Brandon Jones, president of AGU and a program director at the National Science Foundation, emphasized the importance of continuing the scientific discourse on climate change. “It’s incumbent on us to ensure our communities, our neighbors, our children are all protected and prepared for the mounting risks of climate change,” Jones stated. He described the partnership as a vital channel for researchers to unite and address the challenges posed by climate change.
The National Climate Assessment serves as a thorough evaluation of prevailing climate science and assesses the impacts of climate change across the U.S., while also identifying potential adaptation strategies. With five editions published since 2000, the sixth edition had been anticipated for early 2028.
The AGU and AMS made clear that their collaborative effort would not substitute the federally mandated report, which stems from the Global Change Research Act of 1990. Following the dismissal of the NCA authors, the administration cited a re-evaluation of the report’s scope as the reason behind their decision, coinciding with budgetary cuts that affected staff and funding in the U.S. Global Change Research Program.
As the situation unfolds, the scientific community remains resolute in its mission to deliver critical insights and data necessary for confronting climate change, even as political dynamics create obstacles. The White House has yet to comment on the matter, leaving stakeholders eager for clarity on future climate assessment initiatives.
The National Climate Assessment serves as a thorough evaluation of prevailing climate science and assesses the impacts of climate change across the U.S., while also identifying potential adaptation strategies. With five editions published since 2000, the sixth edition had been anticipated for early 2028.
The AGU and AMS made clear that their collaborative effort would not substitute the federally mandated report, which stems from the Global Change Research Act of 1990. Following the dismissal of the NCA authors, the administration cited a re-evaluation of the report’s scope as the reason behind their decision, coinciding with budgetary cuts that affected staff and funding in the U.S. Global Change Research Program.
As the situation unfolds, the scientific community remains resolute in its mission to deliver critical insights and data necessary for confronting climate change, even as political dynamics create obstacles. The White House has yet to comment on the matter, leaving stakeholders eager for clarity on future climate assessment initiatives.
