• Energy Research
• CH close

The data is available for download at the AR6 Scenario Explorer hosted by IIASA. As part of the IPCC's 6th Assessment Report (AR6), authors from Working Group III on Mitigation of Climate Change undertook a comprehensive exercise to collect and assess quantitative, model-based scenarios related to the mitigation of climate change. Building on previous assessments, such as those undertaken for the 5th Assessment Report (AR5) and the Special Report on Global Warming of 1.5°C (SR15), the calls for AR6 for scenarios have been expanded and includes economy-wide GHG emissions, energy, and sectoral scenarios from global to national scales, thus more broadly supporting the assessment across multiple chapters (see Annex III, Part 2 of the WGIII report for more details). The compilation and assessment of the scenario ensemble was conducted by authors of the IPCC AR6 report, and the resource is hosted by the International Institute for Applied Systems Analysis (IIASA) as part of a cooperation agreement with Working Group III of the IPCC. The scenario ensemble contains 3,131 quantitative scenarios with data on socio-economic development, greenhouse gas emissions, and sectoral transformations across energy, land use, transportation, buildings and industry. These scenarios derive from 191 unique modelling frameworks, 95+ model families that are either globally comprehensive, national, multi-regional or sectoral. The criteria for submission included that the scenario is presented in a peer-reviewed journal accepted for publication no later than October 11th, 2021, or published in a report determined by the IPCC WG III Bureau to be eligible grey literature by the same date. The AR6 scenario database is documented in Annex III.2 of the Sixth Assessment Report of Working Group III. For the purpose of the assessment, scenarios have been grouped in various categories relating to, among other things, climate outcomes, overshoot, technology availability and policy assumptions. For ease of use, the dataset is split into multiple files: Scenarios data for the Global region Scenarios data for R5 regions Scenarios data for R6 regions Scenarios data for R10 regions Scenarios data for ISO-3 (country) regions Global metadata indicators file National metadata indicators file The data is available for download at the AR6 Scenario Explorer hosted by IIASA. The license permits use of the scenario ensemble for scientific research and science communication, but restricts redistribution of substantial parts of the data. Please refer to the FAQ and legal code for more information. In addition to the data you may find more relevant information and cite one of the relevant chapters of the WG III report. If working with global or regional (R6, R10) data: Keywan Riahi, Roberto Schaeffer, et al. Mitigation Pathways Compatible with Long-Term Goals, in "Mitigation of Climate Change". Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, Geneva, 2022. url: http://www.ipcc.ch/report/sixth-assessment-report-working-group-3/ If working with national data (ISO region data): Franck Lecocq, Harald Winkler, et al. Mitigation and development pathways in the near- to mid-term, in "Mitigation of Climate Change". Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, Geneva, 2022. url: http://www.ipcc.ch/report/sixth-assessment-report-working-group-3/ If you find the metadata files particularly useful: Celine Guivarch, Elmar Kriegler, Joana Portugal Pereira, et al. Annex III: Scenarios and Modelling Methods, in "Mitigation of Climate Change". Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, Geneva, 2022. url: http://www.ipcc.ch/report/sixth-assessment-report-working-group-3/ Scenarios data also supports analysis in Chapters 2, 5, 6, 7, 9, 10, 12 and 15

The data is available for download at the AR6 Scenario Explorer hosted by IIASA.<<< click here. As part of the IPCC's 6th Assessment Report (AR6), authors from Working Group III on Mitigation of Climate Change undertook a comprehensive exercise to collect and assess quantitative, model-based scenarios related to the mitigation of climate change. Building on previous assessments, such as those undertaken for the 5th Assessment Report (AR5) and the Special Report on Global Warming of 1.5°C (SR15), the calls for AR6 for scenarios have been expanded and includes economy-wide GHG emissions, energy, and sectoral scenarios from global to national scales, thus more broadly supporting the assessment across multiple chapters (see Annex III, Part 2 of the WGIII report for more details). The compilation and assessment of the scenario ensemble was conducted