IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/spr/ieaple/v24y2024i2d10.1007_s10784-024-09642-0.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Pathways of scientific input into intergovernmental negotiations: a new agreement on marine biodiversity

Author

Listed:
  • Ina Tessnow-von Wysocki

    (University of Vienna)

  • Alice B. M. Vadrot

    (University of Vienna)

Abstract

A new legally binding agreement for the conservation and sustainable use of marine biodiversity beyond national jurisdiction (BBNJ) was adopted by consensus on 19th June, 2023. Setting new regulations and filling regulatory gaps of the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea are expected to be informed by “best available science”. It is critical to understand how science entered the negotiations, which defined the global scientific knowledge base of decision-makers. This paper presents various pathways over which scientific input entered the BBNJ negotiations, using empirical data, collected through collaborative event ethnography, including participant observation and semi-structured interviews at the BBNJ negotiation site. Results show that scientific input in the BBNJ negotiations was not systematic and transparent but dependent on (a) available national scientific capacity, (b) financial resources, (c) established contacts and (d) active involvement of actors. Results of the study call for formalised science-policy interfaces, initiated by the UN Secretariat to guarantee a global knowledge base for decision-making. Keywords: international negotiations; United Nations; marine biodiversity; BBNJ; ocean protection; science-policy interfaces.

