The EU Green Deal's ambition for a toxic‐free environment: Filling the gap for science‐based policymaking

Abstract

Around the world, many ambitious environmental conventions and regulations have been implemented over recent decades. Despite this, the environment is still deteriorating. An increase in the volume and diversity of chemicals is one of the main drivers of this deterioration, of which biodiversity loss is a telling indicator. In response to this situation, in October 2020, a chemicals strategy for sustainability (CSS) was published in the EU. The CSS is the first regional framework aiming to address chemical pollution in a holistic manner. The CSS covers the complete lifecycle of a chemical, including the design of better substances and remediation options, to remove chemicals from the environment. The strategy contains terms, such as a "toxic-free environment," for which no clear definition exists, potentially hampering the implementation of the CSS. In this paper, a definition for a "toxic-free environment" is proposed on the basis of a survey and a discussion held at the 2020 SETAC Europe Annual Meeting. In addition, key issues that are absent from the CSS but are considered to be key for the realization of a toxic-free environment are identified. To achieve the policy goals, it is recommended to align the definition of risk across the different chemical legislations, to establish a platform for open data and data sharing, and to increase the utility and use of novel scientific findings in policymaking, through the development of a strong science to regulation feedback mechanism and vice versa. The paper concludes that environmental scientists have the tools to address the key challenges presented in the CSS. However, an extra step is needed by both policymakers and scientists to develop methods, processes and tools, to increase the robustness and transparency of deliberation processes, and the utility of science. Integr Environ Assess Manag 2021;00:1-9.

Lessons Learned from the Grouping of Chemicals to Assess Risks to Human Health

“…There is an urgent need to strengthen the utility of science for policy and to improve the science–policy interface. […]“ [143] …”

Lehren aus dem Gruppieren von Chemikalien zur Bewertung der Risiken für die Gesundheit des Menschen

“…kamen zu dem Schluss: “Die Politik fordert die Vereinfachung und Standardisierung von Risikobewertungen, aber gleichzeitig ist es unerlässlich, dass die Benutzung und der Nutzen neuer wissenschaftlicher Erkenntnisse intensiviert werden […]. Es besteht die dringende Notwendigkeit, den Nutzen der Wissenschaft für die Politik zu stärken und die Schnittstelle zwischen Wissenschaft und Politik zu verbessern […]” [143] …”

“…auf der Grundlage der gefährlichen Eigenschaften der Chemikalie und allgemeiner Überlegungen zu ihrer Exposition […]", wobei "[…] spezifische Risikobewertungen die Gefahr, die Verwendung der Stoffe und die damit verbundenen spezifischen Expositionsszenarien für Mensch und Umwelt berücksichtigen und Risikomanagementmaßnahmen auf der Grundlage dieser Ergebnisse ausgelöst werden […]". [141] Bei der Risikobewertung werden die Gefahr und die Exposition gegenüber der Gefahr betrachtet (Abbil- [143]…”

Development of Chemical Emission Scenarios Using the Shared Socio-Economic Pathways

“…It is also challenging to get a complete picture despite being the largest category of chemicals being in use. The lack of information on different uses of chemicals, their emission volumes, and spatial differences hampers the chemical risk assessment (Dijk et al, 2021;van Gils et al, 2019) and adds to the uncertainty.…”

“…The goals of the Zero-pollution action plan to 2050 can be translated into quantitative assumptions as part of EFfuture(r, i). Dijk et al (2021) discussed the importance of analysing changes in pollution and its effects over space and time in the risk assessments to achieve the EU policy goals. The scenario-based framework can help to improve risk assessments by quantifying future policy targets such as improved wastewater treatment and reduced use per activity, region and time.…”