Is Indigenous Knowledge meaningfully represented in the IPCC AR6? A bibliometric meta-analysis

In recent global climatic and environmental reports, Indigenous Knowledges (IK) are recognised as essential to comprehending social-ecological systems and multi-scalar climate-society relationships. However, IK and Indigenous Peoples (IP) continue to be mostly excluded from important and powerful processes such as the UNFCCC and the IPCC reports. In the current (AR7) cycle of the IPCC, it is important to understand whether the last cycle (AR6) meaningfully engaged with IK and IP. Here, we present a multi-tiered bibliometric analysis of the literature cited in the AR6 report (n=46,145 citations), through which we identified citations with abstracts mentioning IK (n=482). Additionally, through exploring this cluster of IK citations, we address enduring questions around disciplinary bias, geographical bias, and academic journal bias. Finally, we categorise IK citations using two indexes of equitable knowledge production. This highlights the different types of relationships (from extractive to co-productive) that guided the cited papers’ research process. Our findings highlight that despite advocacy, promises, and assurances, IK is mostly excluded from the IPCC AR6 report (1.04% of scholarly literature cited). We also call attention to the fact that biophysical sciences, elite journals, and authors from the Global North are dominant in the IK that is included. Finally, we identify some key points of intervention for AR7, which include strategic choices for chapter authors, a focus on Working Group I (climate science), and the inclusion of chapter-scale knowledge justice audits.