Breadcrumb
- Epi
- Endocrine-Disrupting Chemicals
About Endocrine-Disrupting Chemicals
Endocrine Disrupting Chemicals (EDCs) are a class of chemicals that can mimic our own hormones and interfere with the endocrine system of people and wildlife. They can disrupt healthy development and are thought to play a role in a range of disorders: from birth defects, reproductive disorders, cancers. Over 800 hundred chemicals are known or suspected EDCs. They can be found in food and in thousands of other products (WHO, 2013). Known endocrine-disrupting chemicals (EDCs) include, among others, PCB, DDT, PBDE and some phthalates. However, no commonly accepted criteria for the identification of EDCs are yet available.
While uncertainties remain, a number of laboratory and epidemiological studies have suggested associations between exposure to certain EDCs and adverse effects in humans, including reproductive dysfunctions, cancers, neurodevelopmental disorders, diabetes and metabolic disorders, among others. Some studies also suggest that certain chemicals have endocrine-disrupting effects on wildlife, including feminization of some species (GCO II, UNEP 2019).
As indicated in the GCO II, EDCs have become a topic of significant international interest. Substantial efforts have been made over the past decades to develop a better scientific understanding, to identify EDCs and develop scientific approaches to support risk management. An important milestone was reached in 2012, when the third session of the ICCM recognized EDCs as an emerging policy issue (EPI).
.
Related resources
22 resources found
Integrating Policy: Water, Endocrine Disruptors, and Pharmaceuticals
The links between policies on water and chemicals are straightforward but integrated policy is a challenge that needs to be addressed. The Strategic Approach to Integrated Chemicals Management (SAICM) has played an important role in bringing attention to emerging issues that cross these domains.
Two chemical groups recognized by SAICM that fall outside global agreements and have significant impacts on water, health, and biodiversity are endocrine disrupting chemicals (EDCs) and environmentally persistent pharmaceutical pollutants (EPPPs). SAICM recognized EDCs and EPPPs as emerging policy issues a decade ago, accelerating cooperative actions among governments and stakeholders to mobilize knowledge and awareness. EDCs and EPPPs are not only important topics for global governance on chemicals. Policy advancements addressing EDCs and EPPPs are also applicable to and can be strengthened by the voluntary commitments of the 2023 UN Water Conference, negotiations for a new international treaty on plastics and a science-policy body on chemicals and wastes, and the implementation of the Global Biodiversity Framework (GBF), among other decision-making forums.
EDC and EPPP Risks
Historically, the risks and harms of pollution have not been prioritized in policy agendas commensurate with their impact on the health of people and planet. Worldwide consumption and production patterns have pushed the planetary boundary for environmental pollutants past sustainability while at least 5,000 novel chemicals produced since 1950 are recognized to have nearly universal human exposure. Pollution contributes approximately 17-25% of the environmental burden of disease, or about 9 million deaths per year. This is a fraction of the amount of its sub-lethal harms that lead to a wide spectrum of diseases, many of which are not recognized.
In 2017, the global health community elevated the visibility of negative health outcomes from chemical pollution through the formation of a Lancet Commission on Pollution and Health, yet an assessment report five years later noted “strikingly little” progress within countries to address these challenges. In fact, the challenge is increasing according to the World Water Development Report 2023: globally, water use rises by 1% per year but, still, five of 11 target indicators for SDG 6 (clean water and sanitation) are not reported.
EDCs and EPPPs were recognized by SAICM as emerging pollutants of concern in 2012 at the third International Conference on Chemicals Management (ICCM3) and in 2015 at ICCM4, respectively, due to their health risks. Worldwide, nearly everyone is suspected to have EDCs in their blood. EDCs are also found in the blood of diverse species in many ecosystems, which creates specific risks for mammals, birds, fish, and some other species who have endocrine systems. Normal reproduction and development of current and future generations of humans and other species are jeopardized by EDCs. This is a risk that will grow with rising use of plastic – a major EDC source -, which is projected to triple by 2060.
The sub-lethal effects of EDCs are dangerous and long-lasting. EDCs alter natural mechanisms of development and normal physiologic function because they change the internal communication system – the hormone system – of the organism exposed, essentially resulting in a biological re-programming, de-programming, or mal-programming. They are also known to modify DNA regulation and expression, yielding heritable changes across multiple generations. In addition, EDCs are associated to secondary effects, such as increased likelihood of non-communicable diseases (NCDs).
