- - TEXT E 79/2024 Final report Indicators for sustainable management of chemicals Contributions to upcoming development work under the new Global Framework for Chemicals By Henning Friege N³ Thinking Ahead Dr. Friege & Partners, Voerde Esther Heidbüchel CSCP Collaborating Centre for Sustainable Consumption and Production gGmbH, Wuppertal Barbara Zeschmar Lahl BZL Kommunikation und Projektsteuerung GmbH, Oyten Publisher: German Environment Agency German Environment Agency TEXTE 79/2024 Ressortforschungsplan of the Federal Ministry for the Environment, Nature Conservation, Nuclear Safety and Consumer Protection Project No. (FKZ) 3719 65 404 0 FB001355/ENG Final report Indicators for sustainable management of chemicals Contributions to upcoming development work under the new Global Framework for Chemicals By Henning Friege N³ Thinking Ahead Dr. Friege & Partners, Voerde Esther Heidbüchel CSCP - Collaborating Centre for Sustainable Consumption and Production gGmbH, Wuppertal Barbara Zeschmar-Lahl BZL Kommunikation und Projektsteuerung GmbH, Oyten On behalf of the German Environment Agency Imprint Publisher Federal Environmental Agency W�örlitzer Platz 1 D-06844 Dessau-Roßlau Phone: +49 340-2103-0 Fax: +49 340-2103-2285 buergerservice@uba.de Internet: www.umweltbundesamt.de Report performed by: N³ Thinking Ahead Dr. Friege & Partners Scholtenbusch 11 D-46562 Voerde Germany Report completed in: November 2023 Edited by Section IV 1.1 International Chemicals Management Hans-Christian Stolzenberg, Christopher Blum Publication as pdf: http://www.umweltbundesamt.de/publikationen ISSN 1862-4804 Dessau-Roßlau, April 2024 The responsibility for the content of this publication lies with the authors. TEXTE Indicators for sustainable management of chemicals Abstract: Indicators for sustainable management of chemicals At the end of September 2023, the fifth International Conference on Chemicals (ICCM5) adopted the Global Framework for Chemicals (GFC), the follow-up framework for the Strategic Approach to International Chemicals Management (SAICM). The GFC aims to ensure the sustainable application of chemicals worldwide throughout their entire life cycle, including the products and waste produced from them. In this study, indicators were developed - in parallel to the ongoing discussions on target setting - using the concept of sustainable chemistry. This concept is based on a cross-system approach involving numerous interfaces, such as the use of renewable resources, occupational health and safety, and the recycling of waste. The collection of data should be as simple as possible as well as practicable in developing and newly industrializing countries. To this end, indicators introduced in the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs), numerous international conventions and existing reporting formats were examined for their applicability. Their suitability was assessed using criteria developed in the project. The criteria take into account importance, specificity, data availability, and key sustainable chemistry fundamentals, among other factors. The project team discussed the criteria and candidate indicators in six international workshops and in dialogue with more than twenty experts from around the world. Interim results were published on a cloud accessible to all participating experts. This resulted in a list of 45 indicators suitable for future work in international chemicals management. These were structured according to various issues. We propose 23 indicators for future work in the "sound management of chemicals and waste". Several of the indicators developed in this project are also suitable for tracking targets of the Chemicals Strategy for Sustainability (CSS) of the European Commission. A preliminary analysis of the targets adopted at ICCM5 in September 2023 showed that the indicators developed in this study make a good contribution to the upcoming discussion on appropriate indicators for the GFC. 5 TEXTE Indicators for sustainable management of chemicals Table of content List of figures ........................................................................................................................................... 8 List of tables ............................................................................................................................................ 8 List of abbreviations ................................................................................................................................ 9 Summary ............................................................................................................................................... 11 1 Background.................................................................................................................................... 26 1.1 Chemicals and waste management: global approaches....................................................... 26 1.2 Status of SAICM 2019 and developments until 2023 ........................................................... 29 1.3 European policy: "Green Deal" and "Chemicals Strategy for Sustainability" ....................... 31 2 Sustainable Chemistry ................................................................................................................... 33 2.1 The concept of sustainable chemistry .................................................................................. 33 2.2 Political significance of the concept and SAICM objectives.................................................. 35 2.3 Sustainability approaches in the chemical industry ............................................................. 38 3 Goals and structure of the project ................................................................................................ 40 3.1 SAICM: Intersessional Process and ICCM5............................................................................ 40 3.2 Goals and structure............................................................................................................... 41 3.2.1 Changes due to the deceleration of the Intersessional Process....................................... 41 3.2.2 Final structure................................................................................................................... 41 4 Preliminary research and documentation..................................................................................... 44 4.1 Fact sheets ............................................................................................................................ 44 4.2 Additionally researched sources........................................................................................... 45 4.3 Conclusions from the investigations of conventions and other sources .............................. 45 5 Criteria for the selection of indicators .......................................................................................... 46 5.1 Basic considerations.............................................................................................................. 46 5.2 Development of formal Criteria A-G..................................................................................... 46 5.3 Development of the criteria for sustainable chemistry (H1-H5) .......................................... 48 5.4 Reconciliation procedure ...................................................................................................... 50 6 Narrowing and selection of indicators .......................................................................................... 52 6.1 Data generation on the global level...................................................................................... 58 6.2 Indicators for hazards caused by chemicals.......................................................................... 58 6.3 Indicators for resources and waste....................................................................................... 60 6.4 Indicators for climate and biodiversity issues....................................................................... 61 6.5 Indicators for social challenges ............................................................................................. 62 6.6 Indicators for sustainable innovations and investments ...................................................... 64 6 TEXTE Indicators for sustainable management of chemicals 7 Suitability of indicators for international policy............................................................................ 67 7.1 Links of indicators to SDGs.................................................................................................... 67 7.2 Suitability of indicators for SMCW........................................................................................ 68 7.3 European Chemicals Strategy for Sustainability (EU CSS)..................................................... 74 7.4 Indicators for the chemical sector ........................................................................................ 77 8 Transparency of the project .......................................................................................................... 79 8.1 Selection of experts for workshops and interviews.............................................................. 79 8.2 Preparation, execution, and documentation of workshops ................................................. 79 8.3 Continuous communication with experts in the field........................................................... 81 9 Dissemination of the project and its results ................................................................................. 82 9.1 ISC3 Stakeholder Forum ........................................................................................................ 82 9.2 Scientific conferences ........................................................................................................... 82 9.2.1 7th Green and Sustainable Chemistry Conference (GREN 2023) ...................................... 82 9.2.2 18th International Conference on Chemistry and the Environment (ICCE), 2023............. 83 9.3 Discussion with European stakeholders ............................................................................... 84 9.4 Homepage of the German Environment Agency.................................................................. 86 10 Conclusions.................................................................................................................................... 87 10.1 Criteria for indicators ............................................................................................................ 87 10.2 Indicators for global policy: future development? ............................................................... 87 10.3 Indicators for European policy: further development? ........................................................ 88 11 Acknowledgements ....................................................................................................................... 90 11.1 Thanks to experts.................................................................................................................. 90 11.2 Thanks to client members..................................................................................................... 90 11.3 Thanks to co-workers............................................................................................................ 90 12 List of references ........................................................................................................................... 