logo white

e-Toolkit

Silicosis and dust-related diseases

A note from our CEO
Section I: Taking action to eliminate silicosis and dust-related diseases
Ideal management approaches
National action plans and strategies for silicosis/dust diseases
Section II: Country summaries, case studies and resources
Silica country summaries – Australia
Silica country summaries – International
Pneumoconiosis case studies
Research on silicosis and dust-related diseases
Section III: What silica and other occupational dusts are and the risks they pose
Mineralogical features of silica
Other dust/fume-related exposures
Exposure pathways
Historical progression of silica and other dust-related diseases
Section IV: Health impacts of exposure to asbestos
What are dust/fume-related diseases?
How are dust-related diseases diagnosed?
Clinical features of silicosis and other dust-related diseases
Patient support, care and information
Reporting, coding and registration of occupational dust-related diseases

Australia: Opening the policy window: How Australia banned engineered stone

Abstract

Objective

This case study applies Kingdon’s multiple streams framework (MSF) to analyse Australia’s world-first decision to ban engineered stone (ES) and addresses the following questions: How did the ES silicosis crisis become a priority on the policy agenda, and how did problem framing, proposed solutions, and political factors converge to enable the ban?

Type of program

The program discussed in this paper involves the regulatory intervention of banning siliceous ES, a significant occupational health policy reform aimed at preventing silicosis, an irreversible lung disease caused by silica exposure in the workplace. The ban, which took effect on 1 July 2024, is part of a broader initiative to protect workers, especially in industries involving ES processing, from the harmful effects of respirable crystalline silica.

Methods

A qualitative case study approach was used. Data sources included government reports, regulatory consultations, media coverage, advocacy materials, and expert insights from stakeholders involved in the reform process. Thematic analysis was structured around MSF’s three streams: problem, policy, and politics.

Results

The analysis reveals that the problem stream was driven by framing the rapid rise of accelerated silicosis in the ES industry as a preventable ‘public health emergency’ disproportionately affecting young Australian workers. The policy stream, led by Safe Work Australia (SWA), featured the evolution and introduction of policy options shaped by sustained advocacy from unions, professional bodies, and researchers. In the political stream, bipartisan support, minimal industry resistance, and low economic impact facilitated the political appetite for change. The convergence of these three streams created ‘a window of opportunity’ that enabled the successful policy reform.

Lessons learnt

This case highlights that policy change can occur when evidence, political conditions, and advocacy efforts align. Strategic problem framing, limited industry resistance, and political feasibility were key enablers. The study reinforces the value of Kingdon’s framework for understanding how diverse efforts can converge to create a window for meaningful occupational health reform.

Reference

Opening the policy window: how Australia banned engineered stone

Yonatal Tefera, Kate Cole, Chandnee Ramkissoon, Dino Pisaniello, Shelley Rowett, Sharyn Gaskin, Mija Coad, Neha Kishan Lalchandani, Carmel Williams

Public Health Res Pract. 2025 Dec 10;35(4):PU25031.

DOI: 10.1071/PU25031

Read more

Sign up to our newsletter

Sign up
Skip to content