Science, PIC and POPs: Negotiating the Membership of Chemical Review Committees under the Stockholm and Rotterdam Conventions

Abstract

Multilateral environmental agreements (MEAs) often have close relationships with scientific and technical advisors, and as international policy makers negotiate the post‐Rio generation of MEAs, there has been an increased emphasis on establishing science advisory bodies (SABs) as part of the institutional design of MEAs. This article will examine the negotiations of the design, membership and roles of the science advisory bodies to two of the most recent additions to the MEA landscape: the Rotterdam Convention on the Prior Informed Consent Procedure for Certain Hazardous Chemicals and Pesticides in International Trade; and the Stockholm Convention on Persistent Organic Pollutants. A particular emphasis will be placed on concerns over membership, examining how policy makers have sought to achieve representative membership by ensuring that the limited number of experts on a SAB reflect the national, economic and geographic diversity of stakeholders (capturing interests of those benefiting and suffering from the problem or its solution), while also maintaining an institutional and disciplinary diversity suitable to the nature of the problem (including those directly or traditionally implicated in the study or management of the problem, whilst still allowing input from other experts more tangentially related, who are likely to identify inter‐problem linkages).