Concentrations of EPPPs create low-dose drug mixtures that humans are exposed to in water, and at the same time, these substances can have complicated negative therapeutic impacts on other species. Drugs in the environment have the unintended consequence of having their intended effect on the physiology of other species. For example, antidepressants, analgesics, antimicrobials, and steroids like contraceptives alter behavior and feeding, renal function, natural decomposition of excrement, and feminization, fertility and fecundity, ultimately disturbing ecological relationships and life cycles. The intentional therapeutic design of pharmaceuticals also contributes to their persistence in ecosystems and risks to other species.
EDCs and EPPPs both have substantial negative impacts on water resources and water ecosystems. EDCs are found in diverse water ecosystems and in surface, ground, and drinking water. Many sectors contribute to the EDC “cocktails” in water resources because EDC production and use are central to agriculture (pesticides), houseware industry (plastics), electronics (plastics and heavy metals), cosmetics, and healthcare (plastics). EDCs also arise from industrial chemicals used to enhance other products, such as with flame retardant qualities. The exposure data on EDCs at the sectoral level can be staggering. For one, fruit and vegetable produce can carry dozens of endocrine disrupting residues from pesticides. Current data on a specific type of EDC with hydrophilic (water-loving) chemical properties, per- and polyfluoroalkyl substances (PFAs), show they are widespread across regions, and frequently detected in water regardless of proximity to point sources, carrying significant implications for public health. For instance, the European Environment Agency (EEA) observes that 14% of teenagers across nine countries have blood levels of PFAs above health guidance levels. Leading institutions generally conclude that the impacts of EDCs are underestimated. A focus on water pollution is important to the management of EDCs because, according to the Stockholm Convention on Persistent Organic Pollutants’ (POPs) Second Global Monitoring and Review, EDC concentrations in water serve as an important indicator to the effectiveness of policies to reduce their emissions.
Similarly, EPPPs mainly pollute water, contaminating surface water, groundwater, drinking water, and soil. The dominant emission pathway is urban wastewater discharge, with that from manufacturing, animal husbandry, and aquaculture also being significant. Findings from a report of 89 countries showed 992 active chemicals from pharmaceuticals or their transformation products are found in water and waste streams, and 703 of these were found in surface, ground, or drinking water. Another finding showed that 37 EPPPs exist in all five UN regions. At the same time, conclusions from a workshop on risks held by the World Health Organization (WHO) Regional Office for Europe concluded that no existing health-surveillance programmes are fully applicable for EPPPs.
Governance arrangements
EDCs and EPPPs slip through the cracks of existing environmental governance regimes. The risks of EDCs are well understood but constructing a regulatory framework that captures their complexity, prevalence, and life cycle in the environment is difficult. EDCs can contaminate soil, water, air, and food, and fall under numerous regulatory categories depending on what profession is assessing them. Under international environmental law they can be categorized as “POPs,” “hazardous waste,” “mercury products” and other “heavy metals,” “pesticides,” and “plastics.” In the health sector, they are discussed as “carcinogens,” “mutagens,” and “reprotoxicants.” Despite that EDCs link to a spectrum of governance instruments, and their global prevalence, major sources of EDCs are not being addressed at the global scale because no global instrument encompasses them comprehensively. Efforts at the sub-global and national level are similarly uneven and patchy. Thousands more chemicals are linked to endocrine disruption than the 1,400 currently documented as EDCs, and of those documented, less than 10% are being assessed and/or addressed through existing instruments and actions, worldwide.
A similar challenge exists for EPPPs, but for different reasons. Major multilateral environmental agreements (MEAs) addressing chemicals, namely the Stockholm Convention on POPs, the Basel Convention on Transboundary Movement of Hazardous Waste, the Rotterdam Convention on Prior Informed Consent (PIC), and the Minamata Convention on Mercury, explicitly exclude pharmaceuticals from consideration. The sheer volume of these substances in the environment warrants a more inclusive approach. In some high-income economies estimates suggest nearly 50% of the population uses pharmaceuticals at any given time. The cumulative outflow of pharmaceutical products in hospital and household water and waste streams is steadily growing but risk assessments are insufficient. For example, in the EU, more than 3,000 pharmaceuticals are distributed without an Environmental Risk Assessment (ERA).
