Understanding the Role of Science in Policy

Happy New Year! I’m very pleased to share our first paper of 2026, an interdisciplinary collaboration across the Grantham Research Institute on Climate Change & the Environment, published in Science Magazine “Translating climate science into legal standards: Lessons from the Milieudefensie v. Shell case” , with Simon Dietz, Catherine Higham, Tiffanie Chan, Noah Walker-Crawford, and Frank Venmans As climate litigation increasingly targets corporate conduct, courts are being asked to translate global climate science into concrete, enforceable legal obligations for individual companies. Our paper examines why this translation has proven difficult—and how it can be improved. 🔍 Key insights from the paper: Courts have relied on integrated assessment models (IAMs) to set binding climate obligations for governments, but remain hesitant to apply the same scientific tools to individual corporations. The Shell appeal judgment exposes a growing gap between global climate goals and company-level legal standards, particularly for scope 3 emissions. Contrary to the court’s concerns, peer-reviewed methods already exist to derive sectoral and corporate emissions pathways consistent with the Paris Agreement. We outline practical ways forward for courts and policymakers, including: - Using ranges of emissions reductions rather than single figures - Drawing on sectoral pathways and marginal abatement cost evidence - Defining minimum legal standards, such as at least requiring disclosure against credible methodologies The implications go beyond litigation: the same challenges arise as regulators embed climate transition planning into law across the EU, UK, Australia, and beyond. 📄 You can access the final published article here (free e-print, limited number of uses): 👉 https://lnkd.in/eZBxFqu4 Please DM me if you can't open the full paper. #ClimateLitigation #ClimateLaw #CorporateAccountability #ScienceBasedTargets #ClimateGovernance #EnergyTransition #PolicyForum

More than 40 climate scientists have issued an open call to the Science Based Targets initiative and Article 6 Supervisory Body to ensure Nature--our most powerful and scalable carbon storage and removal system globally-- isn’t left on the sidelines in the climate fight. Their message is clear, we cannot deliver on climate stabilization without large scale nature interventions. My favorite points below: 💡 Managing the Earth’s climate over the coming decades is as important as managing it over the coming centuries. ✅ Framing “permanence” as a binary threshold—either 1,000 years or failure—does not serve climate science or policy. A more accurate framing focuses on durability, a concept based on reversal risk: how long a tonne of CO2 is likely to remain out of the atmosphere, and what mechanisms exist to manage reversal risk and compensate for lost carbon. 🔎 Unlocking the ~11 Gt yr -1 of mitigation potential available through NCS in the next decade (IPCC, 2023; Griscom et al. 2017), will require policy measures that evaluate and address reversal risks associated with all carbon storage and removal pathways, rather than policies that default to an exclusion of a wide swath of options. 👍 NCS are not a substitute for fossil fuel phaseout or engineered removals. But geological storage cannot deliver the immediate, large-scale climate benefits that nature can. Climate mitigation must be portfolio-based: incorporating options across the durability-scale spectrum, matched to specific goals, timelines, and risk tolerances. ⚠️ Insisting that only 1,000-year removals count toward climate neutrality—a proposition that has appeared with increasing frequency in policy and guidance documents—ignores the fact that climate risk is cumulative and time-sensitive. Temporary reductions can have lasting impact if they help flatten the emissions curve, delay peak warming, and keep us within planetary boundaries. Conversely, failing to act—by excluding credible, well-managed, near-term options—carries irreversible consequences. ‼️ Successful approaches to climate mitigation that combine NCS, energy, and industrial alternatives will not be an “either, or” strategy but a “yes, and” strategy (Anderson et al. 2019). I am really excited about the conversation we're having on permanence and durability system design and management. We can deliver approaches to durability and reversal risk in the carbon markets that can ensure the atmosphere stays whole, projects can get done in the real world, and we have strong regulatory and legal frameworks in place that enable large scale finance to flow and for nature to play its necessary role in mitigating and adapting to climate change. See the full letter here: https://lnkd.in/gRx4H8vi

