Multiple-Criteria Decision Analysis for Assessments of Chemical Alternatives (MCDA-ACA)

A comprehensive assessment of chemical alternatives (ACA)
is necessary
to avoid regrettable substitution. In a preceding study, an analysis
of six hazard assessment methods found that none of them are fully
aligned with the hazard assessment criteria of Article 57 of the European
REACH regulation, indicating a need for a method better reflecting
hazard assessment schemes in European chemical regulations. This paper
presents a multiple-criteria decision analysis (MCDA) method for the
ACA that takes the criteria of Article 57 of REACH into account. Investigated
and presented are objective hierarchies, the aggregation of objectives,
the curvature of the value functions, weights, and the introduction
of a classification threshold. The MCDA-ACA method allows for the
aggregation of hazards in such a way that poor performance in one
hazard cannot be compensated for by good performance in another hazard.
The method parameters were developed and tested using two data sets
with the aim to classify chemical alternatives into acceptable (nonregrettable)
and unacceptable (regrettable) alternatives according to the regulations
set in Europe. The flexibility of the general method was explored
by adapting the method to align with two hazard assessment schemes,
Article 57 of REACH and GreenScreen. The results show that MCDA-ACA
is so flexible and transparent that it can easily be adapted to various
hazard assessment schemes.