Reducing releases of POPs, POP candidates, and other chemicals of concern (CoCs) in the textiles sector

Project General Information



01568

Asia Textiles FSP




VI





1. Project Description. Briefly describe: 1) the global environmental and/or adaptation problems, root causes and barriers that need to be addressed; 2) the baseline scenario or any associated baseline projects, 3) the proposed alternative scenario, GEF focal area[1] strategies, with a brief description of expected outcomes and components of the project, 4) incremental/additional cost reasoning and expected contributions from the baseline, the GEFTF, LDCF, SCCF,  and co-financing; 5) global environmental benefits (GEFTF) and/or adaptation benefits (LDCF/SCCF); and 6) innovation, sustainability and potential for scaling up.

 

The following description of problem, causes and barriers, baseline and alternative scenarios, intervention reasoning and benefits described are all as well described in the documents of the SAICM Chemicals in Products (CiP) Programme[2]. These documents – approved by the SAICM community in 2015 -  include a set of objectives and methodologies which facilitate stakeholders to access information on the chemical content of manufactured products. The underlying intervention logic (or theory of change) inherent to the CiP Programme and as well present in the various sections of this Project Justification, is that access to this CiP information enables decisions that will lead to safe and more sustainable products and production processes. This project is an application of that logic, by implementing the CiP Programme in the textiles sector.

 

The global environmental problems, root causes and barriers: The problem tree (Figure 1) highlights the current lack of knowledge about chemicals used in the production of and remained in textile products, and the subsequent undesirable effects leading to exposure of humans and/or the environment to, and harmed by, POPs, POP candidates and other priority CoCs in relation to production, use and disposal of textile products.

 

It has been increasingly recognized by governments, businesses and the public at large that chemicals which are contained in everyday products and articles may pose a risk to human health and the environment. This is especially the case when a hazardous chemical is improperly, handled, stored, incorporated into a product or when a product is handled in an unsound manner. Proper management of these chemicals requires that sufficient information is known about them (i.e., their presence, their hazards and suitable precautions) to enable the appropriate management measures being in place at each stage in the product life cycle[3]. This is, however, rarely the case for textile products on the market today. Extremely complex supply chains, spread over numerous countries, have led to insufficient information being made available through the many manufacturing stages. This also results in insufficient availability and flow of information through to the consumer and end-of-life phases, greatly complicating the proper management of products and chemicals incorporated in products for these stakeholders.

 

These root causes have led to the currently-inadequate CiP information exchange throughout the product life cycle (extraction / raw material, production, use and end of life) and resulted in stakeholders at most life-cycle stages lacking awareness of risks of chemicals contained in products to human health and the environment.

Lack of access to this enabling CiP information also results in missing opportunities to apply the principles of Green Chemistry[4], notably the principles of prevention of waste, of production and use of more benign chemicals (i.e. substitution of more hazardous chemicals by less hazardous ones both for incorporation into products and as solvents or process chemicals) and of analysis for pollution prevention.

 

Barriers to overcoming this problem include: [i] that stakeholders throughout the product life cycle generally lack knowledge, capacity and/or resources in setting up and running CiP information exchange systems, in ensuring data quality, in considering what information is useful, how to transmit it (i.e. to receive or present it to other stakeholders) and how recipients might act upon the CiP information; and [ii] that stakeholders with different interests face challenges in addressing confidential business information and transparency related issues in a harmonized manner. Furthermore, non-coordinated responses in some sectors have led to multiple solutions being proposed by individual actors (e.g. negative- vs. positive-list approaches, duplication through request for similar sets of CiP information) and results in an inefficient or unclear approach, thereby creating additional barriers. In addition, businesses of the textile value chain are lacking the understanding of impacts beyond their companies boundaries, and business opportunities that can be associated with the integration of this information and the development of business strategies that embed sustainability.

 

The textiles industry has grown to become one of the largest global industries, with a sales value estimated at over $2.5 trillion in 2010. The textile industries in Bangladesh, Indonesia, Pakistan and Viet Nam account for a significant, and growing, portion of this amount (e.g., according to WTO, in 2015  these four countries accounted for 15-20% of global exports)[5]. Depending on brands, raw materials, processes used and customer requirements (e.g. color, functionality) a wide range of chemicals are used in the manufacturing of textiles products. Compounding the complexity of supply chains, the complexity of chemistries employed in the sector makes access to adequate CiP information difficult, including chemical identities and environmental and human health related  impact and risk information. It is particularly problematic for brands and supply chain actors to be aware of chemical constituents intentionally added to the products and any residuals or contaminants of concern (including POPs) and to understand the life cycle impacts of chemicals in their products. Inadequate knowledge about chemicals in products and chemicals used in processes also limits brand and supply chain actors’ abilities to identify and choose safer alternatives to those hazardous chemicals in the designing and manufacturing their products and to avoid “regrettable substitutions” and to apply the Principles of Green Chemistry. Programs and initiatives aimed at sound chemicals and waste management in the textiles sector are being piloted by some brands in countries including Viet Nam and Bangladesh, but are not yet widely utilized by all relevant actors throughout the supply chain and do not yet transmit the CiP information needed to enable sound chemicals management of textiles products on all levels (i.e. from basic product and process safety to sustainable products and production).

