ABSTRACT
There is an unprecedented exposure of living organisms to mobile communications radiofrequency electromagnetic field (RF-EMF) emissions. Guidelines on exposure thresholds to limit thermal effects from these emissions are restricted to humans. However, tissue heating can occur in all living organisms that are exposed. In addition, exposure at millimetric frequencies used by 5G may impact surface tissues and organs of plants and small-size species. It is also expected that the addition of 5G to existing networks will intensify radiofrequency absorption by living organisms. A European Parliament report proposed policy options on the effects of RF-EMF exposure of plants, animals, and other living organisms in the context of 5G: funding more research, implementing monitoring networks, accessing more information from operators on antennas and EMF emissions, and developing compliance studies when antennas are installed. However, there is no evidence on the preferences of relevant stakeholders regarding these policy options. This paper reports the findings of a survey of key European stakeholders' policy option preferences based on the European Parliament's report. It reveals a broad consensus on funding more research on the effects of exposure of plants, animals, and other living organisms to EMFs. It also highlights the need for deliberation concerning the other policy options that could provide solutions for regulatory authorities, central administrations, the private sector, nongovernmental associations and advocates, and academics. Such deliberation would pave the way for effective solutions, focusing on long-term output from funding research, and enabling short-term socially and economically acceptable actions for all parties concerned.
ABSTRACT
The unprecedented exposure of radiofrequency electromagnetic field (RF-EMF) to humans from mobile communications raises serious public concern about the possibility of unexpected adverse health effects and has stimulated authorities to adopt precautionary exposure limits. These limits are distinctly different across countries, and the causes of these differences are unclear from the literature. This article is the first empirical analysis on the determinants of RF-EMF exposure legislation, using a novel cross-sectional database of 164 countries worldwide. The analysis shows that decentralization and mobile competition in countries with low mobile network deployment tend to promote more stringent RF-EMF exposure limits across the dataset with 164 countries. In more decentralized countries, the regions had a greater influence on national legislation and could accommodate local demands with the advent of mobile technology in the 2000s. In contrast, decentralization and mobile competition in countries with high levels of mobile network deployment tend to relax RF-EMF exposure limits in the sample of 61 countries with fifth-generation (5G) technology. Indeed, restrictive RF-EMF exposure limits are constraining 5G deployment in a context of the widespread adoption of mobile-broadband technologies. These results should be useful for policymakers and mobile operators alike to anticipate the outcome of legislation in countries that have yet to introduce 5G technology. The results should also be useful when reviewing policies and strategies for the implementation of the upcoming 6G technology in frequency bands that will be increasingly higher (above 6 GHz up to THz for very local usage), and hence where the health effects on humans are less well studied.
ABSTRACT
Maritime transportation is a major contributor to the world economy, but has significant social and environmental impacts. Each impact calls for different technical or operational solutions. Amongst these solutions, we found that speed reduction measures appear to mitigate several issues: (1) collision with wildlife; (2) collision with non-living objects; (3) underwater noise; (4) invasive species; and (5) gas emission. We do not pretend that speed reduction is the best solution for each individual issue mentioned in this paper, but we argue that it could be a key solution to significantly reduce these threats all together. Further interdisciplinary research is required to balance private economic costs of speed reduction measures with environmental and social benefits emerging from all mitigated issues.
