UN nations have the started a science panel on chemical pollution, without health protections standing up or even opposing putting gender and equity into the system.
Throughout, the June 2025, Meeting of the Conference of the Parties to the Chemicals in Stockholm Convention, held in Punta del Este, Uruguay, diplomats representing more than 170 nations agreed on the first of its kind global science-policy panel on chemicals, waste and pollution. This newly established panel is hailed as a historical event on the way to imagining a better governance of the environment and can be compared to such a revered organization as the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) or even the United Nations as another attempt to find the scientific answer to issues presented by an ever more complex problem of toxic substances and pollutions worldwide. However, in the euphoria, a reality was played out: although the countries started conjoining on the importance of scientific talent, they did not have sanctioned defense in favour of human health. When concrete steps were critically proposed by someone to connect chemical pollution to negative health effects, they refused to achieve this purely on the assumption that this was politically infeasible since it was a compromising step. More controversy was surrounding the use of inclusive language, where delegates went against each other in mentioning gender equality and Indigenous rights, as well as vulnerable communities, and left some areas of the panel mandate in the bracket and left undone. The promises and pitfalls of the new science panel, which the new introductory evidence puts in perspective, may leave an imprint on the global environment policies of the next decades, but the greater its success will be proportional to the extent in which it is able to face the crisis it is meant to tackle.
Context
The threats of chemical perils and toxic contamination have accelerated all over the world in the last several years, and current measures to achieve scientifically credible recommendations of policy actions and global connections have been organized.
Origin of the Science Panel
In due to a resolution adopted at the 2022 United Nations Environment Assembly (UNEA-5), a global science-policy panel on chemicals, waste, and pollution was decided to be created. This resolution was seen as an urgent response to increase the need of an independent institution to evaluate scientific evidence of chemical risks as well as exchange knowledge and fill the knowledge gap between science and policy. Based on the footprint of such organizations as the Intergovernmental panel on Climate Change (IPCC) and the Intergovernmental Science-Policy Platform on Biodiversity and Ecosystem Services (IPBES), the new panel hopes to achieve the same degree of credibility and influence in the chemical safety and pollution control area.
A triple planetary emergency
The pollution of the planet associated with chemicals and waste is no longer a separate problem on the planet, but it is an essential aspect of the so called triple planetary crisis of climate change, biodiversity loss. That number is widely understood to be in excess of 350,000 chemicals in trade; it is further estimated that there are vast numbers of un-controlled pollutants in places of leaking into and intoxicating ecosystems. The world health organization notes that costs related to fatalities due to exposure to harmful substances cost millions of premature deaths annually. It is planned to form the science panel as one of the keys to highlight these threats, shape the regulation of regulatory bodies, and promote action on a global scale through open, peer-reviewed evidence.
Equity and International Representation
Inclusivity making diverse knowledge systems and Indigenous wisdom combined with the data of developing countries, which are commonly underrepresented in scientific discussion, one of the objectives of the panel. The panel wants to make all marginalized voices heard, not just in name but by providing technical support and capacity-building materials, the panel will make marginalized voices a reality in the decision-making processes. Driven by equity, this is an increasing recognition that global environmental solutions should be collaborative, representative and just.
Purposive and Functions of the Panel
Formation of a world science-policy panel on chemicals and wastes and pollution is a seminal step towards formalising responses to a growing body of threats represented by pollution by means of scientific coordination, evidence based policies, and dissemination of knowledge.
Defining the Essential role of the Panel
In its essence, the panel is present to interpret advanced scientific discoveries into a similarity on policy recommendation. Its purpose is to act as an independent, interdisciplinary, science-based authority, which detects and recognizes arising concerns in chemical and waste management, as well as, provides dictation to global and national decision-making. The panel will connect scientific advancements to political leadership in an effort to assist government in developing mitigation measures to avoid environmental degradation and exposures of people to toxicities.
