Sitting Down With… Jacob de Boer, Emeritus Professor of Environmental Chemistry and Toxicology at Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam, the Netherlands.
How did your career in environmental analytical chemistry begin?
I began my career in September 1974 as a trainee analyst at the laboratory of the Netherlands Institute for Fisheries Research. My initial work focused on analyzing dichlorodiphenyltrichloroethane (DDT), other organohalogen pesticides, and polychlorinated biphenyls (PCBs) in fishery products, which involved developing analytical methods using gas chromatography with electron capture detection. There were no computers at the time, but I still remember, with pleasure, the steady improvement of integrators.
I later became head of the laboratory as my work expanded into international research. The primary focus was on improving analytical methods through interlaboratory studies within the framework of the International Council for Exploration of the Sea (ICES) in Copenhagen. Between 1983 and 1990, capillary columns were introduced – followed soon after by the installation of the first mass spectrometer in our laboratory. One of the early European projects led to the launch of the QUASIMEME interlaboratory program. This was a major success at the time and remains active to this day, supporting hundreds of laboratories working on nutrients, organic contaminants, trace metals, and related analyses.
In 1995, I obtained my PhD under Professor Udo Brinkman at Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam. I was appointed part-time Professor of Environmental Analytical Chemistry at Wageningen University in 2005, and the following year moved, together with much of my research group, to Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam. From 2013 to 2016, I served as Director of the Institute for Environmental Studies, and later as Head of the Department of Environment and Health. During this period, I coordinated numerous European research projects and advised the United Nations Environment Programme in the context of the Stockholm Convention.
Over the course of my career, I have published more than 260 scientific papers and book chapters, including work in Nature and Science, and have served as Editor-in-Chief of Chemosphere since 2013. After retiring in 2022, I founded a small consultancy, STAEPS, and continue to work as an advisor on environmental issues, including as a member of an expert group on health in the IJmond region for the Dutch Ministry of Infrastructure.
What drives your work?
I was strongly influenced by Rachel Carson’s Silent Spring and by the Club of Rome, both emerging from the 1960s. Since then, the study of persistent compounds in the environment – and in humans – has remained my main motivation. This work continually underscores the need for careful assessment and intervention to protect our future generations.
Looking back, which scientific contributions are you most proud of?
One particularly successful outcome was an EU-funded research project focused on developing an LC-MS method for detecting diarrhetic shellfish poisoning. This approach went on to replace animal testing, which had previously been the only available option in this field. The analytical development itself was led primarily by my PhD student, Arjen Gerssen.
I have also contributed to the development of certified reference materials for organic pollutants – first through the European Bureau for Reference Materials (BCR) in Brussels, and later through the European Commission’s Joint Research Centre in Geel, Belgium. This work has helped improve analytical quality and comparability across laboratories, and I believe it has had a lasting impact on environmental monitoring.
Beyond analytical development, some of the most consequential outcomes of my work have been regulatory. Scientific evidence contributed to the closure of the 3M factory in Zwijndrecht, near Antwerp, which was responsible for severe PFAS-related environmental contamination. A similar process unfolded in Dordrecht in the Netherlands, where evidence also supported action against the Chemours facility.
On a more personal level, I was particularly glad to have supported a group of female workers at DuPont in Dordrecht who were involved in lycra production using dimethylacetamide (DMAc). Many experienced serious pregnancy-related health problems, and the case ultimately went to court successfully.
What are some of the most urgent issues in environmental chemistry today?
Industry remains able to introduce new chemicals without adequate prior testing of their environmental behavior. At the same time, the pace of chemical innovation is accelerating: new compounds are already being developed at remarkable speed, and with tools such as AI at our disposal, that rate is likely to increase further.
As with pharmaceuticals, chemicals should be properly assessed before they enter widespread use. The principle of “no data, no market” remains essential, yet we still know far too little about the long-term effects of many substances – particularly the combined impacts of multiple chemicals on human health and the environment.
And from an analytical perspective, while recent advances in mass spectrometry have been impressive, important gaps remain. There is still a clear need for more reliable and standardized methods for measuring microplastics. Progress has been relatively slow, largely due to their complex physical and chemical properties and the high level of methodological uncertainty involved.
What role do politics and regulation play in addressing chemical pollution?
Politics plays a crucial role. Through my increasing engagement with the media, I’ve observed that policymakers often respond much more quickly to newspaper, radio, or television interviews than to scientific publications. Nevertheless, regulation remains essential – particularly when it comes to controlling industrial emissions. For a time, the European Green Deal appeared to offer a more robust framework for addressing chemical pollution. More recently, however, shifts in the political composition of the European Parliament have reduced the level of attention given to environmental safety and human health.
This is compounded by the current situation in the United States. Colleagues report increasing restrictions on travel to scientific meetings, deterioration of research facilities, and reduced attention to environmental advice. These developments risk long-term damage to environmental science capacity.
Beyond the laboratory, what responsibility do analytical scientists have in tackling environmental challenges?
Analytical scientists carry a significant responsibility. In an era where misinformation is widespread, careful measurement and evidence-based analysis are essential. Few disciplines are better equipped than analytical chemistry to establish what is actually true.
At the same time, communicating those findings is obviously just as important. Historically speaking, this hasn’t always been a strength in analytical chemists, and thus it is an area where greater effort and attention are needed.
In difficult situations, I try to contribute where I can – even if only in my own, modest way. One important role is explaining issues around chemical pollution through the media, in a form that is accessible beyond the scientific community. As mentioned, I’ve noticed that policymakers often pick up and respond to these messages, which makes this kind of engagement worthwhile.
How do your current roles keep you engaged with the field?
I continue to be actively involved in the field, regularly giving presentations at symposia around the world. One current focus is the organization of the International Symposium on Flame Retardants (BFR2026), which will take place in September 2026 in Riva del Garda, held jointly with the International Dioxin Symposium – a combination we’re very excited about.
Alongside this, I spend a significant amount of time in Flanders, Belgium, where I provide scientific advice on PFAS-related issues to policymakers, firefighters, and environmental campaigners. I also work with lawyers, offering expert input on PFAS and other chemical-related cases.
What advice would you give to the next generation of environmental and analytical scientists?
In the younger generation, some focus primarily on rapid career success and financial security, but many others are strongly motivated to improve the world – particularly in areas such as environmental protection and human health. It’s encouraging to see how many remain deeply engaged with these issues.
I hope that as many young people as possible have the opportunity to study at university, because it can be an inspiring environment. At the same time, there are new pressures. Social media, in particular, can contribute to stress and low mood, including among students, and the pace of technological change has become extremely fast. Developments such as smartphones and AI arrive so quickly that they can make life more demanding rather than easier for young people.
My hope is that people remain open to learning throughout their lives. I am retired now, but I still learn something new every day – and I find that enormously rewarding.
Newsletters
Receive the latest analytical science news, personalities, education, and career development – weekly to your inbox.
