Evaluating the alignment of alternative assessment methods with REACH Article 57

The assessment of chemical alternatives for hazardous substances is an important prerequisite for avoiding regrettable substitution, and several methods have been developed in the past to perform such an Assessment-of-Alternatives. We investigate whether GreenScreen®, Cradle to Cradle®, Multi Criteria Decision Analysis (MCDA), Cost Benefit Analysis, the Pollution Prevention Options Analysis System, the U.S.EPA Safer Choice Standard and Criteria, and the GHS column model 2020 from IFA use similar criteria for the evaluation of substances as Article 57 of REACH and how suitable these methods are for assessing per- and polyfluoroalkyl substances. MCDA and GreenScreen® were identified as the most promising methods and were analyzed in detail using two different datasets. The results of the assessments show that none of the investigated alternative assessment methods use the same hazard assessment criteria as described in Article 57 of REACH. It was also not possible to parameterize MCDA (using the multi-attribute utility theory approach) without redundant variables so that the results align with an assessment according to Article 57 of REACH. There is therefore an urgent need for a modified/new method that can be used in the future to assess organic substances that are used within the European Economic Area.