Air quality regimes are evolving as science evolves and policy ambitions are murky, researchers say

The failure to coordinate the thinking of law, policy and science is dangerous to “spoil the opportunity” to improve air quality, concludes a new research in environmental law, led by a UCL expert.

It’s theirs Science paper, “Harnessing science, policy and law to provide clean air,” Professors Eloise Scotford (UCL Faculty of Laws), Alastair Lewis (University of York) and Delphine Misonne (UCLouvain Saint-Louis, Brussels) review the latest research- rao and highlight major risks. access to clean air around the world.

Despite the great success of air quality legislation and policy in some parts of the world in recent decades, scientific evidence points to health risks from air pollution at very low levels, which which makes clean air even faster but more difficult to achieve.

Research shows that, for many national regulatory authorities, raising policy ambitions and air quality outcomes is not just a matter of increasing legal standards to the level of the World Health Organization’s Air Quality Guidelines. .

Recognizing this complexity, researchers emphasize the need to move from policy desire to policy delivery, with greater integration of science, law-making and legal knowledge.

“Once-in-a-generation, if it is not accompanied by a reflection on the effects of air quality, and a coordinated restoration of control, it can lead to the destruction of opportunities,” they said in their paper.

The researchers point to several areas where collective action is needed: around setting standards; deciding which pollutants will make the law; setting targets to reduce pollution as well as not to exceed certain levels; urban planning including consideration of the impact of air pollution on poor and ethnic minorities; and coordinate policy making at local, national and supranational levels.

One of these factors – deciding which pollutants to regulate – is related to the fact that a limited number of pollutants have been the target of air quality regulations over the years. forty years ago, but these may need to be expanded to better represent the current state of science. levels of toxicology and hazards.

The problem, they say, is that “statutory limits are often created when scientific evidence of risks is considered compelling by policymakers,” leading to “pollutants” such as fine particulate matter known as PM2.5. which are controlled today. . Because it is cheap and easy to measure, PM2.5 has become the “de facto variable” in health studies, they say.

But they added, “There may be benefits to the levels of black carbon, ultrafine particles, formaldehyde or small particles of Particulate Matter such as secondary organic aerosol;

To help combat this bias, researchers are looking for an analysis of “pollution” of air pollution, according to the principle of protection, “properly” as well as research funds to encourage them.

Another important aspect of ensuring that clean air policies are achieved and implemented is coordination of policy making.

The benefits of reducing air pollution and climate emissions “have long been described by the scientific community, but there is an unrecognized need for legislative and regulatory cooperation,” the researchers said in the paper. see.

They give the example of low-carbon fuels for aviation, saying that carbon control alone “doesn’t guarantee good air quality.”

The climate commitment for the adoption of low-carbon fuels can only succeed in reducing pollution if there are “coherent, internationally agreed regulatory requirements for reducing the temperature of the nitrogen engine oxide and Particulate Matter,” they said.

At the end of their paper, the researchers say, “To take the debate forward, we argue that expanding the space for strong regulatory development in the science-law-policy structure is an important way to accelerate supply of clean air goals around the world.