PROCEEDINGS 

First Wittulsberg Symposium on Pesticide Reduction in Developing Countries, 7 – 11 May 2001

Introduction

The Wittulsberg Symposium is an initiative which brings together representatives of regulators, research, universities, technical agencies, trade unions and NGOs, and represents the industrial and developing world with stakeholders from Africa, Central America, South East Asia and Europe. The Group* recognises that Sweden has a lot to offer in terms of expertise from KEMI – the Swedish National Chemicals Inspectorate and other Swedish stakeholders, and potential support from Sida to address pesticide problems.

The objective is to develop recommendations for a multistakeholder approach to reduce pesticide use, risk and dependence; promote the development and implementation of sound regulation of pesticides; and support ecological alternatives to pesticides. The Group expressed concern that the risk assessments which guide pesticide registration decisions in developing countries are based on conditions in industrialised countries and do not take account of the actual conditions of use and exposure to women, men and children and to the environment, in developing countries. 

Brief recommendations discussed over the week have noted the importance of activities and support in relation to:

1. Outreach and dissemination of information
2. Training in Sweden
3. Training overseas
4. Improving policies in relation to pesticide and pest management
5. Stakeholder involvement and increased networking
6. Chemical conventions
7. The role of Sweden in general and KEMI and Sida – The Swedish International Development Cooperation Agency in particular
8. National activities in Costa Rica, Tanzania and Vietnam
9. NGO activities (Pesticide Action Network UK / International Union of Food and Allied Workers’ Associations / Swedish Farm workers Union)
10. Possible enlargement of the group

Specific proposals were:

11. To request KEMI to establish an ask-kemi@kemi.se / www.kemi.se information and advice service
12. To suggest to Sida that this Group could act as a reference group
13. To develop and write proposals for submission to Sida.
14. To meet annually over the next three years.

Visions and reflections

The vision of the Group is that stakeholders should work together to achieve the following:

v    Pesticide policies should aim for minimal pesticide use and be based on the precautionary principle, applying an approach based on a reduction in pesticide use, risk, dependency, and guided by the substitution principle to ensure only the least hazardous products are approved.

v    All countries where pesticides are used must have adequate legislation and regulation covering the import, distribution and use of pesticides, with the capacity to implement and enforce requirements; development agencies should urgently support activities to achieve this objective.

v    Economic measures which externalise the costs of pesticide use need to be investigated, developed and applied and employed as a policy tool in reducing pesticide use.

v    The obsolete stocks of pesticides which have accumulated in many countries in Africa, Asia, Latin America and Eastern Europe need to be urgently disposed of using the safest means available. Pesticide reduction, training, and capacity building is urgent to prevent a build up of future stocks.

v    The social, health and environmental costs of pesticides need to be identified and addressed, recognising the different ways in which women and men may be affected.

v    Research should identify the effects on young and adult women and men of the effect of pesticides on health, and parallel research conducted on the impact of pesticides on the environment, including impacts on biodiversity, and residues in water, soil and food.

v    Monitoring of the health and environmental exposure of pesticides needs to be carried out on a regular basis to assess the impacts and changes over time.

v    Information flow needs to be improved at bilateral and multilateral levels and to the field. Internationally accessible databases which assist the flow of relevant information need to be developed and supported.

v    Risk analyses, where used as a guide to pesticide registration, should be based on actual levels of health and environmental exposure under the conditions of use.

v    Integrated Pest Management (IPM) and organic agricultural strategies should be promoted:  appropriate training of farmers, agricultural workers, and producers should be supported, particularly making use of the Farmer Field School (FFS) approach.

v    Support should be given to agricultural research which takes a ‘farmer first’ approach working with farmers and ensuring that research can be quickly and easily made available.

v    To reduce risks, training (including increased training of trainers) in pesticide use and management is important at all levels, including training of the women and men agricultural workers, farmers and others using, distributing, storing or otherwise managing pesticides.

v    Exposure to pesticides needs to be reduced through all available means, particularly application technology, use of closed systems and, as a last resort, use of effective personal protective equipment.

v    Methods of disseminating information and knowledge of pesticide use and safety measures to end users – women and men agricultural workers, small scale farmers and others – must be put in place.

v    Public awareness of agricultural pollution and of the health and environmental costs of pesticides is essential, both in developing and industrialised countries, including increasing the knowledge of the impacts along the food chain, from field to consumer.

v    Development agencies should consider, as a matter of urgency, supporting pesticide reduction through capacity development in pesticide reduction in developing countries, and extend support to relevant public interest NGOs and trades unions.

v    Development agencies should promote, through the projects they support, the same standards in developing countries as are acceptable in Europe. Aid should be prioritised to the urgent actions needed to achieve these ends and be a condition when supporting any scientific, technical and research bodies.

v    Development agencies should compile, make publicly available and draw on successful and relevant experiences from projects they support.

