INERIS, Parc Technologique ALATA, BP 2, 60550, Verneuil-en-Halatte, France.
Centre D'Economie de La Sorbonne, CNRS Université Paris-1 Sorbonne, Paris, France.
Regul Toxicol Pharmacol. 2024 Feb;147:105561. doi: 10.1016/j.yrtph.2024.105561. Epub 2024 Jan 19.
Cost-Effectiveness Analysis (CEA) is a decision-making framework to prioritize policy decisions for chemicals. Differences in hazard profiles among chemicals are not integrated in CEA under the EU REACH Regulation, which could limit its relevance. Another concern is that two different economic decision support methods (CEA for chemicals considered as PBTs or vPvBs from a regulatory perspective and Cost Benefit Analysis (CBA) for others) are used under REACH. To address this situation, we define "Hazard" CEA by integrating a hazard score, based on persistence, bioaccumulation and (eco)toxicity, in the effect indicator of CEA. We test different designs and parameterizations of Hazard-CEA on a set of past socio-economic assessments under REACH for PBT and non-PBT chemicals. Weighing and thresholds in hazard scores do not have a significant impact on the outcome of Hazard-CEA but the design of the hazard scoring method does. We suggest using an integrated and unweighted scoring method with a multiplicative formulation based on the notion of risk. Hazard-CEA could be used for both PBT and non-PBT chemicals, to use a single method in REACH and therefore improve consistency in policy decisions. Our work also suggests that using Hazard-CEA could help make decision easier.
成本效益分析（CEA）是一种决策框架，用于优先考虑化学品的政策决策。欧盟 REACH 法规下的 CEA 并未整合化学品危害特征的差异，这可能限制了其相关性。另一个问题是，REACH 下使用了两种不同的经济决策支持方法（监管角度下将持久性、生物蓄积性和（生态）毒性视为 PBT 或 vPvB 的化学品的 CEA 和其他化学品的成本效益分析（CBA））。为了解决这种情况，我们通过将基于持久性、生物蓄积性和（生态）毒性的危害评分整合到 CEA 的效应指标中，定义了“危害”CEA。我们在 REACH 下对一组过去的 PBT 和非 PBT 化学品的社会经济评估中测试了 Hazard-CEA 的不同设计和参数化。危害评分中的加权和阈值对 Hazard-CEA 的结果没有重大影响，但危害评分方法的设计有影响。我们建议使用基于风险概念的综合、非加权评分方法和乘法公式。Hazard-CEA 可用于 PBT 和非 PBT 化学品，以便在 REACH 中使用单一方法，从而提高政策决策的一致性。我们的工作还表明，使用 Hazard-CEA 可以帮助决策更加容易。
