Do you believe in green chemistry?

In 1998, Cher asked: “Do you believe in life after love?” This question speaks to the possibility of transformation and rebuilding self-worth after experiencing heartbreak. Generations of chemists have similarly faced challenges of rebuilding the environment or their sense of professional value when confronted with the heartbreaking reality of chemical pollution, waste generation, and environmental accidents. For us chemists, the concept could be translated to: “Do you believe in chemistry after hazard?” or even “Do you believe in green chemistry?”

It’s a meaningful coincidence that the same year that Cher asked this question, Paul Anastas and John Warner developed the 12 principles of green chemistry. Nearly 3 decades later, textbooks, conferences, dedicated journals, publications, classes, workshops, and even C&EN columns showcase and discuss the impact of green chemistry in the development of safer processes and products for human health and the environment. Nevertheless, in several sectors, places, and systems, green chemistry remains an addition or an afterthought. Chemists need to consider how our belief in green chemistry’s potential to address sustainability through chemistry affects its advancement and implementation.

In an objective and data-driven field such as chemistry, it is sometimes hard to weigh the importance of human systems involved in promoting the advancement of the discipline. But beliefs and values can push the chemical industry to pursue safer alternatives before regulators act, or they can frame sustainability as a competitive strategy instead of compliance. In education, the power of belief is even more transformative. Chemistry educators, then, sit at a crucial and privileged position. Their beliefs and values greatly influence how they shape the disciplinary knowledge they share and promote accessibility. In turn, this information and the way it’s delivered shape the eventual professional identity of their students.

If what is emphasized, normalized, and assessed as “good chemistry” is based on yield, selectivity, and scalability, students will internalize these priorities. But if hazard assessment, waste minimization, atom economy, and life cycle thinking are also included in discussions and problem-solving from day one, these attributes also become inseparable from future chemists’ definition of scientific excellence. That shift helps to bring systemic changes to the perception that sustainability in chemistry is an expectation rather than a specialization.

Countless studies have shown that belief systems and mindsets are essential to behavior change. We are comfortable thinking in these terms for activities like sports—coaches and commentators preach that we must believe in ourselves to perform well. When it comes to changing the way we approach our science, the social science of our mindsets, perceptions, and beliefs can be just as important as the hard science. Changing behavior is hard—particularly when you are working within systems encouraging compliance with the status quo. Taking risks to try something new (for example, a new approach to research or a new approach to teaching through a green chemistry lens) can be uncomfortable. Bucking the norms of a well-established field such as chemistry can also put someone in a vulnerable position.

But those who have a firm belief in the power and potential of chemistry to address human and environmental health often are not cowed by the resistance that they might face. With deep convictions, a person can persevere through challenging times. In sports, belief in their ability to succeed enables athletes to face challenging opposition through a more confident lens, which often helps them perform better. In chemistry, the same mindset can mean staying true to our ethics and values, even when challenged by peers.

In addition to belief and understanding, having the right support mechanisms to fall back on during hard times can be a determining factor of success. In sports, a coach or teammates might encourage a player and cheer them on. Chemists, especially those who are mentors and educators, might tap into the extensive network of green chemistry researchers and other colleagues with experience to find support and encouragement to move forward and achieve our goals.

Chemistry educators play a big role in changing how our field looks (now and in the future). Our work at Beyond Benign is focused on empowering them to integrate green chemistry into their courses and labs. To build and recognize the depth of this empowerment, our community survey measures human systems. In 2024, over 80% of respondents said that being part of Beyond Benign’s community increased their belief, confidence, conviction, and sense of belonging in the green chemistry community. These parameters can directly affect an educator’s likelihood of designing experiments, revising curriculum, advocating for departmental changes, and strengthening the overall depth and reach of their implementation of green chemistry.

Empowerment, in this sense, is not something abstract, but it emerges when community members believe in themselves as agents of change within a support network. So join us, be the change you want to see, support one another, and believe. The future of our society may very well depend on it.

Amy Cannon is the cofounder and executive director of Beyond Benign, a global nonprofit dedicated to green chemistry education. Juliana Vidal is a senior program manager at the same organization.

Views expressed are those of the authors and not necessarily those of C&EN or the American Chemical Society.