Alternatives assessment: An analysis on progress and future needs for research and practice.

Alternatives assessment is a science-policy approach to support the informed substitution of chemicals of concern in consumer products and industries, with the intent of avoiding regrettable substitution and facilitating the transition to safer, more sustainable chemicals and products. The field of alternatives assessment has grown steadily in recent decades, particularly after the publication of specific frameworks and the inclusion of substitution and alternatives assessment requirements in a number of policy contexts. Previously, 14 research and practice needs for the field were outlined across five critical areas: comparative hazard assessment, comparative exposure characterization, lifecycle considerations, decision-making and decision analysis, and professional practice.

The use of alternatives assessment in chemicals management policies: Needs for greater impact.

Alternatives assessment is a methodology used to identify, evaluate, and compare potential chemical and nonchemical solutions with a substance of concern. It is required in several chemicals management regulatory frameworks, with the objective of supporting the transition to safer chemistry and avoiding regrettable substitutions. Using expert input from symposium presentations and a discussion group hosted by the Association for the Advancement of Alternatives Assessment, four case examples of the use of alternatives assessment in regulatory frameworks were evaluated and compared: (1) the US Environmental Protection Agency Significant New Alternatives Policy (USEPA SNAP), (2) authorization provisions in the EU REACH (Registration, Evaluation, Authorisation, and Restriction of Chemicals) regulation, (3) the California (CA) Safer Consumer Products (SCP) Program, and (4) the Safer Products for Washington (WA) Program.

Lessons from the 2018 International Symposium on Alternatives Assessment: Advances and Reflections on Practice and Ongoing Needs to Build the Field.

Alternatives assessment is gaining traction as a systematic method to support the informed substitution of chemicals of concern. The 2nd International Symposium on Alternatives Assessment, on 1-2 November 2018, convened nearly 150 professionals from government agencies, industry, consultant firms, academia, and advocacy organizations to advance a greater understanding of the evolving methods, practices, and challenges in the use of alternatives assessment. This article reviews highlights and lessons from the symposium, including 1) notable advances in methods, 2) shared insights from practitioners on best practices as well as inherent tensions and challenges, and 3) research and practice needs in the field that can be addressed by organizations such as the newly launched Association for the Advancement of Alternatives Assessment.

Advancing alternatives assessment for safer chemical substitution: A research and practice agenda.

Alternatives assessment has emerged as a science policy field that supports the evaluation and adoption of safer chemistries in manufacturing processes and consumer products. The recent surge in the development and practice of alternatives assessment has revealed notable methodological challenges. Spurred by this need, we convened an informal community of practice comprising industry experts, academics, and scientists within government and nongovernmental organizations to prioritize a research and practice agenda for the next 5 years that, if implemented, would significantly advance the field of alternatives assessment.

Advancing alternatives analysis: The role of predictive toxicology in selecting safer chemical products and processes.

Alternatives analysis (AA) is a method used in regulation and product design to identify, assess, and evaluate the safety and viability of potential substitutes for hazardous chemicals. It requires toxicological data for the existing chemical and potential alternatives. Predictive toxicology uses in silico and in vitro approaches, computational models, and other tools to expedite toxicological data generation in a more cost-effective manner than traditional approaches.

The applicability of chemical alternatives assessment for engineered nanomaterials.

The use of alternatives assessment to substitute hazardous chemicals with inherently safer options is gaining momentum worldwide as a legislative and corporate strategy to minimize consumer, occupational, and environmental risks. Engineered nanomaterials represent an interesting case for alternatives assessment approaches, because they can be considered both emerging "chemicals" of concern, as well as potentially safer alternatives to hazardous chemicals. However, comparing the hazards of nanomaterials to traditional chemicals or to other nanomaterials is challenging, and critical elements in chemical hazard and exposure assessment may have to be fundamentally altered to sufficiently address nanomaterials.

The Architecture of Chemical Alternatives Assessment.

Chemical alternatives assessment is a method rapidly developing for use by businesses, governments, and nongovernment organizations seeking to substitute chemicals of concern in production processes and products. Chemical alternatives assessment is defined as a process for identifying, comparing, and selecting safer alternatives to chemicals of concern (including those in materials, processes, or technologies) on the basis of their hazards, performance, and economic viability. The process is intended to provide guidance for assuring that chemicals of concern are replaced with safer alternatives that are not likely to be later regretted.

Alternatives Assessment Frameworks: Research Needs for the Informed Substitution of Hazardous Chemicals.