 

Inadequate CiP information exchange impacts actors and stakeholders throughout and outside the supply chain. It hampers the brands, upstream manufacturers, consumers and waste managers from identifying and taking measures to minimize the environmental and human exposure to various POPs, POP candidates and other priority chemicals of concern (CoCs) and prevents consumers from verifying and making informed decisions on the sustainability of the textiles products they purchase. A focus on consumer information and highlighting the value to customer under Eco-innovative business model development can address this shortfall. A well-designed CiP information exchange system can also help governmental agencies and civil societies to better defend the public interest and to monitor, track and acknowledge progress by the sector.  

 

In addition, there is a lack of effective coordination among relevant stakeholders and actors throughout and outside the value chain (brands, textile manufacturers, chemical manufacturers, academic scientists, governments and NGOs) leading to fragmented actions with limited impact. In particular, these drawbacks hamper countries from the successful implementation of the provisions of the Stockholm Convention to restrict/eliminate the production and intentional use of POPs in Annex A and B, and to report accordingly.

 

Developing countries and countries with economics in transition (hereafter referred to as “Developing and transition countries”) face additional challenges in addressing hazardous chemicals used in the manfacturing processes and/or contained in textile products, namely inadequate capabilities and capacities of relevant actors and stakeholders in these countries. For example, to assess and identify safer alternatives to hazardous chemicals, expertise and knowledge in a wide range of fields is needed including: data on physicochemical properties; environmental fate and transport; toxicokinetics and toxicodynamics; performance chemistry; chemical process design; chemical engineering; life-cycle assessment; and, socio-economic analysis. For most small to medium sized manufacturers in developing countries, even if they are aware of the issues in relation to hazardous substances used in their processes, many lack the expertise needed for the chemical alternatives assessment framework. Similarly, governmental agencies lack adequate capacities to develop tools, monitor, track and acknowledge progress by the sector and report their progresses in terms of restriction/elimination of the production and intentional use of POPs listed in Annex A and B.

 

There is also a fundamental issue with the replacement of POPs and POP candidates in the processing of textiles.  “Regrettable substitutions” in the sector have occurred in the past, when one chemical from a group of structurally similar chemicals was removed from the market and replaced by other chemicals from the same group, requiring substantial effort but yielding little benefit in reducing overall risk.[6] For example, PFOS-related chemicals have been largely replaced by structurally similar chemicals derived from long-chain fluorotelomers, which often contain perfluorooctanoic acid (PFOA)12, a fluorochemical which is itself currently being evaluated to be listed as a POP in the Stockholm Convention.[7] [8] To avoid such “regrettable substitutions” and to be able to apply the Green Chemisty principles of using inherently safer chemicals and of employing safer solvents an auxiliaries, efforts are required at an early stage to systematically assess and evaluate the available alternatives to POPs and POP candidates. These assessments and evaluation of alternatives need to be framed by considering the whole life-cycle impacts of the alternatives. This includes analysis of potential environmental impacts from manufacturing, using and disposing of this substitute chemical.

 



[1] For biodiversity projects, in addition to explaining the project’s consistency with the biodiversity focal area strategy, objectives and programs, please also describe which Aichi Target(s) the project will directly contribute to achieving.

[2] See http://www.unep.org/chemicalsandwaste/SAICM/ChemicalsinProductsCiP/tabid/56141/Default.aspx

[3] The PPG will confirm the project focus on reflecting the reality of use of chemcials in the manufacturing process in the country, and define indicators for how the change is tracked, through which information / standard / label, and through which partners.

[4] https://www.acs.org/content/acs/en/greenchemistry/what-is-green-chemistry/principles/12-principles-of-green-chemistry.html

[5] https://www.wto.org/english/res_e/statis_e/wts2016_e/WTO_Chapter_04.pdf

[6] Goldstein B, Banda S, Cairncross E, Jiang G, Massey R, Miglioranza K, Samseth J, Scheringer M, Smith J. 2013. Chapter “minimizing chemical risks” from UNEP Year Book 2013: emerging issues in our global environment. 37–51. p.