Water policy should be a logical home for governance of EDCs and EPPPs, however in practice, there is a mismatch in scale. Most regulatory policies on water are at the local or regional level, or scoped for river basins, while the prevalence and distribution of EDCs and EPPPs are global and transboundary. Moreover, global health experts note that metrics for industrial water pollution were agreed as part of the SDGs but are underdeveloped. Under public health mandates, water and sanitation policies are not scoped to consider chemical pollutants comprehensively or, in some areas, prioritize water access over risks from chemical pollution. The WHO began a process of developing drinking water quality guidelines on PFAs in 2017.
SAICM mobilized a series of “cooperative actions” to stimulate progress on EDCs (2012) and EPPPs (2015), because a focus on research cannot alone be successful in driving policy action. In 2020, the UN Environment Programme (UNEP) issued ‘An Assessment Report on Issues of Concern: Chemicals and Waste Issues Posing Risks to Human Health and the Environment,’ in which it noted that despite some progress on EDCs and EPPPs, current actions were insufficient to address the global nature and/or full life cycle of these issues. In the report, UNEP identified a number of ways to develop and advance a landscape of governance approaches to EDCs, spanning agriculture policies, health and occupational policies, human rights, and the domains of biodiversity and climate change. UNEP also identified challenges and opportunities to shape the norms and policies in the sound management of EDCs:
- Bringing countries to the same level of awareness and knowledge, and ensuring regular periodicity of assessments and synthesis of scientific knowledge ready to be used in policy environments; and
- Bridging different approaches to assessing and managing EDCs, rectifying policy inconsistencies, data requirements, and joint assessments and strategies, with emphasis on the broad uptake of the Globally Harmonized System of Classification and Labelling of Chemicals (GHS).
UNEP also identified challenges to making progress on EPPPs that include addressing barriers in existing norms and policies:
- The scope of pharmaceuticals addressed is limited by terminology “environmentally persistent,” which does not capture, for instance, those that are pseudo persistent and bioaccumulate or those whose short-term impacts are irreversible. One way forward is to expand this scope with simple, general criteria.
- Pharmaceutical waste prevention needs to be stepped up because contamination is expensive and technically difficult. Stakeholders need to encourage pharmaceutical manufacturers to be more engaged in “green pharmacy” approaches along the value chain.
- Support for addressing negative impacts of pharmaceuticals is needed in developing countries and economies in transition and needs to be tailored to the pharmaceuticals most prevalent in local wastewater in those areas.
- The system of Environmental Risk Assessments (ERAs) needs to be re-visioned to capture the existing risk of total pollution load. Thousands of pharmaceutical products are distributed without ERAs and are measured in surface water at significant concentrations.
- Strengthening the engagement of pharmaceutical manufacturers and capturing the full life cycle of a pharmaceutical product in policy actions are important.
- Moving beyond a focus on knowledge to policy actions is needed. A package of instruments that includes marketing authorization, take-back unused/expired drug programs, and waste treatment, among others, are required.
One issue linked to EPPPs – the increasing risk and threat of “superbugs” – is drawing increasing attention worldwide. The multifaceted problem due to the use of antimicrobial drugs in human, veterinary, and livestock agriculture is a significant issue under EPPPs. According to a 2023 report, ‘Bracing for Superbugs,’ UNEP says minimizing pharmaceuticals is “critical” to preventing antimicrobial resistance (AMR) and ecotoxicity. Antibiotics, antivirals, fungicides, and disinfectants flow in wastewater, but a fraction have been assessed. The scale and interconnectedness of AMR water contamination calls for a comprehensive, multi-sectoral response, including ‘upstream’ and ‘downstream’ interventions as well as enhanced data collection and research. Solutions include improved prevention and reduction in overuse, especially in the agriculture sector, and improved water, sanitation, and hygiene (WASH) programmes.
Financing the sound management of EDCs and EPPPs
Major risks and major costs present a dual challenge for the sound management of EDCs and EPPPs and new attention is needed to highlight the long-term financial impacts of these pollutants. Arguments that pollution is not cost-effective are “flawed and obsolete,” according to health experts. At the same time, new investments in cost-benefit analyses to unveil and communicate hidden costs of pollution are essential.
