| Category |
Text Publication |
| Reference Category |
Journals |
| DOI |
10.1002/pan3.70064
|
Licence  |
|
| Title (Primary) |
Role of science and scientists in public environmental policy debates: The case of EU agrochemical and Nature Restoration Regulations |
| Author |
Pe'er, G.; Kachler, J.; Herzon, I.; Hering, D.; Arponen, A.; Bosco, L.; Bruelheide, H.; Finch, E.A.; Friedrichs-Manthey, M.; Hagedorn, G.; Hansjürgens, B.
; Ladouceur, E.; Lakner, S.; Liquete, C.; López-Hoffman, L.; Sousa Pinto, I.; Robuchon, M.; Selva, N.; Settele, J.; Sirami, C.; van Dam, N.M.; Wittmer, H.
; Bonn, A.
|
| Source Titel |
People and Nature |
| Year |
2025 |
| Department |
OEKON; NSF; UPOL; iDiv; BioP |
| Language |
englisch |
| Topic |
T5 Future Landscapes |
| Supplements |
https://besjournals.onlinelibrary.wiley.com/action/downloadSupplement?doi=10.1002%2Fpan3.70064&file=pan370064-sup-0001-Supinfo01.docx |
| Keywords |
food security; land-use conflicts; misinformation; Nature Restoration Regulation; policy; science policy; sustainable agriculture; Sustainable Use Regulation |
| Abstract |
- Halting biodiversity loss, mitigating global warming
and maintaining the long-term viability of rural and urban areas
requires urgent policy action. However, environmental policies often
trigger resistance and highly polarised public debates, with some actors
employing pseudo-scientific claims. This raises concern about the
increasing impact of misinformation on policymaking.
- Here, we analyse the role of science and scientists
in the public debate around two pieces of legislation that were proposed
in 2022 by the European Commission as part of the Green Deal, namely
the Nature Restoration Regulation (NRR) and the Sustainable Use
Regulation (SUR) of plant protection products.
- First, we examine key claims against these two
legislative proposals and contrast them with scientific evidence. We
show that these claims fail to consider ample scientific evidence that
restoring nature and reducing the use of agrochemicals are essential for
maintaining long-term agricultural production and enhancing food
security. Critics further failed to acknowledge that the NRR and SUR may
generate new employment opportunities and stimulate innovation, with
high return rates and multiple beneficiaries across society, fostering a
transition to sustainable production and consumption models.
- Second, we examine how the publication of an open
letter, signed by 6000 scientists, may have influenced the public
debate. We contrast the role that scientific evidence played in the fate
of the NRR, which was adopted, against the fate of the SUR, which was
rejected by the European Parliament.
- We draw lessons from these two cases that illustrate
the global tension between environmental protection and economic-driven
interests to spread misinformation. We argue that scientists should play
an important role in making scientific evidence more accessible and
available to the general public and policymakers for informed
decision-making. We recommend that scientists be proactive and unbiased
in providing information and data and that policymakers use scientific
evidence and engage scientists in developing much needed, well informed
environmental policies.
|
| Persistent UFZ Identifier |
https://www.ufz.de/index.php?en=20939&ufzPublicationIdentifier=30943 |
Pe'er, G., Kachler, J., Herzon, I., Hering, D., Arponen, A., Bosco, L., Bruelheide, H., Finch, E.A., Friedrichs-Manthey, M., Hagedorn, G., Hansjürgens, B., Ladouceur, E., Lakner, S., Liquete, C., López-Hoffman, L., Sousa Pinto, I., Robuchon, M., Selva, N., Settele, J., Sirami, C., van Dam, N.M., Wittmer, H., Bonn, A. (2025):
Role of science and scientists in public environmental policy debates: The case of EU agrochemical and Nature Restoration Regulations
People Nat. 10.1002/pan3.70064 |
