The precautionary principle in EU and US chemicals policy: A comparison of industrial chemicals legislation

Regulating Chemical Risks: European and Global Challenges

Volumn , Issue , 2010, Pages 239-265

  Karlsson, Mikael ^a  

^a School of Life Sciences Södertörn University   (Sweden)

Author keywords

EU; Precautionary principle; REACH; TSCA; US

Indexed keywords

EID: 79951765460     PISSN: None     EISSN: None     Source Type: Book    
DOI: 10.1007/978-90-481-9428-5_14     Document Type: Chapter

References (84)

1. Ackerman, F., Stanton, E. and Massey, R. (2006) European Chemical Policy and the United States: The Impact of REACH. Global Development and Environment Institute. Working Paper 6-06. Medford: Tuft University.
2. Ahteensuu, M. (2007) Defending the precautionary principle against three criticisms. TRAMES 11, 366-381.
3. Allanou, R., Hansen, B. G. and van der Bilt, Y. (1999) Public availability of data on EU high production volume chemicals. Ispra: European Commission Joint Research Centre, Institute for Health and Consumer Protection, European Chemical Bureau.
4. Applegate, J. S. (2000) The precautionary preference: An American Perspective on the Precautionary Principle. Human and Ecological Risk Assessment 6, 413-443.
5. Applegate, J. S. (2008) Synthesizing TSCA and REACH: Practical Principles for Chemical Regulation Reform. See http://ssrn. com/abstracts=1183942.
6. Applegate, J. S. and Baer, K. (2006) Strategies for Closing the Chemical Data Gap. Washington, DC: Center for Progressive Reform.
7. Ashford, N. (2007) The Legacy of the Precautionary Principle in US Law: The Rise of Cost-Benefit Analysis and Risk Assessment as Undermining Factors in Health, Safety and Environmental Protection. In: de Sadeleer, N. (ed.) Implementing the precautionary principle. Approaches from the Nordic Countries, EU and USA. London: Earthscan.
8. Boehmer-Christiansen, S. (1994) The precautionary principle in Germany - Enabling Government. In: O'Riordan, T. and Cameron. J (eds.) Interpreting the precautionary principle. London: Earthscan.
9. Cairns, J. and Smith, E. P. (1996) Uncertainties Associated with Extrapolating from Toxicologic Responses in Laboratory Systems to the Responses of Natural Systems. In: Lemons, J. (ed.) Scientific Uncertainty and Environmental Problem Solving. London: Blackwell Science.
10. CEQ (1971) Toxic Substances. Executive Office of the President: United States Council on Environmental Quality (CEQ).
11. CNC (2000) Non-hazardous products - Proposals for implementation of new guidelines on chemicals policy. Committee on New Guidelines on Chemicals Policy (CNC). SOU 2000:53. Stockholm: Fritzes.
12. Dancet, G. (2009). The main challenges for ECHA and the chemical industry as a whole in the (near) future. Speech at the Annual FECC Conference, Helsinki, 23/6 2009.
13. de Sadeleer, N. (ed.) (2007a) Implementing the Precautionary Principle. Approaches from the Nordic Countries, EU and USA. London: Earthscan.
14. de Sadeleer, N. (2007b) The precautionary principle in European Community Health and Environmental Law: Sword or Shield for the Nordic Countries? In: de Sadeleer, N. (ed.) Implementing the precautionary principle. Approaches from the Nordic Countries, EU and USA. London: Earthscan.
15. de Sadeleer, N. (2007c) The Impact of the Registration, Evaluation and Authorization of Chemicals (REACH) Regulation on the Regulatory Powers of the Nordic Countries. In: de Sadeleer, N. (ed.) Implementing the precautionary principle. Approaches from the Nordic Countries, EU and USA. London: Earthscan.
16. Denison, R. A. (2009) Ten Essential Elements in TSCA Reform. Environmental Law Reporter 39, 10020-10028.
17. Ditz, D. (2007) The States and the World: Twin Levers for Reform of U. S. Federal Law on Toxic Chemicals. Sustainable Development Law & Policy, Fall 2007.
18. EC (2003a) Directive 2002/95/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 27 January 2003 on the restriction of the use of certain hazardous substances in electrical and electronic equipment. Official Journal of the European Union L 37, 13.2.2003, 19-23.