Suggested Citation

  • Ina Tessnow-von Wysocki & Alice B. M. Vadrot, 2024. "Pathways of scientific input into intergovernmental negotiations: a new agreement on marine biodiversity," International Environmental Agreements: Politics, Law and Economics, Springer, vol. 24(2), pages 325-348, September.
    • Handle: RePEc:spr:ieaple:v:24:y:2024:i:2:d:10.1007_s10784-024-09642-0
    DOI: 10.1007/s10784-024-09642-0
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://link.springer.com/10.1007/s10784-024-09642-0
    File Function: Abstract
    Download Restriction: Access to the full text of the articles in this series is restricted.
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1007/s10784-024-09642-0?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. David Driesen, 2004. "Science and Regime Formation," International Environmental Agreements: Politics, Law and Economics, Springer, vol. 4(1), pages 100-102, March.
    2. Lisa M. Campbell & Shannon Hagerman & Noella J. Gray, 2014. "Producing Targets for Conservation: Science and Politics at the Tenth Conference of the Parties to the Convention on Biological Diversity," Global Environmental Politics, MIT Press, vol. 14(3), pages 41-63, August.
    3. Nuria Castells & Jerry Ravetz, 2001. "Science and Policy in International Environmental Agreements: Lessons from the European experience on Transboundary Air Pollution," International Environmental Agreements: Politics, Law and Economics, Springer, vol. 1(4), pages 405-425, December.
    4. Katharina Rietig, 2014. "‘Neutral’ experts? How input of scientific expertise matters in international environmental negotiations," Policy Sciences, Springer;Society of Policy Sciences, vol. 47(2), pages 141-160, June.
    5. Haas, Peter M., 1992. "Introduction: epistemic communities and international policy coordination," International Organization, Cambridge University Press, vol. 46(1), pages 1-35, January.
    6. Noella J. Gray & Rebecca L. Gruby & Lisa M. Campbell, 2014. "Boundary Objects and Global Consensus: Scalar Narratives of Marine Conservation in the Convention on Biological Diversity," Global Environmental Politics, MIT Press, vol. 14(3), pages 64-83, August.
    7. Heike Schroeder & Heather Lovell, 2012. "The role of non-nation-state actors and side events in the international climate negotiations," Climate Policy, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 12(1), pages 23-37, January.
    8. Rolf Lidskog & Göran Sundqvist, 2015. "When Does Science Matter? International Relations Meets Science and Technology Studies," Global Environmental Politics, MIT Press, vol. 15(1), pages 1-20, February.
    9. Henrik Selin & Noelle Eckley, 2003. "Science, Politics, and Persistent Organic Pollutants: The Role of Scientific Assessments in International Environmental Co-operation," International Environmental Agreements: Politics, Law and Economics, Springer, vol. 3(1), pages 17-42, March.
    10. Broggiato, Arianna & Arnaud-Haond, Sophie & Chiarolla, Claudio & Greiber, Thomas, 2014. "Fair and equitable sharing of benefits from the utilization of marine genetic resources in areas beyond national jurisdiction: Bridging the gaps between science and policy," Marine Policy, Elsevier, vol. 49(C), pages 176-185.
    11. Charles Weiss, 2003. "Scientific Uncertainty and Science-Based Precaution," International Environmental Agreements: Politics, Law and Economics, Springer, vol. 3(2), pages 137-166, June.
    12. Alice B. M. Vadrot & Arne Langlet & Ina Tessnow-von Wysocki & Petro Tolochko & Emmanuelle Brogat & Silvia C. Ruiz-Rodríguez, 2021. "Marine Biodiversity Negotiations During COVID-19: A New Role for Digital Diplomacy?," Global Environmental Politics, MIT Press, vol. 21(3), pages 169-186, Summer.
    13. Lisa M. Campbell & Catherine Corson & Noella J. Gray & Kenneth I. MacDonald & Peter Brosius, 2014. "Introduction: Studying Global Environmental Meetings to Understand Global Environmental Governance: Collaborative Event Ethnography at the Tenth Conference of the Parties to the Convention on Biologic," Global Environmental Politics, MIT Press, vol. 14(3), pages 1-20, August.
    14. Hannah Hughes & Alice B. M. Vadrot, 2019. "Weighting the World: IPBES and the Struggle over Biocultural Diversity," Global Environmental Politics, MIT Press, vol. 19(2), pages 14-37, May.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Kari De Pryck, 2021. "Intergovernmental Expert Consensus in the Making: The Case of the Summary for Policy Makers of the IPCC 2014 Synthesis Report," Global Environmental Politics, MIT Press, vol. 21(1), pages 108-129, Winter.
    2. Jeanie Bukowski, 2017. "A “new water culture†on the Iberian Peninsula? Evaluating epistemic community impact on water resources management policy," Environment and Planning C, , vol. 35(2), pages 239-264, March.
    3. Thor Olav Iversen, 2023. "Boundary experts: Science and politics in measuring the Sustainable Development Goals," Global Policy, London School of Economics and Political Science, vol. 14(4), pages 600-610, September.
    4. Alexandros Kailis, 2017. "The influential role of consensual knowledge in international environmental agreements: negotiating the implementing measures of the Mediterranean Land-Based Sources Protocol (1980)," International Environmental Agreements: Politics, Law and Economics, Springer, vol. 17(2), pages 295-311, April.
    5. Alejandro Esguerra & Sandra van der Hel, 2021. "Participatory Designs and Epistemic Authority in Knowledge Platforms for Sustainability," Global Environmental Politics, MIT Press, vol. 21(1), pages 130-151, Winter.
    6. Peter R Wilshusen & Kenneth Iain MacDonald, 2017. "Fields of green: Corporate sustainability and the production of economistic environmental governance," Environment and Planning A, , vol. 49(8), pages 1824-1845, August.
    7. Kenji Otsuka, 2022. "Co‐optation in co‐production: Maintaining credibility and legitimacy in transboundary environmental governance in East Asia," Review of Policy Research, Policy Studies Organization, vol. 39(6), pages 771-797, November.
    8. Lukas Hermwille, 2018. "Making initiatives resonate: how can non-state initiatives advance national contributions under the UNFCCC?," International Environmental Agreements: Politics, Law and Economics, Springer, vol. 18(3), pages 447-466, June.
    9. Wilshusen, Peter R., 2019. "Environmental governance in motion: Practices of assemblage and the political performativity of economistic conservation," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 124(C), pages 1-1.
    10. Claude Paraponaris, 2017. "Plateformes numériques, conception ouverte et emploi," Post-Print halshs-01614430, HAL.
    11. Büthe Tim, 2010. "Engineering Uncontestedness? The Origins and Institutional Development of the International Electrotechnical Commission (IEC)," Business and Politics, De Gruyter, vol. 12(3), pages 1-64, October.
    12. Andrew B. Whitford & Derrick Anderson, 2021. "Governance landscapes for emerging technologies: The case of cryptocurrencies," Regulation & Governance, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 15(4), pages 1053-1070, October.
    13. Barry Eichengreen and Fabio Ghironi., 1997. "European Monetary Unification and International Monetary Cooperation," Center for International and Development Economics Research (CIDER) Working Papers C97-091, University of California at Berkeley.
    14. Roland Königsgruber, 2010. "A political economy of accounting standard setting," Journal of Management & Governance, Springer;Accademia Italiana di Economia Aziendale (AIDEA), vol. 14(4), pages 277-295, November.
    15. Mateos-Garcia, Juan & Steinmueller, W. Edward, 2008. "The institutions of open source software: Examining the Debian community," Information Economics and Policy, Elsevier, vol. 20(4), pages 333-344, December.
    16. Catherine Long, 2017. "Delegated Service Authority: Institutional Evolution of PEPFAR Health-Based Program Implementing Units in Tanzania," Global Policy, London School of Economics and Political Science, vol. 8(3), pages 303-312, September.
    17. White, Joseph, 2013. "Budget-makers and health care systems," Health Policy, Elsevier, vol. 112(3), pages 163-171.
    18. Creplet, F. & Dupouet, O. & Kern, F. & Mehmanpazir, B. & Munier, F., 2001. "Consultants and experts in management consulting firms," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 30(9), pages 1517-1535, December.
    19. Katzenstein, Peter J., 2022. "Worldviews in World Politics," EconStor Open Access Book Chapters, in: Uncertainty and Its Discontents: Worldviews in World Politics, pages 1-69, ZBW - Leibniz Information Centre for Economics.
    20. Federico Maria Ferrara & Jörg S Haas & Andrew Peterson & Thomas Sattler, 2022. "Exports vs. Investment: How Public Discourse Shapes Support for External Imbalances," Post-Print hal-02569351, HAL.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:spr:ieaple:v:24:y:2024:i:2:d:10.1007_s10784-024-09642-0. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Sonal Shukla or Springer Nature Abstracting and Indexing (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.springer.com .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.