[7] https://chemicalwatch.com/23284/eu-to-propose-pfoa-listing-to-stockholm-convention

[8] http://chm.pops.int/TheConvention/POPsReviewCommittee/Meetings/POPRC12/Overview/tabid/5171/Default.aspx


Full Size Project(FSP)

Multi Regional


Western Asia


Bangladesh, Pakistan, Indonesia, Vietnam


GEF Trust Fund

Stage Grant to UNEP Grant to other IA Co-Financing UNEP Fee Other IA Fee


No





External



Executing Agency Category

Partner Category

Name Category Period

Low Risk

4 Risks. Indicate risks, including climate change, potential social and environmental risks that might prevent the project objectives from being achieved, and, if possible, propose measures that address these risks to be further developed during the project design (table format acceptable). An overview of risks and potential risk management strategies is listed in Table 2. In brief, the project involves numerous and diverse countries, and risks arise due to different chemicals management systems, political situations, varying access to reliable information and stakeholder commitment. For example, as most POP candidates and other priority CoCs are substances that are not yet regulated on the local and global scale, it might take time and motivation to identify, assess and transit to relevant alternatives to POP candidates and other priority CoCs. However identification and inclusion of important stakeholders, such as key supply chain actors, and development of robust partnerships (covering multiple life cycle stages) in the early stages in the project is planned to address this.



Not Applicable

0





Fiscal Year Project activities and objectives met

Project Objective:  Significant and documented reductions in emissions of PFOS, PBDEs, SCCPs, PFOA and other targeted chemicals of concern (CoCs) in the textiles sector in selected countries

Project Components

Finan-cing Type[1]

Project Outcomes

Project Outputs

Trust Fund

(in $)

GEF Project Financing

Co-financing

Identification of POPs, POP candidates and other priority CoCs in the textiles sector

Information on the occurrence of POPs, POP candidates and other CoCs in the textile sector, and on alternatives to these, is available and being used to inform decision making

1.1 Report of existing chemistry in the sector (including chemical manufacturers supplying the textiles industry) and identification of relevant POPs, POP candidates and other priority CoCs

 

1.2 Assessment of available alternatives, including product performance and implications for change-over, and environmental and human health concerns (cost-benefit analysis). 

 

1.3 Design and development of a textile sector CiP information system based on life-cycle approaches

 

1.4 Development of textile sector communication strategy, targeting stakeholders outside of the supply chain (e.g., governments, civil society representatives, recyclers, etc.) to receive CiP information. 

1,500,000

10,000,000

Transition to alternatives to POPs, POP candidates and other priority CoCs

A transition is made to alternatives to POPs, POP candidates, and other priority COCs in production process by selected partners in Bangladesh, Indonesia, Pakistan and Viet Nam.

 

 

 

 

2.1 Guidance on selecting substitutes for POPs, candidate POPs and other COCs including through application of the principles of green chemistry.

 

2.2 Guidance and training to support the operational substitution of, and transition to alternatives for, POPs, candidate POPs and other COCs.

 

2.3 Report of results for the demonstration of restriction, elimination and substitution of POPs and other identified COCs from the textile manufacturing processes.

2,500,000

20,000,000

Implementing Eco-innovative strategies in the private sector, towards  a non-toxic circular economy approach in the textile production system

Eco-innovative strategies adopted within the textile value chain (through private businesses, business intermediaries such as RECP Net members, and governments), including alternatives to POPs, POP candidates and other priority CoCs, and supporting the shift towards a more circular, non toxic economy.

 

 

3.1 Guidance and training of technical institutions, business intermediaries and selected companies on eco-innovation in the textile sector, integrating information on alternatives to POPs, POP candidates and other priority CoCs.

 

3.2 Facilitation of access to finance for SMEs in the sector.

 

3.3 National governments develop eco-innovation and circular economy guidance aligned with international best practice and national specificities and regulations.

 

3.4 Implementation of eco-innovative strategies in selected companies and their value chain, including partnership creation for the textile manufacturers along their value chain, to shift to a circular economy approach

 

3.5 Business case studies developed to support eco-innovation uptake and replication by the technical institutions and business intermediaries.

2,657,500

10,000,000

Building national capacity for data collection and reporting

Countries empowered to meet  Stockholm Convention reporting obligations for POPs, as well as responding to identified stakeholder information needs for candidate POPs and CoCs identified under the project.

4.1 Reporting tools and platform for collection / disclosure of information on chemicals contained in textiles and released from chemical and textile manufacturing processes.

