Published February 5, 2024 | Version v4
Preprint Open

Role of science and scientists in public debates around environmental policy negotiations: the case of nature restoration and agrochemical regulation in the European Union

Creators

  • 1. 1) UFZ - Helmholtz Centre for Environmental Research, a) Department of Ecosystem Services, Leipzig, Germany AND 2) German Centre for integrative biodiversity research (iDiv) Halle-Jena-Leipzig, Leipzig, Germany
  • 2. 1) UFZ - Helmholtz Centre for Environmental Research, a) Department of Ecosystem Services, Leipzig, Germany AND 2) German Centre for integrative biodiversity research (iDiv) Halle-Jena-Leipzig, Leipzig, Germany AND 4) 4) Friedrich Schiller University Jena, Institute of Biodiversity, Jena, Germany
  • 3. 4) University of Helsinki, Helsinki Sustainability Center, Helsinki, Finland
  • 4. 5) University of Duisburg-Essen, Faculty of Biology, Aquatic Ecology, Essen, Germany
  • 5. 6) Finnish Museum of Natural History, University of Helsinki, Helsinki, Finland
  • 6. 2) German Centre for integrative biodiversity research (iDiv) Halle-Jena-Leipzig, Leipzig, Germany AND 7) Institute of Biology / Geobotany and Botanical Garden, Martin Luther University Halle-Wittenberg, Halle, Germany
  • 7. ROR icon Helmholtz Centre for Environmental Research
  • 8. ROR icon German Center for Integrative Biodiversity Research
  • 9. ROR icon Friedrich Schiller University Jena
  • 10. 1) UFZ - Helmholtz Centre for Environmental Research, a) Department of Ecosystem Services, Leipzig, Germany AND ; 2) German Centre for Integrative Biodiversity Research (iDiv) Halle-Jena-Leipzig, Leipzig, Germany AND 8) Friedrich Schiller University Jena, Institute of Biodiversity, Jena, Germany
  • 11. 9) Museum für Naturkunde - Leibniz-Institut für Evolutions- und Biodiversitätsforschung (MfN), Berlin, Germany
  • 12. 1b UFZ – Helmholtz Centre for Environmental Research, Department of Economics, Leipzig, Germany AND 8 Martin Luther University Halle-Witenberg, Faculty for Law and Economics, Hall/S., Germany
  • 13. 1) UFZ - Helmholtz Centre for Environmental Research, Leipzig, Germany; AND 2) German Centre for Integrative Biodiversity Research (iDiv) Halle-Jena-Leipzig, Leipzig, Germany ; c) Department of Physiological Diversity, d) Department of Physiological Diversity, Leipzig, Germany
  • 14. 10) University of Rostock, Germany
  • 15. 11) Joint Research Centre (JRC) of the European Commission, Directorate for Sustainable Resources, Ispra, VA 21027, Italy
  • 16. 2) German Centre for integrative biodiversity research (iDiv) Halle-Jena-Leipzig, Leipzig, Germany AND
  • 17. Udall Center for Studies in Public Policy & School of Natural Resources and the Environment, University of Arizona, Tucson AZ, USA;
  • 18. 13) Institute of Nature Conservation Polish Academy of Science, Krakow, Poland AND 14) Faculty of Experimental Sciences, Universidad de Huelva, Huelva, Spain
  • 19. 1) UFZ - Helmholtz Centre for Environmental Research c) Department of Physiological Diversity, Leipzig, Germany AND 2) German Centre for Integrative Biodiversity Research (iDiv) Halle-Jena-Leipzig, Leipzig, Germany AND 5) Institute of Biology / Geobotany and Botanical Garden, Martin Luther University Halle-Wittenberg, Halle, Germany AND 15) Institute of Biological Sciences, University of the Philippines in Los Baños (UPLB), Laguna, Philippines
  • 20. 16) INRAE-DYNAFOR, Castanet-Tolosan, France
  • 21. 15) Ciimar and Department of Biology, faculty of Sciences, University of Porto, Portugal
  • 22. 7) Friedrich Schiller University Jena, Institute of Biodiversity, Jena, Germany; AND 17) Leibniz Institute for Vegetable and Ornamental Crops (IGZ), Großbeeren, Germany
  • 23. 1) UFZ - Helmholtz Centre for Environmental Research, b) Department of Environmental Politics, Leipzig, Germany
  • 24. 1) UFZ - Helmholtz Centre for Environmental Research, a) Department of Ecosystem Services, Leipzig, Germany AND 2) German Centre for integrative biodiversity research (iDiv) Halle-Jena-Leipzig, Leipzig, Germany AND 3) Friedrich Schiller University Jena, Institute of Biodiversity, Jena, Germany

Description

The scientific community has an important role in intervening when misinformation is used in policy-related debates, especially when pseudo-scientific arguments are being used. This is a common problem with regards to environmental policies.

This paper focuses on the case of the EU’s Green Deal, and specifically the Sustainable Use Regulation (SUR) and Nature Restoration Law (NRL). We compare eight of the claims made against the SUR and NRL with the scientific evidence, demonstrating why, based on science, the NRL and SUR are essential.

We summarize the path of policy developments and the impact of the Open Letter published in 2023, signed by 6000 scientists.

Based on these experiences we recommend scientists to be more proactive in relevant policy debates, debunking misinformation where needed. We recommend policy makers to use the science, and involve scientists, in setting ambitious environmental policies. The call made by 6000 scientists, to proceed with the Green Deal, remains valid. 

Notes

The claims and counterclaims presented in the paper (preprint - version 5.2.2024) are based on those published in an open letter. The initial version (preprint 1) was published on 16.6.2023 and accompanied by 3339 signatures. The second version was published on 9.7.2023 with 6000 signatures by scientists. These are available as previous preprint versions, alongside the list of signatories.

Files

Peer et al 2024 Role of science in public debates around NRL SUR in EU_5.2.2024.pdf

Files (417.6 kB)