De Vector

IPCC suspends meeting without agreement on timetable and budget

The impasse also affects the budget for 2027, while timely publication of the climate reports remains uncertain.

Follow-up to: IPCC countries remain divided over timetable for new climate report Thursday, 15 October 2026, 15:45

The meeting of the UN climate panel, the IPCC, was suspended on Friday without agreement on the timetable for its new climate reports or next year's budget. It therefore remains uncertain whether the reports will be available for the international assessment of climate policy in 2028.

Chair Jim Skea suspended the meeting in Addis Ababa after many representatives from developing countries had left. According to the public report by Earth Negotiations Bulletin, he wanted to prevent substantive decisions from being taken in their absence. The meeting is to resume at a later stage; the report does not yet give a date.

De Vector previously reported on divisions over the publication timetable. The new development is that this week's negotiations have failed to produce an agreement, and no decision has been taken on the budget for 2027 either. Whereas negotiations had previously continued over a way forward, the meeting has now been suspended without agreement on either issue.

The dispute centres on the IPCC's seventh series of climate assessments. In these, experts bring together the available scientific knowledge for policymakers. The three working groups cover the physical science basis of climate change, its impacts and options for adapting to them, and ways to limit warming. These are therefore separate reports that together form a broad assessment.

Scheduling and funding are linked in this process. Earth Negotiations Bulletin describes how the budget required depends on the work programme and the activities expected. The IPCC fund supports, among other things, participation by experts from developing countries, meetings, and the publication and translation of reports. The absence of a budget agreement therefore affects the organisation of the assessment process, without establishing precisely which activities will not go ahead.

A central point of contention is the participation of researchers from poorer countries. According to NOS, India and Saudi Arabia are among those calling for more time to improve their representation. At the same time, the meeting report shows that representatives of some least developed countries and small island states fear this argument is being used to postpone urgently needed action. Developing countries therefore do not form a united bloc in this discussion.

The stakes extend beyond a publication date. In 2028, an international assessment will examine how much progress countries have made with their climate policies. According to NOS, delays make it harder to use the latest consolidated knowledge in that assessment. This is relevant to the Netherlands and Europe because the assessment is part of international climate diplomacy. The deadlock over the timetable is not in itself a new scientific conclusion about the scale or speed of warming.

Nor is it certain that the reports will no longer appear at all. NOS describes considerable uncertainty over timely delivery; the meeting report refers to suspension and subsequent resumption. The immediate task therefore remains concrete: to reach agreement on the work programme and funding. Only then can it become clearer which publication dates are achievable and what consequences the delay will have for the work.

Respond to this article

← Back to the edition