91 A Appendix: Short documentation of workshops ............................................................................ 97 B Appendix: List of interview partners ........................................................................................... 105 B.1 Interviews, first round (June - August, 2020)...................................................................... 105 B.2 Interviews, second round (October - December, 2020) ..................................................... 105 B.3 Interviews, third round (May, 2021 - March, 2022) ........................................................... 106 B.4 Interviews, fourth round (March - June, 2023)................................................................... 108 C Appendix: Complete list of indicators ......................................................................................... 109 D Appendix: Minutes of "Indicators measuring progress towards sustainable chemistry"........... 120 E Appendix: List of documents checked for potential indicators and milestones ......................... 126 7 TEXTE Indicators for sustainable management of chemicals List of figures Figure 1: Development towards sustainable chemistry..........................34 Figure 2: Goals and frame of green and sustainable chemistry..............36 Figure 3: Structure and time schedule of the project .............................43 Figure 4: Documentation from workshop No 4: results of the discussion of a potential indicator .............................................................51 Figure 5: Suggested indicators related to SDGs ......................................68 List of tables Table 1: Criteria for indicators................................................................15 Table 2: List of priority indicators with respect to SMCW .....................17 Table 3: Stakeholder perceptions of the degree of success in achieving SAICM objectives (overarching policy strategy - OPS) from 2006 to 2015......................................................................................28 Table 4: General criteria for indicators aiming at sustainable chemistry ..................................................................................................48 Table 5: Criteria for sustainable chemistry indicators related to important sources ....................................................................49 Table 6: Complete list of proposed indicators .......................................52 Table 7: List of priority indicators with respect to SMCW .....................70 Table 8: Indicators that are hardly available or measurable globally but available at EU level..................................................................74 Table 9: Potential indicators to monitor progress in the chemical sector; "Priority" is related to the final list for SAICM (Section 6.2) ....77 Table 10: General schedule for workshops..............................................80 8 TEXTE Indicators for sustainable management of chemicals List of abbreviations Abbreviation CFP CLP CO2 CO2 eq. CoC COFOG CSDDD CSR(D) CSS DJSI DPSIR EEA EHS EMAS EPI ESAP ESS EU EuChemS EUROSTAT ETS FAO GCO GDP GFC GHS GREN GRI HHP ICCA ICCE ICCM INI ILO IOMC Explanation Chemical footprint Classification, Labelling and Packaging (Regulation) Carbon dioxide CO2 equivalents Chemicals of Concern Classification of the Functions of Government (OECD) Corporate Sustainability Due Diligence Directive (EU) Corporate Social Responsibility (Directive) (EU) Chemicals Strategy for Sustainability (EU) Dow Jones Sustainability Index Driving force - pressure - state - impact - response (approach, EEA) European Environment Agency Environment, health, safety Eco Management and Audit Scheme Emerging policy issue (SAICM) European single access point European Statistical System European Union European Chemical Society Statistical Office of the European Union Emissions trading system Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations Global Chemicals Outlook Gross domestic product Global Framework for Chemicals Globally Harmonised System (of Classification, Labelling and Packaging of Chemicals, UN) Green and Sustainable Chemistry Conference Global Reporting Initiative Highly hazardous pesticides International Council of Chemicals Associations International Conference on Chemistry and the Environment International Conference on Chemicals Management International Nitrogen Initiative International Labour Organization Inter-Organization Programme for the Sound Management of Chemicals 9 TEXTE Indicators for sustainable management of chemicals Abbreviation IP IPBES IPCC IPEN ISC3 LCA LMICs MSCI NACE NAFTA OSPARCOM PIC POP(s) PRTR PSA PSR REACH SAICM SC SDG(s) SMCW SSbD SusChem SVHC TfS TWG UBA UN UNCED UNEA UNEP UNIDO VWG WBCSD WFD WHO Explanation Intersessional Process (SAICM) Intergovernmental Science-Policy Platform on Biodiversity and Ecosystem Services International Panel on Climate Change International Pollutants Elimination Network International Sustainable Chemistry Collaborative Centre Life cycle assessment Low and middle-income countries (World Bank) Morgan Stanley Capital International Nomenclature statistique des activités économiques dans la Communauté européenne (Nomenclature of Economic Activities) North American Free Trade Agreement Commission of the Oslo and Paris Convention Prior informed consent (Rotterdam Convention) Persistent organic pollutant(s) (Stockholm Convention) Pollutant release and transfer register Portfolio sustainability assessment Pressure - state - response (approach, OECD) Registration, Evaluation, Authorisation and Restriction of Chemicals (EU) Strategic Approach to International Chemicals Management Sustainable chemistry Sustainable Development Goal(s), UN Sound management of chemicals and waste Safe and sustainable by design (EU) European Technology Platform for Sustainable Chemistry Substance(s) of very high concern (REACH) Together for Sustainability Technical Working Group (SAICM) Umweltbundesamt - German Environment Agency United Nations United Nations Conference on Environment and Development (UN, Rio de Janeiro) United Nations Environment Assembly United Nations Environment Programme United Nations Industrial Development Organization Virtual Working Group (SAICM) World Business Council on Sustainable Development Waste Framework Directive (EU) World Health Organization 10 TEXTE Indicators for sustainable management of chemicals Summary The development of indicators for the international management of chemicals and waste in the terms of the Strategic Approach to International Chemicals Management (SAICM) is the focus of this study. Within this framework, the concept of sustainable chemistry is to be given greater consideration and thus contribute to the significant further development of the "sound management of chemicals and waste" (SMCW) in the future. Political environment The project was implemented in a dynamically evolving political environment: ► Despite various global standards and agreements (Globally Harmonised System, Stockholm Convention, Basel Convention, etc.), the handling of hazardous chemicals and wastes is still at a very different level of implementation and enforcement; the disparity between industrialized, emerging and developing countries is sometimes considerable. ► The UN Summit in Johannesburg (2002) set, among other things, the goal of minimizing the negative impact of chemicals on human health and the environment from production to use, disposal and recycling by the year 2020 (the "2020 goal"). To this end, the international community has established SAICM as a "multi-stakeholder multi-sector voluntary policy framework" under the aegis of UNEP. The goals described in more detail in the Dubai Declaration1 (2006) were not or only partially achieved by 2020. ► At the same time, global chemical production has increased massively since the beginning of the century, especially its share in emerging countries. This makes it all the more urgent to pursue the targets set, especially outside industrialized countries. ► The findings on pollution of marine biotope in particular on plastic waste, species extinction, progressive climate change, and other global or regional environmental problems are linked to the topic of SAICM and were reflected in corresponding resolutions of the UN Environmental Assembly. The question of the extent to which global exposure to chemicals is already exceeding planetary boundaries cannot be answered yet. However, the increase in production, the low proportions of recovered resources, and the increasing inputs to the environment (all on a global scale), combined with inadequate capacities of monitoring and analysis of adverse effects, point to major difficulties. In any case, given the large capacity deficits in many countries, especially in the Global South, the ongoing "chemical intensification" means that responsible chemical management with globally adequate chemical safety is becoming increasingly difficult. ► In industrialized countries, sustainable chemistry has become an issue: The U.S. Congress passed the Sustainable Chemistry Research and Development Act in 2019. The EU Commission published its Chemicals Strategy for Sustainability (CSS) in 2020. However, both approaches are still strongly oriented toward the existing regulations of chemicals. In the SAICM Intersessional Process (IP)2, recommendations for shaping the strategy for the international management of chemicals and (hazardous) wastes for the period after 2020 were 1 Strategic Approach to International Chemicals Management (2015): SAICM texts and resolutions of the International Conference on Chemicals Management. https://saicmknowledge.org/sites/default/files/resources/New%20SAICM%20Text%20with%20ICCM%20resolutions_E.pdf (09 June 2023). 2 SAICM: Strategic Approach and sound management of chemicals and waste beyond 2020 - The Intersessional Process. http://saicm.org/Beyond2020/IntersessionalProcess/tabid/5500/language/en-US/Default.aspx (06 Sept 2023). 