|
Intervention during the G20 Ministerial Meeting of the Environment and Climate Sustainability Working Group the Ministerial Meeting
By: Mr. Rolph Payet, Executive Secretary, 3 October 2024, Rio de Janeiro, Brazil
Excellency Minister Marina Silva
Ministers, Excellencies,
Distinguished participants,
It is an honour to address this Ministerial Meeting of the G20 Environment and Climate Sustainability Working Group.
I extend my sincere gratitude to the Brazilian Presidency and for prioritizing Waste Management and Circular Economy as well as commend the G20 member states and invited countries for their commitments to take decisive actions.
As indicated by Inger Andersen, ED of UNEP earlier today, we also need to give attention to multilateral agreements addressing the pollution crisis, such as the Montreal Protocol, Minamata Convention, and the Basel, Rotterdam and Stockholm Conventions.
Waste management remains an enormous global challenge, with 2.7 billion people lacking proper collection services and 40% of municipal solid waste not properly managed worldwide. Poor waste management contributes up to 17% of global greenhouse gas emissions, and 22 million tons of plastic wastes into the oceans every year. This crisis is expected to worsen, if there is little or no action, with municipal waste generation projected to increase by 56% by 2050.
Aside the environmental and health benefits of pollution reduction, we know that many waste streams can be a valuable resource in the transition towards a circular economy.
It is, therefore, essential to continue emphasizing the pollution agenda and its solutions to address other pressing environmental challenges like climate change, biodiversity loss and ocean conservation.
The Secretariat of the Basel, Rotterdam and Stockholm Conventions will have its triple conference of the Parties from 28 April to 9 May 2025, and priority wastes streams, such as plastic wastes; e-wastes; household waste; batteries will be addressed, as well as consideration of new dangerous chemicals may be listed for elimination or stricter control.
Under the theme “Make Visible the Invisible”, the High-Level Segment will bring together ministers to guide the future of the world’s efforts to protect human health and the environment from hazardous chemicals and wastes. I thus warmly extend the invitation to all ministers and high-level government representative present today to attend the High-Level Segment during the 2025 BRS COPs.
In closing, I once again thank the G20 for its leadership to these vital global issues.
|
|
Just before the start of the 20th meeting of the Chemical Review Committee (CRC), we talked to Christine Fuell, Senior Technical Officer and Team Leader in FAO’s Plant Production and Protection Division (NSP) and Executive Secretary ad interim of the Rotterdam Convention.
Countdown to the 20th meeting of the Chemical Review Committee
13/09/2024
Just before the start of the 20th meeting of the Chemical Review Committee (CRC), we talked to Christine Fuell, Senior Technical Officer and Team Leader in FAO’s Plant Production and Protection Division (NSP) and Executive Secretary ad interim of the Rotterdam Convention.
The Chemical Review Committee in a nutshell?
The Chemicals Review Committee (CRC) is composed of 31 government-designated experts in chemicals management, appointed by the Conference of the Parties (COP) to the Convention, the highest authority of the Rotterdam Convention, which consists of all Parties to the Convention. The CRC includes members from different regions to ensure a balanced representation of developed and developing countries or countries with an economy in transition. However, members are not representing their countries but their expertise in the field of chemicals management.
The Committee reviews final regulatory actions (FRAs) related to pesticides and chemicals taken by parties to the Convention and notified to the Secretariat. These national bans or severe restrictions taken by parties must be based on a risk evaluation, and their aim must be the protection of human health or the environment.
What will this Chemical Review Committee meeting be about?
The 20th meeting of the Chemical Review Committee, on 17-20 September 2024 in Rome, is scheduled to review up to 33 notifications of final regulatory actions – a number never seen before! In addition, the Committee will also review four proposals for severely hazardous pesticide formulations. These are proposals made by developing countries or countries with an economy in transition that face significant health or environmental problems with these pesticide formulations under their specific conditions of use, including social, economic and climatic. And the Committee will also continue reviewing notifications of final regulatory action on chemicals such as carbaryl, chlorfenvinphos, ethion, methidathion and thiodicarb, which were discussed but not completed in the previous meeting. According to the Rules of Procedure, such items need to be again on the agenda of the next meeting.
Finally, the Committee will discuss draft decision guidance documents (DGDs) for chlorpyrifos and mercury, already recommended for listing in Annex III at the previous meeting. The expectation is to finalize these draft DGDs for consideration by the Conference of the Parties at its 12th meeting (COP12) in May 2025, who will then decide on the listing in Annex III.
What about this pesticide chlorpyrifos to be discussed by COP in 2025?
Chlorpyrifos is an organophosphate pesticide, an insecticide commonly used in agriculture to control pests on a variety of crops. It has been linked to adverse health effects, including neurodevelopmental issues in children and potential risks to farmworkers and wildlife. Various countries have taken regulatory actions to ban or severely restrict the use of chlorpyrifos.
The inclusion of chlorpyrifos in Annex III would make it subject to the so-called Prior Informed Consent or PIC procedure, enabling all Parties to take an informed decision on whether they want to use, and thus potentially import the pesticide. Such global cooperation aims to manage and mitigate risks, protecting both human health and the environment.
It’s going to be a busy week!
We will organize a session of an interactive game aimed at raising awareness on the objectives of the Basel, Rotterdam and Stockholm Conventions developed by the Secretariat to loosen up a bit. The game introduces the topic of chemical safety to a younger audience and is based on the idea of escape games.
This will be the fun part of the meeting.
|
|
A joint op-ed by the Executive Secretaries of the Basel, Rotterdam and Stockholm Conventions Secretariat and the Convention on Biological Diversity.
International Day for Biological Diversity 2022: Building a shared future for all life
by the Executive Secretary of the Basel, Rotterdam and Stockholm Conventions, Rolph Payet, and the Executive Secretary of the Convention on Biological Diversity, Elizabeth Maruma Mrema
“There was a strange stillness. The birds, for example – where had they gone? Many people spoke of them, puzzled and disturbed. The feeding stations in the backyards were deserted. The few birds seen anywhere were moribund; they trembled violently and could not fly. It was a spring without voices. On the mornings that had once throbbed with the dawn chorus of robins, catbirds, doves, jays, wrens, and scores of other bird voices there was now no sound; only silence lay over the fields and woods and marsh.”
(Rachel Carson, The Silent Spring, 1962)
Sixty years after the publication of Rachel Carson’s book, pollution remains one of the main drivers of biodiversity loss. However, several multilateral environmental agreements (MEAs) have helped to prevent damage on a larger scale. A study commissioned by the Basel, Rotterdam, Stockholm, and Minamata Conventions on how, through regulation and sound management of chemicals and waste, these agreements have contributed to the conservation and sustainable use of biodiversity and the services provided by ecosystems highlights just that!
The effects of the exposure of hazardous chemicals and wastes on biodiversity has been extensively documented for animal species - resident, sedentary and migratory - in air, land and water bodies. The non-exhaustive list of impacts includes the decline of bees and other pollinators; reproduction in migratory species of animals by hazardous pesticides, and the physiological, behavioral and reproductive impacts on many fish and other species of wildlife affected by bioaccumulation of Persistent Organic Pollutants (POPs). Other effects include the adulteration of the aquatic biota, including aquatic vascular plants, seagrasses, algae and other water plants; fish, crabs and mussels; and the population declines of Baltic seals, bottle-nosed and striped dolphins and killer whales. All these are associated with exposure to hazardous chemicals and wastes, including POPs. And more than 800 marine and coastal species are impacted by plastic pollution through ingestion, entanglement, ghost fishing and dispersal by rafting, as well as by the effects of plastic pollution on their habitats. Unfortunately, less is known about the effects of microplastics and nanoplastics, although nanoplastics have been observed to enter the cells of organisms.
Having listened to the science, the international community rose to the challenge and adopted four binding MEAs to protect human health and the environment from hazardous chemicals and wastes. These are: the 1989 Basel Convention on the Control of Transboundary Movements of Hazardous Wastes and Their Disposal; the 1998 Rotterdam Convention on the Prior Informed Consent Procedure for certain Hazardous Chemicals and Pesticides in International Trade; the 2001 Stockholm Convention on Persistent Organic Pollutants (POPs); and the 2013 Minamata Convention on Mercury. In addition, the non-binding Strategic Approach to International Chemicals Management (SAICM) aimed at a goal of achieving by 2020 the sound management of chemicals throughout their life cycle, by focusing on important chemicals and waste issues not covered by the above MEAs or the Montreal Protocol on Ozone-Depleting Substances. That agreement is now in the process of being updated. Furthermore, the 1992 Convention on Biological Diversity (CBD) with its three objectives of ensuring the conservation of biodiversity, the sustainable use of its components, and the fair and equitable sharing of benefits arising from the utilization of genetic resources, will not be fully attained without its effective contribution to the goals of the above binding and non-binding instruments.
Progress has been made as a result of the implementation of these agreements, for example, primary emissions of legacy POPs listed in the Annexes A, B and C to the Stockholm Convention are declining. The concentrations measured in air and in human populations have declined and continue to decline or remain at low levels. Concentrations of brominated diphenyl ethers (BDEs) and perfluorooctane sulfonic acid (PFOS)are beginning to show decreases even though in a few instances, increases and/or stable levels are observed. Dichloro-diphenyl-trichloroethane (DDT) best known for its egg-shell thinning among birds, especially birds of prey, has been restricted to use for disease vector control only.
Under the Basel Convention, Parties have been supported to minimize the generation of toxic wastes; manage the waste covered under the Convention generated in an environmentally sound manner; and minimize transboundary movements of wastes, in particular to avoid trade that involves movements of wastes to countries unable to manage them or that do not agree to receive such imports. Under the Rotterdam Convention, Parties have been provided with information to enable informed decision-making on the import of hazardous pesticides and industrial chemicals that, among others, impact on biodiversity. Under the Minamata Convention, Parties have been supported to reduce or eliminate their anthropogenic emissions of mercury, including in the Artisanal and Small-Scale Mining Sector (ASGM) which are the single biggest source of mercury releases to soil and often take place in biodiverse and sensitive ecosystems around the world. Finally, under the CBD, despite the increasing efforts that have been generated by the Convention to improve the use of chemical fertilizers and pesticides, nutrient levels and the impacts of pesticides continue to be detrimental to ecosystem function and biodiversity. While the use of fertilizers and pesticides has stabilized globally over the last decade, it remains at unsustainably high levels.
Nonetheless, despite these and other collective efforts, there is still much to do, with pollution and poor management of chemicals and waste continuing to have adverse effects on human health and the environment. Moreover, some groups, including indigenous peoples and local communities, women, children, and people living in vulnerable situations, are disproportionately affected. So, have the targets and objectives set out in these international frameworks been unrealistic? Has the international community lacked appropriate and adequate data to take more ambitious decisions? How do we ensure that by 2030 pollution stops driving the loss of biodiversity?
In Rachel Carson’s book, the final chapter entitled “The Other Road” describes a decisive moment where two roads diverge: “The road we have long been travelling (…), a smooth superhighway on which we progress with great speed, but at its end lies disaster. The other fork of the road – the one ‘less travelled by’ – offers our last, our only chance to reach a destination that assures the preservation of our earth”. The ‘less travelled’ road was described as the one where people had asserted their right to know, and having decided that humanity should not take “senseless and frightening risks” had decided to invest in alternatives to chemicals for insect control. By mapping the interlinkages between chemicals and wastes management and biological diversity we hope this exploratory study encourages the international community to take a ‘less traveled road’. One that will lead us to the protection of the environment and biodiversity for the present and future generations through the certainty that environmental challenges and their solutions are inter-related, complex and shared. This exploratory study can provide a baseline for future work and collaboration between conventions in different spheres and within them.
To achieve the World’s 2050 vision of “living in harmony with nature”, the post-2020 global biodiversity framework will need to be embraced by all governments, stakeholders, international organizations and related multilateral environmental agreements. The significant ongoing contributions of the Basel, Rotterdam, Stockholm and Minamata conventions need to be fully harnessed. In particular, work under these conventions will be important to achieve the framework’s proposed target on pollution, aimed at reducing nutrients lost to the environment, pesticides and eliminating the discharge of plastic waste.
Conversely, knowledge and insights garnered through collaboration with the CBD and its Protocols is complementary to the work of the four global chemical and waste conventions. Only through collaborative approaches will we be able to reshape our relationship with nature and ensure that we deliver on the promise of a healthy and prosperous world for all for the current and future generations.
|
|
Lisez la nouvelle interview BRS illustrant comment les petits États insulaires en développement partagent leurs expériences sur la mise en œuvre de la Convention de Rotterdam.
Saint-Christophe-et-Niévès - prêts pour partager leurs connaissances
Mme Jeanelle Kelly est l'une des deux autorités nationales désignées (ADN) que Saint-Kitts-et-Nevis a désigné pour s’occuper des travaux de mise en œuvre de la Convention de Rotterdam (CR) et pour coopérer étroitement avec le Secrétariat de la CR sur les produits chimiques et les pesticides. Mme Kelly est le fonctionnaire chargée de la quarantaine au ministère de l'Agriculture du pays.
Christine Fuell est la coordonnatrice du Secrétariat de la CR à la FAO et haut fonctionnaire technique à la Division de la production végétale et de la protection des végétaux à la FAO.
CF: Saint-Kitts-et-Nevis est une petite île des Caraïbes. Votre pays est membre de la Convention de Rotterdam depuis la fin de 2012, vous avez donc maintenant huit ans d'expérience avec la convention. Quels sont les défis que vous rencontrez pour mettre pleinement en œuvre la Convention de Rotterdam ?
JK: Comme vous l'avez mentionné, nous sommes un petit Etat, nous n'avons que 53 000 habitants. Les ressources humaines et physiques sont donc rares et seul un nombre très limité de personnes est chargé de gérer une série d’obligations nationales et internationales liées à la gestion des produits chimiques et des déchets.
CF: Les Parties dans la région sont compétentes dans la soumission des réponses concernant les importations. Et vous êtes l'une des rares membres à les avoir toutes soumises. Quel est le secret de ce succès ?
JK: Eh bien, comme vous le savez, nous ne produisons et n’utilisons aucun de ces 52 produits chimiques inscrits à l’annexe III, ce qui signifie que nous n’en avons pas besoin pour le moment. Par conséquent, nous ne voulons pas les importer dans notre pays. Nous resterons ainsi à l'écart de tout risque qui y est associé. Nous avons donc pu remplir rapidement le formulaire de réponse à l'importation en indiquant « pas de consentement à l’importation ».
CF: Et vous savez que vous pouvez changer votre décision à tout moment, n’est-ce pas ?
JK: Sûrement. Si nous décidions vouloir utiliser ces produits chimiques et pesticides en totalité ou en partie, il suffirait de soumettre un nouveau formulaire indiquant « consentement à l'importation ». Enfin, les produits chimiques figurant dans l'Annexe III ne sont pas interdits en vertu de la CR, mais ils ont été interdits au niveau national dans au moins deux pays membres au sein de régions PIC différentes après l’évaluation de leur risque sur la santé humaine et l'environnement.
CF: Alors, par exemple, comment gérez vous les ravageurs des plantes sans ces pesticides répertoriés ? Et quels sont les principaux défis des pesticides en général dans votre pays ?
JK: Il existe un large éventail d'autres produits chimiques non-inscrits à l'annexe III qui présentent moins de risques pour la santé humaine et l'environnement qui peuvent être utilisés pour lutter contre les ravageurs des plantes. Nous essayons d'utiliser autant que possible des produits chimiques à faible risque avec un équipement de protection individuelle (EPI) et un contrôle biologique approprié pour contrôler et gérer les ravageurs de plantes. Le principal défi de la gestion d'un organisme nuisible spécifique est le choix de la méthode la plus appropriée. En outre, il existe une gamme de produits chimiques disponibles avec différents modes d'action et nous visons à sélectionner les moins dangereux qui sont encore efficaces. Il s’agit toujours d’un équilibre entre la protection de la santé humaine et de l'environnement et de la garantie de la sécurité alimentaire.
CF: Votre pays examine-t-il actuellement vos lois sur le contrôle des pesticides et des produits chimiques toxiques et envisage-t-il de restreindre ou même d'interdire l'utilisation de certains produits chimiques et pesticides ? Seriez-vous alors prêt à soumettre des notifications de mesures de réglementation finales (MRF)?
JK: Avec l'aide de la FAO, nous avons pu assurer un projet pour la région des Caraïbes financé par le FEM pour revoir nos lois sur le contrôle des pesticides et des produits chimiques toxiques et le gouvernement a pour priorité de restreindre et / ou interdire l'utilisation de certains produits chimiques extrêmement dangereux pour protéger la santé humaine et l’environnement. Dans l’avenir , nous nous préparerons à soumettre des notifications de MRF pour ces produits chimiques avec l'aimable assistance du Secrétariat.
CFs: Est-ce que c’est simple de préparer des notifications des MRF?
JK: Eh bien, je dirais que le Secrétariat a préparé beaucoup de matériel d’information et a mis à disposition diverses sources d’information pour aider autant que possible les parties membres dans cette tâche. Nous avons également participé à certains ateliers de formation organisés par le Secrétariat de la CR et aimablement financés par la FAO. Par exemple, un atelier de formation collectif sur l'inspection des pesticides et les questions douanières dans les Caraïbes en 2017, ou une formation sur la Convention de Rotterdam dans le cadre de la réunion du Groupe de coordination pour le contrôle des pesticides des Caraïbes (CGPC) et la réunion du Comité directeur pour le projet GCP / SLC / 204 / GFF en 2018, entre autres. Et bien sûr, nous ne manquons jamais la Conférence des Parties et les réunions régionales préparatoires respectives ! En fait, après cette réunion en 2019, nous avons soumis toutes les réponses d'importation ! De nombreuses informations sont disponibles sur le processus, et le Secrétariat est prêt et disponible pour aider toutes les Parties.
CF: Comment apprenez vous sur l’organisation de ces ateliers de formation?
JK: Nous faisons partie du Groupe de coordination des commissions de contrôle des pesticides des Caraïbes (CGPC). En outre, la FAO nous invite à participer à leurs réunions. Et si les Parties souhaitent recevoir des formations et une assistance technique, elles peuvent s'adresser directement au Secrétariat. Ils sont très disponibles, ils discutent des besoins particuliers avec le pays membre et, par exemple, ils peuvent nous proposer de participer à un atelier déjà programmé, développer une activité sur mesure avec l'ADN ou aussi nous suggérer une coopération avec des partenaires de la région.
CF: Pensez-vous que vous pourriez coopérer avec les quelques Parties de la région qui semblent avoir des difficultés à soumettre des réponses concernant les importations ? Un modèle de coopération Sud-Sud facilitée par le Secrétariat ?
JK: Nous sommes de très bons voisins dans les Caraïbes et nous serions certainement prêts à aider. Peut-être que le Secrétariat pourra-t-il nous aider à démarrer?
CF: Nous serions très heureux de le faire. Faites-nous part de vos idées et vos besoins et nous agirons immédiatement. Il existe encore une poignée de pays de la région qui ne sont pas encore parties à la Convention de Rotterdam. Seriez-vous prêt à les encourager à devenir membre et pourquoi ?
JK: Absolument. En tant que petites îles, nous vivons dans un environnement étonnant, riche en biodiversité, et en même temps nous sommes très vulnérables en ce qui concerne les impacts négatifs sur l'environnement à cause du changement climatique, des déchets plastiques ou des produits chimiques et pesticides dangereux. Nous avons une obligation envers nos enfants de protéger cet environnement unique et nous avons une obligation internationale de mettre en œuvre le Programme 2030. Il ne nous reste plus que dix ans pour cela ! Il vaut donc mieux unir nos forces autant que possible. Être partie à la CR - ou encore, à toutes les conventions sur les produits chimiques et les déchets - nous donne une voix plus forte, plus d'informations et une meilleure capacité à prendre des décisions éclairées sur notre avenir, y compris sur les importations futures de certains produits chimiques et pesticides dangereux.
CF: Vous êtes actuellement également membre du Bureau de la Convention Rotterdam et vous avez déjà été membre du Bureau de la Convention Stockholm. En tant que membre du Bureau, vous êtes fortement impliqué dans la préparation de la Conférence biennale des Parties (CdP). Comment les Parties devraient-elles se préparer à la prochaine réunion prévue pour juillet 2021 ?
JK: Comme je l’ai mentionné, des travaux sont en cours pour la préparation des CdP BRS 2021. Les Parties se réunissent normalement aux niveaux national et régional pour présenter leurs points de vue sur les sujets à débattre à la réunion de la CdP, ainsi que pour formuler des positions régionales, ce qui est certainement encouragé. Bien que la pandémie du COVID-19 ait posé des obstacles sur notre chemin, nous sommes des personnes fortes, résilientes et innovantes et nous travaillerons ensemble au niveau international pour assurer la gestion rationnelle continue des produits chimiques et des déchets.
CF: Ce fut un plaisir de recevoir vos opinions. Merci beaucoup pour avoir accepté de partager votre expérience avec toutes les Parties.
Le Secrétariat de la Convention de Rotterdam espère poursuivre la collaboration avec toutes les Parties, en tenant compte de leurs besoins identifiés et de leurs demandes.
|
|
Coopération Sud-Sud dans la mise en œuvre de la Convention de Rotterdam: Saint-Christophe-et-Niévès prêt à partager ses connaissances.
Saint Kitts y Nevis: listos para compartir sus conocimientos
La Sra. Jeanelle Kelly es una de las dos Autoridades Nacionales Designadas (AND) que Saint Kitts y Nevis ha designado para abordar el trabajo de aplicación del Convenio de Rotterdam (CR) y para cooperar estrechamente con la Secretaría del CR sobre productos químicos y plaguicidas. La Sra. Kelly es un oficial de cuarentena del Departamento de Agricultura del país.
Christine Fuell es la coordinadora de la parte de la FAO de la Secretaría del CR y Oficial Técnica Superior de la División de Producción y Protección Vegetal de la FAO.
CF: Saint Kitts y Nevis es una isla bastante pequeña en el Caribe. Su país es Parte del Convenio de Rotterdam desde el final de 2012, por lo que tiene ocho años de experiencia en el convenio por ahora. ¿Cuáles son los desafíos a los que se enfrenta para aplicar plenamente el Convenio de Rotterdam.
JK: Como lo mencionó, somos un pequeño estado, sólo tenemos 53, 000 habitantes. Es por eso que los recursos humanos y físicos son escasos y sólo un número muy limitado de personas están a cargo de la gestión de una serie de obligaciones nacionales e internacionales que se refieren a los productos químicos y a la gestión de desechos.
CF: Las Partes en la región son todas bastante eficiente en la presentación de las respuestas de importación. Y son una de las pocas Partes que han presentado todas las respuestas. ¿Cuál es el secreto de este éxito?
JK: Bueno, verá, no estamos produciendo ni utilizando estos 52 productos químicos incluidos en el Anexo III, lo que significa que no los necesitamos en este momento. Por lo tanto, no queremos importarlos a nuestro país. De esta forma, nos mantendremos alejados de cualquier riesgo que se les atribuya. Es por eso que pudimos completar rápidamente el formulario de respuesta de importación que indica "sin consentimiento para importar".
C F: Y como Ud ya lo sabe, puede cambiar su decisión en cualquier momento, ¿verdad?
JK: Claro. Si tuviéramos que decidir utilizar todos o algunos de estos productos químicos y plaguicidas sería suficiente para presentar un nuevo formulario que indique “Se permite la importación”. Después de todo, los productos químicos del Anexo III no están generalmente prohibidos bajo la CR, pero han sido prohibidos a nivel nacional en al menos dos Partes dentro de las diferentes regiones de CFP después de evaluar su riesgo para la salud humana y el medio ambiente.
CF: Entonces, ¿cómo maneja, por ejemplo, las plagas de las plantas sin los plaguicidas incluidos? ¿Y cuáles son los principales desafíos con los plaguicidas en general en su país?
JK: Existe una amplia gama de otros productos químicos no incluidos en el Anexo III que presentan un riesgo menor para la salud humana y el medio ambiente que pueden usarse para la gestión de plagas de plantas. Tratamos de utilizar productos químicos de menor riesgo en la medida de lo posible con el equipo de protección personal (EPP) y el control biológico adecuados para controlar y gestionar las plagas de las plantas. El principal desafío de la gestión de una plaga específica es la selección del método más apropiado. Además, hay una gama de productos químicos disponibles con diferentes modos de acción y nuestro objetivo es seleccionar los menos peligrosos que aún son eficaces. Siempre se trata de un equilibrio entre proteger la salud humana y el medio ambiente y garantizar la seguridad alimentaria.
CF: ¿Su país está revisando actualmente sus leyes de control de plaguicidas y productos químicos tóxicos y tal vez está contemplando la posibilidad de restringir o incluso prohibir el uso de ciertos productos químicos y plaguicidas? ¿Estará entonces Ud. preparado para presentar notificaciones de Medidas de Reglamentación Finales (MRF) ?
JK: Con la ayuda de la FAO, hemos sido capaces de garantizar un proyecto regional de la Región del Caribe financiado por el FMAM para revisar nuestras Actas de control de Plaguicidas y Productos Químicos Tóxicos y es una de las prioridades del Gobierno restringir y / o prohibir el uso de ciertos productos químicos extremadamente peligrosos para proteger la salud humana y el medio ambiente. En el futuro, nos prepararemos para presentar notificaciones de FRA para estos productos químicos con la amable asistencia de la Secretaría.
CF: ¿Es sencilla la preparación de notificaciones de MRF?
JK: Bueno, yo diría que la Secretaría ha preparado un conjunto de material de información y elaborado diversos recursos de información disponibles para ayudar las Partes en esta tarea lo mejor posible. También participamos en algunos talleres de capacitación organizados por la Secretaría del CR y amablemente financiados por la FAO. Por ejemplo, un Taller Conjunto de Capacitación sobre Inspección de Plaguicidas y Asuntos Aduaneros en el Caribe en 2017, o uno sobre la Capacitación sobre el Convenio de Rotterdam en el marco de la Reunión del Grupo Coordinador de las Juntas de Control de Plaguicidas del Caribe (CGPC) y la reunión del Comité Directivo para el proyecto GCP / SLC / 204 / GFF en 2018, entre otros. ¡Y, por supuesto, nunca dejamos de participar a la Conferencia de las Partes y a las respectivas Reuniones Preparatorias Regionales! De hecho, después de esa reunión en 2019, enviamos todas las respuestas de importación. Hay una gran cantidad de información disponible sobre el proceso, además de la Secretaría está dispuesta y disponible para ayudar a todas las Partes.
CF: ¿Cómo se enteró de estos talleres de capacitación?
JK: Somos parte del Grupo Coordinador de Juntas de Control de Plaguicidas del Caribe (CGPC). Además, la FAO nos invita a participar en sus reuniones. Y si las Partes están interesadas en recibir capacitación y asistencia técnica pueden dirigirse directamente a la Secretaría. Son muy atentos a los pedidos, y a poder discutir sobre las necesidades particulares y, por ejemplo, pueden sugerir la participación en un taller ya programado, desarrollar una actividad orientada y realizada junto con la ADN o sugerir una cooperación con los interesados de la región.
CF: ¿Cree que podría cooperar con las pocas Partes de la región que parecen estar enfrentándose a desafíos para enviar respuestas de importación? ¿Un tipo de cooperación Sur-Sur facilitada por la Secretaría?
JK: Somos muy buenos vecinos en el Caribe y sin duda estaremos disponibles para ayudar. ¿Quizás la Secretaría pueda ayudarnos a empezar?
CF: Estaríamos muy contentos de hacerlo. Simplemente háganos saber sus ideas y necesidades y actuaremos de inmediato. Todavía hay un grupo de países en la región que aún no son parte del Convenio de Rotterdam. Estaría Ud. dispuesta a alentarlos para que se conviertan en Parte y por qué sería?
JK: Por supuesto. Nosotros, como pequeñas islas, vivimos en un entorno increíble, rico en biodiversidad y, al mismo tiempo somos muy vulnerables en lo que respecta a los impactos adversos sobre el medio ambiente, ya sea debido al cambio climático, los desechos plásticos o los productos químicos y plaguicidas peligrosos. Tenemos una obligación para con nuestros hijos de proteger este entorno único y tenemos una obligación internacional para implementar la Agenda 2030. ¡Solo nos quedan diez años para esto ! Así que es mejor que unamos fuerzas tanto como sea posible. Ser Parte en el CR - o mejor dicho, de todos los convenios sobre productos químicos y desechos - nos da una voz más fuerte, más información y una mejor capacidad de tomar decisiones informadas sobre nuestro futuro, incluyendo en futuras importaciones de determinados productos químicos y plaguicidas peligrosos.
CF: Usted es también miembro de la Mesa del Convenio de Rotterdam y ha sido en el pasado miembro de la Mesa del Convenio de Estocolmo. Como miembro de la Mesa, está muy involucrado en la preparación bienal de la Conferencia de las Partes (CdP). ¿Cómo deben las Partes prepararse para la próxima reunión, que está previsto que tenga lugar en julio de 2021?
JK: Como se mencionó, se está trabajando para la preparación de las CdP de BRS de 2021. Las Partes normalmente se reúnen a nivel nacional y regional para expresar sus puntos de vista sobre los temas que se debatirán en la reunión de la CdP, así como para formular posiciones regionales, lo que sin duda se alienta. Aunque la pandemia del COVID-19 ha puesto algunos obstáculos en nuestro camino, somos fuertes, resistentes, innovadores y vamos a trabajar juntos a nivel internacional para garantizar la gestión racional de productos químicos y de desechos.
CF: Fue un placer recibir sus opiniones. Muchas gracias por su amabilidad de querer compartir su experiencia con todas las Partes.
La Secretaría del Convenio de Rotterdam espera poder continuar colaborando con todas las Partes, teniendo en cuenta sus necesidades identificadas y sus pedidos.
|
|
Read the new BRS interview illustrating how Small Island Developing States are sharing experiences on implementing the Rotterdam Convention.
South-South Cooperation in implementing the Rotterdam Convention: Saint Kitts and Nevis ready to share their knowledge
Ms Jeanelle Kelly is one of the two Designated National Authorities (DNAs) whom Saint Kitts and Nevis has nominated to address the implementation work of the Rotterdam Convention (RC) and to cooperate closely with the RC Secretariat on chemicals and pesticides. Ms Kelly is a Quarantine Officer in the Department of Agriculture in the country.
Christine Fuell is the coordinator of the FAO part of the RC Secretariat and Senior Technical Officer in FAO’s Plant Production and Protection Division.
CF: Saint Kitts and Nevis is quite a small island in the Caribbean. Your country has been Party to the Rotterdam Convention since the end of 2012, so you have eight years of experience with the convention by now. What are the challenges you face to fully implement the Rotterdam Convention?
JK: As you mentioned, we are small, we have only 53,000 inhabitants. So human and physical resources are scarce and only a very limited number of people are in charge of managing a range of national and international obligations as they relate to chemicals and waste management.
CF: The Parties in the region are all quite good at submitting import responses. And you are one of the few Parties that have submitted them all. What is the secret of this success?
JK: Well, you see, we are not producing or using these 52 chemicals listed in Annex III, which means we don’t need them at this time. Therefore, we do not want to import them into our country. In this way, we will stay clear of any risk attached to them. So, we were able to swiftly fill the import response form indicating “no consent to import”.
CF: And you know that you could change your decision at any time, right?
JK: Sure. If we were to decide that we wanted to use some or all of these chemicals and pesticides it would be sufficient to submit a new form indicating “consent to import”. After all, Annex III chemicals are not generally banned under the RC, but they have been banned on a national basis in at least two Parties within different PIC regions after evaluating their risk to human health and the environment.
CF: So how, for example, do you deal with plant pests without those listed pesticides? And what are the main challenges with pesticides in general in your country?
JK: There is a wide range of other chemicals not listed in Annex III that pose less of a risk to human health and the environment that may be used to manage plant pests. We try to use lower risk chemicals as far as possible with appropriate personal protective equipment (PPE) and biological control to control and manage plant pests. The main challenge with the management of a specific pest is the selection of the most appropriate method. Also, there is a range of chemicals available with varying modes of action and we aim to select the least hazardous ones that are still effective. It is always a balance between protecting human health and the environment and ensuring food security.
CF: Is your country currently reviewing your Pesticides and Toxic Chemicals Control Acts and maybe contemplating whether to restrict or even ban the use of certain chemicals and pesticides? Would you then be prepared to submit notifications of Final Regulatory Actions (FRAs)?
JK: With the assistance of FAO, we were able to secure a GEF funded Caribbean Regional project to review our Pesticides and Toxic Chemicals Control Acts and it is a priority of the Government to restrict and/or ban the use of certain highly hazardous chemicals to protect human health and the environment. In the future, we will be preparing to submit notifications of FRAs for these chemicals with the kind assistance of the Secretariat.
CFs: Is the preparation of notifications of FRAs straightforward?
JK: Well, I’d say the Secretariat has prepared quite a lot of information material and made available various information resources to support the Parties in this task as much as possible. We also participated in some training workshops organized by the RC Secretariat and kindly funded by FAO. For example a Joint Training Workshop on Pesticides Inspection and Customs Issues in the Caribbean in 2017, or a Training on the Rotterdam Convention in the framework of the Coordinating Group of Pesticides Control Boards of the Caribbean (CGPC) Meeting and the Steering Committee meeting for the project GCP/SLC/204/GFF in 2018, among others. And of course we never miss the Conference of the Parties and the respective Regional Preparatory Meetings! Actually, after that meeting in 2019, we submitted all import responses! There is a lot of information available on the process, plus the Secretariat stands ready and available to assist all Parties.
