings to establish ambitious emissions reduction targets.
Conversely, a coalition including Saudi Arabia, India, Russia, and China opposed that accelerated schedule. They argued that developing countries face structural constraints in research infrastructure and need additional time to review comprehensive drafts, advocating to postpone Working Group II and Working Group III reports into 2029 or beyond. Climate analysts noted that delaying publication would leave the 2028 Global Stocktake without current authoritative benchmarks, weakening pressure on fossil-fuel-producing states to accelerate decarbonization. With governments unable to bridge the gap, the meeting concluded in deadlock. Scientists Rally Behind AR7 Cycle and Urge Political Compromise Administrative gridlock has triggered serious concerns across the international scientific community. Dr. Bill Hare, chief executive of Climate Analytics, emphasized that clear planning horizons are essential for voluntary authors, more than half of whom hail from developing nations. Hare stressed that resuming the 65th session before year's end to secure the 2027 budget is vital to sustain research operations.
Refusing to allow political disputes to derail their work, nearly 120 IPCC authors released a joint declaration affirming their commitment to the assessment cycle. The signatories, including researchers from nations whose delegations resisted report alignment, stressed that inclusivity remains fundamental to the panel. The scientists declared: “We are committed to an assessment in which the knowledge, experience and priorities of every region are fully reflected, a commitment we share with the leadership of the IPCC. Equity is built into how our assessment is being drafted.”
IPCC Authors Urge Compromise as Skea Vows Engine Room
The authors appealed directly to member governments “to overcome their political differences and work together as we do as a global scientific community, so that we can deliver the IPCC reports the world needs to hear”. Working Group I Co-Chair Dr. Robert Vautard reaffirmed author dedication in a public statement, noting that drafting teams are moving forward with revisions: “The boat is at full steam... The most exciting two years of the cycle are ahead, for the authors. The momentum in the engine room is here and now. Trust the engine room!”
In his closing address in Addis Ababa, IPCC Chair Jim Skea observed that recent months had proved exceptionally challenging, noting that if terms stronger than “profound disappointment” existed, he would use them. Nonetheless, Skea affirmed: “The engine room of the IPCC is working, and it's healthy.” As the COP31 summit convenes in Antalya, observers await whether world leaders can restore institutional consensus and deliver the financial resources needed to sustain global climate science.
