The French government agency for food, environmental and occupational health & safety, ANSES, has proposed that the use of octocrylene in cosmetics should be dramatically reduced to the point where it would lose efficacy in a formulation.
The dossier, which proposes lowering the maximum authorised concentration, has been submitted to the European Chemicals Agency (ECHA) under the REACH Regulation.
1,500 tonnes of octocrylene used in Europe each year
Octocrylene, which is widely used in cosmetics as a solar filter, photostabiliser and UV absorber can be found in many sunscreen, colour cosmetic, day cream and fragrance formulations. In fact, according to ANSES, more than 1,500 tonnes of octocrylene are used in cosmetics products across Europe each year.
The agency said it carried out an assessment that shows that the use of octocrylene contaminates aquatic environments and soil and that this “poses risks to the reproduction and growth of aquatic species, and organisms living in sediment and soil.”
There are also suspicions that it may have toxic effects on the thyroid and reproduction and could potentially be an endocrine disruptor.
“The main source of environmental contamination is the use of cosmetics containing octocrylene: when these are applied to the skin, the substance ends up in domestic wastewater and sewage sludge,” said ANSES. “Octocrylene also contaminates lakes, rivers and coastal seas when people go swimming.”
The restriction proposal calls to drastically limit the maximum authorised concentration of octocrylene in cosmetic products for all uses, which means that at this level of concentration, the technical properties of octocrylene as a UV filter, UV absorber and photostabiliser will no longer be effective. Therefore, if the restriction is adopted, cosmetic products containing octocrylene will most likely be removed from the market.
Reformulating would mean “moderate” costs
ANSES said it has also assessed the expected socio-economic impacts of the restriction on the market for cosmetic and sun protection products. Based on this, it has estimated the cost of changing formulas for cosmetics manufacturers, specifically for sunscreens, and assessed the additional cost of manufacturing these products with alternative substances. It considers that these extra costs will be “moderate” and that they “could be absorbed by manufacturers.”
ANSES said that there is a shortage of available tools for monetising the environmental benefits of protective measures, so instead it conducted a large-scale survey of 7,200 consumers in six European countries, in partnership with Ipsos and the London School of Economics.
“This survey determined the average amount that a household would be willing to pay for octocrylene-free cosmetic products that would help to improve the state of marine and freshwater ecosystems,” it said. “The price that consumers would be willing to pay was then used to assign a monetary value to the expected environmental benefits.”
Study shows Europeans want safer cosmetics
According to the survey results, the expected benefits far outweigh the costs of the restriction, showing that Europeans want to have cosmetics that do not negatively affect the quality of aquatic environments. ANSES therefore concluded that this restriction meets the criteria of effectiveness and feasibility.
Following this public consultation, based on the information received, the restriction dossier will be amended and ECHA’s Committees for Risk Assessment and Socio-Economic Analysis will issue their respective opinions in September 2026. These opinions will then enable the European Commission, in agreement with the Member States of the European Union, to enact the final legislative proposal so that this restriction applies in Europe.