The federal government’s decision to stop funding travel for Canadian scientists contributing to international climate change research is “absolutely appalling,” Green Party Leader Elizabeth May said.
The Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) relies on scientists and experts across the world (including Canada) to produce in-depth reports assessing the causes, impacts and possible solutions to climate change. This body of work guides international climate negotiations.
“The IPCC reports and the IPCC itself represents the largest peer review process in the history of science,” May, who is co-leader of the Greens with Jonathan Pedneault, said in a phone interview with Canada’s National Observer.
“Every line of the IPCC report has to go through an excruciating process of achieving international consensus between and among scientists, and some of those scientists are driven by their governments, like Saudi Arabia, to block progress,” May said. It’s important to have Canadian climate scientists in the room with their peers to push for more ambitious language, she added.
In early 2025, Environment and Climate Change Canada (ECCC) decided it would not commit to providing long-term travel funding for all academics selected to author the IPCC’s next major report, according to an emailed statement from department spokesperson Samantha Bayard.
“This is mind boggling stupidity,” May said.
“You could imagine Pierre Poilievre doing it because he doesn't think there is a climate crisis, but the Liberals ostensibly claim they understand there is one even though they build pipelines and approve wasteful carbon capture and storage … this is beyond stupid,” she said.
Compared to the $34-billion Trans Mountain pipeline expansion, $680,000 for travel over several years is mere “breadcrumbs spilt at the cabinet table,” May said.
Prime Minister Mark Carney did not respond to a request for comment.
The decision to stop funding travel for IPCC work is “disappointing,” said Chris Bataille, IPCC author and professor at Simon Fraser University, in a phone interview with Canada’s National Observer.
“This just seems like a weird cost cutting measure that was not taken in full consideration of the diplomatic input,” he said.
“When I told colleagues, specifically from Australia, that my travel wasn't funded last December, they were quite shocked,” Bataille said.
“This is not normal for a G7 country, including the US at this point in time.”
Canada gets a lot of value out of its IPCC authors for the low price of approximately $680,000, Bataille said.
“We represent Canada at all these meetings, we bring it back, we engage with the media, we engage with policymakers and we do this voluntarily,” he said.
He estimated economy airfare and hotels cost between $15,000 and $20,000 out of pocket for experts to attend the four or five in-person international meetings.
ECCC’s statement said IPCC authors who are not government employees can access funding through their own institutions — like universities and think tanks — or through research grants and private foundations.
“It is expected that most, if not all Canadians selected by the IPCC as authors will be able to be actively involved in the proceedings of the IPCC using those funds,” reads the department’s statement.
ECCC also said it will consider funding authors who do not have sufficient access to other sources of funding.
“The Government of Canada is committed to ensuring the world-leading climate scientists are well represented where necessary,” it reads.
Bataille said it can be “virtually impossible” to secure travel funding from other sources.
“It would have to basically come from your savings or from some sort of research fund if you've got it,” he said, adding universities would usually rather fund new students or teaching assistants than travel expenses.
“The younger and mid-career researchers who might not be able to afford to participate, they're going to be the senior researchers, the advisors to policy makers of the 2030s, 40s, 50s,” Bataille said.
Natasha Bulowski / Local Journalism Initiative / Canada’s National Observer
Comments
Still in doubt about the Liberals' bona fides on climate? Here you go.
Tens of billions of dollars on fossil-fuel subsidies, no problem. But let's cut the relatively miniscule travel budgets for scientists.
Who made this decision and why? Faceless bureaucrats at Environment Canada? Or politicians?
That said, in this age of Zoom, etc., you would think scientists could find ways to communicate that do not require air travel.