2009
DOI: 10.1289/ehp.0800404
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Toward a New U.S. Chemicals Policy: Rebuilding the Foundation to Advance New Science, Green Chemistry, and Environmental Health

Abstract: oBjective: We describe fundamental weaknesses in U.S. chemicals policy, present principles of chemicals policy reform, and articulate interdisciplinary research questions that should be addressed. With global chemical production projected to double over the next 24 years, federal policies that shape the priorities of the U.S. chemical enterprise will be a cornerstone of sustainability. To date, these policies have largely failed to adequately protect public health or the environment or motivate investment in o… Show more

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
1
1
1

Citation Types

0
143
0
2

Year Published

2011
2011
2018
2018

Publication Types

Select...
6
1

Relationship

0
7

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 176 publications
(145 citation statements)
references
References 24 publications
0
143
0
2
Order By: Relevance
“…As a result, current US chemicals policies at all levels fall short in identifying chemicals of concern, managing their risks, and facilitating a shift toward development and use of safer chemicals (US GAO 2007, 2009Wilson and Schwarzman 2009;Denison 2007;Lowell Center for Sustainable Production 2008;Rosenbaum 2010). The current federal policy framework has resulted in three major gaps related to data, safety, and technology (Wilson and Schwarzman 2009): Data gap: Manufacturers and businesses can sell a chemical or product without providing sufficient information about its potential health or environmental hazards to enable agencies or consumers to adequately assess the environmental and health impacts of these chemicals (US GAO 1994;Wilson and Schwarzman 2009;Allen and Dinno 2011).…”
Section: Chemicals Managementmentioning
confidence: 99%
See 1 more Smart Citation
“…As a result, current US chemicals policies at all levels fall short in identifying chemicals of concern, managing their risks, and facilitating a shift toward development and use of safer chemicals (US GAO 2007, 2009Wilson and Schwarzman 2009;Denison 2007;Lowell Center for Sustainable Production 2008;Rosenbaum 2010). The current federal policy framework has resulted in three major gaps related to data, safety, and technology (Wilson and Schwarzman 2009): Data gap: Manufacturers and businesses can sell a chemical or product without providing sufficient information about its potential health or environmental hazards to enable agencies or consumers to adequately assess the environmental and health impacts of these chemicals (US GAO 1994;Wilson and Schwarzman 2009;Allen and Dinno 2011).…”
Section: Chemicals Managementmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…The current federal policy framework has resulted in three major gaps related to data, safety, and technology (Wilson and Schwarzman 2009): Data gap: Manufacturers and businesses can sell a chemical or product without providing sufficient information about its potential health or environmental hazards to enable agencies or consumers to adequately assess the environmental and health impacts of these chemicals (US GAO 1994;Wilson and Schwarzman 2009;Allen and Dinno 2011). There is little incentive for companies to develop better information because doing so voluntarily may increase the likelihood that they will uncover evidence of harm, thus triggering government action (Denison 2007;Allen and Dinno 2011).…”
Section: Chemicals Managementmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…While regulatory strategies primarily aim to find a safe level for individual chemicals, science demonstrates that exposures to multiple chemicals can combine to produce effects experienced in the general population and that even some very low-dose exposures can carry risks, a phenomenon that is not well accounted for in risk assessment calculations (National Research Council 2008;Vogel 2008). This type of mismatch between scientific knowledge and regulatory decision-making has led to calls among many stakeholders for updated policies to better protect public health (Wilson and Schwarzman 2009;Cranor 2011;Woodruff et al 2011a). In addition, the complexity and uncertainty in the science of chemical exposures lead to various interpretations and can often be influenced by financial motives (Woodruff et al 2011a).…”
Section: Democratization Of the Biomonitoring Expertisementioning
confidence: 99%
“…Public biomonitoring debates highlight the concept of the Bpublic hypothesis,^whereby new scientific paradigms are the subject of public deliberations and involve the lay public, advocacy groups, and scientific experts (Krimsky 2000). In part by using the media, advocacy groups seek to democratize science, introduce lay knowledge within the scientific enterprise, and implement new policy-making logics, such as reforming existing chemical policies to better protect public health (Morello-Frosch et al 2009;Parthasarathy 2010;Wilson and Schwarzman 2009). Advocacy groups publicize biomonitoring results through storytelling, placing real faces on aggregated exposure data, and disseminating this information in diverse ways ranging from peer-reviewed journals to interactive websites (Washburn 2009).…”
Section: Limits Of Detectionmentioning
confidence: 99%
See 1 more Smart Citation