 

4.2 Release estimation techniques for quantifying amounts of POPs, candidate POPs and other COCs released from textile manufacturing operations.

 

4.3  Training on the use of available tools and interpretation of data generated through the project by the selected countries, and the use of this data for their POPs reporting documents

1,750,000

4,500,000

Subtotal

 

8,407,500

44,500,000

Project Management Cost (PMC)[2]

442,500

500,000

Total Project Cost

 

8,850,000

45,000,000

 



[1]  Financing type can be either investment or technical assistance.

[2]   For GEF Project Financing up to $2 million, PMC could be up to 10% of the subtotal;  above $2 million, PMC could be up to 5% of the subtotal. PMC should be charged proportionately to focal areas based on focal area project financing amount in Table D below.


$ 0.00

Project Objective:  Significant and documented reductions in emissions of PFOS, PBDEs, SCCPs, PFOA and other targeted chemicals of concern (CoCs) in the textiles sector in selected countries

Project Components

Finan-cing Type[1]

Project Outcomes

Project Outputs

Trust Fund

(in $)

GEF Project Financing

Co-financing

Identification of POPs, POP candidates and other priority CoCs in the textiles sector

Information on the occurrence of POPs, POP candidates and other CoCs in the textile sector, and on alternatives to these, is available and being used to inform decision making

1.1 Report of existing chemistry in the sector (including chemical manufacturers supplying the textiles industry) and identification of relevant POPs, POP candidates and other priority CoCs

 

1.2 Assessment of available alternatives, including product performance and implications for change-over, and environmental and human health concerns (cost-benefit analysis). 

 

1.3 Design and development of a textile sector CiP information system based on life-cycle approaches

 

1.4 Development of textile sector communication strategy, targeting stakeholders outside of the supply chain (e.g., governments, civil society representatives, recyclers, etc.) to receive CiP information. 

1,500,000

10,000,000

Transition to alternatives to POPs, POP candidates and other priority CoCs

A transition is made to alternatives to POPs, POP candidates, and other priority COCs in production process by selected partners in Bangladesh, Indonesia, Pakistan and Viet Nam.

 

 

 

 

2.1 Guidance on selecting substitutes for POPs, candidate POPs and other COCs including through application of the principles of green chemistry.

 

2.2 Guidance and training to support the operational substitution of, and transition to alternatives for, POPs, candidate POPs and other COCs.

 

2.3 Report of results for the demonstration of restriction, elimination and substitution of POPs and other identified COCs from the textile manufacturing processes.

2,500,000

20,000,000

Implementing Eco-innovative strategies in the private sector, towards  a non-toxic circular economy approach in the textile production system

Eco-innovative strategies adopted within the textile value chain (through private businesses, business intermediaries such as RECP Net members, and governments), including alternatives to POPs, POP candidates and other priority CoCs, and supporting the shift towards a more circular, non toxic economy.

 

 

3.1 Guidance and training of technical institutions, business intermediaries and selected companies on eco-innovation in the textile sector, integrating information on alternatives to POPs, POP candidates and other priority CoCs.

 

3.2 Facilitation of access to finance for SMEs in the sector.

 

3.3 National governments develop eco-innovation and circular economy guidance aligned with international best practice and national specificities and regulations.

 

3.4 Implementation of eco-innovative strategies in selected companies and their value chain, including partnership creation for the textile manufacturers along their value chain, to shift to a circular economy approach

 

3.5 Business case studies developed to support eco-innovation uptake and replication by the technical institutions and business intermediaries.

2,657,500

10,000,000

Building national capacity for data collection and reporting

Countries empowered to meet  Stockholm Convention reporting obligations for POPs, as well as responding to identified stakeholder information needs for candidate POPs and CoCs identified under the project.

4.1 Reporting tools and platform for collection / disclosure of information on chemicals contained in textiles and released from chemical and textile manufacturing processes.

 

4.2 Release estimation techniques for quantifying amounts of POPs, candidate POPs and other COCs released from textile manufacturing operations.

 

4.3  Training on the use of available tools and interpretation of data generated through the project by the selected countries, and the use of this data for their POPs reporting documents

1,750,000

4,500,000

Subtotal

 

8,407,500

44,500,000

Project Management Cost (PMC)[2]

442,500

500,000

Total Project Cost

 

8,850,000

45,000,000

 



[1]  Financing type can be either investment or technical assistance.

[2]   For GEF Project Financing up to $2 million, PMC could be up to 10% of the subtotal;  above $2 million, PMC could be up to 5% of the subtotal. PMC should be charged proportionately to focal areas based on focal area project financing amount in Table D below.


No