by authors of the IPCC AR6 report, and the resource is hosted by the International Institute for Applied Systems Analysis (IIASA) as part of a cooperation agreement with Working Group III of the IPCC. The scenario ensemble contains 3,131 quantitative scenarios with data on socio-economic development, greenhouse gas emissions, and sectoral transformations across energy, land use, transportation, buildings and industry. These scenarios derive from 191 unique modelling frameworks, 95+ model families that are either globally comprehensive, national, multi-regional or sectoral. The criteria for submission included that the scenario is presented in a peer-reviewed journal accepted for publication no later than October 11th, 2021, or published in a report determined by the IPCC WG III Bureau to be eligible grey literature by the same date. The AR6 scenario database is documented in Annex III.2 of the Sixth Assessment Report of Working Group III. For the purpose of the assessment, scenarios have been grouped in various categories relating to, among other things, climate outcomes, overshoot, technology availability and policy assumptions. The AR6 Scenarios Database is jointly published by the Integrated Assessment Modeling Consortium & International Institute for Applied Systems Analysis. The data is available for download at the AR6 Scenario Explorer hosted by IIASA.<<< click here. For ease of use, the database is provided as multiple files: Filename Description Region coverage Uncompressed Size (MB) Standard files for assessment AR6_Scenarios_Database_World_v1.1.csv All data reported for the World region, primarily from integrated assessment models (IAMs), as well as variables from the climate assessment World only 353 AR6_Scenarios_Database_R5_regions_v1.1.csv All data reported and aggregated to R5 regions, primarily from IAMs. 5 global regions 847 AR6_Scenarios_Database_R6_regions_v1.1.csv All data reported and aggregated to R6 regions (as preferred by IPCC), primarily from IAMs. 6 global regions 408 AR6_Scenarios_Database_R10_regions_v1.1.csv All data reported and aggregated to R10 regions, primarily from IAMs. 10 global regions 1,266 AR6_Scenarios_Database_ISO3_v1.1.csv Ass data reported at the country level, primarily from national integrated assessment and energy systems models, but also IAMs for major countries. Country level 1,155 AR6_Scenarios_Database_metadata_indicators_v1.1.xlsx Wide range of categorical and numerical indicators calculated for each model-scenario. Primarily world data 3 Additional "climate assessment" files New in v1.1 AR6_Scenarios_Database_World_ALL_CLIMATE_v1.1.csv Same as World snapshot above, but with all the climate assessment data for MAGICC and FaIR models included World only 3,006 AR6_Climate_Diagnostics_CICERO-SCM_v1.1.csv Climate assessment data for the CICERO-SCM model World only 743 AR6_Climate_Diagnostics_metadata_indicators_v1.1.xlsx Full set of categorical and numerical indicators relating to the climate assessment, calculated for each model-scenario World only 2 AR6_historical_emissions.csv Historical CO2 and GHGs for world region used in climate assessment World only 0.01 The data is available for download at the AR6 Scenario Explorer hosted by IIASA. The license permits use of the scenario ensemble for scientific research and science communication, but restricts redistribution of substantial parts of the data. Please refer to the FAQ and legal code for more information. In addition to the data you may find more relevant information and cite one of the relevant chapters of the WG III report. If working with global or regional (R6, R10) data: Keywan Riahi, Roberto Schaeffer, et al. Mitigation Pathways Compatible with Long-Term Goals, in "Mitigation of Climate Change". Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, Geneva, 2022. url: http://www.ipcc.ch/report/sixth-assessment-report-working-group-3/ If working with national data (ISO region data): Franck Lecocq, Harald Winkler, et al. Mitigation and development pathways in the near- to mid-term, in "Mitigation of Climate Change". Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, Geneva, 2022. url: http://www.ipcc.ch/report/sixth-assessment-report-working-group-3/ If you find the metadata files particularly useful: Celine Guivarch, Elmar Kriegler, Joana Portugal Pereira, et al. Annex III: Scenarios and Modelling Methods, in "Mitigation of Climate Change". Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, Geneva, 2022. url: http://www.ipcc.ch/report/sixth-assessment-report-working-group-3/ Scenarios data also supports analysis in the Summary for Policy Makers, Technical Summary and Chapters 2, 5, 6, 7, 9, 10, 12 and 15. Climate assessment of global emissions pathways The climate assessment of the long-term global emissions scenarios was undertaken as part of the Chapter 3 assessment. The workflow is available at https://github.com/iiasa/climate-assessment and published in Kikstra et al. 2022. The IPCC Sixth Assessment Report WGIII climate assessment of mitigation pathways: from emissions to global temperatures. Geoscientific Model Development https://doi.org/10.5194/egusphere-2022-471. Scripts for this assessment are at https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.7304736 For these purposes, the full climate assessment data is provided, as documented in the table above. Release notes for v1.1 Following feedback and identification of some issues between the versions available to authors in preparation of the published report and the v1.0 public release, updates are made to v1.1.Changes made here are made with the intention of facilitating and improving the reproducibility of the IPCC report. There are no resulting corrections to the report and its findings, as these issues were identified by authors and manually addressed. Full list of release notes is published on the Downloads page https://data.ene.iiasa.ac.at/ar6/#/downloads The data is available for download at the AR6 Scenario Explorer hosted by IIASA.<<< click here.

Abstract. In every Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) Assessment cycle, a multitude of scenarios are assessed, with different scope and emphasis throughout the various Working Group reports and special reports, as well as their respective chapters. Within the reports, the ambition is to integrate knowledge on possible climate futures across the Working Groups and scientific research domains based on a small set of “framing pathways” such as the so-called representative concentration pathways (RCPs) in the Fifth IPCC Assessment Report (AR5) and the shared socioeconomic pathway (SSP) scenarios in the Sixth Assessment Report (AR6). This perspective, initiated by discussions at the IPCC Bangkok workshop in April 2023 on the “Use of Scenarios in AR6 and Subsequent Assessments”, is intended to serve as one of the community contributions to highlight the needs for the next generation of framing pathways that is being advanced under the Coupled Model Intercomparison Project (CMIP) umbrella, which will influence or even predicate the IPCC AR7 consideration of framing pathways. Here we suggest several policy research objectives that such a set of framing pathways should ideally fulfil, including mitigation needs for meeting the Paris Agreement objectives, the risks associated with carbon removal strategies, the consequences of delay in enacting that mitigation, guidance for adaptation needs, loss and damage, and for achieving mitigation in the wider context of societal development goals. Based on this context, we suggest that the next generation of climate scenarios for Earth system models should evolve towards representative emission pathways (REPs) and suggest key categories for such pathways. These framing pathways should address the most critical mitigation policy and adaptation plans that need to be implemented over the next 10 years. In our view, the most important categories are those relevant in the context of the Paris Agreement long-term goal, specifically an immediate action (low overshoot) 1.5 °C pathway and a delayed action (high overshoot) 1.5 °C pathway. Two other key categories are a pathway category approximately in line with current (as expressed by 2023) near- and long-term policy objectives, as well as a higher-emission category that is approximately in line with “current policies” (as expressed by 2023). We also argue for the scientific and policy relevance in exploring two “worlds that could have been”. One of these categories has high-emission trajectories well above what is implied by current policies and the other has very-low-emission trajectories which assume that global mitigation action in line with limiting warming to 1.5 °C without overshoot had begun in 2015. Finally, we note that the timely provision of new scientific information on pathways is critical to inform the development and implementation of climate policy. Under the Paris Agreement, for the second global stocktake, which will occur in 2028, and to inform subsequent development of nationally determined contributions (NDCs) up to 2040, scientific inputs are required by 2027. These needs should be carefully considered in the development timeline of community modelling activities, including those under CMIP7.