11 TEXTE Indicators for sustainable management of chemicals developed starting in 2017. This work was significantly delayed by the COVID-19 pandemic and did not reach its conclusion until ICCM5 in Bonn, Germany, September 25-30, 2023. In the meantime, five overarching "Strategic Objectives" were drafted with broad consensus, and "Targets" were developed from them to operationalize the overarching goals. The working groups set up for this purpose during the IP - most of which met online - were faced with the challenges to: ► formulate generally accepted and understandable, yet ambitious goals, ► link unmet goals for redressing grievances as well as visions for 2030, ► make the link to the SDGs while strengthening the role of chemical management, ► significantly improve the controlling of agreed targets and measures, and ► find a viable model for funding future activities. Indicators are needed to track paths taken to reach goals, to counteract undesirable developments, and to formulate new interim goals or milestones. Similar challenges apply to indicators as to goals. Each goal should be: ► comprehensive and significant, ► reliable, and ► easy to understand and determine as simply as possible. Sustainable chemistry The concept of sustainable chemistry has been developed over the past twenty years. In parallel to the many different scientific approaches, the OECD and the Federal Environment Agency in particular have endeavored to work on the concept for practical application and to anchor it politically. Resolution 2/7 of the UN Environment Assembly (UNEA 2, 2016) should be mentioned as a milestone in establishing the concept at the global level: In it, the UNEA called on national governments, international organizations, and stakeholders to document and evaluate examples of good practice in sustainable chemistry in support of the "sound management of chemicals and waste." Based on a decision of UNEA 4 (2019, Resolution 4/8), the "Green and Sustainable Chemistry: Framework Manual" (see section "Criteria") was developed, which is suitable for applying the concept of sustainable chemistry in companies and administrations alike. Sustainable chemistry requires the safe handling of chemicals over the entire product life cycle and integrates the principles of "Green Chemistry" with its principles for substance synthesis. However, with its "benign by design" approach, among other things, the concept goes beyond "green chemistry". Through its holistic approach ("systems thinking"), sustainable chemistry takes into account important interfaces, especially with the extraction and use of natural resources, waste management and recycling, climate protection, the preservation of biodiversity, and the protection of the rights and needs of vulnerable groups. Implementing sustainable chemistry therefore means not only looking at the environmental compatibility of a substance, but also taking into account the opportunities and risks of its use, its production, and its recycling or disposal. In this way, the scientific concept of sustainable chemistry can support the political goals of the SDGs with their multiple interfaces and interdependencies. It is thus also suitable as a link between the goals of chemical safety ("sound management of chemicals and waste") and the broad approach of the SDGs and the 2030 Agenda. 12 TEXTE Indicators for sustainable management of chemicals Of the five "objectives" developed during the IP, "Objective D" in particular addressed aspects of sustainable chemistry: "Benefits to human health and the environment are maximized and risks are prevented or, where not feasible, minimized through safe[r] alternatives, innovative and sustainable solutions and forward thinking."3 The ICCM5 adopted seven "Targets"4 for "Strategic Objective D on safer alternatives and innovative and sustainable solutions" that address various aspects of sustainable development in connection with the use of chemicals, in the spirit of sustainable chemistry. In the search for indicators, the concept of sustainable chemistry was used in order to be able to track and evaluate future-oriented developments based on the safe handling of chemicals and waste. Overall, this resulted in the challenging task of searching for indicators that: ► Cover all sectors and fields of application relevant to (sustainable) chemistry, ► Take into account the different situations of industrialized, emerging, and developing countries, and ► Use existing conventions wherever possible to avoid additional reporting burden. Procedure The development of indicators was an iterative process involving experts from all UN regions in workshops or individual interviews. Their opinions on overarching issues or individual indicators were reviewed by the project team and used for further work. An initial list of possible indicators was generated by evaluating relevant international conventions at global or continental level, working papers of SAICM or its stakeholder groups, reporting requirements based on the SDGs, etc., which were documented in "fact sheets". In parallel, a number of internationally renowned experts were interviewed in the summer of 2020 about: ► Which aspects of sustainable chemistry should be integrated into SAICM, ► Which indicators from existing conventions, chemical industry statistics, or the like are suitable, and ► How investments in sustainable chemistry can be indexed. In addition, the names and contact addresses of other experts important for the project were identified during the interviews. This resulted in a dynamically growing list of experts, which was used for further interview rounds or workshops. Another round of interviews with a detailed questionnaire was conducted in 2021, focusing on the criteria used for the evaluation of indicators. Scientists from teaching, research, industry and international as well as non- governmental organizations were interviewed. A third round of interviews (starting in the fall of 2021) focused on the interfaces of sustainable chemistry with other global problem areas and corresponding indicators, with the questions being geared to the respective areas of expertise of the interviewees. In parallel, five workshops with proposals for four to eight indicators each were held with experts from Europe (November 2020), South and East Asia, Australia and Oceania (March 3 SAICM (2022): Development of recommendations for consideration by the fifth session of the International Conference on Chemicals Management for the Strategic Approach and the sound management of chemicals and waste beyond 2020; SAICM/IP.4/2/Rev.1/Add.1, 15.07.2022 https://www.saicm.org/Portals/12/documents/meetings/IP4/2022/SAICM_IP.4_2_Rev.1_Add.1_Outcome%20of%20VWG1%20on %20targets,%20indicators%20and%20milestones.pdf (06 Sept 2023). 4 IISD (2023): Summary of the Fifth International Conference on Chemicals Management: 25-30 September 2023 https://enb.iisd.org/iccm5-saicm-intersessional-process-resumed-4-sound-management-chemicals-waste-beyond-2020-summary (05 Oct 2023). 13 TEXTE Indicators for sustainable management of chemicals 2021), Latin America (June 2021), North America / NAFTA (November 2021), and Africa and the Middle East (March 2022). The workshops lasted approximately five hours each and were held online only due to the pandemic. The assignment to the workshops roughly corresponded to the UN regions; the layout took into account time zones to allow guests to participate roughly within their normal working hours. The first workshop also discussed the criteria used to select the indicators. The sixth and last, a hybrid workshop (March 2023), served to present the complete list of indicators and to discuss a possible prioritization. For this purpose, it was possible to recruit a group of experts from science, international organizations, and industry who had already participated in previous workshops or interviews. Participants of the workshops received a "thought starter" tailored to the topics in question in advance. In addition to an introduction to the project and the upcoming indicators, specific problems from the perspective of the particular region were presented in two to three presentations. Interim results from the project were made available to specialists and institutions engaged in the field without delay. Initially, a read-only cloud was made available, which was replaced by an interactive platform in the final phase of the project. Furthermore, partial results were presented at the Stakeholder Forum of the International Sustainable Chemistry Collaborative Center (ISC3), at two scientific conferences, and at a specialist event for EU policy-makers. Research for potential indicators Based on the premises mentioned in the sections "Political environment" and "Sustainable chemistry", international conventions, ESG investment indices, voluntary initiatives, etc. were first evaluated where interfaces with the "sound management of chemicals and waste" or with the concept of sustainable chemistry were to be expected. These include conventions and initiatives that explicitly refer to chemicals or waste (e.g., Minamata Convention, Basel Convention, Responsible Care©, Together for Sustainability (TfS)) or contain specifications for sustainable investment (such as Dow Jones Sustainability Index (DJSI), MSCI ESG Indexes), sustainability reporting (Global Reporting Initiative (GRI)), innovation programs, or action programs (e.g., for health protection, climate protection, biodiversity). The evaluation of around 50 such documents led to an initial list of potential indicators, each of which could be assigned to one of the five draft "Strategic Objectives" for the SAICM successor system. This showed that the vast majority of the indicators could be assigned to the ideas formulated in "Objective D". An assignment to detailed "Targets" was abandoned in the course of the project because the objectives were revised several times. Sources of potential indicators - in addition to the evaluation of relevant conventions, etc., described above - continued to be: ► Preliminary results of a Technical Working Group or Virtual Working Group established by SAICM 2020, ► A list of proposals developed by the International Pollutants Elimination Network (IPEN), an association of some 600 local and national initiatives, ► Indicators for individual SDGs that were tested for suitability using keywords such as "chemicals," "waste," "resources," "innovation," "health," and ► Evaluation of workshops and interviews. 14 TEXTE Indicators for sustainable management of chemicals Criteria for indicators The next step was to evaluate the indicators according to their suitability. A good indicator should not only be recognized by its accuracy in relation to the target in question, but should also be easy to measure, reliable, and comprehensible. "Targets" should - according to the specification of the responsible SAICM working group5 - be "SMART", i.e., "specific," "measurable," "achievable," "relevant," and "timebound." Based on these requirements, criteria were formulated with which an indicator could be assessed as suitable. In addition to the formal requirements, aspects of sustainable chemistry were also to be included in the assessment of an indicator. For this purpose, a first draft was developed and presented for discussion in several interviews with experts as well as in the first workshop. The exchange with the UNEP project "Green and Sustainable Chemistry: Framework Manual"6 and a dialogue on the "Key Characteristics of Sustainable Chemistry" published by the ISC37 were particularly helpful. The criteria were presented in each of the second to fifth workshops. This helped to replace formulations that were not very comprehensible; however, changes in content were not necessary. The criteria now available for the selection of indicators can be found in Table 1. Criteria A-G reflect the requirements for "SMART" goals (see above): The criterion "achievable" is missing, as it can only be meaningfully linked to a goal, but not to an indicator. A criterion for reliability or traceable data collection has been added. The H-criteria H1-H5 are based on key aspects of the sustainable chemistry concept. Various "key characteristics" were grouped into five criteria to limit the number of criteria. Table 1: Criteria for indicators General criteria for indicators aiming at Sustainable Chemistry A) Specific The indicator must be precise and unambiguous. B) Established The indicator is already in use by other systems, e.g., SAICM, Conventions. C) Determinable The collection of the data needed for reporting in the respective sector is easy and cost-efficient. D) Measurable Measurable: Either quantities, thresholds or qualitative properties are applicable. E) Reliable and transparent The data associated with the indicator are trustable and traceable. F) Dynamic Progress over time, a difference in the data associated with the indicator can be measured. G) Pertinent The indicator covers relevant aspects for the respective sector and / or area of application. 