The DOI matches its Crossref record.
Summary for Policymakers
Abstract
Introduction The Working Group III contribution to the IPCC's Fifth Assessment Report (AR5) assesses literature on the scientific, technological, environmental, economic and social aspects of mitigation of climate change. It builds upon the Working Group III contribution to the IPCC's Fourth Assessment Report (AR4), the Special Report on Renewable Energy Sources and Climate Change Mitigation (SRREN) and previous reports and incorporates subsequent new findings and research. The report also assesses mitigation options at different levels of governance and in different economic sectors, and the societal implications of different mitigation policies, but does not recommend any particular option for mitigation. This Summary for Policymakers (SPM) follows the structure of the Working Group III report. The narrative is supported by a series of highlighted conclusions which, taken together, provide a concise summary. The basis for the SPM can be found in the chapter sections of the underlying report and in the Technical Summary (TS). References to these are given in square brackets. The degree of certainty in findings in this assessment, as in the reports of all three Working Groups, is based on the author teams' evaluations of underlying scientific understanding and is expressed as a qualitative level of confidence (from very low to very high) and, when possible, probabilistically with a quantified likelihood (from exceptionally unlikely to virtually certain). Confidence in the validity of a finding is based on the type, amount, quality, and consistency of evidence (e.g., data, mechanistic understanding, theory, models, expert judgment) and the degree of agreement. Probabilistic estimates of quantified measures of uncertainty in a finding are based on statistical analysis of observations or model results, or both, and expert judgment. Where appropriate, findings are also formulated as statements of fact without using uncertainty qualifiers. Within paragraphs of this summary, the confidence, evidence, and agreement terms given for a bolded finding apply to subsequent statements in the paragraph, unless additional terms are provided. Approaches to climate change mitigation Mitigation is a human intervention to reduce the sources or enhance the sinks of greenhouse gases .
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cited by
Morton, T. A., Rabinovich, A., Marshall, D., & Bretschneider, P. (2011) · Global Environmental Change · doi:10.1016/j.gloenvcha.2010.09.013 · Cited by 391
Differences between carbon budget estimates unravelled
Rogelj, J., Schaeffer, M., Friedlingstein, P., Gillett, N. P., van Vuuren, D. P., Riahi, K., Allen, M., & Knutti, R. (2016) · Nature Climate Change · doi:10.1038/nclimate2868 · Cited by 288
Effective Communication of Uncertainty in the IPCC Reports
Budescu, D. V., Por, H.-H., & Broomell, S. B. (2012) · Climatic Change · doi:10.1007/s10584-011-0330-3 · Cited by 261
Broome, J. (2005) · Journal of Political Philosophy · doi:10.1111/j.1467-9760.2005.00230.x · Cited by 81
Mental Health Impacts of Climate Change: Perspectives for the ED Clinician
Nicholas, P. K., Breakey, S., White, B. P., Brown, M. J., Fanuele, J., Starodub, R., & Ros, A. V. (2020) · Journal of Emergency Nursing · doi:10.1016/j.jen.2020.05.014 · Cited by 34
Metadata
- Venue
- Climate Change 2014: Mitigation of Climate Change
- Publisher
- Cambridge University Press
- Published
- 2015-01-26
- Pages
- 1-30
- OpenAlex
- W4252018107
- Cited by
- 256
- References
- 0
- FWCI
- 168.25
- Type
- book chapter
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
How to cite
Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.
- This page
- CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Summary for Policymakers. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1017/cbo9781107415416.005
- The paper
- Summary for Policymakers. (2015). Climate Change 2014: Mitigation of Climate Change. https://doi.org/10.1017/cbo9781107415416.005
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.