&lt;p&gt;To understand how global warming can be kept well-below 2&amp;#176;C and even 1.5&amp;#176;C, climate policy uses scenarios that describe how society could transform in order to reduce its greenhouse gas emissions. Such scenario are typically created with integrated assessment models that include a representation of the economy, and the energy, land-use, and industrial system. However, current climate change scenarios have a key weakness in that they typically focus on reaching specific climate goals in 2100 only. &lt;br&gt;&lt;br&gt;This choice results in risky pathways that delay action and seemingly inevitably rely on large quantities of carbon-dioxide removal after mid-century. Here we propose a framework that more closely reflects the intentions of the UN Paris Agreement. It focusses on reaching a peak in global warming with either stabilisation or reversal thereafter. This approach provides a critical extension of the widely used Shared Socioecononomic Pathways (SSP) framework and reveals a more diverse picture: an inevitable transition period of aggressive near-term climate action to reach carbon neutrality can be followed by a variety of long-term states. It allows policymakers to explicitly consider near-term climate strategies in the context of intergenerational equity and long-term sustainability.&lt;/p&gt;

AbstractGlobal emission reduction efforts continue to be insufficient to meet the temperature goal of the Paris Agreement1. This makes the systematic exploration of so-called overshoot pathways that temporarily exceed a targeted global warming limit before drawing temperatures back down to safer levels a priority for science and policy2–5. Here we show that global and regional climate change and associated risks after an overshoot are different from a world that avoids it. We find that achieving declining global temperatures can limit long-term climate risks compared with a mere stabilization of global warming, including for sea-level rise and cryosphere changes. However, the possibility that global warming could be reversed many decades into the future might be of limited relevance for adaptation planning today. Temperature reversal could be undercut by strong Earth-system feedbacks resulting in high near-term and continuous long-term warming6,7. To hedge and protect against high-risk outcomes, we identify the geophysical need for a preventive carbon dioxide removal capacity of several hundred gigatonnes. Yet, technical, economic and sustainability considerations may limit the realization of carbon dioxide removal deployment at such scales8,9. Therefore, we cannot be confident that temperature decline after overshoot is achievable within the timescales expected today. Only rapid near-term emission reductions are effective in reducing climate risks.

Résumé. Dans chaque cycle d'évaluation du GIEC, une multitude de scénarios sont évalués, avec une portée et une importance différentes dans les différents groupes de travail et rapports spéciaux et leurs chapitres respectifs. Dans les rapports, l'ambition est d'intégrer les connaissances sur les futurs climatiques possibles dans les groupes de travail et les domaines de recherche scientifique sur la base d'un petit ensemble de « voies de cadrage », telles que les voies dites RCP du cinquième rapport d'évaluation du GIEC (AR5) et les scénarios SSP-RCP dans le sixième rapport d'évaluation (AR6). Cette perspective, initiée par les discussions lors de l'atelier du GIEC à Bangkok en avril 2023 sur « l'utilisation des scénarios dans le RE6 et les évaluations ultérieures », est destinée à servir d'une des contributions de la communauté pour mettre en évidence les besoins pour la prochaine génération de voies de cadrage qui est avancée sous l'égide du CMIP pour une utilisation dans le RE7 du GIEC. Ici, nous suggérons un certain nombre d'objectifs de recherche politique