Environmental Science & Policy最新文献

{"title":"The politics and co-production of knowledge in Indigenous wildfire management","authors":"Sarah Dickson-Hoyle,&nbsp;Char John,&nbsp;Lori D. Daniels,&nbsp;Shannon M. Hagerman","doi":"10.1016/j.envsci.2026.104424","DOIUrl":"10.1016/j.envsci.2026.104424","url":null,"abstract":"<div><div>In settler colonial countries such as Canada, increasing recognition of Indigenous rights and attention to Indigenous fire stewardship systems are resulting in calls for more collaborative decision making and practice. However, many collaborative processes fail to address knowledge inequities or give sufficient attention to the role of power and politics in shaping knowledge outcomes and processes. In this study we use the theoretical lens of co-production to examine how distinct forms of expertise and authority materialize and are co-produced in the context of wildfire response and recovery, and how this shapes processes of Indigenous engagement in collaborative wildfire governance. Drawing on participatory action research with Secwépemc Nation communities in British Columbia, Canada, including over 50 interviews and three years of ethnographic research centred around the 2017 ‘Elephant Hill’ wildfire, we demonstrate how First Nations both resisted the authority of external ‘experts’, and strategically emphasized their own technical expertise, to assert their decision-making authority in wildfire response and recovery. Results also reveal how wildfire agencies’ claims to authority are sustained in reference to knowledge and experience that is credentialled and deemed legitimate by those same agencies, reflecting how expertise and authority are mutually constituted in the context of wildfire risk. We argue that achieving ‘true partnerships’ in wildfire management requires recognizing the distinct authority and expertise that Indigenous peoples and Nations hold throughout their/our territories, and how Indigenous knowledge and fire stewardship systems are inseparable from the enactment of their/our inherent rights on the land.</div></div>","PeriodicalId":313,"journal":{"name":"Environmental Science & Policy","volume":"181 ","pages":"Article 104424"},"PeriodicalIF":5.5,"publicationDate":"2026-07-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"148500417","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"环境科学与生态学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"OA","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

{"title":"Lessons learned through convergence research applied to wildfire risk mitigation","authors":"Alison C. Cullen,&nbsp;Nick Bradbury,&nbsp;Reed Humphrey,&nbsp;Anna Kenig-Ziesler,&nbsp;Lee Kessenich,&nbsp;Rachel McCrary,&nbsp;Seth McGinnis,&nbsp;Susan Prichard,&nbsp;John Abatzoglou","doi":"10.1016/j.envsci.2026.104423","DOIUrl":"10.1016/j.envsci.2026.104423","url":null,"abstract":"<div><div>In this paper we examine lessons learned through the lens of an NSF Growing Convergence Research project addressing the pressing societal challenge of managing risk associated with high-impact, simultaneous wildfires - work requiring deep integration of climate science, forest ecology, and decision science to describe, understand, and project risk and mitigation. We share lessons learned in this application of convergence approaches, in identification of the sub-contexts in which they offer relative advantage over discipline-focused silos, and metrics for gauging success. We also highlight lessons learned about addressing and mitigating wildfire impacts in the current biophysical, social, and political landscape. We consider specific research thrusts and outcomes from our project while exploring the question: What did our convergence approach to wildfire risk mitigation achieve, and what lessons may be generalized? Our metrics of convergence progress include i) convergence findings and tools reaching and supporting applications such as decision making, policy development, risk mitigation, and public information needs, ii) development of a strong networked community of partners demonstrating mutual trust and value in outputs through sustained and iterative interactions, iii) the ability of individuals to communicate effectively about research relevance and applicability from the perspective of their own fields as well as from the fields and perspectives of teammates, and iv) evidence of two way initiation of ideas and engagement from practitioners and academic researchers.</div></div>","PeriodicalId":313,"journal":{"name":"Environmental Science & Policy","volume":"181 ","pages":"Article 104423"},"PeriodicalIF":5.5,"publicationDate":"2026-07-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"148500420","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"环境科学与生态学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"OA","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

