Research indicates that the increased use of scientific evidence is an important lever for transforming policy toward sustainability goals. We explore how actors use scientific evidence in contests over policy transformation in the agri-food sector. Theoretically, we build on prior research on evidence use in policymaking and the 3i's —ideas, interests, and institutions—that constitute policy regimes. We argue that some pieces of scientific evidence become salient in policy debates but are contested by competing actor coalitions. Salient and contested means that different actors refer to the same scientific evidence to support arguments for and against options of policy transformation. We posit that, in these arguments, evidence use is closely linked to the ideas, interests, and institutions that actor coalitions want to protect or challenge. We assess our arguments through a close examination of a landmark Swiss policy reform between 2019 and 2022 aimed at pesticide risk reduction. Drawing on policy post-exceptionalism literature to operationalize our analytical categories, we analyzed a comprehensive set of content-coded parliamentary and consultation documents derived from the policy process. Our analysis shows that (1) only a few pieces of scientific evidence became salient, (2) actor coalitions linked scientific evidence to different ideas, interests and institutions in line with their policy preferences, and (3) salient scientific evidence in support of transformation becomes contested when it is "too big to ignore". We conclude that while salient scientific evidence promotes evidence-informed debate, it does not necessarily provide clear and unambiguous direction for policy.

To understand complex societal transformations, scholars have called for more interdisciplinary research in which researchers from various disciplines collaborate. To support the implementation of such collaborations, we introduce a novel typology of interdisciplinary collaborations developed from the literature and from structured reflection on our own research experience. The typology distinguishes (I) common base, (II) common destination, and (III) sequential link type of interdisciplinary collaborations. Common base refers to an interdisciplinary collaboration at one research stage that later separates into parallel disciplinary work; common destination to a collaboration where separate disciplinary work feeds into joint interdisciplinary work at the next stage; and sequential link to a completed stage of disciplinary research that provides the basis for research in another discipline. We illustrate the typology with a case study of interdisciplinary collaborations in a research project that studied the potential for an evidence-based transformation of agricultural pesticide governance. The project involved researchers from seven natural, health, and social science disciplines who developed a process for forming and maintaining interdisciplinary collaborations. We provide five examples of interdisciplinary collaborations from the project, explaining for each its practical design and implementation, its contribution to overall research goals, and related opportunities and challenges. The examples show that the typology can systematize the thinking about interdisciplinary collaborations and enable critical reflection about interdisciplinary research design and implementation. Based on our reflections as early-career researchers, we conclude with lessons that can inform future interdisciplinary research projects on agri-food transformation and beyond.

To increase the societal impact of environmental governance research, scholars have called for knowledge cumulation, meaning that scientific evidence builds more systematically on previous findings. Our article develops the perspective that such knowledge cumulation takes place not only within academia but also at science-policy interfaces (SPIs). Drawing on literature on knowledge integration, synthesis, and use as well as science-policy literature, we outline five opportunities for knowledge cumulation at SPIs: (1) proximity to democratic discourse and decision-making; (2) suitability for inter- and transdisciplinary integration; (3) combined problem and solution focus; (4) potential to increase the generality of scientific findings; and (5) creation of targeted synthesis products. We illustrate their respective benefits and challenges with empirical examples from SPIs for climate change, biodiversity and natural resources, and food systems. We conclude that SPIs are an important locus for cumulating knowledge used in complex environmental governance and that future research could explore how this interacts with knowledge cumulation in the academic realm.

Inter- and transdisciplinary (ITD) research is increasingly called for and supported to promote sustainable transformation through knowledge co-production, knowledge integration, and solution development. The paper explores what is needed to support researchers in reflecting on their new roles in ITD research. We introduce a reflection tool that makes the growing literature on researchers’ roles in sustainability science applicable to ITD projects. Its design is based on the arguments that each researcher can have several roles within one research project and that focusing on a few key roles increases clarity compared to differentiating many specialized roles. The tool consists of (1) a researcher survey that operationalizes six prominent roles (traditional scientist, self-reflexive scientist, knowledge integrator, knowledge broker, process facilitator, and change agent), (2) a visualization of role profiles from the survey, and (3) a set of reflection questions on related opportunities, challenges, and coping strategies on individual and project level. We empirically applied the tool in two ITD research projects focused on sustainable food production and water and forest ecosystem management. Comparative application of the tool yielded diverse role profiles of researchers in both projects, with different patterns for senior and junior researchers as well as natural and social scientists. The reflection produced a collection of opportunities, challenges, and coping strategies that corroborates and extends insights from ITD literature. We discuss how the tool triggers multi-dimensional reflection on roles (individual and project level, role combinations, self-perception and external perception) and outline opportunities for further strengthening such reflection in ITD research.

