Asbestos legislation SITREP in the European Union: a mixed-methods analysis of parliamentary questions (1995–2024)

Abstract Background Asbestos, a group of naturally occurring minerals once known as ‘magic minerals’, is widely regulated due to its carcinogenicity. However, its regulation remains a complex challenge for the European Union (EU). This study analyses how asbestos-related issues are addressed within the EU by studying parliamentary questions submitted to the European Commission over 30 years. Results The analysis of 378 parliamentary questions identified four context themes: asbestos presence, related activities, impact, and regulations. Italian Members of the EU Parliament raised 41% of the questions, other countries asked < 10% each. Most cases (69.2%) requested information rather than action, while answers provided additional information (76.7%). Action-based answers included legislative actions, official correspondence, and verification. Responsibility was attributed to Member States in 178 out of 186 answers. Waste management resulted a consistent compliance concern. Within asbestos presence context (19.9% of PQs), questions addressed asbestos containing material (14%), waste (4.6%) and naturally occurring asbestos (NOA) (1.3%). Before the 2005 asbestos ban, questions focused on responsibility and regulatory frameworks, answers highlighted legislative actions, awareness, and commitment. After the ban, questioning declined and shifted to plans, implementation, and compliance issues, while answers highlighted Member State responsibility and compliance. Conclusions Asbestos-related Parliamentary Questions expose regulatory, enforcement, and public health challenges across EU Member States but their impact is limited by weak follow-up mechanisms. Due to the nature of EU legislation, adoption, implementation and enforcement of asbestos -related measures depend primarily on national authorities. This can result in uneven application across Member States and many limit the EU’s capacity to ensure continuous protection from asbestos exposure, especially in higher-risk contexts and cross-border activities. Italy’s high number of PQs reflects complex national vulnerabilities, including the presence of NOA along with processed materials and waste. The exclusion of NOA from the current regulations represents a critical oversight. The authors encourage the European Commission to create a regulatory framework for NOA for safer environment for people in risky areas. Future legislation should strengthen and support EU-wide NOA mapping and coordination. This study recommends the use of PQs as a monitoring tool to identify national issues and drive more responsive and effective policy development across the EU, despite potential limitations. Graphical Abstract