Five Strategic Function Versions
The operations of the panel are established on five core functions:
- Issue Identification: Identification and prioritizing of current and new pollution threats
- Evidence Synthesis: the scientific information analysis which results in consent reports to policymakers
- Information dissemination: Developing easy to understand communication tools that can be used by governments, civil societies and citizens
- Capacity Building: Enhancement of the scientific training and monitoring technologies in low- and middle-income countries
- Horizon Scanning: Risk foresight and cross-disciplinary research
The missions of these roles are to see that the panel is proactive and dynamic in the evolving environmental landscape.
Sustainability of Global Equity and Inclusivity
A balance of international interests on the scientific environment is one of the major objectives of the panel. It strives to bring marginalized voices in the scientific circle, which primarily include Indigenous people and the developing nations and economically poor communities, which are the most affected by these horrendous acts of pollution. The panel also aspires to go beyond a purely scientific rigor to also become a socially responsive panel by integrating a diversity of knowledge systems and addressing the asymmetrical research and technology access with its deliberations.
Health Protection Gap
Although a global science-policy panel on chemicals, waste, and pollution might have been established, one of the most important findings has created a sense of uneasiness: the human health has not been given an overt position in the panel terms of reference.
An Oversight of Public Health Protection
As the panel was planned as a science foundation in finding the solution to the problem of toxic risks, the delegates failed to take to heart language that would place the protection of health as a primary goal. This was looked upon critically by environmental health advocates and experts who believe that with no definite mandate on health, the panel is liable to become a toothless one with regard to addressing the real-life consequences of exposure to chemicals. The Center for International Environmental Law (CIEL) deems this gulf as a bad signal and undercuts the capability of the panel in proposing precautionary actions.
Political opposition and Industrial persuasion
Some of the resistance in entrenching health protections is because of geopolitical rivalries and trade industry lobbies. Other countries were worried that the further extension of the panel mandate to cover health would mean some examination of the petrochemical industries and regulatory hassles. According to one of the delegates, most are in favour of environment when they are not being poisoned but a bunch of countries with such power prevented any consensus. This opposition brings out the tension between the civic interest and the corporate control in environmental policy regulation.
Reputability and Effectiveness
The panel will lose credibility in this sense unless they develops a strong commitment to health. There are even criticisms that excluding health in its mission may threaten the trust of the people on it and have limited resource to influence effective policy. WHO has connected the gas with thousands of deaths every year, signifying the importance of the fact that health must be a part of environmental governance. Unless the panel can meet its pledge, there should be a face-on approach in future negotiations to make sure that the human well-being is taken into consideration and not discussed as last-minute requirement.
Ethnic and Inclusion Conflicts
It was not easy to create the global science-policy panel on chemicals, waste, and pollution and it was greeted with some friction, especially in the matter of gender and Indigenous rights, as well as on the question of equity in the governance of scientific knowledge.
Conflict with Language
In negotiations, some of the delegates insisted on direct references to gender equality, Indigenous Peoples and vulnerable communities in the text that forms the basis of the panel. Nevertheless, such suggestions were opposed by a group of nations fearful of so-called politicized words. This meant that words such as equitable were left between brackets, which is UN code indicating a language that is not settled or one that has been contentious, so it is not clear whether the panel can be said to be committed to inclusion since this can be revisited at a later date and time.
The importance of Gender in Scientific Panels
It is more than a show of omitting gender sensitive language. Research has also indicated that a wide range of scientific organizations come up with more thorough and socially applicable research findings. Marginalized groups and women tend to present a fresh set of opinions regarding environmental health, especially in those communities that are more exposed to pollution. It is worthwhile not to brush away these voices lest we create blind spots in the system and compromise the credibility of the panel. As the UN Secretary-General put it, the more women and girls are out there in the science, the better science will become.
The World Backlash and the Future
Some of the member states and civil society organizations have committed themselves to continue fighting against an exclusive use of language and representation. They say that unless equity is structurally committed, the panel risks reproducing the same inequalities that the panel aims to put to rest. The demands find support in the various efforts by UNESCO to reduce the gender gap in science, such as its 2024 Call to Action. The new issue is how to capture that energy to make it lead to concrete commitments at the level of governance and operations of the panel.