{"title":"Does poor regulation lead to pollution? Key takeaways from a systematic review","authors":"Vincent Emenyonu,&nbsp;Kat O. Mara,&nbsp;Mark Lund","doi":"10.1016/j.envsci.2026.104426","DOIUrl":"10.1016/j.envsci.2026.104426","url":null,"abstract":"<div><div>Formal recycling of used lead acid batteries (ULAB) is a multibillion-dollar industry, valued at US$12.12 billion in 2024, and expected to grow to more than $26 billion within eight years. Demand for recycled lead (Pb) for new batteries grows in developing countries where costs limit the uptake of lithium-ion batteries. ULAB recycling in these regions poses significant danger to human health and the environment. Stringent regulatory approaches for ULAB recycling in developing countries, intended to reduce pollution, have thus far been ineffective as they typically do not adequately cover small-scale informal recycling in rural and remote communities. We examine what characterises effective environmental regulation for ULAB recycling in developing countries through the use of a systematic review of 85 papers covering three decades of literature from 1977 to 2023, and applied constructivist grounded theory-informed thematic analysis using NVivo 14 to code and analyse data. We generated three key frameworks that characterise regulatory conditions associated with effectiveness in developing countries: well-crafted policies, adequate governance mechanisms, and mitigation measures to avoid pollution. The results indicate that effective regulation emerges from complex interactions that are simultaneously flexible and structured, inclusive yet focused, and locally relevant while also considering global efforts to address pollution-related Sustainable Development Goals.</div></div>","PeriodicalId":313,"journal":{"name":"Environmental Science & Policy","volume":"181 ","pages":"Article 104426"},"PeriodicalIF":5.5,"publicationDate":"2026-07-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"148500383","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"环境科学与生态学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"OA","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

{"title":"Collaborative scenario development as an initiator of transformative thinking in flood risk management","authors":"Britta Höllermann,&nbsp;Adrian Almoradie,&nbsp;Joshua Ntajal,&nbsp;Mariele Evers","doi":"10.1016/j.envsci.2026.104427","DOIUrl":"10.1016/j.envsci.2026.104427","url":null,"abstract":"<div><div>The interplay between climate extremes, urbanisation, and land use planning poses a complex challenge for policymakers, disaster managers and residents of flood-prone areas. Stakeholders must navigate these factors to reduce flood risk while also sustaining livelihoods against increasing extremes and intensifying flood hazards. Transformative adaptation, involving system changes to socio-ecological system, is an effective way to address structural drivers and causes of vulnerability. Existing adaptation measures often produce uneven outcomes and can lead to maladaptation, highlighting the need for a transformative approach. This study explores how combining collaborative exploratory scenario development with backcasting can foster transformative thinking and raise awareness for the risk of maladaptive responses. We applied this approach in Ghana and involved stakeholders from three flood-prone regions (Accra, Kumasi and Bolgatanga) in two workshops. We implemented a three-step process: 1) qualitative system analysis to understand “What is?”, 2) exploratory scenario analysis to explore “What could happen?”, and 3) backcasting adaptation measures to identify “How to get there?”. This process was complemented by focus group discussions and transect walks in flood-prone communities. The findings reveal a shift in stakeholder preferences from reactive interventions to more transformative and systemic strategies. The study illustrates that the approach can initiate transformative thinking in flood risk management by making assumptions, trade-offs, risk of maladaptation and enabling conditions visible before adaptation measures are implemented. It provides a scalable methodology for addressing flood risk in other socio-ecologically diverse and vulnerable regions.</div></div>","PeriodicalId":313,"journal":{"name":"Environmental Science & Policy","volume":"181 ","pages":"Article 104427"},"PeriodicalIF":5.5,"publicationDate":"2026-07-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"148500384","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"环境科学与生态学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"OA","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