Across the Horn of Africa, climate shocks now unfold as compound crises. The 2020–2023 drought left over 46 million people food insecure and eroded their livelihoods. Before recovery could begin, the 2023–2024 El Niño rains triggered widespread flooding, displacing hundreds of thousands of people. Drought–flood whiplash is no longer exceptional; it is the region’s operating climate. My research with the Jameel Observatory for Food Security Early Action in northern Kenya reveals that pastoralist communities are already adapting to these shifts with remarkable flexibility. From star calendars to animal behaviour and vegetation cues, herders read a rich tapestry of indicators and now complement these with radio forecasts and satellite data. They do not wait for a single forecast or a rigid trigger. Instead, they adjust grazing routes, stagger herd movements, and pool resources as signals evolve. This flexible anticipatory action challenges the dominant model of fixed thresholds and single-event triggers. It shows that forecast information only has value if it is trusted, timely, and open to renegotiation on the ground. Climate Information Services (CIS) enable this agility by translating global climate models into local, impact-based advisories. Regional centres, such as ICPAC, provide seasonal outlooks to guide rangeland management and food security planning. Communities use this information to develop innovative solutions by layering these scientific forecasts onto their own adaptive calendars. Formal Anticipatory Action (AA) frameworks can learn from this. Kenya’s 2024–2029 AA Roadmap is vital. Fundamentally, it will deliver more if it incorporates flexibility by allowing rolling triggers, locally defined indicators, and iterative decision-making, rather than treating early action as a one-off release of funds. The cost of inaction rises with every season. Investing in flexible, forecast-driven anticipatory systems is both fiscally prudent and politically essential. For governments, regional bodies, and development partners, the way forward is clear: move beyond crisis response and embed adaptive, plural, and community-grounded anticipatory action at the heart of policy and planning. In the Horn of Africa’s climate future, acting early and being flexible is the most innovative and cost-effective form of adaptation. Photo courtesy of United Nations Office for Disaster Risk Reduction (UNDRR)

Today, I – alongside nearly 40 other academics – announced our support for natural climate solutions (NCS) as an essential part of the path to net zero. In a letter to the U.N.’s Article 6.4 Supervisory Body and the Science Based Targets initiative, we highlight why climate policy must emphasize durability and scalability to deliver effective, large-scale action. NCS like reforestation, peatland protection, and cropland soil conservation, offer gigaton-scale mitigation potential today, while also delivering biodiversity, water, and community co-benefits. Excluding NCS risks sidelining some of the most immediately available and impactful climate tools. Learn more about the importance of durability and how NCS effectively scale climate action here: https://lnkd.in/gAV4MiZ4 To add your name as a scientist, fill out this form: https://lnkd.in/gRReNvsv Onward with science and nature. #ClimateAction #NetZero #NaturalClimateSolutions #Sustainability #ScienceBasedTargets naturebase.org

The most important discoveries of the next decade will not happen inside a single discipline. For centuries, science advanced largely in silos. Chemistry, biology, and physics progressed mostly on separate tracks. That model is breaking down. Data and AI are accelerating a new phase of convergence. Breakthroughs are emerging at the intersections. Biology is becoming programmable. Drug discovery is being reshaped by data and AI. Therapies are evolving into integrated solutions that combine drugs, devices, and digital systems. Computing is shifting as well, with neuromorphic designs drawing on biology and enabled by advances in physics and semiconductor technology. This changes what it takes to innovate. Progress across discovery, development, and delivery now depends on operating across disciplines with precision and speed. Most organizations struggle to do this. Merck Group is built differently. We operate across biology, chemistry, and physics, powered by data and AI. That combinatorial power enables us to unlock value at the intersections where multi-disciplinary science and a broad mix of technologies become real-world outcomes for companies and patients. The next decade will favor those who can work fluently across atoms, molecules, cells, and silicon. Our focus is clear. Invest where disciplines meet. Build long-term value. Make complex science real. #Science #Innovation #AI #Semiconductors #LifeScience

