Abstract

The processes underpinning the environmental risk assessment (ERA) of chemicals have not changed appreciably in the last 30 years. It is unclear how successful these processes are in protecting the environment from any adverse effects of chemicals. To ascertain if the current methodology can be improved, and if so, how, we invited experts to suggest how the current ERA process could be improved. They were not asked to select from a list of suggestions. The 36 experts made 109 suggestions for improvement, which could be grouped into 33 categories. The category that received the most support, from 12 experts, was to utilise a broader range of scientific information, including all up-to-date information, in ERAs. The second most popular category, supported by 10 experts, was the suggestion to regulate mixtures of chemicals; the current regulatory process involves chemical-by-chemical assessment. Two quite radical proposals were suggested. One was to replace the regulator with artificial intelligence. The other was to establish a new competent authority that would appoint groups of experts, each including representatives of the range of stakeholders, to decide which studies were required, commission those studies, then conduct the ERA based on the results of those studies. These two radical proposals, which the authors support strongly, are not necessarily mutually exclusive. We conclude that the present ERA process could be improved to better protect the environment from the myriad of chemicals in use.

Full Text
Published version (Free)

Talk to us

Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have

Schedule a call