{"title":"Reimagining environmental science & policy: From emerging themes of plurality, justice, and sense-making to future research directions","authors":"Nicole Klenk,&nbsp;Christopher Cvitanovic,&nbsp;Maud Borie,&nbsp;Hussam Hussein,&nbsp;Alice Vadrot,&nbsp;Viola Hakkarainen","doi":"10.1016/j.envsci.2026.104420","DOIUrl":"10.1016/j.envsci.2026.104420","url":null,"abstract":"<div><div><em>Environmental Science &amp; Policy</em> has undergone a period of significant growth and diversification between 2023 and 2025, publishing more than 800 papers from authors working across a wide range of governance contexts, disciplinary traditions, and methodological approaches. This editorial offers a thematic synthesis of this corpus, examining how contemporary scholarship reflects, and responds to, shifting conditions at the environmental science–policy interface. In doing so, we highlight how these years have been marked by intensifying environmental crises, rising misinformation, growing political polarization, and renewed scrutiny of the authority and trustworthiness of science, alongside global movements to recognize Indigenous knowledge systems and plural forms of expertise. Against this backdrop, the journal’s recent publications reveal an important epistemic shift: environmental science now operates as one knowledge system among many within a crowded, contested, and emotionally charged governance landscape. We identify several cross-cutting themes that characterize the journal’s evolving scholarship, including deepening engagement with plural knowledge systems; expanding work on co-production and relational approaches to environmental decision-making; growing attention to sense-making and meaning-making; and increasing focus on affect, ethics, and lived experience in governance processes. Building on these insights, the editorial outlines a forward-looking research agenda for <em>Environmental Science &amp; Policy</em>. Key priorities include advancing scholarship on co-production in fragile or informal governance settings; interrogating the politics of meaning-making; strengthening analyses of epistemic plurality and polarization; expanding methodological innovation, including ethnographic and AI-assisted approaches; examining governance under geopolitical tension and institutional fragility; and attending to the diverse geographical and digital spaces in which environmental knowledge is produced, contested, and mobilized. Together, these directions underscore the need for research that treats environmental governance as a relational, interpretive, and ethically charged endeavour, one that embraces plurality, foregrounds justice, and critically examines how knowledge shapes, and is shaped by, environmental decision-making across scales.</div></div>","PeriodicalId":313,"journal":{"name":"Environmental Science & Policy","volume":"181 ","pages":"Article 104420"},"PeriodicalIF":5.5,"publicationDate":"2026-07-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"148500416","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"环境科学与生态学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

{"title":"Biocultural families and leaders: New metaphors, methods and members for environmental connectivity in Unama’ki","authors":"Msit No’kmaq,&nbsp;Jeffrey Wall,&nbsp;Thomas Baker,&nbsp;Rodney Chiasson,&nbsp;Daniel Christmas,&nbsp;Keith Christmas,&nbsp;Caitlin Cunningham,&nbsp;Joe Googoo,&nbsp;Judy Googoo,&nbsp;Jessica Lukawiecki,&nbsp;Albert Marshall,&nbsp;Dave McKinnon,&nbsp;Patricia Nash,&nbsp;Clifford Paul,&nbsp;Riley Scanlan,&nbsp;Tristen Simon,&nbsp;Faisal Moola,&nbsp;Lisa Young,&nbsp;Alana Westwood","doi":"10.1016/j.envsci.2026.104415","DOIUrl":"10.1016/j.envsci.2026.104415","url":null,"abstract":"<div><div>This study leverages an Indigenous-led call for connectivity research in Unama’ki (Cape Breton), Nova Scotia, as an opportunity to show the power of ‘connectivity science’ to serve Indigenous Peoples’ environmental priorities. In line with the directive of Elders Murdena and Albert Marshall to deactivate and replace inappropriate metaphors for conservation practice, we innovate and demonstrate a biocultural families and leaders approach to selecting species for geospatial modelling. As a research and author collaborative of scientists and Indigenous knowledge-keepers, we come to define biocultural connectivity as that bundle of forces—known and revered by local community—which sustain mutually enriching relationships between a people and their place. We utilize salience of life forms in Mi’kmaw placenames, oral teachings, workshop transcripts, and Indigenous-led biological surveys to indicate significance. We nominate beaver, spruce, berry, and water birds as biocultural leaders for pursuing greater connectivity with the Kluskap Indigenous Protected and Conserved Area. We subsequently identify major priorities for connectivity in Unama’ki territory as connection between generations, connection to Kepmej—or taking action toward a Mi’kmaw Way of Life—and connection to healing. Our work generates a novel relational model of connectivity in which candidate species operate as leaders for families, with leadership implying responsibility rather than hierarchy. These are spatially visualized in our companion paper in this issue. This work offers a ready approach for First Nations and Indigenous Peoples beyond the study area, while demonstrating unlearning’s power to advance the biocultural orientation to conservation.</div></div>","PeriodicalId":313,"journal":{"name":"Environmental Science & Policy","volume":"181 ","pages":"Article 104415"},"PeriodicalIF":5.5,"publicationDate":"2026-07-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"148500444","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"环境科学与生态学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"OA","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