CF: How did you know about these training workshops?
JK: We are part of the Coordinating Group of Pesticides Control Boards of the Caribbean (CGPC). In addition, FAO invites us to participate in their meetings. And if Parties are interested in receiving trainings and technical assistance they can directly address the Secretariat. They are very responsive, discuss the particular needs with the Party and, for example, can suggest participation in an already scheduled workshop, develop a tailor-made activity together with the DNA or suggest cooperation with partners in the region.
CF: Do you think you could cooperate with those few Parties in the region who seem to face challenges in submitting import responses. A type of South-South cooperation facilitated by the Secretariat?
JK: We are very good neighbours in the Caribbean and we would certainly be available to help. Maybe the Secretariat can support us to get started?
CF: We would be very happy to do so. Just let us know your ideas and needs and we will act immediately. There is still a handful of countries in the region that are not yet Party to the Rotterdam Convention. Would you be willing to encourage them to become a Party and why would that be?
JK: Definitely. We as small islands live in an amazing environment, rich in biodiversity, and at the same time we are very vulnerable as regards adverse impacts on the environment – be it due to climate change, plastic waste or hazardous chemicals and pesticides. We have an obligation towards our children to protect this unique environment and we have an international obligation to implement the 2030 Agenda. We have only ten years left for this! So we better join forces as much as possible. Being Party to the RC – or better, to all chemicals and waste conventions – gives us a stronger voice, more information and better capacity to make informed decisions on our future, including on future imports of certain hazardous chemicals and pesticides.
CF: You are currently also a Rotterdam Convention Bureau member and have been a Stockholm Convention Bureau member in the past. As Bureau member, you are heavily involved in the preparation of the biennial Conference of the Parties (COP). How should Parties prepare themselves for the next meeting that is scheduled to take place in July 2021?
JK: As mentioned, work is underway for preparation of the 2021 BRS COPs. Parties normally meet at the national and regional level to air their views on the topics to be discussed at the COPs meeting, as well as formulate regional positions and this is certainly encouraged. Although the COVID-19 pandemic has put some hurdles in our way, we are strong, resilient, innovative people and will be working together at the international level to ensure the continued sound management of chemicals and waste.
CF: It was a pleasure getting your views. Thank you so much for your willingness to share your experience with all Parties.
The Rotterdam Convention Secretariat looks forward to continuing collaboration with all Parties, taking account of their identified needs and upon their request.
|
|
Read the remarks from Rolph Payet when opening the Global Meeting of the Regional Seas Programme in Berlin, 3 October 2019.
BRS Executive Secretary urges strong cooperation between chemicals and waste and regional seas conventions
Ms. Monika Mac Devette, Deputy Director of Ecosystems Division, UNEP and Head of Marine and Coastal Ecosystem Branch ( ad interim)
Mr. Rüdiger Strempel, Executive Secretary, Helsinki Convention (HELCOM)
Distinguished Directors,
Distinguished colleagues,
Ladies and Gentlemen,
It is a pleasure and an honor for me to be here with you today representing the Secretariat of the Basel, Rotterdam and Stockholm Conventions at this 21St Global meeting of the Regional Seas Conventions and Action Plans hosted by the Helsinki Convention.
I would like to start by thanking the organizer for inviting us to participate in this meeting which we hope will be a step towards further strengthening the cooperation and collaboration between the Chemicals and wastes conventions and the regional seas conventions and action plans, in particular on those areas were interlinkages in our work can be identified, such as land based sources of marine pollution or plastic pollution.
So being here today is a dream come true – Many of you do not know but I was the interim coordinator for the Nairobi Convention for more than 10 years, and joining the BRS Secretariat, I am celebrating 5 years today in the UN is an honour to be able to see how we can link our regional conventions to three important international conventions.
Chemicals are a part of our daily lives. They improve our lives, our health, food security and much more, but when misused and mismanaged, hazardous chemicals and wastes threaten our health and the environment.
The Global assessment report on biodiversity and ecosystem services of the Intergovernmental Science-Policy Platform on Biodiversity and Ecosystem Services, released in May this year states that “Coastal waters hold the highest levels of metals and persistent organic pollutants from industrial discharge and agricultural run-off, poisoning coastal fish harvests. Severe effects from excess nutrient concentrations in certain locations include damage to fish and seabed biota. The dynamics of ocean and airborne transport of pollutants mean that the harm from inputs of plastics, persistent organic pollutants, heavy metals and ocean acidification is felt worldwide, including with consequences for human health”.
It is a fact that at least 10% of the 100 million tons of plastic we use every year end up in the oceans. This is the equivalent to the weight of 700 billion plastic bottles. Put on tops of each other these bottles would reach further than the sun. But unfortunately, they will never leave our planet, they are going into our oceans, our atmosphere, our drinking water and in our food - and will stay there for a long time affecting nature’s ecosystems and our lives.
By the middle of this century 9000 million human beings are expected to generate over 13000 tons of waste, that is about 20 percent more than that generated ten years ago. This increase in waste generation is most apparent in urban areas. Today more than 50 per cent of the world’s population lives in cities and by 2050 this number is expected to rise to around 70 per cent.
Although Chemicals and waste issues have been underplayed in the environmental agenda in the past, times are changing fast. The sustainable management of chemicals and waste is now seen as a fundamental cornerstone of the objectives in the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) set out in the 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development where the Basel, Rotterdam and Stockholm Conventions are highlighted as the key legally binding instruments whose implementation contributes towards achieving by 2030 all the goals of the 2030 agenda.
Last May the Conferences of the Parties to the Basel, Rotterdam and Stockholm Conventions took numerous decisions strengthening our conventions including landmark amendments to the conventions which are of great relevance to the work of your regional seas conventions and Action Plans.
With the adoption of the Plastic Wastes Amendment, Parties to the Basel Convention by consensus amended the annexes to the Convention to clarify and strengthen entries for plastic wastes, bringing many types of plastics into the PIC procedure and therefore ensuring a more transparent, traceable, and enforceable set of measures concerning imports/exports of waste between countries.
At the same time a Plastic Waste Partnership has been established under the Basel Convention, providing a platform for exchanges and best practices, technical assistance and information-sharing, public awareness and more, to assist parties from all over the world implement the new measures for controlling plastic waste.
Considering the terms of reference for the Plastic Waste Partnership I take the opportunity to extend to you all an invitation to become a member of the Partnership.
Parties also adopted an improved version of the technical guidelines on the import/export on the e-waste and used equipment. Now Parties have more means to control import and export, with criteria and suggested documentation which should help prevent illegal movements of waste and of used equipment.
The Stockholm Convention listed 2 (out of 2) toxic chemicals: Dicofol (pesticide) and the industrial chemical Perfluorooctanoic acid (PFOA) and its salts and PFOA-related compounds. The latter comprises more than 4,000 chemicals with a wide a range of industrial applications ranging from non-stick cookware to firefighting foams. Listing means elimination, in the case of dicofol without exemptions, in the case of PFOA with country specific, time specific, use-specific exemptions. This brings the total number of POPs listed in the Convention to 30.
The Rotterdam Convention also listed two (out of 7) chemicals in its annex III, namely:
- Phorate (a pesticide)
- exabromocyclododecane (HBCDD) an industrial chemical.
This means they are now under the PIC procedure to share information between countries trading in hazardous chemicals. This brings the total of chemicals now listed under Annex III to 52.
Furthermore, the Conference of the Parties to the Rotterdam Convention adopted a new Annex VII on Procedures and mechanisms on compliance.
These outcomes of our recent COPs demonstrate the commitment our parties have towards achieving a clean planet, healthy people”. We invite you to help us maintain the current momentum and thus I look forward to engaging further with you over the next three days.
One might think what relevance all those complicated chemicals and plastic waste have to do with the regional seas. Indeed, our regional seas do not exist without land, and without human activities on land. The plastic you observe today is only the tip of the iceberg – pollution runoff containing many of the chemicals listed under both the Stockholm and Rotterdam Conventions – are to be found all over the planet, it is therefore our joint responsibility to address it. Remember a clean land results in a clean ocean, and of course healthier coastal people, millions of which depend on the oceans for their livelihood.
I hope that we will be able to bring to you in our session on the third day the many interfaces and aspects where we can reinforce our cooperation. I stand ready to work with you all, and I thank Habib and Nancy who have been so kind to ensure our active engagement in your meeting.
With those few words, I am once again honoured to be part of the global regional seas meeting.
Thank you.
|
|
Nairobi, 15 March 2019 - Remarks on the occasion of the 4th meeting of the United Nations Environment Assembly; delivered by Mr. Rolph Payet, Executive Secretary, Secretariat of the Basel, Rotterdam and Stockholm Conventions
Statement of the Basel, Rotterdam, Stockholm Convention at the fourth session of the United Nations Environment Assembly
Delivered by Mr. Rolph Payet, Executive Secretary
Secretariat of the Basel, Rotterdam and Stockholm Conventions
Remarks on the occasion of the 4th meeting of the United Nations Environment Assembly
Nairobi, 15 March 2019
Your Excellency,
Distinguished delegates,
Ladies and Gentlemen,
Thank you for the opportunity to address this fourth meeting of the United Nations Environment Assembly on “Innovative solutions for environmental challenges and sustainable consumption and production”, a topic of great relevance to the successful implementation of the chemicals and waste agenda, in particular the Basel, Rotterdam and Stockholm Conventions, agreements to which your governments are very committed to.
Throughout the week, the relevance and importance of the chemicals and wastes conventions towards achieving sustainable development, the eradication of poverty and achieving a peaceful and fair world have been highlighted, thus raising awareness of the importance of making the “invisible, visible”.
Last Monday we commemorated the 30 years of achievements, as well as of the innovative spirit of the Basel Convention on the transboundary movement of hazardous and other wastes and their disposal.
Ladies and Gentleman, Today I take the opportunity to extend to you a very warm invitation to the 2019 meetings of the Conferences of the Parties to the Basel, Rotterdam and Stockholm conventions, which will be held in Geneva, from 29 April to 10 May, under the theme: “Clean Planet, Healthy People: Sound Management of Chemicals and Waste".
The meetings will be touching upon a number of key issues which are of relevance to this gathering, some of which include:
- The proposal to establish of a new partnership on Plastic Wastes under the Basel Convention, as well as a proposal to amend annexes to Convention which, are intended to increase the effectiveness of the Convention with regard to plastic wastes.
- Under the Rotterdam Convention seven new hazardous chemicals will be considered for listing under the Convention, and Parties will also consider the adoption of compliance procedures as well as the outcomes of the intersessional process on enhancing the effectiveness of the Convention. The urgency to control the international trade and not ban those chemicals, has been expressed in many side events organized this week.
- Under the Stockholm Convention Parties will be invited to consider listing a number of chemicals used in the production of non–stick kitchen ware, food processing equipment, textiles paper, paints, and firefighting foams, to name a few.
We will also be focusing on issues of technical assistance and the role our network of regional centres can play in supporting countries in building their national capacities, among other needs, to manage chemicals and wastes, and accordingly thank and invite our donors for their continued support.
As we engage for a cleaner and healthier planet, I count on the commitment of your governments, in responding to the recommendations of our scientific committees to consider further controls and management of those chemicals. It is imperative that we make progress at each and every Conference of the Parties, so that we can achieve the sustainable development goals with regards to the sound management of chemicals and wastes.
With these few words, allow me to reiterate the commitment of our Secretariat in working with governments, other UN agencies and international organisations, multistakeholder groups and the private sector in advancing the global agenda.
Let us together continue to make the visible, invisible as we move towards a Clean Planet and Healthy People!
Thank you for your attention.
|
|
Preventing, detecting & acting against the illegal transboundary movements of hazardous & other wastes is a crucial element in the global waste challenge.
BRS opens Illegal Traffic meeting in China: Read the keynote on the Operation Demeter IV initiative
WCO Regional Workshop on Combating Environmental Crime
and Debriefing of WCO Operation “Demeter IV”
20th - 23rd November, Shanghai, China
General Administration of China Customs & World Customs Organization
Video opening statement by Mr. Rolph Payet, Executive Secretary of the Basel, Rotterdam, and Stockholm conventions
Excellencies, ladies and gentlemen,
It is a great honor for me to take part in the opening ceremony of the WCO Regional Workshop on Combating Environmental Crime
and Debriefing of the WCO Operation “Demeter IV” which is being held on 20th – 23rd November 2018, in Shanghai, China. I regret not being in a position to be with you in person today due to prior commitments, but I hope that these few words will attest to the importance I personally and the Secretariat of the Basel Convention attach to the work of enforcement officers in China, in Asia and around the world to prevent and combat illegal traffic in hazardous wastes and other wastes.
The Basel convention is the only global legally binding agreement aimed at controlling transboundary movements of hazardous wastes and other wastes. With 186 Parties, it is nearly universal and because transboundary movements with non-Parties are usually prohibited, this means that all exports and imports of such wastes must abide by a common set of rules. These rules were developed with very specific objectives in mind: to protect human health and the environment from the negative effects of hazardous wastes and other wastes, to ensure their environmentally sound management, and, in order to do so, to ensure that only countries with the capacity and willingness to receive wastes from other countries would receive them.
You all know of the strict procedures embedded in the Convention to control the international trade of hazardous wastes and other wastes. And these procedures can only be effective if they are domesticated in each country’s national legal framework, if the responsibilities for implementing and enforcing them are clearly assigned, if entities are given the necessary means and incentives to do their job, and if conduct that contravenes these procedures is adequately punished.
In some countries, it is therefore not without struggle that illegal traffic is prevented, and it is the responsibility of the entire international community to work hand in hand to achieve the goals of the Convention.
Operation Demeter IV, just like its predecessors, is a shining example of cooperation between countries to prevent and combat illegal traffic. The Secretariat of the Basel convention is proud to have once again partnered with the WCO to support this operation. Enforcement operations provide a unique opportunity for countries to reaffirm their commitment to the objectives of the Basel Convention, to raise the visibility both nationally and internationally of the issues at stake and to better monitor and scope the extent of illegal traffic. I look forward to the debriefing of Operation Demeter IV to learn about possible new trends in the types of wastes smuggled across borders and about new routes used by traffickers. Such increased knowledge is key for countries to adjust their response measures to further prevent and combat illegal traffic.
But as important as mapping illegal traffic is knowing, understanding and influencing the drivers of illegal traffic. Is a new route due to new demands for a specific waste stream or constituent in a particular country? Or is it in response to more stringent control or enforcement measures in another country? Is a new type of smuggled wastes due to increased disposal costs in a country? Or is it in response to weakened control measures in another country? Only by analyzing such information can illegal traffic be prevented in a sustainable manner.
It is therefore important in my view for the outcomes of Demeter IV to be brought to the attention of policy makers both at the national and global levels so that lessons from the enforcement community may resonate more broadly and drive more comprehensive responses to illegal traffic. I am therefore pleased to invite the WCO to participate in the fourteenth meeting of the Conference of the Parties to the Basel Convention, which will be held on 29 April - 10 May 2019 in Geneva, Switzerland, to present a debriefing of Operation Demeter IV to the 186 Parties to the Convention. As the Basel convention celebrates its 30-year anniversary, I sincerely hope that the enforcement community, through the WCO, the indispensable partner of competent authorities, can be with us.
Excellencies, ladies and gentlemen,
I thank you for your kind attention.
|
|
UN Special magazine interview with Rolph Payet, Executive Secretary of the Basel, Rotterdam, and Stockholm (BRS) Conventions.
Making the Invisible, Visible: Interview with BRS Executive Secretary published in UN Special
Interview with Rolph Payet, Executive Secretary of the Basel, Rotterdam, and Stockholm (BRS) Conventions
By ALEX MEJÍA, EDITOR-IN-CHIEF
Dr. Rolph Payet has a 26-year career spanning academia, government, NGOs, politics and international governance. He has received numerous international awards and recognition for his work on islands, oceans, climate change, tertiary education and biodiversity. He was the first President and Vice-Chancellor of the University of Seychelles, and Minister of Environment and Energy in the Cabinet of Seychelles from 2012 to 2014. He was appointed in October 2014 by the UN Secretary-General to lead the Secretariat of the three principle multilateral agreements on chemicals and waste.
A. MEJÍA: When one thinks of environmental issues and global challenges, chemicals and waste do not necessarily come immediately to mind, and yet we all inherently understand that hazardous and toxic substances are a threat to human health and environment. How can you overcome this, essentially to make the invisible, visible, in order to mobilize attention and efforts at the international level?
ROLPH PAYET: This a daunting challenge, because chemicals and wastes are not something that people immediately relate to. However, when you talk about mobile phones, cars, furniture, food, they relate to this. They think of chemicals as someone in a lab-coat – a scientist. So that is the first problem. The second problem is, when you talk about waste, people think it is not their issue – this is an issue for the garbage collectors! Waste is something people, even politicians, don’t usually want to talk about, and in some cultures waste is seen as taboo. So, you have this double complexity there. The challenge, therefore is how you convert this narrative, into real life stories… connecting the intangible with tangibles, things around us. So, how chemicals are connected to food, connected to your mobile phone, and so on… Most dramatic is how chemicals are connected to your life. Newborns are important to mothers and fathers alike, we pay so much attention to childcare, so when we advocate breastfeeding, of course the milk needs to be healthy and not contain toxic chemicals. With this narrative, mothers become more concerned about what they are consuming, what they are eating, what they are being exposed to, and through the Stockholm Convention’s Global Monitoring Plan we have discovered that in many countries the level of toxic chemicals in breast milk is a cause for concern. In using a human story of a mother and a child we can communicate to society in a more helpful manner. So, focusing on human stories has been our strategy to raise awareness, even among policy makers.
Yes, make it more visible. Unless the whole of society understands, it’s very difficult. One issue which is constantly in the news right now is marine litter, with almost daily images of our oceans awash with plastics, or of wildlife dying from plastic and other pollution. How do the three conventions relate to marine litter and microplastics?
You won’t believe it. Scientists have been talking about this for more than 50 years, around the time I was born. When I graduated from university, and that is way back in 1992, I applied for a research grant to study plastic debris on the uninhabited outer islands of the Seychelles. Where was this plastic coming from? And then when I attended a conference in Miami, it was the umpteenth global conference on marine debris, I shared my research and discovered that like-minded scientists were highlighting this over 30 years ago. Climate change and other global phenomena are subject to this same agnostic response despite clear scientific evidence. That said, I am indeed very motivated that we now have this opportunity to turn the tide on marine plastics so to speak.
Marine plastics might be thousands of miles away, but their origins are a result of our actions, our consumption, our shortsighted actions. However, let me be clear to say that the problem is not plastic per se, as plastic is often useful and indeed critical in many applications. The challenges are rather with the amount and kind of wastes we generate and in the ways we manage them, especially disposable – or single-use – plastics. In our pursuit for development we have become a throw-away society, with little understanding that resources are limited, or indeed that waste can have monetary value.
Where do the international conventions come in? It should be obvious, as we have failed as individual nations to tackle the issue of marine plastic litter, that we need international action, and fast. The Basel Convention in its preamble already sets the stage for dealing with hazardous wastes and other wastes that move between boundaries, and in Article 15 makes explicit reference to the marine environment. So my endeavor is to work with Parties and the wider community, to put in place an action-oriented mechanism to reverse marine plastic litter. There has truly been a huge wave of commitment from all parties to the Convention, and, in fact, last month during one of our intersessional meetings, the government of Norway tabled two proposals to concretely address the issue of marine plastics, within the Convention. Whilst there was broad support, the Parties will need to hammer out the details at our upcoming Conference of the Parties in April next year.
So, these are very concrete steps, which can be used, together with UN Environment and other actors and with other initiatives, to tangibly reverse this trend. Of concern, and this is yet to be confirmed by researchers, is the potential contamination of our food with chemicals leaching out of the degraded plastics in the environment.
Many of these potential chemicals are considered under the Stockholm Convention as being accumulative in our food web, suffering long range transport and persisting in our ecosystem for long periods of time. Which implies we have in less than a hundred years gone full circle: our waste, and chemicals from that waste, can now be increasingly found in our food.
You do a lot with very few people
Aha yes. We work in a matrix environment and in many cases with established processes, and with minimum hierarchical interventions. I feel very fortunate that I can devote my focus to moving those issues forward and interacting in a proactive way with the Parties and other partners.
o, the three conventions are important.
The conventions are legally- binding, and also provide opportunities for countries and the private sector to innovate and develop sustainable green products, adopt a life-cycle approach to products, and engage in sound waste management. The overall objective remains to make our planet cleaner and our people healthier. It is never too late to do what is right, and countries know that!
The challenge is to convert the issue of chemicals and waste to stories that put the human at the center.
This is a good moment to tell you that in the Geneva international community the BRS Secretariat has achieved a very good reputation. A very efficient, professional entity, and with a large mandate. How many people are working at the Secretariat?
Thank you, this is the result of the work of the excellent team that I have in the Secretariat, and the support of our donors and contributions of our many partners. Our staff here is between 40 and 50 dedicated professionals.
Congratulations, leadership is also very important. Now, the Basel, Rotterdam and Stockholm conventions have 186, 160 and 182 Parties, respectively. That’s almost universal coverage. How does work undertaken by Parties to implement these three conventions relate to, or underpin, the Sustainable Development Goals?
Well, we benefit from having so many governments that are concerned about the three conventions, even though these topics are not always politically attractive. For example, at the last meetings of the conference of the parties (or COPs) in 2017, more than 100 ministers from around the world attended, sending a very strong message to my team and I. I am grateful that many of these ministers talk about SDGs and indicate how chemicals and wastes are intrinsically linked. It is an amazing prospect to have made such progress in garnering such high-level political commitment. The SDGs represent a significant opportunity for us to exploit the links, synergies, nexuses and complementarities between economic development and environment, without forgetting the social aspects. Maintaining the big picture can in the end help us to save the planet and the individual at the same time. Global agreements help us in monitoring our progress, agree on what actions to be taken and when. When we talk about chemicals and wastes, we should indeed be talking about food, water, jobs and indeed poverty alleviation! All SDG topics.
Do you also engage in the field, do your people go to the field, to see examples like the one you are telling me about?
Yes, we do but in a limited way because we are a small Secretariat. However, Parties have created a global network of regional centers. There are 27 around the world – they work with counties, they are our frontline organizations and they make a big difference in reaching local levels. They are our living “tentacles” in all countries. One of my priorities when I joined the Secretariat was to strengthen their work – because I felt this was the way to create the most impact and also to learn the most.
I am happy to hear that because as you know, at the UN, we like to create partnerships – and I am sure this leads to partnerships. Now, coming from The Seychelles, from a “Small Island Developing State”, please tell us how your career brought you here, to Geneva, to the UN, and are there advantages to being located in this city, when thinking of implementing actions around the world to protect human health and the environment?
First, when you grow up on a distant island, you feel isolated but as you become more aware you realize you are so close to the rest of the word. Take marine plastics for example. I saw it firsthand on my islands and found out it came from Africa and from Asia, transported across the oceans for thousands of kilometers. So, we are not an island, we are part of the world! Secondly, when you live on an island, when it rains, within minutes, you see the effect on the coastal area. So, when there is pollution in the mountains, you immediately see it downstream, on the coast. These island insights have helped me to make connections between human activities and the resulting impacts.
So our people are disconnected between their actions and the result, and this is the problem with chemicals and waste, particularly waste. Today we generate waste and we put it in our bin in our kitchen, we put it outside and expect someone will pick it up. You know what happens to it? We don’t know.
Or we don’t care.
Exactly, today, some of that waste ends up in West Africa. Did you know that only about 20% of electronic wastes are documented to be recycled in proper facilities, and here we are talking about millions of tons? Do you know where your discarded mobile is? Most probably it is in the hands of a young boy in West Africa, with no job. Since mobile phones have gold and other precious metals in it, he might burn it to get the gold to sell in exchange for food. In that process he has inhaled a concoction of toxic chemicals and released other chemicals into the atmosphere, the soil or the marine environment. What is the health cost to that boy, to that country, what is the cost to our environment?
I hadn’t seen that island perspective, and it is quite unique and revealing. Now, the contrast between the beautiful Seychelles and Geneva is quite a drastic change. Do you see advantages to being in Geneva?
I was deeply influenced by Jane Goodall whom I met many years ago: she told me she spent her lifetime working with chimpanzees and at 60 she realized that by staying with them she was not going to save them. To save them she needed to engage with policy-makers at the global level. Staying on my island was not sufficient for me to change the world. Geneva is an important city because it convenes a significant proportion of the international community, including especially a host of influential organizations also working – like the Secretariat but in differing spheres – on sound management of chemicals and waste. And indeed our host, the Swiss government, remains very committed and supportive.
We have only one planet. Lastly, what secrets to a successful international career can you pass on to young people here, or at home, who might have ambitions to work for the United Nations one day? Are there key features or motivations you would look out for, in your colleagues and in your team?
First, this is not a job, it is a passion. Yes, we have challenges as an organization, but on the flipside if we stick our necks in the sand – then who will fight for the weak, for the unspoken, for those affected by our action? Who? Who will represent the planet? I also learned a lot growing up in the Seychelles from the local people. They have so much to teach us. So, learning is my second secret. Learning should never stop! And finally, one has to have a clear vision, be able to share that vision, and in sharing that vision bring people together to be able to bring change, that is fundamental. Along the way, perseverance is important: remember 30 years for global attention on plastics! Some say that the UN is a very slow organization, however some will tell you slow cooking is good when compared to fast food! In the UN we try to hear and to listen to everybody, so that no one is left behind. That’s our calling!
Thank you for sharing this advice and wisdom with younger people. These words will resonate with them. I sincerely thank you for this interview.
For more on the work of the Basel, Rotterdam, and Stockholm conventions see www.brsmeas.org or follow the Secretariat’s Twitter messaging on @brsmeas.
|
|
As part of the Geneva World Environment Day 2018 events in Geneva, Abiola Olanipekun describes how the chemicals and wastes conventions contribute to global efforts to Beat Plastic Pollution.
How do the Basel and Stockholm conventions relate to marine litter and plastic pollution?
Opening Remarks delivered by Abiola Olanipekun, Chief of the Science and Technical Assistance (STA) Branch at the UN Palais des Nations, June 5th 2018
Ladies and gentlemen,
On behalf of the Secretariat of the Basel, Rotterdam and Stockholm Conventions, hosted by the UN Environment Programme here in Geneva, it is a pleasure and an honour for me to be part of the 2018 World Environment Day celebration here today to look at solutions to beat plastic pollution.
The Basel Convention - on the control of transboundary movements of hazardous waste and their disposal - aims to protect human health and the environment against the adverse effects of hazardous wastes and ‘other wastes’ - namely household wastes and incinerator ash.
The Basel Convention covers many issues which are at the heart of preventing and minimizing the generation of wastes, including those ending up in the ocean. Much of the marine litter and microplastics found in the sea may be determined as “waste” as defined under the convention, although not all will necessary fall within this definition.
Marine litter is a transboundary issue. Parties are to therefore take measures to ensure that the generation of hazardous and other wastes is reduced to a minimum; and to ensure the availability of adequate disposal facilities for the environmentally sound management of hazardous wastes and other wastes.
Under the Basel Convention, a number of guidance documents addressing issues related to marine plastic litter and microplastics have been developed with focus on environmentally sound management, efficient strategies for achieving the prevention and minimization of the generation of hazardous and other wastes, and their disposal including improving the sea-land interface.
The Stockholm Convention on Persistent Organic Pollutants – or POPs - is also aimed at protecting human health and the environment from chemicals knowns as persistent organic pollutants. These are organic chemicals that persist in the environment, bioaccumulate in humans and wildlife, have harmful effects, and have the potential for long-range environmental transport.
Exposure to POPs can cause serious health problems including certain cancers, birth defects, dysfunctional immune and reproductive systems, greater susceptibility to disease and even diminished intelligence.
As of 2018, the convention controls 28 POPs, including those which have been used as additives, flame retardants or plasticizers in plastics. Plastics can adsorb POPs such as PCB, DDT and dioxins and these are frequently detected in marine plastic litter.
In 2017 the Basel Convention Conference of Parties decided that its subsidiary body, the Open-ended working group should consider relevant options available under the convention to further address marine plastic litter and microplastics. That group will meet in September 2018 here in Geneva.
The new Household waste partnership established under the Basel Convention at the same time, explores the environmentally sound management of household waste including plastics, while the global network of Basel and Stockholm Conventions’ regional centres explores measures for the prevention and environmentally sound management of plastic wastes, marine plastic litter and microplastics.
Just last week staff from the Secretariat contributed to the 1st meeting of the UN Environment Ad-Hoc Expert Working Group on Marine Litter in Nairobi.
The BRS Secretariat is thus very busy facilitating and participating in international policy efforts and actions to beat marine pollution. It’s a pleasure and an honour to be here and to learn from such an interesting panel of innovators, explorers, and entrepreneurs.
Let’s together BEAT PLASTIC POLLUTION: We join our voice with millions of others to say:
“If you can’t reuse it – refuse it”.
For more information:
On Marine Litter and the three conventions see:
https://synergies.pops.int/Implementation/MediaResources/SpeechesandInterviews/tabid/2946/language/en-US/Default.aspx
On Household Waste see:
https://www.basel.int/Implementation/HouseholdWastePartnerships/Overview/tabid/5082/Default.aspx
On global efforts to beat plastic pollution, see UN Environment:
https://www.unenvironment.org/news-and-stories/press-release/new-report-offers-global-outlook-efforts-beat-plastic-pollution
|
|
At the Guatemala Bonn Challenge, BRS Executive Secretary stresses importance of sound management of chemicals and waste and its interconnectivity with climate change.
Read Rolph Payet’s keynote speech at the opening of the Guatemala Bonn Challenge 2018
Delivered by Mr. Rolph Payet, Executive Secretary of the Basel, Rotterdam and Stockholm Conventions
Acting President and VicePresident of the Republic of Guatemala, Dr Jafeth Cabrera
Mr Alfonso Alonzo Vargas, Minister for Environment and Natural Resources, Government of Guatemala
Mr Jose Antonio Galdamez, Minister for Natural Resources, Environment and Mining, Government of Honduras
Mr Jochen Flasbarth, State Secretary, Federal Ministry of Environment, Nature Conservation and Nuclear Safety, Germany
Distinguished delegates,
Ladies and Gentlemen,
On behalf of the Secretariat of the Basel, Rotterdam and Stockholm Conventions, hosted by the UN Environment Programme, it is a pleasure and an honour for me to be back visiting this beautiful country to address you today at the Bonn Challenge Guatemala 2018.
Allow me to start by commending the vision and long-term commitment of the Government of Guatemala for its pledge to restore 1.2 million hectares of degraded and deforested land by 2020, as a contribution to the global Bonn Challenge, which in turn also contributes towards the implementation of the 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development and the attainment of the sustainable development goals (SDGs). This is not only an ambitious commitment but one which transcends the way all the people of Guatemala live and interact with nature, and how they are securing a better future for their children.
Forests are not just about trees – they are about life and prosperity - they provide us with water, food, medicine, clothing, shelter, energy or fuel, protection against floods, natural disasters, natural storage for carbon, attenuation of pollution, chemicals and recycling of nutrients, revenue from its resources, tourism, and the wonderful air that we breathe.
However, much of our forests around the world remains in a very poor state. We have failed to learn from past civilisations that revered the forests and this will not only cost us our communities and livelihoods but also our planet. Due to the world’s rapidly growing population and increasing demands for shelter, food and fuel production, as well as clearing of forests for agriculture, dams, mining, use of pesticides, mining, rapid urbanization, waste generation and infrastructure development continues to contribute to global scale land degradation and increase in pollution. In many countries, hundreds of square kilometers of land have a legacy of contaminated land resulting from mining, past industrial activity, intensive agriculture, chemical stockpiles and waste management. According to the 2015 status of the World’s Soil Resources Report, published by FAO, soil pollution is one of the ten major soil threats.
Estimates from the World Health Organization indicate that at least 12.6 million people died as a result of living or working in an unhealthy environment in 2012, primarily from environmental risk factors, such as air, water and soil pollution, chemical exposures, climate change, and ultraviolet radiation.
We have good news however.. Another study has confirmed that living near nature and trees is good for human health — and can even save lives. A report by the Nature Conservancy finds compelling evidence that planting trees in cities can result in cooler temperatures and reduced air pollution for millions of urban residents.
Those efforts to reverse this worrying trend have been supported through action by the international community which has established global regimes and programmes to reverse land degradation, deforestation and minimize pollution.
Of these, I represent three global instruments, namely the Basel, Rotterdam and Stockholm Conventions, which share a common objective to protect human health and the environment from the adverse effects of chemicals and wastes. The Basel Convention aims to reduce the transboundary movements of hazardous and other wastes, prevent and minimize their generation and promote their environmentally sound management. The Rotterdam Convention promotes shared responsibility and cooperative efforts among parties in the international trade of certain hazardous chemicals, and contributes to the environmentally sound use of those hazardous chemicals by facilitating information exchange about their characteristics, and by providing for a national decision-making process on their import and export. The Stockholm Convention on Persistent Organic Pollutants (POPs) aims to eliminate or reduce the releases of such chemicals into the environment. Ministers attending the High Level Segment of the Conference of the Parties to these three Conventions in May last year, which included the Minister of Environment from Guatemala, concluded that: “There can be no sustainable development without a commitment to a pollution-free planet, and this requires sound management of chemicals and waste.”