Caring about climate is not enough. It never was. A major review just published in Nature Climate Change, by Kelly Fielding and Matthew Hornsey, makes this case with unusual clarity. Across 125 countries, strong majorities express willingness to act on climate. Yet actual behavior remains stubbornly low. The gap between intention and action is not a communication failure. It is a systems failure. The review proposes a tripartite framework of mechanisms that explain why climate-friendly intentions so rarely translate into behavior: intrapersonal, social, and structural. Intrapersonal mechanisms include cognitive biases, emotion-based drivers, and behavioral habits. Our brains are wired for immediacy, not for diffuse, long-term threats. We discount future costs. We underestimate how much regret we will feel for inaction. We overestimate how inconvenient change will be. Social mechanisms involve norms, identity, and visibility. We look to others to calibrate what is normal, what is acceptable, what is worth doing. When climate action is invisible or socially risky, intentions collapse. And then there are structural mechanisms, the ones that politics consistently ignores. Cost. Convenience. Institutional trust. These are not soft variables. They are the architecture within which all individual motivation either succeeds or fails. You can have the strongest climate intention in the world and still be blocked by infrastructure that makes the sustainable option slower, more expensive, and less reliable. This is where the review gets politically uncomfortable. Self-reported intentions explained only 5% of the variance in actual pro-environmental behavior. Five percent. The remaining 95% is shaped by the systems people inhabit, not the values they hold. From an Eco-Affective Health perspective, this matters enormously. We have spent decades trying to change minds. The evidence says we also need to change cities, supply chains, financial systems, and governance structures. Affect, motivation, and identity are real forces, but they operate inside structural containers that either enable or constrain them. Closing the intention-behavior gap is not a psychology project. It is a political project that needs psychology. The intervention toolbox is there. Implementation intentions, peer modelling, block leaders, default green options, financial incentives, participatory governance. Effect sizes are documented. The knowledge exists. What is missing is the political will to deploy it at scale. Article link: https://lnkd.in/dhemQvSc Follow our work at ewahlab.com #EWAHLab #EcoAffectiveHealth #ClimateAction #BehaviorChange #ClimatePolitics #PlanetaryHealth #ClimateMentalHealth #EnvironmentalPsychology #GlobalMentalHealth #SystemsChange

UNESCO for the People – Harnessing Science, Technology, and Innovation as Global Public Goods Science, technology, and innovation (STI) shape not only what we know but how societies thrive and tackle pressing challenges. The International Decade of Sciences for Sustainable Development (2024–2033), led by UNESCO, presents a unique opportunity to strengthen international cooperation, boost public and private research investment, reinforce local research ecosystems, and place science at the core of inclusive development strategies that empower women, youth, and marginalized communities. Over three decades in academia, I have witnessed how scientific research transforms societies. I have mentored students and young scholars, collaborated with leading global academic institutions, and helped establish joint academic and research programs that unite scholars across borders and empower early-career researchers. Throughout my campaign, I have met scientists who are making a meaningful impact despite limited resources. As I emphasized during a lecture at UNESCO’s Arab Week, strong education systems, adequate funding, and international collaboration are essential to building diverse, resilient research communities capable of driving real change. “UNESCO for the People” envisions STI as tools for inclusion and sustainable development—creating tangible benefits for people’s lives by: • Supporting Member States in developing national research strategies that strengthen inclusive science ecosystems, uphold the right to science, ensure scientists’ safety, improve working conditions, and advance gender equality and youth participation. • Advocating for greater investment in research and innovation by increasing national budgets and fostering partnerships with international financial institutions and donors. • Reducing disparities among countries by promoting an inclusive digital transformation, fostering skills in emerging and converging technologies, implementing the Recommendation on the Ethics of AI, and establishing ethical guidelines for frontier technologies such as neurotechnology, quantum computing, and synthetic biology. • Expanding capacity-building programs, increasing research grants for young scientists, investing in STEM education, and supporting the development of think tanks, science parks, and technology incubators. • Enhancing cooperation and knowledge-sharing through global academic networks and UNESCO Chairs, and by strengthening South-South and triangular partnerships. • Promoting open and responsible science, scaling up access to data and publications, and integrating Indigenous and local knowledge into policy and innovation strategies. • Strengthening the science-policy-society nexus by ensuring evidence-based decision-making rooted in robust data collection and analysis, while aligning research with national priorities to effectively address societal challenges.

