Keep up With the Science: Professor Says Climate Risk Assessment Must Be Regular

‘The science and the climate change rapidly. New information comes to light almost every day,’ said Monash University professor Christian Jakob.

A drone view shows the floodwater impact that affected the Rochester township in Rochester, Australia, on Jan. 9, 2024. Diego Fedele/Getty Images

A Monash University professor has proposed that Australia’s national Climate Risk Assessment be conducted regularly to stay relevant amid rapidly evolving climate science.

On Sept. 15, the Labor government unveiled the country’s first national Climate Risk Assessment, describing it as a “comprehensive” analysis of climate impacts on society, despite being released months later than planned.

The report highlighted a series of alarming figures.

It estimates that rising seas could directly affect 1.5 million Australians and warned that the annual economic cost of natural disasters may climb to $40 billion (US$26.6 billion) by 2050.

While welcomed by climate change advocates, the report has drawn criticism over its nature and timing.

Shadow Home Affairs Minister Andrew Hastie alleged that the report was climate alarmism “put together by politically compromised, economically insulated public servants who are running cover for Labor.”

Nationals Senator Matt Canavan called the report a “scare campaign,” while denouncing it as an abuse of taxpayer money.

While the government has not disclosed the cost of the assessment, some media reports have estimated that its pricetag was close to $23 million.

Professor Calls for More Regular Release of Climate Risk Assessment

During a recent parliamentary inquiry, Monash University professor Christian Jakob, deputy director of the ARC Centre of Excellence for Climate Extremes, said the assessment should not be a one-off.

“The science and the climate change rapidly. New information comes to light almost every day,” he told the Environment and Communications References Committee.

“Hence, we need this process to be continuous with reports released on a regular basis, updated with the latest information.”

Jakob suggested major reports could be released every four years, with shorter, targeted updates in between on areas such as economic impacts or decarbonisation, similar to the approach taken by the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change.

Shortcomings in the Report

At the same time, Jakob pointed out that the report has information gaps. One example is that it does not cover the risks associated with decarbonisation.

“What I mean is that our net-zero 2050 economy will be highly weather-dependent,” he said.

“The weather will be the fuel for our economy, because the electricity we generate will come from the weather, and we need to assess opportunities and risks since that weather and the resources it provides are changing as the climate is changing.

He added that the reliability of Australia’s carbon sink had also not been assessed.

Solar panels are seen at a solar farm on the northern outskirts of Canberra, Australia, on June 15, 2022. AAP Image/Mick Tsikas

Australia’s Sovereign Litigation Risk

Meanwhile, University of Melbourne associate professor Ben Neville, deputy director of the Melbourne Climate Futures, noted that the report omitted Australia’s potential exposure to sovereign litigation over climate change.

He referred to a July 2025 advisory opinion from the International Court of Justice, which suggested states could be held liable for failing to meet international obligations to limit temperature rises to 1.5 degrees Celsius (pdf).

“This means that the Australian government, and thus Australian taxpayers, could be on the hook for the climate damage caused to other nations by companies operating in Australia,” he said.

Neville recommended that future climate risk assessment reports should include “attribution science” linking emissions from individual firms to specific events.