You would agree with me that chemicals, many of which are quite invisible, can be found everywhere in our daily lives as we have become dependent on them. The sound management of chemical wastes is an essential contributor not only to the environmental, but also social and economic dimensions of sustainable development; it represents an illustration of a truly key cross‐cutting issue which can provide practical solutions to global and local challenges.
Thus, its full integration in the global sustainable development policy is crucial for the societies to have clean air and water, sanitation, safe food, sustainable ecosystems and cities while promoting healthy lives, safe jobs and sustainable economic growth.
During the 3rd United Nations Environment Assembly ( UNEA 3) held last December, Ministers of Environment issued a declaration which committed to increasing research and development, targeting pollution through tailored actions, moving societies towards sustainable lifestyles based on a circular economy, promoting fiscal incentives to move markets and promote positive change, strengthening and enforcing laws on pollution and much more.
When we undertake land restoration, reafforestation and forest rehabilitation we generate a wide range of benefits–not only forest quantity and quality, but enhanced food security, improved air and water quality, reduced chemical pollution, climate change resilience, job creation, and more. And of course, land restoration can bring economic benefits such as tourism, eco- tourism, promotion of indigenous people’s alternative lively-hoods, agroforestry. There, we should acknowledge and continue to encourage the participation of the private sector, NGOs and local governments.
Thus, efforts such as the Guatemala Bonn Challenge, contributes immensely towards ensuring a sustainable and pollution free environment for tomorrow’s generations!
In closing, allow me to thank once again the Government and the people of Guatemala, for this long term investment in their environment and people, and for their warm welcome! Thank you Vice-President Cabrera, Minister Alfonso for your leadership and commitment to this important initiative, and you can count on my support and that of my organization in this important endeavor.
Thank you to the government of Germany, to the International Conservation Union for Nature and the Rainforest Alliance for your support and commitment towards this important initiative.
Thank you
|
|
Read the latest BRS interview, with Moustafa Kamel, Director of the Basel Convention Regional Centre in Egypt.
Towards the sound management of wastes in the Arabic-speaking countries
Interview between Charlie Avis, Public Information Officer for the Secretariat of the Basel, Rotterdam, and Stockholm Conventions, and Professor Moustafa Kamel, Director of the Basel Convention Regional Centre in Cairo, Egypt
Charlie Avis (CA): Good morning Mostafa and greetings from Geneva. Thank you for answering my questions which aim to shed light on the work you are doing to support the sound management of chemicals and waste across the Arabic-speaking countries.
Mostafa Kamel (MK): Thank you, Charlie, we are delighted to be featured.
CA: Firstly, please tell us a little bit about the Regional Centre (RC) itself. Where are you housed, how many staff do you have, and when was the RC established: basically how did the RC come about?
MK: Of course I would like first to introduce myself; my name is Prof. Moustafa Hussein Kamel, the Director of BCRC-Egypt. Beside being BCRC-Egypt Director, I am a Professor at the Faculty of Science, Cairo University, in Egypt.
Regarding BCRC-Egypt, BCRC-Egypt is a regional centre that facilitates the implementation of the multilateral Environmental agreements in 22 Arab states in North Africa and West Asia. The conference of parties of the Basel convention adopted decision VI/9 to establish BCRC-Egypt in Egypt. The Government of Egypt has signed the framework agreement with the Secretariat of the Basel Convention for the legal establishment of the centre, and it is now hosted within one of the most outstanding academic and research institutes in the region; the Cairo University, since 2004.
BCRC-Egypt has a unique issue than all the regional centres around the world, that it serves countries in two continents, Asia and Africa. This adds richness to the knowledge and experience which may be generated from interacting with the 22 Arab states.
Following the ratification of the Framework Agreement by the Egyptian Parliament in 2005, BCRC-Egypt had its own structure and bank account with flexibility to assign part-time consultants and administrative staff for implementing projects and other capacity building activities. The BCRC-Egypt structure includes a Steering Committee of the Centre (CSC) with membership of the representatives of four rotating member countries (currently Saudi Arabia, Sudan, Bahrain and Djibouti), the host country, Egypt, the representative of the Secretariat of the Basel Convention, The representative of the Arab League, President Cairo University (Observer), Vice President for Environmental Affairs, Cairo University (Observer) and the Director of BCRC-Egypt.
CA: Now, and at the risk of generalisation, what are the main constraints or challenges to protecting health and environment in the region from the harmful effects of toxic chemicals and waste?
MK: Charlie, The Chemicals and waste issue has become a very hot topic around the world for its environmental, economic and health impact of course. Currently, there is a great global need to address that issue and try to find a solution for it, especially with the less developing countries. Of course, I am aware that the international bodies such as the UN, the UNDP, the UNEP and Multilateral Environmental agreements Secretariat has been exerting great efforts to assist all the countries, especially the less developing ones in achieving the sound management of chemicals and waste. However, I still believe there is a role, which the regional centres like BCRC-Egypt, should play in order to enhance those efforts and maximize the benefit of the less developing countries from them.
Serving 22 Arab states makes their needs and conditions vary according to their political, economic, environmental and developmental circumstances. This huge variations make the achieving the sustainable development more difficult, which requires more efforts from all the stakeholders, beside BCRC-Egypt of course.
CA: Of these, which would you say is the main priority theme, or core business, for the Centre?
MK: Actually, BCRC-Egypt vision is to be a credible Regional Centre capable of providing Quality Sound Management of Hazardous Wastes services and consultations acknowledged by the 22 member Arab countries, BRS and the COP. While its mission, is to provide services for implementation of the Basel Convention to the Arab Countries. We, in BCRC-Egypt, have been always communicating with the Arab states we serve, to explore their needs that require the intervention of BCRC-Egypt to enhance their implementation of those countries to the multilateral environmental agreements. Examples of those needs are:
- Legal drafting.
- National reporting to BRS.
- Hazardous waste (HW) management
- Control of illegal HW transboundary movements
- Management of medical waste.
- Planning, designing, and managing HW disposal/recycling facilities.
- Development of HW inventories.
- Management and/or recycling of specific waste
- Analytical HW identification and classification.
CA: Marine litter is gaining ever-greater visibility as a global and regional problem, and was the subject of significant attention at the recent U.N. Environment Assembly last month in Nairobi. Your region shares several vitally important marine environments. How is the Centre responding to these challenges, and do you see hopes for progress?
MK: BCRC-Egypt has always been working on updating its mandate according to the Arab states needs and the new environmental updates that come on the surface through the concerned international organizations Caring about the marine sector is one of the sustainable development goals which was adopted by the UN in 2015. Still, even before that, it has been an important issue for all the Arab states that have important marine environments. Therefore, BCRC-Egypt has been encouraging the Arab states before and after 2015 on taking the most feasible measures to protect its marine environments according to the international standards. We always receive very promising cooperative responses from the Arab states.
CA: The Centre has a long tradition and proud record and has clearly achieved a lot, but is there a single achievement of which you are most proud?
MK: BCRC-Egypt through the past few years focused its efforts on strengthening the regional cooperation of Arab states in hazardous waste management and trans-boundary control which should support compliance with the Basel Convention in the Arab states, inspite of the political instability facing few States in the region.
Accordingly, through the past five years, BCRC-Egypt conducted a total of 28 activities, 19 workshops (18 Regional and 1 National in Egypt), 9 Trainings (7 Regional (2 “Hands On” trainings in Nigeria and Finland) and 2 National in Tunisia and Lebanon). All the activities focused on the capacity building, knowledge sharing and technology transfer among the Arab States. Also, BCRC-Egypt signed 3 MoUs with Regional Centres of Basel and Stockholm convention in China, India and Indonesia, in order to enhance collaboration and synergy between the regional centres of the Multilateral Environmental Agreements (MEAS).BCRC-Egypt initiated cooperation with national, regional and international NGOs, out of its faith of the common responsibility of all stake holders for how our environment could be better. Finally, BCRC-Egypt has completed, with the help of international professional experts, a draft for e-waste legislation, as guidance for the Arab states in e-waste management. BCRC-Egypt aims to translate the legislation into English language, to allow discussions with Parties worldwide.
CA: Our readers might like to know you have active communications platforms such as the Centre’s facebook and twitter accounts. How important is social media for explaining your work to a wider audience?
MK: BCRC-Egypt managed to maintain and update its website to include all the news, activities and structure of BCRC-Egypt and all the international entities that are related to BCRC-Egypt areas of interest (bcrc-egypt.com). The website provides users with all the multilateral environmental agreements (Basel, Stockholm and Rotterdam) documents and guidelines. Also the website can provide its users with information related to other relevant conventions and issues, such as Minamata Convention, the SAICM and the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) which were adopted by the UN in 2015 to achieve the 2030 Agenda. Also BCRC-Egypt continued its communication with the Arab members through social media, such as Facebook (www.facebook.com/BCRCEgypt.OfficialPage), twitter (www. twitter.com/bcrcegypt) and YouTube (www.youtube.com/user/bcrcegypt). On the other side, the media and the press (local and regional) have followed BCRC-Egypt activities due to the importance of the topics addressed in those activities on environment. Finally, BCRC-Egypt issued many non-periodic newsletters in Arabic language which summarized some of its activities.
CA: Thank you, for your time and for your answers, and for sharing your insights.
MK: Thank you, Charlie.
and if you need any further information on our centre and its activities, or would like to sign-up to receive our newsletter please go to our website www.bcrc-egypt.com
|
|
Read Rolph Payet’s opening remarks to the national high-level forum on chemicals and waste in Trinidad and Tobago, 20 March.
Towards the sound management of chemicals and waste in the Caribbean
Hilton Trinidad Conference Centre, Port-Of-Spain
March 20th, 2018
(remarks delivered remotely via skype)
Your Excellency, the honourable Camille Robinson - Regis, Minister of Planning and Development of Trinidad and Tobago
Excellencies and distinguished guests,
Ms. Jewel Batchasingh, Acting Director of the Basel Convention Regional Centre for the Caribbean,
Distinguished participants,
Ladies and gentlemen,
It is a pleasure and an honour to have been invited to address you during the opening ceremony of this high-level forum on “Policy and Programmatic Approaches to Sustainable Integrated Waste and Chemicals Management in Trinidad and Tobago. I wish I could be there in person with you, however I am also thankful to the wonders of modern technology that has allowed us to bridge the distance gap enabling me to join you from Geneva.
In its report released last October, the Lancet Commission on Pollution and Health found that “Pollution is the largest environmental cause of disease and premature death in the world today. Diseases caused by pollution were responsible for an estimated 9 million premature deaths in 2015—16% of all deaths worldwide— three times more deaths than from AIDS, tuberculosis, and malaria combined and 15 times more than from all wars and other forms of violence.”
These figures are of great concern, we live in a fast-changing world, surrounded with potential environmental threats that affect us and our future generations on a daily basis. By the middle of the 21st century 9000 million human beings are expected to generate over 13000 tons of waste, that is about 20 percent more than that generated in 2009. This increase in waste generation is most apparent in urban areas. Today more than 50 per cent of the world’s population lives in cities and by 2050 this number is expected to rise to around 70 per cent. Small Island Developing States are no exception.
At least 10% of the 100 million tons of plastic we use every year end up in the oceans. This is the equivalent to the weight of 700 billion plastic bottles. Put on tops of each other these bottles would reach further than the sun. But they are not going to the sun, they are going into our oceans and will stay there for a long time affecting nature’s ecosystems and our lives.
Although Chemicals and waste issues have been underplayed in the environmental agenda in the past, times are changing fast. The sustainable management of chemicals and waste is now seen as a fundamental cornerstone of the objectives in the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) set out in the 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development where the Basel, Rotterdam and Stockholm Conventions are highlighted as the key legally binding instruments whose implementation contributes towards achieving by 2030 all the goals of the 2030 agenda.
As part of the key players contributing towards the implementation of these three conventions is the network of 22 regional centres for capacity-building and the transfer of technology which have been established under the aegis of the Basel and the Stockholm Conventions, one of which is your host today, the Basel Convention Regional Centre for the Caribbean or BCRC Caribbean as it is more commonly known.
Since establishment in October 2004 when its Framework Agreement was signed between the Government of Trinidad and the Secretariat of the Basel Convention on behalf of the Conference of the Parties to the Convention, the BCRC- Caribbean has played a fundamental role providing capacity-building and assistance to 13 countries in the region. More recently under the able leadership of the outgoing Director, Mr. Ahmad Khan, the centre demonstrated that it has the required technical know-how in the fields of wastes and chemicals, playing a key role in fostering the coordinated implementation of the chemicals and wastes conventions in the Caribbean. It is worth noting that the Centre has been successful in mobilizing more than 20 million USD for activities and projects in the last couple of years. As you know the negotiations are now ongoing on the GEF 7, thus I take the opportunity to invite all the SIDs in the region to ensure that SIDS issues are reflected and the GEF has enough resources to implement the Conventions.
I want to highlight that this region is very lucky to have a regional Centre that caters for the needs of SIDs, providing assistance for the implementation of the conventions and which is actually in a SID. There is only one other such regional Centre amongst our network of centres and that is the one for the Pacific located in Samoa. SIDs in the African region are not that lucky, they are served by centres located in the continent.
The Conference of the Parties at its meeting in 2015 recognized the achievements of the centre and evaluated its performance, placing it along-side the top performing regional centres. We expect this trend will continue under the leadership of the Acting Director Ms. Jewel Batchsingh and that it will be recognized by the Conference of the Parties at its next meeting in May 2019 when it evaluates again the performance of its regional centres.
Ladies and gentlemen, over the past 20 years the BCRC Caribbean has demonstrated through its activities its dedication towards the achievement of the environmentally sound management of chemicals and all wastes throughout their life cycle, this is also testimony of the commitment the Government of Trinidad Tobago has towards the region and the world to implement the Basel, Rotterdam and Stockholm Conventions as well as the Minamata Convention and SAICM. I look forward to continuing strengthening our collaboration as we Continue to implement the chemicals and wastes conventions.
Before I finish, I want to invite you to celebrate! To celebrate today the 10th anniversary of the entry into force of the Stockholm Convention for Cuba! And to celebrate more than 20 years of activities of the BCRC.
It only rests for me to wish you the best in your work in this High-level Forum over the next 2 days and I look forward to meeting you all in person in the near future.
Thank you!
|
|
Ridwan Tamin, Indonesia, talks to the Secretariat in the latest in our series highlighting the 26 BRS Regional Centres.
Read the South-East Asian perspective on soundly managing chemicals and wastes
Interview between Charlie Avis, Public Information Officer for the Secretariat of the Basel, Rotterdam, and Stockholm Conventions, and Ridwan Tamin, Director of the Basel and Stockholm Conventions’ Regional Centre for SE Asia, located in Jakarta, Indonesia (BCRC-SCRC Indonesia).
Charlie Avis (CA): Good morning and thank you for sharing the work of the Regional Centre for South-East Asia. Our readers would like to know what your work is all about and what are the major issues in your region!
Ridwan Tamin (RT): Thank you, Charlie, at present our Centre is mandated to carry out capacity building and technology transfer activities for countries within the southeast Asia region in fulfilling the objectives of the Basel and Stockholm Conventions. At present BCRC-SEA serves 10 (ten) countries within the southeast Asia region namely Brunei Darussalam, Cambodia, Lao PDR, Malaysia, Myanmar, Philippines, Singapore, Thailand and Vietnam. All countries have ratified the Basel Convention. Our core functions are on training, technology transfer, information, consulting and awareness raising. Issues faced within our area vary among countries ranging from issues on illegal transboundary trade of hazardous chemicals and waste, electronic waste, obligations to review and update national implementation of POPs, etc. Individual countries such as Indonesia may face particular issues such as the concern on mercury emission since Indonesia is considered as one of the largest coal users in the world.
CA: Firstly, please tell us a little bit about the Regional Centre (RC) itself. Where are you housed, institutionally and geographically, how many staff do you have, and when was the RC established: basically how did the Centre come about?
RT: The Regional Centre is housed within the Ministry of Environment and Forestry, formerly the Ministry of Environment. The office is located in Jakarta, we currently have 5 staff members including the Director, supported by 2 part-time scholars/technical staff dealing with the various themes that we are doing. The Centre was established by Decision III/19 during COP III in 1995, by which Indonesia was selected to host a Basel Convention Regional Centre. By 1997 the Centre under the guidance of the Ministry of Environment became operational under the supervision of the Director of Hazardous Waste, Ministry of Environment. In formalizing the Centre, Indonesia signed the Framework Agreement on the establishment of BCRC-SEA with the Secretariat of the Basel Convention in 29 October 2004 which was later endorsed by Presidential Regulation No. 60 Year 2005 on 12 October 2005. Hence the Centre was allocated a routine budget and office space within the Ministry and appointment of the Director of BCRC-SEA was by the Minister of Environment.
CA: Do you serve all of the countries of the region, how many Parties are there, and how do you manage with languages?
RT: We serve the 10 parties within the southeast Asian region which coincidentally are members of ASEAN (the Association of Southeast Asian Nations). The common language for communicating between countries is English.
CA: What are the main technical issues or focus areas covered by the RC?
RT: Lately the focus towards e-waste has been increasing. Another issue that the countries have in common are the movement of Illegal waste, mercury issues. The Centre hosts meetings and workshops prior to COP Conventions, training on POPs. Also the center was involved in the review and update of POPs national implementation plan and aftermath activities such as follow up on PCB, identifying laboratory capabilities to analyze POPs, etc.
CA: Tell me, please, in a nutshell what does “Synergies” mean to you (in relation to sound management of chemicals and waste)?
RT: In a nutshell it means identifying the correct and precise counterpart having the same visionary stance in carrying out thematic activities of concern to its success. No BRS activity are stand-alone activities requiring the involvement of various related agencies/institutions. Unless there is same perception and strong common interest shared among parties or individuals to carry out a special job or particular activity then the chances of it failing becomes great and disappointment.
CA: The Minamata Convention recently entered into force and COP1 took place in September in Geneva. How does that impact on your work?
RT: Actually before COP1 Minamata entered into force, the Center had been offered an assignment to conduct the study of mercury from power plants in Indonesia. Similar works have been carried out in South Africa, Russia, India and China. This activity was for one year and nearing its final phase.
CA: Finally, what are the major challenges ahead in this region, and how would you like the RC to evolve, say in the next 5 to 10 years, in order to meet them?
RT: Major challenges are e-waste which is at the tip of the iceberg, illegal trade of hazardous waste which will requiring more enforcement capabilities. Countries within the southeast Asian countries will have to start identifying more POPs chemicals outside the 24 by the SC as guidance for the Ministry of Trade, meaning that would also have to update their NIPs, a lot of work…technical as well as coordination among stakeholders.
CA: Thank you, for your time and for your answers. Good luck with your important work!
RT: Thank you, Charlie, and if you need any further information on our centre and its activities, please go to our website www.bcrc-sea.org and we look forward to further working with you!
|
|
Naoko Ishii
CEO and Chairperson, Global Environment Facility
4 May 2017, Geneva Switzerland
Opening remarks of the 2017 COPs High Level Segment
Naoko Ishii
CEO and Chairperson, Global Environment Facility
4 May 2017, Geneva Switzerland
Excellencies and colleagues.
It is wonderful to be back in Geneva for the joint Basel, Rotterdam and Stockholm Convention COPs. Thank you for inviting me to address the High Level Segment.
The world is in a different place today, compared to two years ago when we last gathered here. Since then, we have reached important milestone agreements—including the 2030 agenda and its Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) and the Paris agreement. We are moving into action and implementation, based on commitments and agreements already reached. As countries tackle the sustainability agenda, they are increasingly recognizing the importance of the chemicals and waste agenda as the catalyst for sound economic and social systems.
I applaud all of you for your tremendous effort to bring the chemicals and waste agenda to the forefront of the global sustainability efforts. I am grateful to Rolph Payet, Executive Secretary, for his strong leadership and for facilitating stronger partnerships with the GEF.
Global pollution is worsening at alarming rates. The continued use of toxic chemicals puts unsustainable pressure on our global environment, compromising our land, forests, water, oceans, and our lives. We are pushing the vital Earth systems towards and beyond the tipping point, with devastating consequences. Business as usual cannot place us on a positive trajectory towards a sustainable, detoxified future.
Chemicals and waste is not an isolated topic. It is integrated into the key economic systems, and needs to be addressed systematically. With the world’s population rising to nine billion by mid-century and with a rising middle class, there is no other option than to transform current production and consumption patterns. The future success of the Chemicals Conventions and our ability to eliminate toxic chemicals and waste depend on such transformations, in our cities, industries, and food systems. We must embrace supply chain interventions, innovative waste management approaches, and alternatives to harmful chemicals.
Economic sectors such manufacturing, building, agriculture, and healthcare are not only highly dependent on chemicals, they also offer great opportunities for reducing chemicals and waste through innovative approaches, like sustainable chemistry and circular economy. Further, our experiences show that initiatives in these sectors offer significant synergy potential for climate action, responsible consumption, life on land, and other SDG themes.
I am therefore absolutely delighted that the Ministerial Roundtables discussions will explore: opportunities for a detoxified future in the 2030 Agenda and SDGs; opportunities for strengthened implementation through partnerships; and opportunities for reducing waste and pollution while enabling economic and social prosperity. We clearly share a common vision, as these three opportunities are the key themes that GEF also stands ready to support. In fact, these themes are central to the ongoing GEF-7 replenishment, which will be guided and informed by the COP outcomes. I look forward to the discussion on your national priorities and a united way forward for the BRS Conventions, towards higher impact.
Our ambition is high, since the task ahead is huge. We must work with urgency to bring about transformations through political leadership, coalitions for change, and innovation. The GEF is committed to working with you in this journey towards a “future detoxified.”
Thank you very much.
|
|
Ms. Maria Helena Semedo
FAO Deputy Director-General - Climate and Natural Resources
4 May 2017, Geneva Switzerland
Opening remarks of the 2017 COPs High Level Segment
Ms. Maria Helena Semedo
FAO Deputy Director-General - Climate and Natural Resources
4 May 2017, Geneva Switzerland
Excellencies, Distinguished panelists and guests, Ladies and Gentlemen,
It is my honour to join you here today in Geneva. Food is the most basic human right yet nearly 800 million people still suffer from hunger in the world. For the most part, they live in rural areas of developing countries and are involved in agriculture. A half a billion smallholder farmers ‐who produce 80 percent of the food supply in their countries – are struggling to make a living. The world’s poor and hungry are most vulnerable to the adverse effects of hazardous pesticides, chemicals and wastes that are the focus of the Basel, Rotterdam and Stockholm Conventions.Growth in the agriculture sector remains one of the most cost‐effective means for developing nations to reduce poverty and end food insecurity. This is why sustainable agriculture and food security go hand‐in‐hand in achieving the aims of the 2030 Agenda to eradicate hunger and all forms of malnutrition. FAO’s strategic framework is aligned to this global vision, integrating agriculture, forestry and fisheries with the social, economic and environmental dimensions of sustainability. Sustainable agriculture must also contribute to detoxifying the air, water and soil.
Ladies and gentlemen,
FAO works with countries to reduce the foot print of agriculture and to address the underlying causes of pollution that could compromise agriculture. FAO hosts over 70 instruments and mechanisms on the sustainability of sectoral and cross‐sectoral issues. Among them is the Rotterdam Convention, in partnership with UNEP. To deal with harmful chemicals in pesticides, FAO‐WHO International Code of Conduct on Pesticide Management provides standards of conduct on sound pesticide management for all stakeholders involved in the pesticide life cycle from formulation to disposal. If misused, pesticides suppress the natural pest control mechanisms of agro‐ecosystems and exacerbate pest problems. There are adverse effects of pesticides on biodiversity, such as the decline in the populations of birds, insects, and other pollinators which are vital for food production. Pollinators are responsible for about 35 percent of the world’s crop production, increasing outputs of about 75 percent of the leading food crops worldwide. Therefore, to guarantee food for all, it is crucial to ensure that pesticides do not threaten pollinators. Addressing the use of highly hazardous pesticides and promoting good agricultural practices to minimize the use of agrochemicals have been a special focus area for FAO.
To give another example, the quantity of plastic and microplastic debris in the ocean has become a growing international concern in recent years. Marine litter and microplastics add to the challenges currently faced by fisheries and aquaculture. To help detoxify our oceans and seas, FAO has teamed with UNEP to identify possible measures and best available techniques and environmental practices to prevent the accumulation of microplastics in the marine environment.
Ladies and Gentlemen,
Be assured that FAO is committed to exploring innovative solutions, supporting dialogue, sharing information and enabling policies towards sustainable agriculture and a future detoxified. To do so, FAO promotes an ecosystem approach for the integrated management of land, water and living resources for conservation and sustainable use in an equitable way. By working at the field level, the benefits of more efficient use of inputs, such as pesticides, are evident. Farmers, fishers and foresters have also demonstrated their ability to work together, share knowledge and expertise in finding innovative approaches to developing more efficient and resilient production systems. Robust governance structures, strong institutions, ministerial collaboration and international cooperation enable countries to benefit more fully from global instruments such as the Basel, Rotterdam and Stockholm Conventions.
The way forward is clear. We must take concerted global action on hazardous chemicals and wastes. We have made good progress in putting together mechanisms, frameworks and instruments at national regional and global levels. What is needed is greater political will to take advantage of these mechanisms. We must work together to protect the planet for our children and our children’s children.
Thank you
|
|
Ms. Kate Gilmore
United Nations Deputy High Commissioner for Human Rights
4 May 2017, Geneva Switzerland
Opening remarks of the 2017 COPs High Level Segment
Ms. Kate Gilmore
United Nations Deputy High Commissioner for Human Rights
4 May 2017, Geneva Switzerland
We are gathered here today to witness a solemn matrimony between sound management of chemicals and protection of human rights, a union not to be entered into unadvisedly or lightly, but reverently and soberly. If anyone can show just cause why they may not be lawfully joined together, let them speak now or forever hold their peace.
Well, this union between sound management of chemicals and waste and human rights is no celebrity marriage. We have been going out together for far too long – ducking the stricture of commitment and disappointing many a would be match‐maker! Ours is far too well‐hidden a relationship and even a union actively opposed by some. And yet the relationship between us is close, intimate and inviolable.
I hope you will forgive me if I take us back in time a little to illustrate just how established our relationship is, even if troubled. Allow me to remind us of our first date. I am not sure who asked who out first, but I do know that people’s rights and heavy metal (and don’t mean rock bands) were involved from the very outset of this journey of search for sound management of chemicals and toxic waste.
On April 21, 1956, a five‐year‐old girl exhibiting puzzling and disturbing symptoms was examined at a factory hospital.
A child at a health service in the context of heavy industry. It is worth emphasizing that children are particularly vulnerable to adult thoughtless disregard as they make their developmental journey into adulthood. And this is as apparent in the consequences for them of exposure to toxic chemicals and pollution, as it is in other area affecting human development. For children are those most vulnerable to toxics and pollution. Numerous impediments to full enjoyment of health and wellbeing are linked to childhood exposure to toxins, including developmental disorders, infertility, respiratory illnesses. Many consequences do not manifest for years or even decades after exposure. The implications for children but are so severe that doctors refer to the present state of impacts on children’s health as a “silent pandemic” while the extreme consequences for the new born are such that paediatricians also refer to children as being born “pre‐polluted”.
The drafters of the UN Convention of the Rights of the Child understood this to be the case: the Convention’s 24th Article obliges States to take into account the risks to children’s health of contaminated food and water as well as pollution. Every State in the world bar one alone has ratified this convention.
So our relationship together begins here – with toxins impacts on children. Back to our early story:
The mother of the girl in our story informed the treating doctor that her neighbour's daughter was also experiencing similar problems.
It is vital to note that in this it is the mother’s voice that was active, brave and persistent – she being a first responder to the crisis in her family and neighbourhood: She spoke out – exercising her freedom of expression – and demanding authorities’ attention. The world over, it is households and particularly carers in households i.e. women who are among the first and most persistent voices, warning their communities when things are not as they should be.
A house‐to‐house investigation revealed that others too had fallen ill.
Community engagement proved essential from the very outset of our story – with the community being both the holder of critical information and entitled to life saving information. The community ‐whose trust in officials is essential for the right information to emerge at the needed time and whose rights in turn to information must be upheld.
Our story continues: exactly, 61 years ago this week – on 1st May 1956:
The factory hospital director reported to the local public health office the discovery of an "epidemic” of an unknown cause.
This was the action of a brave official ‐someone who stepped forward to report, who knew where to report and who was clear about his responsibility to report.
So far so good. Basic rights of injured individuals have been exercised, calling on authorities to fulfil their human rights obligations.
A month later, the local government had formed a committee to oversee the response.
While on reflection, not a timely response, nonetheless, the State authorities are taking up their obligations.
However, the localised nature of the illnesses and lack of awareness of the possible consequences of toxins for people, saw officials blame first the community itself. Stigmatisation and discrimination infected the early public responses and, hardened through fear the attitudes of surrounding communities – whose bigotry frankly towards the affected populations serve to deepen the distress of the victims of this mysterious disease.
Discrimination against those affected by and exposed to toxic waste and chemical mismanagement is quite simply frequent: unlovely bedfellows ‐exposure to toxins and marginalization go hand in hand. Yet not only is such discrimination unacceptable – wrong in law and in principle – it is without doubt counterproductive to early warning, early intervention and to the formation of just responses.
Yet so longstanding is the toxic relationship between environmental degradation and inequality, discrimination and marginalization, that early definitions of the now more familiar term “environmental justice” focused not on calls for remedy or prevention but remarkably on calls the fair treatment and meaningful involvement of all people regardless of race, color, national origin, or income. To this list we must add, of course, disability and all other forms of discrimination prohibited under international law.
In our story, so dominant was prejudice against the rights of the affected communities that:
Only when strange behaviour in cats was reported; when crows had fallen from the sky; when seaweed no longer grew on the sea bed, and fish were found floating dead on the surface of the sea, did investigations begin to shift the blame away from the victims themselves.
There is an intricate relationship between bio diversity, protection of species, environmental sustainability and human habitat – the habitats that humans destroy, that humans create, the habitats that humans need. But this can be neither appreciated nor managed if humans themselves are left invisible; if they are discounted; when they removed from the page of our examination or otherwise rendered silent in the course of our consideration of environmental matters. People must be partners in our efforts and actively engaged in the design of agenda – they after all are our greatest resource.
It took five months after the first girls’ case was reported for the local authorities to abandon the victim‐blaming and instead finally seek help from the local university. The company that would ultimately be found responsible not only refused to cooperate with the research; it actively obstructed investigation of cause.
Let me reiterate here that bigotry and prejudice impede knowledge and understanding as it has where ever it is allowed to seep into our thinking. I should further recall that article 27 of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights asserts our human right to share in scientific advancement and its benefits. When scientific knowledge is interfered with improperly for political or commercial purposes; when it becomes, for example, hate’s vehicle as the Nuremberg trials famously established it was under the Nazi regime; then rights are betrayed – the rights of those who seek scientific knowledge from scientific method and the rights of those who are entitled to benefit from its findings.
A “post‐truth” world has been long in the making and its caustic consequences was evident early on in our relationship, for:
Despite the active efforts for cover up by the company concerned, the cause of this fatal and when not, debilitating disease was established eventually to be toxic waste and chemical mismanagement.
Legal standards must empower the State to oblige accountability from those whose conduct and resources have the potential to cause great harm to communities, even in the context of their manufacture of otherwise great benefit. Today the SDGs remind us that in these struggles the private sector can be, must be, friend and partner. But we need not be naive. Commercial interests – if their captains so choose as they did in this case ‐can be foe, and from them the full force of the law must not be withheld. After all governments are not merely managing economies – they are the stewards of societies as a whole – just, inclusive, fair and accountable societies.
The urgent need for empowering legislation to tackle impunity and to provide remedy when toxic waste and pollution destroys lives and livelihoods is revealed in a number of other elements of our story.
Disturbingly, it was uncovered that decades previously the local population had brought claim again this same company for its polluting practices. 30 years previously fishermen had demanded compensation for damage caused by water pollution. Intimidated into accepting a meagre and disproportionate compensation, they were required to drop all further complaints. But the pollution did not cease – instead it worsened.
When the State chooses to side with business over its citizens, it enters itself into a dangerous business. When it abandons its responsibility to its citizens – for remedy including compensation against wrong, it is arguably no longer acting as a State – but as something so much the lesser. No matter the economic imperative – and there are no doubt plenty – there can be no imperative so great or so pressing as to render people themselves merely casualties, simply collateral damage – in prosperity’s hot pursuit.
The polluted skies of our cities, and the waste ridden waterways of our urban centres the world over – driving up health budgets, eroding quality of life and deteriorating human dignity ‐must be entered into development’s calculus. The right to development is precious, it must be upheld and duly exercised but if one right is peeled away and treated separately from the consideration of all rights – when development runs ahead without regard for the right to health, to habitat and to fresh air, to food security, to water – then people are its casualties rather than its beneficiaries: people ‐women, children, men ‐and more often it is those who already have the least.
In our story, a man of conscience – who was a health worker in the company’s clinic – recognised that his employer was obstructing the university researchers. So he began to carry out his own experiments and within just two months, he had established the unequivocal causal link.
