The BRS Secretariat will participate in the sixth meeting of the Conference of the Parties to the Minamata Convention (COP-6) to be held from 3 to 7 November 2025, in Geneva, Switzerland.

The BRS Secretariat, which participates in the meeting as an observer, will monitor and contribute as appropriate to the deliberations of the Minamata Convention COP-6 regarding a number of items on the agenda that are relevant to the BRS conventions, including:

• Item 5: International cooperation and coordination: The COP will consider the cooperation and coordination between the Minamata Convention and the BRS conventions on a broad range of programmatic and administrative issues to advance shared goals on addressing pollution; 

• Item 4(d): Waste: The COP will consider, among other things, the decision of the Basel Convention COP-17 to update the technical guidelines on mercury wastes to reflect the threshold for mercury wastes established in decision MC-5/10;    

• Item 4(a): Mercury supply sources and trade: The COP will examine measures to control mercury supply and trade, including illegal trade of mercury and trade of mercury compounds. Among the possible outcomes, the COP may request cooperation with other MEAs, including their compliance committees, to support Parties in preventing and combating illegal trade of mercury.

The BRS Secretariat will also take part in various events, such as knowledge labs, to showcase the technical, policy and awareness raising work done under the conventions that contributes to the Minamata Convention’s goals. It will further contribute to discussions on the benefits of, and possible approaches to, strengthening cooperation among MEAs and with other bodies to address the triple planetary crises of climate change, biodiversity loss and pollution.

BRS engagements at the COP-6:

• Monday, 3 November, 13:15 - 14:30, Special Event: “Driving Effective and Inclusive Implementation of the Minamata Convention on Mercury”, Room A
• Tuesday, 4 November at 18:00 – 18:45, Knowledge Lab: “InforMEA in Action: Supporting Minamata Convention Implementation through Digital Tools and Legal Transparency”, Location: Space A, Level 0
• Thursday, 6 November, 14:00–14:45, Knowledge Lab: “Informing Integrated Chemicals Management: Data Needs and Experience from Mercury”, Location: Space B, Level 0
• Friday, 7 November, 14:00–14:45, Knowledge Lab, “Mercury Wastes Management in countries: latest advances and experience in protecting human health and the Environment”, Location: Space A, Level 0

As the Persistent Organic Pollutants Review Committee (POPRC) marks another milestone in its work under the Stockholm Convention, having just finished its twenty-first meeting in Rome, we take a moment to reflect on some of the key moments of its outgoing Chair, Peter Dawson. In this interview, we explore the Chair’s reflections, insights, and hopes for the future of POPRC.

Q: After six years of serving as chair of the POPRC, what have been some of your proudest achievements? 

Peter: There are a number of things over the past six years that I think POPRC can be proud of, and that I personally am proud of. Firstly, there is the number of new chemicals the Committee has assessed and which the COP has gone on to list as POPs. There were six of these including some of the most complex substances the Committee has considered to date, such as Dechlorane Plus, UV-328 and the medium-chain chlorinated paraffins (MCCPs). This continued the record of the COP adopting all of the chemicals that the POPRC has recommended to it that should be listed as POPs.

Then there is the work we have done on developing guidance or framework material to assist the Committee, and indeed the Convention, to operate in a more effective and efficient way. This includes the development of the report on long-range environmental transport and how the Committee has considered evidence in respect of this in past deliberations in order to improve the understanding and more consistent approach to this, and this included consideration of complex matters such as the influence of local sources on levels of POPs in remote regions and of the potential for long-range transport of POPs as part of plastic debris in the oceans.

Then there was the report on POPs in stockpiles, products and articles in use, and in wastes, and particularly how to identify these. This work has become more important as the nature and complexity of the substances being considered as POPs has increased. This work is ongoing and has expanded to look at how we can more effectively engage with stakeholders to enhance the information we use in the Annex F risk management evaluation stage and how this can be used to develop more complete, robust recommendations to COP.

Then, just at this last meeting, we considered how the Committee can effectively engage with and assist the work of the Global Coordination Group of the Global Monitoring Plan which is another critical part of the Stockholm Convention. I think if the Committee can continue to engage and cooperate with the GMP work this will only help enhance the success of the Stockholm Convention. Another thing I am very happy with after the last six years is how we have increased the engagement with and inclusion of observers. Again, this has been particularly important for the consideration of the industrial chemicals we have considered over this period, and their complex uses and supply chains. I have always been very appreciative of the inputs of the observers.

Q:  How has the scientific landscape around persistent organic pollutants evolved since you have been chair of Committee?