One of the most important lessons I’ve learned as a leader? 🔺. I don’t know what I don’t know. So I made it a principle: Find the people who do. Hire them. Collaborate with them. Get out of their way. It sounds simple. It’s not. Because it requires self-awareness. It requires humility. It requires the courage to lead with, not over, others. If you're solving a problem for someone, but not with them -- or better yet, not led by them -- you're likely doing it wrong. Too many leaders are taught that their job is to have the answers. But in today’s world, real leadership is about: ✅ Asking better questions ✅ Curating the right voices ✅ Building trust This is what leading from alongside means... Not from above. Not from ego. But in partnership. ⁉️ What it doesn’t mean: 👉. Giving up your role or responsibility as a leader. 👉. Flattening all structures or avoiding decision-making. ⭕ What it does mean: 👉. Modelling intellectual humility. Listening deeply to those closest to the issue - whether they are staff members, frontline workers, community members, students, or underrepresented voices - and treating their insights as central, not secondary. 👉. Co-creating solutions, rather than dictating them. 👉. Sharing credit and accountability. 👉. Stepping up when needed, but also stepping back to let others lead where they have greater expertise. 👉. It also means sharing power with those most impacted by the issue. Because proximity to the problem is also proximity to the solution. - The single parent juggling three jobs doesn’t need a policy memo on economic mobility. - The frontline nurse doesn’t need a webinar on burnout. - The refugee, the factory worker, the indigenous climate activist, the rural voter... They all hold knowledge most leaders will never find in a report. When we design systems without them, we fail them. Because the people closest to the pain are often furthest from the power. 👉. And that gap is where bad policy, ineffective strategy, and injustice thrive. Let’s be clear: This isn’t about guilt or blame. It’s about building systems that work... rooted in lived experience, shared ownership, and deep listening. If you’re always the one talking, leading, deciding... Ask yourself: Who is missing? Who should be leading here instead? Power doesn’t diminish when it’s shared. It expands. So does possibility. Let’s build from within. Let’s create rooms where more of us can thrive. ------------ Some takeaways from a strategy session I led with 150+ senior executives earlier this week. 📸: Me and Sayantani Saha, my powerhouse Chief of Staff -- better at many things than I’ll ever be.

The history of human progress can be understood as a series of breakthrough inventions that fundamentally changed how we live, work, and think. As the timeline in the image below illustrates, from stone tools and the control of fire to agriculture, the printing press, electricity, computers, and the internet, each major innovation initially created uncertainty but ultimately expanded human capability. I believe that #ArtificialIntelligence should be viewed in this same historical context-not as an anomaly to fear, but as the next logical step in humanity’s long journey of invention. What connects these innovations is not just their novelty, but their ability to amplify human potential. The wheel multiplied physical mobility, the printing press multiplied knowledge distribution, and the internet multiplied connectivity. #AI similarly represents a multiplier - this time of cognition. It helps humans process information faster, identify patterns beyond our natural limits, and automate routine intellectual tasks, allowing people to focus on creativity, judgment, and complex problem solving. History also shows that transformative technologies rarely replace humans outright; instead, they reshape work and create new opportunities. Just as electricity enabled entirely new industries and the computer created the digital economy, AI is likely to enable new forms of #healthcare, #education, #science, and #business #innovation. Rather than viewing AI as a disruption outside the normal course of progress, we should recognize it as part of the same continuum of human ingenuity-another powerful tool that, if guided responsibly, can help society solve problems at a scale previously unimaginable. Thoughts appreciated #entrepreneurship #technology #changemanagement https://lnkd.in/gGUTu-R3

I've debated with myself if I should write this post. Last week's government's drought advice included a recommendation to "delete old emails and pictures to save water at data centres." This kind of guidance shows why we urgently need more technologists across the public sector, and especially in the policy teams. It's not that this advice will not help, it will actively worsen the situation. Here's the thing: deleting old emails doesn't save water. Those emails sit in "cold storage" using virtually no energy. Worse, logging in to delete them actually creates more server activity and heat than leaving them alone. It's a bit like suggesting we burn books to reduce library heating costs. But this isn't really about drought policy - it's about something much bigger. We're living through the fastest technological transformation in human history. AI, quantum computing, biotech - these aren't distant future concepts anymore. They're reshaping our economy, our infrastructure, and our society right now. Yet many of our policy frameworks were designed for a different era. Clearly, even new policies are also sometimes designed for a different era! Government departments are full of incredibly smart people with deep expertise in economics, law, and public administration. What we're missing are enough people who can translate between the technical realities of our digital world and the policy decisions that shape it. We need people who understand both the technology and the Cabinet Office. People who can spot when well-intentioned advice might backfire. Who can help design regulations that actually achieve their intended outcomes. Who can anticipate the second and third-order effects of tech policy decisions. This isn't about criticizing anyone - it's about building stronger teams. The challenges we're facing as a country require all types of expertise working together. How do we attract more tech professionals into public service? And how do we help existing government teams access technical expertise when they need it? #GovTech #PublicService #TechPolicy #Innovation #Leadership