No fee unless we recover compensation for your family Text size 833-4-ASBESTOS (833-427-2378) Free Case Review

Time to Break the "Lock-In" Impediments to Chemicals Management

Our plain-English summary of Time to Break the "Lock-In" Impediments to Chemicals Management, by J. Blumenthal, M.L. Diamond, M. Hoffmann, et al (Environmental Science & Technology, 2022).

You don't need the product names or old records. No fee unless we recover compensation for your family.

Call 833-4-ASBESTOS Request a review

The study

Abstract

Despite enormous national, regional, and global efforts on chemical management, the widespread use of hazardous chemicals continues in many parts of the world even after decades of there being well-known risks to public and/or ecosystem health. This continued supply and use, despite strong evidence of negative impacts, is not unique to chemicals management. In the field of climate change, the concept of "lock-in" has been used to explain the complex interactions among economic, social, technological, and political dynamics that reinforce global reliance on the extraction and use of fossil fuels. Learning from carbon "lock-in" phenomena, this Perspective explores the challenges of chemicals management from the perspective of lock-in through three case studies: paraquat, perfluorooctanesulfonic acid (PFOS), and asbestos. These case studies illustrate that most current chemicals management frameworks fail to address the concerns arising from this complex interplay by not involving all relevant stakeholder groups that are part of lock-in, from producers to consumers. This results in a relatively narrow consideration (e.g., only demand but not supply) of the effectiveness and consequences of regulations. We submit that to break lock-in and address the global threat of chemical pollution, current approaches to managing hazardous chemicals should be broadened to take a comprehensive approach to understanding and managing factors contributing to lock-in, notably both supply and demand on national and international scales.

In plain English

This Perspective article, not an original study, applied the climate-change idea of lock-in (economic, social, technological and political forces that keep a harmful product in use) to three case studies: the herbicide paraquat, the chemical PFOS, and asbestos. The article reported no new data. For asbestos, the authors described how Canada, whose asbestos was mostly mined in Quebec, kept supporting the industry as domestic demand fell. According to the authors, the Canadian government gave the Chrysotile Institute more than CA $20 million, the Institute lobbied low-income countries to keep accepting Canadian asbestos, and Canada opposed listing asbestos under the Rotterdam Convention from 2003 until the Quebec industry shut down in 2012, after a new Quebec government cancelled a loan guarantee. Canada banned asbestos use in 2018. The authors concluded that lock-in could have been broken earlier by supporting affected mining communities, and that chemicals rules should address both supply and demand. They called their work a demonstration of the concept, not a full analysis.

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: Perspective (policy analysis) article built on three case studies (paraquat, PFOS, asbestos); no original data collected
  • Who was studied: For asbestos: the Canadian asbestos industry, mostly in Quebec (towns of Asbestos and Thetford Mines), and Canadian government policy toward it, mainly from 1984 to 2018
  • Exposure: Asbestos production, export and use (fiber type not specified beyond the name of the Chrysotile Institute); the article also covers the herbicide paraquat and PFOS
  • Main results:
    • According to the authors, the Chrysotile Institute, founded in 1984 by the Canadian government with industry groups, received more than CA $20 million from the Canadian government
    • The authors stated that Canada sought to maintain foreign demand by lobbying low-income countries to keep accepting Canadian asbestos exports
    • The authors stated that the Chrysotile Institute spread "false science" disputing that asbestos caused mesothelioma and other lung diseases
    • Canada's delegation opposed listing asbestos under the Rotterdam Convention from 2003 until the Quebec industry shut down in 2012
    • A newly elected Quebec government cancelled the CA $58 million loan guarantee for the Jeffrey mine in September 2012, and both Quebec mines then closed
    • Canada implemented a complete ban on asbestos use in 2018
    • In the authors' view, lock-in to asbestos could have been broken earlier by supporting affected mining communities to transition
  • The authors' conclusion: The authors concluded that chemicals management frameworks need broader perspectives that consider both supply and demand of hazardous chemicals, along with externalities such as public healthcare and cleanup costs
  • Limitations the authors state:
    • The authors stated their work was not a full analysis of lock-in but a demonstration of the concept

Browse more research in Environmental Science & Technology, or return to medical research.

Cited on this site

How to cite it

Cite the study

J. Blumenthal, M.L. Diamond, M. Hoffmann, Z. Wang. Time to Break the "Lock-In" Impediments to Chemicals Management. Environmental Science & Technology 2022;56(7):3863-3870. doi:10.1021/acs.est.1c06615. PMID: 35306812.

Cite our summary

“Time to Break the "Lock-In" Impediments to Chemicals Management.” AsbestosClaims.Law Library. https://asbestosclaims.law/library/research/time-to-break-the-lock-in-impediments-to-chemicals-management.

ACL Doc numbers and their short links never change. See how to cite the Library.

Talk with an asbestos lawyer

Start with what you remember, and we'll take it from there.

This page is provided for general informational purposes and does not constitute legal advice. Every asbestos case turns on its own facts, exposure history, diagnosis, deadlines, available evidence, and applicable law. Reviewing this page does not create an attorney-client relationship. For advice about your specific situation, call 833-4-ASBESTOS for a free case review.