5 SAICM (2020): TWG/document/3: Proposal by TWG Co-Chairs: Suggested framework to support the development of targets & indicators http://www.saicm.org/Portals/12/Documents/meetings/TGW/TWG-Doc-3_Suggested_framework.pdf (06 Sept 2023). 6 UNEP (2020): Green and Sustainable Chemistry: Framework Manual, ISBN No: 978-92-807-3839-1 https://www.unep.org/resources/toolkits-manuals-and-guides/green-and-sustainable-chemistry-framework-manual (06 Sept 2023). 7 Km� merer, K.; Amsel, A. K.; Bartkowiak, D.; Blum, C.; Cinquemani, C. (2021): Key Characteristics of Sustainable Chemistry. Dialogue Paper by the International Sustainable Chemistry Collaborative Centre (ISC3), Bonn, Germany https://www.isc3.org/cms/wp- content/uploads/2022/06/ISC3_Sustainable_Chemistry_key_characteristics_20210113.pdf (06 Sept 2023). 15 TEXTE Indicators for sustainable management of chemicals General criteria for indicators aiming at Sustainable Chemistry Special sub-criteria focussing on the Concept of Sustainable Chemistry H) Sustainability H1) Responsible innovation H2) Inter- and multidisciplinary, holistic approach H3) Social responsibility H4) Transparency and information exchange H5) Resource management and circularity Indicators Systems thinking is the prerequisite to reach the goals of the Agenda 2030: Potential trade-offs can be identified and managed with systems thinking. Sectors dealing with chemical entities contribute to Sustainable Development in compliance with the respective SDG principles and the following sub-criteria. Development of sustainable solutions and safe and non-regrettable alternatives for chemicals of concern through cooperation on innovations, non-chemical alternatives, services like chemical leasing or Extended Producer Responsibility (EPR) mechanisms. Foster collaboration along the value chains to promote circularity. Considering interfaces with other urgent issues (health, environment, climate, resources/waste/circularity, biodiversity, nutrition, etc.) throughout the entire life cycle of chemical entities, while avoiding transport of problems to other sectors and future legacies. Promoting and ensuring health and safety as well as fair, inclusive, and emancipatory labour conditions, complying with human rights and justice in all its fields including education and science. Reduction of inequalities and fair distribution of benefits. Enabling right-to-know throughout the entire life cycle. Promoting knowledge exchange on all levels including all stakeholders (e.g., science, education, business, governments, administration, NGOs). Sustainable management of resources, materials, and products (raw materials extraction, production, application, logistics, recycling and end of life scenario) and energy, to enable circularity without contamination throughout the entire life cycle. In accordance with the objective of this research work, indicators were developed for the goal of "sound management of chemicals and waste (SMCW)," which, as far as possible, also retain aspects of the concept of sustainable chemistry. Indicators in terms of sustainable chemistry should fulfill one or more of the H-criteria (Table 1). Existing studies on indicators for sustainable chemistry are limited to the framework of "green chemistry" with regard to ecological aspects (e.g., emissions and waste quantities from production) and are therefore more likely to be assigned to the SMCW objective. As a result of the iterative approach (see section "Approach"), a list of 45 indicators emerged after evaluation in five workshops and about twenty interviews, from which a list of 23 indicators particularly relevant to SMCW was highlighted after the sixth workshop (see Table 2). Table 2 describes, for each selected indicator: ► Assignment to one of the five "Strategic Objectives" (A to E) available in the draft for the SAICM successor project, ► Its origin, e.g., SDG or IOMC indicator, from a convention (e.g., Rotterdam Convention), proposal from a SAICM working group (TWG4), NGO (e.g., IPEN) or workshop participant, 16 TEXTE Indicators for sustainable management of chemicals modified by the project team if necessary, or proposal of a new indicator in view of existing data not yet used for SMCW monitoring (e.g., data from Together for Sustainability (TfS)), ► Assignment to the criteria for sustainable chemistry, as well as ► Reference to the SDG targets. Table 2: List of priority indicators with respect to SMCW No. Proposed indicator As si gn m en t t o a SA IC M (d ra ft ed ) S tr at eg ic O bj ec tiv e O rig in o f t he in di ca to r an d po te nt ia l d at a so ur ce Cr ite ria fo r s us ta in ab le ch em is tr y (b ra ck et ed = pa rt ia lly a pp lic ab le ) Re la tio n to S DG s: bo ld = d ire ct ly br ac ke te d = in di re ct ly 1 Share of large/medium/small chemical D, E Project team H2, H3, H4, 12.6 enterprises of the region (Africa, Asia, Europe …) that report on their sustainability performance using GRI SRS H5 2 Number of new supplier assessments carried out A, D Project team (H2), H3 12.4, in the year under review, by region, and change compared with the previous year (TfS) 12.6 6 Proportion of hazardous waste treated, by type of A, D Modification (H2), H3, 12.4 treatment, e.g., recovered, recycled, incinerated of SDG Indicator 12.4.2. (H5) 8 Value of fossil-fuel subsidies per unit of GDP (production and consumption) related to Chemical Industry´s energy consumption D, E Modification of SDG Indicator 12.c.1 H2, H5 12.c 9 Total value inward and outward illicit financial flows related to chemicals and waste measured per unit of product detected used for unintended application and volume of illegally disposed waste A, C, D Modification of SDG Indicator 16.4.1 H3, H4 16.4 10 Number of companies certified for Environmental D Modification H4, (H4), 12.4, Management or Health, Safety, Environment of a TWG4 (H5) 12.6 Management System... within the chemical industry… by an independent auditor Indicator (8.3) 12 Share of the world’s largest chemical companies having signed on to 2014 Responsible Care Global Charter A, D Project team H3 12.4 13 Number or share of parties that have ensured that the public has appropriate access to information on chemical handling and accident management and on alternatives that are safer for human health or the environment than the chemicals listed in Annex III of the Rotterdam Convention B Project team H3, H4 12.4 17 TEXTE Indicators for sustainable management of chemicals No. Proposed indicator As si gn m en t t o a SA IC M (d ra ft ed ) S tr at eg ic O bj ec tiv e O rig in o f t he in di ca to r an d po te nt ia l d at a so ur ce Cr ite ria fo r s us ta in ab le ch em is tr y (b ra ck et ed = pa rt ia lly a pp lic ab le ) Re la tio n to S DG s: bo ld = d ire ct ly br ac ke te d = in di re ct ly 16 CO2eq. Scope 1 & 2 per unit of value added (e.g., gross output [Mg / yr]) of the chemical industry C, D Modification of SDG Indicator 9.4.1 H2, H5 9.4 19 Share of chemical production based on renewable materials in relation to the global production which is based on renewable materials … [%] D Modification of a TWG4 Indicator H5 12.2 20 Reduction of the amount of hazardous chemicals A, D Modification H1, H3 12.4 used in design and manufacturing related to the total mass of chemical production by x % of IPEN Indicator D.5-2 (6.3) 22 Amount of post-consumer plastic waste generated / recycled / incinerated / landfilled / not collected per country B, C, D Project team (based on a suggestion by the participants of Workshop #2) (H2), (H5) 12.5 24 Material footprint, material footprint per capita, and per GDP D SDG Indicator 12.2.1 (H2), H5 12.2 28 Number of countries that adopt policies and instruments that implement agro-ecological strategies and practices that reduce synthetic input such as pesticides and fertilizers and are based on biodiversity and integrated soil nutrition… D IPEN Indicator A.1-6 H2, (H5) 2.4, 2.5 31 Number of PRTRs with publicly accessible data A, B, D IPEN (H1), H4 (12.4, established Indicator A.5-1 16.10) 33 The percentage of companies with human rights D Modification H3, (H4) (12.4, (HR) due diligence procedures for toxic substances used, produced and released in their activities of IPEN Indicator D.6-2 10.3) 34 Change in water-use efficiency in the chemical industry ("water footprint") A Modification of SDG Indicator 6.4.1 (H2), H5 6.4 18 TEXTE Indicators for sustainable management of chemicals No. Proposed indicator As si gn m en t t o a SA IC M (d ra ft ed ) S tr at eg ic O bj ec tiv e O rig in o f t he in di ca to r an d po te nt ia l d at a so ur ce Cr ite ria fo r s us ta in ab le ch em is tr y (b ra ck et ed = pa rt ia lly a pp lic ab le ) Re la tio n to S DG s: bo ld = d ire ct ly br ac ke te d = in di re ct ly 35 Renewable energy share in the… final energy consumption of the chemical industry A, D Modification of SDG Indicator 7.2.1 (H2), H5 7.2 36 Number of countries that have implemented pesticide legislation based on the FAO/WHO International Code of Conduct A, B, C TWG4 (IOMC Indicator) (H2), H5 12.4 37 Number/percentage of countries where the legal framework demands risk assessment and registration / authorization of new chemicals before putting them on the market A, C Project team (with reference to the IOMC Toolbox) H1, H3 12.4 38 Number of (share of) countries reducing the A, C Project team (H1), H2, H3 2.4, emission of reactive N compounds (waste water, 6.3, exhaust air, agriculture) by legislation 13.2 44 Number of companies conducting an environmental cost-benefit analysis D Project team H4, H5 (12.6) 45 Sum of resource taxes on non-renewable natural D, E Project team (H4), H5 (8.4, resources and their extraction collected by 9.4, countries 11b, 12.2) The numbers in the first column are linked to the complete list of indicators (see full report, Table 6, and Appendix C). Abbreviations: GDP: Gross domestic product PRTR: Pollutant Release and Transfer Register SDG Indicator: Indicator for Sustainable Development Goal No… TWG4: Mapping exercise: existing global and regional data and indicators relevant to the Beyond 2020 Framework (SAICM 2019b) In the following section, some indicators are explained by way of example; the number given in each case refers to the first column in Table 2. Process and impact indicators In environmental protection, the DPSIR system (driver - pressure - state - impact - response) is often applied. The cycle of cause, environmental state, impact, and cause control usually has to be run through several times in order to achieve the desired state. Indicators can refer to all phases of the causal chain of this system-analytical approach. Impact-related indicators are usually best suited to track the development towards a goal (targeted "state"). Process-related indicators can be used to track measures ("response") or the development of triggers of environmental degradation ("driver", "pressure"). Impact indicators are difficult to capture on a global scale. Therefore, process-related indicators are often used, e.g., the number of states that 19 TEXTE Indicators for sustainable management of chemicals have joined a certain convention. This does not allow any statement on the impacts achieved. For this, production quantities or, even better, environmental impacts of the pollutants regulated in this convention would have to be recorded. Due to the low availability of data for impact-related indicators, it was mostly necessary to resort to indicators describing causes of undesirable developments or corresponding countermeasures (e.g., number of countries with measures against emissions of nitrogen oxides