qu'un tel ensemble de voies d'encadrement devrait idéalement remplir, y compris les besoins d'atténuation pour atteindre les objectifs de l'Accord de Paris, les risques associés aux stratégies d'élimination du carbone, les conséquences du retard dans la mise en œuvre de cette atténuation, des conseils pour les besoins d'adaptation, les pertes et les dommages, et pour la réalisation de l'atténuation dans le contexte plus large des objectifs de développement sociétal. Sur la base de ce contexte, nous suggérons que la prochaine génération de scénarios climatiques pour les modèles du système terrestre évolue vers des « voies d'émission représentatives » (REP) et suggérons des catégories clés pour ces voies. Ces « voies d'encadrement » devraient répondre aux besoins les plus critiques en matière de politique d'atténuation et d'adaptation au cours des 5 à 10 prochaines années. À notre avis, les catégories les plus importantes sont celles qui sont pertinentes dans le contexte de l'objectif à long terme de l'Accord de Paris, en particulier une action immédiate (dépassement faible) de 1,5 °C et une action retardée (dépassement élevé) de 1,5 °C. Deux autres catégories clés sont une catégorie de trajectoire approximativement conforme aux objectifs politiques actuels (tels qu'exprimés d'ici 2023) à court et à long terme, et une catégorie d'émissions plus élevées qui est approximativement conforme aux « politiques actuelles » (telles qu'exprimées d'ici 2023). Nous plaidons également en faveur de la pertinence scientifique et politique de l'exploration de deux « mondes qui auraient pu l'être ». L'une de ces catégories a des trajectoires d'émissions élevées bien au-dessus de ce que les politiques actuelles impliquent, et l'autre a des trajectoires d'émissions très faibles qui supposent que les mesures d'atténuation mondiales visant à limiter le réchauffement à 1,5 °C sans dépassement ont commencé en 2015. Enfin, nous notons que la fourniture en temps opportun de nouvelles informations scientifiques sur les voies est essentielle pour éclairer l'élaboration et la mise en œuvre de la politique climatique. Pour le deuxième bilan mondial dans le cadre de l'Accord de Paris en 2028, et pour éclairer le développement ultérieur des contributions déterminées au niveau national (CDN) jusqu'en 2040, des contributions scientifiques sont nécessaires bien avant 2028. Ces besoins doivent être soigneusement pris en compte dans le calendrier d'élaboration des activités de modélisation communautaire, y compris celles menées dans le cadre du CMIP7. Resumen. En cada ciclo de Evaluación del IPCC, se evalúan una multitud de escenarios, con diferentes alcances y énfasis a lo largo de los diversos Grupos de Trabajo e Informes Especiales y sus respectivos capítulos. Dentro de los informes, la ambición es integrar el conocimiento sobre posibles futuros climáticos en los Grupos de Trabajo y los dominios de investigación científica basados en un pequeño conjunto de "vías de encuadre", como las llamadas vías RCP del Quinto Informe de Evaluación del IPCC (AR5) y los escenarios SSP-RCP en el Sexto Informe de Evaluación (AR6). Esta perspectiva, iniciada por las discusiones en el taller del IPCC en Bangkok en abril de 2023 sobre el "Uso de escenarios en el IE6 y evaluaciones posteriores", pretende servir como una de las contribuciones de la comunidad para resaltar las necesidades de la próxima generación de vías de encuadre que se está avanzando bajo el paraguas del CMIP para su uso en el IE7 del IPCC. Aquí sugerimos una serie de objetivos de investigación de políticas que ese conjunto de vías de encuadre debería cumplir idealmente, incluidas las necesidades de mitigación para cumplir los objetivos del Acuerdo de París, los riesgos asociados con las estrategias de eliminación de carbono, las consecuencias del retraso en la promulgación de esa mitigación, la orientación para