A 2015 estimate of the cost of inaction on EDCs in Europe totals EUR 157 billion, and similarly, projections to pre-emptively manage the costs of antimicrobial resistance (AMR) are between USD 4 billion – 9 billion per year (upstream) and USD 13 billion – 47 billion per year (downstream). Another gap area is the disproportionate lack of funding in research and design for hazard analysis. In 2013, the EEA noted that “over the past decade” 1% of research funding went to hazards while 99% went to product development. Some stakeholders advocate for a 0.5% chemicals tax on the USD 2.3 trillion profit from production of basic chemicals.
Human rights dimension of EDCs and EPPPs management
The UN Special Rapporteur on Toxics views exposure of people to harmful substances without their prior informed consent as a human rights issue. The Rapporteur outlines the human rights obligations of states on pollution and toxics, including to establish monitoring programmes, assess major sources of exposure, and provide the public with accurate, accessible information about risks to health, and to not cause pollution or exposure to toxic substances that violate the right to a clean, healthy, and sustainable environment recently recognized by the UN General Assembly (UNGA). Specifically, the Rapporteur notes that the “application and interpretation of the right to a safe, clean, healthy and sustainable environment in the context of pollution and toxic substances should be guided by the principles of prevention, precaution, non-discrimination and non-regression, and the polluter pays principle.” The UN Special Rapporteur on the Human Environment further states that a non-toxic environment depends on safe, sufficient water and healthy aquatic ecosystems, which should be managed with water plans that take a rights-based approach.
Pollution is a major cause of environmental injustice, and gender equity is receiving increasing attention in this regard. The disproportionate exposure and risks women face leads some stakeholders to underscore the importance of gender-responsive chemicals management, while eight countries have invested in a multi-year project to assess the EDC toxicity on the female reproductive system. SAICM recognizes that information on chemicals associated to endocrine disruption should not be confidential.
Opportunities to promote sound management of EDCs and EPPPs
The recently concluded UN 2023 Water Conference created an opportunity to elevate the importance of sound management of EDCs and EPPPs. One key focus could be incorporating their consideration in voluntary commitments that make up the Water Action Agenda, which could, for instance, emphasize or specify quantitative goals on pollution, and the interlinkages of the human right to a clean, healthy, sustainable environment and the right to water and sanitation. The High-level Political Forum on Sustainable Development (HLPF) in July 2023 where SDG 6 will undergo in-depth review, as well as the SDG Summit in September could both bring much-needed attention to the issue of EDCs’ and EPPPs’ sound management.
In addition, 2023 will be a busy year with high potential to advance more comprehensive global chemical governance that includes emerging policy issues. SAICM – a multistakeholder and multi-sectoral policy framework established in 2006 to mobilize action until 2020 – will undergo a critical review to determine the sound management of chemicals and waste beyond 2020. Key events contributing to this review are the resumed fourth session of the Intersessional Process for Considering SAICM and the Sound Management of Chemicals and Waste Beyond 2020 (IP4.3) and ICCM5 – a body whose aim is to promote chemical safety worldwide and whose mandate includes considering a new instrument to follow SAICM. Both of these events have been delayed since 2020 and will convene in September 2023. These forums provide opportunities to directly promote the management of EDCs and EPPPs as issues of concern.
In addition, UNEP’s intergovernmental negotiating committee (INC) on plastics will reconvene to continue deliberation on the design of a new international legally-binding instrument (ILB). The meeting will focus on the substantive scope of the treaty and its implementation and the form of the global agreement to which countries could commit. Some governments propose that the treaty be scoped to consider both socioeconomic and environmental considerations of plastics, which is a way to ensure space to consider EDCs and EPPPs under the health dimension of socioeconomic concerns.
The Open-ended Working Group for a science-policy panel for chemicals, waste, and pollution will also resume to advance discussion on the scope and concept of the new panel. The panel aims to provide policy-relevant scientific advice, and these talks provide another ripe moment to ensure that the mandate of the panel is broad enough to include impacts of EDCs across exposure routes (air, water, soil, food, and chemicals in products) and also explicitly include pharmaceuticals. The innovative horizon-scanning feature proposed for this panel is important for tackling emerging issues and facilitating early warning. The updated WHO report on the State of Science on Endocrine Disrupting Chemicals since 2012 is underway and anticipated prior to the sixth session of the UN Environment Assembly (UNEA) in 2024. Consideration for how the global health field can incorporate EDCs’ and EPPPs’ monitoring and actions to address them, such as through WASH programmes, would be a valuable chapter.