History does not fully record what then happened to our man of conscience, although many years later he would bravely testify at a related court hearing. However, his part in our story is a sober reminder that workers are the eyes and ears of environmental protection. They bury waste. They operate the incinerators. They transport the effluents and they are witness to the discharge of pollutants. We need their witness, their conscience. However, employees who bravely "blow the whistle" on wrongful practices are more often subject to harassment, dismissal, and blacklisting. The only ones who benefit from intimidation of those who “blow the whistle” are those who have something to hide.
In this instance, not only did the company not reveal their employee’s research findings publicly, they actually suppressed them; they ordered him to stop his research thereby ensuring that it would take some months longer before the external research group would arrive at the same conclusion.
Complicity by the company in the cover up was a corruption of public interest for the sake of commercial interest.
Extraordinarily another 2 years would pass before the company stopped its dumping of the toxic waste and even then it did so by moving its disposal methods to yet another waterway whose surrounding population of course then began to exhibit the same symptoms.
To the perspective of human rights, this is nothing more than palpable evidence of the toxic consequence of impunity: absent impartial investigation of culpability and judicial review of responsibility not only did those who knowingly committed grave wrong go free, there is an absence of due diligence for non‐recurrence.
Let me come to the conclusion of this tale of our earliest date. For although civil society organizations pursued both the company and the State down through the decades, at each turning point, commercial and political power chose against the interests of the relatively powerless. In the immediate decade after the cause and effect relationship was well established, the company continued its polluting ways, offering only meagre compensation that failed the most basic tests of due remedy and reparation – whose elements – under international law – are restitution, compensation, rehabilitation, satisfaction and guarantees of non‐repetition. The disproportionately pitiful figures of the first offers of compensation were so paltry as to add insult to injury.
But lack of financial compensation for the victims was indeed the least of it. The company went so far to publically deceive government, the community and victims’ families – putting in place pretend purifiers, sponsoring pretend research, lying about pretend disposal practices – driving further and further but very real human suffering and environmental degradation.
Freedom of information about hazards to health, about the nature and routines of toxins disposal and of governments’ steps to so provide – this is a fundamental human rights obligation and an essential responsibility of the State. In our story, the authorities knew of many of these continuing pernicious impacts but did not publish the results of their surveys’ findings. If there had been transparency in public reporting then perhaps local medical services in the affected areas would have recognised the related patterns of disease that told the story of continued toxic contamination and which led to unknown numbers of imminently preventable deaths. This is just one example of why cause‐of‐death surveillance – along with birth registration – are two essential elements of civil registration and the buildings blocks of legal personhood.
14 years after the little girl of our story fell ill, and following four years of legal review the State in question finally drew up a compensation plan for the victims and their families. However, a newspaper leak revealed the inadequacy, once again, of the compensation planned.
In this, the week in which on one day we always celebrate both the right to work and on another the freedom of the press, it is worth recalling how independent, impartial professional journalistic scrutiny is a friend to just and accountable public policy, however painful that scrutiny might be.
It took a trial, and the exercise of the rule of law, to establish a complete victory for the victims:
"The defendant's factory was a leading chemical plant with the most advanced technology and ... should have assured the safety of its wastewater. The defendant could have prevented the occurrence of disease or at least have kept it at a minimum. We cannot find that the defendant took any of the precautionary measures called for in this situation whatsoever. The presumption that the defendant had been negligent from beginning to end in discharging wastewater from its acetaldehyde plant is amply supported. The defendant cannot escape liability for negligence."
You know, those who summoned the courage to pursue the company’s accountability through the courts came under fierce pressure: one woman was intimidated at her own home by the company’s executive; her family's property was attacked and human faeces were thrown at her in the street. How can it be that speaking out against environmental degradation should be such a dangerous business? Yet the Special Rapporteur on the Environment has reported just this year that on average, three people a week are killed somewhere in the world, simply for trying to protect the environment on which we all rely. Human rights defenders must be protected!
To conclude my recounting of our long and sometimes troubled relationship, that I trust today we can truly celebrate, let me sound a note of optimism. Historians reflecting on the legacy of this the story we have been considering – credit the protests, learning, law and scrutiny that it generated as being an enabler of democratization of the State concerned. Advocacy, protest, law reform, industry standards – all emerged phoenix like from the ashes of our story – a democratic dividend now enjoyed by millions.
As you may recognise, this is the story of Minamata disease. Its dynamics have been repeated over and over again elsewhere; whenever the consequences of toxic waste mismanagement are approached without regards to human rights and whenever respect for human rights fails to reach the contaminated terrain.
We recall this shared story ‐not to admonish but to urge; not to criticise but to point to that which is critical; not to compete for visibility but to visibly and tangibly collaborate.
In this human rights would urge you to:
- Please put people in the picture as your partners ‐Ask people what they think, know, see; make it easy for people to tell you what they know and what they fear – without reprisal or retaliation or repercussion. Let quality, accurate information, like fresh water, flow freely.
- Ensure that in pursuit of development, there is also always a public eye to the universal benefit for the people. Avoid selectivity and discrimination. Be impartial and proportional, particularly when companies seek to place themselves beyond the reach of the law.
- Create laws that oblige and structure the conversation between people and developers; people and manufacturers; people and the State.
- Monitor and report publically on incidents of mismanagement and evaluate.
- Take action when promises are broken.
Let’s us vow now to do so together. In this struggle please know you have the High Commissioner, the Special Rapporteur on the Environment and the Special Rapporteur on Toxic Substances and Waste; you have the treaty bodies; the resolutions of the HRC and the SDGs. I hope you will take our hand so that we too can take yours. And, I most certainly hope there will be a wonderful reception party to follow forthwith.
Thank you.
|
|
From Thursday, 4 May 2017, to Friday, 5 May 2017, more than 140 Ministers, Deputy Ministers, and Ambassadors from over 100 countries gathered together for the High-Level Segment of the 2017 triple Conferences of the Parties, under the theme “A future detoxified: Sound management of chemicals and waste”.
Key messages emerging from the High Level Segment of the Conferences of the Parties to the Basel, Rotterdam and Stockholm Conventions
From Thursday, 4 May 2017, to Friday, 5 May 2017, more than 140 Ministers, Deputy Ministers, and Ambassadors from over 100 countries gathered together for the High-Level Segment of the 2017 triple Conferences of the Parties, under the theme “A future detoxified: Sound management of chemicals and waste”.
Overall messages
1. With the adoption of the 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development and the Sustainable Development Goals, the political momentum for a detoxified planet has increased, and this window of opportunity must be seized.
2. There can be no sustainable development without a commitment to a pollution-free planet, and this requires sound management of chemicals and waste.
3. The key to a detoxified future is by taking action now, and the implementation by all parties of all the provisions of the Basel, Rotterdam and Stockholm conventions, which should be translated into national legislation, policy and actions.
On opportunities for a detoxified future in the 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development
(a) The sound management of chemicals and wastes is central to achieving the three dimensions of sustainable development, and should be dealt with as a priority, as well as, in a mutually supportive manner to achieve the 2030 goals. It is also central to addressing poverty, food security, access to water, achieving human rights and gender balance, particularly for women, children and vulnerable populations, and is linked to addressing climate change and the protection of biodiversity. With the obvious linkage between the Sustainable development goals and the conventions, and its many cross-sectoral aspects, chemicals and wastes related Sustainable development goals cannot be achieved without the implementation of the conventions.
(b) The 2030 Agenda provides a unique opportunity for mainstreaming chemicals and waste related issues into national sustainable development plans, and for the development of business cases for sound management of chemicals and wastes. Institutional frameworks must be strengthened at all levels and policy coherence achieved across all sectors. This requires strong political will, cooperation, as well as community and end-user awareness, including partnerships.
(c) Furthermore, the 2030 Agenda provides specific targets which support the commitment for sound management of chemicals and wastes in order to protect human health and environment. The importance of increasing efforts to achieve the Sustainable development goals is clear through a focus on poverty reduction strategies recognizing that the poor are the most affected by pollution including extensive use of chemicals in agriculture.
(d) There is a need for greater commitment by industry to prevent pollution of streams and water bodies on which communities depend, especially those in abject poverty. Industry must play a more proactive role in achieving the sustainable development goals.
(e) Different levels in development and differing capacities among countries to address the challenges of chemicals and wastes management must be recognized, particularly in small island developing states, least developed countries and other vulnerable populations who have limited capacity or access to information to deal with environmental challenges.
On opportunities for strengthened implementation through partnerships
(a) Increased cooperation and coordination is needed at the national, regional and global levels to implement the Conventions effectively. Partnerships have a central role, and civil society, business, industry, and private sector investment must be fully involved and engaged.
(b) Partnerships have proved to be useful tools in the implementation of the chemicals and waste agendas and should be further encouraged. Multistakeholder partnerships, including those with the private sector, should be strengthened to promote new technologies, win-win partnerships and innovation in support of the implementation of the Conventions.
(c) Partnerships must be established with all sectors and stakeholders including with local communities and municipal entities. A bottom-up approach is essential as citizens are the key driver for action. Regional networks can assist in monitoring and managing cross border issues and civil society groups can help governments monitor their environment.
(d) The Basel and Stockholm Conventions regional centres and national institutions are uniquely positioned to deliver synergistically on chemicals and wastes by engaging in capacity-building and catalysing the transfer of technology for the sound management of chemicals and waste at the national level.
(e) Availability of, and access to adequate financial resources are fundamental in order to ensure the restoration of our oceans and landscapes from chemical pollution and for the adequate implementation of the chemicals and wastes agenda within the framework of the Sustainable development goals.
On opportunities for reducing waste and pollution while enabling economic and social prosperity
(a) Although there has been much progress, further efforts are needed to achieve the sound management of chemicals throughout their life cycle and with respect to hazardous wastes prevent or minimize significant adverse effects on human health and the environment, through the work of the three conventions
(b) Commitment to, and conscientious implementation of the chemicals and wastes conventions contributes to the achievement of environmentally sound management of chemicals, the reduction of illegal waste traffic and pollution nationally and across borders thus enabling economic and social prosperity.
(c) Awareness raising of the interlinkages between the conventions and issues such as air pollution, plastic pollution and marine litter increases the visibility of the chemicals and wastes issues in a simple manner to stakeholders, the media and schools, thereby enhancing the Conventions’ contributions to the achievement of Sustainable development goals, the protection of human health and the environment.
(d) Adequate technology transfer is essential to address sustainable development in fields such as agriculture, recycling technologies, household and medical waste management, as well as training and capacity-building in chemicals and waste management throughout the lifecycle. Legislation and control techniques should be in place in all sectors, as there is limited enforcement even where such regulations exist.
(e) Lack of financial resources, as well as, limited institutional capacity are legitimate concerns which require attention. Further scientific research is also needed in developing countries along with associated funding for national coordinating units, laboratories and research institutes to develop and adapt new technologies for chemicals and wastes management, to establish baseline data, develop viable alternatives, promote science based decisions, and enhance monitoring capacity and database management skills in order to monitor progress in the targets of the Sustainable development goals.
(f) Mechanisms should be established to implement the polluter pays principle, with economic and policy incentives and disincentives, taking into consideration the specific situation of each country.
(g) Formalization of the informal recycling sector is fundamental for the creation of decent jobs, and the reduction of legal and also occupational risks and environmental impacts. There is a large potential for recycling to have positive economic impacts in developing countries. This must be guided by strong regulatory frameworks and technical expertise to ensure that wastes destined for use as a resource do not have an impact on health and the environment.
(h) Concepts such as the circular economy and the green economy are models that provide opportunities for developing countries to reduce waste and pollution while enabling economic and social prosperity and that also requires behavioural and cultural adaptations.
(i) Industry should be encouraged to develop chemicals and products based upon green and sustainable chemistry principles taking into account the precautionary principle, in particular in the case where persistence, bioaccumulation and long range transport are of concern, in order to prevent further damage to health and environment.
|
|
Mr. Ibrahim Thiaw
Deputy Executive Director, UN Environment
24 April 2017, Geneva Switzerland
Opening remarks of the 2017 COPs
Mr. Ibrahim Thiaw
Deputy Executive Director, UN Environment
24 April 2017, Geneva Switzerland
Introduction
Distinguished Presidents of the Bureaus of the Conferences of the Parties,
Executive Secretary, Ladies and gentlemen,
As a young boy, I used to look at the stars and wonder about the adventures of people like Neil Armstrong.
As a parent, I used to watch my children do the same and wonder about their future – would they be the ones to see the era of mass space travel?
But today, when I get a precious evening with my grandson and we look up at the sky:
- I think of the kids with lives so full of pollution that they can’t even see the stars or imagine a future or be healthy enough to care.
- I wonder if my grandson will travel because of his sense of adventure or because he is forced to find safe air and water for his family.
Because, from 36,000 feet down in the Mariana Trench - the deepest part of the ocean - to 36,000 feet up in busy air traffic corridors and most places in between, humans are polluting everything we need to eat, drink or breathe.
When did we slip from marveling at this amazing planet to casually destroying it? Become so numb to our surroundings that 13 deaths from a traffic accident can move us to tears, but up to 13 million deaths from pollution can’t even move us to action?
Scale of problem
Chemicals are a big part of that problem. We didn’t intend them to be. After all, they improve our lives in incredible ways.
- They provide clean water, medical care and hygiene.
- They support agriculture, clean energy and job creation.
- In fact, they contribute to almost everything that we use.
But we are losing control of our own creations. We are introducing them across the planet much faster than we can assess their real impact on our lives and much faster than we can get any problems back under control.
People talk about the risk of this with Artificial Intelligence in the future. Yet it’s already happening with chemicals. Everyday items like pizza boxes, microwave popcorn and baby nappies suddenly pose a threat to the hormone balance of humans, wildlife and our entire food chain.
The difficulty is that once these substances are out there, getting the genie back into the bottle is not so easy and it’s not fast.
Look at mercury. We are just a few months away from the first meeting of the Minamata Convention. Yet it will still be 60 years since the Minamata coast in Japan became synonymous with mercury poisoning. Even with agreement on what action to take, we still need to take it – fast!
- Because we are finding mercury in the once pristine waters of the Arctic.
- And we are letting it seep into our soil, water and air from millions of tonnes of electronic waste being dumped illegally each year.
New approach to chemical management
And that’s just one example. There is a huge variety of toxic chemicals in that growing pile of eWaste. And there are over 130,000 chemicals on the market, feeding 10 million tonnes of solid urban waste each year. Yet, incredibly, we only properly assess, control or label a fraction of them.
- We can’t keep dealing with them one at a time, once we have enough irrefutable scientific data to convince governments, producers, traders, doctors, lawmakers and the general public.
- Every stakeholder has a moral responsibility to act when there is a doubt, not when victims emerge, laws change and loopholes close.
So yes, we need this conference to tackle the chemicals and waste on the agenda. But we also need it to trigger a rethink in our lifecycle approach to chemicals and the way we adapt to new findings.
- We need to work with governments and scientists to provide evidence and lead the assessment of all important chemicals and waste.
- We need to work with the private sector to develop better controls, quicker responses and innovative alternatives.
- We need to work with schools to look at how we educate young people who will develop the chemicals, pharmaceuticals and consumer products of the future.
- And we need to work with the general public to leverage their purchasing power and household decision making.
Opportunity for planet & profits
In the 30th Anniversary year of the Montreal Protocol, sometimes it’s good to remember just how powerful concerted action by all the stakeholders can be. How important it can be to take precautionary action even before the hard, scientific evidence emerges.
And this doesn’t need to come at a cost; it can come with a profit. Global chemical sales are already worth up to $5 trillion per year and will triple by 2050. So, what’s good for the planet can also be good for business.
- For example, 300 million tonnes of plastic are produced every year and up to 13 million tonnes of that end up on our oceans.
- The growing backlash from consumers creates a huge market for alternatives.
- Not the kind of things that only biodegrade in specific conditions, but a true lifecycle alternative that works everywhere.
- And we see the huge increase in demand for renewable energy, mobile technology and electric transport. They all need batteries that can efficiently store power and still be safely managed when they are no longer needed.
Conclusion
Dear colleagues, holding this triple conference to agree a global response to the threat from chemical and hazardous waste reflects the scale of the task before us.
While the Basel, Rotterdam and Stockholm Conventions may not cover every pollutant on the planet:
- But they do cover some of the worst,
- They do give us an opportunity to phase out some of the most dangerous ones,
- And they do give us a chance to reset the way we work with all stakeholders to treat chemicals and waste from now on.
So, the work here is crucial to the three conventions, but it will also impact the success of related agreements like:
- the Kigali Amendment
- the Minamata Convention,
- the 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development
- and the Paris Agreement on Climate Change.
The pollution on this planet has never been worse. The impact on our people has never been more deadly. But the time to fix it has never been better.
While no single nation can control chemicals on their own.
- At last year’s UN Environment Assembly, nearly 200 nations asked us to explore the role of chemicals in the 2030 Agenda.
- This year, with the Assembly serving as a summit on pollution, the chemicals and waste sector will be an important voice for change.
Just as pollution has no limits when it spreads, we can’t afford to have any limits when we seek solutions. We need policy and law makers, public and private sector, civil society and individual women, men and children.
Ladies and gentlemen, if we have the power to block the stars from our children and to poison the most remote corners of the ocean, then surely we also have the power to reverse it?
So, let me leave you with a personal request.
- When you go home from this conference,
- Sit your own kids or grandkids or friend’s kids on your knee.
- Look up at the stars together.
- And ask yourself: during these two weeks, did we really do everything we could?
Or did we miss an incredible opportunity?
- To achieve the sound management of chemicals by 2020.
- To add important new chemicals to the three conventions.
- And to use the power of global agreements to achieve global progress.
Please, let’s not have any regrets.
Thank you.
|
|
Mr. William Murray
Executive Secretary of the Rotterdam Convention
Deputy Director, Plant Production and Protection Division, the Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations (FAO) Rome, Italy
24 April 2017, Geneva Switzerland
Opening remarks of the 2017 COPs
Mr. William Murray
Executive Secretary of the Rotterdam Convention
Deputy Director, Plant Production and Protection Division, the Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations (FAO) Rome, Italy
24 April 2017, Geneva Switzerland
Presidents, distinguished delegates, ladies and gentlemen,
I would like to join my colleague Rolph Payet in welcoming all of you here this morning. It is my pleasure to have this opportunity to address this meeting of the three Conferences of the Parties to the Basel, Rotterdam and Stockholm Conventions.
Rolph has provided a global perspective on the importance of chemicals management and highlighted some of the key challenges facing the Conventions and the issues that you will be addressing over the next two weeks.
In preparing these brief remarks, I thought it would be important to use this opportunity to provide some background information as further context for your deliberations, and to highlight the importance of the three Conventions and the urgency of your work before you.
Agriculture has a major impact on the environment while the environment and the services it provides are essential to the future of agriculture.
The world’s population is projected to reach 9.2 billion in 2050. This will require a 50% increase in global food production. Some 80% of this increase will need to come from land that is already under cultivation. So we need to produce more food per unit of land – essentially intensify production.
From the 1960’s to the 1980’s the Green Revolution in Agriculture, and it’s input intensive approach to production, helped to reduce the number of undernourished people in the world, drive rural development and saved large areas of fragile land from conversion to extensive farming.
But these achievements came at a high cost. In many countries, decades of input intensive agriculture have degraded fertile land and depleted groundwater, eroded biodiversity, and polluted the air, soil and water. It is clear that this input intensive approach to food production is not sustainable nor viable.
Yet today there are nearly 800 million people in the world that go to bed hungry every night.
About 75% of the worst affected live in rural areas of developing countries with livelihoods that depend directly or indirectly on agriculture. They include many of the world’s half a billion low-income small holder farmers who produce 80% of the food supply in those countries.
These smallholder farmers and rural poor are the same people who are at greatest risk from the uncertainties of climate change and most vulnerable to the adverse effects of hazardous pesticides, chemicals and wastes that are the focus of the three Conventions.
The adoption in 2015 of the 2030 Agenda and the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs), as well as the Paris Agreement on climate change, put food security and agriculture at the center of the global development agenda.
Recognition of the critical importance of agriculture is also reflected in the outcomes of both the United Nations Climate Change Conference in Morocco (COP22) and the United Nations Biodiversity Conference in Mexico (COP 13) in 2016.
It is clear that agriculture in 2017 and beyond must produce more while at the same time protect and enhance the underlying natural resources on which it is based.
The challenge is complicated by recognition of the fact that there is no silver bullet or one-size-fits-all solution to sustainably increasing agricultural production. Successful approaches are context specific and must be tailored to the needs of particular regions or communities.
So we are moving from an input intensive approach to production to one that is knowledge intensive.
The need for more varied, specialized and innovative approaches, that draw on traditional knowledge and advances in science and technology will only be addressed though greater collaboration and cooperation at all levels. This includes within countries, between communities, Ministries and agencies but also between countries through south-south cooperation - sharing knowledge, experience and expertise.
One example of such cooperation is the joint secretariat provided by FAO and UNEP for the Rotterdam Convention, a unique arrangement across UN bodies that builds on the best of both. The colocation of the Secretariats of the Basel, Stockholm and UNEP portion of the Rotterdam Convention here in Geneva is another example. The synergies that have resulted from these innovative secretariat arrangements for the three conventions is one of your topics for discussion.
FAO is the lead international organization working on the sound management of pesticides throughout their lifecycle.
The work of FAO on capacity development and institution building in support of sound pesticide management helps ensure a governance framework in countries that reduces the risks to human health and the environment from pesticides and associated wastes.
Such national frameworks facilitate countries working together at a regional level and enable countries to take full advantage of global instruments like the Basel, Rotterdam and Stockholm Conventions.
Finally I would like to draw your attention to the fact that over the next two weeks the Technology Fair and more than 40 side events will provide us with opportunities to learn more about partnerships, to share knowledge and experiences and to explore opportunities for strengthening collaboration in working towards the sound management of chemicals and wastes and a detoxified future.
In closing, I would like to join Rolph in thanking the Swiss government for their warm welcome and continued support and in recognizing the professionalism of the Secretariat staff from Rome and Geneva who are for the most part working behind the scenes to make this triple COP a reality.
I look forward to working with you all over the next two weeks.
|
|
Mr. Rolph Payet
Executive Secretary of the
Basel, Rotterdam and Stockholm Conventions
24 April 2017, Geneva Switzerland
Opening remarks of the 2017 COPs
Mr. Rolph Payet
Executive Secretary of the
Basel, Rotterdam and Stockholm Conventions
24 April 2017, Geneva Switzerland
Excellencies, Presidents of the Conferences of the Parties, distinguished delegates, dear friends,
Welcome to the 13th Meeting of the Conference of the Parties to the Basel Convention, the 8th Meeting of the Conference of the Parties of the Rotterdam Convention and the 8th Meeting of the Conference of the Parties of the Stockholm Convention.
As early as 1920 Geneva has been host to international organisations and multilateral international meetings, and in recent years we have seen the establishment of chemicals and wastes related organisations and bodies in Geneva. The outcomes of this work crystalizes in these three conventions which set out an international multilateral environmental agreements framework for the sound management of chemicals. The three conventions, and the Minamata Convention, create a global legal framework for parties to agree on how we should manage hazardous chemicals and wastes many of which are now found in every aspect of our life, our societies and the environment, even to the deepest ocean trenches of the planet.
A growing number of local and global issues are increasingly linking hazardous chemicals, pollution and wastes to human health and well-being. More than ever, the people of this planet are counting on you, representatives of governments and parties to the conventions, to make the right decisions; decisions that would lead to improvements in the quality of life of people and for a sustainable planet. Negotiations taking place over the next two weeks should enable to make progress in tackling this nexus between development and planetary health.
In preparation of these Conferences of the Parties, the secretariat has organised a number of regional preparatory meetings with the generous support of the Swiss government. I was personally encouraged by the level of commitment demonstrated by all parties during those preparatory sessions. I was further motivated to see that our efforts have resulted in the largest ever gathering of delegations for the three COPs. We have to day registered over 1862 participants, from more than 160 countries, and indeed in recent months seen new parties sign or ratify the conventions.
In addition to this surge in positive commitments from governments, a number of events of international significance and relevance to the conventions have transpired since our last COPs in 2015. These include:
- The adoption by heads of state and world leaders attending the UN Sustainable Development Summit, in September 2015, of the 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development. Its 17 Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) and 169 targets, many of which are interlinked to the sound management of chemicals and wastes further demonstrates the importance of these international conventions on sustainable development;
- The adoption by the fourth session of the International Conference on Chemicals Management held in September 2015 of the decision to initiate an intersessional process to prepare recommendations regarding the Strategic Approach and the sound management of chemicals and wastes beyond 2020;
- The adoption by the second session of UNEA held in June 2016 of several resolutions, highlighting the important contribution of the conventions towards the implementation of sound management of chemicals and waste (Resolution 2/7), and resolution 2/8 on sustainable consumption and production, resolution 2/11 on marine plastic litter and microplastics and resolution 2/5 on delivering the 2030 agenda;
- The adoption by the 69th World Health Assembly held in May 2016 of a number of resolutions of specific relevance to the conventions, particularly resolution WHA69.4 on the role of the health sector in the Strategic Approach to International Chemicals Management towards the 2020 goal as well as the welcoming of a roadmap for enhanced global response to the adverse effects of air pollution;
- The release during the 33rd Session of the Human Rights Council held in September 2016, of the report by the UN Special Rapporteur on the implications for human rights of the environmentally sound management and disposal of hazardous substances and wastes;
The relevance and importance of the Chemicals and Wastes Conventions is therefore central to achieving sustainable development, the eradication of poverty and achieving a peaceful and fair world. Indeed the BRS Secretariat has been active and remains engaged in supporting these global goals.
We have also engaged with the private sector, and to showcase their commitment to engaging with governments in finding sustainable solutions, I will later this week open our first ‘Technology Fair’ which is aimed at showcasing the efforts of industry and non-governmental organisations in moving towards the sound management of chemicals and wastes. Indeed, we need your continued support and that of industry and non-governmental organisations to make it happen. I trust the fair will be inspirational as well as create opportunities for technology transfer and exchange of knowledge and practices.
With regards to the matters at hand during these CoPs, I am convinced that we will be able to tackle a number of outstanding issues. Whilst I will not go into any level of detail here, I would like to just remind parties of the importance of listing those chemical identified under the best available scientific information and the compliance mechanisms for the Rotterdam and Stockholm Conventions. Secondly, it is also important to remind all parties in a position to do so, to financially support activities to ensure the effectiveness of the three conventions. In the past years, we have seen a significant decrease in voluntary contributions for the implementation of those conventions and, more generally, financial resources for the sound management of chemicals. That said, I would like to sincerely thank our donors who have remained strongly committed in supporting the work of the conventions, namely Australia, the Peoples Republic of China, Denmark, the European Union, Finland, France, Germany, Japan, Moldova, the Netherlands, Norway, Sweden, and Switzerland. I encourage them to continue their support, and invite others to join. With regards to the core funding of the secretariat, I am sad to say that the arrears of parties continue to increase, despite efforts by the Bureaux and my office to encourage parties to meet their financial obligations. I would like to urge parties to make good on their commitment so that we can continue to deliver effectively as a secretariat.
With regard to the implementation of the Stockholm Convention, I would also like to thank the Global Environment Facility (The GEF), the principal entity entrusted with the operation of the financial mechanism of the Convention on an interim basis, and its implementing agencies for their continued efforts in ensuring the availability of financial resources and technical expertise for the development and updating of National Implementation Plans (NIPs) and the implementation of the Convention on the ground. Without this support the decisions of the COP will be difficult if not impossible to implement. More than 4.3 billion US Dollars are required for the implementation of the Stockholm Convention over the period 2018−2022, as noted in the needs assessment report which will be considered at this meeting. And this does only takes into account legacy Persistent Organic Pollutants (POPs), since comprehensive data from updated NIPs was unfortunately not yet available. This is a significant amount and I would like to urge the GEF Secretariat and donor countries, as they prepare for the 7th replenishment, to take into consideration the recommendations of this report and enhance the financial support to the entire chemicals and wastes focal area. This triple COPS is also important as we will be hosting more than one hundred high level delegates, the majority of which will be ministers of environment, health and/or agriculture. This is by far the largest turnout to date, and I would like to especially thank our parties and delegates for reaching out to their governments at the highest possible political level. Kindly convey the warm welcome and appreciation of the Secretariat.
I would also like to thank our administrative host, UN Environment for their support and also FAO for their support given to the Rotterdam Convention and our office in Rome. In closing, I wish to thank the Genevois and the Swiss people and government for their ‘accueil’ and their strong support for the chemicals and wastes agenda, thank you Mr. Marc Chardonnens, State Secretary, Swiss Federal Office for the Environment. I would like you to also join me in applauding the professionalism of my team in the BRS secretariat, including the team in Rome (thank you Bill) as we continue to improve our performance within the matrix structure adopted by the CoPs. Indeed, the synergies report has shown clearly those areas were we have excelled but also the weaknesses we need to address.
We have also continued to strengthen our collaboration with other UN organisations such as UN Environment, FAO, ILO, IMO, ITU, OCHA, OHCHR, UNIDO, UNDP, WHO, WTO, UNCHR, and UNITAR who continue to pledge their commitment to the chemicals and wastes agenda. The Secretariat cannot do this job alone and the regional centres for the Basel and Stockholm Conventions continue to play a significant role in the implementation of the conventions on the ground. These BRS Regional Centres need support, both politically and financially.
Excellencies, Presidents, distinguished delegates, dear friends, as you know the new UN Secretary-General, Antonio Guterres will also be here in Geneva during the first week our COPs. Unfortunately, due to other pressing obligations he will not be able to join us physically. However, he is aware of the importance of these COPs within the wider UN Agenda and in his recent statements he is giving priority to the sustainable development agenda and the importance of ensuring the health of humans and the planet.
The sustainable management of chemicals and waste must be achieved, in order for our health, and that of our children, to be protected, wherever we live, whatever our job, whatever our gender, nationality or income.
Let us begin our work, with this in mind.
Thank you
|
|
Our latest interview, with FAO’s Aleksandar Mihajlovski, explains all.
How does the Rotterdam Convention work to protect human health and environment?
Questions & Answers with Aleksandar Mihajlovski, FAO’s Officer in charge of publishing the Prior Informed Consent (PIC) Circular, the essential information document for the implementation of the Rotterdam Convention.
Q. What does your role at the Secretariat entail?
My work centres around the PIC Circular, which unifies and puts the two main provisions of the Convention into action – the Prior Informed Consent (PIC) procedure and the exchange of information on hazardous chemicals. This document is compiled throughout the year and is published and circulated to all the parties and interested stakeholders twice every year, in June and December.
I am also in charge of reviewing and verifying the import response decisions and the Notifications of Final Regulatory Actions (FRAs), as well as proposals for listing Severely Hazardous Pesticide Formulations (SHPFs) into Annex III, submitted to the Secretariat by the parties to the Convention in accordance with Articles 10, 5 and 6, respectively. The parties submit this information to the Secretariat individually, it is then shared through the PIC Circular to all of the parties that make up the Convention – there are currently 157, and it is available to view on this website for all interested stakeholders.
Q: Take us through what the Convention sets out to do.
The RC team promote shared responsibility and cooperative efforts among parties in the international trade of certain hazardous chemicals in order to protect human health and the environment from potential harm. We do this by facilitating the exchange of information on chemicals that may be unsafe for use.
The Convention deals with pesticides and industrial chemicals that have been banned or severely restricted by the parties because of environmental or human health concerns and which have been reported to the Secretariat. Two such notifications for the same chemical submitted by at least two parties from two different PIC regions are needed in order to activate a complex mechanism that potentially might end up with adding the chemical to the Annex III list of hazardous chemicals, and consequently for it to become relevant for the PIC procedure. This obligation for the parties is indicated in Article V, followed by Annexes I and II, which provide detailed explanations of the information requirements for submitting notifications as well as the criteria for listing the chemicals in Annex III.
In addition, through Article 6 and Annex IV, the Convention gives developing countries or parties with transition economies the opportunity to submit proposals for inclusion on the list of SHPFs in Annex III, based on reports of poisoning incidents.
The information received by the Secretariat, is part of the information exchange mechanism and it basically activates the PIC procedure through which chemicals become listed in Annex III of the Convention text. The PIC procedure is relevant only for the Annex III listed chemicals, and means that parties are obliged to submit national decisions on their future imports of these chemicals. I believe it is important to emphasize that the response or national decisions on future imports do not constitute a ban considering that the party based on its own national consultative process has the intrinsic right to allow the import of the chemical, not to allow import, or to allow imports subject to specified conditions. Decisions by an importing country must be trade neutral, meaning that the decisions must apply equally to domestic production for domestic use as well as to imports from any source.
As all these import decisions are circulated to the parties through the PIC Circular, and at the same time are available online for reference on the database, the exporting country parties are obliged under the Convention to make sure that the exporter under their national jurisdiction complies with these decisions.
I would like to emphasize another very important aspect of the information exchange mechanism established as an obligation for the parties that are exporting chemicals produced but banned or restricted for use within their own territory to the importing party. It is important to note that the exporting party must submit export notifications to the importing party, informing it about the planned export of a chemical that is banned or restricted before the first shipment and annually thereafter.
