Global knowledge assessments such as the IPCC play a key role for our understanding of climate change, as well as the direction of policy to combat it. Thus, IPCC’s assessments have a framing effect that influences the potential and direction of sustainability transformations. The IPCC has been criticized for its natural scientific dominance which has favored a narrow set of solutions that do not address the root causes of co2 emissions, such as growth. As a consequence of this criticism there have been enduring calls for the inclusion of a broader set of perspectives in the IPCC. In this paper we present two different pathways for increased inclusion and influence of the IPCC that derive from current theoretical debates. We use these two perspectives to explore IPCC introduction of early career scientists, the role they play in the organization, and how this role is to be understood in terms of creating an opportunity for institutional change and sustainability transformations. The introduction of early career scientists partly divert from IPCC’s previous strategy to reach sustainability by enrolling world leading scientists to 'speak truth to power'. The change can be seen in the light of a growing work load, but it also involves the inclusion of a new group and the opportunity to, at least partly meet the criticism regarding lack of inclusion. Empirically, the study analyze interviews, documents, and scientific journal articles. Theoretically, the study elaborate on how the socialization process can enhance deliberative capability for sustainability transformations.
Implications for sustainability transformations: Global knowledge assessments does not per se result in sustainability transformations. Knowledge assessments may be organized in ways that either prevent or enable transformative changes. Due to its framing effect, a reflective and deliberate organization, execution, and use of knowledge assessments is crucial to enable future sustainability transformations.