Preventing regrettable substitution through regulatory frameworks: using REACH regulation and Stockholm Convention as case studies

Abstract Background Regrettable substitution, which involves the replacement of a hazardous chemical with an alternative that later proves equally harmful or introduces new risks, remains an ongoing significant challenge for chemical regulation. As regulatory frameworks such as REACH (Registration, Evaluation, Authorisation and Restriction of Chemicals) and the Stockholm Convention increasingly drive transitions away from the use of hazardous substances, the need to prevent regrettable substitution has become central to effective chemicals management. Methods This study examines how regrettable substitution can be prevented through deliberate regulatory design and implementation. Using REACH and the Stockholm Convention as case studies, we performed a qualitative study involving interviews and document analysis. Results Reflexive thematic analysis generated interconnected themes that collectively identify how regulatory frameworks can potentially prevent regrettable substitution. These include improving the reliability, completeness, and transparency of regulatory data to support informed substitution; using incentives and structured regulatory support to promote innovation in safe(r) alternatives; establishing coherent and coordinated regulatory approaches that reduce fragmentation; strengthening partnerships among regulators, industry, and scientific actors to enhance information flow; adopting proactive and precautionary regulatory strategies, including early screening; and reinforcing compliance through enhanced monitoring and enforcement. Conclusions The findings demonstrate that regrettable substitution is not merely a scientific or technical failure but a systemic and operational regulatory issue arising from late hazard identification, incomplete exposure and performance information, siloed regulatory structures, and uneven innovation incentives. The study concludes that preventing regrettable substitution requires regulatory frameworks that are anticipatory, integrated, transparent, and adaptive that can actively steer the substitution process toward genuinely safe(r) and sustainable chemical solutions.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
Environmental Sciences Europe
Published
2026-07-22
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1186/s12302-026-01470-0
Primary Topic
Chemistry and Chemical Engineering
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
0.00
Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

Preventing regrettable substitution through regulatory frameworks: using REACH regulation and Stockholm Convention as case studies

Nigel Watson, Rob Whiting, Olasunkanmi Dosunmu, Avtar S. Matharu et al.
Environmental Sciences Europe
Chemistry and Chemical Engineering
article

Preventing regrettable substitution through regulatory frameworks: using REACH regulation and Stockholm Convention as case studies

Nigel Watson, Rob Whiting, Olasunkanmi Dosunmu, Avtar S. Matharu, Andrew J. Sweetman
article en

Abstract

Abstract Background Regrettable substitution, which involves the replacement of a hazardous chemical with an alternative that later proves equally harmful or introduces new risks, remains an ongoing significant challenge for chemical regulation. As regulatory frameworks such as REACH (Registration, Evaluation, Authorisation and Restriction of Chemicals) and the Stockholm Convention increasingly drive transitions away from the use of hazardous substances, the need to prevent regrettable substitution has become central to effective chemicals management. Methods This study examines how regrettable substitution can be prevented through deliberate regulatory design and implementation. Using REACH and the Stockholm Convention as case studies, we performed a qualitative study involving interviews and document analysis. Results Reflexive thematic analysis generated interconnected themes that collectively identify how regulatory frameworks can potentially prevent regrettable substitution. These include improving the reliability, completeness, and transparency of regulatory data to support informed substitution; using incentives and structured regulatory support to promote innovation in safe(r) alternatives; establishing coherent and coordinated regulatory approaches that reduce fragmentation; strengthening partnerships among regulators, industry, and scientific actors to enhance information flow; adopting proactive and precautionary regulatory strategies, including early screening; and reinforcing compliance through enhanced monitoring and enforcement. Conclusions The findings demonstrate that regrettable substitution is not merely a scientific or technical failure but a systemic and operational regulatory issue arising from late hazard identification, incomplete exposure and performance information, siloed regulatory structures, and uneven innovation incentives. The study concludes that preventing regrettable substitution requires regulatory frameworks that are anticipatory, integrated, transparent, and adaptive that can actively steer the substitution process toward genuinely safe(r) and sustainable chemical solutions.

Environmental Sciences Europe
University of York (GB), Lancaster University (GB), University of Reading (GB)
Partnerships for the goals
Openalex Percentile: Top 14%
Chemistry and Chemical Engineering
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.