A recent study conducted by a global team of researchers, including Professor Ian Cousins and Associate Professor Marlene Ågerstrand from the Department of Environmental Science, sheds light on the risks associated with biased industry participation.

Associate Professor Marlene Ågerstrand. Photo: Private

The United Nations Environment Assembly, in March 2022, mandated the creation of a science-policy panel to enhance efforts in managing chemicals and waste while preventing pollution. An open-ended working group (OEWG) was subsequently formed to propose the establishment of the panel, with the aim of completing its formation by the end of 2024. The OEWG is scheduled to convene in Nairobi from December 11-15 to outline the structure of the Science-Policy Panel.

Professor Ian Cousins. Photo: Niklas Björling

The research underscores the importance of addressing conflicts of interest to maintain the panel's credibility and prevent incompatible outcomes. The study identifies common tactics employed by the industry to cast doubt on scientific findings and emphasizes the need for vigilant measures to safeguard the panel's independence.

Key recommendations from the study include:
1.    Rigorous conflict of interest provisions: The study calls for the definition and strict enforcement of conflict of interest provisions. Individuals with conflicts of interest should be barred from participating in decision-making processes but may contribute as observers.
2.    Independent audits: The researchers advocate for independent audits to review compliance with conflict of interest provisions. These audits would also ensure that the panel's outputs adhere to transparency, impartiality, credibility, and scientific robustness, as mandated by UNEA Resolution 5/8.
3.    Transparency advocacy: The Science-Policy Panel is urged to embrace transparency by promoting FAIR (Findable, Accessible, Interoperable, and Reusable) and CARE (Comprehensive, Appropriate, Relevant, and Timely) principles for scientific data management and stewardship.
4.    Distinguishing conflicts: The study emphasizes the need to differentiate between undesirable conflicts of financial or political competing interests and legitimate biases, urging the panel to make this distinction clear.

Understanding conflict of interest

The article provides a clear definition of conflict of interest, emphasizing that it refers to professional, financial, or other interests that could compromise an individual's objectivity or provide unfair advantages. Failure to manage conflicts of interest in the Science-Policy Panel could result in conflicting outcomes, delayed solutions, and eroded trust in science and scientists.

Tactics for manufacturing doubt

The study exposes over two dozen strategies employed to counter scientific evidence or promote industry-favorable narratives. Tactics range from criticizing study designs and intimidating scientists to publishing misinformation and lobbying policymakers. By highlighting these tactics, the researchers aim to create awareness and mitigate their impact on the panel's work.

Policy brief on conflicts of interest in the assessment of chemicals, waste and pollution. Source: Baltic Sea Centre, Stockholm University

The research was facilitated by the International Panel on Chemical Pollution (IPCP), an independent assembly of academic scientists established in 2008. IPCP aims to provide an objective assessment of research on chemical pollution and waste, contributing to science policy guidance at regional and global levels.

As the UN prepares to establish the Science-Policy Panel in Nairobi, the findings of this study serve as a crucial guide to ensure the panel's effectiveness, credibility, and independence in addressing the challenges of chemical management and pollution prevention on a global scale.

Read the policy brief based on this study:

Policy brief on conflict of interest in high-level decision-making (137 Kb)