Background: Given increasing pressures for hazardous chemical replacement, there is growing interest in alternatives assessment to avoid substituting a toxic chemical with another of equal or greater concern. Alternatives assessment is a process for identifying, comparing, and selecting safer alternatives to chemicals of concern (including those used in materials, processes, or technologies) on the basis of their hazards, performance, and economic viability.

Objectives: The purposes of this substantive review of alternatives assessment frameworks are to identify consistencies and differences in methods and to outline needs for research and collaboration to advance science policy practice.

Advancing safer alternatives through functional substitution.

To achieve the ultimate goal of sustainable chemicals management policy–the transition to safer chemicals, materials, products, and processes–current chemicals management approaches could benefit from a broader perspective. Starting with considerations of function, rather than characterizing and managing risks associated with a particular chemical, may provide a different, solutions-oriented lens to reduce risk associated with the uses of chemicals. It may also offer an efficient means, complementing existing tools, to reorient chemicals management approaches from time-intensive risk assessment and risk management based on single chemicals to comparative evaluation of the best options to fulfill a specific function.

The sustainability solutions agenda.

Progress toward a more sustainable society is usually described in a "knowledge-first" framework, where science characterizes a problem in terms of its causes and mechanisms as a basis for subsequent action. Here we present a different approach-A Sustainability Solutions Agenda (SSA)-which seeks from the outset to identify the possible pathways to solutions. SSA focuses on uncovering paths to sustainability by improving current technological practice, and applying existing knowledge to identify and evaluate technological alternatives.

Reforming state-level chemicals management policies in the United States: status, challenges, and opportunities.

During the last several years there has been increasing public concern about chemicals in everyday products. Scientific studies are increasingly revealing the build-up of some substances in ecosystems and in our bodies and new findings are linking exposures to hazardous chemicals to a range of adverse human health effects. Despite these trends, there has been little federal initiative in the United States on reforming chemicals management policies for well over two decades, even though a variety of analyses have identified significant gaps in the regulatory structure.

Human exposure to PBDEs: associations of PBDE body burdens with food consumption and house dust concentrations.

This study was designed to determine the body burden of polybrominated diphenyl ethers (PBDEs) among first-time mothers in the Greater Boston, Massachusetts area and to explore key routes of exposure. We collected breast milk samples from 46 first-time mothers, 2-8 weeks after birth. We also sampled house dust from the homes of a subset of participants by vacuuming commonly used areas.

Categorizing mistaken false positives in regulation of human and environmental health.

One of the concerns often voiced by critics of the precautionary principle is that a widespread regulatory application of the principle will lead to a large number of false positives (i.e., over-regulation of minor risks and regulation of nonexisting risks).

The problem of current toxic chemicals management.

In this article, we explore the limitations of current chemicals management policies worldwide and the evolution of new European, International and U.S. policies to address the problem of toxic chemicals control.

Primary prevention of chemical contamination.

The current approach to addressing health and ecosystem risks from biosolids, or sludge, requires identification of so-called "safe" or "acceptable" levels of exposure and installation of controls to achieve such levels. This end-of-the pipe approach is inconsistent with the public health concept of primary prevention. Following an overview of the limitations in current approaches to understand and address risks of biosolids contamination, we present a new, preventative paradigm for addressing the hazards of sludge.

Precaution, environmental science, and preventive public policy.

The Lowell Center for Sustainable Production has sought to engage scientists, policy-makers, advocates, and students in a broad public discussion about whether the tools and methods of environmental science and its integration in policy are adequate to address complex, highly uncertain environmental and health risks. It did so in an International Summit on Science and the Precautionary Principle and a recent collection of analyses stemming from the summit. Here, the author summarizes some summit recommendations to overcome barriers and build momentum for a vision for science and policy that better reflects uncertainty and complexity in natural systems.

What does the precautionary principle mean for evidence-based dentistry?

The precautionary principle calls for preventive actions in the face of uncertain information about risks. It serves as a compass to better guide more health-protective decisions in the face of complex risks. Applying precaution requires thinking more broadly about risks, taking an interdisciplinary approach to science and policy, and considering a wide range of alternatives to potentially harmful activities.

Community-initiated breast cancer and environment studies and the precautionary principle.

The precautionary principle implies the need for research paradigms that contribute to "strength of the evidence" assessments of the plausibility of health effects when scientific uncertainty is likely to persist and prevention is the underlying goal. Previous discussions of science that inform precautionary decision making are augmented by examining three activist-initiated breast cancer and environment studies--the Long Island, New York, and Cape Cod, Massachusetts, studies and the National Institute of Environmental Health Sciences breast cancer and environment centers. These studies show how the choice of research questions affects the potential of results to inform action.