Q. Why does the management of hazardous chemicals continue to be so important globally?
Well we live in a world where the chemical industry represents one of the largest sectors of the global economy and it is one of the highest contributors to growth in the world. All sorts of chemicals are used, applied and present in people’s everyday lives. They are utilised in the construction industry, in electronics, to make different sorts of plastics, in consumer care products and in agriculture were they are present in fertilisers and pesticides. This calls for attention and caution in the way these products are managed and dealt with starting from their development, throughout the production process, application and use through to adequate disposal.
As I have already underlined, many of the chemicals that are developed and available for use, have certain hazardous properties and pose risks to human health and the environment. The RC has 47 hazardous chemicals listed under Annex III. Thirty-three of these are pesticides and fourteen are industrial chemicals. At the Conference of the Parties (COP) this May, eight more chemicals will be considered for listing and the parties will decide whether they will be included in Annex III of the Convention.
The RC’s PIC procedure for pesticides and industrial chemicals in international trade, together with the Stockholm Convention (SC) on protecting human health and the environment from Persistent Organic Pollutants (POPs) and the Basel Convention (BC) on the transboundary movement of hazardous wastes and their disposal, jointly through the synergies processes contribute to the careful management of hazardous chemicals and waste throughout their life-cycle, from production to disposal.
Ultimately, the adequate management of hazardous chemicals is a globally important issue because it is directly linked to the basic human rights of access to clean air, clean water and healthy and safe food. In a recent report by the UN Human Rights Council’s Special Rapporteur on the right to food, pesticides are cited as a global human rights concern. According to the latest figures, hazardous pesticides are responsible for 200,000 deaths each year, with 99 percent of these cases occurring in developing countries, lacking functional national regulations for hazardous chemicals management.
Q. Explain the process of the Chemical Review Committee (CRC), how does science become policy?
I already explained the rationale and the mechanism that precedes the CRC’s work, after the Secretariat receives the notifications of FRAs and proposals for SHPFs, and before being forwarded for consideration by the CRC. The CRC is composed by 31 independent experts in chemicals management appointed by the Conference of the Parties (COP) to the RC. The Committee is responsible for undertaking the scientific review of chemicals proposed for listing.
The Convention requires science-based risk and hazard evaluations, as well as scientifically supported information on physico-chemical, toxicological and eco-toxicological properties of the pesticides for which parties submit notifications of final regulatory actions for banning or restricting certain pesticides. The specific information requirements and criteria are listed in Annex I and Annex II of the Convention. Annex I contains all the information requirements for notifications made pursuant to article 5, whereas Annex II describes the criteria for listing these banned or severely restricted chemicals in Annex III, making them subject to the PIC procedure. Annex II requires a risk evaluation based on a review of scientific data in the context of the conditions prevailing in the party’s country submitting the notification of a final regulatory action to ban or restrict a chemical. The data should be generated in accordance with scientifically recognized methods and data reviews carried out in accordance with sound scientific principles and methods.
Based on the Committee’s recommendations, the COP, as the governing body of the Convention, decides by consensus whether to include or not to include hazardous chemicals and pesticides in Annex III of the Convention.
Q. Give us an example of a success story you have overseen since joining the Secretariat. What happened, where? And, how did you see an impact at grassroots level?
It is hard for me to emphasize any country or Party to the Convention. To a certain extent, I am involved in almost daily communication with all the Parties to the Convention either regarding the Import Decisions either regarding the Notifications of FRAs or SHPF proposals they submit to the Secretariat. The verification and the review process in many occasions require getting back to the Party DNA to directly assist and meticulously explain the missing or not correctly provided information. The proper submission of these information exchange documents as indicated in the Convention text, is giving me unique chance and opportunity to help and assist Parties into implementation of the Convention at national level which further on has regional and global benefits fitting into the main objective of the Convention – to protect human health and the environment from the hazardous chemicals. Of course, the reward comes in the end with the addition of new hazardous chemical into Annex III, realizing that the chemical I started working with when initially submitted to the Secretariat, becomes part of the PIC procedure.
|
|
Anne Daniel, Chair of the Stockholm Convention’s Effectiveness Evaluation Committee, shares her thoughts.
How effective is the Stockholm Convention?
Interview with Anne Daniel, General Counsel with the Public Law Sector of Canada’s federal Department of Justice by Charlie Avis, BRS Public Information Officer
Charlie Avis: Anne, many thanks for joining us, tell us please what is your position, your role, and how do you relate to the work of implementing the Stockholm Convention?
Anne Daniel: Thank you. I work for the Department of Justice advising mainly Environment and Climate Change Canada on a wide range of multilateral environmental agreements. I served on the Canadian delegation during the negotiation of the Stockholm Convention, as well as at all of the COPs to date. I have also chaired a number of negotiating groups, and am currently leading efforts as Chair of the Stockholm Convention’s Effectiveness Evaluation Committee.
CA: You mentioned the Effectiveness Evaluation committee, whose report has just been published. What are the main conclusions from that evaluation you’d like to share with our audiences?
AD: The report is basically a snapshot of the progress the Convention is making in achieving its objective of protecting human health and the environment from POPs, measured against a framework of indicators provided by the Conference of the Parties (COP).
We concluded that the Convention provides an effective and dynamic framework to regulate POPs throughout their lifecycle, addressing the production, use, import, export, releases, and disposal of these chemicals worldwide. However, inadequate implementation is the key issue that has been identified in the evaluation, and we have made a number of recommendations aimed at resolving that problem.
CA: More specifically?
AD: To address inadequate implementation, we noted that priority attention should be given to developing, strengthening, and/or enforcing national legislation implementing the Convention that is appropriate for both industrial chemicals and pesticides and specifically implements the Convention’s obligations on POPs. This gap currently affects implementation of many of the listed POPs, and even PCBs, one of the original “dirty dozen”, where we concluded that the deadlines of 2025 and 2028 are not likely to be met by most Parties. We also note that Parties are becoming bound by amendments involving chemicals in commerce and not registering for exemptions that they need in order to be in compliance with their obligations. Another area of poor implementation is the submission of national reports, which are required every four years and outline how Parties have met their obligations. The reporting rate of about 40% meant that there were substantial gaps in the information the committee had to work with during our evaluation. We recommend that when a compliance committee is established, a priority focus of its work programme should be to improve reporting.
CA: It sounds like a lot of work. So people around the world are less exposed to these toxic chemicals than previously? What about “new” chemicals entering the market, how does the international community deal with those?
AD: Yes, the good news is that the Convention has an excellent Global Monitoring Programme, and monitoring results indicate that regulations targeting POPs are succeeding in reducing levels of POPs in humans and the environment. For POPs listed as of 2004, concentrations measured in air and in human populations have declined and continue to decline or remain at low levels due to restrictions on POPs that predated the Convention and are now incorporated in it. For the POPs added in 2009 and after, concentrations are beginning to show decreases, although in a few instances, increasing and/or stable levels are observed.
With better implementation, we can expect these results to improve, and we hope our evaluation report can contribute to helping bring the international community closer to meeting the Convention’s objective.
CA: In a few weeks time there will be the meetings of the conferences of the parties to the Basel, Rotterdam, and Stockholm Conventions. Will you be travelling to the Triple COPs in Geneva, and what are your hopes and expectations?
AD: I will indeed participate on the Canadian delegation for all three COPs. For the Stockholm Convention, I expect that the listing decisions and the discussions on a compliance mechanism will be important issues for many delegations, but I hope that Parties reading this interview will take the time to study the recommendations of our Committee, which will be inserted into and negotiated in the relevant COP decisions. As this is the first effectiveness evaluation done on the basis of a framework of indicators, our report examines all aspects of the Convention’s work and is very far-reaching.
CA: Clearly, much has been achieved, congratulations. What are the major challenges for the Convention, in years ahead?
AD: Based on our report, I would say that improving legislative implementation of the Convention’s obligations at the national level is a major challenge. As the Convention continues to list POPs, with many that are currently extensively used, it may be a challenge for many jurisdictions to take timely action to eliminate and restrict these as required. The Committee noted that there is no subsidiary body charged with focusing on implementation issues in the intersessional period—a real gap—and while adoption of a compliance mechanism has been a challenge in the past, it could fill this gap. Additional sources of financing also need to be sought and current sources focused on the priorities identified in our report, such as the elimination of the use of PCB in equipment by 2025 and the environmentally sound waste management of liquids and equipment containing or contaminated with PCB, the development of safer, effective and affordable alternatives to DDT and strengthening the capacity of Parties still relying on DDT to commence a sustainable transition away from DDT, and the use of best available techniques and best environmental practices to address releases of unintentionally produced POPs, among others.
CA: How does the international community respond to that?
AD: We have finished our work, and now it is up to the Conference of the Parties to carefully consider the Committee’s recommendations—and decide on the actions that will help improve our individual and collective performance—and move us closer to meeting the Convention’s goal of protecting human health and the environment from POPs. We are also asking that the secretariat be requested to update the framework of indicators based on the Committee’s recommendations so that the next evaluation is even better.
CA: On the subject of implementation, the Secretariat will host a Technology Fair, in the margins of the Triple COPs, to showcase solutions for implementing the three conventions, including from the private sector. Do you encourage Canadian and other businesses to take part?
AD: Yes, absolutely. This seems like a great opportunity for the private sector to showcase how they can contribute to the Convention`s objective. One of our recommendations is that there is a need to strengthen technical assistance and technology transfer activities, and I encourage those considering participating to review the executive summary of our report at paragraphs 130-137 for particular areas of need.
Regarding another event, the Committee`s Vice-chair and I will be hosting a side event at 1 pm on Tuesday April 25th before this issue arises on the Stockholm agenda. We plan to explain our report in detail to delegates in advance of plenary discussion.
CA: Thank you very much for your time answering these questions, and thank you also for providing leadership to the Effectiveness Evaluation Committee. I look forward to seeing you at the Triple COPs!
AD: You are very welcome….. Before signing off, I want to thank the incredible team that produced this comprehensive and detailed report,the executive summary and the report on the framework, which we hope will help not only the Stockholm Convention, but possibly other treaties that are seeking to evaluate their own performance: the entire Committee from all UN regions, our Vice-chair, Linroy Christian from Antigua and Barbuda, and the secretariat team that worked effectively and efficiently to support the Committee in this complex and challenging task.
|
|
The Director of the Basel and Stockholm Regional Centre for anglophone Africa, Taeolo Letsela, shares his thoughts ahead of the 2017 Triple COPs.
Latest regional focus takes us to Pretoria, South Africa
Interview between Charlie Avis, Public Information Officer for the Secretariat of the Basel, Rotterdam, and Stockholm Conventions, and Dr. Taelo Letsela, Director of the Basel and Stockholm Conventions Regional Centre for English-speaking countries in Africa, located in Pretoria, South Africa.
Charlie Avis (CA): Good morning Dr. Letsela and greetings from Geneva. Thank you for answering my questions which aim to shed light on the work you are doing to support the sound management of chemicals and waste across the African continent.
Taelo Letsela (TL): Thank you Charlie, it is a pleasure to share the work that we do in the centre with the rest of the world.
CA: Firstly, and at the risk of generalisation, what are the main constraints or challenges to protecting African people’s health, and the African environment, from the harmful effects of toxic chemicals and waste?
TL: Well there are many challenges but I think at the centre are the mere facts of widespread poverty and underdevelopment. You see there is a cynical relationship between these two and exposure to harmful chemicals and pollution of the environment within which people live. They both limit the options of people to choose; choice about means of livelihood, places to live in, materials to use, access to healthcare services, access to education, access to resources, decent jobs, and many other things. They breed perfect conditions for terrible impact on human health and the environment in most communities where they are most prevalent.
CA: Now, please tell us a little bit about the Regional Centre (RC) itself. Where are you housed, how many staff do you have, and when was the RC established: basically how did the Centre come about?
TL: The regional centre for English speaking African countries commonly known as the Africa Institute, is situated in Pretoria, South Africa, housed by the Department of Environmental Affairs of the Government of South Africa. It is an intergovernmental organization established through a statute that countries in the region have to ratify.
The Institute coordinates the efforts of these countries in the implementation of the chemicals and hazardous waste conventions. These are Basel, Stockholm, Rotterdam and recently Minamata conventions.
CA: Now, please tell us, Africa is a large and diverse continent, made up of many countries which differ from one another in many ways. I understand the centre primarily serves the Anglophone countries. How many Parties do you actually serve?
TL: Africa has 54 countries and the Africa Institute serves 23 of them. This covers a large area from southern Africa, East Africa and West Africa.
CA: It must be very challenging, yet very rewarding. What are the main technical issues or focus areas covered by the centre and what activities does the centre concentrate on in order to have the biggest possible impact?
TL: As you realise the mandate is quite large. Each of these conventions is a big task on its own yet the countries are expected to implement them all at the same time. The Institute, together with the countries narrow down this task to specific project based activities. For example, for Stockholm the focus now is on PCBs. The Institute is currently executing a large project for PCB elimination for 12 SADC countries. It has also submitted a PCBs elimination project for South Africa for GEF consideration. For Minamata, the focus is on assisting countries to understand their Mercury situation so that they may then take a decision to ratify the Minamata convention. For Basel and Rotterdam the focus is on awareness campaigns.
CA: One waste issue which seems constantly linked with Africa is electronic waste or e-waste. What insights would you like to share with our audience concerning e-waste, its impact on health, who is the most impacted, the overall social and economic costs and benefits? What would you say is the general level of awareness amongst policymakers and decision-makers concerning these risks?
TL: For starters I am not so sure that our policy makers on the continent have E waste as a priority waste stream. You see, waste management is a problem generally in almost all African countries. The bulk of waste is very poorly managed if ever. A high tech waste stream such E waste is even less understood. Yet there are some in African countries who have seen that that E waste may present some opportunities for them. Many of these operate in the informal sector, are unregulated and operate without any standards per se. These are the people who are in the forefront of the E waste challenge.
CA: The centre has a long tradition and proud record and has clearly achieved a lot, but is there a single achievement of which you are most proud?
TL: I am most proud of the ability of the centre to serve as a platform for countries on the continent to meet and discuss these common issues that relate to chemicals and hazardous waste management. An example is the meeting that we convened on the on-going challenges of listing chemicals in Annex III of the Rotterdam convention. The purpose of that meeting was for Africans to look at this issue on their own, develop their own positions and recommend options that arise from their own experiences to overcome the problem. The outcome of that dialogue is now being canvassed across the continent and with the rest of the world.
CA: On a somewhat more personal note, Dr Letsela, how did you come to lead this centre, how did your career lead you this in your direction, and what advice would you have for other Africans, male or female, striving for a career in science and international development?
TL: I have always had passion for environment and human health paradoxically. When I was younger I wanted to be a medical doctor which led me to study science, as I grew older, specifically after completing my undergraduate degree I decided to focus on environmental sciences. I think this is a career that can bring a lot of fulfilment to many young people and can bring a good sense of purpose. It may not bring the largest pay check at the end of the month, however its impact on the quality of life is unparalleled.
CA: And lastly, please give us your view on the next Triple COPs, to be held in Geneva in April-May 2017: what are your expectations, what do expect to be achieved, and how useful do you think the Technology Fair is likely to be for the countries in your region?
TL: Well I hope that Parties can bring themselves at the COPs to remember why in the first place they agreed on establishing these conventions. It was primarily to protect human health and the environment. All other benefits are secondary. Yet in recent times there seems to be increasing loss of focus in favour of other considerations. This is sad and the brunt of the failure at the international level will be borne by the poorest of the poor across the world. My expectations are high and I hope this time around most delegates will be powered up to put their people before any other considerations.
With respect to the technology fair, I think it is a welcome addition and hopefully delegates from Africa in particular, shall see some technologies that are affordable that may solve some of the challenges that we have on the continent.
CA: Thank you, for your time and for your answers and for sharing your insights. Good luck with your important work in this important region, and I hope we shall be able to meet in person at the Triple COPs in Geneva very soon?
TL: Thanks Charlie, it was a pleasure. And if your readers need any further information on our centre and its activities, please go to our website www.africainstitute.info.
|
|
Read our interview with Gabriela Medina to understand how regional efforts help implement the Basel and Stockholm conventions.
Focus on Latin America: the work of the Basel and Stockholm Conventions Regional Centre in Montevideo, Uruguay
Interview between Charlie Avis, Public Information Officer for the Secretariat of the Basel, Rotterdam, and Stockholm Conventions, and Chem. Gabriela Medina, Director of the Basel Convention Coordinating Centre, and Stockholm Convention Regional Centre for Latin America and the Caribbean. The Centre (BCCC/SCRC) is hosted by the Uruguayan Ministry of Housing, Land Planning and Environment (MVOTMA, Spanish acronym), and housed in the Technological Laboratory of Uruguay (LATU, Spanish acronym), in Montevideo, Uruguay.
Charlie Avis (CA): Good morning Gabriela and thank you for your time to answer our questions: your Regional Centre is the next in our series whereby we put one Centre per month “in the spotlight” in order to highlight all the many ways the Regional Centres contribute to the implementation of the conventions.
Gabriela Medina (GM): Thank you Charlie for this opportunity to share our work with a wider audience!
CA: Firstly, please tell us a little bit about the Centre (BCCC/SCRC) itself. Where are you housed, institutionally and geographically, how many staff do you have, and when was the BCCC/SCRC established: basically how did the Centre come about?
GM: Charlie, the Basel part of the joint Centre has been operational since 1998 and is hosted by the Technological Laboratory of Uruguay (LATU), established through an agreement between the Ministry of Housing, Land Planning and Environment (MVOTMA) and the Basel Convention Secretariat at that time. It was then endorsed by the 4th COP of the Stockholm Convention in 2009 to act as Regional Centre for Capacity Building and Technology Transfer for the GRULAC Region.
Direction of the Centre, performed by me, belongs to the Ministry of Housing, Land Planning and Environment (MVOTMA), so, I am a public officer working for MVOTMA, and the Co-Direction of the Centre belongs to the Technological Laboratory of Uruguay (LATU), and is performed by my colleague Ing. Alejandra Torre.
Our permanent staff is formed by five persons, Director, Co-Director, two technical assistants, and an accountant, but through our different projects we hire translation and design services and experts in different topics depending on the field of work.
CA: Do you serve all of the countries of the region, how many Parties are there, and how do you manage with language: do you communicate solely in Spanish, or also in Portuguese, or in English or how?
GM: The BCCC/SCRC serves all the parties to the Latin America and the Caribbean region presently 33 countries: Antigua and Barbuda, Argentina, Bahamas, Barbados, Belize, Bolivia, Brazil, Colombia, Costa Rica, Cuba, Chile, Dominica, Ecuador, El Salvador, Guatemala, Granada, Guyana, Haiti, Honduras, Jamaica, Mexico, Nicaragua, Panama, Paraguay, Peru, Dominican Republic, St. Kitts and Nevis, St. Lucia, St. Vincent and the Grenadines, Suriname, Trinidad and Tobago, Uruguay, and Venezuela.
We therefore need, and have, the capability to communicate in English, Portuguese and Spanish.
CA: It must be very challenging, yet very rewarding. What are the main technical issues or focus areas covered by the BCCC/SCRC and what activities does the BCCC/SCRC have in order to overcome these challenges?
GM: The focal areas of our work have been:
- Global Monitoring Programme Phase I (2009-11). Capacity building on POPs Sampling and analysis in breast milk and air samples, in: Antigua and Barbuda, Bahamas, Barbados, Brazil, Chile, Cuba, Ecuador, Haiti, Jamaica, Mexico, Peru and Uruguay.
- Minimization and environmentally sound management of mercury containing waste affecting most exposed populations in various economic, industrial and health sectors (2010-13), in: Argentina, Costa Rica and Uruguay.
- Temporary storage and final disposal of mercury and its wastes (2011-12), in: Argentina and Uruguay.
- The Minamata Convention and its implementation in the Latin America and Caribbean region (2013-14), in all GRULAC countries.
- Capacity Building on Hazardous Waste and Promotion of Best Available Technologies and Best Environmental Practices (BATs and BEPs) (2013-14), in: Bolivia, Costa Rica, El Salvador, Guatemala, Honduras, Nicaragua, Panama, Paraguay and Dominican Republic).
- Regional strategy for strengthening environmental laboratories (2014-15), in: Argentina, Brazil, Chile, Paraguay and Uruguay.
- UNEP Guidance on the Development of Legal and Institutional Infrastructures and Measures for Recovering Costs of National Administration (LIRA Guidance), April to August 2013, we have participated using the Pilot Guidance in Uruguay, as well as being part of the experts group on the elaboration of the Guidance. Parties served: global level.
Nowadays we are working on:
- Project on Mercury Inventories and Risk Management Plans (2014-17), in: Argentina, Ecuador, Peru and Uruguay.
- Project on Minamata Initial Assessment (2014-17), in: Bolivia, Chile, Dominican Republic and Paraguay.
- Project: Regional Outlook on Waste Management (ROWM), (2016-17), in: all GRULAC countries.
- We are Co – Charing jointly with Mauritius, the new Basel global partnership initiative on establishing a Household Waste Initiative.
- Project: Global Monitoring Proramme Phase II (2015-18). Capacity building on POPs Sampling and analysis in breast milk, water and air samples, in: Antigua and Barbuda, Argentina, Barbados, Brazil, Chile, Colombia, Ecuador, Jamaica, Mexico, Peru and Uruguay.
- Project: Steering Committee on Chemicals and Waste Network for Latin America and the Caribbean, this is an initiative emerged by the GRULAC Forum of Ministers of Environment (2016-18), in: all GRULAC countries.
- Project: National Implementation Plans, Stockholm Convention, Umbrella Component (2016 – 2017), in: Argentina, Chile, Paraguay and Uruguay.
CA: So I understand one specific area of focus for the BCCC/SCRC is on POPs, and on the Stockholm Convention’s Global Monitoring Programme in particular. Are there concrete evidence of lowering levels of POPs concentrations in your region? Are we winning the battle?
GM: Charlie the situation in POPs is quite complex, we have got data on GMP Phase I (the former 12 pollutants), and now we are carrying on the GMP Phase II, with all the news POPs which have been included. Let’s wait until the next results to see what is happening at least at Regional Level.
CA: Gabriela, can we switch to a topic slightly more personal? How did you come to lead this BCCC/SCRC, how did your career lead you this in your direction, and what advice would you have for other women, hoping or striving for a career in science, or in international development more generally?
GM: Charlie, this is a real personal question, hahahahaha!!.
I started to work in the Environmental Ministry very young in 1994, while I was studying at the University; I started working in the environmental laboratory, where I worked for 13 years.Later in 2007, I was the Director of the Special Solid Waste and Contaminated Sites Department.
Once I obtained a degree in Pharmaceutical Chemistry, I took several postgraduate courses in Brazil, Japan, Germany and Holland, I am specialized in environmental toxicology, and as a woman, and living in a developing country, I think I had good job opportunities and training.
The environmental theme is very vast, and given that the development of chemicals and waste grows in an amazing way, since it has an exponential growth, the good news is that there is a lot to do, it has its difficulties, talking about prevention issues, because policies always go one step backward than industrial development.
In 2011 the Government offered me to Manage the Center, something I accepted immediately, it really is a very challenging job.
For other women I would like tell them that there is a lot to do, and to see the environmental progress over the years is very rewarding, therefore, we should to continue working for the health and environment in a worthy way for our society.
CA: And lastly, please, could you comment briefly on the forthcoming 2017 Triple COPs? Will you be present? What do you see as the main challenges, working towards a Future Detoxified?
GM: Next year will be a great job since we will have the BRS triple COP, the 1st Minamata COP, where the next lines of work will be taken for the coming years, I hope to participate, in fact, I am anxious to be in the different meetings, where we can take decisions for a better world, working to reduce pollutants worldwide, as I pointed out, much remains to be done, and everything is in our hands.
CA: Thank you, for your time and for your answers. Good luck with your important work!
GM: Thank you, Charlie, and if you need any further information on our centre and its activities, please go to our website.
|
|
Canadian Karen Quinto felt the sustainable management of chemicals so important, she wrote a rap to communicate it. Listen to her song and tell us if you agree.
Listen to the POPs rap, a musical postcard from Toronto
Interview between Charlie Avis, Public Information Officer for the Secretariat of the Basel, Rotterdam, and Stockholm Conventions, and Ms. Karen Yves Quinto, a scientist/musician/artist from Toronto, Canada.
Charlie Avis (CA): Good morning Karen, thank you for time in sharing with us your work and first of all can I say how much I and many of my colleagues enjoyed your rap about persistent organic pollutants, or POPs. Congratulations!
Karen Yves Quinto (KYQ): Thank you, Charlie, for the opportunity to get my work out there and it’s great to know you enjoyed the song, it was certainly fun writing it!
CA: Firstly, please tell us a little bit about yourself. From what age did you feel interested in science and in chemistry and the environment?
KYQ: Well, I went to a progressive elementary school where we had Botany and Zoology as early as grade 1 and I fell in love with microscopes in grade 4 because it was like another world for me. I kind of forgot about science during high school, because I was too busy fitting in and science was not a popular subject, so I got into art and music instead up until I decided to pursue a career in science in the end. As for chemistry and the environment, those interests developed at Ryerson University where I did my undergrad. I was really into Microbial Fuel Cells, so I studied the topic for my Directed Studies in Chemistry course in my final year. We also had a very prominent, environmentally focused science programs and I held leadership positions in many environmentally focused projects, from making vertical gardens to petitioning to save the Experimental Lakes Area here in Canada.
CA: Why rap music, why not singer/song-writer guitar, for example?
KYQ: I do sing and write songs in other music projects. In my {Mandelbrot} & {Julia}: Boundaries Dissolve album, I focused more on my jazz lounge repertoire. I chose to delve into science rap recently because first of all, it's amusing in the context of science and I like to perform during my presentations. But I think rap also has a way of communicating quite plainly and honestly about any topic. Rapping is a good medium for communicating science because scientific terms are easier to rhyme. It also has a huge "wow" factor and has been my strategic go-to for seminars and presentations at school. It makes people laugh and it's never boring, so I keep doing it. I initially wrote "Persistent Organic Pollutants (POPs)" for Environment Canada's "Take Our Kids to Work Day", Canada's annual initiative to bring high school students to their parent/guardian's workplace. I went to my dad's workplace when I was a teen but he was in a manufacturing setting so there were lots for students to see because it was very visual. However, at Environment Canada, it was harder to show what scientists and policy makers actually do in a concrete and tangible way. So, I volunteered to co-host the event in 2015 and I used my POPs rap as an introduction to our work at the Hazardous Air Pollution Laboratory.
CA: How did the students react to your rap?
KYQ: When I first performed the rap, they looked very embarrassed for me. And I get it, it's unusual to be rapping about science but I know they acknowledged the skill that went into that. Some of them secretly told me later that initially they thought it was going to be lame, but they found it was "actually good". After the day was over, some parents emailed me afterwards saying that their children couldn't stop talking about the science rap that they had seen. And believe me, these teens are hard to impress! So in the end, I think it was successful in reaching the younger demographic.
CA: I’m curious, do you have other science raps you’ve written before POPs? And do you have any recordings of them?
KYQ: I've rapped about Lysteria in second year undergrad for Cellular Biology, then I wrote "Microbial Fuel Cells" and "Climate Change" for my Masters of Environmental Science presentations. If anyone wants to hear my music, they can go to https://soundcloud.com/karen-quinto or https://karenquinto.com/music-projects/ where they can stream my recorded music. The other rap songs are still in the process of being recorded. I barely record, to be honest, I much prefer performing in front of an audience!
CA: I’m sure you’ll get some additional visitors, after this interview. The only “criticism” I’ve heard about your POPs rap is that it is too short, and it’d be great to be able to enjoy it for longer! Is it difficult to write and perform for longer than a minute or so?
KYQ: I wrote POPs as an intro to a presentation of our work at Environment Canada, so initially the one-minute mark was because of its original use. Rap is fast-paced, so there’s a lot of work and longevity that goes into writing and performing one. You have to be concise and find ways for all the words to fit and rhyme in your own style. Then you have to memorize the whole thing, which requires a seriously intense amount of repetition until it is recorded in the muscle memory of your mouth. I suppose I could write a few more verses!
CA: Let’s talk about environment awareness. How would you describe the awareness of young adults and teenagers, for example in your city, concerning the environment, concerning chemicals, everyday pollution, waste, recycling, themes like that?
KYQ: I can’t really speak about statistics or anything concrete like that, but from what I have observed, it really depends on many factors: their geography, their upbringing at home, their school, and other sources like the shows that they watch. Some cities like Toronto have a fairly good recycling culture, but other cities don’t. If you’re eating home cooked meals, you’re less likely to produce trash than if you were always on the go. If your school has a clean-up day, it becomes part of your habit. If you live in a condo without a recycling program, you’re not going to think about recycling as much as if you lived in a house. I think that young adults in general are becoming more aware of the “big picture” environmental issues, but practicing environmentalism is dependent upon the local community of that teen.
CA: Tell me what are your current projects, anything else POPs-related?
KYQ: Right now, I am more into the painting side of things. I perform sometimes and have collaborations on the side, really slow-burning stuff. I’m not a full-time musician, so everything is happening on a different timescale. Nothing POPs-related, although I’m sure something interesting is bound to come along and help me continue that path. I have been bouncing around ideas and thinking about ways to communicate that area of science. I’m very much project-driven when it comes to my art. I like finding opportunities to create something for both science and art’s sake.
CA: Last question from me: the international community has its two-yearly “COPs” - or meetings of the conference of parties – coming up in Geneva next April, when new chemicals will be added to the Stockholm Convention and other decisions will be taken through the Basel and Rotterdam Conventions to protect human health and the environment. Do you think you could write a song about that?
KYQ: Is that an offer? Yeah for sure, I’d welcome any invitation to write and even perform; the sky’s the limit. Why not? That’s a very exciting proposition. When I wrote POPs, I was having lunch in the cafeteria of Environment Canada and planning what to do for an education event. That’s how my ideas thrive and come to fruition.
CA: Not an offer, no, but maybe the germ of an idea! Let’s see. Karen, thank you so much for your time, for your answers, and especially for your music. Good luck with your inspiring work, please let’s keep in touch!
ANAG: Thanks Charlie, we definitely will! And let me just add that if anyone wants to connect with me about science, art, and/or music, they can add me on www.linkedin.com/in/karenquinto or email me at k.quinto@mail.utoronto.ca
|
|
Latest in the series talks to Dr Abdulnabi Al-Ghadban, who leads the Stockholm Convention Regional Centre in Kuwait.
The BRS interview - Focus on the Gulf region
Interview between Charlie Avis, Public Information Officer for the Secretariat of the Basel, Rotterdam, and Stockholm Conventions, and Dr. Abdul Nabi Al-Ghadban, the Coordinator of the centre.
Charlie Avis (CA): Good morning Dr. Al-Ghadban, thank you for time in sharing with us the work of the SCRC Kuwait.
Dr. Abdul Nabi Al Ghadban (ANAG): Thank you, Charlie, for this kind invitation!
CA: Firstly, please tell us a little bit about the Regional Centre (RC) itself. Where are you housed, institutionally and geographically, how many staff do you have, and when was the RC established: basically how did the Centre come about?
ANAG: The RC is located or hosted by the Kuwait Institute for Scientific Research (KISR) in the state of Kuwait which is located at the north western part of the Gulf region. KISR was established in 1967 to carry out applied scientific research and to provide consulting services for both governmental and private sectors in Kuwait, the Gulf region and the Arab World. Due to its nature of work and based on its capabilities in terms of experienced manpower (researchers, professionals and technicians), number of laboratories and the variety of up to date equipment) KISR was nominated to serve as a Stockholm Convention Centre by the parties of Asia region, and was endorsed by the Conference of the Parties of the Stockholm Convention to serve as a Stockholm Convention Regional Centre in 2009. The number of staff members totally devoted to the RC is 15; other staff members who are involved in several related field of interest are also accessible whenever needed.
CA: Do you serve all of the countries of the Gulf region or Middle Eastern region? How many Parties are there?
ANAG: We serve all parties of the Convention in general and in particular we serve the countries located in the West Asia region, namely; Saudi Arabia, United Arab Emirates, Oman, Qatar, Bahrain, Kuwait, Yemen, Syria, Jordan, and Lebanon.
CA: What are the main technical issues or focus areas covered by the RC?
ANAG: The main objective of the RC is to strengthen and further develop the capabilities of countries in West Asia region in implementing the Stockholm Convention through capacity building and the transfer of environmentally sound technologies adopted and used under the Stockholm convention. Therefore our priorities are to 1) Coordinate with the 10 served members regarding the compliance of the stated recommendations by the POPRC and the conference of the parties; 2) Provide all served members with needful technical support to assist them in fulfilling the requirement of the convention; and 3) Upgrade the RC with up to date facilities such as equipment for providing better services.
CA: I’m sure you work on POPs and on the Stockholm Convention’s Global Monitoring Plan in particular. What would you say is the level of awareness amongst policymakers and decision-makers in the region concerning POPs? And amongst the general public?
ANAG: Yes the level of awareness is somewhat progressing well compared to the past period. A good example is the development of NIPs in most of the countries we serve. This reflected good rate of awareness as far as the policymakers in such countries. Obstacles that prevented other countries in developing the NIPs is currently monitored by the RC and we hopefully reach a level where all parties have not only the NIPs but also the updated ones based on the latest information of the SC. As far as the general public it varies, in some counties it is of an advanced stage, but in others such as in Syria and Yemen is not in a good stage, and this is interpreted due to the effect of state of wars in such countries. We hope that such conflicts be resolved soon so that we do our mandate more effectively.
