The purpose of this Article is to compare the regulatory systems in Canada and the EU, and use comparative insights to draw some lessons that may be of interest to U.S. policy makers engaged in TSCA reform. CEPA and REACH are seen by stakeholders as state of the art in chemicals assessment and management, and thus the U.S. may draw useful insights from them. Indeed, the European Union and Canada have each been urging other countries to join in a globalization of the REACH or Canadian programs, respectively. Regardless of what TSCA reformers choose to learn from the Canadian and European experiences, a secondary objective of the Article is to provide comparative information that may be of interest to reformers in Canada, Europe, or other countries and regions where chemical risk management is under consideration for reform. Thus, the Article's long-term value extends beyond the current U.S. debate over TSCA reform.
The Article is organized in three Parts. In Part I, we describe the scope of our analysis, our research methods, and our analytical approach. In Parts II and III, we compare CEPA and REACH across two significant dimensions: (1) prioritization of existing chemicals for assessment and regulation; and (2) placement of the burdens to produce data and demonstrate safety of specific chemical uses. We conclude by summarizing the possible lessons for TSCA reform and highlighting some future research needs.
Recommended CitationAdam D.K. Abelkop and John D. Graham, Regulation of Chemical Risks: Lessons for Reform of the Toxic Substances Control Act from Canada and the European Union, 32 Pace Envtl. L. Rev. 108 (2015)
Available at: https://digitalcommons.pace.edu/pelr/vol32/iss1/3