Skip to main content

Thank you for visiting You are using a browser version with limited support for CSS. To obtain the best experience, we recommend you use a more up to date browser (or turn off compatibility mode in Internet Explorer). In the meantime, to ensure continued support, we are displaying the site without styles and JavaScript.

Social sciences

IPBES disciplinary gaps still gaping

The Intergovernmental Platform on Biodiversity and Ecosystem Services (IPBES) convenes this month to approve summaries for policymakers of the first assessments at its fourth plenary.

Despite early calls for IPBES to draw on a broader range of disciplines than did the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (see E. Turnhout et al. Nature 488, 454–455; 2012), the social sciences and the humanities remain markedly under-represented. They make up less than 10% of the membership of IPBES expert groups, instead of the recommended 30%. These disciplines should play a bigger part in IPBES assessments and in implementing the first IPBES work programme for 2014–18.

The imbalance mirrors institutional and knowledge barriers between research disciplines. The IPBES Secretariat and its Multidisciplinary Expert Panel need to consult more experts from the social sciences and humanities for nominations for assessments. The panel should encourage these stakeholders to engage in scoping and reviewing activities and to register on IPBES networking sites.

One of the IPBES objectives is to include experts with “balance in the terrestrial and marine natural sciences, social and economic sciences, and arts and humanities”. The secretariat should review the disciplinary balance of all IPBES activities and products, and make the findings publicly available.

Author information



Corresponding author

Correspondence to Lindsay C. Stringer.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and Permissions

About this article

Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Vadrot, A., Jetzkowitz, J. & Stringer, L. IPBES disciplinary gaps still gaping. Nature 530, 160 (2016).

Download citation

Further reading


Quick links

Nature Briefing

Sign up for the Nature Briefing newsletter — what matters in science, free to your inbox daily.

Get the most important science stories of the day, free in your inbox. Sign up for Nature Briefing