At the core of international environmental assessments is usually a scientific document that reviews available literature and data on a specified topic. The majority of the work is done by scientists who are considered to be experts in their fields. This has been the norm within the IPCC and in AMAP's assessments of pollution issues in the Arctic. Other actors, such as local stakeholders, have limited influence on this core activity of gathering information and synthesizing the available knowledge. This is in contrast to IASC's sub-regional climate impact assessment of the Bering and Barents Sea regions that also included discussions with local stakeholders. In most respects, ACIA's scientific assessment follows the IPCC and AMAP model and could be described as governed by internal scientific norms. However, before the scientists even begin their work, there is a process to determine the scope of the assessment, where chapter headings were discussed and lead authors selected. This process is one in which science and policy interact closely with each other.
Was this article helpful?