Evidence map›Paper›PMID 33860613›Full record

ArticleIntegrated environmental assessment and management2021

The EU Green Deal's ambition for a toxic-free environment: Filling the gap for science-based policymaking.

Joanke van Dijk, Annegaaike Leopold, Hannah Flerlage, Annemarie van Wezel, Thomas-Benjamin Seiler, Marie-Hélene Enrici, Michelle C Bloor

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Integrated environmental assessment and management, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
4citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

4 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Review
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

7 authors.

Joanke van DijkCopernicus Institute of Sustainable Development, Utrecht University, Utrecht, The Netherlands.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0003-2539-8636
Annegaaike LeopoldCalidris Environment BV, Warnsveld, The Netherlands.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0001-6049-5947
Hannah FlerlageInstitute for Biodiversity and Ecosystem Dynamics, University of Amsterdam, Amsterdam, The Netherlands.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-7071-1524
Annemarie van WezelInstitute for Biodiversity and Ecosystem Dynamics, University of Amsterdam, Amsterdam, The Netherlands.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-6875-957X
Thomas-Benjamin SeilerRuhr District Institute of Hygiene, Gelsenkirchen, Germany.
Marie-Hélene EnriciSolvay, St Fons, France.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0001-5696-4376
Michelle C BloorSchool of Interdisciplinary Studies, University of Glasgow, Dumfries Campus, Dumfries, Scotland, UK.

Funding

H2020 Marie Sklodowska-Curie Actions 813124
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Around the world, many ambitious environmental conventions and regulations have been implemented over recent decades. Despite this, the environment is still deteriorating. An increase in the volume and diversity of chemicals is one of the main drivers of this deterioration, of which biodiversity loss is a telling indicator. In response to this situation, in October 2020, a chemicals strategy for sustainability (CSS) was published in the EU. The CSS is the first regional framework aiming to address chemical pollution in a holistic manner. The CSS covers the complete lifecycle of a chemical, including the design of better substances and remediation options, to remove chemicals from the environment. The strategy contains terms, such as a "toxic-free environment," for which no clear definition exists, potentially hampering the implementation of the CSS. In this paper, a definition for a "toxic-free environment" is proposed on the basis of a survey and a discussion held at the 2020 SETAC Europe Annual Meeting. In addition, key issues that are absent from the CSS but are considered to be key for the realization of a toxic-free environment are identified. To achieve the policy goals, it is recommended to align the definition of risk across the different chemical legislations, to establish a platform for open data and data sharing, and to increase the utility and use of novel scientific findings in policymaking, through the development of a strong science to regulation feedback mechanism and vice versa. The paper concludes that environmental scientists have the tools to address the key challenges presented in the CSS. However, an extra step is needed by both policymakers and scientists to develop methods, processes and tools, to increase the robustness and transparency of deliberation processes, and the utility of science. Integr Environ Assess Manag 2021;17:1105-1113. © 2021 The Authors. Integrated Environmental Assessment and Management published by Wiley Periodicals LLC on behalf of Society of Environmental Toxicology & Chemistry (SETAC).

Indexed as

EcotoxicologyEnvironmental PollutionBiodiversityPolicy MakingRisk AssessmentEnvironmental pollutionGreen DealRegulatory risk assessmentsScience-policy interfaceToxic-free environment

Identifiers

PMID33860613
PMCPMC8596606

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.