As governments around the world grapple with the growing challenges of chemical pollution, waste management, and environmental health, a newly established United Nations science-policy body faces the critical task of turning scientific knowledge into effective action. In a recent policy brief for the United Nations’ University Centre for Policy Research (UNU-CPR), Henrik Selin, Professor of International Relations at the Pardee School, examines the opportunities and challenges facing the Intergovernmental Science-Policy Panel on Chemicals, Waste and Pollution (ISP-CWP), a new UN panel created in 2025 to strengthen global cooperation on pollution and chemicals governance.

In the brief, titled “Can the New Intergovernmental Science-Policy Panel on Chemicals, Waste and Pollution Succeed?”, Selin argues that the panel’s success will depend on how effectively member states navigate a period of geopolitical tension while building a credible and inclusive science-policy institution. Although the ISP-CWP was created to provide authoritative scientific assessments that inform policymaking, its first plenary meeting in February 2026 revealed significant challenges, including procedural disputes that prevented agreement on several foundational decisions. Selin notes that the panel must now move from its formal establishment to practical implementation while maintaining broad international participation and support.

Selin identifies three key issues that will shape the panel’s future: legitimacy and participation, expert engagement, and the design of its assessments. With 131 countries already participating, including the United States, China, India, Brazil, and members of the European Union, the panel has established a strong foundation for global representation.

However, Selin emphasizes that meaningful participation requires more than membership alone. Decisions about funding, capacity-building, and the inclusion of diverse forms of expertise, including social science, Indigenous knowledge, and industry perspectives, will be critical to ensuring that the panel produces credible and widely accepted assessments. He argues that strong conflict-of-interest safeguards and transparent expert selection processes will be particularly important as the panel develops its operating procedures.

The policy memo also highlights the need for assessments that are tailored to the complex realities of chemicals and waste management. Rather than simply replicating the model of existing global bodies such as the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC), Selin argues that the ISP-CWP must develop approaches suited to a field that includes hundreds of thousands of chemicals, highly varied pollution risks, and significant regional differences.

Looking ahead, he calls for assessments that are not only scientifically rigorous but also increasingly solutions-oriented, helping policymakers identify practical and equitable options for addressing pollution challenges. Ultimately, Selin concludes that the ability of member states to find common ground despite differing priorities will determine whether the new panel can fulfill its mission of strengthening the science-policy interface and advancing the sound management of chemicals, waste, and pollution worldwide.