19. EC (2003b) Directive 2002/96/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 27 January 2003 on waste electrical and electronic equipment (WEEE). Official Journal of the Union L 37, 13.2.2003, 24-38.
20. EC (2006a) Regulation (EC) No 1907/2006 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 18 December 2006 concerning the Registration, Evaluation, Authorisation and Restriction of Chemicals (REACH), establishing a European Chemicals Agency, amending Directive 1999/45/EC and repealing Council Regulation (EEC) No 793/93 and Commission Regulation (EC) No 1488/94 as well as Council Directive 76/769/EEC and Commission Directives 91/155/EEC, 93/67/EEC, 93/105/EC and 2000/21/EC. Official Journal of the European Union L 396, 30.12.2006, 1-849.
21. EC (2006b) Council Decision of 17 July 2006 amending Decision 1999/468/EC laying down the procedures for the exercise of implementing powers conferred on the Commission. Official Journal of the European Union L 200, 22.7.2006, 11-13.
22. EC (2008) Regulation (EC) No. 1272/2008 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 16 December 2008 on classification, labelling and packaging of substances and mixtures, amending and repealing Directives 67/548/EEC and 1999/45/EC, and amending Regulation (EC) No 1907/2006. Official Journal of the European Union L 353, 31.12.2008, 1-1355.
23. ECB (2008) European Chemicals Bureau Newsletter, No 1 2008. Ispra: European Commission Joint Research Centre, Institute for Health and Consumer Protection, European Chemical Bureau (ECB).
24. ECHA (2009) Recommendation of the European Chemicals Agency (ECHA) of 1 June 2009 for the inclusion of substances in Annex XIV (the list of substances subject to regulation) of Regulation No 1907/2006. Helsinki: European Chemicals Agency (ECHA).
25. EDF (2007a) Not that innocent. A Comparative Analysis of Canadian, European Union and United States Policies on Industrial Chemicals. Washington, DC: Environmental Defense (EDF).
26. EDF (2007b) High Hopes, Low Marks. A Final Report Card on the High Production Volume Chemical Challenge. Washington, DC: Environmental Defense Fund (EDF).
27. EDF (2008) Environmental Defense Fund's Comments on ChAMP: EPA's Recent Commitments and Possible New Initiatives for Existing Chemicals. Washington, DC: Environmental Defense Fund (EDF).
28. EEA (1998) Chemicals in the European Environment: Low Doses, High Stakes? The EEA and UNEP Annual Message 2 on the State of Europe's Environment. Copenhagen: European Environment Agency (EEA).
29. EEA (2007) Europe's environment. The fourth assessment. Chapter 2.5. Hazardous Chemicals. Copenhagen: European Environment Agency (EEA).
30. EEC (1967) Council Directive 67/548/EEC on the approximation of laws, regulations and administrative provisions relating to the classification, packaging and labelling of dangerous substances, as amended. Official Journal of the European Communities 196, 16.8.1967, 1.
31. EEC (1976) Council Directive 76/769/EEC on the approximation of the laws, regulations and administrative provisions of the Member States relating to restrictions on the marketing and use of certain dangerous substances and preparations. Official Journal of the European Communities L 262, 27.9.1976, 201.
32. EEC (1988) Council Directive 88/379/EEC on the approximation of the laws, regulations and administrative provisions relating to the classification, packaging and labelling of dangerous preparations. Official Journal of the European Communities L 187, 16.7.1988, 14.
33. EEC (1993) Council Regulation 793/93/EEC of 23 March 1993 on the evaluation and control of the risks of existing substances. Official Journal of the European Communities L 84, 1.
34. Environment Council (1999) Council Conclusions on Community policy for chemicals products. Minutes of the 2194th Council meeting (Environment) held in Luxembourg on 24 and 25 June 1999.
