Rethinking the science-policy interface for chemicals, waste, and pollution: Challenging core assumptions

• Negotiations for a new science-policy interface aim to complement similar bodies for climate change and biodiversity. • Existing models of science-policy panels are ill-suited to address unique aspects of chemicals and waste issues. • Policy uptake is a key feature of the new panel’s design. • Participation by stakeholders is vital, but industry input requires safeguards. • Further research on chemicals and waste issues will be able to contribute to the future panel’s reports. Negotiations are ongoing but fraught for designing a new global science-policy panel for chemicals and waste pollution. In this Perspectives article, we challenge three assumptions guiding these negotiations. First, the new panel should resemble the existing panels of the Inter-governmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) and the Inter-governmental Science-Policy Platform on Biodiversity and Ecosystem Services (IPBES). Second, the creation of a new panel will automatically carry authority within policymaking. Third, the participation of industry is crucial without special consideration for its interests. Further, we identify three steps to enhance the panel’s relevance and influence.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
Global Environmental Change
Published
2025-04-08
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.gloenvcha.2025.102995
Citations
5
Primary Topic
Environmental Justice and Health Disparities
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
21.01
Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

Rethinking the science-policy interface for chemicals, waste, and pollution: Challenging core assumptions

Anwesha Borthakur, Alice B. M. Vadrot, Henrik Selin, Moritz Petersmann et al.
5 citations
Global Environmental Change
Environmental Justice and Health Disparities
21.01
article

Rethinking the science-policy interface for chemicals, waste, and pollution: Challenging core assumptions

Anwesha Borthakur, Alice B. M. Vadrot, Henrik Selin, Moritz Petersmann, D. A. Barry, Tim Forsyth, Hannah Hughes, Silke Beck, Yixian Sun, Jen Iris Allan, Angeliki Balayannis, Anita Hardon, Kevin C. Elliott, Philip Macnaghten, Fiona Kinninburgh
article en
5 citations

Abstract

• Negotiations for a new science-policy interface aim to complement similar bodies for climate change and biodiversity. • Existing models of science-policy panels are ill-suited to address unique aspects of chemicals and waste issues. • Policy uptake is a key feature of the new panel’s design. • Participation by stakeholders is vital, but industry input requires safeguards. • Further research on chemicals and waste issues will be able to contribute to the future panel’s reports. Negotiations are ongoing but fraught for designing a new global science-policy panel for chemicals and waste pollution. In this Perspectives article, we challenge three assumptions guiding these negotiations. First, the new panel should resemble the existing panels of the Inter-governmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) and the Inter-governmental Science-Policy Platform on Biodiversity and Ecosystem Services (IPBES). Second, the creation of a new panel will automatically carry authority within policymaking. Third, the participation of industry is crucial without special consideration for its interests. Further, we identify three steps to enhance the panel’s relevance and influence.

Global Environmental ChangeVol. 92
University of Vienna (AT), University of Lisbon (PT), Aberystwyth University (GB), University of Eastern Finland (FI), Finland University (FI), Laser Scan Engineering (United Kingdom) (GB), Instituto de Ciências Sociais da Universidade de Lisboa (PT), University College London (GB), University of Bath (GB), Cardiff University (GB), Michigan State University (US), Wageningen University & Research (NL), KU Leuven (BE)
Openalex Percentile: Top 1%
Environmental Justice and Health Disparities
21.01
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.