Echa Draft Substitution Strategy Due by the Summer

Agency invites stakeholder views on resourcing, funding and networking

Echa expects to complete a draft of its strategy on substitution by the summer, with the final version slated for the end of the year.

The agency is developing the strategy to become better informed, when handling restriction proposals and applications for authorisation, and to help companies improve the way they identify and assess alternatives to hazardous chemicals.

It is working in collaboration with the Lowell Center for Sustainable Production, which produced a series of recommendations on safer alternatives in a report commissioned by Echa in 2016.

In an interview with Chemical Watch at its Global Business Summit in Amsterdam on 22 March, Echa’s head of risk management implementation unit Matti Vainio said a draft should be available “within a couple of months”. It will be based on three areas that were identified in the Lowell report:

capacity building: this involves identifying the most pressing needs for alternatives assessment, the level of expertise, types of training or reference material, and whether online training or workshops, for instance, would be most useful;
funding schemes: targeted finance for innovation must be available as early as possible; the candidate list could be a “trigger” for funding; and
network development: this would involve players in the supply chain and ‘match-making’ producers of alternatives with potential clients, involving member states. Existing networks, such as Network of REACH SEA and Analysis of Alternatives practitioners (NeRSAP), could be used. An open NeRSAP meeting will take place on 18-19 May in Helsinki.
Collaboration
Substitution should be an “integral part” of a chemical company’s everyday research and development policy, Mr Vainio said, but little is communicated on this subject. “We do not know what companies really need.”

The agency is embarking on an information gathering exercise – in collaboration with stakeholders – to identify which of the three areas, and others that may be suggested, should be developed and to what extent. The agency “cannot and should not” do it alone, Mr Vainio said.

In March, Echa met with people from the European Commission, NGO ChemSec, consultancy Anthesis-Caleb UK and metals association Eurometaux. These people, Mr Vainio said, have experience with innovation, R&D and its relationship with substitution.

The meetings were designed to gauge “if there is a genuine need and possibility to come up with something that would make a difference”.

At a later stage, the agency must decide what its role in the strategy will be. “We wish to discuss our role with the Commission because we are working closely with them and they have many things going on that link to what we are doing, including the circular economy, for instance.”

It must also discuss the strategy with its management board, as well as member states, he said.

A training programme on substitution could also be considered, which would be “geared towards specific industry sectors” with a similar programme for member states, Mr Vainio said. “That should become more concrete during the year.”

Funding examples
Under Horizon 2020 – the EU programme for research and innovation from 2014 to 2020 – DG Research has funded a €10m pilot project in Finland, which is looking at alternatives for hazardous substances in the electroplating industry.

An ‘innovation workshop’ organised by Echa on 25 January, attended by electroplaters, suppliers and customers, providers of alternatives and funding support organisations, generated eight project ideas that could be funded.

Supply chain workshops could be repeated in other member states and for different industries, Mr Vainio said.