35. EPA (1994) Lead Fishing Sinkers; Response to Citizen's Petition and Proposed Ban. Federal Register 59, 11138.
36. European Commission (1998) Report on the operation of community legislation in the chemicals sector. COM (1998) 587/3.
37. European Commission (2000) Communication from the Commission on the precautionary principle. COM (2000) 1.
38. European Commission (2001) Strategy for a future Chemicals Policy. White Paper. COM (2001) 88.
39. European Commission (2003) Extended Impact Assessment. Commission Staff Working Paper. COM (2003) 644 Final. SEC (2003) 1171/3.
40. European Commission (2007) REACH in brief. Brussels: European Commission, Environment Directorate.
41. European Commission (2009) Final Report of the High Level Group on the Competitiveness of the European Chemicals Industry. Brussels: European Commission, DG Enterprise and Industry.
42. European Council (2000) Presidency Conclusions. Nice European Council Meeting, 7, 8 and 9 December 2000.
43. Fisher, E. (2008) The 'perfect storm' of REACH: charting regulatory controversy in the age of information, sustainable development, and globalization. Journal of Risk Research 11, 541-563.
44. GAO (1994) Toxic Substances Control Act: Legislative Changes Could Make the Act More Effective. Report to Congressional Requesters. GAO-05-458. Washington: United States Government Accountability Office.
45. GAO (2005) Chemical Regulation: Options Exist to Improve EPA's Ability to Assess Health Risks and Manage its Chemical Review Program. Report to Congressional Requesters. GAO-05-458. Washington: United States Government Accountability Office.
46. GAO (2007) Chemical Regulation. Comparison of U. S. and Recently Enacted European Union Approaches to Protect Against the Risks of Toxic Chemicals. Report to Congressional Requesters. GAO-07-825. Washington: United States Government Accountability Office.
47. Gardiner, S. M. (2006) A Core Precautionary Principle. The Journal of Political Philosophy 14, 33-60.
48. H. R. (1976) House Report No. 94-1341, pp 13-14. U. S. House of Representatives.
49. H. R. (2004) A Special Interest Case Study: The Chemical Industry, the Bush Administration, and European Efforts to Regulate Chemicals. U. S. House of Representatives, Committee on Government Reform, Minority Staff Special Investigations Division, Washington.
50. H. R. (2008) A Bill to amend the Toxic Substances Control Act to reduce the exposure of children, workers, and consumers to toxic chemical substances. U. S. House of Representatives, 110th Congress, 2D Session, May 20, 2008, H. R. 6100.
51. Hansen, S. F., Carlsen, L. and Tickner, J. (2007). Chemicals regulation and precaution: does REACH really incorporate the precautionary principle? Environmental Science and Policy 10, 395-404.
52. Hansson, S. O. (1997) The limits of precaution. Foundations of Science 2, 293-306.
53. Harremoës, R., Gee, D., MacGarvin, M., Stirling, A., Keys, J., Wynne, B. and Guedes Vaz, S. (2001) Late lessons from early warnings: the precautionary principle 1896-2000. Environmental issue report No 22. Copenhagen: European Environment Agency (EEA).
54. Karlsson, M. (2005) Managing Complex Environmental Risks for Sustainable Development: Policies for Hazardous Chemicals and Genetically Modified Organisms. Doctoral Thesis. Karlstad University Studies 2005:34. Karlstad: Karlstad University.
55. Karlsson, M. (2006) The Precautionary Principle, Swedish Chemicals Policy and Sustainable Development. Journal of Risk Research 9, 337-360.
56. Koch, L. and Ashford, N. A. (2006) Rethinking the role of information in chemicals policy: implications for TSCA and REACH. Journal of Cleaner Production 14, 31-46.
57. Krämer, L. (2006). EC Environmental Law. 6th edition. London: Sweet & Maxwell.
58. Lahl, U. (2007) REACH - assessment of the political agreement. Environmental Law Network International Review 1/2007, 34-38.
59. Löfstedt, R. E. and Vogel, D. (2001) The Changing Character of Regulation: A Comparison of Europe and the United States. Risk Analysis 21, 399-405.
