As regulators in Europe and North America are increasingly phasing out per- and polyfluoroalkyl substances (PFAS) from packaging and consumer products, researchers warn that the pollution from these persistent chemicals may end up being displaced instead of eliminated.
In a perspective article for the Environmental Science & Technology special issue “Safe and just Earth system boundaries for novel entities,” Brij Mohan Sharma of Masaryk University and ETH Zürich along with co-authors discuss the fragmented regulatory landscape for PFAS across the globe. The article argues “that regulatory disparities between developed and developing countries in managing the production, use, and trade of PFASs (and products containing them) will further exacerbate global PFAS pollution and its associated environmental and health burdens.”
Widening regulatory gaps
In the EU and parts of North America, policymakers are advancing broad restrictions on PFAS use, including proposals to phase out most applications over time (FPF reported). These efforts go beyond earlier measures that targeted only a limited number of substances, reflecting growing concern about the entire class of PFAS chemicals (FPF reported).
By contrast, many developing countries do not have comprehensive PFAS regulations or lack the infrastructure to enforce them. Current global agreements, such as the Stockholm Convention, cover only a small subset of PFAS and are not universally ratified. Leaving thousands of related chemicals largely unregulated worldwide.
This imbalance is creating conditions for what the authors describe as a “race to the bottom,” where industries can shift production and sales to regions with weaker oversight.
Shifting pollution
The consequences extend beyond manufacturing footprints. Sharma and co-authors warn that uneven regulation could lead to increased trade and even the relocation of entire industrial operations to developing regions.
Such shifts risk creating new environmental “hotspots,” particularly in countries where waste management and water treatment systems are less equipped to handle persistent chemicals. Pollution does not remain local. PFAS can travel long distances through air and water, and contaminated products can re-enter global markets through trade (FPF reported).
Costs and infrastructure challenges
Estimates suggest that the health and environmental costs of PFAS exposure already run into tens of billions annually in developed regions alone (FPF reported). For developing countries, the challenge is still greater. As a result, they face the prospect of bearing a disproportionate share of the global PFAS burden while having fewer resources to manage it.
Call for coordinated global action
Sharma et al. argue that avoiding a shift of pollution will require a more coordinated global response. Proposed measures include:
- Expanding PFAS restrictions beyond a limited subset of chemicals
- Strengthening regulatory frameworks in developing countries
- Increasing investment in monitoring, waste management, and water treatment
- Accelerating the development and adoption of safer alternatives
- Enhancing international cooperation, including funding and technology transfer
They conclude, “[i]t is high time that the governments, researchers, and private sector in developing countries come together to take steps to systematically monitor, map, and reduce the import, use, and emissions of PFASs, and to build solid support for the relevant local regulatory developments.”
Reference
Sharma, BM, et al. (2026). “Global disparities in the regulation of PFASs: The risk of shifting the PFAS pollution burden to developing countries.” Environmental Science and Technology. DOI: 10.1021/acs.est.5c14777