CA: How would you like the RC to evolve, in the next say 5 to 10 years?
ANAG: our vision for evolving the RC in the next coming 5 to 10 years is to ensure that all members we are serving would have the means and support needed that can be offered by the RC to reach the level of full compliance with the Stockholm convention.
CA: Are there any key events towards which you are currently focusing your energies and resources?
ANAG: currently we are focusing in the following: 1) transfer or disseminate scientific data that are obtained from implemented projects related to POPs to other members; 2) conduct frequent meetings and or training workshops related to the implementation of recommendations set by the SC; 3) facilitate more cooperation between the RC and UNEP as well as other UN-bodies.
CA: The theme of the 2015 Triple COPs was “Science to Action”. What does “Science to Action” mean to you and how might it guide the work of the RC?
ANAG: To me science to action implies delivering or meeting the objective in a smooth way. Science will create data that can be validated at a later stage. Whence such validation is being done then a good justification for banning or getting rid of a certain chemical or pollutant would be granted. The second step is to convey this message to the community in a very professional or meaningful manner so that the community understand the issue and support the scientific community in meeting the objective of the convention. It is simply all about the support given by the community to the scientist.
CA: Thank you, for your time and for your answers. Good luck with your important work!
ANAG: Thank you, Charlie, and if you need any further information on our centre and its activities, please go to our website www.kisr.edu.kw
|
|
BRS contributed to the UN Human Rights Day of General Discussion on chemicals and the rights of the child, held in Geneva on 23 September 2016. Read Rolph Payet’s speech here.
Linkages between children, human rights, and chemicals and wastes
2016 Day of General Discussion
23rd September 2016
on
Children’s Rights and the Environment
Speech given by Amelie Taoufiq, Legal Officer, on behalf of Dr. Rolph Payet, Executive Secretary of the Basel, Rotterdam and Stockholm (BRS) Conventions (UNEP)
Excellencies, distinguished delegates, dear colleagues, friends, ladies and gentlemen:
First, on behalf of Dr. Rolph Payet, Executive Secretary of the BRS Conventions on hazardous chemicals and wastes, three Multilateral Environmental Agreements (MEAs) administered by UNEP, please allow me to thank the Committee on the Rights of the Child, OHCHR and other partners, for organising this Day of General Discussion on the environment and children’s rights, including the side-event on the “Unsound Management of Chemicals and the Rights of the Child”, as well as panellists for their very interesting presentations. Today discussion, we believe, is of major importance so that we may all brainstorm, identify and analyse gaps, think forward and look ahead in terms of concrete course of actions on these key issues.
Indeed, children are the future... They are and should be at the core of our preoccupations and work. They are among the most affected by harmful effects on health and the environment caused by hazardous chemicals wastes; but as children can be great agents of change, they are also part of the solution for a ‘detoxified future’....
Also, on this occasion, I would like to thank the Special Rapporteur on the implications for human rights of the environmentally sound management and disposal of hazardous substances and wastes, Mr. Tuncak, for his excellent work, which we support, and for the report presented last week at the Human Rights Council, pointing out the “silent pandemic” of disease and disability affecting millions of children, to the point that paediatricians now begun to sadly refer to children born “pre-polluted”....
In this regard, within the BRS/UNEP perspective, I would like to quickly highlight 3 (three) angles, as follows:
1. Some positive achievements and examples under BRS Conventions/UNEP with respect to the protection of children from exposure to hazardous chemicals and wastes:
- It is important to recall that, through their common objectives, i.e. the protection of human health and the environment, the BRS Conventions are committed, in their provisions implementation, to protect children from hazardous chemicals and wastes, thereby contributing to protect fundamental children’s rights such as the rights: to life, to health, to a healthy environment, to development, to food security , to clean water and sanitation and to an adequate standard of leaving;
- The specific conditions of vulnerable groups, including children, pregnant women and breastfeeding mothers, and indigenous communities, including children therefrom, are explicitly and implicitly recognized in some convention provisions or taken into account in specific programmes implementing the BRS Conventions; also in this respect, the BRS Secretariat has been active, even before adoption of SDG No5 on gender, on promoting gender equality, between men and women, as well as boys and girls, which is closely linked to protecting children (e.g. development of the BRS-Gender Action Plan/GAP).
- To prevent and remedy harmful exposure of human beings, mostly children, to hazardous chemicals and wastes, it is essential to monitor this exposure e.g.: the Global Monitoring Programme (GMP) on POPS and breast milk in partnership with the World Health Organization (WHO);
- BRS S-Y-N-E-R-G-I-E-S……at all levels;
- Among the most recent positive UNEP achievements: adoption of the Minamata Convention on Mercury, to enter into force the soonest hopefully, and perhaps to be synergized with the BRS Conventions, following the life-cycle approach of sound management of chemicals and wastes;
- Etc..
2. The gaps, i.e. where additional guidance and developments are needed, most essentially would be:
-
Compliance mechanisms and procedures to still be adopted under the Stockholm and Rotterdam Conventions;
- Financing, mobilizing funds;
- Prevention from exposure…;
- Involvement of not all relevant stakeholders;
- Limited number of chemicals listed;
- Awareness, communication, education, information;
- Capacity;
- Etc..
3. Some ideas of good practices and recommendations, could be for instance:
-
More synergies, i.e. to enhance cooperation and coordination, between all relevant stakeholders, and at all levels, national, regional and international levels. So,
- “Partnerships, partnerships, partnerships”….recalling the recent words of the newly appointed UNEP Executive Director, Mr. Erik Solheim;
- More chemicals listed under the Conventions - through the CRC and POPRC, the technical and scientific bodies under the Stockholm and Rotterdam Conventions - and ultimately by the Conference of the Parties;
- More awareness raising, education, communication;
- More funding…;
- More technical assistance in order to build better capacity on these issues;
- Environmental treaties to refer more explicitly to vulnerable groups, including children;
- Etc..
Finally, I would like to recall and encourage you to participate in the forthcoming 2017 meetings of the Conferences of the Parties (COP) of the BRS Conventions, to be held in May; the meetings will include a high-level segment. The theme of the meetings and the high-level segment will be “A future detoxified: sound management of chemicals and wastes”. Thus, these may be a good momentum and an opportunity to seize so as to continue addressing the important issues mentioned above and these discussed at today DGD, in order to eventually help ‘detoxify the future’...
|
|
Our popular series continues with an interview with Otavio Okano and Lady Virginia from CETESB in Sao Paolo, Brazil
Science in action: the work of the Stockholm Convention Regional Centre in Brazil
Interview between Charlie Avis, Public Information Officer for the Secretariat of the Basel, Rotterdam, and Stockholm Conventions, Mr. Otavio Okano and Ms. Lady Virginia Traldi Meneses, Director and Technical Coordinator respectively, of the Stockholm Regional Centre for Latin America, located in Sao Paolo, Brazil.
Charlie Avis (CA): Good morning Mr. Otavio Okano and Ms. Lady Virginia, thank you for time in sharing the work of the SCRC Brazil.
Mr. Otavio Okano: Thank you, Charlie, for this kind invitation and congratulations on this important initiative to disseminate information on the Regional Centres.
CA: Firstly, please tell us a little bit about the Regional Centre (RC) itself. Where are you housed, institutionally and geographically, how many staff do you have, and when was the RC established: basically how did the Centre come about?
Mr. Otavio Okano: The RC is located in the São Paulo city in São Paulo State, one of the most industrialized states in Brazil and very important economically, with a population of 44 million inhabitants in an area of 248,000 sq. km. A large number of agricultural and industrial activities that use a variety of chemical products are concentrated here.
RC is housed in the Environmental Company of Sao Paulo State (CETESB) which was created in 1968 and its mission is to improve and to assure environmental quality of Sao Paulo State in order to achieve sustainable development. To accomplish this task CETESB has 46 offices scattered in the state with around 2,000 employees, highly qualified, most of them graduated in technical areas, such as engineering, biology, chemistry, geology and other professional specialties.
CETESB performs its action in many different fields such as: environmental permits; environmental quality contro;, enforcement of regulations; environmental monitoring and pollution charges on sources of pollution. Set up with modern facilities, equipped with analytical instruments based on leading-edge technology, our laboratories accredited by ISO/IEC 17025:2005, perform more than 350,000 analyses per year, encompassing a wide variety of physical-chemical, biological and toxicological tests on the most different matrices.
CETESB currently has the largest and most comprehensive network of environmental quality monitoring in the country. Air, water, sediment, groundwater, soil and vegetation are systematically studied; researched resulting to a state policy on control actions and preservation for the benefit of society.
Besides that, CETESB works for the prevention, preparedness and response to chemical emergencies; provides technical support and intervention if such emergencies occurred on roads, railroads and maritime transports, hazardous substance discard, industries, gasoline stations, pipelines, and provides supports to the Emergency Preparedness in Cases of Disasters with Chemical Products in Latin America.
CETESB works with waste treatment and final disposal facilities, which includes environmental assessment and evaluation of technological feasibility as well. Since the 90’s it has a multidisciplinary team dealing with the management of contaminated sites that includes environmental drilling, soil sampling, monitoring well installation, ground-water sampling, and non-invasive site investigation with geophysical equipment.
The centre also participates and/or coordinates some of the Latin American and the Caribbean networks, such as Chemical Emergency Network (REQUILAC), Prevention and Management of Contaminated Sites Network (RELASC) and Pan American Network of Information in Environment (REPIDISCA).
In short, CETESB is actively engaged in the National Environmental Council (CONAMA) regulatory activities. In its capacity as environmental agency and RC it usually collaborates with discussions addressing national and subnational legislation on pollution control, chemicals and waste management and licensing in Brazil. It also shares experiences on enforcement and inspection in order to support GRULAC countries aiming at strengthening their regulatory capacity in these fields.
All this expertise led the Company to become an international certification agency and reference agency for environmental issues in Latin America for regional centers in the world and for United Nation.Due to its recognized and relevant technical expertise, CETESB was nominated, in 2007, by the Brazilian Government to become a Stockholm Convention Regional Centre on POPs for Latin America and the Caribbean Region and since then, has been rated with the maximum evaluation score.
CA: Do you serve all of the countries of the region, how many Parties are there, and how do you manage with languages: do you communicate solely in Spanish, or Portuguese, or English, or how?
Mr. Otavio Okano: We serve all parties of the Convention in the GRULAC countries that speak Spanish and English as well the Portuguese speaking African countries. Although Brazil is the unique country of GRULAC that speaks Portuguese, there have been no difficulties in conducting technical assistance and training programs for them. For Spanish speaking countries, the total technical class materials and the slide presentations are translated from Portuguese into Spanish language. Besides, the majority of CETESB’s trainers speak Spanish and only a few classes are simultaneously translated from Portuguese into Spanish. The same applies for English speaking countries, where the trainings are given by professionals who speak English and, occasionally, a simultaneous translation is performed. On the other hand, legislations, guidelines, analytical methods i.e., documents etc available in Portuguese from Brazilian institutions that could be useful to the GRULAC countries are translated as needed.
CA: What are the main technical issues or focus areas covered by the RC?
Mr. Otavio Okano: Charlie, in order to define the technical issues to be offered, our strategy is to analyze the NIPs of the GRULAC parties that are already submitted and then, we identify their main priorities to be addressed. Based on CETESB’s expertise mentioned before, linked to the NIPs priorities, we focus on several environmental technical and legal issues, related to chemical and waste, especially POPs and Hg, comprising: toxicology; urban and health care solid waste management; PCBs and obsolete pesticide wastes management; BATs and BEPs measures for the Unintentional POPs; chemical emergency responses; soil and groundwater pollution prevention; identification, management and evaluation of contaminated sites with POPs and Hg; POPs and heavy metals environmental monitoring in the following matrixes: air, soil, sediments, groundwater and biological samples (aquatic organisms, milk and human blood); laboratory analysis to monitor POPs (PCBs, chlorinated organic pesticides and dioxin and furans) and Hg; and regulatory frameworks and management guidance.
CA: So I understand one specific area of focus for the Centres is on POPs and on the Stockholm Convention’s Global Monitoring Plan in particular. What would you say is the level of awareness amongst policymakers and decision-makers in the region concerning POPs? And amongst the general public?
Ms. Lady Virginia: Charlie, as mentioned before, CETESB has recognized strength in the scientific, technological and legal areas. Our Centre has been working in strengthening the capacity of the GRULAC countries for the implementation of NIPs and transferring of technology through training programs. . The main targets of these activities are the policymakers and decision-makers and the technical staff. In this way, we provide them with the tools for improving the environment and to protect human health from POPs in the region.
In order to increase the broader awareness amongst the public in general we had developed an e-learning course on the Stockholm Convention on POPs having various aspects of its implementation for the Brazilian stakeholders. From this experience, our RC has been developing an e-learning program on POPs in general to be extended to the Region. CETESB has a website with wide range of information on chemical management and we keep updating the RC webpage.
Regarding the Global Monitoring Plan, I would say that LAC has made a lot of efforts in training laboratories to perform POPs and Hg analysis, to improve the availability of inventories and monitoring data base of these compounds in the Region. CETESB plays a crucial role in providing training to many laboratories of the GRULAC region including national laboratories. However, much more needs to be done to improve GMP in GRULAC region. The establishment of a laboratory network for analysis of these compounds is challenging but crucial to overcome the lack of capacity at country level and to obtain reliable data base. Another way might be to build on other initiatives such as the Global Atmospheric Passive Sampling network (GAPS) that covers the Region. Mechanism to promote coordination and facilitation would be necessary in order to synergize the efforts.
CA: How would you like the RC to evolve, in the next say 5 to 10 years?
Ms. Lady Virginia: Charlie, what we have been noticing is that developing and economies in transition country Parties have complied with the SC obligations for the first dozen POPs better than the new POPs. We therefore understand that for the management of new POPs a broader knowledge of the chemicals management is necessary in general, comprising, among others, applicable chemical and environmental legislations, integrated institutional arrangement with scientific support and control of chemical in product, in order to transpose the SC obligations to the national level.
In this context, I would say that in the next 5-10 years, our RC intends to provide capacity building of these countries and to assist them technically and administratively paving the way to the post 2020 chemical agenda.
CA: RC, we often highlight the fact that the world of sustainable management of chemicals and waste features quite a large number of prominent and successful, high-profile women, yourself included. Could you perhaps say a few words about how it was for you as a woman making a career in science, in the environmental sector, in chemicals and waste? And any advice for any budding female scientists out there who might read this interview?
Ms. Lady Virginia: I would say that the persistent historical and global context of discrimination against women has made most of them believe they are not competent enough and, therefore unable to reach higher levels inside an organization at a professional level, especially at the technical level.
In Brazil, despite the difficulties faced by many women due to gender discrimination, especially in the poorest sections of the population, women constitute the majority of the labor force in the market. In my case, fortunately I was born in a family where I was able to study and had the freedom to choose what career to follow and develop myself professionally, both in technical area such as management. I was lucky to have parents who always encouraged me and promoted my education. So I could be graduated in Chemical Engineering, specialized in Environmental Engineering and Industrial Administration, completed my PhD in the subject “Institutional, Legal, Political and Technical Aspects on Stockholm Convention on Persistent Organic Pollutants Implementation: Polybrominated Diphenyl Ethers”. In addition, CETESB, as a company dedicated to environmental issues, has always been open to new ideas and ideals and therefore has a large number of graduates and highly qualified women in its staff. Furthermore, I had the opportunity to take part in several activities concerning chemicals and wastes.
What can I tell to women is that we cannot underestimate our power to carry out, because, among many qualities, we have the ability to conciliate professional activities with other areas of life. Also, women are the symbol of life, so they must engage themselves in all technical or political spheres to leave it a better place for future generation in this wonderful Planet, where, regardless of gender, we are all human beings.
CA: The theme of the 2015 Triple COPs was “Science to Action”. What does “Science to Action” mean to you and how might it guide the work of the RC?
Ms. Lady Virginia: In the 2015 Triple COPs our RC participated as a Scientific Fair exhibitor demonstrating our achievements in this subject. In fact, the theme itself was a great motivation for us since we needed to convert the results of scientific researches into concrete actions and therefore, to strengthen guidelines and science‐policy interface for the effectiveness of the Conventions. Let me highlight on the activities of CETESB that are routinely enforced, which have been shared with the countries by our RC.
CA: Thank you, for your time and for your answers. Good luck with your important work!
Mr. Otavio Okano: Thank you, Charlie, and if you need any further information on our centre and its activities, please go to our websitewww.pops.CETESB.sp.gov.br and we look forward to working with you!
|
|
Our latest interviewee highlights the rapidly developing CEE region and also reflects on women in science.
Dr. Kateřina Šebková on how more science is needed in policy-making
Interview between Charlie Avis, Public Information Officer for the Secretariat of the Basel, Rotterdam, and Stockholm Conventions, and Dr. Kateřina Šebková, Director of the Stockholm Regional Centre for Central and Eastern Europe, located in Brno, Czech Republic.
Charlie Avis (CA): Good morning Katka and thank you for your time to answer our questions: your Regional Centre is the next in a new series whereby we put one Centre per month “in the spotlight” in order to highlight all the many ways the Regional Centres contribute to the implementation of the conventions.
Dr. Kateřina Šebková (KS): Thank you, Charlie, for this great opportunity to share our work with a wider audience!
CA: Firstly, please tell us a little bit about the Regional Centre (RC) itself. Where are you housed, institutionally and geographically, how many staff do you have, and when was the RC established: basically how did the Centre come about?
KS: Charlie, the Stockholm Convention Regional Centre in Czech Republic (SCRC) is hosted by the Research Centre for Toxic Compounds in the Environment (RECETOX), which is an independent research centre operating within the Faculty of Science, Masaryk University, Brno, Czech Republic since 2007. City of Brno is conveniently located 190 km southeast of Prague, the capital of the country, some 130 km north of Vienna (capital of Austria) and at about the same distance from another capital, Bratislava (Slovakia). It is in a region experiencing steady technological and economic growth over last 25 years, a hub of large life science projects and home to new growing business and technology incubators, and a city with more than 50,000 university students.
The RC was established on the basis of the Czech experience in working on implementation of the Stockholm Convention nationally in 2003, on the identified knowledge gaps and data needs through an European research project enhancing laboratory expertise in countries of the central and Southern Europe in 2004-5 (EU FP5 APOPSBAL), and on understanding that we have ability providing such technical assistance and capacity building when felt the urgent need for it among other countries.
And our team - you would be surprised - there are only two permanent staff of the SCRC, however we closely cooperate with and draw on resources available at the whole RECETOX having more than 200 staff, 4000 m2 of modern research space, 70 laboratories, two lecture rooms, and a more than 30 year-long expertise in dealing with environmental issues, interdisciplinary research as well as providing practical solutions for environmental decontamination and remediation. In addition, we maintain a large international network of experts who cooperate with us, thus our teams vary according to a project. We can have a team of five up to 50, depending on a task, challenges and money.
CA: Do you serve all of the countries of the region, how many Parties are there, and how do you manage with all the very many languages: do you communicate solely in English, in German, in Russian or how?
KS: We are able to communicate in several languages, but the Centre`s main languages are Czech and English. Moreover, we can and have run courses and provided consultations in Russian, Slovak and French as well. In addition, other Central and Eastern European languages are also spoken at RECETOX, so we are quite well set in this regard.
The RC serves all 23 countries of Central and Eastern Europe and supports over 30 other countries in other regions (Africa, Central Asia, and in Latin America) as a strategic scientific partner. In addition, we also work as a project partner with UNEP, UNIDO and UNDP and organize conferences, global or regional workshops, and summer schools.
When looking at the monitoring activities, we have so far supported almost 60 countries worldwide and while looking at our training, there are about 80 countries that benefited from our expertise and services.
CA: It must be very challenging, yet very rewarding. What are the main technical issues or focus areas covered by the RC and what activities does the RC have in order to overcome these challenges?
KS: I fully agree. When looking at the monitoring activities, we have so far supported almost 60 countries worldwide since 2005 and while looking at our training, there are about 80 countries that benefited from our expertise and services. This is about 50-200 people that visit us each year.
Our 2016-2019 work plan as SCRC concentrates on strengthening global capacities in chemical analyses of toxic chemicals, on support in implementation of the Global Monitoring Plan to the Stockholm Convention by operating monitoring networks (MONET) in Europe, Africa and in the Czech Republic and by training experts in sampling, monitoring, and data mining and management. In addition, we will strive to support decision making by communicating science based advances in the research, presentation of environmental and human data in relation to toxic chemicals through electronic tools, by enlarging capacities in the management of PCB, new POPs, and by contributing to a greater understanding of linkages between environment and health. We also need to enhance visibility of our activities among our stakeholders, so we have a quarterly newsletter and a website and we try to attend many global meetings to meet our constituency. There are too many parallel issues, and I would say that main challenge for us is time.
CA: So I understand one specific area of focus for the Centre is on POPs, and on the Stockholm Convention’s Global Monitoring Plan in particular. What would you say is the level of awareness amongst the general public in the region concerning POPs? And amongst policymakers and decision-makers?
KS: Charlie, on awareness raising among general public in our region, there is more to be done apart from a website and a quarterly newsletter that we release. On the other hand, we developed and operate publicly available instruments that enhance understanding of anyone interested in POP occurrence - our environmental data repository and portal is available since 2010 displaying POPs monitoring information generated by us and our partners (www.genasis.cz). Similar instrument was developed for global purposes to serve the effectiveness evaluation and Global Monitoring Plan. And this talk certainly is a good opportunity to spread the news further.
Decision makers in this region are quite aware of chemicals problem, namely in relation to environmental burdens and hotspots in our region, as the political and economic transition since 1990s revealed many unwanted or untreated inheritance of obsolete stocks and wastes that needs to be dealt with. Unfortunately, there are other issues related to changes in the region that can outweigh the importance of environmental protection. On the other hand, we need to raise their awareness on the strong link between chemicals and health and perhaps that could get POPs and other chemicals back to the spotlight. We emphasize this in each talk we do.
CA: The RC has clearly achieved a lot, but what is the single achievement of which you are most proud?
KS: We are really proud of the GMP data warehouse, a joint achievement of the BRS Scientific Branch and RECETOX. It is the first global electronic tool that is publicly available and brings under one roof validated global data on levels of POPs in core matrices (air, breast milk and water), allows to evaluate effectiveness of eliminating or minimizing POP releases into the environment. Its data browser generates maps, charts, evaluates trends, and is publicly available online, so I believe it has a very strong awareness raising as well as decision making potential (https://www.pops-gmp.org/visualization-2014/app.php/).
CA: How would you like the RC to evolve, in the next say 5 to 10 years?
KS: We started with environmental chemistry and a handful of chemicals under one Convention at the outset, nowadays our range of studied chemicals and expertise spans to more global instruments including SAICM and Minamata Convention on Mercury. Currently, we have a capacity to support others with expertise in relation to POPs, emerging chemicals, endocrine disrupters, non-EDCs, as well as heavy metals. We are working hard on enhancing our understanding of links between health and environment as well as improving the speed of the transfer of knowledge from science to policy by being involved in larger population studies and working on harmonization of data collection, processing, visualization and data mining in order to be prepared and being able to capture all aspects of human exposure as well as holding solid data to support decision making worldwide.
CA: Katerina, can we switch to a topic slightly more personal? How did you come to lead this RC, how did your career lead you this in your direction, and what advice would you have for other women, hoping or striving for a career in science per se, or in international development more generally?
KS: Sure, I am happy to share this with others. I have a degree and a PhD in chemistry from both the Czech Republic and France and I started working in a family business as specialist for food commodities. Since 2003, I worked as chemical specialist and negotiator for the Ministry of Environment of the Czech Republic on chemicals management, and represented the Czech Republic in negotiations on new global legal agreements or EU legislation in relation to mercury and persistent organic pollutants for eight years. I was also representing the CEE region in the bureau of the Stockholm Convention from 2007 to 2009 and in the bureau of Intergovernmental Negotiating Committee on Mercury between 2010 and 2013. I joined RECETOX in 2012 to run the Stockholm Convention Regional Centre and to establish and maintain a more solid bridge from science to policy and back and thus employ my previous work and life experience.
I would say to other ladies - science is exciting, very demanding and not everyone can be an excellent scientist, so pressure is on. On the other hand, scientific background has certainly helped me greatly in finding my niche in working at the ministry and speaking several languages. And lastly, I would add that there continues to be a dire need for people with a scientific background at the policy level to push environmental issues to a more prominent position (where they should be) and increase understanding among decision makers on the subject matter that affects us as well as future generations.
CA: And lastly, please, what do you think are the most pressing, emerging issues will be for sustainable management of chemicals and wastes in central and Eastern Europe, in the next years, and how well is the region equipped to meet those challenges?
KS: In two words - complex mixtures - is the future pressing topic for all of us. So far, we have globally mostly generated information on impacts and effects of individual chemicals in the environment and for a limited pool of chemicals, but there is much more to be done, quite urgently. We have a little or no knowledge on synergistic effects of chemical mixtures that can enhance negative impacts of individual toxic compounds and such mixtures are all around us - in our personal care products, consumer goods, food and many other items.
The region will be better off in near future as mentioned above on where we would like to evolve. Our weakness is that a longitudinal studies have not been carried out more broadly in this region, but we are working on it. We gradually strengthened capacities and span of our research infrastructure, we established a new cohort (longitudinal) study in 2015, building on expertise available through WHO ELSPAC study since 1991, and we are also launching an exposome study that would generate important information for countries in the region as well as for global community and work of international organizations such as WHO and UNEP.
CA: Thank you, for your time and for your answers. Good luck with your important work!
KS: Thank you, Charlie, and if you need any further information on our centre and its activities, please go to our website https://www.recetox.muni.cz/rc/ and we look forward to working with you!
|
|
Read all about the big issues for the Caribbean in this interview with Dr. Ahmad Khan.
A Caribbean View: Latest BRS interview takes us to Trinidad and Tobago
Interview between Charlie Avis, Public Information Officer for the Secretariat of the Basel, Rotterdam, and Stockholm Conventions, and Dr. Ahmad Khan, Director of the Basel Convention Regional Centre for the Caribbean, located in Port-of-Spain, Trinidad & Tobago.
Charlie Avis (CA): Good morning Dr. Khan and thank you for your time to answer our questions: your Regional Centre is the next in a new series whereby we put one Centre per month “in the spotlight” in order to highlight all the many ways the Regional Centres contribute to the implementation of the conventions.
Ahmad Khan (AK): Thank you Charlie for this opportunity to share our work with a wider audience!
CA: Firstly, please tell us a little bit about the Regional Centre (RC) itself. Where are you housed, how many staff do you have, and when was the RC established: basically how did the Centre come about?
AK: Charlie, the Caribbean BC Regional Centre was first established as a “desk” at the Caribbean Industrial Research Institute (CARIRI) as early as 1998 but as time passed and more responsibilities were placed on the Regional Centres by the Conference of Parties, the Caribbean Regional Centre evolved into a fully autonomous regional institution. By 2008, the Centre had the legal authority to enter into contracts, hire staff and own its own physical assets and is now located at its leased premises in Port-of-Spain. The financial support for the centre is provided by the host country, the Republic of Trinidad and Tobago. Its current staff complement is ten persons - three administrative staff, six professional staff and one chief cook and bottle washer!
CA: Now, please tell us, the Caribbean is a large and diverse region, made up of many countries which differ from one another in many ways. Do you serve all of the countries of the Caribbean, how many Parties are there, and how do you manage with the languages: Spanish, English, French, Dutch?
AK: The RC serves all the parties to the Basel, Rotterdam and Stockholm Conventions in the region and we have already started to serve those countries who have signed onto or are intending to ratify the new Minimata Convention. So far there are sixteen countries that are served in various ways by the Centre.
These are Antigua and Barbuda, Barbados, the Commonwealth of the Bahamas, Belize, The Republic of Cuba, the Commonwealth of Dominica, Dominican Republic, Haiti, The Republic of Guyana, Grenada, Jamaica, The Federation of St Kitts and Nevis, St Lucia, St Vincent and the Grenadines, The Republic of Suriname and the Republic of Trinidad and Tobago.
The operating language of the Centre is English but we do translate our educational material into Spanish, Dutch and French as needed. Our main activities are Training and Technology Transfer and thus far we have had only limited challenges with the differences in language between our member countries since most of the professional staff at the Ministries and Agencies in each country with whom we are in direct contact are often bi- or multi-lingual. Some of the staff at the Centre are bilingual English and Spanish speakers as well so this helps with our communication with our member countries.
CA: It must be very challenging, yet very rewarding. What are the main technical issues or focus areas covered by the RC and what activities does the RC have in order to overcome these challenges?
AK: The focal areas of the Caribbean Regional Centre are defined by our member countries on a biennial cycle, during our annual Steering Committee meetings, and are mainly on building technical, institutional and legislative capacity in each country for the environmentally sound management of wastes and chemicals. Charlie, the priorities for the Caribbean over the next two biennial cycles (2016 – 2019) lie in the effective management of waste lubricating oils, electronic wastes, waste pneumatic tyres, industrial chemicals, lead acid batteries, obsolete pesticides, persistent organic pollutants, mercury and municipal wastes. It sounds like quite a mouthful but we are actively pursuing an agenda to institute a regional collaborative system for integrated waste and chemicals management with our member country partners to reduce the generation of wastes at source, to institute sustainable resource recovery measures and to institutionalize on a regional basis novel technologies for waste and chemicals recycling using the public sector/private sector/civil society collaborative approach. In short Charlie, our bottom up approach to serving our member countries’ needs have allowed us to overcome a number of challenges except one critical one and that is sourcing funding for implementation of projects and programmes in a timely manner.
CA: So I understand one specific area of focus for the RC is on e-waste, in relation to assisting parties fulfil their obligations under the Basel Convention. What would you say is the level of awareness amongst the general public in the region concerning e-waste? And amongst policymakers and decision-makers?
AK: Charlie the e-waste situation in the Caribbean is like La Soufriere in Montserrat, the peak gets bigger and bigger as time goes on. This is because the Caribbean in general is consumer driven when it comes to mobile phones, computers and other ICT equipment….everyone must have the latest and hottest gadget!
In addition some islands have even instituted policies to provide free laptop computers and tablets to every student entering a secondary school or tertiary educational institution all of which come back as waste within three to five years. Regrettably, the level of education and awareness of the e-waste problem by both the policy and decision makers and the population in general is not yet at a stage where this toxic and hazardous waste stream is given the attention it deserves.
We at the Centre have produced brochures and newsletters to enhance the level of awareness of all stakeholder and interest groups in the islands. But what we expect will work best for us is when we have finally been able to establish sub-regional e-waste refurbishment, disassembly and material recycling facilities to remove this waste stream from our landfills, waterways, beaches and backyards.
It is important to note that the Caribbean may be diverse and extend over quite a large acreage of space but our population size is at best 17 million people so the economies of scale hamper what we can do by way of investment in recycling facilities. For instance, when the precious and semi-precious metal containing components are recovered from waste electronic equipment, we can only hope to be able to broker this on the international market rather than set up metal recovery facilities. The latter option is too costly and not sustainable in relation to the volumes of e-waste generated within the entire Caribbean region.
CA: Let us now consider the wider region served by the RC. How do you liase with all these other countries, who are your partners on the ground there, and what kinds of activities do you carry out in-country?
AK: The BCRC-Caribbean works with our member countries in two ways. We work primarily through the political and technical Focal Points of the waste and chemicals conventions in government, in each country. But the BCRC-Caribbean is also fortunate to have a very competent and knowledgeable Steering Committee which is comprised of representatives of the fourteen countries who are parties to the Basel, Rotterdam and Stockholm Conventions. These fourteen ladies and gentlemen ensure delivery of our services on the ground in each country but also bring back to us the issues of priority concern for each country and assist us in developing work programmes to address these.
Our services for now are essentially project driven but we have also conducted workshops and seminars on topics related to e-waste management, on waste oils management, on used lead acid battery collection and disposal, on waste tyres recovery and recycling, on NIPs updates, on Mercury assessments and on industrial chemicals and obsolete pesticides management.
CA: The RC has clearly achieved a lot, but what is the single achievement of which you are most proud?
AK: I cannot identify a single achievement that stands out but I think in developing our delivery of services to the region, we have been successful in creating networks with the public sector, the private sector, the business communities and civil society groups which work well with us and through which we work effectively. Our medium term goal is to expand that network and to encourage these four groups of stakeholders to collaborate and cooperate on projects and programmes aimed at improving the environmentally sound management of wastes and chemicals in the region among themselves and for us to eventually take on the role of “facilitators of the process”, providing technical support and advisory services as required.
CA: How would you like the RC to evolve, in the next say 5 to 10 years?
AK: The next 5 to 10 years is a very important period for the Caribbean region as it moves towards firstly adopting the Sustainable Development Goals and then integrating these into national policy, planning and legislation. In the short term, I see the BCRC-Caribbean working towards aligning the environmentally sound management of wastes and chemicals into some of the relevant SDGs and by extension assisting the countries we serve in achieving higher degrees of compliance and implementation of the wastes and chemicals conventions and protocols. But more importantly in the medium to long term period, I see the Centre increasing its capacity to develop projects, source funding to support the implementation of these projects and executing them on behalf of our Caribbean partners and at the same time building capacity in the region and in individual countries so that they can eventually take ownership to do it themselves.
