Regulatory leaders in the US and Europe claim that most of the information is acquired to converse the poor awareness of chemicals amongst people.

Communicating at Chemical Watch’s Global Business Summit, leader of Echa Nancy Beck and Bjorn Hansen, deputy assistant administrator for US EPA’s Office of Chemical Safety and Pollution Prevention, accepted that view of public and chemical awareness is low.

This is mostly because of less information, said Mr. Hansen.

Mr. Hansen commented that “Authorities, NGO and industry lack information. However, we are on the right road to getting this information, which will enable us to make the right decisions and, once we achieve this, we can start regaining the confidence of the public”.

It is said by Mr. Hansen that the database of Echa is needing the company to deliver information on considering the list of substances in articles, the “good start” in accomplishing it.

Mr. Hansen said that the database that came out of the reviewed waste framework Directive (WFD) is entering in the force, “strengthens” REACH Article 33. This specifies that providers will offer the beneficiaries of articles comprising the ingredients of very high concern with data enabling the safe use.


Mr. Hansen claimed that a wider issue was the absence of confidence in organizations, motivating how chemicals are been viewed by citizens and are not supported by unfair criticism.

“Many people disapprove scientific judgments, for instance, made by Echa on titanium dioxide or glyphosate or the other chemicals. And many times statements are done that appear to challenge the experts or institution”.

Mr. Hansen claimed that “It’s very important that we communicate that we’re expressing a difference in scientific opinion but not intending to undermine the institution or experts”.

There is a “crisis of confidence in chemicals” said Ms. Beck.

Ms. Beck even claimed that “Environmental groups are unhappy in some cases, industry groups can be unhappy and it does erode away at the credibility of the organization”.

“When it comes to chemicals, in the US there is a lack of awareness and understanding, particularly around hazard versus risk.”

Ms. Beck stated that “These are impossible messages to get across”.

In the year 2017, a European Commission survey on the public awareness of the security of chemical products discovered that more than 85% of European citizens are worried regarding the chemicals affecting the environment and human health.

On considering the survey, chief economist at Dow, Rafael Cayuela claimed that “We need to address this as we are a part of the solution. I would like to see this figure reduced to 10% in ten years”.

Executive Director of Zero Discharge of Hazardous Chemicals, Frank Michel states that “To tackle this, there is a need to demystify chemistry and ensure rigorous transparency”.

Frank Michel commented that “We need to understand the consumer when they are uncomfortable with the notion that their product contains chemicals”.

“If the consumer has the perception that we are hiding something, they then become suspicious. Explaining that chemistry comes with product performance is important.”

A senior adviser at the UN Environment’s Chemicals and health branch, Achim Halpaap, claimed that the issue of chemicals is not easy to communicate.

“It’s challenging because we don’t have the 1.5 degrees [climate] goal. Instead, we have thousands of chemicals, each with its own story and exposure scenario.”Regulatory leaders in the US and Europe claim that most of the information is acquired to converse the poor awareness of chemicals amongst people.