Multiple-Criteria\nDecision Analysis for Assessments\nof Chemical Alternatives (MCDA-ACA)

A comprehensive assessment of chemical alternatives (ACA)\nis necessary\nto avoid regrettable substitution. In a preceding study, an analysis\nof six hazard assessment methods found that none of them are fully\naligned with the hazard assessment criteria of Article 57 of the European\nREACH regulation, indicating a need for a method better reflecting\nhazard assessment schemes in European chemical regulations. This paper\npresents a multiple-criteria decision analysis (MCDA) method for the\nACA that takes the criteria of Article 57 of REACH into account. Investigated\nand presented are objective hierarchies, the aggregation of objectives,\nthe curvature of the value functions, weights, and the introduction\nof a classification threshold. The MCDA-ACA method allows for the\naggregation of hazards in such a way that poor performance in one\nhazard cannot be compensated for by good performance in another hazard.\nThe method parameters were developed and tested using two data sets\nwith the aim to classify chemical alternatives into acceptable (nonregrettable)\nand unacceptable (regrettable) alternatives according to the regulations\nset in Europe. The flexibility of the general method was explored\nby adapting the method to align with two hazard assessment schemes,\nArticle 57 of REACH and GreenScreen. The results show that MCDA-ACA\nis so flexible and transparent that it can easily be adapted to various\nhazard assessment schemes.