{"title":"Boundary orchestration and knowledge integration in convergence research","authors":"Shruti Punjabi,&nbsp;Shalini Misra,&nbsp;Stanley B. Grant,&nbsp;Megan A. Rippy","doi":"10.1016/j.envsci.2026.104421","DOIUrl":"10.1016/j.envsci.2026.104421","url":null,"abstract":"<div><div>In this paper, we examine how knowledge is assembled, translated, and routed across science and policy arenas in a large-scale, cross-disciplinary, and cross-sectoral convergence research project. Using abductive research methodology, and participant interviews, story maps, and archival research as methods, we characterized how convergence is conceptualized and operationalized by academic and professional experts in the team. First, we found that participants understood convergence as the ability to co-reason together under evolving constraints through adaptable representations, with progress marked not by consensus or cognitive reframing, but by artifacts that were useful for different audiences, routable through academic and policy communication channels, and durable to retain credibility across audiences and project phases. Second, we identified the conditions under which boundary objects become interpretable and actionable in environmental policy contexts. Third, we determined how boundary orchestration can yield legible and credible decision-making outputs. We offer transferable insights and hypotheses to inform the design and evaluation of future convergence efforts tackling complex environmental challenges.</div></div>","PeriodicalId":313,"journal":{"name":"Environmental Science & Policy","volume":"181 ","pages":"Article 104421"},"PeriodicalIF":5.5,"publicationDate":"2026-07-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"148500418","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"环境科学与生态学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

{"title":"Editorial special issue: Advancing stakeholder engagement for the food, energy, water nexus","authors":"Andrew Kliskey,&nbsp;Paula Williams","doi":"10.1016/j.envsci.2026.104406","DOIUrl":"10.1016/j.envsci.2026.104406","url":null,"abstract":"<div><div>Stakeholder engagement as a practice has been embraced by relatively few scientists who research FEWS systems. There are numerous benefits to engaging stakeholders, including improved quality of local management plans; effectiveness of solutions; fewer conflicts with and between stakeholders; improved quality of decisions; improved outcomes; and identification and implementation of solutions. Yet stakeholder engagement is often unsuccessful without careful consideration of how stakeholders are engaged. The contributions to this special issue illustrate best practices in engaging stakeholders in FEWS research by: discussing those engagement practices that were successful and those that were not; using stakeholders to assess and improve the engagement process; exploring collaborative learning with stakeholders, and; providing frameworks for successful engagement. The issue provides a robust suite of practices to improve stakeholder engagement in FEWS research.</div></div>","PeriodicalId":313,"journal":{"name":"Environmental Science & Policy","volume":"180 ","pages":"Article 104406"},"PeriodicalIF":5.2,"publicationDate":"2026-06-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"148178625","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"环境科学与生态学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