or excessive use of nitrogen in agriculture, No. 38) or the current status (e.g., extent of illegal trade in chemicals and waste, No. 9). Specificity vs. measurability As already mentioned in the section "Political environment," data for indicators should, on the one hand, be collectable even in low and middle-income countries (LMICs) (Criteria C and D) and reliable (Criterion E), and, on the other hand, be specific (Criterion A) and relevant (Criterion G). These requirements often cannot be met at the same time. For already established indicators (Criterion B), data are usually available from the individual states or international organizations. This applies to aspects of the "sound management of chemicals and waste" that have already been taken into account. However, these data are usually not specific enough. Therefore, in several cases, it was recommended to consider a sector-specific breakdown of data collected under conventions or for the 2030 Agenda. For example, for water-use efficiency ("Change in water-use efficiency," SDG Indicator 6.4.1), an addition of "in the chemical industry ("water footprint")" is proposed. Indicators of environmental damage caused by chemicals or their prevention Another problem with the informative value of the indicators arises from unclear terms and different definitions for the same term. In this case, it is usually helpful to refer to the respective source (e.g., convention, SDGs). If this is not available, a definition is required as part of the establishment of the indicator at SAICM. Here, numerous indicators can build on existing conventions, which primarily pursue goals in for the SMCW and often only have a reference to the process. These include, for example: ► "Number of companies certified for Environmental Management or Health, Safety, Environment Management System" for the chemical industry sector, where certification should be verified by external audits (No. 10), and ► "Number of countries that have implemented pesticide legislation based on the FAO/WHO International Code of Conduct" (No. 36). The above indicators also meet some H criteria, such as the Criterion H2 and partly H3. Indicators for resource consumption The chemical industry requires resources on a large scale, but can contribute to reducing resource consumption through innovative products. It is also important to monitor the shift from fossil to renewable raw materials. Both aspects are part of the concept of sustainable chemistry. Indicators have been proposed in order to map progress for: ► Resource consumption in relation to economic output, e.g., "Material footprint, material footprint per capita, and per GDP," SDG Indicator 12.2.1, no. 24, ► Waste management and recycling, e.g., "Proportion of hazardous waste treated, by type of treatment" (analogous to SDG Indicator 12.4.2 with the addition of "e.g., recovered, recycled, incinerated"), No. 6, and 20 TEXTE Indicators for sustainable management of chemicals ► The increase in the share of renewable raw materials, e.g., "Share of chemical production based on renewable materials in relation to the global production which is based on renewable materials [%]," No. 19. SAICM initially targeted the Dubai Declaration exclusively at hazardous waste. However, the discussions at SAICM indicate that the concept of waste is also being expanded in the sense of a more comprehensive management of resources. Therefore, the list includes an additional indicator on plastic waste (No. 22). Since the switch to renewable raw materials can be accompanied by strong environmental impact due to monocultures, high water consumption, or the like, indicators for careful land management are also provided (see next section). Interfaces with other global challenges Global warming, species loss, water consumption and overloading of environmental media with nutrients threaten to exceed planetary boundaries or have already done so. The holistic and systemic approach of the sustainable chemistry concept makes it possible to define meaningful interfaces in targets and indicators. Climate-relevant gases can be included via an SDG indicator (9.4.1), which is related to the industry: "CO2 eq. Scope 1 & 2 per unit of value added (e.g., gross output [Mg / yr]) of the chemical industry, No. 16." This indicator is also relevant for the economic dimension. The inclusion of Scope 3 makes little sense for global statistics and would also be an overload for many LMICs. In addition, the indicator "Renewable energy share in the final energy consumption" (No. 35) should be mentioned here (SDG Indicator 7.2.1) with the addition "of the chemical industry." For the use or overuse of water reserves, an extension of SDG Indicator 6.4.1 was proposed (see above): "Change in water-use efficiency over time" with the addition of "in the chemical industry (water footprint)." The development of biodiversity is mainly influenced by land use. Ecotoxic chemicals can have a reinforcing effect or endanger certain species. The following indicators are proposed here: ► "Number of countries that adopt policies and instruments that implement agroecological strategies and practices that reduce synthetic inputs such as pesticides and fertilizers and are based on biodiversity and integrated soil nutrition" (No. 28), which was proposed in this form by IPEN, and ► "Number of (share of) countries reducing the emission of reactive N compounds (waste water, exhaust air, agriculture) by legislation" (No. 38), which resulted from discussions with the International Nitrogen Initiative (INI). Operationalizing the Aichi targets for this interface proved difficult. The targets of the Montreal- Kunming Agreement can be used in the further development of the indicators, predominantly targets 7 and 15, which explicitly refer to companies.8 Social indicators Criterion H3 applies to several indicators that deal with issues of public health, occupational health and safety, or fair pay. Here, among other things, the monitoring of standards in the supply chains is an important instrument. Numerous globally active chemical companies have joined forces in the "Together for Sustainability" (TfS) organization to conduct audits of upstream suppliers in a coordinated manner. The number of audits or the number of 8 Kunming-Montreal Global Biodiversity Framework: 2030 Targets https://www.cbd.int/gbf/targets/. 21 TEXTE Indicators for sustainable management of chemicals improvements achieved during the audits would be an interesting indicator (No. 2), the realization of which depends on the willingness of TfS or the organizer of the audits, EcoVadis, to cooperate. Another problem with this indicator is that small and medium-sized enterprises have not yet participated in these initiatives. The introduction of the Corporate Sustainability Due Diligence Directive (CSDDD) in the European Union could provide indicators for measuring the social impact of the chemical industry in the future. An example of a potential indicator is "The percentage of companies with human rights (HR) due diligence procedures for toxic substances used, produced and released in their activities" (modifying a proposal from IPEN), No. 33. The search for indicators for "gender equity" in the context of sustainable chemistry was unsuccessful. It is to be expected that indicators for this will prove necessary in the future, and the discussions within the SAICM process, for example on the topic of "Women and Chemistry," will become more intensive. Economic indicators It proved to be extremely difficult to find indicators for investments or innovations in the direction of sustainable chemistry. There is no corresponding statistical basis. The number of patents applied for, which is often used as an indicator of innovation activity, is not meaningful due to the different strategies of chemical companies in dealing with patent applications and the inflationary use of the term "sustainable" (Criteria A, E, G). The use of the number of companies that carry out a "Portfolio Sustainability Assessment" (PSA) does not lead to comparable and comprehensible statements due to the lack of standardization of PSAs (Criterion E). This can change with a standardization of the method and its implementation, which is being worked on at the WBSCD. Therefore, indirect aspects were used such as the frequency of GRI reporting ("Share of large/medium/small chemical enterprises of the region (Africa, Asia, Europe ...) that report on their sustainability performance using GRI SRS," No. 1). In addition, various indicators were found or developed that combine an ecological and an economic component; see the comments in the sections on resource consumption and other global challenges. Signs of more transparency Disclosure of the composition of products in the chemical industry as well as education and training in the proper handling of chemicals support the development towards the use of less critical substances and further steps towards sustainable chemistry. Criterion H4 is met by some indicators already mentioned (see section "Indicators of environmental damage from chemicals"). This also includes the introduction of Pollutant Release and Transfer Registers (PRTR), the data of which are publicly accessible (No. 31), the implementation of the Rotterdam Convention with reference to the information rights contained therein (No. 13) or increasing reporting in accordance with the GRI standard (No. 1). Work of the IOMC The "Inter-Organization Programme for the Sound Management of Chemicals" is a cooperation project of several international institutions (WHO, ILO, OECD, UNIDO), which is working on indicators for SMCW, among other things, with financial support from the EU. To support the work of SAICM, a list of indicators was already published on the occasion of the ICCM4 (2015), 22 TEXTE Indicators for sustainable management of chemicals which has been expanded in a multi-stage process to 63 indicators at last count by July 2023.9 The exchange with members of the corresponding IOMC working group revealed that the indicators developed by IOMC and those in this study coincide in some cases and that both lists complement each other because they are based on different focuses - on the one hand focus on SMCW, on the other hand focus on goals beyond that. Indicators for European policy In the European Union, many of the goals that are being pursued at the global level have already been achieved. Chemicals legislation, product liability regulations, labeling requirements, etc., ensure that "sound management of chemicals and waste" is legally anchored, even if implementation and enforcement are not ensured at a high level everywhere. Therefore, many indicators are not applicable to the European level. In the "Chemicals Strategy for Sustainability", the EU Commission points out the necessary strengthening of SAICM and at the same time recognizes: "[...] it is important to use relevant international standards, guides and methodologies when developing EU rules, unless they are ineffective or inappropriate." The statistical basis for numerous questions is incomparably better in the EU than in many other regions of the world. This was examined specifically on the basis of indicators for which little or no data was available at the global level. Subsequently, a few indicators were proposed that could show progress in terms of sustainable chemistry in Europe: ► Material footprint, and material footprint per capita and per GDP (No. 24), ► Share of chemical production based on renewable materials in relation to the global production