las necesidades de adaptación, las pérdidas y los daños, y para lograr la mitigación en el contexto más amplio de los objetivos de desarrollo social. Con base en este contexto, sugerimos que la próxima generación de escenarios climáticos para los Modelos del Sistema Terrestre evolucione hacia 'Vías de Emisión Representativas' (REP) y sugerimos categorías clave para tales vías. Estas "vías de encuadre" deberían abordar las políticas de mitigación y las necesidades de adaptación más críticas en los próximos 5–10 años. En nuestra opinión, las categorías más importantes son las relevantes en el contexto del objetivo a largo plazo del Acuerdo de París, específicamente una vía de acción inmediata (sobrepaso bajo) de 1,5 °C y una vía de acción retardada (sobrepaso alto) de 1,5 °C. Otras dos categorías clave son una categoría de vía aproximadamente en línea con los objetivos políticos actuales (expresados para 2023) a corto y largo plazo, y una categoría de emisiones más altas que está aproximadamente en línea con las "políticas actuales" (expresadas para 2023). También defendemos la relevancia científica y política de explorar dos "mundos que podrían haber sido". Una de estas categorías tiene trayectorias de altas emisiones muy por encima de lo que implican las políticas actuales, y la otra tiene trayectorias de muy bajas emisiones que asumen que la acción de mitigación global en línea con la limitación del calentamiento a 1.5 ° C sin sobrepasar había comenzado en 2015. Finalmente, observamos que el suministro oportuno de nueva información científica sobre las vías es fundamental para informar el desarrollo y la implementación de la política climática. Para el segundo Balance Global bajo el Acuerdo de París en 2028, y para informar el desarrollo posterior de las Contribuciones Determinadas a Nivel Nacional (NDC) hasta 2040, se requieren insumos científicos mucho antes de 2028. Estas necesidades deben considerarse cuidadosamente en el cronograma de desarrollo de las actividades de modelado comunitario, incluidas las del CMIP7. Abstract. In every IPCC Assessment cycle, a multitude of scenarios are assessed, with different scope and emphasis throughout the various Working Group and Special Reports and their respective chapters. Within the reports, the ambition is to integrate knowledge on possible climate futures across the Working Groups and scientific research domains based on a small set of ‘framing pathways’, such as the so-called RCP pathways from the Fifth IPCC Assessment report (AR5) and the SSP-RCP scenarios in the Sixth Assessment Report (AR6). This perspective, initiated by discussions at the IPCC Bangkok workshop in April 2023 on the “Use of Scenarios in AR6 and Subsequent Assessments”, is intended to serve as one of the community contributions to highlight needs for the next generation of framing pathways that is being advanced under the CMIP umbrella for use in the IPCC AR7. Here we suggest a number of policy research objectives that such a set of framing pathways should ideally fulfil, including mitigation needs for meeting the Paris Agreement objectives, the risks associated with carbon removal strategies, the consequences of delay in enacting that mitigation, guidance for adaptation needs, loss and damage, and for achieving mitigation in the wider context of Societal Development goals. Based on this context we suggest that the next generation of climate scenarios for Earth System Models should evolve towards ‘Representative Emission Pathways’ (REPs) and suggest key categories for such pathways. These ‘framing pathways’ should address the most critical mitigation policy and adaptation needs over the next 5–10 years. In our view the most important categories are those relevant in the context of the Paris Agreement long-term goal, specifically an immediate action (low overshoot) 1.5 °C pathway, and a delayed action (high overshoot) 