Quantifying the gap from scientific evidence to environmental policy and implementation across scales
9 affiliations
- 1Mediterranean Center for Environmental Studies (CEAM Foundation), Joint Research Unit University of Alicante-CEAM, University of Alicante, 03690 Alicante, Spain; Corresponding author
- 2Department of Ecology, University of Alicante, 03690 Alicante, Spain; Corresponding author
- 3Department of Ecology, University of Alicante, 03690 Alicante, Spain
- 4Instituto Multidisciplinar para el Estudio del Medio Ramon Margalef, University of Alicante, 03690 Alicante, Spain
- 5Department of Ecology, University of Alicante, 03690 Alicante, Spain; Instituto Multidisciplinar para el Estudio del Medio Ramon Margalef, University of Alicante, 03690 Alicante, Spain
- 6Department of Ecology, University of Alicante, 03690 Alicante, Spain; Department of Applied Biology, Miguel Hernández University of Elche, Elche, Spain
- 7Mediterranean Center for Environmental Studies (CEAM Foundation), Joint Research Unit University of Alicante-CEAM, University of Alicante, 03690 Alicante, Spain
- 8Department of Ecology, University of Alicante, 03690 Alicante, Spain; Instituto Multidisciplinar para el Estudio del Medio Ramon Margalef, University of Alicante, 03690 Alicante, Spain; Center for Engineering, Modelling and Applied Social Sciences, Universidade Federal do ABC, 09280-560 Santo André, São Paulo, Brazil
- 9Mediterranean Center for Environmental Studies (CEAM Foundation), Joint Research Unit University of Alicante-CEAM, University of Alicante, 03690 Alicante, Spain; Department of Ecology, University of Alicante, 03690 Alicante, Spain
Abstract
Assessing key dimensions of the broader science-policy-implementation gap is crucial in an era of global environmental threats to human well-being. We quantify the time required for ecological concepts to be incorporated into United Nations environmental conventions and test whether concept age and typology influence their uptake. We also illustrate the effectiveness of environmental policies for biodiversity conservation. On average, the uptake of ecological concepts by the Conference of the Parties of the UN Conventions takes 7 years. While climate change conventions favor concepts related to structural and abiotic features, which reflects a focus on mitigation, the biodiversity and desertification conventions favor more idiosyncratic concepts, probably depending on the alignment of the scientific and political agendas on particular topics. Environmental policies have limited effectiveness, with better outcomes at local scales. Closing these gaps requires stronger implementation mechanisms and more effective identification and communication of scientific discovery across governance levels worldwide. Science for society: Scientific research is essential for informing environmental policy, yet a persistent gap remains between scientific results, their integration into policy-making, and their implementation through on-the-ground strategies. On average, scientific ecological concepts take around 7 years to be incorporated into the policies of major UN environmental conventions. While some concepts are adopted immediately, others take up to 28 years to be incorporated into global policy frameworks. Long delays in knowledge transfer occur for relevant and sound concepts, such as extreme events and soil biodiversity in the context of desertification; ecosystem services, when referring to climate change; and phylogenetic diversity, in relation to biodiversity conservation. The science-policy gap is generally smaller for older concepts but not for those with positive connotations or related to structural attributes, which we expect to be more rapidly accepted and implemented as indicators. Examining the policy-implementation gap in biodiversity conservation across contrasting geographic scales as a case study, we find that implementation is more successful at smaller spatial scales. This pattern likely relates to greater accountability, higher stakeholder engagement, and a lower diversity of socio-environmental constraints within smaller-scale governance frameworks. To ensure that science benefits society through environmental policy, we must shorten the path from evidence to action. Bridging this science-policy gap can promote mutual learning and trust at the science-policy interface, thereby fostering more informed actions, setting more realistic goals, and allowing more effective implementation.
Related
- After "nature"? Using the concept of nature in scientific and policy contexts: an "indisciplinary" approach
- Environmental impact assessment of scientific publishing: a life cycle analysis (LCA) of print and digital books by editions Quae
- Oral vs parenteral drug administration: Quantifying the future health costs of routine prescribing choices through their environmental scope.
