Government, industrial companies fail to protect locals' health: Dutch Safety Board

Large industrial companies and the government fail to protect the health of people living near factories. They often opt for a “procedural” attitude, and it is therefore “not self-evident” that people’s health is adequately protected, the Dutch Safety Board (OVV) concluded in a report on Thursday. According to OVV deputy chairman Stavros Zouridis, industrial companies and the government have “lost sight” of locals’ health, which is “the biggest surprise” of the research.

The OVV investigated the system of permits, enforcement, and supervision at three industrial companies: Tata Steel in IJmond, Chemcours (formerly DuPont) in Dordrecht, and Asfalt Productie Nijmegen (APN).

According to the OVV, practice shows that action is often only taken when residents start complaining or the media picks up the story. Locals often feel “unheard and not taken seriously.” Both the government and companies give “technical answers” to complaints. The OVV called it a “recurring pattern” that “responsibilities are shifted away” in response to residents’ concerns. That creates mistrust among the population, the researchers warned.

The government sometimes issues permits without properly assessing the risks of exposure to certain substances, the OVV wrote. The use of the “best available techniques” also does not always guarantee that the concentrations of harmful substances “remain below the standards for the environment and health.”

The researchers pointed out that if there is no hard evidence that a substance is harmful, that does not necessarily mean it is safe. The current system lacks “incentives” to reassess risk over time. While knowledge about the health effects of substances is “constantly evolving.” That must be improved, according to the OVV.

The OVV sees points for improvement in the attitude of the government and industry in how risks are viewed. “Instead of responding to unrest among local residents and signals from the media, companies and government should focus more on minimizing health risks,” Zouridis said.

State Secretary Vivianne Heijnen (Environment) has an essential role in making the permit process more strict. The “precautionary principle” must be given more weight in this. That means it is up to the user to prove the substance is safe. Environmental services must also have sufficient knowledge and capacity to supervise. The report stated that they could conduct “limited” research on their own and rely heavily on the information provided by companies themselves and external advisers.

From the three examples studied, lessons can be learned for the entire Netherlands, according to the Safety Board. Tata, Chemcours, and APN must at least provide insight into how their emissions contribute to health risks for locals. If there are increased risks, the companies must reduce the emission of harmful substances. It is also vital that trade associations and their members are aware of the recommendations, the OVV said.

Companies’ response

Tata Steel says it embraces the conclusions of the OVV that there should be a better picture of the effect of industry’s emissions on the environment. The steel factory also agrees that “even more effort must be made to reduce these effects.”

“It is good that thorough research has been done into how people living near industrial companies are protected” against the effects of company emissions, Tata said in response to the study. That is “sound,” and the “conclusions speak for themselves.”

Tata Steel has already taken “significant steps” in limiting “our impact on the environment, the company says. “We will remain fully active in this,” Tata says, adding that it is working towards cleaner steel production in the shortest possible time. That is also in Tata’s best interest, according to the company. “We also live and work in the IJmond. And just like the people who live in our immediate vicinity, we want to further reduce our emissions, further reduce the nuisance people experience, and remove concerns as much as possible.”

Chemcours says that the company wants to keep its environmental impact as small as possible and, therefore, continues to invest in measures to reduce emissions. The chemical company says it wants to be “a good neighbor” and recognizes that there are residents “with concern and questions.” According to a spokesperson, the company actively engages with residents and presents accessible information based on scientific facts. “Our 500 committed employees in Dordrecht work every day to safely carry out production processes and environmental measures. In this way, they ensure the responsible production of essential materials for many products in our daily lives,” he said.

According to Chemcours, the measures it announced in 2018 to reduce emission levels by over 99 percent “have resulted in the eventual emission level being lower than the initial commitment to the competent authority.” The spokesperson said the company has an intermediate goal of reducing emissions by 80 percent before the end of this year.

RIVM response.

The public health institute RIVM called the OVV report “a helping hand” in guaranteeing the safety of locals living near industrial companies. A 2021 RIVM study at Tata Steel showed that people in the vicinity are exposed to much more harmful substances than people who live elsewhere. It also recently found that vegetable gardens near Chemchours contain too much PFAS.

The OVV report “confirms the importance of public research,” said Charles Wijnker, RIVM director of environment and safety. People living near the companies are often concerned, but “of course, they are not in a position to conduct large-scale research themselves.” The RIVM tries to include locals’ concerns when formulating its research, WIjker said.

The RIVM is already working on improving its knowledge of the health effects and risks of substances emitted by the industry. The RIVM is setting up a “partnership” with 29 environmental services. By working more closely together, the RIVM and these services can share knowledge about companies' emissions more quickly. That will help with supervision, “Because if you don’t know where to look, it’s difficult to estimate risks,” Wijnker said.