Microplastic regulation should be more precise to incentivize both innovation and environmental safety
Open access
Date
2020-10-21Type
- Journal Article
Abstract
The presence of plastic in the environment has sparked discussion amongst scientists, regulators and the general public as to how industrialization and consumerism is shaping our world. Here we discuss restrictions on the intentional use of primary microplastics: small solid polymer particles in applications ranging from agriculture to cosmetics. Microplastic hazards are uncertain, and actions are not similarly prioritized by all actors. In some instances, replacement is technically simple and easily justified, but in others substitutions may come with more uncertainty, performance questions and costs. Scientific impact assessment of primary microplastics compared to their alternatives relies on a number of factors, such as microplastic harm, existence of replacement materials and the quality, cost and hazards of alternative materials. Regulations need a precise focus and must be enforceable by these measurements. Policymakers must carefully evaluate under which contexts incentives to replace certain microplastics can stimulate innovation of new, more competitive and environmentally conscious materials. Show more
Permanent link
https://doi.org/10.3929/ethz-b-000448968Publication status
publishedExternal links
Journal / series
Nature CommunicationsVolume
Pages / Article No.
Publisher
NatureOrganisational unit
09717 - Mitrano, Denise M. / Mitrano, Denise M.
Funding
168105 - The path of microplastics to the environment: fate and transport in waste water treatment systems (SNF)
More
Show all metadata