Peter: The complexity of the chemicals being considered by the Committee has increased considerably, in not only the description, scope and identity of the substance, as we saw with the consideration of the MCCPs, but also the range of uses and given that these substances are also still currently used, the number and length of specific exemptions and the phase out times needed. DecaBDE, Dechlorane Plus, UV-328, and particularly the MCCPs which is probably the most complex listing recommendation ever put forward by the POPRC, are all examples of this. As we heard from industry side events at the last POPRC meeting, these types of substances can be used in a myriad of plastic and polymer materials, and the supply chains before the production of the final article, such as a motor vehicle or an aeroplane, is mind-boggling. There can be many tiers of suppliers and thousands of companies supplying components before you get to the final product. This makes the process of identifying whether a POP is in a particular end product extremely complex and demonstrates the need for the work I mentioned above on identification of POPs in articles and on the better engagement with stakeholders. The international landscape relating to the management of chemicals and wastes has become more complex in recent times with the establishment of the Global Framework on Chemicals and the work underway to develop the Science-Policy Panel on chemicals and wastes and the negotiations to develop a global treaty on plastic pollution. It is necessary there is enhanced cooperation and coordination between the BRS Conventions and these other initiatives in order to get the most effective and efficient outcomes – there is a long way to go to truly get the benefits of synergies across all the related United Nations activities in this area.

Q:  What were some of the most challenging decisions or debates the committee faced, and how did you navigate them?

Peter: Firstly, there were the logistical challenges with the meetings that were affected by Covid-19. My first meeting as Chair was POPRC-16 and this was postponed from 2020 until January 2021 in the hope that the pandemic would have passed by then which in hindsight was rather optimistic. The meeting went ahead but online and given the 12-hour time difference between New Zealand and Geneva, it meant I had to chair the meeting from about 9.30pm each day until around 6am the following day, for six days in a row. I still remember starting the day’s sessions just when the sun was setting and closing the meeting for the day when the sun was just rising again! Then POPRC-17 could also not be held as scheduled in Rome in 2021 but was rescheduled for Geneva in January 2022 and was held in a hybrid fashion with some members participating online which introduced its own challenges. POPRC-18 then followed in September 2022 in Rome, but this only allowed eight months for the intersessional work which was also challenging. In terms of challenging decisions or debates, these were mostly handled using a transparent, inclusive, precautionary and science-based approach. In several cases where the Committee was not able to reach consensus on a decision then it was deferred until the following meeting to allow further evidence to be gathered and analysed and discussed. If there was one decision that I had regrets over, then it would be on the risk profile for Dechlorane Plus which I rather pushed through at the second meeting it was considered despite the misgivings of some very experienced members of the Committee. But this was during that Covid period where, as mentioned above, there were a number of challenges.

Q: What’s next for you?

Peter: There is still some unfinished work with POPRC on the follow-up to the report on POPs in stockpiles, products and articles in use and in wastes, and the consideration of ways of enhancing the engagement with stakeholders and the submission of information specified in Annex F to the Convention. Then there is more work to do with the Technical Guidelines on POPs wastes, including the establishment of low-POP content values under the Basel Convention and the work on the revision of the Annexes to the Basel Convention. Also, following the discussions at the recent POPRC meeting, I am encouraged to take some more interest in the work under the Global Monitoring Plan of the Stockholm Convention.

Magdalena Frydrych from Poland has been made the new interim Chair for the Committee, taking up the office from 5 May 2026.

As her time as Chair of the Chemical Review Committee (CRC) of the Rotterdam Convention comes to a close, Noluzuko “Zukie” Gwayi shares her reflections on the achievements, challenges, and lessons learned over the past eight years. 

Q: What do you see as the Committee’s biggest achievements during your time as Chair? 

Zukie: We’ve made significant progress over the years, and I’m proud of what the Committee has achieved. One of the biggest accomplishments was standing firm under pressure. At times, we faced strong opposition from observers who wanted decisions to reflect their interests, even involving political influence. Despite that, the Committee remained committed to fairness and scientific integrity. We also made strides in improving openness and inclusion, allowing observers to participate more meaningfully in a way that strengthened trust and transparency. The workload was intense - we reviewed a large number of notifications of final regulatory action to ban or restrict harmful chemicals and severely hazardous pesticide formulations - but we handled it effectively. Over time, the quality of our work improved, with better preparation and more thorough assessments. Personally, I learned how to navigate complex political dynamics and manage diverging views of Committee members and observers from governments or industry. These experiences weren’t always easy, but they were essential. I believe all of this has helped lay a strong foundation for the next Chair to build on and continue advancing the Committee’s important mission. 

