The export of hazardous industries in 2015

Our plain-English summary of The export of hazardous industries in 2015, by B. Castleman (Environmental Health, 2016).

The study

• Author: B. Castleman
• Journal: Environmental Health
• Published: 2016;15:8
• Cited by: 4 articles, as counted by NIH iCite
• Read it: PubMed · Publisher · Free full text

Abstract

In the 1970s, there were many reports of toxic hazards at corporate subsidiaries in the developing world that were no longer tolerated in the corporations' "home" countries. Following the chemical disaster in Bhopal, India, in 1984, leading corporations then announced that they applied uniform standards of worker and environmental protection worldwide. With globalization, corporations should also be obliged to take responsibility for their separate supplier, contractor and distributor companies, and licensees of their technology.The asbestos industry today consists of national corporations. Individual countries must overcome the influence of the asbestos-exporting countries and asbestos companies and stop building with asbestos, as recommended by WHO, ILO, and World Bank. WHO precautions for limiting governmental interaction with the tobacco industry should be applied in dealing with the asbestos industry.

In plain English

This commentary reported no new research data. The author described how, as regulation grew in the 1970s, some ultra-hazardous technologies were exported to the developing world, though most new industry there was ordinary expansion and major relocations occurred in relatively few cases, such as asbestos textiles. It also described corporate "double standards" in worker and environmental protection. On asbestos, the author stated that it is banned in over 50 countries but still used elsewhere, mostly in asbestos-cement products. The author cited a World Health Organization estimate of more than 107,000 deaths a year worldwide from lung cancer, mesothelioma and asbestosis due to occupational exposure. The author wrote that the asbestos industry now consists mainly of national companies. From US litigation documents and published sources, the author listed industry practices such as not telling employees about asbestosis found in their medical examinations. The author also wrote that some governments have blocked listing chrysotile under the Rotterdam Convention. The author concluded that governments should treat the asbestos industry as WHO recommends for the tobacco industry, and should stop all asbestos use.

We wrote this plain-English summary from the full article with the help of AI, and a second AI model checked each sentence against the article. It is not the authors' wording; the abstract and the article are their own account.

What the study did and found

• Design: Commentary (opinion article; no original data collected)
• Who was studied: No study population. The commentary discussed multinational and national corporations, especially the asbestos industry, and hazardous conditions in the developing world from the 1970s to 2015.
• Exposure: Asbestos in general, mainly chrysotile, used mostly in asbestos-cement sheets and pipes. Other hazardous industries were also discussed.
• Main results:
  • The author wrote that most new industry in the developing world was ordinary global expansion, but some was the selective export of ultra-hazardous, discredited technologies. Major relocations occurred in relatively few cases, such as asbestos textiles, benzidine dyes and arsenic recovery.
  • The author stated that asbestos is banned in over 50 countries, but most of the world's people live where it is still used.
  • The author cited a WHO estimate (not this article's own finding) of more than 107,000 deaths annually worldwide from lung cancer, mesothelioma and asbestosis due to occupational exposure.
  • The author wrote that no global asbestos corporations remain. The industry now consists mainly of national companies, with occasional ownership by companies from asbestos-mining countries (mainly Russia and Kazakhstan).
  • Drawing on internal company documents from US litigation and published sources, the author listed asbestos industry practices, including non-disclosure to employees of asbestosis found in their medical examinations.
  • The author stated that governments with close ties to asbestos interests have repeatedly blocked adding chrysotile asbestos to the Rotterdam Convention's prior-informed-consent requirements.
• The authors' conclusion: The author concluded that governments should limit their interaction with the asbestos industry, as WHO recommends for the tobacco industry, and should act on WHO's position that stopping the use of all types of asbestos is the most efficient way to eliminate asbestos-related diseases.

Related studies

• Leaching behaviour of hazardous demolition waste — N. Roussat, J. Méhu, et al. (2008)
• Protest and survive, the U.K. Construction Safety Campaign: a case study of workers' and victims' family action and legal and regulatory inaction on construction health and safety — M. Holder, T. O'Brien (2007)
• South Africa's export trade in asbestos: demise of an industry — J.S. Harington, N.D. McGlashan, et al. (2010)
• Bilateral environmental and occupational health program with India — M. Allred, S. Campolucci, et al. (2003)
• Late industrial development and occupational health in southern Italy — G. Assennato, L. Bisceglia, et al. (2005)
• Health effects of hazardous waste — S.M. Dearwent, M.M. Mumtaz, et al. (2006)

Browse more research in Environmental Health, or return to medical research.