Expansion

The Group felt it was too early to expand the stakeholder group to bring in other individuals or countries from the regions, this would add to complexity and cost. However a representative from an Eastern European country would be welcome. Networks exist in all regions and each region, and stakeholders are involved in these: 

• East African Community:  Kenya, Tanzania, Uganda 
• Central American group:  Belize, Colombia, Costa Rica, El Salvador, Guatemala, Honduras, Nicaragua, Panama, and the Caribbean 
• South East Asia:  Brunei, Cambodia, Laos, Malaysia, Myanmar, Philippines, Singapore, Thailand, Vietnam. Formal grouping for free movement of people and trade, with an annual meeting of Ministers of Agriculture.
• Unions: Swedish Farm workers Union (SLF) is part of the International Union of Food and Agricultural Workers (IUF), with a Global Pesticide Project (GPP) at present focusing on Africa but expanding.
• Pesticide Action Network: Regional coordinators of the five (Africa, Asia and the Pacific, Europe, Latin America, North America) independent regions meet annually. International conference once every three years (next May 2003). Joint projects on issues.

Priorities

The Group should generate activities. The Group recognises that South « South and South ® North links are as important to promote as North ® South.  A joint proposal to Sida should be formulated by regulators from Tanzania and Vietnam, research workers from Vietnam and Costa Rica, KEMI as technical agency, IUF and SLF as trade unions, and PAN UK as NGO.

The Group believed that KEMI has an important role to play in capacity building, in particular:

• offer an email service to provide advice via:  ask-kemi@kemi.se / www.kemi.se
• offer training in pesticide policy, regulation, registration and risk assessment
• provide coordination for a joint approach

Identified and present country and NGO priorities are:

Costa Rica

1. A new National Profile that collects information and establishes priorities: may be able to initiate through a request from the Ombudsman.
2. Environmental and health research, using the results for public awareness and adequate policymaking.
3. Change in pesticide policy: help from KEMI, IUF, PAN would be welcome.
4. Establish a course on risk assessment for the Central American region (NB project in development with the National Institute for Working Life).
5. Monitoring human and environmental exposure to pesticides.

Tanzania

A report of this meeting/study tour might make new recommendations, but the immediate priorities as identified in the National Profile are:

1. Create awareness – many of the problems encountered are a result of lack of awareness at many levels.
2. Existing programmes in Tanzania are not coordinated leading to duplication, gaps and poor use of resources. Any recommendations should go to strengthening the coordination process now being developed.
3. Re-evaluation of registered active ingredients in Tanzania using the substitution principle.

Vietnam

1. Improve and enforce pesticide legislation; develop ordinances on disposal of obsolete pesticides; adopt the substitution principle to remove WHO Ia and Ib pesticides and nationally or internationally restricted pesticides;
2. Improve facilities and human resource capacities: training staff, increasing laboratory facilities for quality control, and residue analysis;
3. Awareness raising in the community; national forum for chemical risk reduction; commitment to reduce effects on humans and the environment;
4. National programme on pesticide risk reduction, including promoting alternatives – strengthen the national IPM programme

Pesticide Action Network UK

PAN priorities are elimination of hazardous pesticides, promotion of alternatives, and sound regulation of pesticides in use. Current international campaign priorities are:

1. Disposing of obsolete pesticide stocks and prevention strategies.
2. Implementation of the international conventions on PIC and POPs, and other international initiatives such as the International Code of Conduct on the Distribution and Use of Pesticides, and the IFCS programme, in the context of pesticide reduction.
3. Supporting policies and practices that demonstrate alternatives
4. Disposing of obsolete pesticide stocks.
5. PAN UK will publish the proceedings on their website (www.pan-uk.org)

Swedish Farm workers Union / International Union of Food and Allied Workers’ Associations

1. The IUF Global Pesticide Project (GPP) is working for pesticide risk reduction, including worker training in using pesticides as carried out by industry and employers, and union training in IPM to enable negotiators to argue for alternatives.
2. GPP adopts a tripartite approach, bringing together workers, industry and government, and promotes a vision that the economy, the environment, and social welfare need to reinforce improved standards.
3. GPP is lobbying for recognition of the problems in the new ILO convention on health and safety in agriculture.
4. SLF will explore the feasibility of including Costa Rica and Vietnam in their training activities.

Tentative meeting schedule

The Group agreed to continue email correspondence and to develop a joint proposal, supported with an annual meeting. The proposal should be ready before the next meeting.  Possible schedule for meeting could be:

• Tanzania 2002
• Vietnam, May 2003 (to coincide with the next PAN International meeting in Malaysia)
• Costa Rica 2004 (to coincide with IRET’s proposed second International Conference on Pesticides)

Funding

Sida has contracted KEMI to draft a pesticide policy to guide Sida’s  future development and funding priorities.  KEMI in turn contracted Johan Mörner and the Group provided guidance on priorities, as set out above.

The Swedish National Institute for Working Life in collaboration with KEMI has applied to Sida for funding of an international course in pesticide policies and management.

Countries could develop an action plan and approach Swedish Embassies (particularly   Sida Embassies) in around 20 countries, including Tanzania (Dar Es Salaam), Vietnam (Hanoi) and for Costa Rica Nicaragua (Managua).  NGO and trade union action plans can also be developed.  For NGO activities on pesticides, the route is through the Swedish Society for Nature Conservation (SNF), or if the programme is large enough it could be negotiated directly with Sida (as has been done recently with GRAIN). 

The Group should collaborate through KEMI with the Swedish labour union Agrifack/SACO (Swedish Confederation of Professional Associations) with a view to disseminating information to their members, and also as an alternative means of raising funds for future activities.