Q: What were some of the toughest cases the Committee had to deal with? 

Zukie: COVID-19 made things harder. We had to train new members and hold meetings online, which wasn’t ideal – especially for those new to the CRC. Some of the most complex cases involved proposals based on national surveys or reviews, especially from developing countries. These didn’t always include detailed risk assessments, which some members from developed countries expected. I had to explain that risk evaluations, not full assessments, are acceptable under CRC rules, and that the conditions prevailing in a country cannot be ignored. 

Sometimes, the documentation we received wasn’t clear, and members had to understand the reasoning behind a country’s decision to ban or restrict a chemical. This led to disagreements within the Committee, and it was my role to remind everyone of the criteria we’re supposed to follow. In some cases, I spoke with Committee members privately, without observers present, to make sure we stayed focused and didn’t let outside pressure influence our decisions. 

Q: How has global chemical management changed during your time on the Committee? What trends do you see shaping the future? 

Zukie: 
The COVID-19 pandemic hit economies hard, and many countries are still recovering. One worrying trend is that the production of highly toxic and long-lasting chemicals is shifting to the Global South, regions that often lack strong safety systems to manage these substances properly. Many of these chemicals are already banned or restricted in the Global North, but they’re still being used in the South, where regulations and enforcement are weaker. At the same time, populations in these regions are growing fast, and so is the demand for food. This has led to increased use of pesticides, many of which are very toxic, persistent, and can disrupt hormones. On the positive side, more countries are becoming aware of the risks and ask for technical assistance provided by the Secretariat. This means the CRC will likely receive more notifications of final regulatory action and proposals for listing Severely Hazardous Pesticide formulations to review, as countries seek to ban or restrict harmful chemicals. To support this progress, the Rotterdam Convention’s Conference of the Parties should encourage countries and partners to invest in training and resources – especially for countries in the Global South. This would help them better understand chemical safety and submit stronger proposals to the CRC. 

Q: What advice would you give to the new Chair of the Committee? 

Zukie: 
First of all, congratulations to the new Chair! I wish the incoming Chair all the best in this important role. My advice is to remember that leadership in the CRC is a team effort. The Chair should work closely with the Bureau and make good use of their support to help guide decisions. It’s important to understand the weight of the responsibility and ensure that the Committee’s work is always fair, transparent, and of high quality. I recommend taking time to study the CRC Handbook, which offers helpful examples of past decisions, especially for complex or unusual cases. No two proposals are the same, so this resource is invaluable. Attending orientation sessions is also key, even for experienced members, as there’s always something new to learn and ways to grow as a leader. Preparation is crucial; doing the groundwork before meetings, and especially during intersessional and pre-session periods, can make all the difference. The Chair should encourage open and respectful discussions among members and with observers, as this leads to better understanding and stronger outcomes. Lastly, the Chair should feel confident reaching out to the Secretariat whenever needed - they are a rich source of knowledge and experience, and their support is always available. 

The Secretariat of the Basel, Rotterdam and Stockholm (BRS) Conventions proudly welcomes an alpine ski legend and environmental champion as our new BRS Advocate for Clean Mountains and Glaciers!

From the Olympic slopes to the global stage, our new Advocate has long used his voice to call for climate action and sustainable development. Now, our Champion joins the BRS conventions mission to protect our fragile mountain and glacier ecosystems from the growing threat of plastic and chemical pollution.

Did you know? Microplastics and hazardous chemicals are being found from the Alps to the Arctic, carried by wind, water, and tourism. Even outdoor gear can contain Persistent Organic Pollutants (POPs)—posing risks to both nature and human health.

Join us in celebrating this exciting partnership and stay tuned for highlights from the launch event.

Title	Download
Event Programme

Geneva, Switzerland 2 May 2025. India’s Union Minister for Environment, Forest and Climate Change, Shri Bhupender Yadav, addressed the Ministerial Roundtable on the theme “Means of Implementation” at the High-Level Segment of the Conferences of the Parties to the Basel, Rotterdam and Stockholm Conventions (BRS COPs).

Minister Yadav presented a summary of deliberations held with fellow ministers during the roundtable on 30 April highlighting the need for:

• Predictable international financing and progressive domestic resource mobilization (e.g. carbon levies, EPR)
• Innovative financial mechanisms such as green bonds, debt-for-nature swaps, and green loans
• Enabling regulatory frameworks and tax incentives for green technologies
• Strengthened institutions, inter-agency coordination, and data infrastructure
• Tailored support for countries emerging from crisis, with conflict-sensitive programming
• Enhanced regional cooperation and knowledge-sharing through regional centres

H.E. Shri Bhupender Yadav held further discussions with Mr. Rolph Payet, Executive Secretary of Basel, Rotterdam and Stockholm conventions, Ms. Inger Andersen, Executive Director of UNEP, on the plastics treaty (INC-5.2), and leaders of other key Multilateral Environmental Agreements (MEAs), including the CITES, Ramsar, Minamata and World Meteorological Organization Secretariats.