CA: Dr Khan, how did you come to lead this RC, how did your career lead you this in your direction, and what advice would you have for other Trinidadians, male or female, striving for a career in science and international development?
AK: When you embark on a career in a small island developing state you invariably become a jack of all trades because of the limited human resource capital in these types of countries. I came to this job after developing a career in waste and chemicals management in the region so I think I brought some experience in the field with me. But I started out as an environmental scientist with an emphasis and interest in marine pollution and oceanography in a marine scientific research institution. I moved away from applied research fairly quickly and became an environmental management professional in an integrated oil and gas company. This transition allowed me to move my career from being an applied scientist into the management and engineering disciplines. I took that experience and training with me to the private sector and further development my career as an environmental management practitioner in a consulting environment. I think the fifteen years spent in the consulting business made me an expert in nothing but knowledgeable in a little bit of everything….so here I am now coasting to retirement…..
Charlie, I think the most important thing I can share with young men and women in the region, who are interested in a career in science and international development, is to keep the focus on what you want to achieve in life. Scientific knowledge is evolving almost on a daily basis and as professionals we must recognise that science and technology can provide a pathway to do so much good for so many people with so little effort. I have always held the view that the more we learn as an individual, the greater is our responsibility to improve the quality of life of our fellow human beings and I’d like to encourage others to adopt the same philosophy.
CA: And lastly, please, what do you think are the most pressing, emerging issues will be for sustainable management of chemicals and wastes in the Caribbean, in the next years, and how well is the region equipped to meet those challenges?
AK: This is a difficult question to answer Charlie since the region has a diverse economic base. For the larger and more industrialized islands like Trinidad and Tobago, Dominican Republic, Barbados, Cuba and Jamaica, the main challenge will be to integrate waste and chemicals management into national environmental policy and legislation and then to enforce the provisions in law so created. It will also be important to stimulate economic activities in waste minimization, resource recovery and recycling in these countries.
For the smaller islands whose economies are more dependent on tourism, commercial enterprises and agriculture, the main challenge will be to ensure that all wastes and chemicals generated at the municipal level are properly handled and disposed of in such a manner to minimize impacts to human health and the environment. For these islands, the preservation of living and non-living natural resources is of paramount importance since these resources are the drivers of the local economies.
As a region the Caribbean is strong in having the capacity to identify and develop programmes and activities to address its priority issues on wastes and chemicals management but its limitation in capacity to fund and implement programmes and activities has to be strengthened.
In the next three years the BCRC-Caribbean will be working with at least eight of the islands and territories in the region to build capacity to achieve these objectives.
CA: Thank you, for your time and for your answers. Good luck with your important work in this important region, and I hope we shall be able to meet in person at the UNEA2 in Nairobi next month?
AK: Thank you, Charlie, and if you need any further information on our centre and its activities, please go to our website www.bcrc-caribbean.org.
|
|
Read the BRS Executive Secretary’s address to the first International Conference on Chemical Safety and Security (ICCSS1) held in Kielce, Poland 18-20 April 2016.
Rolph Payet on the outlook for sustainable management of chemicals and waste
Excellencies
Ladies and Gentlemen
As we entered the third millennium, our world had become more globalised and interconnected. We can today manufacture to bespoke needs in one part of the world and ship to anywhere within days. However, those great transformations have exposed millions of people and biodiversity to hazardous chemicals and wastes.
New estimates from the World Health Organization indicate that at least 12.6 million people died as a result of living or working in an unhealthy environment in 2012, primarily from environmental risk factors, such as air, water and soil pollution, chemical exposures, climate change, and ultraviolet radiation. The situation is far worse in the developing world, the WHO report finds. Low- and middle-income countries in the WHO South-East Asia and Western Pacific regions had the largest environment-related disease burden in 2012, with a combined total of 7.3 million deaths, most attributable to indoor and outdoor air pollution, whilst there were also 2.2 million deaths in the African region, 1.4 million deaths in the European region, 854,000 deaths in the Eastern Mediterranean region and 847,000 deaths in the region of the Americas. Furthermore, the United Nations Environment Programme, UNEP, estimated that 41 million tones of electronic wastes are generated per year, growing to 50 million tons by next year.
Africa and Asia, being the destinations for large-scale shipments of hazardous wastes, has resulted in large areas turned into illegal dumps scavenged by the poor in those countries. Inconsistency in regulations between exporting and importing countries - including what is classified as hazardous or contaminated waste - poses a challenge to effectively combating illegal waste trafficking. Wastes have the potential to pollute and expose millions of people to hazardous chemicals through food chains, water, the oceans and the atmosphere.
Contaminated land is also global issue with chemical safety concerns at hand. In many countries, hundreds of square kilometers of land have a legacy of contaminated land resulting from mining, past industrial activity, intensive agriculture, chemical stockpiles and waste management. Sadly, despite efforts by numerous organizations, such as UNEP, FAO, UNIDO and donors such as the GEF - land contamination is still on the increase especially in the developing countries. Contamination of water bodies, remote communities and also the atmosphere through open burning presents a serious chemical danger to the entire planet.
Chemical Safety, in the context of the Basel, Rotterdam and Stockholm Conventions involves all efforts to ensure the protection of human health and the environment through sound management of chemicals and wastes. Whilst our conventions are limited to a few chemicals it provides an international legal framework for the sound management of chemicals and wastes. Furthermore, many of those chemicals, such as POPs are present in almost all materials and products produced in the last 50 years or so. Their accumulation in the environment in expected to last beyond this century due to their long-term environmental persistence.
The Stockholm Convention lists 26 chemicals that are persistent, toxic, bio-accumulative and travel long distances in the environment for which consumption, production and use, import and export, disposal and/or environmental release must be reduced, prohibited and/or eliminated. The Basel Convention on the Control of Transboundary Movements of Hazardous Wastes and their Disposal is the most comprehensive global agreement specifically targeting hazardous and other wastes. The Rotterdam Convention on the Prior Informed Consent Procedure for Certain Hazardous Chemicals and Pesticides in International Trade focuses on facilitating information exchange about hazardous chemicals and severely hazardous pesticide formulations, by providing for a national decision-making process on their imports and exports and by disseminating these decisions to Parties.
Against this backdrop of widespread use of chemicals in products, the capacity of countries to implement chemical safety is severely limited in many parts of the world. The Special Programme under UNEP and the Chemicals and Wastes Conventions is expected to support countries in building robust policies, regulations and mechanisms for the sound management of chemicals. However, resources remain limited. Although in 2014, the global chemicals industry earned more than 5 trillion dollars, its contribution to the sound management of chemicals and wastes is but a pittance. The current contributions to the UNEP Special programme are about 14 million dollars, which is about 0.0028%. The GEF Chemicals and Waste Portfolio, which includes partnerships with industry, at 2.7 billion USD, does not even come close to 1%. Indeed, there are numerous efforts and initiatives by industry but we cannot achieve the 2030 Sustainable Development Goals with this level of support from the industry.
For example, in a report to the Conference of the Parties to the Stockholm Convention indicates that there are at least 11,000 Tons of DDT stockpiles around the world. DDT has been linked to a large number of cancers, male infertility and child growth. Such stockpiles are a clear and present danger to millions of people located in those areas. Can we remove those stockpiles in a sound manner - yes, and before 2030 - yes - We need financial resources and political will!
It is also an honor and a pleasure for me to represent the Executive Director of UNEP, Mr Achim Steiner, who unfortunately could not be with us this afternoon. UNEP remains committed to the sound management of chemicals and wastes, and to the minimization of hazardous wastes. Many initiatives implemented by UNEP have addressed the issue of chemical safety, especially in areas of institutional support and scientific knowledge. It has produced a number of guidance and capacity building to countries on sound management of chemical wastes, and led many global initiatives such as the DDT Alliance. As such, the UNEP Chemicals and Waste branch, based in Geneva, is a very strong partner with the Basel, Rotterdam and Stockholm Convention Secretariat. We also work very closely with the Minamata Convention Secretariat.
The Basel, Rotterdam and Stockholm Conventions are successful examples of the commitment of the global community, including governments, industry, academia and public interest groups towards a common goal to produce and use chemicals in ways that minimize adverse effects to human health and the environment. Although these three conventions have done a great deal to improve the global situation regarding toxic chemicals and hazardous wastes, the treaties alone cannot solve all the problems. The global chemicals industry whoch accounts for around 9% of the world's economy needs to play a greater role. We need to continue to build partnerships and invest in a future that is driven by sustainable chemistry and the sound management of chemicals and wastes.
The Sustainable Development Agenda provides us with a unique opportunity to engage and make this vision a reality. The role of initiatives such as the Chemss2016 forum in strengthening community preparedness and enhancing chemical safety and security is of great importance for the global environmental sound management of chemicals and wastes and for the international community to achieve sustainable development goals.
In closing, I wish to thank the people of Poland for their warm welcome. The conference organizers, in particular Andrzej Jagusiewicz, who was also former President of the Basel Convention, for his invitation to this timely global conference.
Thank you.
|
|
Latest in the BRS interview series features Dr. Jinhui Li, Executive Director of the Basel and Stockholm Conventions Regional Centre, Beijing China.
China and Asia Pacific: the work of the Regional Centre in Beijing, China
Interview between Charlie Avis, Public Information Officer for the Secretariat of the Basel, Rotterdam, and Stockholm Conventions, and Dr. Jinhui Li, Executive Director of the Basel and Stockholm Conventions Regional Centre, hosted by the Tsinghua University, Beijing, China.
Charlie Avis (CA): Good morning Professor Li and thank you for your time to answer our questions: in fact, your Regional Centre is the first in a new series whereby we put one Centre per month “in the spotlight” in order to highlight all the many ways the Regional Centres contribute to the implementation of the conventions.
Jinhui Li (JL): Thank you Charlie, we are happy to be the first!
CA: Firstly, please tell us a little bit about the Regional Centre (RC) itself. Where are you housed, how many staff do you have, and how do you manage to cover both the Basel and the Stockholm, Conventions within one RC?
JL: We are supported institutionally by Tsinghua University and the Ministry of Environmental Protection of the People’s Republic of China. The Centre is located at Tsinghua University. Currently, there are thirty one full time staff divided into six departments covering administrative affairs, regional waste management, regional chemicals management, multilateral environmental agreement research, environmental technology consulting, and circular development research. In addition, we also have a part-time technical team consisting of numerous professors and experts, master/doctoral candidates, and post-doctors, supporting the process of assisting countries to achieve the aims of both the Basel and Stockholm Conventions.
CA: Now, please tell us, but does the RC “only” cover China, or a wider region as well?
JL: The RC serves all the parties in the Asia and Pacific Region who are willing to be served by it, such as Mongolia, Sri Lanka, Cambodia etc.
CA: The biggest, and some of the smallest, countries in the world, an extremely diverse collection of countries, contexts, cultures, and capacities therefore. For the sake of the next question, then, let’s focus on China. As you know, BRS is just launching a Massive Open Online Course (MOOC) on electronic, or e-waste. What are the main issues or capacity constraints hindering sustainable management of e-waste in China, and what activities does the RC have in order to overcome these challenges?
JL: As we all know, the increasingly rapid growth of production and consumption of electrical and electronic equipment (EEE) has led to a sharp rise in the volume of e-waste at the end of their life. E-waste has both toxic and valuable materials. China has established a whole set of policies for e-waste management, and significant improvements have been achieved. The management, collection and recycling systems have been quickly established. For example, we have now 109 qualified e-waste recycling enterprises benefitting from (fund) subsidies, and corresponding fund audit mechanisms; and the collection rate for the 5 standard types (TVs, computers, washing machines, air-conditioners and refrigerators) increased from approximately 4% in 2012 to 35% in 2014. But there are problems: for example the existence of large-scale informal collection and recycling sectors with potential environmental and health risks; kinds of e-waste which cannot effectively be collected; and the levels of e-waste treatment are not advanced, without advantageous deep utilization technology for dismantled materials.
In China, the main issues hindering sustainable management of e-waste mainly include the following points: first, that the Extended Producer Responsibility (EPR) system is not fully implemented in the lifecycle of e-waste, producers should take more responsibility beyond only paying money; second, is that there remains somewhat weak policy implementation, despite some regulations such as on the eco-design and fund reduction mechanism for producers, a lack of supporting implementation regulations hinders actual implementation; third, regulations do not define the responsibility of all stakeholders clearly, particularly for consumers and vendors, and in general environmental awareness and responsibility of these and other stakeholders remains low. All these factors, plus the presence of a large scale irregular second-hand market, hinder the flow of e-waste to formal collection and proper recycling.
The RC has conducted many projects on the e-waste management and technology to improve the E-waste management, technology and facility development in China. Activities have included participating in the development of e-waste regulations or policies; studying collection systems to explore effective collection modes; conducting training to raise public awareness and enhance information-sharing and education; strengthening of producer’s responsibilities; developing deep utilization technologies for dismantled materials; and promoting the domestic dissemination and use of international e-waste guidelines, amongst others. The RC is also developing partnerships at international, regional and domestic levels in order to cooperate in the process to achieve the target of environmentally sound management of e-waste overall.
CA: I understand one big area of focus for the RC is on persistent organic pollutants, or POPs, in relation to assisting parties fulfil their obligations under the Stockholm Convention. Sticking with China, what would you say is the level of awareness amongst the general public concerning POPs?
JL: For some time now, China has been actively pushing for the elimination and reduction of POPs with great success. China banned the production, use, import and export of 17 kinds of POPs including mirex and DDT; reduced by about 10% of the dioxin emissions in key industries such as waste incineration, iron ore sintering, and non-ferrous metal production; disposed of more than 20,000 tonnes of historical waste pesticides and contaminated soils in 12 provinces; disposed of 30,000 tonnes of PCBs-contaminated electric equipment and 13,000 tonnes of PCBs-contaminated waste and soil in 17 provinces. China has made significant efforts on remediation of POPs-contaminated sites,.
Additionally, the amendments of the newly listed 10 POPs under the Stockholm Convention entered into force in China, which will further promote the POPs management. All these efforts and progress not only enhanced the national capacity of POPs management in China, but also raised the public awareness, although more effort is required to raise people’s awareness further.
CA: Let us now consider the wider region served by the RC. How do you liase with all these other countries, who are your partners on the ground there and what kinds of activities do you carry out?
JL: The RC maintains good communications with all Focal Points of the parties in the region. We actively continue to invite all the parties in Asia-Pacific region to participate in our work andto provide information on trends and best practices to all who are interested. For example, the Basel Convention and Stockholm Convention international monthly newsletters have been compiled by the RC continuously since 2011 and are delivered to almost all parties and other stakeholders directly or in-directly through other regional centres (eg. through SPREP for the Pacific). Moreover, the online international training platform on waste and chemicals in English is being established and will open to all the parties and stakeholders so as to improve the capacity and knowledge in the field of waste and chemicals.
Other regional centres are also important partners and the RC has signed MOUs with SPREP and BCRC Egypt in 2013 and 2015 respectively, for cooperation on a joint information newsletter, staff and researchers exchanges, and joint applications for potential funds. BCRC China also has conducted joint activities and cooperation with BCRC CAM, BCCC-Nigeria, BCRC/SCRC SEA, BCRC-Iran and SCRC-India. The cooperative efforts include internships, joint activities and information exchanges.
In addition, RC is working hard to improve the cooperation with UN organizations. We have been members of the StEP initiated by UNU, PEN and others for several years and have established good cooperative relationships. BCRC China initiated the Programme on Establishing Public and Private Partnership for Metal Recycling in Asia and the Pacific Region in 2015 which is now being considered as a focal area of Global Partnership on Waste Management by UNEP. UNDP, UNIDO, ILO and other international organizations are also current or potential partners.
CA: How would you like the RC to evolve, in the next say 5 to 10 years?
JL: As per our Preliminary Strategic Plan (2014-2020), which was deliberated and adopted during the First Meeting of Steering Committee of the BCRC China in 2014, we intend to significantly strengthen our own capacity for the implementation of Basel Convention; upgrade the level of assistance to parties in Asia and the Pacific region for the implementation of the Basel Convention; and enhance the international influence of BCRC China in the field of environmentally sound management of wastes and chemicals. Under the guidelines, RC is willing to continue to take efforts to promote regional communication and cooperation with countries and international organisations, conduct more extensive and meaningful activities for supporting Parties in meeting their obligations, as well as propel synergies with other Conventions.
CA: The RC has achieved a lot, but what are the achievements of which you are most proud?
JL: Firstly, the RC has formed a steady and effective network linking national governments, academic institutions and related enterprises together, which played an important role in bolstering the work of RC; secondly, RC has strengthened its presence in government service and negotiations support; thirdly, RC has formed an integrated and systematic information platform, including but not limited to the website system, the annual international conference on waste management and technology (ICWMT), online training, information release systems and performance services; and last but not least, RC has continually stimulated international cooperation, for example RC has built relationships with International Environmental Technology Centre (IETC), United Nations Centre for Regional Development (UNCRD) and Solving the E-waste Problems Initiative (StEP), and Metal Recycling PPP in Asia and the Pacific Region. RC obtained the full score during the assessment on regional centres of Basel and Stockholm Convention in 2015, which shows that our work is recognized by the parties of the conventions.
CA: And lastly, Professor Li, what do you think the most pressing, emerging issues will be for sustainable management of chemicals and wastes in your region, in the next years?
JL: As the sustainable management of chemicals and wastes is vitally important for environmental protection, all stakeholders in society should work together to reduce the risk by chemicals and wastes. A lack of legislation is the most pressing issue in this region. When it comes to the recycler, e.g., e-waste, a reasonable legislation and subsidies framework would promote their interest on e-waste recycling activities, at the same time conferring responsibility for any environmental pollution during the collection and recycling processes. In terms of the public, awareness raising is key, with important needs for information exchange mechanisms and platforms. We also face long-standing issues such as language barriers, large populations and large territorial areas, which all offer challenges for achieving the sustainable management of chemicals and wastes in our region.
CA: Thank you, Professor Li, for your time and for your answers. Good luck with your important work in this important region.
JL: Thank you, Charlie, and if you need any further information on our centre and its activities, please go to our websites https://www.en.bcrc.cn and www.sc.bcrc.cn and we also have a newsletter to you which you can subscribe in order to keep up to date.
|
|
Kerstin Stendahl reflects on the successful BRS International Womens Day event, which celebrated inspirational women from many Geneva-based organisations.
Women and men working together for the environment
Synergies is joint action and working together. As part of last week’s International Women’s day, the BRS secretariat and the Geneva Environment Network celebrated inspirational women in Geneva working together for the environment.
The response to our call to find such inspirational women was overwhelming. We received a total of 160 nominations. It is fair to say that all of the nominated women deserved to be recognised and selecting twenty women to shine the light on was a hard task.
The 20 inspirational women that were selected by a small committee comprising of BRS, GEN and government representatives (men and women) represent a wide range of organizations, sectors, functions and nationalities. Some of the dynamic, knowledgeable, bold and enthusiastic women are from the UN family or intergovernmental organizations; from UNEP, UNECE, the Secretariat of the Aarhus Convention, UNDP REDD+, UNITAR, the International Trade Center (ITC), the International Organization for Migration (IOM), the World Meteorological Organization (WMO), the World Health Organization (WHO), the World Intellectual Property Organization (WIPO), and the International Telecommunication Union (ITU).
Civil society is also represented by passionate and dedicated women from WWF, the International Institute on Sustainable Development and the Programme for the Endorsement of Forest Certification. We also celebrated respected, motivated and motivating women from the private sector, namely from the World Business Council for Sustainable Development and Transparence.
Last but not the least, the committee acknowledged the important contribution of wise and insightful visionaries from the University of Geneva and the Swiss Parliament.
The inspirational women are:
- Susan Brown, Director of Global and Regional Policy at WWF
- Fiona Marshall, environmental Affairs Officer with the Secretariat of the Aarhus Convention
- Silja Halle, programme officer with UNEP’s post conflict and disaster management branch
- Isabella Marras, coordinator of the Sustainable UN Facility of UNEP
- Monika Linn, the Chief of the Sustainable Development and Gender Unit in the Office of the Executive Secretary of UNECE
- Berta Pesti, technical adviser on REDD+ finance at UNDP
- Emily Bradley, UNITAR with the multilateral diplomacy team
- Laurence Boisson de Chazournes, Professor at the University of Geneva
- Nawal Ait-Hocine, sustainability, legal and compliance Executive
- Ann- Kathrin Zotz, associate expert for the trade and environment programme at the International Trade Center
- Nathalie Bernasconi, senior international lawyer and head of the economic law and policy work of the international institute on sustainable development
- Dina Ionesco, the head of the migration, environment and climate change division of the International Organization for Migration
- Sheila Logan, programme officer with UNEP on chemicals and waste related issues, and mercury
- Maria Mendiluceis, the Managing Director of Climate and Energy ar the World Business Council for Sustainable Development
- Elena Manaenkova, Assistant Secretary General at the World Meteorological Organization
- Maria Neira, the Director of the Department of Public Health, Environmental and Social Determinants of Health at the World Health Organization
- Sarah Price, head of Projects and Development at the Programme for the Endorsement of Forest Certification
- Isabelle Boutillon, Director of Premises infrastructure at the World Intellectual Property Organization
- Cristina Buetti, at the International Telecommunication Union on issues dealing with environmental sustainability, e-waste and smart cities
- Lisa Mazzone, a Swiss green party member of the Swiss Parliament.
The event was coupled with a portrait exhibition of our 20 awardees at the International Environment House here in Geneva.
The nomination process provides much food for thought. Most of the nominations came through a bottom up process, whereby colleagues or staff put a name of a supervisor forward. Many of the nominated were supported by team nominations. Many of the women were nominated by male colleagues. We also saw a few instances of a supervisor putting a name forward.
I find it really encouraging that we can see years of mainstreaming efforts bearing fruit, as many of the nominated women work for organizations or entities the focus of which is not environmental matters as such but where environment and sustainability is important.
I would like to place a challenge for next year. Let’s look at nominating women who work to support and enable leaders and agendas. Let’s recognise women from all UN regions who work to make change happen for the betterment of environment and sustainable development.
Ever since the signing of the Charter of the United Nations in 1945, the first international agreement to affirm the principle of equality between women and men, the UN has contributed to the advancement of the status of women worldwide. It is absolutely essential that gender equality is promoted and ensured through internationally agreed strategies, standards, programmes and goals, such as the Sustainable Development Goal on gender equality. In my experience, the greatest impact is achieved through the daily on the ground work that we do – both men and women – to recognise, advance and respect gender equality.
It is only when we in our work and lives have completely assimilated the view that men and women, girls and boys should have equal choices, equal opportunities, equal access – and shoulder responsibility in equal measure - that we have achieved our goal.
This is not to say that equality means that we strive for sameness of men and women, but rather that the differences among us are a great strength. Being in an international setting, with varying cultural backgrounds and expectations, makes the challenge all the more interesting and complex.
|
|
BRS Deputy Executive Secretary, Kerstin Stendahl, outlines lessons learnt from 10 years of working on synergies.
18th February is the 4th Anniversary of the - joint - BRS Secretariat
10 years of synergies among the BRS conventions
Distinguished participants and colleagues,
It is a great pleasure to represent the Secretariat of the Basel, Rotterdam and Stockholm conventions here today. I would like to thank and congratulate the CBD secretariat and Switzerland for facilitating and organising this workshop. It is clear that there is much scope and hope for progressing synergies within the biodiversity cluster over the next few days
As Deputy Executive Secretary of the BRS Conventions I have been working on synergies in the secretariat for the last three years. Before that I was very engaged in synergies from a Party perspective, co-chairing different working groups and COP sessions. I feel very fortunate to have been involved from the start in this interesting, challenging and successful process.
In May this year, the Basel, Rotterdam and Stockholm conventions will be celebrating the 10 year anniversary of our synergies process. It all began in 2006 with the Stockholm COP 2 decision to join an ad hoc joint working group consisting of a total of 45 members. There were to be 15 parties per convention that were selected taking due consideration of regional balance.
It was clear from the start that in order to strengthen coordination and cooperation among the BRS conventions, the parties to all three conventions needed to feel that they were equally included and were entering a level playing field in the negotiations.
Addressing fears and distrust among those that face change is an absolute necessity in any synergies process. Needless to say, transparent communication is key.
The need to ensure inclusion and equal opportunity meant that already the establishment of the joint working group required some carefully crafted language. The Stockholm COP was the first to address the issue and therefore suggested the establishment of an ad hoc joint working group as a possible way forward and then went on to invite the Conferences of the Parties to the Basel and Rotterdam Conventions to consider that option, and in the event of their endorsement, noted that it would agree to its establishment.
One decade later the synergies live on, with new challenges.
We will know more about what these challenges are by the end of this year as we are just about to embark on a review of the synergies arrangements at all levels of implementation. Based on the results from the review, the conferences of the parties to the three conventions should at their COPs in May 2017be able to define how the synergies arrangements could be enhanced and what needs to be adapted or modified in the future to increase the impact of the conventions.
Let me remind ourselves of the initial objectives of the BRS synergies process. The Parties stated clearly that what they wanted out of enhanced cooperation and coordination among the Basel, Rotterdam and Stockholm conventions was:
- strengthened implementation at the national, regional and international levels
- promotion of coherent policy guidance
- enhanced efficiency in the provision of support to Parties with a view to reducing their administrative burden
- maximising the efficient and effective use of resources at all levels
The synergies process among the BRS conventions has always been, and still is, driven by parties, taking into account global concerns and specifically responding to the needs of developing countries.
The joint working group therefore spent much time during its three meetings discussing what the specific needs of Parties are and these discussions subsequently guided the drafting of the COP decisions.
The Parties were also very clear as to the fact that any institutional rearrangements had to be based on needs expressed. The notion of form follows function has always been at the core of synergies.
Over the last decade the Parties to the three conventions have adopted some 20 decisions pertaining specifically to enhanced cooperation and coordination among the Parties.
What have we achieved so far?
- We have convened two sets of ordinary meetings of the Conferences of the Parties back to back in 2013 and 2015, and the third set of tripleCOPs will be held in May next year.
- We have also held two sets of extraordinary meetings of the COPs – specifically to look at synergies issues. Thanks to the generous support of governments, we have been able to fund 2-3 developing country participants to the tripleCOPs, thus aiding national dialogue among the delegates.
- Many countries also already have in place interministerial commissions or committees on chemicals and waste.
- We also present information on national focal points in a joint manner on our websites, making it easier to link up with colleagues from the three conventions
- As to the COPs’ programmes of work - some 20 cross-cutting and joint activities have been included allowing for lifecycle implementation of the conventions.
- A joint technical assistance programme for the three conventions is in place, as part of which the secretariat arranges national and regional training workshops on how to increase coordination and cooperation.
- We compile and highlight case studies on successful synergies at national level and thus facilitate processes on best practices and learning from others
- There is increased collaboration between the scientific and technical bodies of the conventions, involving experts from several conventions, for example training of members of scientific groups, joint rosters of experts, guideline documents that address joint issues and intersessional work on environmentally sound management of POPS waste
- Other issues dealt with in a joint manner include legislation, linked obligations, enforcement, illegal traffic, information exchange and flow, customs, resource mobilisation, awareness raising, risk assessment and communication, import/export issues, and alternatives to hazardous chemicals
- Through our regional centres under Basel and Stockholm we increasingly channel regional delivery for all three conventions as well as for the Minamata convention on mercury
- We have adopted a harmonized approach to parties’ needs assessments, resource mobilization and international cooperation.
- We have a joint calendar for all meetings of the conventions easily accessible on our web-page
- We do joint communication and joint web-pages for the three conventions as well as a synergies webpage
- The parties negotiate the three budgets of the conventions in a joint budget group and present the budgets in an overall format
- Parties have also requested us to determine the feasibility of a joint single trust fund for staffing costs
- The three secretariats have been merged into one, with one joint Executive Secretary and an Executive Secretary for the FAO part of the Rotterdam secretariat
- The merged secretariat works in a matrix structure through its branches on technical assistance, scientific support and conventions operations as well as a unit on administrative services. Through the matrix we disseminate and develop best practices and processes across the joint secretariat. We also hold regular matrix training sessions.
I also hope that Parties and colleagues in the UN system as well as stakeholders find it easier to access and work with us now that we are one secretariat, a one stop shop as it were.
In conclusion, it is clear that the conventions have benefitted from joint action at the various levels of implementation.
It is important, though, to note that the conventions and their decision-making bodies remain sovereign and autonomous. This is the firm foundation and another essential guiding principle of our work that has been clearly communicated by our Parties.
I wish you much success in your deliberations on this very important and engaging matter.
Thank you.
|
|
Interview between Charlie Avis, BRS Public Information Officer, Yun Zhou, Technical Officer of the Rotterdam Convention Secretariat based at FAO Rome.
What are the implications of the recent CRC11 meeting?
Interview between Charlie Avis, BRS Public Information Officer, Yun Zhou, Technical Officer of the Rotterdam Convention Secretariat based at FAO Rome.
Charlie Avis (CA): Good morning, Yun, you must be very busy right now following up on the recent CRC meeting, thanks for joining me and first question please: what exact role does this scientific subsidiary body play in the workings of the Convention?
Yun Zhou (YZ): Good morning, Charlie and thank you! Yes indeed we are all very busy building on the highly successful meeting. The CRC – or Chemicals Review Committee to give it its full title – is made up of 31 experts in chemicals management appointed by the Conference of the Parties (COP) to the Rotterdam Convention and is responsible for undertaking scientific review of chemicals proposed for listing. Based on the Committee’s recommendations the COP takes a final decision on the listing of a chemical into Annex III of the Convention
CA: So actually the Committee prepares the way for decisions to be taken by parties at the COP, at which point they become binding. So, please tell me, what decisions have been taken by the Committee so far?
YZ: At its tenth meeting, CRC took decisions to recommend listing short-chained chlorinated paraffins and tributyltin compounds in Annex III to the Convention as industrial chemicals. The Committee then prepared draft decision guidance documents on those chemicals and adopted them at the eleventh meeting. The Committee also concluded that at least two notifications of final regulatory action from two PIC regions for carbofuran and carbosulfan met the criteria in Annex II to the Convention, and thereby recommended listing of those chemicals in Annex III to the Convention as pesticides. The Committee will prepare draft decision guidance documents for consideration at its next meeting in September 2016.
CA: The two pesticides you mention, carbosulfan and carbofuran: can you please give me an idea of what uses they have had, and in which parts of the world?
YZ: Indeed. Carbofuran and carbosulfan are used to control pests in a wide variety of field crops. Just to give some examples, in the EU carbofuran was used to control soil insects where maize, sugar beet or sunflowers are grown. In Canada, it was applied to sunflower, corn, sugar beet, potato, raspberry, and strawberry. In the Sahelian countries it was used in various vegetables, fruits and other crops as well as in forests. With regard to carbosulfan it was used on maize, sugar beet, citrus and cotton. The review of the two pesticides by the CRC is triggered by the notifications submitted by the EU, seven Sahelian countries and in the case of carbofuran also by Canada. These countries concluded that the risks to human health and environment caused by the two pesticides were unacceptable and consequently banned them.
CA: And if those two chemicals are then listed, what would that mean for the parties in terms of obligations?
YZ: The chemicals listed in Annex III to the Convention are subject to the Prior Informed Consent - or PIC - Procedure. The PIC procedure is a mechanism for obtaining and disseminating the decisions of importing Parties on the import of the chemicals listed in Annex III and for ensuring compliance with those decisions by exporting Parties.
Each chemical listed in Annex III has a decision guidance document (DGD) made available to all Parties. The decision guidance documents are intended to help governments assess the risks associated with the handling and use of the chemical and make more informed decisions about future import and use of the chemical, taking into account local conditions.
For each chemical listed in Annex III, all Parties need to take a decision on whether or not they will allow future import of the chemical, and send such a decision (import response) to the Secretariat. The Secretariat circulates the import responses every six months through the PIC circular. Exporting Parties need to ensure that exports of chemicals in Annex III do not occur contrary to the decision of each importing Party. Exporting Parties ensure that import responses published in the PIC Circular are immediately communicated to their exporters, industry and other relevant authorities.
CA: Good! Back to the CRC, is there another “chance” between now and the COP to propose additional decisions?
YZ: Yes, the CRC will meet again in September 2016 to review candidate chemicals and propose additional decisions on listing if they meet the criteria set out by the Convention. In order for them to do so parties of the Convention need to submit notifications of final regulatory actions for banned or severely restricted chemicals. Further, developing countries and countries with an economy in transition are encouraged to submit proposal on pesticide formulations that cause human health or environment problems under the use conditions in their countries. The CRC counts on timely submission by parties.
CA: And what work is ongoing between now and then?
YZ: A lot of work is going on between now and then. For each of the chemicals listed in Annex III a DGD is prepared by the CRC to help governments making informed decisions about future imports of these chemicals. As decided at the current meeting, the CRC immediately started with the preparation of the DGD for carbofuran and carbosulfan, which will be finalized at its next meeting and submitted to the COP together with CRC’s recommendations to list the pesticides in Annex III. In order to enhance the efficiency of its work, about two months before the actual meeting the CRC will start to preliminary review the information submitted by parties, which is often voluminous. The members serve the Committee for four year in each term. In May 2016 about half of the current committee members will be replaced by new members. In view of the upcoming meeting of the CRC in September 2016 and of the substantial contribution required of members towards the intersessional work, it is important to enable new members and to provide them with appropriate tools. An orientation workshop will be organized in April 2016 to familiarize new members with the role and mandate of the CRC, as well as its operational procedures and policy guidance. The workshop will provide a platform to exchange experience, transfer knowledge and will help fostering efficient working relationships among members of the Committee. The secretariat supports the CRC in carrying out all these activities. It is indeed rewording to work with such a highly competent and dedicated Committee.
