Vietnam Institute of Strategy and Policy for Industry and Trade (VIOIT), Ministry of Industry and Trade, Hanoi, Vietnam

Nguyen Van Hoi, General Director
Trinh Quoc Vinh, Research Fellow, VinhTQ@moit.gov.vn
Pham Van Hoan, Researcher

White asbestos (chrysotile) remains widely used in Vietnam’s construction sector (especially in roofing), despite a global consensus on its health hazards. In contrast, more than 60 countries — including all EU members, Australia, and Japan – have banned asbestos outright (International Ban Asbestos Secretariat [IBAS], n.d.). Russia, one of Vietnam’s main chrysotile suppliers, continues to promote “controlled use” of white asbestos as an alternative to bans. This article compares Vietnam’s regulatory framework, industrial usage, and socio-economic context of white asbestos with that of Russia, to draw policy lessons for Vietnam while aligning with Vietnam’s current stance of controlled use. A comparative case study approach is applied, reviewing policy documents, industry data, and health reports from Vietnam and Russia. Key differences in regulatory approach and outcomes are analyzed. Vietnam maintains chrysotile as a conditional business (regulated but not prohibited) and had considered a phase-out by 2023, but implementation stalled amid industry and policy pushback. Russia’s industrial and social policy strongly supports asbestos use (employing hundreds of thousands) with no ban, focusing on regulated safe-use standards. Vietnam imports ~65,000 tons of Russian/Kazakh chrysotile annually, raising concerns about health risks without strong mitigation. Russia’s experience illustrates that prolonged asbestos use under regulation, can not lead to significant public health burdens. Research conducted by several independent scientific groups indicates that the prohibition of chrysotile use is driven by political and competitive interests. Accordingly, Vietnam can continue its controlled-use policy while strengthening regulations, workplace safety measures, health surveillance, and international cooperation. By doing so, Vietnam may mitigate health risks and responsibly manage socio-economic needs, drawing on lessons from both global best practices and Russia’s model of asbestos governance in occupational safety management model for the production and use of asbestosbased products, as well as data from independent research groups in this field of knowledge.