Other international forums and implementation actions provide additional opportunities to ensure water pollution, EDCs, and EPPPs are appropriately addressed and regulated at the global level. There are a number of biodiversity policy spaces that can strengthen uptake and capacity building for chemicals. GBF target 7 – to “reduce pollution risks and the negative impact of pollution from all sources, by 2030, to levels that are not harmful to biodiversity and ecosystem functions and services, considering cumulative effects,” including by halving nutrient loss and the risk of pesticide and highly hazardous chemicals, and by working towards eliminating plastic pollution – provides important synergies to chemicals governance spaces. Specific mention of water pollution from EDCs and EPPPs can be incorporated into updates of National Biodiversity Strategies and Action Plans (NBSAPs), which are currently underway. Development of One Health Action Plans is another vehicle where EDCs and EPPPs are relevant, such as within management strategies for antimicrobial drugs.
A renewed focus on gaps in national implementation and agenda setting is a way to take up global health recommendations. A 2022 Lancet Commission on pollution and health progress report on national water governance underlined the importance of cross-sectoral approaches to pollution control policies. The report observed that “ministries of health continue to prioritise infectious diseases and disease treatment, leaving pollution prevention to the ministries of environment, which usually have less power and less funding than ministries of health,” and further noted the absence of leadership from powerful ministries of finance, urban development, and energy.
Advancing effective pollution control for water resources, EDCs, and EPPPs will require the involvement of the health sector at the national level, particularly in the development of evidence reports, action plans, and communication. Some countries are making progress on EDCs, including Belgium, France, Japan, and Malaysia, though a recent analysis of regulatory approaches points to major technical barriers, such as the in vivo evidence requirement to demonstrate EDCs’ adverse effects. On pharmaceuticals, the Netherlands, Sweden, and China have developed progressive approaches. However, significant imbalance exists in the assessment and monitoring of chemicals, including EDCs and EPPPs, across regions. The Lancet report offers several recommendations to develop health sector involvement, including:
- Establishing monitoring and control systems on different forms of exposure, such as developmental toxicity, reproductive toxicity, immunotoxicity, the effects of long-term low-level exposures, and the health risks of chemical mixtures, such as by building on hazard identification models;
- Incorporating pollution prevention into development strategy frameworks;
- Strengthening media attention to topics relating to pollution and health;
- Including modern pollution prevention in multilateral development institutions’ country strategy frameworks;
- Linking pollution to planning for noncommunicable disease, climate change, biodiversity, food, and agriculture, and making pollution a more robust component of the One Health approach and in dialogues on planetary health; and
- Identifying and mapping pollution exposures particularly in low-income and middle-income countries.
A stronger mention of pollution in the Global Action Plan for the Prevention and Control of Non-Communicable Diseases would provide top-down support to national planning.
UNEP’s Assessment Report on Issues of Concern concluded by highlighting looking not only at risks to human health and the environment, but also at the links between chemicals and waste and other environmental and societal priorities. The year 2023 offers many doors to improving the global best practices on emerging issues in chemicals governance.
* * *
This document has been developed within the framework of the Global Environment Facility (GEF) project ID: 9771 on Global Best Practices on Emerging Chemical Policy Issues of Concern under the Strategic Approach to International Chemicals Management (SAICM). This project is funded by the GEF, implemented by UNEP, and executed by the SAICM Secretariat. The International Institute for Sustainable Development acknowledges the financial contribution of the GEF to the development of this policy brief.
This Policy Brief is the fourth in a series featuring cross-cutting topics relating to the sound management of chemicals and waste. It was written by Liz Willetts, IISD Earth Negotiations Bulletin (ENB) Team Leader and Senior Writer. The series editor is Elena Kosolapova, Senior Policy Advisor, Tracking Progress Program, IISD.
RELATED EVENTS
- Fifth Meeting of the International Conference on Chemicals Management (ICCM5)
- UN 2023 Water Conference
Creating a Strong Policy Framework for Sound Chemicals Management
Chemicals are essential to many household and industrial activities, but they also pose threats to humans, wildlife, and ecosystem health. The World Summit for Social Development (WSSD) in 1995 called for developing “a strategic approach to international chemicals management” by 2005, and set a 2020 target to minimize the significant adverse effects of chemicals on human health and the environment.