which is based on renewable materials (No. 19), ► GHG emissions of the chemical industry per value added (No. 16), ► Reduction of the amount of hazardous chemicals used in design and manufacturing related to the mass of chemical production by x% (No. 20), ► Amount of post-consumer plastic waste generated / recycled / incinerated / landfilled / not collected per country (No. 22), ► Number of companies (within the chemical sector) certified for Environmental Management or Health, Safety, Environment Management System by an independent auditor (No. 10). For these, either statistical data are available or can be obtained by evaluating the CSR reporting for companies with a turnover of €40 million or more, which will be mandatory from 2025. This approach was discussed in an online workshop at EU level with experts from the Commission, academia, industry and Member States. The Commission will therefore include the list drawn up here in its deliberations. The indicators, developed in dialogue with numerous experts from all UN regions, provide a bridge between the "sound management of chemicals and waste" and the concept of sustainable chemistry that goes beyond it. On the one hand, the indicators focus on unresolved problems and goals of the Dubai Declaration, and on the other hand, they depict developments that are conducive to the implementation and scaling up of sustainable chemistry or that stand in its way. The concept of sustainable chemistry can support numerous SDGs, as can be seen in the 9 SAICM (2023): Inventory and analysis report: existing indicators on chemicals and waste management. SAICM/IP.4/INF/39/Rev.1, 08/08/2023, Annex: IOMC Indicators Project Working Group: IOMC: Update to the Inventory and analysis report: existing indicators on chemicals and waste management. 17/07/2023 https://www.saicm.org/Portals/12/documents/meetings/IP4_3/SAICM_IP.4_INF_39_Rev.1.pdf (09 June 2023). 23 TEXTE Indicators for sustainable management of chemicals last column of Table 2. Numerous innovations from chemical research, such as highly selective catalysts, the production of platform chemicals in bio-refineries, the resource-efficient extraction of active ingredients from plant precursors, and the "in silico" estimation (i.e., computer-aided modeling) of the properties of new substances, open up many opportunities to transform chemical production in the spirit of sustainable development. The indicators do not map such developments in detail, but show whether their consequences globally point in the direction of the goals set by the 2030 Agenda or by SAICM. Evaluation of the results Due to the interdisciplinary nature of the concept of sustainable chemistry, numerous interfaces had to be taken into account, including with finance, the global management of resources, health protection, and even the threat of crossing planetary boundaries. The indicators therefore focus not only on fundamental demands on the properties or handling of chemicals, but also on essential interfaces of the production and use of chemicals with global problems, i.e., climate protection, eutrophication, biodiversity, water scarcity, etc. Considerable gaps remain in the economic indicators with a focus on innovations as well as investments in plants and processes that promote development in the sense of sustainable chemistry. Similar problems apply to social indicators. Sufficient and reliable data are currently available for only some of the potential indicators. In many cases, further differentiation of statistical data is required, for example, to be able to determine sector-specific indicators. In many cases, a compromise between data availability on the one hand and meaningfulness on the other appeared necessary. This led to the inclusion of process-related indicators, such as the number of signatories to certain international agreements, in the list, although impact-related indicators, such as the measurable positive consequences of such an agreement for people and the environment, would have been more meaningful. The criteria developed for the evaluation of indicators, which cover both formal (relevance, verifiability) and substantive aspects (systemic thinking, consideration of resource consumption), were met with broad approval at the workshops. Further procedure Due to the multiple postponements of ICCM5 and the associated delay in setting "targets" for further work on the SAICM successor instrument, it was not practical to bring the results obtained here to ICCM5. The successor to SAICM is called the "Global Framework for Chemicals."10 (GFC – complete title: "Global Framework for Chemicals – For a Planet Free of Harm from Chemicals and Waste"). ICCM5 succeeded in adopting forward-looking goals for SAICM without neglecting previously unachieved objectives. Some of the newly formulated goals go beyond the results achieved in the working groups during the IP. In particular, the extensive set of goals in "Objective D" leaves room for using the concept of sustainable chemistry at the global level. Greater integration of waste management issues can be achieved with a compromise formulation found in the final declaration - "the life cycle of chemicals, including products and waste." The prioritized list of indicators (Table 2) can now be made available to stakeholders who continue to shape the process after ICCM5. This is because under the new "Global Framework for Chemicals," all stakeholders are called upon to report on their implementation efforts and "the progress of indicators and milestones." The broadness of the approach taken here allows these indicators to 10 The evaluation of the ICCM5 in the final report is mainly based on the evaluation of the Earth Negotiations Bulletin Vol. 15, No. 311, dated 03.10.2023, as well as on inquiries with participants of the German delegation. 24 TEXTE Indicators for sustainable management of chemicals be used for many of the "Targets" agreed at ICCM5, particularly in relation to "Objective D". The aforementioned image of a bridge between SMCW and sustainable chemistry may increase acceptance: First, among those who focus on the unmet targets and remaining legacy issues and problems, and second, among those who want to push for much faster development in terms of industrial transformation. Global progress requires patience and consensual, effective solutions. The criteria developed in the project can be used in this form for the search for further indicators in connection with the development of the chemical industry and downstream production. A publication of the approach chosen here in environmental policy journals and its presentation in discussions related to sustainable chemistry (webinars, congresses) is therefore planned. A continuation of the exchange on indicators started with the IOMC after the end of the project can contribute to the optimization of the indicators and their database. Due to the participation of the UN Statistics Division in the corresponding IOMC working group, it is much easier to assess the availability and reliability of the required database than it was possible here in the project. The discussion of sustainable chemistry in Europe is often reduced to the regulation of chemicals or restrictions on their use. This is evident in the many reactions from both non- governmental organizations and industry to the European Commission's "Chemicals Strategy for Sustainability." The members of the "High-Level Roundtable" established by the Commission should be informed about the findings of this project. The interactive platform, which has been running since February 2023, is a central element for communicating and sharing project information. Here, all relevant results can be downloaded, discussed and exchanged with other experts. This platform serves as an important resource for experts and institutions involved in the transformation of industrial society. The exchange via this platform has already been positively received at various expert conferences and European talks. The documents uploaded so far can be downloaded from the platform and made available to UBA so that these documents can be published on UBA's own website. 25 TEXTE Indicators for sustainable management of chemicals 1 Background 1.1 Chemicals and waste management: global approaches Agenda 21 (UNCED 1992), adopted by the UN Conference on Environment and Development (UNCED) in Rio de Janeiro in 1992, devotes a separate chapter to chemicals and hazardous waste, respectively. At that time, there was only one international convention relating to chemicals: the Basel Convention on the Control of Transboundary Movements of Hazardous Wastes and their Disposal. The Rio Conference dealt with all chemicals at this level for the first time and called for, among other things (UNCED 1992, Chapter 19): ► Expanding and accelerating international assessment of chemical risks, ► Harmonization of classification and labelling of chemicals, ► Information exchange on toxic chemicals and chemical risks, and ► Establishment of risk reduction programs. As a result of the corresponding mandate from the Rio Conference, it was possible in the wake of the UNCED and ► The Rotterdam Convention on the Prior Informed Consent Procedure for Certain Hazardous Chemicals and Pesticides in International Trade (PIC) in 1998, ► The Globally Harmonized System of Classification and Labelling of Chemicals (GHS) in 2002, and ► The Stockholm Convention on Persistent Organic Pollutants (POPs) in 2004 to create milestones of international chemicals law, which have an effect specifically in a few particularly urgent problem areas. Agenda 21 also emphasized the need for the safe handling of all chemicals and called for national regulations for the handling of chemicals in individual countries. To this end, among other things, the international exchange of experience was to be improved, and widely available dossiers on chemicals were to be compiled. In order to operationalize these still very general goals, the World Summit on Sustainable Development in Johannesburg in 2002 adopted a "Strategic Approach to International Chemicals Management (SAICM)," with which the goal of "sound management of chemicals throughout their life cycle and of hazardous wastes for sustainable development" was to be realized: "[...] aiming to achieve, by 2020, that chemicals are used and produced in ways that lead to the minimization of significant adverse effects on human health and the environment, using transparent science-based risk assessment procedures and science-based risk management procedures, taking into account the precautionary approach, and supporting developing countries in strengthening their capacity for the sound management of chemicals and hazardous wastes by providing technical and financial assistance" (UN 2002). The international organizations cooperating within the framework of the Inter-Organization Programme for the Sound Management of Chemicals (IOMC) (including UNEP, WHO, ILO, FAO, OECD, and the World Bank) were thus given a corresponding mandate. SAICM was conceived as a "multi-stakeholder multi-sector voluntary policy framework" under the auspice of UNEP, and its development began with the first International Conference on Chemicals Management (ICCM1) in Dubai in 2006. In addition to a declaration, the conference adopted an "Overarching policy strategy" and 26 TEXTE Indicators for sustainable management of chemicals a comprehensive work program ("Global action plan") with 273 planned activities in which the goals agreed at the Johannesburg Summit were