🔗 Read the original press release by the Ministry of Environment, Forest and Climate Change – Government of India (PIB)

Geneva, Switzerland, 2 May 2025 - Over 70 Ministers gathered in Geneva to strengthen global cooperation on the sound management of chemicals and waste through the Basel, Rotterdam and Stockholm conventions.

The high-level segment, held on 30 April and 1 May under the theme “Make Visible the Invisible – Sound management of chemicals and wastes,” brought together global leaders to explore integrated solutions to the triple planetary crisis of pollution, climate change, and biodiversity loss. The event fostered constructive dialogue and strong political engagement, as ministers and senior officials shared national experiences and reaffirmed their commitment to scaling up action on chemicals and waste.

Advancing global commitments

Through dynamic round-table discussions and interactive ministerial panels, the segment highlighted the critical role of the Basel, Rotterdam and Stockholm conventions in building safer, more resilient societies. Participants emphasized the need to strengthen multilateralism, bridge implementation gaps and integrate chemicals and waste management across climate, biodiversity and sustainable development agendas.

“We must also acknowledge that multilateralism is facing challenges. Geopolitical tensions and financial crises can at times weaken our ability to act collectively. That is why this conference – and this high-level segment in particular – are also valuable opportunities to reinforce international dialogue, a space where exchange and trust prevail.”

Katrin Schneeberger, State Secretary Federal Office of Environment, Switzerland

Building on recent global milestones—including the adoption of the Global Framework on Chemicals and progress towards a legally binding instrument on plastics pollution, the high-level segment aimed to accelerate progress by spotlighting three critical areas: Pollution, Circularity, and Means of Implementation.

Pollution: Ministers reaffirmed that pollution, climate change, and biodiversity loss are deeply interconnected and require urgent, coordinated global action. Tackling transboundary pollution and environmental injustice was recognized as a matter of global solidarity and ethical responsibility. They stressed the importance of embedding sound chemicals and waste management in national development frameworks and aligning with global environmental goals.  

The Stockholm convention's work to eliminate persistent organic pollutants (POPs) was cited as a model for success, with strong calls to expand efforts to reduce toxic exposures and protect food security, water systems and vulnerable communities.

Circularity: Leaders underscored the vital role of the Basel, Rotterdam and Stockholm conventions in strengthening legal frameworks, implementing extended producer responsibility (EPR) and reducing hazardous chemicals in product lifecycles.

“The Basel, Rotterdam and Stockholm conventions are essential global legally binding instruments to address pollution at its source, and to drive individual and collective efforts towards resource use efficiency and circularity.  But for them to succeed, implementation must be strengthened. This means having comprehensive legal frameworks, access to scientific information and expertise, and robust enforcement mechanisms.  We must work together to strengthen national capacities and ensure that technical and financial assistance reaches those countries that need it most.”

Mr. Hammad Shamimi, President of the Conference of the Parties to the Rotterdam Convention

Ministers called for stronger national implementation plans that promote recycling, reduce pollution, and use resources more efficiently. They emphasized the importance of laws such as extended producer responsibility schemes that make producers responsible for the full life of their products—including collection and recycling. To drive change, they urged the use of tools like landfill taxes, green purchasing rules, and the creation of Circular Economy Councils, with business involvement in shaping practical, enforceable policies that align with national goals and the Basel, Rotterdam and Stockholm conventions. Ministers further agreed on the need for more technical assistance, clean technology transfer, and the use of digital tools like permits and traceability platforms to improve waste tracking, ensure transparency, and advance global environmental goals.

“When waste or hazardous chemicals are not managed in an environmentally sound manner, people and planet pay the price. We need sustainable solutions that manage chemicals better, support greater circularity, reduce waste, and treat the waste that we do produce as a resource. These multilateral environmental agreements are committed to protecting human health and the environment from hazardous chemicals and wastes.”

Inger Andersen, Executive Director of the United Nations Environment Programme

Means of Implementation: Leaders acknowledged the substantial resources required to meet Convention obligations, welcoming the USD 800 million allocated by the Global Environment Facility (GEF) for the Chemicals and Waste focal area, while recognizing that full implementation of the Stockholm Convention alone would require over USD 18 billion in the next five years.