Since then, the international community has taken some important steps, adopting multilateral agreements on prior informed consent (PIC), persistent organic pollutants (POPs), and mercury, as well as continuing prior work on the transboundary movement of hazardous waste. An overarching policy process, the Strategic Approach to International Chemicals Management (SAICM), was established in Dubai in 2006. While some progress has been made, the ambition for an overall strong post-2020 regime on chemicals and waste has not yet been achieved.
To support negotiations toward a post-2020 regime, in 2019, the fourth session of the UN Environment Assembly (UNEA-4) called for review of evidence published within the previous decade (Resolution 4/8) to support further discussion at UNEA-5 and other international forums working toward sound management of chemicals and waste. Following on from this, in 2020, the UN Environment Programme (UNEP) published a major report titled, ‘An Assessment on Issues of Concern: Chemicals and Waste Issues Posing Risks to Human Health and the Environment.’ The report highlights challenges and opportunities for sound chemicals management, and proposes policy and management options.
This policy brief provides a summary and perspective on that report, in light of the most recent developments on chemicals and waste.
The eight issues identified under SAICM
The 2006 Dubai Declaration and Overarching Policy Strategy called for the SAICM process to identify “emerging policy issues” (EPIs), based on specified criteria that include the magnitude and impacts of the problems, their cross-cutting nature, and the status of knowledge and action around those issues, with the aim to avoid duplication of efforts. To date, the SAICM process has identified six EPIs, namely:
- chemicals in products;
- endocrine disrupting chemicals;
- environmentally persistent pharmaceutical pollutants;
- hazardous substances within the life cycle of electrical and electronic products;
- lead in paint; and
- nanotechnology and manufactured nanomaterials.
Two other “issues of concern” have also been highlighted for action:
- highly hazardous pesticides; and
- per- and polyfluoroalkyl substances.
This section provides a summary of these issues, as reflected in the UNEP report.
Chemicals in products (CIP), including those used in many consumer items, are not always listed on labels. The CIP programme, launched by UNEP, SAICM, and the Inter-Organization Programme for the Sound Management of Chemicals (IOMC) in 2015, promotes information exchange about chemicals of concern so that all users can make informed choices. That includes not only the companies within the product supply chain, but also others, such as designers, consumers, waste managers, and users. This is truly a global challenge because product life cycles often span different countries – they are made in one country, used in another, and finally recycled or disposed in yet another.
Endocrine disrupting chemicals (EDCs) affect the characteristics of sexual organs and reproduction in humans and animals. More than 1,400 chemicals in pesticides, biocides, industrial chemicals, cosmetics and drinking water are thought to be EDCs, but only a small number have been screened by regulators. The report suggests that including EDCs in the Globally Harmonized System of Classification and Labelling of Chemicals – a system for the classification of chemicals with the use of internationally consistent labels, safety data sheets, and easily understandable symbols – would help countries regulate EDCs in a coordinated manner.
Environmentally persistent pharmaceutical pollutants (EPPPs) include drugs used to treat people and livestock, which cause ill effects when released into the environment. The impacts include antimicrobial resistance, which is linked to the rise of ‘superbugs.’ Action on this issue would mean that countries strengthen their own regulatory and voluntary frameworks to avoid improper prescription and overuse of antibiotics, and organize take-back and sound disposal of unused or expired drugs. The report calls for conducting risk assessment of drugs – especially those that were licensed before environmental risk assessment systems were put in place – based on criteria such as sales data, ecotoxicity, and efficiency of wastewater treatment to counter their impacts.
Hazardous substances in the life cycle of electrical and electronic products (HSLEEP) contain heavy metals and persistent organic pollutants. Actions to reduce the impacts of HSLEEP would include changes to the design and composition of products to minimize the use of hazardous substances, and management of recycling methods to avoid releases of chemicals into the environment. As noted in the report, this is a major issue for many developing countries and economies in transition (EITs), where informal recycling methods expose women and children who work in those industries.
Highly hazardous pesticides (HHPs) are those that cause severe and irreversible harm to human health, the environment, and sustainability of agriculture. While the Food and Agriculture Organization of the UN (FAO) and the World Health Organization (WHO) have developed codes of conduct and management guidelines, implementation is often patchy. Capacity building, information sharing about pesticide use, toxicity, and exposure, and steps toward non-chemical alternatives are all needed. For example, agroecology techniques and integrated pest management would help reduce risk. FAO is currently in the process of drafting a Global Action Plan on Highly Hazardous Pesticides to reduce and manage HHP use.