operationalized. Despite the various global standards and conventions on the management of hazardous chemicals and wastes created since 1992, there is still a wide variation in the level of implementation. This is already noticeable in the number of signatory states to the conventions: 152 of 192 UN Member States have ratified the Stockholm Convention and another 34 have otherwise acceded.11 To the Basel Convention (53 signatory as well as 138 otherwise acceded states)12 several important industrialized countries have declared restrictions regarding their signature. In some cases, it takes more than ten years from signing to ratification. There is sometimes a significant gap in enforcement between industrialized, emerging and developing countries. The work at SAICM, which involves not only national governments but also industrial and environmental associations, human rights organizations, etc., suffers from the non-binding nature of implementation, but it does allow for it to: ► Use emerging policy issues (EPI) to address problems that may later be regulated in conventions, e.g., use of lead in paints, use and handling of highly hazardous pesticides (HHP), hazardous substances in electronic products, ► Share experiences on enforcement in chemicals management at the administrative level to improve overall, and ► Transfer knowledge, increase public awareness, and thereby achieve a reduction in the risks associated with the handling of chemicals. Nevertheless, the evaluation of SAICM's work from 2006 to 2015 criticized "insufficient sectoral engagement; the capacity constraints of national focal points; lack of tools to measure progress; limited financing of activities, and insufficient and uneven advances in substantive areas such as illegal international traffic" (SAICM Secretariat 2018). Reporting on existing indicators leaves much to be desired; in particular, a negative trend is evident (UNEP 2019): "Reporting rates under SAICM exhibit a worrying downward trend: among governments, reporting rates dropped from around 40 per cent (78 submissions out of 194 governments) and 43 per cent (83 submissions out of 194 governments) in the first two rounds to 28 per cent (54 submissions out of 193 governments) in the third round, with data lacking in particular from African countries." The targets described in the 2006 Dubai Declaration have not been met or have only been partially met by 2020, as noted in the second edition of the Global Chemicals Outlook (GCO II) (see, e.g., Table 3). Among other statements (UNEP 2019): ► In particular, the lack of implementation of conventions is deplored. Progress can be seen in the GHS, among other things, ► Regional chemical and waste management collaborations are moving forward, ► National approaches to SMCW are supported by numerous stakeholders; this also broadens the knowledge base on chemicals, ► Approaches to national chemicals legislation with reference to Chemicals of Concern (CoC) are partly in place, 11 Acceptance (A), Approval (AA), Accession (a), see "Status of ratification" of the Stockholm Convention https://chm.pops.int/Countries/StatusofRatifications/PartiesandSignatoires/tabid/4500/Default.aspx (25 July 2023). 12 Acceptance (A), Approval (AA), Accession (a), see "Status of ratification" of the Basel Convention https://www.basel.int/Countries/StatusofRatifications/PartiesSignatories/tabid/4499/Default.aspx (25 July 2023). 27 TEXTE Indicators for sustainable management of chemicals ► There continues to be a high need for financial resources to support emerging and developing countries for SMCW, and ► Combating illegal trade in waste and (incorrectly declared) chemicals remains a high priority. Table 3: Stakeholder perceptions of the degree of success in achieving SAICM objectives (overarching policy strategy - OPS) from 2006 to 2015 OPS objective A. Risk reduction B. Knowledge and information changing C. Governance D. Capacity building and technical cooperation E. Illegal international traffic Very successful (%) 15 22 16 20 7 Some success (%) 56 54 47 40 27 Little success (%) 16 14 20 25 18 Unsuccessful (%) 3 2 5 4 18 Don’t know (%) 11 7 12 11 31 Source: GCO II, Table 3.10 (UNEP 2019), citing SAICM Secretariat 2018, p. 24 According to GCO II, chemical industry sales are expected to double between 2017 and 2030 (UNEP 2019). Since the beginning of the century, investments in the chemical and pharmaceutical industry have been rising steeply outside Europe, Japan, and North America: In 2000, more than 50% of all global investments were still made in these industrialized countries; in 2013, this figure was only 35%, with a declining trend, especially in Europe, with China accounting for the majority of investments (Statista 2023). The goals set at SAICM must therefore be pursued all the more urgently outside the "classic" industrialized countries. The findings on the pollution of marine biotopes in particular with plastic waste, the loss of species, the progressive change of the climate and numerous other regional environmental problems such as nutrient deficiencies or excesses in soils are linked to the topic of SAICM. These problem areas have mostly still been discussed separately at UN conferences, although they influence each other mutually. In the case of one-dimensional views and decisions, progress in the fight against one of the world's pressing problems could be bought by backward steps elsewhere. A well-known example of such a conflict is the use of renewable raw materials as feedstock for hydrocarbons at the expense of land for food cultivation ("plate-tank discussion"). Regional contamination by certain pollutants endangers human health, animal species, and entire ecosystems. Examples include high concentrations of active nitrogen compounds due to overfertilization or over-intensive livestock farming, which lead to species poverty in soils, groundwater pollution, and anaerobic zones in affected marginal seas. Pollution of the outdoor air with nitrogen oxides and ammonia is also partly due to emissions from agriculture, and partly to the operation of internal combustion engines. These problems are now occurring in numerous regions of the world and require concerted action (INI 2021). A corresponding resolution of UNEA 5 (UNEA 2022d) now builds on preliminary work by individual states and scientific associations. The enormous amounts of plastic waste, which enter the oceans via rivers mainly due to inadequate waste collection and a lack of extended producer responsibility, but also due to contamination of soils by microplastics, are to be combated with a global plastics 28 TEXTE Indicators for sustainable management of chemicals convention. Negotiations have been initiated on the basis of a mandate from UNEA 5.2 (UNEA 2022a) with the aim of presenting a draft international agreement by the end of 2024 that will contain principles for dealing with plastics from the production to the waste stage. Multiple pollution of large regions or oceans with harmful substances raises the question of the extent to which global exposure to chemicals already exceeds planetary boundaries. For an assessment of "chemical pollution" - extended by (Steffen et al. 2015) to "novel entities"13 (including microplastics, nanomaterials) - no sufficient data were available at that time in the context of research on planetary boundaries - with the exception of pollution by nitrogen and phosphorus compounds (Rockstr� m et al. 2009). However, a policy response to global hazards from chemicals requires firm evidence on their nature and extent. In a comprehensive review, Diamond et al. (2015) concluded from the work available by 2015: "Although it may not be possible to establish a single or even multiple planetary boundary (or boundaries) for chemical pollution at this time, an increasing body of evidence strongly suggests that we need more effective global chemicals management." The movement for an International Panel on Chemical Pollution (IPCP), which emerged almost ten years ago, took up these concerns and proposed the establishment of a body to advise global policy on chemicals, similar to the IPCC for climate issues. This initiative was supported by thousands of scientists worldwide. In 2019, UNEA 4 identified the need for a science policy interface (SPI). Based on a UNEA 5 resolution (UNEA 2022b), discussions of a working group began in 2022, although it is still unclear whether to convene a similar platform to the IPCC, a link with the Global Chemical Outlook, or issue-specific working groups as needed. Research into potential threats to planetary boundaries from "novel entities" (see, e.g., Persson et al. 2022) is likely to have a major impact on the outcome of this discussion. 1.2 Status of SAICM 2019 and developments until 2023 As the decisions taken in Dubai provided for implementation by 2020, recommendations on the goals and strategy for the international management of chemicals and (hazardous) wastes for the period after 2020 were developed in the framework of the SAICM Intersessional Process (IP, currently chaired by the UK and Uruguay) following ICCM4. This "beyond 2020" process has been significantly delayed by the COVID-19 pandemic and did not conclude until ICCM5, held under the German presidency, in Bonn in September 2023. In the meantime, five overarching "Objectives" have been formulated with broad consensus, and some 25 "Targets" have been discussed to operationalize the overarching goals. IP4, originally scheduled to adopt a draft in early 2020, had to be postponed and could not start its work until August 2022 (IP4.1 in Bucharest). Since the agenda could only be partially completed, a second date was scheduled for February/March 2023 (IP 4.2 in Nairobi). Remaining items, including the proposals for targets, were dealt with again in a third meeting (IP4.3 in Bonn immediately before ICCM5). A largely consolidated version is now available after ICCM5. The working groups had to complete the following tasks in particular: ► Formulate generally accepted yet ambitious goals, 13 "... new substances, new forms of existing substances, and modified life forms that have the potential for unwanted geophysical and/or biological effects. Anthropogenic introduction of novel entities to the environment is of concern at the global level when these entities exhibit (i) persistence, (ii) mobility across scales with consequent widespread distributions, and (iii) potential impacts on vital Earth-system processes or subsystems. These potentially include chemicals and other new types of engineered materials or organisms (...) not previously known to the Earth system, as well as naturally occurring elements (for example, heavy metals) mobilized by anthropogenic activities." 