1.5 °C pathway. Two other key categories are a pathway category approximately in line with current (as expressed by 2023) near- and long-term policy objectives, and a higher emissions category that is approximately in line with “current policies” (as expressed by 2023). We also argue for the scientific and policy relevance in exploring two ‘worlds that could have been’. One of these categories has high emission trajectories well above what is implied by current policies, and the other has very low emission trajectories that assume that global mitigation action in line with limiting warming to 1.5 °C without overshoot had begun in 2015. Finally, we note that timely provision of new scientific information on pathways is critical to inform the development and implementation of climate policy. For the second Global Stocktake under the Paris Agreement in 2028, and to inform subsequent development of Nationally Determined Contributions (NDCs) up to 2040, scientific inputs are required well before 2028. These needs should be carefully considered in the development timeline of community modelling activities including those under CMIP7. الملخص. في كل دورة تقييم للهيئة الحكومية الدولية المعنية بتغير المناخ، يتم تقييم العديد من السيناريوهات، مع نطاق وتركيز مختلفين في مختلف مجموعات العمل والتقارير الخاصة وفصولها. ضمن التقارير، يتمثل الطموح في دمج المعرفة حول المستقبل المناخي المحتمل عبر مجموعات العمل ومجالات البحث العلمي بناءً على مجموعة صغيرة من "مسارات التأطير"، مثل ما يسمى مسارات RCP من تقرير التقييم الخامس للهيئة الحكومية الدولية المعنية بتغير المناخ (AR5) وسيناريوهات SSP - RCP في تقرير التقييم السادس (AR6). يهدف هذا المنظور، الذي بدأته المناقشات في ورشة عمل الفريق الحكومي الدولي المعني بتغير المناخ في بانكوك في أبريل 2023 حول "استخدام السيناريوهات في التقرير التقييمي السادس والتقييمات اللاحقة"، إلى أن يكون أحد مساهمات المجتمع لتسليط الضوء على احتياجات الجيل القادم من مسارات التأطير التي يتم تطويرها تحت مظلة الفريق الحكومي الدولي المعني بتغير المناخ لاستخدامها في التقرير التقييمي السابع للفريق الحكومي الدولي المعني بتغير المناخ. نقترح هنا عددًا من أهداف أبحاث السياسات التي يجب أن تلبيها مجموعة مسارات التأطير هذه بشكل مثالي، بما في ذلك احتياجات التخفيف لتحقيق أهداف اتفاق باريس، والمخاطر المرتبطة باستراتيجيات إزالة الكربون، وعواقب التأخير في سن هذا التخفيف، وتوجيه احتياجات التكيف، والخسائر والأضرار، ولتحقيق التخفيف في السياق الأوسع لأهداف التنمية المجتمعية. بناءً على هذا السياق، نقترح أن يتطور الجيل التالي من سيناريوهات المناخ لنماذج النظام الأرضي نحو "مسارات الانبعاثات التمثيلية" (REPs) واقتراح الفئات الرئيسية لمثل هذه المسارات. يجب أن تتناول "مسارات التأطير" هذه أهم سياسات التخفيف واحتياجات التكيف على مدى السنوات الخمس إلى العشر القادمة. من وجهة نظرنا، فإن أهم الفئات هي تلك ذات الصلة في سياق الهدف طويل الأجل لاتفاق باريس، وتحديداً مسار الإجراء الفوري (التجاوز المنخفض) 1.5 درجة مئوية، ومسار الإجراء المتأخر (التجاوز العالي) 1.5 درجة مئوية. هناك فئتان رئيسيتان أخريان هما فئة المسار التي تتماشى تقريبًا مع أهداف السياسة الحالية (كما هو معبر عنه بحلول عام 2023) على المدى القريب والطويل، وفئة الانبعاثات الأعلى التي تتماشى تقريبًا مع "السياسات الحالية" (كما هو معبر عنه بحلول عام 2023). كما ندعو إلى الأهمية العلمية والسياسية لاستكشاف "عالمين كان من الممكن أن يكونا". واحدة من هذه الفئات لديها مسارات انبعاثات عالية أعلى بكثير مما تنطوي عليه السياسات الحالية، والأخرى لديها مسارات انبعاثات منخفضة للغاية تفترض أن إجراءات التخفيف العالمية بما يتماشى مع الحد من الاحترار إلى 1.5 درجة مئوية دون تجاوز قد بدأت في عام 2015. أخيرًا، نلاحظ أن توفير المعلومات العلمية الجديدة في الوقت المناسب حول المسارات أمر بالغ الأهمية لإثراء تطوير وتنفيذ سياسة المناخ. بالنسبة للتقييم العالمي الثاني بموجب اتفاقية باريس في عام 2028، وللإبلاغ عن التطوير اللاحق للمساهمات المحددة وطنيًا (NDCs) حتى عام 2040، هناك حاجة إلى مدخلات علمية قبل عام 2028 بوقت طويل. يجب النظر في هذه الاحتياجات بعناية في الجدول الزمني لتطوير أنشطة النمذجة المجتمعية بما في ذلك تلك الموجودة في إطار CMIP7.