NGO comments on Transparency measures for nanomaterials on the market: Working conclusions

A statement by several NGOs, including the Center for International Environmental Law, criticizing the European Commission's working conclusions on transparency measures for nanomaterials. The authors argue that the Commission has ignored public consultation results and scientific concerns in favor of industry interests, and they strongly advocate for the creation of an EU-wide nanoregister to ensure public health, environmental safety, and consumer transparency.

• The authors contend that the European Commission's working conclusions on nanomaterial transparency are biased toward industry economic interests and ignore the public's right to know and environmental health and safety concerns.
• A public consultation showed broad agreement among non-industry stakeholders, including citizens, NGOs, and most Member State authorities, on the necessity and utility of an EU nanoregister to improve transparency and consumer trust.
• The document asserts there is a critical lack of information regarding nanomaterials on the EU market, noting that only 9 nanomaterials are registered under REACH because many fall below the one tonne per annum registration threshold.
• The authors argue that the French notification system demonstrates the inadequacy of the Commission's data; the French register contains between 243 and 422 different substances, whereas the Commission's Staff Working Paper estimated only around 20 concrete nanomaterial substances in the EU market.
• Specific health and environmental risks are highlighted for nanosilver, which is used in products like clothing and baby bottles; it can bioaccumulate in soil, penetrate biological barriers in humans, and reach organs including the brain and heart.
• The authors reject the Commission's claim that a nanoregister would impose an excessive regulatory burden on industry, citing that costs decrease after the first year of implementation and that an EU-wide system would be less burdensome than multiple separate national registers.
• The document argues that a nanoregister is essential for risk management and traceability, enabling the recall of materials if health concerns arise and allowing workers to implement precautionary measures against occupational exposure.

APA

Center for International Environmental Law (n.d.). NGO comments on Transparency measures for nanomaterials on the market: Working conclusions. https://www.ciel.org/wp-content/uploads/2015/06/NGO-comments-on-Transparency-measures-for-nanomaterials-on-the-market.pdf

Chicago

Center for International Environmental Law. NGO comments on Transparency measures for nanomaterials on the market: Working conclusions. n.d. https://www.ciel.org/wp-content/uploads/2015/06/NGO-comments-on-Transparency-measures-for-nanomaterials-on-the-market.pdf.

Wikipedia

{{cite press release |author=Center for International Environmental Law |title=NGO comments on Transparency measures for nanomaterials on the market: Working conclusions |url=https://www.ciel.org/wp-content/uploads/2015/06/NGO-comments-on-Transparency-measures-for-nanomaterials-on-the-market.pdf |access-date=17 August 2026 |via=Climate Insights Directory}}

BibTeX

@misc{centerforinternationalenvironmentallawndngo, author = {{Center for International Environmental Law}}, title = {{NGO comments on Transparency measures for nanomaterials on the market: Working conclusions}}, publisher = {Center for International Environmental Law}, url = {https://www.ciel.org/wp-content/uploads/2015/06/NGO-comments-on-Transparency-measures-for-nanomaterials-on-the-market.pdf}, urldate = {2026-08-17}, note = {Indexed by Climate Insights Directory} }