Green industries and companies provide crucial political support for ambitious environmental policy. In this article, I examine through which mechanisms green business interests influence international environmental negotiations. I theorize technology-based arguing as an influence mechanism that builds on combined technological and discursive power and can outstrip relational and structural business power rooted in material resources. I probe these propositions in a process-tracing case study of new wastewater regulations for ships in the Baltic Sea negotiated in the Helsinki Commission and International Maritime Organization. I find that green business built, expanded, and sustained state support for ambitious nutrient removal standards by persuasively arguing that advanced treatment was feasible. Provision of tangible evidence of technology development, availability, and uptake undermined the influence of reluctant and materially superior business interests. I conclude that even small green business actors can facilitate ambitious environmental policy when communication channels between innovators and policymakers are strong.

Calls for supporting sustainability through more and better research rest on an incomplete understanding of scientific evidence use. We argue that a variety of barriers to a transformative impact of evidence arises from diverse actor motivations within different stages of evidence use. We abductively specify this variety in policy and practice arenas for three actor motivations (truth-seeking, sense-making, and utility-maximizing) and five stages (evidence production, uptake, influence on decisions, effects on sustainability outcomes, and feedback from outcome evaluations). Our interdisciplinary synthesis focuses on the sustainability challenge of reducing environmental and human health risks of agricultural pesticides. It identifies barriers resulting from (1) truth-seekers’ desire to reduce uncertainty that is complicated by evidence gaps, (2) sense-makers’ evidence needs that differ from the type of evidence available, and (3) utility-maximizers’ interests that guide strategic evidence use. We outline context-specific research–policy–practice measures to increase evidence use for sustainable transformation in pesticides and beyond.

Chapter 20 explores the management of increased shipping activities in the Arctic Ocean, which is changing dramatically due to regional warming and declines in the extent and thickness of sea ice. Increased shipping, which has been made possible by climate change, poses new threats to Arctic Ocean ecosystems, including the growing danger of accidental spillage of fuel oil and emissions of black carbon – itself a contributor to climate change - into the atmosphere. In response to these threats, traditional state-based governance ap-proaches, notably in the context of the International Maritime Organization (IMO), are being supplemented by newer forms of transnational governance that involve nongovernmental and corporate actors. This combination of traditional approaches to marine environmental governance with newer innovative approaches can serve as an example for governing other marine environments affected by global change. The chapter advocates innovative governance involving nonstate actors in the region, which in turn can stimulate traditional state-oriented institutions to bring their resources to bear on addressing the impacts of global environmental change.

The objectives and challenges of the UN Decade of Ocean Science for Sustainable Development stress the need to generate new knowledge about ocean problems, involve multiple stakeholders, and develop solutions for sustainable ocean development. In this perspective article, I argue that Earth System Governance (ESG) research could contribute significantly to addressing these needs. First, it can identify salient frames for ocean problems that trigger policy action. Second, it can inform stakeholder involvement by mapping powerful and marginalized interests and suggesting pathways towards more inclusive participation. Third, it can support viable and effective ocean solutions based on insights into political support coalitions and governance design. To make these contributions, ESG needs to be mainstreamed into ocean science. Governance researchers can facilitate mainstreaming by (i) greater knowledge cumulation around ocean issues, (ii) stronger engagement with frameworks of actionable knowledge production, and (iii) proactive integration into inter- and transdisciplinary ocean research.

The article explores energy policy tradeoffs faced by states that expand renewable electricity production and are part of cross-border electricity systems. We develop the concept of an impossible energy trinity (IET), which posits that many states cannot simultaneously achieve energy security, sustainability, and sovereignty. We argue that these states have three options to cope with the challenge of intermittent electricity production from domestic renewables. The dirty option resorts to base or reserve electric generating capacity from non-sustainable sources. The insecure option accepts system stability risks and/or higher electricity prices. The non-autonomous option cedes control over domestic energy rules to pursue integration with neighboring electricity grids and markets. We empirically illustrate our novel concept using the case of Switzerland, which finds itself at the crossroads of the three options. The country has to choose whether to add conventional generation capacities, accept grid instabilities and higher electricity prices, or integrate with the EU electricity market and rules. We discuss generalizations to other countries and ways to manage the IET. We conclude that public pressure for decarbonization and economic pressure to maintain secure energy supply render the non-autonomous option most likely in many states. The operation and governance of transboundary grid structure thereby influence energy transitions on national and subnational scales.

This chapter explores the political influence of Switzerland as a non-EU country in European electricity governance. We argue that the influence of non-EU countries depends on their access to European governance institutions and their structural power resources. We further posit that the type of structural power resources circumscribes the specific areas of influence. The empirical analysis assesses these variables qualitatively based on interview and other primary data. First, it shows that Switzerland has relatively high access to important European governance bodies. Second, it reveals that Switzerland possesses structural power in serving as a European transit hub for electricity and an important source of technical expertise. Third, it confirms our theoretical expectation that Switzerland acts as a shaper in European electricity governance. Swiss influence is especially seen in matters related to grid management and cross-border electricity trade. Limitations to Swiss influence are often rooted in the legal principles of the EU internal market. Our findings qualify claims about a marginalization of Switzerland in European electricity governance. At the same time, we highlight uncertainties resulting from the present lack of an electricity agreement between Switzerland and the EU. Our chapter recommends Swiss policy-makers to strive for viable forms of energy cooperation with the EU and to strengthen the transit function and technical expertise of the country.