Governance, membership and Transparency
The structure and successful functioning of the international science-policy panel on chemicals, waste, and pollution will depend upon the way the panel will organize its governance, elect its members, and opens up its activities.
Structure of Governance
The panel will be established to work with a multi-level governance structure, with a plenary entity consisting of the members of government, a scientific oversight group of independent professionals and a secretariat to organize tasks. This structure is meant to merge the scientific autonomy and political validity. Although the plenary gives strategic direction, the scientific committee has a mandate to issue evidence-based judgments without any political interference. Nevertheless, conflicts arise on whether the panel should enjoy lots of freedom to initiate studies and publish findings without consulting the government.
Membership Requisites
The problem of selection of members has become an issue of critical concern. The nomination of experts is expected to be done at country level although there has been a concern on how to address geographic, gender and discipline diversity. To circumvent politicization, there are certain stakeholders who call to introduce a merit-based selection system that should be conducted by an independent advisory board. The idea is to bring to the table representation of marginalised areas and fields, especially the ones who experienced the effects of pollution first-hand. This is inclusive method that is necessary in assembling a panel that can echo the worldwide nature of chemical and wastes problems.
Transparency Mechanisms
The main problem with the panel is its transparency. It has been proposed that reports should be published in open access, the draft findings should be publically consulted, and the decision-making process should be well-documented. Civil society, academic and industry observers also are expected to be part of the solution that brings accountability. However, the wide involvement of observers has been opposed by other nations owing to the issue of confidentiality and national sovereignty. These tensions will be central to ensuring there is both openness and international coherence.
What’s next?
The setting of global science policy panel on chemicals, waste and pollution is just the start. The path forward signs such milestones as operationalizing its mission, making sure that its mission achieves long-term results.
The Groundwork
The adoption of the panel is long overdue, so the short-term goal is to properly establish an operating basis. This comprises the formulation of procedural rules, the extent of examinations and the guidelines of selecting experts. The initial plenary meeting will take place in 2026 where member states will nominate scientists, resolve governance protocols and embark on the first work program of the panel.
Scientific Infrastructural and Capacity Development
A special attention will be paid to the technical infrastructure development of the panel- data-sharing platforms, research networks, and communication tools. Particular attention will be laid on assisting low and middle income nations with capacity-building activities so that all should partake in scientific evaluations fairly. The step is crucial in the democratization of environmental science and preventing duplication of the already existing inequalities around the globe.
Consultation with the Stakeholders and the Civil Society
Effective involvement of the civil society, academia, as well as industry will also be an important factor of success of the panel. Its operations are supposed to be built with public consultations, the involvement of observers and open reporting procedures. Certain governments have however raised concerns on expansion of observer access with the introduction of extra seats in the panel being one of the areas that could still be a subject of negotiations in the early days of the panel.
Predicting Threats and Priorities
In the future, it is the job of the panel to conduct horizon scanning, which is determining the risks of the future like unusual types of pollutants, waste streams, and chemical technologies. These insights will assist in formation of international policy and inform national policies. The trick is to make some linkage between the science foresight and the political will and to be proactive and policy-relevant with the panel.
Conclusion
The establishment of the global science-policy panel on chemicals, waste and pollution is an important step in global environmental collaboration. Such a proposed channel of synthesizing and sharing scientific evidence has a strong potential of influencing the laws of the future and protection of global ecosystems, as the panel could create a structured platform for creating scientific evidence that would support the arguments of policy decisions. But even its compromises in the beginning, especially the absence of robust health protections and inclusive language, betray the tensions that have always existed between scientific ideals and the reality of politics. Absent claims to equity, transparency and public health, the panel will be likely to disappoint in its transformative potential. It is changing as it moves towards its implementation but the global community should stick to it by ensuring to have a panel that is not only powerful in scientific terms but also socially sensitive.