Alternatives to planetary boundaries can enhance science-policy linkages for chemicals governance

Chemical pollution poses significant environmental and human health problems. Some researchers have put forward the planetary boundary framework as a way to contextualize knowledge about Earth system challenges, including chemicals. In this Perspective, we argue that further application of the planetary boundary framework has limited conceptual and practical value for advancing research and policy-making to address environmental and human health risk from chemicals, and may end up having negative unintended consequences for inclusive and effective governance. We present four sets of issues which challenge the application of the planetary boundary framework to chemicals, connected to conceptual inconsistencies, conflicts with established norms and practices on risk and precaution, a limited ability to help protect the most vulnerable, and a lack of legitimacy in political processes. As an alternative, we discuss three ways in which researchers can help advance knowledge and action on chemicals, working with stakeholders through existing policy efforts and treaties.