Evidence map›Paper›PMID 39970383›Full record

ArticleIntegrated environmental assessment and management2025

Operationalization of the safe and sustainable by design framework for chemicals and materials: challenges and proposed actions.

Elisabetta Abbate, Ad M J Ragas, Carla Caldeira, Leo Posthuma, Irantzu Garmendia Aguirre, Anne Chloe Devic, Lya G Soeteman-Hernández, Mark A J Huijbregts, Serenella Sala

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Integrated environmental assessment and management, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
7citing 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

7 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Review
  2. Review
  3. Review
  4. Review
  5. Review
  6. Article
  7. Review
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

9 authors.

Elisabetta AbbateEuropean Commission - Joint Research Center, Brussels, Belgium.ORCID 0000-0003-4102-0457
Ad M J RagasDepartment of Environmental Science, Radboud Institute for Biological and Environmental Sciences (RIBES), Radboud University, Nijmegen, the Netherlands.
Carla CaldeiraEuropean Commission - Joint Research Center, Brussels, Belgium.
Leo PosthumaDepartment of Environmental Science, Radboud Institute for Biological and Environmental Sciences (RIBES), Radboud University, Nijmegen, the Netherlands.
Irantzu Garmendia AguirreEuropean Commission - Joint Research Center, Brussels, Belgium.
Anne Chloe DevicSSbD Consulting Europe SL, Denia (Alicante), Spain.
Lya G Soeteman-HernándezNational Institute for Public Health and the Environment (RIVM), Center for Safety of Substances and Products, Bilthoven, the Netherlands.
Mark A J HuijbregtsDepartment of Environmental Science, Radboud Institute for Biological and Environmental Sciences (RIBES), Radboud University, Nijmegen, the Netherlands.
Serenella SalaEuropean Commission - Joint Research Center, Brussels, Belgium.

Funding

Criteria for Safe and Sustainable-by-Design 35334Directorate General for Research and Innovation JRC 36058-DG RTD LC-01671974European Commission Joint Research CentreEuropean Commission Joint Research Centre and Radboud UniversityEuropean Union's Horizon Europe research and innovation 101058245Horizon EuropeSwiss State Secretariat for Education, Research and InnovationUKRI 10038816
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The production and use of chemicals and materials have both advantages and drawbacks for human and ecosystem health. This has led to a demand for carefully guided, safe, and sustainable innovation in the production of chemicals and materials, taking into consideration their entire life cycle. The European Commission's Joint Research Centre (JRC) has released the Safe and Sustainable by Design (SSbD) framework, which aims to support this objective. The SSbD framework consists of two components that are intended to be iteratively implemented throughout the innovation process: (1) the application of design principles phase, and (2) the safety and sustainability assessment phase. However, the operationalization of the framework is currently challenging. This article maps the challenges and proposes ways to address them effectively. The mapping, which is based on a literature review and stakeholder opinions, resulted in 35 challenges. The highest priority challenge is "integration of SSbD framework into the innovation process." To begin addressing this issue, this article recommends conducting a scoping analysis to define the SSbD study. This can be achieved through implementing a tiered approach that aligns with the objectives of the innovation and the growing expertise that comes with it. The second priority challenge is "data availability, quality and uncertainty." This can be supported by using Findability, Accessibility, Interoperability, and Reuse (FAIR) principles and by optimizing in silico methods at early stages of the innovation process. An infrastructure for data and communication is necessary to effectively engage with the entire value chain. The third priority challenge is "integration of safety and sustainability aspects," which requires a clear definition of how to integrate those aspects in the SSbD context, and harmonization, as far as possible, of input data, assumptions, and scenario construction. This review is the first step in accelerating the operationalization of the novel SSbD concept and framework into industrial practice.

Indexed as

Conservation of Natural ResourcesSustainable DevelopmentHumansby designdecision-makingintegrationJRC SSbD frameworkscoping analysis

Identifiers

PMID39970383
PMCPMC11844345

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.