Abstract
The United Nations Convention to Combat Desertification (UNCCD) has lacked an efficient mechanism to access scientific knowledge since entering into force in 1996. In 2011 it decided to convene an Ad Hoc Working Group on Scientific Advice (AGSA) and gave it a unique challenge: to design a new mechanism for science-policy communication based on the best available scientific evidence. This paper outlines the innovative ‘modular mechanism’ which the AGSA proposed to the UNCCD in September 2013, and how it was designed. Framed by the boundary organization model, and an understanding of the emergence of a new multi-scalar and polycentric style of governing, the modular mechanism consists of three modules: a Science-Policy Interface (SPI); an international self-governing and self-organizing Independent Non-Governmental Group of Scientists; and Regional Science and Technology Hubs in each UNCCD region. Now that the UNCCD has established the SPI, it is up to the worldwide scientific community to take the lead in establishing the other two modules. Science-policy communication in other UN environmental conventions could benefit from three generic principles corresponding to the innovations in the three modules—joint management of science-policy interfaces by policy makers and scientists; the production of synthetic assessments of scientific knowledge by autonomous and accountable groups of scientists; and multi-scalar and multi-directional synthesis and reporting of knowledge.
Highlights
Improving the communication of scientific knowledge to United Nations environmental conventions is vital if global environmental change is to be addressed successfully
The United Nations Convention to Combat Desertification (UNCCD) has used various mechanisms to supply these inputs, including ad hoc panels of scientists; a Group of Experts which served for six years (2001–2007); and, most recently, a series of biennial UNCCD Scientific Conferences, which discuss scientific knowledge on a theme chosen by the Committee on Science and Technology (CST)
Building on insights from the boundary organization model, which indicate that the effectiveness of any mechanism of science-policy communication depends on how its interface is governed, the Ad Hoc Working Group on Scientific Advice (AGSA) (2013b) evaluated two main governing style options derived from the governance framework: (i) a government option, in which the CST would decide the rules of the science-policy interface, maintaining the status quo; and (ii) a governance option, in which the science-policy interface would be jointly managed by UNCCD representatives and scientific advisers representing an independent international group of scientists
Summary
Improving the communication of scientific knowledge to United Nations environmental conventions is vital if global environmental change is to be addressed successfully. The UNCCD was agreed in 1994 as the third of the ‘Rio Conventions’ that emerged from the UN Conference on Environment and Development, held in Brazil in 1992 It defines desertification as: “land degradation in arid, semi-arid and dry sub-humid areas resulting from various factors, including climatic variations and human activities” (UN, 1994). The UNCCD has used various mechanisms to supply these inputs, including ad hoc panels of scientists; a Group of Experts which served for six years (2001–2007); and, most recently, a series of biennial UNCCD Scientific Conferences, which discuss scientific knowledge on a theme chosen by the CST All of these mechanisms have had limited immediate effectiveness, owing to political constraints, such as giving priority to regional representation over scientific competence when choosing experts, as well as funding problems and communication difficulties within the UNCCD (Grainger, 2009)
Sign-in/Register to view highlights & summary Sign-in/Register to access full text options 
Free) 
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a call