29 TEXTE Indicators for sustainable management of chemicals ► Link unmet goals for redressing grievances as well as visions for 2030, ► Connect to the SDGs while strengthening the role of chemical management, ► Significantly improve the controlling of agreed targets and measures, and ► Find a viable model for funding future activities. The complexity of these tasks obviously made it difficult to agree on the lowest common denominator, since - certainly with good reasons - targets can be formulated differently and more or less stringently. The burden of chemicals and the public pressure generated by them vary from country to country, so that the numerous "targets" are needed in their entirety, but individual countries or social groups - from industry associations to non-governmental organizations - set different priorities. However, changes requested from the current draft of the sub-targets (SAICM 2019b) often complicated the "Targets" or addressed issues of regional importance at best. A major point of contention was the inclusion of the topic of waste, as this had previously only been understood to include hazardous waste (exposure to hazardous chemicals). "Objective D" with its future-oriented claim was little affected by the changes during the IP. The overarching approach to sustainability contained in Objective D and its advantage in the interaction of otherwise separately considered economic sectors and environmental media was probably initially underestimated or not understood by some stakeholders. The IOMC addressed this problem in IP 4.2 by attempting to focus on three key issues, namely: ► "developing basic national chemical management systems and capacities in all countries, ► integrating chemicals management in key industry sectors and product value chains, ► integrating chemicals management with sustainable development issues and initiatives", in order to incorporate and communicate the inclusive nature of the process (SAICM 2022b). The requests for changes, which go into a great deal of detail, require enormous human resources for processing at the national governments and the SAICM stakeholders. However, these are generally not available, especially since chemicals and waste are not a top environmental policy issue. In addition, countries with low specific GDP in particular make resolving financial issues a condition for adopting targets. The advantage of a multi-stakeholder process in SAICM can also be a disadvantage in negotiations due to the entry of previously inactive associations with new areas of interest. Targeted disruptions related to completely different processes (wars, nuclear proliferation...) are an additional problem in UN bodies. UNEA 5 emphasized the connection of the burden of waste and chemicals with issues ranging from climate and nature protection to the human right to a healthy environment. With this resolution, UNEA again clarified that the Dubai 2020 targets had been missed, and therefore encouraged participants in the SAICM process "to put in place an ambitious, improved enabling framework to address the sound management of chemicals and waste beyond 2020, reflecting a life-cycle approach and the need to achieve sustainable consumption and production, and addressing the means of implementation of the framework at the ICCM5." It extended the funding mechanism for SAICM, among others, for five years. UNEA 5 also highlighted a number of key issues of concern from the Global Chemical Outlook and tasked UNEP with detailed analysis of additional critical substances, including asbestos (UNEP 2022c). Without a doubt, a comprehensive international convention would be desirable as a replacement for SAICM (see, e.g., Steinhäuser et al. 2022) and is called for by environmental associations ("global framework convention on sustainable management of substances, 30 TEXTE Indicators for sustainable management of chemicals materials and resources should link the regulations on chemicals, pollutants, resources and hazardous wastes, while setting binding reduction targets" (BUND 2023)). According to previous experience, most recently with the Minamata Convention, the realization of such a vision will take at least a decade. The results of the ICCM5 do not indicate such an approach. Nor was a proposal for an "International Code of Conduct on Chemicals and Waste Management" adopted. However, the "Targets" that have now been adopted provide scope for internationally coordinated measures, e.g., in connection with the problem of highly hazardous pesticides. Some of the newly formulated targets go beyond the results achieved in the working groups during the IP. In particular, the seven targets formulated for "Objective D" are suitable for using the concept of sustainable chemistry at the global level, whereby waste management aspects are also to play a greater role than before. 1.3 European policy: "Green Deal" and "Chemicals Strategy for Sustainability" Europe has extensive experience with the regulation of chemicals. The REACH Regulation, which has been in force since 2006, obliges manufacturers and importers of chemicals to record in a register an assessment of the properties of chemicals on the market or intended for the market from a production volume of 1 t per year, and also to disclose information on the safe handling of substances in products. According to REACH, particularly critical substances ("substances of very high concern") may be subject to prohibitions and restrictions on use. The great importance of the European market has led to numerous other countries - especially those that export substances or products to Europe - introducing similar regulations or working on them. The EU responded to the challenges arising from the findings on the global burden of plastic waste with its plastics strategy (see, among others, (EU 2019b)). The EU Commission's "Green Deal" draws a comprehensive vision of future European economic and environmental policy. Consequently, ways are being sought that go beyond mere regulation to protect against hazards, as realized in REACH. In 2020, the Commission published its "Chemicals Strategy for Sustainability - for a Toxic-free Environment" (CSS), which takes a more integrative approach with a view to climate protection and resource management, among other things, and also refers to the necessary support of SAICM. The Commission presented the idea of substances and materials that can be considered "safe and sustainable by design" (SSbD). This is similar to the "benign-by-design" approach of sustainable chemistry (see Chapter 3). With the SSbD concept, the EU aims to provide incentives to Member States, industry and other stakeholders to promote innovation to largely substitute substances of concern in all sectors. Thus, to situate the project in global politics, it should be noted: ► The international political environment has a high dynamic. The importance of chemicals and waste management increased significantly and led to groundbreaking decisions by the UNEA. ► This has been accompanied by a broadening of the field of vision, which is now no longer limited to damage caused by chemicals and hazardous waste, but includes interactions with other global problems. ► Sustainable chemistry is now being understood as a useful concept for sustainable chemicals management in both UN and EU policies to address these interrelationships. 31 TEXTE Indicators for sustainable management of chemicals ► The ongoing work at SAICM suffered from the restrictions of the Corona pandemic. It is apparent at SAICM that the enormous complexity of the subject area is slowing down operationalization at the global level. 32 TEXTE Indicators for sustainable management of chemicals 2 Sustainable Chemistry 2.1 The concept of sustainable chemistry "Sustainable chemistry" is not a new subfield of chemical research but a concept designed to identify possible contributions to sustainable development with the help of chemical products and processes and to promote them in research, development and production. Sustainable chemistry goes beyond the "green chemistry" propagated since the 1990s with its twelve basic rules for the synthesis of substances. "Green chemistry" is concerned with "design, development and implementation of chemical processes and products to reduce or eliminate substances hazardous to human health and the environment" (Anastas / Warner, 1998). The rules of "green chemistry" have now achieved wide acceptance in synthetic chemistry. The OECD (OECD 2012) stated: "Green Chemistry is an approach to chemical synthesis that considers life cycle factors like waste, safety, energy use and toxicity in the earliest stages of molecular design and production, in order to mitigate environmental impacts and enhance the safety and efficiency associated with chemical production, use, and disposal. It takes a life cycle approach to minimize undesirable impacts that can be associated with chemicals and their production." However, it is only possible to evaluate the life cycle of a substance if all its applications in materials and products are taken into account. In this respect, a "green chemical" or a "sustainable material" cannot be readily defined (K�� merer et al. 2016). The concept of sustainable chemistry therefore integrates "green chemistry" but goes beyond it. Through its holistic approach ("systems thinking") (Blum et al., 2017), sustainable chemistry takes into account important interfaces, especially with the extraction and use of natural resources, waste management or climate protection. Sustainable chemistry therefore focuses not only on the environmental compatibility of a substance, but also on the opportunities and risks of its use, its production, and its recycling or disposal.14 By seeking materials that can be separated from products after use and recycled, as well as by largely excluding toxic or ecotoxic additives in materials, this concept supports strategies for an economic approach that is more circular than linear (Friege 2017, Kümmerer et al. 2020). In the sustainable chemistry concept, the desired function of a substance or material is the focus of consideration, so alternative ways of fulfilling the intended function are also taken into account. Therefore, for example, "chemical service" (UNIDO 2016) is an important tool to make the use of chemicals more sustainable. These relationships are shown in Figure 1 graphically. 14 The term "sustainable chemistry" has been or is sometimes used in the U.S. literature to refer to "green chemistry" as well (https://gc3sca.com/our-perspective/), although in the meantime even the protagonists of "green chemistry" consider a broadening of the original concept to be necessary (Anastas et al. 2018). 33 TEXTE Indicators for sustainable management of chemicals Figure 1: Development towards sustainable chemistry Source: Graphics by Prof. Klaus Kümmerer Sustainable chemistry involves contributions from chemistry to all areas of life (mobility, nutrition, clothing, housing). Decisive advances in research can be used for this purpose, for example (selection not exhaustive): ► Use of reagent-free conversions by photochemistry or electrosynthesis, ► Improving the atomic balance and thus the yield of chemical reactions while avoiding waste through more specific synthesis routes, ► Restructuring of the raw material base with the help of biorefineries, among others, which process renewable raw materials and waste of biological origin, ► Optimizing the use of CO2 and optimizing electrolytic H2 recovery as a basis for simple hydrocarbons, ► Development of substances and products that are completely degraded after use if they enter the environment as a result of their intended use, such as pharmaceuticals, ► Use of nanomaterials15 in areas suitable for them, such as energy storage, air and water purification, protection of surfaces, catalysis and drug application, and ► Linking the design, production and application of chemicals with tools provided by digitalization ("Chemistry 4.0") with the aim of replacing today's excessive use of chemicals with substances that are as non-hazardous as possible in much smaller quantities. A compilation of innovative developments that promise progress towards sustainable chemistry can be found in (Bazzanella et al. 2017). The World Business Council for Sustainable Development (WBCSD 2018) presents a wealth of ways in which innovative concep