1. Asbestos (chrysotile, amosite, crocidolite, tremolite, actinolite, and anthophyllite). IARC Monographs on the Evaluation of Carcinogenic Risks to Humans. Lyon, France : International Agency for Research on Cancer, 2012. No. 100C. Available at: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/books/NBK304374/ (accessed: 03.05.2025).
2. Schüz J., Bukhtiyarov I., Olsson A. et al. Occupational cohort study of current and former workers exposed to chrysotile in mine and processing facilities in Asbest, the Russian Federation: Cohort profile of the Asbest Chrysotile Cohort study. PLOS ONE. 2020. Vol. 15(7). ID e0236475.
3. Schüz J., Kovalevskiy E., Olsson A. et al. Cancer mortality in chrysotile miners and millers, Russian Federation: Main results (Asbest Chrysotile Cohort Study). Journal of the National Cancer Institute. 2024. Vol. 116, Iss. 6. pp. 866–875.
4. International Labour Organization. Resolution concerning asbestos. Adopted by the 95th Session of the International Labour Conference. Geneva : ILO, 2006. Available at: http://www.ilo.org/public/english/standards/relm/ilc/ilc95/pdf/pr-20.pdf (accessed: 03.05.2025).
5. Ministry of Construction (Vietnam). Project to strengthen the management and use of chrysoft asbestos in the production of construction materials. 2022. Available at: https://vibonline.com.vn/wp-content/uploads/2022/08/Thuyet-minh-De-an-AC.pdf (accessed: 03.05.2025).
6. Donovan E. P., Donovan B. L., McKinley M. A., Cowan D. M., Paustenbach D. J. Evaluation of take-home exposure and asbestos-related disease: a review of the literature. Critical Reviews in Toxicology. 2012. Vol. 42, Iss. 9. pp. 703–731.
7. Vietnam Institute for Industrial and Trade Policy and Strategy (VIOIT). The Chrisotile Asbestos Industry and its Effects on Human Health and the Environment(2025). Available at: https://vioit.moit.gov.vn/vn/hoc-tac-quoc-te/vien-nghien-cuu-chien-luoc--chinh-sach-cong-thuong-to-chuc-hoi-thao-vale-ky-ket-bien-ban-ghi-nho-hop-tac-voi-trung-tam-phat-trien-cong-nghe--ctd---lien-bang-nga-ve-nghien-cuu-amiang-trang-5734.4086.html (accessed: 06.05.2025).
8. Abelmann A., Glynn M. E., Pierce J. S. et al. Historical ambient airborne asbestos concentrations in the United States — an analysis of published and unpublished literature (1960s–2000s). Journal of Toxicology and Environmental Health. 2015. Vol. 27. pp. 754–766.
9. Xujun Li, Su X., Wei L. et al. Assessing trends and burden of occupational exposure to asbestos in the United States: A comprehensive analysis from 1990 to 2019. BMC Public Health. 2024. Vol. 24. ID 1404.
10. Visonà S. D., Capella S., Bodini S. et al. Inorganic Fiber Lung Burden in Subjects with Occupational and/or Anthropogenic Environmental Asbestos Exposure in Broni (Pavia, Northern Italy): An SEM-EDS Study on Autoptic Samples. International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health. 2021. Vol. 18, Iss. 4. ID 2053.
11. World Health Organization. Asbestos: Key facts and overview. 2024. Available at: https://www.who.int/news-room/fact-sheets/detail/asbestos (accessed: 03.05.2025).
12. Chen M., Wang H., Zhang J. et al. Distribution of asbestos enterprises and asbestosis cases — China, 1997–2019. China CDC Weekly. 2020. Vol. 2(19). pp. 305–309.
13. Stayner L., Kuempel E., Gilbert S., Hein M., Dement J. An epidemiological study of the role of chrysotile asbestos fibre dimensions in determining respiratory disease risk in exposed workers. Occupational and Environmental Medicine. 2008. Vol. 65, Iss. 9. pp. 613–619.
14. Feletto E., Kovalevskiy E. V., Schonfeld S. J. et al. Developing a companyspecific job exposure matrix for the Asbest Chrysotile Cohort Study. Occupational and Environmental Medicine. 2021. Vol. 79. pp. 339–346.
15. Kashansky S. V., Slyshkina T. V. Asbestos in water sources of the Bazhenovskoye chrysotile asbestos deposit. International Journal of Occupational Medicine and Environmental Health. 2002. Vol. 15(1). pp. 65–68.
16. Olsson A., Kovalevskiy E. V., Talibov M. et al. Tobacco smoking among chrysotile asbestos workers in Asbest in the Russian Federation. Occupational and Environmental Medicine. 2020. Vol. 77(9). pp. 623–627.
17. Pylev L. N., Kogan F. M., Kulagina T. F. Carcinogenic activity of asbestos cement dust. Gigiena Truda i Professional’nye Zabolevaniya. 1988. Vol. 7. pp. 55–57.
18. Tossavainen A., Kovalevsky E., Vanhala E., Tuomi T. Pulmonary mineral fibers after occupational and environmental exposure to asbestos in the Russian chrysotile industry. American Journal of Industrial Medicine. 2000. Vol. 37(4). pp. 327–333.
19. Ridho F. M., Ghani H. N., Laksono E. P., Faisal A., Nurrahman H. A. Occupational asbestos‑containing materials exposure and risk of asbestosis among construction workers. Jurnal Ilmu Medis Indonesia. 2024. Vol. 3, No. 2. pp. 65–73.
20. Goswami E., Craven V., Dahlstorm D. L., Dominik Alexander, Mowat F. Domestic asbestos exposure: A review of epidemiologic and exposure data. International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health. 2013. Vol. 10, Iss. 11. pp. 5629–5670.
21. Bernstein D. M., Tath B., Rogers R. A. et al. Final results from a 90-day quantitative inhalation toxicology study evaluating the dose-response and fate in the lung and pleura of chrysotile-containing brake dust compared to TiO2, chrysotile, crocidolite or amosite asbestos: Histopathological examination, confocal microscopy and collagen quantification of the lung and pleural cavity. Toxicology and Applied Pharmacology. 2021. Vol. 424. ID 115598.
22. Acheson E. D., Gardner M. J., Pippard E. C., Grime L. P. Mortality of two groups of women who manufactured gas masks from chrysotile and crocidolite asbestos: A 40‑year follow‑up. British Journal of Industrial Medicine. 1984. Vol. 39(4). pp. 344–348.
23. Alpert N., van Gerwen M., Taioli E. Epidemiology of mesothelioma in the 21st century in Europe and the United States, 40 years after restricted/banned asbestos use. Translational Lung Cancer Research. 2020. Vol. 9, S. 1. pp. S28–S38.
24. Pham Van Hoan. Assessment of white asbestos fiber concentration in the working environment: Findings from airborne dust sampling at roofing sheet manufacturing facilities in Vietnam. Vietnam Institute of Industrial and Trade Policy and Strategy. 2024. Available at: https://vioit.moit.gov.vn/en/others/assessment-of-white-asbestos-fiber-concentration-in-theworking-environment--findings-from-airborne-dust-sampling-at-roofing-sheetmanufacturing-facilities-in-vietnam-6278.4134.html (accessed: 03.05.2025).
25. Andujar P., Lacourt A., Brochard P. et al. Five years update on relationships between malignant pleural mesothelioma and exposure to asbestos and other elongated mineral particles. Journal of Toxicology and Environmental Health, Part B. 2016. Vol. 19, Iss. 5–6. pp. 151–172.
26. Boffetta P., Donato F., Pira E., Luu H. N., Vecchia C. L. Risk of mesothelioma after cessation of asbestos exposure: a systematic review and metaregression. International Archives of Occupational and Environmental Health. 2019. Vol. 92. pp. 949–957.