MPA-ESP Student Spotlight: Margot Francini

Photo: Sydney Jones

Margot Francini (ESP ‘26) developed her interest in climate policy and environmental health through a mix of scientific research and state-level policy work in North Carolina, where she spent three years analyzing chemical regulation and working alongside policymakers and in research labs. Her global perspective deepened after representing her university at COP29, following NCQG negotiations and observing how climate science is, or isn’t, translated into international action. After graduating from the MPA-ESP program, Margot hopes to work with a climate-focused litigation or policy nonprofit, using her scientific and policy background to support U.S. climate litigation and pollution policy development.

What first sparked your interest in environmental health and policy?

I found out about climate change when I was little. When I was seven I followed the development of the Deepwater Horizon oil spill on NPR, and then I got books from my local library to figure out what climate change was and how fossil fuel companies were involved. Since then, environmental protection has been an ongoing theme throughout my life, but I decided to specifically study environmental health in undergrad because the discipline focuses on the human impacts of environmental issues, making them more tangible in peoples’ lives. I also studied public policy to learn how to effectively implement scientific findings to create real-world impact.

Throughout these studies, I focused on forever chemical pollution because this is an issue that critically affects my home state of North Carolina. I wanted to engage on an issue that was close to home, and from there, I was able to develop a toolbox for leveraging scientific evidence, community experiences, and existing policy frameworks to address emergent environmental issues. I pursued a three-year, in-depth focus on forever chemical science and policy, but I gained an interdisciplinary understanding of how to think outside the box to address urgent environmental issues as a whole.

How have your studies on environmental health shaped your understanding of global climate policy?

I studied environmental health science because it connects directly to people and it spans such a wide range of disciplines and issues, including climate change. I also minored in Portuguese in undergrad, and while to many this choice seemed a bit random to pair with my majors, I pursued these language studies to broaden my understanding of human-environment interactions and the communities impacted by climate change. I chose Portuguese because I was specifically interested in learning more about the Amazon region, including the Indigenous people protecting an ecosystem critical to the balance of our global climate system. These peoples’ rights to life, health, and culture are threatened daily by environmental pollution, climate change, food scarcity, disease, and violence. This is just one extreme example of an environmental health issue. Connecting all of these disciplines can feel a bit scatterbrained at times, but global climate change is inextricably interdisciplinary, so it is important to understand the issue from multiple angles.

Part of the reason why I went to COP last year was because I wanted to see to what extent Indigenous people were included or considered in international climate negotiations and decision-making. Looking ahead, I’m interested in developing ways to strengthen community-led climate accountability, including through climate litigation.

Let’s talk more about your experience at COP. What specifically did you learn from that and what was that experience like?

I got to attend the first week of COP29 in Azerbaijan as the sole representative for my undergraduate university. I specifically followed the negotiations surrounding the New Collective Quantified Goal (NCQG) on climate finance, where the agenda was focused on setting a new global climate finance goal to support developing countries after 2025.

I followed that because I had never been exposed to international policy or climate finance mechanisms before. Coming from North Carolina, I’d mostly worked on state-level policy, so it was incredibly eye-opening to see firsthand how geopolitical tensions influence negotiations on environmental issues. I learned a lot about how different countries position themselves, specifically how developed versus developing states frame their needs and the unique stances that middle-income countries take. I went in with a lot of questions, and while I feel like I left with even more, I also left with a much better understanding of the geopolitical and financing complexities stalling multilateral climate action.

I also wanted to see how science actually influences decision-making. I wondered how IPCC reports get operationalized in negotiation rooms, and who actually has the fluency to do that. In the rooms, I saw a disparity in how much parties pulled on scientific evidence, lived experience, or both, in stating their positions. A lot of Global South countries talked about what they were facing — tragic events, like Nepal having just gone through massive landslides. Meanwhile, many countries in the Global North were speaking strictly in terms of finance, adjusting fine details of the text, and reiterating actions already taken. It just felt like there were completely different realities and different stakes all in the same room.

During your work in North Carolina and later at COP, what gaps did you notice between scientific research and climate policy, and how did those gaps shape your academic or career direction?

I conducted policy analysis for about three years on chemical policy for North Carolina, and I also worked in an environmental engineering lab to invent an air sampler for forever chemicals. While I may not end up using a mass spectrometer or spend hours extracting samples from air filters later in my career, I spent time in the lab because I wanted to engage with the scientific community and the scientific research process. I wanted to learn why research questions get proposed and how projects get funded. Then, I wanted to leverage that perspective on the policy side to further understand how to advance science-informed policy. I still think there’s a big gap in collaboration between scientists and policymakers, specifically in terms of asking and answering the right questions.

At the global scale, I wanted to see if that disconnect existed there too. We have these incredible IPCC reports, but then there’s this stagnation in international climate policy. At COP, I was going to all these side events – press conferences, working group dialogues, panels – and it felt like there were two totally separate conversations happening. The scientists, including IPCC contributors, were talking about the intricacies of the problem, the fine-grained details. But those intricacies weren’t really showing up in the negotiation rooms.

And I think that’s something I want to keep exploring: why that gap exists, and how we can bridge it in a way that helps identify strategic paths forward.

What drew you to the ESP program and what topics or skills are you most excited to explore through the program?

I thought a lot before making my decision to attend Columbia. I chose this program because, even though I had the policy analysis and scientific research experience, I wanted to practice engaging with diverse stakeholders and working with people from a variety of disciplines and cultural backgrounds. I’ve already had the privilege of being a manager for the workshop group advised by Dr. Cohen, and through this experience I learned how to foster a collaborative work environment where diverse skillsets are leveraged to pursue projects efficiently and effectively. It’s those intricate interpersonal, team-building, managerial skills that I was looking to develop, and I feel like I’m already building them, which I’m really happy about.

Looking ahead, where do you hope your work takes you in the next 5–10 years?

Originally I really wanted to work for the federal government, because in North Carolina we had the EPA’s Office of Research and Development right near my university. I also got to engage with the Southern Environmental Law Center, and their campaigns have inspired me to support litigation and policy work at similar nonprofits in the near term. This work is especially critical now, when so much of the effort needed to protect people and the environment is circling back to these organizations.

Right now I want to contribute my scientific and policy background to strategize policy and issue campaigns. That could mean engaging communities around litigation, or engaging with the legislature, or whatever the pathway looks like, in order to support U.S.-based environmental litigation and policy development.

---

Views and opinions expressed here are those of the authors, and do not necessarily reflect the official position of the MPA in Environmental Science and Policy Program or Columbia University.