POLICY PERSPECTIVE Preserving environmental health and scientific credibility: a practical guide to reducing conflicts of interest Jason R. Rohr & Krista A. McCoy Integrative Biology Department, University of South Florida, SCA 110, 4202 East Fowler Avenue, Tampa, FL 33620, USA Keywords Atrazine; biodiversity; chemical registration; ecotoxicology; junk science; manufacturing uncertainty; peer-review process. Correspondence Jason R. Rohr, Integrative Biology Department, University of South Florida, SCA 110, 4202 East Fowler Avenue, Tampa, FL 33620, USA. Tel: 813-974-0156, fax: 813-974-3263. E-mail: jasonrohr@gmail.com Received 5 December 2009 Accepted 9 March 2010 Editor Richard Krannich doi: 10.1111/j.1755-263X.2010.00114.x Abstract Conflicts of interest, situations where personal or organizational considera- tions have compromised or biased professional judgment and objectivity, can weaken scientific credibility, pose threats to biodiversity and ecosystem ser- vices, and are often precursors to corruption. Here, we review historical and international examples of conflicts of interest and their impacts on global bio- diversity. We present a contemporary example of a conflict of interest that might have implications for the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency’s re- evaluation of the safety of the herbicide atrazine. To help scientists, natural resource managers, policy makers, and judicial officials identify and thwart conflicts of interest, we review strategies used by individuals and organiza- tions with conflicts of interest to evade environmental and public health de- cisions, discuss the role of the scientific and governmental review processes in maintaining scientific integrity, and offer recommendations to reduce bias and facilitate sound and swift decision making for enhanced environmental health. Introduction Although all researchers are influenced by their own ideas and perspectives, biases driven by conflicts of in- terest can be particularly harmful to biodiversity and the goods and services it provides. We define conflicts of in- terest as circumstances where it can be reasonably per- ceived that financial or other personal or organizational considerations have compromised or biased professional judgment and objectivity. A conflict of interest is a pre- requisite, and can be a precursor, to outright corruption, where an individual or organization unlawfully exploits a professional capacity for private gain (Laurance 2004; Smith & Walpole 2005). Conflicts of interest have encouraged individuals and organizations with personal agendas to distort, misrep- resent, and suppress scientific research and foster skep- ticism in science as a strategy to evade unwanted polit- ical or judicial decisions (Michaels & Monforton 2005). This strategy can progressively deteriorate trust in sci- ence (Mooney 2005), making it difficult for policy mak- ers, regulators, and managers to remediate the loss of goods and services associated with our biodiversity cri- sis because they are left wondering what science to be- lieve (Michaels & Monforton 2005). Indeed, conflicts of interest are implicated in the international loss of forest ecosystem services and declines of threatened and en- dangered species (Robertson & van Schaik 2001; Gross 2005; Bradshaw et al. 2009). Here, we discuss and review the consequences of conflicts of interest in conservation science and provide knowledge and recommendations to reduce conflicts of interest. Why conflicts of interests and conservation science? There is a long tradition of science being influenced and co-opted as a result of pressures from governmental Conservation Letters 3 (2010) 143–150 Copyright and Photocopying: c  2010 Wiley Periodicals, Inc. 143