Three deadly pesticides targeted for control 

A committee of government-appointed experts meeting in Geneva in February concluded that three widely-used pesticides should be added to the international list of chemicals in the Prior Informed Consent (PIC) procedure, making them subject to trade controls. 

Monocrotophos was the first target of the 24 scientific experts, who agreed last year that the bans in Australia and Hungary met the criteria of the Rotterdam Convention on PIC. This insecticide is applied in many developing countries to control insects and spider mites on cotton, citrus, rice, maize and other crops. It is actively traded and is manufactured by more than a dozen firms, almost all in Asia. 
    The Decision Guidance Document prepared by an Australian team was accepted at this meeting of the Convention’s Interim Chemical Review Committee (ICRC). Monocrotophos can now go forward to governments at the International Negotiating Committee meeting in Bonn from 30 September to 4 October this year, where it could be added to the other 26 pesticides on the PIC list. Once listed, governments are requested to indicate whether they allow or prohibit import. Exporting countries undertake to ensure that their industries comply with these decisions.
    Monocrotophos is widely used, and poses an acute hazard to hundreds of thousands of farm workers, particularly in developing countries where the lack of protective clothing and mechanical equipment makes it more likely that people will come in direct contact with chemicals. Medical effects include nausea, diarrhoea, blurred vision and, in severe cases, respiratory depression, convulsions and death. The Hungarian ban was based on studies suggesting that over the 25 years of its use there, monocrotophos caused more damage to wild birds than any other pesticide. 
    Controlling this pesticide is a major achievement, and highlights concerns over the problem of cheap organophosphates. The experts’ decision reconfirms the right to make trade judgments on the basis of how a pesticide is actually used in the field, rather than on the basis of the manufacturer’s instructions.

First ‘severely hazardous pesticide formulation’ notified
The Committee has also launched the process for listing two pesticides, Granox TBC and Spinox T, formulated in Senegal by SPIA. Similar formulations are sold in nearby Gambia and Mali. 
    A ‘severely hazardous pesticide formulation’, requires only one notifying country, and no risk evaluation, to start the listing process. Such formulations can be included in PIC when there is evidence that they cause problems in developing countries and countries with economies in transition. 
    Suspicious of growing reports of illnesses and deaths in one part of the country in the 2000 groundnut season(1) (see also PN 51 March 2001), the Senegal government mapped incidents of rural poisoning. Its investigations pointed the finger at Granox TBC and Spinox T, powdered formulations of the fungicides thiram (15%), benomyl (7%) and the highly toxic insecticide carbofuran (10%). 
    The government and a WHO study(2) found that close contact with the product had led to hundreds of cases of poisoning, fevers, chest and abdominal pains, vomiting, insomnia – and over 20 deaths. Oedema of the limbs was common, but likely to follow lung oedema which cannot be observed externally. All farmers suffering the symptoms had been exposed to this formulation, while farmers who had not been exposed were not affected. Indications were that the major poison was the powdered form of carbofuran. The PIC Secretariat sought information from other countries, and none of those responding (25 countries and the EU) registers powdered carbofuran formulations. A US EPA paper indicated the importance of considering the whole formulation, pointing out that thiram is a sensitizer in humans(3). 
    In developed countries seeds are often treated and planted mechanically, thus protecting farmers from contact. Farmers in Senegal mix groundnut seeds with Granox or Spinox, and while planting farmers plunge their hands periodically into the seed/pesticide mix to clear blockages in the seeder. Farmers work without protective clothing, which is unavailable, expensive and generally inappropriate.
    The notification by Senegal, and its acceptance by scientific experts as valid, is a landmark. Pesticides causing death and ill-health in developing countries are often not those banned or severely restricted in industrialised countries. Information sharing is crucial to alert other governments to the dangers of certain formulations, and may pave the way for further notifications.

Other chemicals identified 
A third pesticide identified at the ICRC meeting was DNOC, which is highly toxic to humans and poses a high risk to other organisms. Once widely used, it qualified for consideration in PIC as a result of a ban in both Peru and the European Union. Experts also agreed that two notifications for asbestos met the criteria of the Convention, bringing into PIC the sixth industrial chemical.

Progress on notifications 
Governments are required by the Convention to inform the Secretariat of their bans and severe restrictions. Between June 2000 and December 2001, the Secretariat received 197 notifications, with all 63 notifications sent in during 2001 verified to fulfill requirements – an improvement on the previous situation where only around half qualified. Virtually all the recent notifications (61 of 63) cover pesticides or chemicals not already subject to PIC. 
    Notification is the first stage in considering whether the government control actions meet the criteria for inclusion in PIC. A useful table prepared for the ICRC contains a list of all notifications since 1990, broken down by region and whether they meet criteria for listing(4). The total is 99 notifications, of which 38 appear to be a valid ban or severe restriction for PIC listing, but in the majority of cases the action has been taken in only one region, whereas the Convention requires two.
    One concern is that the import response rate is low, with only 50% of chemicals receiving an indication from governments of whether they prohibit or consent to continued import. 

Slow progress in ratification 
The international community adopted the Rotterdam Convention in 1998 under the auspices of the UN Environment Programme (UNEP) and the Food and Agriculture Organization of the UN (FAO). The Convention has been ratified by 18 countries and will enter into force 90 days after the fiftieth ratification. In the interim governments have agreed to apply the PIC provisions of the Convention on a voluntary basis. There remains the hope that 50 governments will ratify PIC before the World Summit on Sustainable Development later this year. (BD)

1. PAN Africa, Pesticides and Alternatives, No 12, November 2000.
2. Santo, EGE, Marrama, L, Ndiaye, K, Coly, M, Diagne, D, Ndour, P, Ba, O, Report of the Research on the Epidemic of an Unknown Etiologic Illness in Kolda, December 2000, UNEP/FAO/PIC/ICRC.3/17.Add3, 28 January 2002.
3. Review of Proposals for Severely Hazardous Pesticide Formulations: Comments received from the representative designated by the US, UNEP/FAO/PIC/ICRC.3/CRP6, February 2002.
4. Prioritization of Work on Old Notifications of Final Regulatory Action to Ban or Severely Restrict a Chemical, UNEP/FAO/PIC/ICRC.3/8, 28 November 2001.

[This article first appeared in Pesticides News No. 55, March 2002, page 16]