Measuring the performance of chemical management systems is important to assess impact with limited resources and ensure efficiency. There are several types of indicators to measure performance, including impact indicators related to chemicals-related diseases and environmental impacts, result indicators on chemical levels in human and environmental samples, and output indicators like restricted substances. However, accurately measuring impact indicators is challenging due to complex attribution of health effects and lack of data, and result indicators are limited to known chemicals with inconsistent monitoring. Harmonization of research, monitoring, and testing is needed to strengthen performance measurement of chemical management systems.

1. How to Measure the Performance of
Different Chemical Management Systems
Helsinki Chemicals Forum 2019
Marco Camboni
22-23 May 2019

2. Importance of Measuring Performance
Why is measuring performance of chemical management
programmes important?
• Limited resources
• Efficiency
• Justification for action

3. Indicators
A
C
C
U
R
A
C
Y
Impact indicators
Chemicals-related diseases (Attributable Fraction) – e.g. number of chemical-related skin
diseases
Chemicals-related environmental impacts (e.g. decline of insects’ populations)
Result indicators
Change in concentration level of chemicals in human body tissues
Change in concentration level of chemicals in animal and plant tissues
Change in concentration level of chemicals in air, water and soil samples
Change in emissions of selected chemicals in air, water and soil
Change in production volume of selected chemicals
Output indicators
Number of substances banned or restricted

4. Challenges
Impact indicators:
• Cost: Gathering data and generating new data is resource-intensive
• Complexity: Health and environmental outcomes are the results of
the synergies of multiple factors
• Attribution to a causative (chemical) factor is possible for short latency
diseases (e.g. occupational skin diseases, occupational asthma)
• For long latency diseases (e.g. chronic obstructive pulmonary diseases,
cancers), attribution is more complex
• Lack of harmonised data

5. Challenges
Results indicators
• Human BioMonitoring is currently possible only for around 200 chemical
substances
• Well-known substances, possibly banned since many years
• Data trends are lacking
• Comparison of data from different laboratories and years is problematic
• Similar issues for environmental monitoring
• Which chemicals should be monitored?
Output indicators
• Remote proxies
• Need to be complemented with enforcement indicators

6. Ways forward
• Investment in research on (eco)toxicity of chemicals
• Investment in monitoring programmes
• Harmonisation of statistics
• Harmonisation of testing programmes

7. Thank you
marco.camboni@rpa-europe.eu