Lead in paint is a neurotoxin, especially dangerous to children. The Global Alliance to Eliminate Lead Paint (GAELP), initiated as an international partnership in 2009, aims to have all countries adopt legally binding measures to control the production, import, sale, and use of lead paints. As of December 2021, just 43% of countries had done so. The Global Environment Facility (GEF) is helping 40 countries to introduce legislation, and also works with some paint manufacturers to phase out the use of lead paint. In a number of countries that already have laws restricting lead paint, measures for effective monitoring and enforcement are still needed, according to the report.
Nanotechnology and manufactured nanomaterials (nanomaterials), while composed of known chemicals, may pose new threats. For example, the effects of inadvertently inhaling or ingesting nanomaterials are often unknown. Vehicle tires are one example of a common product containing nanomaterials that may be released into the environment during use, recycling, and disposal. In the EU and Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD) countries, some information-sharing mechanisms and voluntary partnerships have begun, including the Malta Initiative that supports OECD guidance and testing development for nanomaterials. The report recommends that a common definition of nanomaterials be adopted.
Per- and polyfluoroalkyl substances (PFASs) are manufactured chemicals containing linked carbon and fluorine atoms. Products containing PFASs include many that resist oil and water, such as rainwear, non-stick cookware, and carpets. Being present in many household products, they pose a high exposure risk. PFASs may have negative impacts on immune system function and cognitive function in children, and are linked to type 2 diabetes in women. Long-chain PFASs are listed under the Stockholm Convention on POPs. A phased approach to ending the use of PFASs except for “essential use” purposes is needed, according to the report.
The eleven other issues of concern identified in GCO-II
In 2016, UNEA requested UNEP to provide an update on EPIs and other issues “where emerging evidence indicates a risk to human health and the environment” (Resolution 2/7). UNEP published a report titled, ‘Global Chemicals Outlook II: From Legacies to Innovative Solutions’ (GCO-II), in April 2019. GCO-II identified 11 “other issues” of concern that pose risks to people and the environment, drawing on assessments done by governments or intergovernmental organizations. They are:
- arsenic, a heavy metal;
- bisphenol A (BPA), used, for example, in durable plastics for water bottles and protective coatings on vehicles and machinery;
- cadmium, used in batteries and solar cells;
- glyphosate, a weedkiller;
- lead, a heavy metal which, besides its usage in paint (addressed above), is also in batteries, ceramics, and other items;
- intentionally added microplastics in products, such as the ‘microbeads’ in some detergents and facial cleansers;
- neonicotinoids, pesticides that affect the nervous system of insects;
- organotins, used as biocides in products such as anti-fouling paint for marine vessels;
- phthalates, used in solvents and plasticizers to improve the flexibility of plastic items;
- polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons (PAHs), found in smoked meats, mothballs, and other consumer goods; and
- triclosan, an antiseptic used in personal care products.
Many of these chemicals are classified as potential carcinogens and have other adverse health impacts in humans and animals. Some pose the risk of bio-accumulation as concentrations in the body tend to increase over time. Many are transported across the globe through water, soil, and atmospheric systems, thus posing transboundary issues that no single country can manage on its own. Clean-up from the environment is difficult or unfeasible; therefore, the UNEP report calls for addressing risks at every stage of the product life cycle, from design through to usage, recycling, and disposal.
As noted in the report, regulating, and reducing the use of chemicals with the most troubling impacts will also have many benefits. For example, more than half the world’s usage of glyphosate is for crops that have been genetically engineered to tolerate this weedkiller. Reducing and eliminating the use of glyphosate would encourage better agricultural practices, such as crop rotation and integrated pest management. Managing the risks would help avoid intergenerational impacts, for example, for low-income populations that are thought to be more exposed to phthalates in cheap building and household materials such as vinyl, food wrappers, and takeaway containers.
Mutually supportive processes and frameworks
Section 5 of the UNEP report presents a “thought starter” on avenues and means of future work, highlighting, among many different possibilities, the following:
- Multilateral environmental agreements (MEAs) allow for addition of new issues of concern to come under their purview. For example, the Basel Convention on the Transboundary Movements of Hazardous Wastes amended its annexes in 2019, to bring plastic waste within its scope. Similarly, the Rotterdam Convention, which covers prior informed consent and information exchange regarding the movement of hazardous chemicals, the Stockholm Convention on POPs, the Minamata Convention on mercury, and the Montreal Protocol on ozone-depleting substances all may include listings of new chemical hazards as they become known.
