4.7 Article

Barriers and opportunities to incorporate scientific evidence into air quality management in Mexico: A stakeholders' perspective

期刊

ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCE & POLICY
卷 129, 期 -, 页码 87-95

出版社

ELSEVIER SCI LTD
DOI: 10.1016/j.envsci.2021.12.022

关键词

Evidence-based policy; Air quality management; Stakeholders ' perspective; Mexico

向作者/读者索取更多资源

This paper examines the barriers and opportunities to incorporating scientific evidence into air quality policies in seven Mexican cities. The findings highlight the differences in technical capacity among cities and identify shared barriers, such as limited institutional capacity and knowledge transfer. Opportunities for integrating evidence into policies are also identified, including follow-up programs and increased funding for research.
Air pollution is among the most pressing environmental issues worldwide. Unfortunately, an effective reduction in air pollution remains elusive, and so does the incorporation of scientific evidence into air quality policies. This paper takes seven Mexican cities as study cases to document barriers and opportunities to incorporate scientific evidence into air quality policies. Supported by the Grounded Theory approach, we conduct and analyze interviews to decision-makers, researchers, and representatives of non-governmental organizations involved in programs aiming to improve air quality in Mexico. Findings from this study illustrate differences across cities in the technical capacity to produce evidence, and document barriers shared to incorporate evidence into air quality management - including institutional capacity, interest groups, legal frameworks, and limited knowledge transfer. Opportunities that increase integration of evidence into air quality policies include follow-up programs, guaranteed research funding, contextualizing the topics to be investigated as a public problem, and assigning a crucial role to research so that formal and informal links among decision-makers and scientists are formed and strengthened.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.7
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据