185
decision-making bodies. The heavy burden of proof associated with this ‘TGD
machine’ caused a science-policy deadlock in the 1990s, resulting in assessment of
less than 100 out of 100,000 substances registered on the EU market (see Karlsson
2006 ). After lengthy political debates, the EU adopted a new policy for the bulk of
industrial substances, namely, the REACH regulation, which is now the central
piece of chemical law in the Baltic Sea region today (EC 2006 ). REACH is EU
harmonised and charges industry with the responsibility of registering data on substance properties. The data is to be evaluated on a scientifi c basis by the European
Chemicals Agency (ECHA), which has a strong technical and expert orientation,
and competent authorities of individual EU member states , which judge whether or
not to suggest risk reduction measures such as authorisation or restrictions. A strong
burden of proof still rests with regulators and, consequently, the implementation has
been slow (Karlsson 2010 ). Several other laws, besides REACH, regulate substances in general and more specifi cally chemical substances in specifi c products,
for example, electric and electronic products (e.g. EC 2003 ).
The second sphere, environment-oriented policy and law, focuses on specifi c
parameters for, e.g., water quality, as stated in the WFD (EC 2000 ) and the MSFD
(EC 2008 ). The scientifi c focus is strong in this sphere as well, but the starting point
here is health and the environment rather than market aspects and EAM is, therefore,
often applied. Risk assessments – or more commonly, environmental assessments –
are carried out in a number of settings, e.g., by agencies, universities or international
bodies such as HELCOM, the latter also adopting recommendations on, for example, restrictions aimed at parties of the convention. Individual countries, within the
general framework set up in law, are then commonly expected (in the case of
HELCOM) or charged (in the case of EU) to ensure implementation of different risk
management measures, for instance, regulating emissions of substances from various sources.
There are no specifi c organisations of a participative nature with regard to
stakeholders pertaining to the environment or chemical industry. However, some
representatives of certain stakeholder groups are invited to and involved in various
steps in decision-making procedures regarding both assessment and management
issues, more frequently the case in public organisations at the national, EU and
international level than in the scientifi c committees under them. The strong burden
of proof that is placed in the public domain has given industry stakeholders a favourable position to delay processes by repeatedly demanding more data.
8.3.1.5 Oil Discharges Linked to Marine Transportation
Oil transportation in the Baltic Sea creates two different kinds of environmental
risks, namely, accidental and intentional oil spills (Hassler 2011 , 2016 ). Whereas
the former are rare but may have severe negative impacts on local or regional ecological systems or result in major economic loss and social disturbances, the latter
consist of the many small acts of pollution that result from operators cleaning tanks
8 Science-Policy Interfaces in Baltic Sea Environmental Governance: Towards…
decision-making bodies. The heavy burden of proof associated with this ‘TGD
machine’ caused a science-policy deadlock in the 1990s, resulting in assessment of
less than 100 out of 100,000 substances registered on the EU market (see Karlsson
2006 ). After lengthy political debates, the EU adopted a new policy for the bulk of
industrial substances, namely, the REACH regulation, which is now the central
piece of chemical law in the Baltic Sea region today (EC 2006 ). REACH is EU
harmonised and charges industry with the responsibility of registering data on substance properties. The data is to be evaluated on a scientifi c basis by the European
Chemicals Agency (ECHA), which has a strong technical and expert orientation,
and competent authorities of individual EU member states , which judge whether or
not to suggest risk reduction measures such as authorisation or restrictions. A strong
burden of proof still rests with regulators and, consequently, the implementation has
been slow (Karlsson 2010 ). Several other laws, besides REACH, regulate substances in general and more specifi cally chemical substances in specifi c products,
for example, electric and electronic products (e.g. EC 2003 ).
The second sphere, environment-oriented policy and law, focuses on specifi c
parameters for, e.g., water quality, as stated in the WFD (EC 2000 ) and the MSFD
(EC 2008 ). The scientifi c focus is strong in this sphere as well, but the starting point
here is health and the environment rather than market aspects and EAM is, therefore,
often applied. Risk assessments – or more commonly, environmental assessments –
are carried out in a number of settings, e.g., by agencies, universities or international
bodies such as HELCOM, the latter also adopting recommendations on, for example, restrictions aimed at parties of the convention. Individual countries, within the
general framework set up in law, are then commonly expected (in the case of
HELCOM) or charged (in the case of EU) to ensure implementation of different risk
management measures, for instance, regulating emissions of substances from various sources.
There are no specifi c organisations of a participative nature with regard to
stakeholders pertaining to the environment or chemical industry. However, some
representatives of certain stakeholder groups are invited to and involved in various
steps in decision-making procedures regarding both assessment and management
issues, more frequently the case in public organisations at the national, EU and
international level than in the scientifi c committees under them. The strong burden
of proof that is placed in the public domain has given industry stakeholders a favourable position to delay processes by repeatedly demanding more data.
8.3.1.5 Oil Discharges Linked to Marine Transportation
Oil transportation in the Baltic Sea creates two different kinds of environmental
risks, namely, accidental and intentional oil spills (Hassler 2011 , 2016 ). Whereas
the former are rare but may have severe negative impacts on local or regional ecological systems or result in major economic loss and social disturbances, the latter
consist of the many small acts of pollution that result from operators cleaning tanks
8 Science-Policy Interfaces in Baltic Sea Environmental Governance: Towards…