- International reviews and risk assessments are conducted by multilateral organizations, including WHO, FAO, UNEP, and others. Additionally, the IOMC was established in 1995 to strengthen cooperation and increase coordination in the field of chemical safety. Besides the flagship GCO, UNEP also publishes the Global Waste Management Outlook. OECD’s work in establishing standard testing guidelines and protocols for good laboratory practice provides a foundation for implementation of sound chemicals management.
- The International Conference on Chemicals Management (ICCM), the governing body for SAICM, will consider options for a post-2020 framework for sound management of chemicals and waste when it convenes for its fifth meeting (ICCM-5) in September 2023. Concurrently, negotiations are ongoing toward establishing a science-policy panel to contribute further to the sound management of chemicals and waste and to prevent pollution. Such a panel would be a counterpart to existing science-policy panels, such as the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) and the Intergovernmental Science-Policy Platform on Biodiversity and Ecosystem Services (IPBES). These processes are also relevant to achieving SDG 12 on ensuring sustainable consumption and production patterns.
According to an IOMC proposal to be considered within the SAICM process, a post-2020 framework for integrated chemicals and waste management should include:
- developing basic national chemical management systems and capacities in all countries;
- integrating chemicals management in key industry sectors and product value chains; and
- integrating chemicals management with sustainable development issues and initiatives.
At an intersessional meeting of SAICM, which took place from 29 August to 2 September 2022 in Bucharest, Romania, delegates developed a draft of a single consolidated document for the future post-2020 framework, to be fleshed out in subsequent intersessional meetings leading up to ICCM-5.
Looking ahead: Creating a strong framework for chemicals management
GCO-II found that global chemical production capacity of 2.3 billion tonnes in 2017 is set to double by 2030. According to UNEP’s assessment of issues of concern, the existing multilateral regime, which addresses specific chemicals and chemical groups, leaves many gaps. Some substitutions for hazardous chemicals also turn out to be “regrettable substitutions” that have equally negative impacts. Rapid changes sparked by adoption of new technologies and the changing global environment are meanwhile posing new challenges.
A strong policy and programme framework on chemicals would include the ability to effectively track national and regional regulatory actions that signal emerging priorities, the UNEP report suggests. It would engage a wide range of stakeholders in the governance of chemical and waste management, beyond chemicals experts, such as law scholars, social scientists, and civil society organizations (CSOs) who would bring a sharper focus on social and environmental concerns relevant to chemicals management.
Ultimately, the sound management of chemicals will not take place in isolation from efforts to address the triple planetary crises of climate change, biodiversity loss, and pollution. A strong policy and management regime to address pollution and waste must be part of the global quest for a sustainable planet.
* * *
This document has been developed within the framework of the Global Environment Facility (GEF) project ID: 9771 on Global Best Practices on Emerging Chemical Policy Issues of Concern under the Strategic Approach to International Chemicals Management (SAICM). This project is funded by the GEF, implemented by UNEP, and executed by the SAICM Secretariat. The International Institute for Sustainable Development acknowledges the financial contribution of the GEF to the development of this policy brief.
This Policy Brief is the third in a series featuring cross-cutting topics relating to the sound management of chemicals and waste. It was written by Delia Paul, Earth Negotiations Bulletin (ENB) team leader and writer. The series editor is Elena Kosolapova, Senior Policy Advisor, Tracking Progress Program, IISD.
Addressing Industry Involvement in the Funding of Sound Management of Chemicals and Waste
This Policy Brief outlines the history behind the SAICM agenda, puts in context the issue of financing the sound management of chemicals and waste, and highlights the main findings and proposals from the SAICM study.
Events
28 Jun 2023
Related Topics
Related people
Amal Saad-Hussein
Collaboration with the air pollutant monitoring researchers to estimate the levels of environmental pollutants then we study the health impacts on the exposed persons and plan a preventive strategy to minimize the hazardous effects and raising awa
Marina Olga Fernandez
I am Associate Researcher of CONICET at the Instituto de Biología y Medicina Experimental in Buenos Aires, Argentina.
Rebecca Mlelwa
Rebecca is an Environmental and Occupational Health Specialist focusing on children’s environmental health, public health, management of hazardous chemicals in products, exposure assessment, chemical risk assessment and management, risk communicat