60. Lökke, S. (2004) The Precautionary Principle and Regulation of Chemicals. Academic Thesis. Aalborg: Aalborg University.
61. Lowell (2003). The Promise and Limits of the United States Toxic Substances Control Act. Lowell Center for Sustainable Production. Lowell: University of Massachusetts.
62. Maastricht Treaty (1992) Provisions Amending The Treaty Establishing The European Economic Community with a view to Establishing The European Community. Title II, Article 130r. Maastricht, 7 February 1992.
63. O'Riordan, T., Cameron, J. and Jordan, A. (eds.) (2001) Reinterpreting the precautionary principle. London: Cameron May.
64. OPPT (2008) Overview: Office of Pollution Prevention and Toxics Programs. March 2008. U. S. EPA: Office of Pollution Prevention and Toxics Programs (OPPT).
65. Park, D., Song, M-Y., Lee, K-H., Yoon, D-C. and Cong, X. (2008) REACHing Asia: Recent Trends in Chemical Regulations of China, Japan and Korea. Working Paper. See http://ssrn. com/abstract=1121404.
66. Rawls, J. (1971) A Theory of Justice. London: Oxford University Press.
67. Roe, D., Pease, W., Florini, K. and Silbergeld, E. (1997) Toxic Ignorance. Washington: Environmental Defense Fund.
68. Rogers, M. D. (2003a) Risk analysis under uncertainty, the Precautionary Principle, and the new EU chemicals strategy. Regulatory Pharmacology and Toxicology 37, 370-381.
69. Rogers, M. D. (2003b) The European Commission's White Paper 'Strategy for a Future Chemicals Policy': A Review. Risk Analysis 23, 381-388.
70. S (2008). A Bill to amend the Toxic Substances Control Act to reduce the exposure of children, workers, and consumers to toxic chemical substances. U. S. House of Representatives, 110th Congress, 2D Session, May 20, 2008, S. 3040.
71. Sachs, N. M. (2009) Jumping the pond: Transnational Law and the Future of Chemical Regulation. Vanderbilt Law Review, Forthcoming. See http://ssrn. com/abstract=1413746.
72. Sand, P. H. (2000). The Precautionary Principle: A European Perspective. Human and Ecological Risk Assessment 6, 445-458.
73. Sandin, P. (1999) Dimensions of the precautionary principle. Human and Ecological Risk Assessment 5, 889-907.
74. Sandin, P. (2004) Better Safe than Sorry. Applying Philosophical Methods to the Debate on Risk and the Precautionary Principle. Thesis in Philosophy from the Royal Institute of Technology, No. 5, 2004. Stockholm: Royal Institute of Technology.
75. Sandin, P., Peterson, M., Hansson, S. O., Rudén, C. and Juthe, A. (2002) Five charges against the precautionary principle. Journal of Risk Research 5, 287-299.
76. Scott, J. (2009) From Brussels with Love: The Transatlantic Travels of European Law and the Chemistry of Regulatory Attraction. American Journal of Comparative Law 57:4.
77. Selin, H. (2007) Coalition Politics and Chemicals Management in a Regulatory Ambitious Europe. Global Environmental Politics 7, 63-93.
78. Stokes, E. (2008) The EC Courts' contribution to refining the parameters of precaution. Journal of Risk Research 11, 491-507.
79. Tickner, J. (ed.) (2003a) Environmental Science and Preventive Public Policy. Washington D. C.: Island Press.
80. Tickner, J. (2003b) Precautionary Assessment: A Framework for Integrating Science, Uncertainty, and Preventive Public Policy. In: Tickner, J. (ed) Environmental Science and Preventive Public Policy. Washington D. C.: Island Press.
81. UNCED (1993) Report of the Conference of the United Nations on Environment and Development (UNCED), Rio de Janeiro, 3-14 June 1992, vol. 1-3. New York: United Nations.
82. von Moltke, K. (1988) The Vorsorge-Prinzip in West-German Policy. In: Twelfth Report of the Royal Commission on Environmental Pollution, Annex 3. London: H. M. Stationery Office.
83. Wagner, W. E. (2000) The Precautionary Principle and Chemicals Regulation in the U. S. Human and Ecological Risk Assessment 6, 459-477.
84. Wirth, D. A. (2007). The EU's New Impact on U. S. Environmental Regulation. Research Paper 144, November 9, 2007. Legal Studies Research Paper Series. Boston: Boston College Law School.