{"title":"The plastics game of thrones: What is the plastics pollution problem represented to be in the plastics treaty negotiations?","authors":"Patricia Villarrubia-Gómez ,&nbsp;Ellen Palm ,&nbsp;Bethanie Carney Almroth ,&nbsp;Sarah E. Cornell","doi":"10.1016/j.envsci.2026.104403","DOIUrl":"10.1016/j.envsci.2026.104403","url":null,"abstract":"<div><div>Negotiations for an international legally binding instrument to end plastics pollution are a highly contested arena framing <em>plastics pollution</em> as a global policy problem. High and low-ambition groupings of political actors strive to control the problem representation, a power struggle ultimately affecting people worldwide and the planetary environment. Drawing on Plastics Treaty negotiation texts from 2022 and 2024, with participant observations of Intergovernmental Negotiating Committee sessions (INC-1–5.1). This paper critically interrogates evolving representations of the plastics pollution problem, combining Bacchi’s “What is the Problem Represented to be” approach with a social-ecological systems perspective to contextualize problem representation within an understanding of sustainable systems. A minority group of countries has dominated the INC process. They represent plastics pollution as a consumer waste problem, where inadequate end-of-life management affects the marine environment. These low-ambition actors, notably petro-states, exert power over the INC process through stalling, lobbying, mis- and disinformation, political pressures and even intimidation by industry actors. Left unproblematized are human rights, just transition, health effects of plastics as complex assemblages of chemicals, and transboundary responsibilities of plastics producers, including on climate and biodiversity. These issues are red line items for petro-states, while civil society groups, Indigenous peoples, and sustainability-concerned scientists press for their inclusion in the Plastics Treaty. By INC-5.1, most member states supported a higher-ambition treaty, yet did not agree on a treaty text. Viewing problem representations as social-ecological issues shows how a narrow waste framing is unjust, exacerbating existing impacts of plastics pollution, especially on already vulnerable communities.</div></div>","PeriodicalId":313,"journal":{"name":"Environmental Science & Policy","volume":"180 ","pages":"Article 104403"},"PeriodicalIF":5.2,"publicationDate":"2026-06-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"148178631","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"环境科学与生态学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

{"title":"The unpredictability of community priorities in planning for water-scarce futures in the Goulburn-Broken River Basin","authors":"Madeline A. Grupper ,&nbsp;Avril C. Horne ,&nbsp;Julian D. Olden ,&nbsp;J. Angus Webb ,&nbsp;Serene Ho","doi":"10.1016/j.envsci.2026.104407","DOIUrl":"10.1016/j.envsci.2026.104407","url":null,"abstract":"<div><div>Community engagement is critical for water management under climate change. There is limited clarity about what types of information should be collected to support planning for water-scarce futures. Current engagement efforts typically focus on community values. However, community priorities, which reflect the trade-offs between values, may be more relevant. Since priorities are context-dependant, it is important to understand if and how they shift as water becomes scarcer. To explore this, we interviewed community members in the Goulburn Catchment, Australia. We compared their priorities for allocating water in the river under current water availability to their priorities under a Future scenario of reduced water availability. We used open-ended questions and a valuation exercise to elicit priorities under both scenarios. Participants changed their priorities between scenarios with varied magnitude and direction. Although they discussed similar themes when explaining decisions, particularly adaptation versus zero-sum game, these rationales could not explain the priority changes observed. Neither could participants’ backgrounds or core values explain how priorities shifted. Our findings challenge engagement approaches that only assess perspectives under current conditions. The unpredictable relationship between specific values and priorities have implications for water policy. As climate change intensifies water scarcity globally, effective water management policies must recognize that priorities will shift under constraints. Rather than relying on one-time value elicitation, more dynamic, iterative approaches to priority assessment could better capture how community preferences shift as resources change.</div></div>","PeriodicalId":313,"journal":{"name":"Environmental Science & Policy","volume":"180 ","pages":"Article 104407"},"PeriodicalIF":5.2,"publicationDate":"2026-06-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"148178629","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"环境科学与生态学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}