Olasunkanmi Dosunmu, Rob Whiting, Avtar S. Matharu, Nigel Watson, Andrew J. Sweetman
{"title":"Preventing regrettable substitution through regulatory frameworks: using REACH regulation and Stockholm Convention as case studies","authors":"Olasunkanmi Dosunmu, Rob Whiting, Avtar S. Matharu, Nigel Watson, Andrew J. Sweetman","doi":"10.1186/s12302-026-01470-0","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><h3>Background</h3><p>Regrettable substitution, which involves the replacement of a hazardous chemical with an alternative that later proves equally harmful or introduces new risks, remains an ongoing significant challenge for chemical regulation. As regulatory frameworks such as REACH (Registration, Evaluation, Authorisation and Restriction of Chemicals) and the Stockholm Convention increasingly drive transitions away from the use of hazardous substances, the need to prevent regrettable substitution has become central to effective chemicals management.</p><h3>Methods</h3><p>This study examines how regrettable substitution can be prevented through deliberate regulatory design and implementation. Using REACH and the Stockholm Convention as case studies, we performed a qualitative study involving interviews and document analysis.</p><h3>Results</h3><p>Reflexive thematic analysis generated interconnected themes that collectively identify how regulatory frameworks can potentially prevent regrettable substitution. These include improving the reliability, completeness, and transparency of regulatory data to support informed substitution; using incentives and structured regulatory support to promote innovation in safe(r) alternatives; establishing coherent and coordinated regulatory approaches that reduce fragmentation; strengthening partnerships among regulators, industry, and scientific actors to enhance information flow; adopting proactive and precautionary regulatory strategies, including early screening; and reinforcing compliance through enhanced monitoring and enforcement.</p><h3>Conclusions</h3><p>The findings demonstrate that regrettable substitution is not merely a scientific or technical failure but a systemic and operational regulatory issue arising from late hazard identification, incomplete exposure and performance information, siloed regulatory structures, and uneven innovation incentives. The study concludes that preventing regrettable substitution requires regulatory frameworks that are anticipatory, integrated, transparent, and adaptive that can actively steer the substitution process toward genuinely safe(r) and sustainable chemical solutions.</p></div>","PeriodicalId":546,"journal":{"name":"Environmental Sciences Europe","volume":"38 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":7.1000,"publicationDate":"2026-07-22","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://link.springer.com/content/pdf/10.1186/s12302-026-01470-0.pdf","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Environmental Sciences Europe","FirstCategoryId":"93","ListUrlMain":"https://link.springer.com/article/10.1186/s12302-026-01470-0","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"环境科学与生态学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2026/10/16 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
Background
Regrettable substitution, which involves the replacement of a hazardous chemical with an alternative that later proves equally harmful or introduces new risks, remains an ongoing significant challenge for chemical regulation. As regulatory frameworks such as REACH (Registration, Evaluation, Authorisation and Restriction of Chemicals) and the Stockholm Convention increasingly drive transitions away from the use of hazardous substances, the need to prevent regrettable substitution has become central to effective chemicals management.
Methods
This study examines how regrettable substitution can be prevented through deliberate regulatory design and implementation. Using REACH and the Stockholm Convention as case studies, we performed a qualitative study involving interviews and document analysis.
Results
Reflexive thematic analysis generated interconnected themes that collectively identify how regulatory frameworks can potentially prevent regrettable substitution. These include improving the reliability, completeness, and transparency of regulatory data to support informed substitution; using incentives and structured regulatory support to promote innovation in safe(r) alternatives; establishing coherent and coordinated regulatory approaches that reduce fragmentation; strengthening partnerships among regulators, industry, and scientific actors to enhance information flow; adopting proactive and precautionary regulatory strategies, including early screening; and reinforcing compliance through enhanced monitoring and enforcement.
Conclusions
The findings demonstrate that regrettable substitution is not merely a scientific or technical failure but a systemic and operational regulatory issue arising from late hazard identification, incomplete exposure and performance information, siloed regulatory structures, and uneven innovation incentives. The study concludes that preventing regrettable substitution requires regulatory frameworks that are anticipatory, integrated, transparent, and adaptive that can actively steer the substitution process toward genuinely safe(r) and sustainable chemical solutions.
期刊介绍:
ESEU is an international journal, focusing primarily on Europe, with a broad scope covering all aspects of environmental sciences, including the main topic regulation.
ESEU will discuss the entanglement between environmental sciences and regulation because, in recent years, there have been misunderstandings and even disagreement between stakeholders in these two areas. ESEU will help to improve the comprehension of issues between environmental sciences and regulation.
ESEU will be an outlet from the German-speaking (DACH) countries to Europe and an inlet from Europe to the DACH countries regarding environmental sciences and regulation.
Moreover, ESEU will facilitate the exchange of ideas and interaction between Europe and the DACH countries regarding environmental regulatory issues.
Although Europe is at the center of ESEU, the journal will not exclude the rest of the world, because regulatory issues pertaining to environmental sciences can be fully seen only from a global perspective.