estimates of climate impacts, including the costs of failing to mitigate. These estimates are needed to inform economic tradeoffs.
Parry, Rosenzweig, and Wilbanks said that an effective self-organization process is needed. Such a process will require mobilization to improve communications both in the vulnerability, impacts, and adaptation community and between that community and other parts of the climate science effort, including earth system and integrated assessment modeling. Researchers focusing on vulnerability, impacts, and adaptation can contribute geographic and sectoral diversity to the larger effort, as other researchers mainly work through larger, more aggregated models. Such a process of self-organization needs to be sensitive to the diversity and bottom-up culture of the vulnerability, impacts, and adaptation research community to establish full collaboration with the earth system and integrated assessment modeling communities.
Parry noted that IPCC organization will be influenced not only by scientific opinion, but also by intergovernmental negotiations. The organization issues discussed included relationships between Working Group II and other working groups, such as possibilities for early identification of questions and key messages in the development of synthesis report outlines. The participants identified several key issues for the next IPCC assessment, including the need to strengthen the knowledge base in peer-reviewed research, especially for such understudied sectors as cities and settlements; maintaining the risk management paradigm, including non-climate changes in projections of longer-term impacts and costs; and developing reference scenarios for vulnerability, impacts, and adaptation assessments.