Saudi Oil Links Raise Questions Over Authors of Key UN Climate Report

Concerns have emerged over the involvement of Saudi-linked scientists and researchers with the next major climate assessment by the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC), with critics questioning whether the panel’s conflict-of-interest safeguards are strong enough.

An investigation published on Monday found that at least a dozen of the authors selected for the IPCC’s Seventh Assessment Report have links to Saudi Aramco, Saudi government institutions or other oil and gas interests.

The findings are particularly significant because several of those researchers are involved in Working Group III, which examines ways of reducing greenhouse gas emissions and removing carbon from the atmosphere.

Among those identified is Mustafa Babiker, a Saudi Aramco employee of about two decades who was appointed a coordinating lead author of the new assessment. Other researchers have links to Saudi universities and institutions involved in energy research and projects connected to Aramco.

The investigation identified 20 cases it considered to raise strong conflict-of-interest concerns among the 223 Working Group III lead authors, including 11 involving Saudi-linked researchers.

However, the IPCC has said its conflict-of-interest procedures found no conflicts among the authors selected for the report. The organisation said potential conflicts reported during the selection process were addressed by working-group leadership and that its reports are produced through collective authorship and extensive review.

Critics argue that the concentration of Saudi-linked experts could affect perceptions of the panel’s independence, particularly on issues such as fossil-fuel reduction and carbon capture technologies.

Saudi Arabia has significant economic interests in the continued production of oil and has increasingly promoted technologies such as carbon capture as part of its approach to addressing climate change.

The controversy comes as the IPCC prepares its seventh assessment, which is expected to provide governments with scientific analysis on climate risks, emissions reduction and possible responses to global warming.

The dispute has renewed calls for greater transparency around researchers’ affiliations and how potential conflicts are assessed before they take part in the preparation of major international climate reports.