Ministers called for innovative financing, stronger private sector involvement, and clear rules to support circular business models. They urged countries to combine international and domestic funding tools—like carbon taxes and extended producer responsibility—to drive change. Strong institutions, harmonized implementation of multilateral environmental agreements, regional cooperation, and cross-sector planning were seen as key, especially in low-capacity settings. Support from developed countries through fair trade, technology transfer, and waste solutions was encouraged, along with greater public awareness and digital tools to boost pollution control and environmental protection.

“We now have an opportunity, and an obligation, to demonstrate that environmental commitments – here to eliminate PCBs by 2028 – are meaningful and achievable, including in developing countries. We [World Bank] are therefore again partnering with the GEF, the BRS Secretariat and other GEF implementing agencies to develop a Global Elimination Program for PCBs, which we will launch here [Geneva] with a side event on Thursday 1 May. The first phase will be implemented by the African Development Bank, UNEP, UNDP and the World Bank in 6 African countries and aims to eliminate over 8000 tons of PCB oil supported by 44 million in GEF grant funding plus co-financing. The Program is designed to scale up, and more countries are waiting to join.”

Juergen Voegele, Vice President for Sustainable Development, The World Bank

Ministers also emphasized the need to strengthen the Basel and Stockholm convention regional centres for training and technology transfer to support local implementation, particularly in developing countries, LDCs, and SIDS.

“FAO as one of the hosting organizations of the Rotterdam convention works closely with all stakeholders through its country offices with global coverage. The conventions have come a long way, yet we know that challenges remain - especially in the agricultural sector. Agriculture both contributes to and is affected by climate change, biodiversity loss, and pollution. Therefore, we urgently need to find and scale up solutions that ensure food security and protect human health and the environment. All eyes are on us – some hopeful, some more critical - and expectations are high. We must live up to these expectations and not leave anyone behind.”

Beth Bechdol, Deputy-Director General of the Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations,

The segment concluded with strong consensus on the need to translate new COPs mandates into national action, ensure coherence across international agreements, and foster inclusive implementation at all levels of governance.

“In a nutshell, we cannot address biodiversity loss or climate change unless we tackle pollution by hazardous chemicals and wastes head-on. Protecting our planet requires urgent and coordinated action to reduce hazardous chemicals and promote sound waste management at every level.”

Rolph Payet, Executive Secretary of the Basel, Rotterdam and Stockholm Conventions

NOTES TO EDITORS

The Basel Convention on the Control of Transboundary Movements of Hazardous Wastes and their Disposal, adopted in 1989 and entered into force in 1992, is the most comprehensive international environment treaty on hazardous and other wastes and is almost universal, with 191 Parties. With an overarching objective of protecting human health and the environment against the adverse effects of hazardous wastes, its scope covers a wide range of waste subject to transboundary movements defined as hazardous based on their origin and/or composition and characteristics, as well as four types of waste defined as “other wastes”, namely household waste, residues arising from the incineration of household wastes ash, certain plastic wastes and certain electronic and electrical wastes requiring special consideration.

The Rotterdam Convention on the Prior Informed Consent Procedure (PIC) for Certain Hazardous Chemicals and Pesticides in International Trade, adopted in 1998 and entered into force in 2004, is jointly administered by the United Nations Food and Agriculture Organization (FAO) and UN Environment (UNEP). The 167 Parties to this legally binding Convention share responsibility and cooperate to safely manage chemicals in international trade. The Convention does not introduce bans but facilitates the exchange of information among Parties on hazardous chemicals and pesticides, to inform and improve national decision making. In addition, through the PIC Procedure, it provides a legally binding mechanism to support national decision-making on the import and export of certain chemicals and pesticides and disseminates decisions to Parties.

The Stockholm Convention on Persistent Organic Pollutants, adopted in 2001 and entered into force in 2004, is a global treaty requiring its 186 Parties to take measures to eliminate or reduce the release of POPs into the environment, to protect human health and the environment from chemicals that remain intact for long periods, become widely distributed geographically, accumulate in the fatty tissue of humans and wildlife, and have harmful impacts on human health or on the environment.

The Secretariat of the Basel, Rotterdam, and Stockholm Conventions, or BRS Secretariat, supports Parties implement these three leading multilateral environment agreements governing sound chemicals and waste management, according to the mandates in each Convention and as decided by the governing bodies.

For media enquiries, contact: 

Maria Cristina Cardenas-Fischer, Head of Unit and Senior Policy and Strategy Advisor, Policy and Strategy Unit, Executive Office, BRS Secretariat, maria-cristina.cardenas@un.org and mea-brs-communications@un.org.