EU RISK MANAGEMENT DECISION-MAKING

Judging from previous EU risk management decision-making, the scope and detail of a regulatory action proposed by a Member State depends on its national regulatory approach and administrative structure [31, 32], Previous research has identified that France, Germany, Sweden and the UK display contrasting styles of... 

A four-step methodology was devised to develop a framework for EU risk management decision-making under REACH (Figure 3.4). 

Compared with analysing the socio-economic consequences of chemical production and use in terms of the impact on variables such as employment and industrial competitiveness, EU risk management decision-making clearly lacks a method to evaluate the consequence that perceived chemical risks have on perceptions of equity. Moreover, there appears to be little consideration of how decisions can affect trust in regulatory institutions. Yet, as described in Chapter 2 and explored in Chapter 4, these social dimensions of risk prove fundamental to regulation. 

A major obstacle in reaching consensus during EU risk management decision-making arises when a large variation in the economic impact... 

EU chemical risk assessment and management decision-making processes appear to be separated into five or more Techmcal Committees and Working Groups attended by different regulators and overseen by at least three Directorate-Generals of the European Commission. 

Actor roles and responsibilities for national and EU risk management Relevance and implications of actors for EU decision-making Identification of methods for supporting actor responsibilities Necessity for national versus EU action... 

Improvements to national c EU risk management Identification of structural changes to the TGD Identification of decision-making structures Opportunities for streamlined decisionmaking... 

These evaluative frames primarily relate to the scientific risk assessment process and the technical ability to manage a risk. By contrast, this book seeks to examine the impact that the different regulatory approaches have on decision-making at national and EU levels. In other words, how a regulatory action varies in the short -and long-term in terms of its (adapted from [258]) ... 

In Chapter 2, the literature review exposed aspects of risk management under REACH that will depend on national policy, rules and practices. Therefore, in addition to tracking developments with the REACH legislative text, the methodology had to contend with changes to policy and practice at national and EU levels. A framework for EU decision-making that does not account for such variables would be rejected by Member States or the European Commission. 

In terms of regulatory risk management, the SOMS does not detail rules for EU action corresponding to each hazard and use categorisation. Similarly, while the RCEP presents a wide and detailed set of recommendations to make increased use of a wide range of risk management and policy instruments, it does not present these as a formalised structure for EU decision-making. 

---