- Dynamic life cycle assessment in environmental assessment of processes and products: A scoping review of sectoral applications, digitalization, decision support, and policy relevance
- Waste management in developing countries: a systematic literature review of policy implementation
BibTeX
@article{morcillo2026quantifying,
title = {{Quantifying the gap from scientific evidence to environmental policy and implementation across scales}},
author = {Luna Morcillo and Elysa Silva and Roberto C. Rodríguez-Caro and Diana Turrión and Santiago Soliveres and Jon Morant and Esther Sebastián-González and María Botella-Cruz and Sergio Gilabert and Maria Dolores Hidalgo-Galvez and Andreu Ibáñez-Rodríguez and Celia de Llanos-Romero and Adrian Orihuela-Torres and Leandro Reverberi-Tambosi and Sara Sánchez-Sáez and Alberto Vilagrosa and Susana Bautista},
journal = {Cell Reports Sustainability},
year = {2026},
month = oct,
doi = {10.1016/j.crsus.2026.100831},
url = {https://doi.org/10.1016/j.crsus.2026.100831},
note = {CC BY},
}
RIS
TY - JOUR
TI - Quantifying the gap from scientific evidence to environmental policy and implementation across scales
AU - Luna Morcillo
AU - Elysa Silva
AU - Roberto C. Rodríguez-Caro
AU - Diana Turrión
AU - Santiago Soliveres
AU - Jon Morant
AU - Esther Sebastián-González
AU - María Botella-Cruz
AU - Sergio Gilabert
AU - Maria Dolores Hidalgo-Galvez
AU - Andreu Ibáñez-Rodríguez
AU - Celia de Llanos-Romero
AU - Adrian Orihuela-Torres
AU - Leandro Reverberi-Tambosi
AU - Sara Sánchez-Sáez
AU - Alberto Vilagrosa
AU - Susana Bautista
PY - 2026
DA - 2026/10/25
JO - Cell Reports Sustainability
DO - 10.1016/j.crsus.2026.100831
UR - https://doi.org/10.1016/j.crsus.2026.100831
AB - Assessing key dimensions of the broader science-policy-implementation gap is crucial in an era of global environmental threats to human well-being. We quantify the time required for ecological concepts to be incorporated into United Nations environmental conventions and test whether concept age and typology influence their uptake. We also illustrate the effectiveness of environmental policies for biodiversity conservation. On average, the uptake of ecological concepts by the Conference of the Parties of the UN Conventions takes 7 years. While climate change conventions favor concepts related to structural and abiotic features, which reflects a focus on mitigation, the biodiversity and desertification conventions favor more idiosyncratic concepts, probably depending on the alignment of the scientific and political agendas on particular topics. Environmental policies have limited effectiveness, with better outcomes at local scales. Closing these gaps requires stronger implementation mechanisms and more effective identification and communication of scientific discovery across governance levels worldwide. Science for society: Scientific research is essential for informing environmental policy, yet a persistent gap remains between scientific results, their integration into policy-making, and their implementation through on-the-ground strategies. On average, scientific ecological concepts take around 7 years to be incorporated into the policies of major UN environmental conventions. While some concepts are adopted immediately, others take up to 28 years to be incorporated into global policy frameworks. Long delays in knowledge transfer occur for relevant and sound concepts, such as extreme events and soil biodiversity in the context of desertification; ecosystem services, when referring to climate change; and phylogenetic diversity, in relation to biodiversity conservation. The science-policy gap is generally smaller for older concepts but not for those with positive connotations or related to structural attributes, which we expect to be more rapidly accepted and implemented as indicators. Examining the policy-implementation gap in biodiversity conservation across contrasting geographic scales as a case study, we find that implementation is more successful at smaller spatial scales. This pattern likely relates to greater accountability, higher stakeholder engagement, and a lower diversity of socio-environmental constraints within smaller-scale governance frameworks. To ensure that science benefits society through environmental policy, we must shorten the path from evidence to action. Bridging this science-policy gap can promote mutual learning and trust at the science-policy interface, thereby fostering more informed actions, setting more realistic goals, and allowing more effective implementation.
SN - 2949-7906
ER -