The fourth round of negotiations towards an international convention to control the production, use and trade in persistent organic pollutant (POP)* chemicals ended in virtual stalemate. The meeting which took place in Bonn in March was marred by disagreement on three key issues:
1. Will the goal of the treaty be elimination of POPs or simply long term management?
2. Will the precautionary principle be implemented into the convention in a meaningful manner?
3. Will there be a funding mechanism dedicated to elimination and replacement of POPs in developing countries and countries with economies in transition?
NGOs are seeking strong text to address elimination of POPs, and include the precautionary principle in the Convention. Key countries with a weak position on these aspects include the US, Australia, New Zealand and Russia, while the European Union and most African, Arab and Asian countries support both the elimination goal and strong precautionary language. Many Latin American countries remain undecided.
Developing countries insist that without a dedicated funding mechanism they can do little to eliminate POPs where they are still in use. They also need help in safely disposing of their POPs stockpiles. The industrialised countries claim that existing financial structures such as the Global Environment Fund (GEF) can fulfil this task. This catch 22 could be the downfall of the negotiations. For this reason special inter-sessional meetings of select countries have been called to try and hammer out agreements on a way forward before the next round of negotiations in South Africa this December.
Agreement has not been reached on the approach for DDT, PCBs, dioxins and furans. The continued use of DDT for malaria vector control in a number of tropical countries remains a complicating factor. Several countries have succeeded in replacing DDT with other vector control strategies, but these tend to be expensive and complex to implement.
Disagreements regarding criteria by which additional POPs chemicals would be identified for global elimination remain unresolved as well.
On a positive note PAN North America and WWF hosted an informal IPM panel presentation during INC4, and the draft of the Convention now encourages governments to promote IPM.
More than 80 NGOs from around the world, including many PAN groups, participated in both the official session and a pre-meeting weekend workshop organized by the International POPs Elimination Network.
(MD)
* POPs are a group of chemicals that are toxic, persist in the environment, accumulate in animal tissue and particularly body fat, and can travel great distances. The initial twelve POPs addressed in the treaty are aldrin, chlordane, DDT, dieldrin, endrin, heptachlor, hexachlorobenzene, mirex, toxaphene, PCBs, dioxin and furans.
[This article first appeared in Pesticides News No. 48, June 2000, page 16]