CA: Finally, the Convention is jointly administered by FAO in Rome and UNEP in Geneva. Can you say something about this shared responsibility, and how does it work in practice?
YZ: Indeed, the team supporting the CRC consists of staff from both parts of the Secretariats and works closely together. A workplan is jointly developed, which clarifies the responsibilities of each team member and helps us to communicate and monitor the progress. With regard to the technical support to the Committee the FAO colleagues are taking care of the pesticides while UNEP colleagues deal with the industrial chemicals. As the meeting was held at the FAO headquarters we also receive logistic support from the relevant divisions of the organization.
CA: Thank you very much for your time, good luck with this important work
YZ: Thank you !
|
|
On the occasion of his retirement, BRS Senior Programme Officer, Nelson Sabogal, reflects on a distinguished career devoted to the sound management of chemicals and waste.
Reflections on 22 years of working for a safer tomorrow
Interview between Nelson Sabogal, Senior Programme Officer, BRS Secretariat, and Charlie Avis, BRS Public Information Officer.
CA: Good morning, Nelson, first of all, let me wholeheartedly congratulate you on your retirement, you will be much missed not only here in the BRS Secretariat but also around the world. Thank you, in advance, for sharing with us some of your reflections, experiences, hopes, and aspirations as you reach this landmark in your life.
NS: Thank you Charlie
CA: So, please, tell us, in the 22 years you have been involved internationally in chemicals and waste governance, what do you consider the sector’s major achievement?
NS: I think the phase out of the ozone depleting chemicals by developed and developing countries. All the countries in the world have done an excellent effort to implement the Vienna Convention for the Protection of the Ozone Layer and its Montreal Protocol on Substances that Deplete the Ozone Layer, so that we now expect the recovery of the ozone layer around the middle of this century, in 35 years time from now.
CA: How was that achieved? What were some of the crucial elements which allowed that to happen?
NS: This was achieved because of science, when the ozone research demonstrated the risk of chlorofluorocarbons (CFCs) in the decrease of stratospheric ozone over Antarctica, the policy makers, using the precautionary principle, adopted the Montreal Protocol and the financial and technical means were provided through the Multilateral Fund and the Panels. The scientific, environmental, technical and economic information was provided on time to amend the Protocol and the countries followed by phasing out the CFCs, halons and other substances that destroy the ozone layer in their industries and the consumers played a fundamental role like in the refrigeration and aerosols sectors. Personally I consider this is an excellent example that shows that the humankind can tackle the climate change, at the end this is a responsibility of every one.
CA: A lot of your work has been on behalf of the different regions, and not just your native Latin America. How have you seen the changing political, economic, and technological landscape across those regions, in these two and half decades?
NS: Well, in the specific case of the chemicals and waste sector there has been a lot of progress in all regions of the world, as an example, there is very well crafted legislation in Argentina, Brazil, Colombia, Chile and Mexico, the environmentally sound management of wastes has improved in Asia, and a lot of obsolete stocks of old pesticides containing persistent organic pollutants have been eliminated in Africa, and Europe is moving towards prevention and minimization of the generation of wastes. All these contributions are important, and the process is largely driven by the Parties as one would expect, however there is also a lot of expertise in the private, academic, non-governmental sectors, and in the cities of the world. We have an excellent asset, the Basel and Stockholm Conventions Regional Centres that steer regional efforts by linking global hazardous chemicals and wastes management obligations with national development plans.
CA: The BRS Secretariat is unique in environmental governance in that it serves and coordinates three separate but interlinked international conventions. Tell us a little background to how this “synergies” arrangement came about, and how successful do you consider it to have been, relative to initial expectations?
NS: Actually, I am privileged to have been involved since the start of the synergies process and the idea was to enhance the implementation of the Basel, Rotterdam and Stockholm Conventions, bearing in mind the lifecycle approach and the interlocking coverage of the three conventions. The main focus was the Parties, that when they are implementing the three conventions, they ensure close cooperation and coordination among the relevant sectors and ministries. In fact, I think the main focus should increasingly now be in the field, in the real implementation of the three conventions at national and local levels.
CA: From Science to Action: what does that mean for you, and what does it mean for the Convention/s?
NS: Well firstly to achieve lifecycle approach to the sound management of hazardous chemicals and wastes to protect human health and the environment you need a good understanding of the scientific aspects. Science was behind of the Montreal Protocol and the Stockholm Convention. The work for the implementation of the Basel, Rotterdam and Stockholm Conventions have contributed to the development of knowledge, like the Basel Technical Guidelines and the scientific documents on the chemicals and their alternatives that contribute to the recommendations of the Persistent Organic Pollutants Review Committee and the Chemicals Review Committee. The Parties should continue to strengthen the scientific and technical base of the three conventions in order to have better decisions and enhance their implementation.
CA: One last question please: how do you see the future for sound management of chemicals and wastes, what are the big issues, where are the major challenges, what are the prospects for succeeding to protect human health and the environment?
NS: Excellent questions! The future for the sound management of chemicals and wastes is prevention, minimization and better use of the chemicals and resources from wastes. Already Europe is moving on the Waste Prevention Programmes, California has very good examples on how to prevent waste in several industrial and services sectors and China is moving to circular economy industry, turning waste into resources. Waste reduction also helps conserve resources for future generations and contributes to a cleaner environment and to protect the climate of the Earth.
We also have our “lighthouse” the Cartagena Declaration on the Prevention, Minimization and Recovery of Hazardous Wastes and Other Wastes adopted at the Tenth meeting of the Conference of the Parties to the Basel Convention (COP 10).
I am retiring in the year of the 70th Anniversary of the United Nations and the year of the adoption of the 17 Sustainable Development Goals.
CA: Thank you very much for your time Nelson, muchas gracias, and all good wishes for your future, you have definitely earned a rest although I expect you will still be quite busy!
NS: Thank you, Charlie.
|
|
The fourth session of the International Conference on Chemicals Management took place in Geneva from 28 September to 2 October 2015. The Executive Secretary's interventions at the meeting are now available.
Executive Secretary addresses the International Conference on Chemicals Management
Interventions by Rolph Payet on progress and challenges towards the achievement of the 2020 goal for the sound chemicals management, at the fourth session of the International Conference on Chemicals Management (agenda item 4(a)).
Distinguished Participants,
As a stakeholder of SAICM, this meeting is an important opportunity for us to assess what more we must do together over the next five years especially with regards to the numerous outstanding challenges highlighted by previous speakers.
Enhanced cooperation and coordination between chemicals and wastes-related MEAs, in particular the BRS conventions, and SAICM, is indeed key to the pursuit of the 2020 goal.
With this in mind, I am pleased to inform you (in a flash) of the outcomes of the 2015 meetings of the three COPs and of the specific contributions made under the three Conventions to the five objectives of the SAICM Overarching Policy Strategy:
With regard to the Risk reduction Objective:
- Nine new technical guidelines were adopted under the Basel Convention, including, on an interim basis, technical guidelines concerning the transboundary movement of e-waste and used electronic and electrical products;
- Three new chemicals were added to the Stockholm Convention
- One new chemical was added to the Rotterdam Convention
With regard to the Knowledge and information Objective:
- The three conferences of the parties adopted identical decisions on the clearing-house mechanism for information exchange and “Science to action”, promoting the exchange of information and strengthening the scientific underpinning for decision-making and policy-making in the sound management of hazardous chemicals and wastes.
- I would also like to draw the attention of delegations to the report of the Special Rapporteur on implications of human rights on chemicals and wastes with regards to ‘access to information’.
With regard to the Governance Objective:
- The COPs re-emphasized the importance of enhancing cooperation and coordination with other international bodies to facilitate the fulfilment of the objectives of the conventions, in particular within the chemicals and wastes cluster.
- Pursuant to this mandate, the BRS Secretariat participates in SAICM meetings and provides inputs to relevant SAICM processes in areas of common interest, and undertakes a number of other cooperative activities with the SAICM Secretariat, through an internal task-force established in early 2014 between the BRS Secretariat and the Chemicals and Waste Branch of UNEP.
- I bring to your attention information document SAICM/ICCM.4/INF/24, which summarizes the main areas of cooperation between the BRS Secretariat and SAICM.
With regard to the Capacity-building and technical cooperation Objective:
- Similar decisions on technical assistance were adopted by the COPs in which they welcomed the technical assistance programme for the biennium 2016-17 and requested the Secretariat to implement it with relevant actors;
- The Basel and Stockholm COPs adopted similar decisions on regional centres, and further recognized their role in enhancing the provision of technical assistance to support national efforts of developing countries and countries with economies in transition for the implementation of the conventions;
- On partnerships, the Basel Convention COP extended the mandate of the Partnership for Action on Computing Equipment (PACE) until 2017.
With regard to the Illegal traffic Objective:
- The COPs requested the Secretariat to prepare recommendations on possible synergies between the three conventions in preventing and combating illegal traffic and trade in hazardous chemicals and wastes, building on lessons learned under the Basel Convention.
- The COP to the Basel Convention mandated the Implementation and Compliance Committee to develop guidance on how to deal with wastes illegally trafficked ; and renewed the membership of the Environmental Network for Optimizing Regulatory Compliance on Illegal Traffic (ENFORCE) which promotes cooperation and coordination between relevant entities to deliver capacity-building activities and tools on preventing and combating illegal traffic.
The BRS Secretariat is an important stakeholder to SAICM and, as mandated by the COPs, will continue to contribute to SAICM processes and activities of relevance to the conventions.
Other interventions made by the Secretariat of the Basel, Rotterdam and Stockholm Conventions at the ICCM4:
|
|
Meet the new ES of the FAO part of the Rotterdam Convention, William Murray, and discover his expectations for the upcoming Chemicals Review Committee (CRC) meeting in Rome.
Interview with the new Rotterdam Executive Secretary (FAO)
Meet the new ES of the FAO part of the Rotterdam Convention, William Murray, and discover his expectations for the upcoming Chemicals Review Committee (CRC) meeting in Rome.
|
|
A look ahead to what to expect from the Triple COPs with Alain Wittig, Andrea Lechner, and Marylene Beau
INTERVIEW: Look ahead to the Triple COPs with the three COP Coordinators
INTERVIEW: Look ahead to the Triple COPs with the three COP Coordinators
Interview between Charlie Avis, BRS Public Information Officer, and the three COP Coordinators, respectively Basel: Alain Wittig; Rotterdam: Andrea Lechner; and Stockholm: Marylene Beau, Programme Officers with the BRS Secretariat.
Charlie Avis (CA): Good morning, Alain, Andrea, and Marylene, you must be very busy right now with less than a week before the Triple COPs, so thanks for your time. Tell me, how are the preparations going?
Alain Wittig (AW): Good morning, Charlie and thank you! Yes indeed we are all very busy with the final preparations of the organization of the Triple COPs - all is going well. We had the great pleasure of meeting the 3 COP Presidents in Geneva last week to finalize arrangements for these meetings. We discussed, among others, the rotation of chairing the various joint sessions on joint issues and the arrangements for the meetings of the bureaux and contact groups. The entire Secretariat is now working hard in finalizing the last arrangements to ensure that all is in place for the opening of the meetings next Monday to enable the successful running of the meetings of COPs.
CA: What does it actually mean “COP Coordinator”, what do you actually do?
Andrea Lechner (AL): Everything! Well, actually each of us is in charge of the COP-related work under one of the Conventions. In preparing for the COPs, we make sure that all meeting documents are prepared on time and that the organization of work provides sufficient time for discussing all agenda items. We also coordinate the intersessional work with the bureaux and the presidents of our COPs in terms of follow-up to decisions taken, bureaux meetings and ensuring that Convention-specific activities are incorporated into the Secretariat’s work plans and are duly implemented as requested by the COPs.
CA: You seem to work very much as a team - which would suggest there is a lot in common to your individual responsibilities. Is this how you identify “synergies”?
Marylene Beau (MB): Indeed, although we have specific areas of responsibilities, we very much work together as a team to organize these meetings. The Conventions, through the synergies process, have a joint secretariat (UNEP part) which facilitates the implementation of consistent approaches and processes across the three conventions. This is done at different levels, e.g. programmatic or administrative levels. Regarding the servicing of the meetings of the COPs, a lot of synergies have been identified and the best practices have been retained and improved throughout the years to enhance the efficiency of the Secretariat’s functions in this regard.
CA: Let’s turn to the COPs themselves. Is the agenda for this coming Triple COP organised any differently to the previous one? Will there be joint sessions featuring all three conventions together?
AW: The Triple COPs this year will in many ways be organized in a similar manner as in 2013, but they will also feature some differences. For example, this year there will be no high-level segment or simultaneous extraordinary meetings. Regarding some of the similarities, the three COPs are again being organized back-to-back and will include joint sessions on joint issues. Another similarity is that the joint sessions will be followed by sequential sessions of each individual COP meeting, starting with the SC COP, followed by the BC COP and finally the RC COP. The last day of the meetings will again feature a joint session to consider the outcomes of the joint contact groups and would discuss any outstanding joint issues, before each COP closes its meeting.
CA: Can you describe the process: how do decisions get made in the COPs, and how does that eventually influence national implementation?
AL: Decisions at the COPs are generally taken by consensus. The texts for these decisions are prepared by the Secretariat and presented in pre-session documents or so-called Conference Room Papers. For more complex items, contact groups are set up at the meetings to prepare draft decisions for adoption in plenary. Having the three COPs meet during the same two-week period allows them to take harmonized decisions on common issues. After the COPs, it is up to each country to implement these decisions at the national level. For some more substantive decisions, such as those to amend the convention for example in order to list new chemicals, parties to the conventions might need to amend their national regulations in order to reflect the decision taken by the COP.
CA: So what is coming up next week, which is common to the three conventions?
MB: The upcoming COPs will include some joint sessions during which issues that are common to two or three of the conventions will be considered. The items for the joint sessions were agreed upon by the bureaux of the COPs. The objective of the joint sessions is to strengthen implementation and interlinkages between the areas of work under the different conventions or to address cross-cutting organizational matters. Items that will be considered in joint sessions include POPs wastes, technical assistance, financial resources, compliance under the Rotterdam and Stockholm conventions, international cooperation and coordination, programmes of work and budgets.
CA: Are there interesting things happening alongside the COPs?
AW: Yes, many interesting events will take place in the margins of the COPs! A science fair will take place in parallel to the negotiation process from 7 to 9 May 2015 under the common theme of this year’s Triple COPs - ‘From science to action, working for a safer tomorrow’. The aim of the Fair is to increase the understanding of the scientific basis and related processes of the three conventions and to increase awareness of the in-depth scientific considerations relating to decision-making under the three conventions. In addition to the science fair, more than 35 side events will be held during lunch breaks and in the evenings on major issues covered under the conventions. The Government of Switzerland will organize a number of events, such as a reception during the evening of Monday 4 May, and a boat trip on Sunday 10 May 2015, to give a warm welcome to delegates to Geneva.
CA: And the million dollar (chemicals and waste) question: what are your expectations for next week, what will be decided?
AL: There are a number of “standing” items on the agenda of every COP that we expect guidance on from the parties: These include for example the Secretariat’s technical assistance programme, financial resources for chemicals and wastes and last but not least the programme of work and budget for the next biennium. From COP coordinator side, the most exciting discussions at the upcoming COPs will be related to the adoption of technical guidelines under the Basel Convention, the listing of new chemicals under the Rotterdam and Stockholm conventions and the possible adoption of procedures and mechanisms on compliance under the Rotterdam and Stockholm conventions. We look forward to the decisions parties will take on these matters.
CA: Any surprises in store?
MB: A lot of the issues at the agendas of the COPs have been consulted and discussed among regions and countries during the preparatory process leading to the meetings, either through the bureaux or the regional preparatory meetings that took place in March-April. We thus feel much more aware about issues that could come up than in the past. However, for large meetings like the Triple COPs, we can always expect some surprises, which we hope will be good ones!
CA: Thank you very much for your time, good luck next week.
AW, AL, MB: Thank you very much Charlie for this opportunity and we wish a successful COP to all participants.
|
|
Find out all about Rotterdam Convention implementation and the role of FAO in the latest of our interview series marking the Countdown to the Triple COPs
Interview with FAO’s Christine Fuell
Interview with Christine Fuell, Senior Technical Officer and Coordinator of the Secretariat of the Rotterdam Convention within the Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations (FAO) in Rome, Italy, and Charlie Avis, BRS Public Information Officer.
CA: Good morning, Christine, thank you for sharing your thoughts with us today. What are the main issues to be addressed at the upcoming meetings of the triple COPs, in particular for the Rotterdam Convention?
CF: Good morning, Charlie, and thank you for giving me this opportunity. One of the main issues will of course be the consideration of chemicals for inclusion in Annex III to the Convention. This time the Chemical Review Committee (CRC), which met in Rome in October 2014, recommended the pesticides methamidophos and trichlorfon, as well as two so-called severely hazardous pesticide formulations, namely fenthion formulation, and paraquat dichloride formulations. In addition, we will discuss, for the 5th time in the history of the Convention COP meetings, the industrial chemical chrysotile asbestos. Another important topic is of course the status of implementation of the Convention. This provides Parties with the opportunity to highlight their implementation efforts and encourages others to do likewise.
CA: The theme of the 2015 triple COPs’ meetings is “From science to action: working for a safer tomorrow” – is science key to the Rotterdam Convention and if so, how?
CF: Definitely! The availability of scientific information is essential to our ability to understand the risks posed by chemicals and pesticides to human health and the environment, and eventually assists us to manage those risks properly. The objective of the Rotterdam Convention is to contribute to the environmentally sound use of certain hazardous chemicals, by inter alia facilitating information exchange about their characteristics. The Convention is built upon requirements for science-based risk and hazard evaluation, as well as scientifically-supported information on the physico-chemical, toxicological and eco-toxicological properties of the chemicals and pesticides for which Parties submit notifications of final regulatory actions for bans or restrictions. Such notifications are reviewed by an independent and impartial scientific committee, the CRC, which consists of government-designated experts in chemical management.
CA: The Rotterdam Convention aims to protect human health and the environment from potential harm of certain hazardous chemicals, as do the other two chemicals and waste conventions, the Basel and Stockholm Conventions. Why is the Secretariat for the Rotterdam Convention split between Geneva and Rome?
CF: The Convention, in Article 19, states that the secretariat functions shall be performed jointly by UNEP and FAO; a Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) was also adopted in 2005 by both organizations with a view to clarify the secretariat roles and fulfil this responsibility, acknowledging the "areas of competence, comparative strengths and experience, FAO having primary responsibility for pesticides and UNEP taking primary responsibility for other chemicals, in order to facilitate the mobilization by the Secretariat of the full range of scientific, technical and economic expertise required by the Convention".
FAO, as the United Nation’s specialized agency for food and agriculture, has the strongest expertise on pesticides and their whole life-cycle, including their uses and wastes when pesticides become obsolete. FAO also provides key capacity on alternatives and alternative approaches, including integrated pest management and agro-ecology. The development and sharing of alternatives (to banned or restricted hazardous chemicals, whether industrial chemicals or pesticides) is a key element of the Rotterdam Convention.
CA: What else does FAO bring, in terms of capacities and expertise?
CF: It is not only the expertise available in FAO Headquarters itself, but also the global network which currently covers more than 180 countries. The decentralized network includes 5 Regional Offices, 9 Subregional Offices, and 80 FAO Representations. We closely cooperate with 18 Plant Protection Officers and their national networks all around the world, all with substantive expertise with regard to pesticides and with thorough knowledge of the national and regional situation and the conditions of use, something very important when it comes to - for example - incidents with severely hazardous pesticide formulations.
CA: How do they support you in practice?
CF: Most importantly, they give us first-hand information on the immediate needs of a country. Furthermore, whenever we provide technical assistance to a country or a region, they mobilise the most relevant and effective networks in that region. They, together with the Designated National Authorities (DNAs) and Official Contact Points (OCPs), support us to ensure that we reach out to the right participants, and make us aware of any particularities that might influence the success of a project or a workshop, and helping also with practical and logistic arrangements. But it doesn’t stop here.
CA: What else?
CF: We align the technical assistance we provide based on the programme of work mandated by the Conference of the Parties to the Rotterdam Convention, as far as possible with FAO’s strategic objectives, regional initiatives, major areas of work and the country priorities as outlined in their Country Programming Framework. Like this, we join forces, avoid duplication of work, and ensure the maximum impact from given resources.
CA: Can you give us a practical example?
CF: In 2014, the secretariat staff supported several Latin-American countries through sub-regional training and planning workshops to prepare national action plans and to strengthen their capacity on meeting their obligations under the Rotterdam Convention. National follow-up is then done by the FAO Plant Protection Officers in the sub-region, with whom the Secretariat exchanges all necessary materials and instructions via skype, email, teleconferences and any media. This saves time and costs on staff travel while ensuring that participants have a direct partner in the region. Technical assistance of this nature in 2014 in Latin-America led to the submission of 60 additional import responses (Honduras: 17, Dominican Republic: 29, Nicaragua: 8, and Colombia: 6).
CA: Will you be travelling to attend the meetings of the triple COPs in Geneva in May, and if so, what are your expectations?
CF: Of course! The whole Rome team will be present, and not only for the Rotterdam Convention COP meeting. We will have a booth at the Science Fair, we will facilitate specialist side events, and we will support the contact groups meeting aside the plenary sessions of the COPs. We will also assist the colleagues in Geneva in many organizational/administrative and technical tasks behind the scene. As to expectations, agreement on the so called non-compliance mechanism and procedures would be a very significant step forwards, because it has been considered at all previous meetings of the Rotterdam Convention COP, including the latest one held in 2013 (‘RC COP6’), at which much progress was made.
Most importantly, the Parties’ unanimous agreement on the listing of all 5 candidate chemicals would be a big achievement, remembering that this would not constitute an outright ban but rather make them subject to the PIC procedure, a structured process of information exchange, from which all Parties may greatly benefit. I know my expectations are high; however, thanks to our joint efforts in the preparation of these COPs’ meetings, I am confident that we will meet many of them!
CA: Thank you very much for your time.
CF: Thank you, Charlie, for this opportunity and see you soon in Geneva!
|
|
Kerstin Stendahl, BRS Deputy Executive Secretary, on how gender considerations are necessary for full implementation of the Conventions
Gender – Why it matters and what BRS is doing
“Linking gender equality with sustainable development is important for several reasons. It is a moral and ethical imperative. Efforts to achieve a just and sustainable future cannot ignore the rights, dignity and capabilities of half the world’s population.” UN Women World Survey 2014.
Charlie Avis: Kerstin, as we celebrate International Women’s Day, please tell us why gender is relevant to the sound management of chemicals and hazardous wastes and the implementation of the BRS conventions?
Kerstin Stendahl: Incorporating gender consideration into the sound management of chemicals and wastes is absolutely key because women, men, boys and girls are exposed to chemicals and hazardous wastes in different ways and to varying degrees depending on where they work and live. In addition to gender differences in exposure to hazardous substances there are also differences in physiological susceptibility between men and women, girls and boys. We need to take these differences into account when we devise measures for the sound management of chemicals and wastes so that we tailor our responses with gender aspects in mind.
Gender equality, sustainable development and the sound management of chemicals and wastes is a model example of synergies at work, and thus the creation of a whole that is greater than the simple sum of its parts. Without gender equality the BRS conventions will fall short of full implementation and will not therefore contribute to sustainable development to their best possible capacity.
It is very encouraging that the international community now recognizes that negotiations on the post-2015 development agenda will need to harbour, nurture and execute these fundamental ideas.
CA: What is the Secretariat doing towards this goal?
KS: Gender equality at all levels is an important factor in making implementation of our conventions efficient. This is why the BRS secretariat strives to make gender considerations an integral part of our day-to-day work. Through the dedicated work of our gender coordinator and the gender task team we have devised ways and means to mainstream gender into the planning and execution of policies and activities, as decided on by the Parties. Have a look at the BRS Gender Action Plan at https://synergies.pops.int/ManagementReports/Gender/Overview/tabid/3651/language/en-US/Default.aspx
CA: The conventions aim at protecting all human beings and the environment, why do we need to focus especially on gender?
KS: Gender mainstreaming requires us to carefully assess whether the action we take will equally impact the lives of women and men, boys and girls. It is not an easy task and we still have a lot to do in this area, not least when it comes to addressing the unsound management of chemicals and wastes and the disproportionate impact that they have on women and girls. We also need to encourage and empower women to be part of decision – making, whereby their knowledge, experience and expertise is equally heard and accounted for. Significant in this regard is the question of access to Secretariat training and support services. In 2014, 52% of the more than 1,100 participants in the BRS technical assistance webinar programme were female, demonstrating that women are aware of – and can use just as easily - this very popular format for building individual and institutional capacities. In this way, we support women (and men) to empower themselves to play a role for securing the sustainable management of chemicals and waste.
CA: What support is out there, to help make this happen?
KS: Thankfully, the BRS is supported and guided in its gender work by a pool of competence and expertise among governments, within UNEP and the UN system at large. Amongst these, the work of UN Women, deserves a specific mentioning. Its report World Survey 2014 focusses on the theme of gender equality and sustainable development and is an essential read for all of us aiming at a sustainable future. (https://www.unwomen.org/en/news/stories/2014/10/world-survey-2014-press-release#sthash.6oo084i2.dpuf )
CA: Are there already any specific activities going on?
KS: Through the Task Team’s work and as part of the BRS Gender Action Plan, the development of internal baseline data and statistics on involvement of women and men in projects and programmes of the secretariat is well underway. More substantively, we monitor consideration of gender aspects in proposal development and project implementation, and facilitate and encourage training of staff on gender mainstreaming. And we are collecting success stories of gender mainstreaming in chemicals and waste projects which will be showcased as “gender heroes” during our triple COPs in May. Lastly, the secretariat is actively contributing to the forthcoming (UNEP) Global Gender and Environment Outlook, and collaborates with the UNEP Gender and Social Safeguards Unit on online and face-to-face trainings on gender and environment. I also hope that we will see more discussions about the gender dimension in the implementation of our conventions during the triple COPs in May.
CA: Tell me about the Secretariat’s staffing, is that gender balanced?
KS: It is certainly something we monitor and bear in mind as part of all action on human resources together with other aspects, such as regional balance.
I would say that we our track record is quite good. Because of specific attention we now have a gender ratio of 50% men and women at “director” level, 49% men and 51% women at “professional” level, and 56% women and 44 % men at “general service” level.
|
|
Join Professor Oladele Osibanjo as he describes the main capacity constraints, and partnership opportunities, for solving waste and chemicals issues in Africa
An African perspective: capacities and partnerships in focus
Regional Capacity, and Innovative Partnerships for the Sustainable Management of Waste: An African Perspective
Interview between Professor Oladele Osibanjo, Executive Director of the Basel Convention Coordinating Centre For Training & Technology Transfer for the African Region (Ibadan, Nigeria) and Charlie Avis, BRS Secretariat Public Information Officer
Charlie Avis: Good morning, Professor Osibanjo, thank you for sharing your thoughts with us today. Please tell me, what is the role of your Centre, and why is it important?
Professor Oladele Osibanjo: Thank you. The Centre aims to strengthen the capacity of the parties in Africa in complying with the provisions of the Basel Convention in legal, technical and institutional arrangements; strengthen the framework for environmentally sound management (ESM) of hazardous and other wastes across the Africa region. It also assists them to effectively implement their obligations on trans-boundary movements of hazardous and other wastes. This is done very much in partnership with the Basel Convention Regional Centres (BCRCs) in Egypt for Arabic-speaking countries; in Senegal for Francophone; and South Africa (Africa Institute) for Anglophone African countries respectively.
One important role of the Centre is to facilitate interaction and exchange of information between the BRS Secretariat and Regional Centres, and among the Regional Centres, Parties and other related institutions. The centre convenes regional consultations to identify priorities and formulate strategies, and helps define and execute regional programmes. These contribute to synergies and mechanisms of cooperation among the Regional Centres and other stakeholders in environmentally sound management (ESM) and minimization of the generation of hazardous wastes and technological transfer in and outside the region. The Centre also maintains a regional information system accessible to stakeholders.
CA: What are the main capacity constraints facing African governments striving to implement the Basel Convention?
OO: The infrastructure for sound management of hazardous wastes varies from no action, to little or weak action, among the parties in the African region. The parties are at different stages of development with different approaches to hazardous waste management. Hence the importance of a regional approach as this helps parties in the region to adopt a common template for addressing ESM of hazardous waste. It also allows parties lagging behind to catch up faster with the rest of the region. It further helps to promote the implementation of the environmentally sound management of hazardous and other wastes as an essential contribution to the attainment of sustainable livelihood, the Millennium Development Goals (MDGs) and the protection of human health and the environment in the region.
The capacity challenges are multidimensional and complex. In general, waste disposal is practised more than waste management (collection, storage, sorting, transportation, recycling, processing and disposal) often due to a lack of or weak infrastructure for hazardous waste management with limited knowledge and understanding of the operational and managerial/maintenance aspects of hazardous waste management. This can also be a function of missing and/or inadequate legal and institutional/administrative frameworks for hazardous waste ESM and the control of transboundary movements. Insufficient financial resources result in poor funding leading to low standards of hazardous waste management. Also, a prevailing low level of awareness at all levels of governance of the adverse environmental and human health impacts of hazardous waste can lead to a lack of political will. Not least, the non-domestication of the Basel Convention after ratification into national laws weakens the control of transboundary movement of hazardous waste at the national level.
CA: In terms of sector, what is the fastest growing waste stream in Africa?
OO: The fastest growing waste stream in Africa in terms of sector is electronic waste, also known as e-waste, or Waste Electrical and Electronic Equipment (WEEE). Africa generates about 2 million metric tons of e-waste annually. This stems from the fact that Africa is one of the major destinations of e-waste exports from developed countries under the guise of exporting used or second-hand functional electronic products to assist Africa bridge the so-called digital divide. Less than 20% of African population can afford to purchase new electronic products hence the high demand for used electronic products which could be near end of life or are already end-of-life on arrival in Africa.
CA: How can partnerships contribute to solving these issues?
OO: The issue of e-waste is a globalized problem requiring global solutions. The Basel Convention Parties recognized the importance of public-private partnerships in the development of innovative, appropriate, and effective strategies for achieving the ESM of hazardous waste. Thus the Partnership for Action on Computing Equipment (PACE) was launched at the ninth meeting of the Conference of the Parties (COP 9), in Bali, Indonesia in June 2008. PACE is a multi-stakeholder partnership forum with representatives of Governments, private sector (both producers and recyclers), international organizations, academia, the Basel Convention Regional Centres/Basel Convention Coordinating Centres – and environmental public-interest non-governmental organizations. They come together to tackle issues related to the ESM, repair, refurbishment, recycling and disposal of used and end-of-life computing equipment. PACE has developed international guidelines for ESM of end-of-life computing equipment and has begun to test the implementation of these guidelines in pilot activities in developing countries and countries with economies in transition.
Other international partnerships include the United Nations University initiative StEP (Solving the E waste Problem (StEP) which also focuses on providing solutions to the e-waste problem, through the application of scientific research based on the life-cycle approach. There is also the UNEP Global e-Sustainability Initiative (GeSI) which is carried out with the Information Communication Sector (ICT) since 2001.
CA: What do you consider to be the three main successes of PACE, for the African region?
OO: PACE provided a unique forum for representatives of personal computer manufacturers, recyclers, international organizations, academia, BCRCs/BCCCs, environmental NGOs, and governments to tackle environmentally sound refurbishment, repair, material recovery, recycling and disposal of used and end-of-life computing equipment in an environmentally sound manner. It raised awareness, particularly through the participation of government officials and Directors of BCRCs/BCCC from Africa, all gaining exposure, knowledge and experience in the process. At the country level, Africa also benefitted from PACE, for example the E-waste inventory in Burkina Faso, and a pilot project on collection and management of used and end-of-life computing equipment from informal sector which is on-going in the same country.
CA: How would you like to see the platform established by MPPI and PACE taken forward?
OO: The legacies of these two global partnerships should be sustained, strengthened and taken forward in a variety of ways. It is important that the knowledge and experiences gained in MPPI and PACE in promoting ESM on used and end-of-life mobile phones and computing equipment is not lost, and that their multi-stakeholder platform should continue to provide a platform for advancing ESM in a wider spectrum of WEEE issues and products beyond consumer electronics and cover other categories of E-waste in developing countries and countries with economies in transition, at the regional and national levels beyond December 2015.
In practical terms, establishing an ‘’Ad hoc follow-up group‘’ on PACE at the end of COP 12, would continue already initiated activities that are ongoing, finalize pilot projects, and enable reporting of lessons learned. It is also important to undertake revision of section 3 of the Guidance Document on the Environmentally Sound Management (ESM) of Used and End-of-Life Computing Equipment.
lt is also important that a New PACE or PACE after PACE be established after December 2015, that would provide a global coordination role towards facilitating the strengthening of information and experience sharing and discussion on emerging issues within the wider WEEE agenda. An expanded mandate (TOR) and governance structure envisioned for the NEW PACE under a proposed 2-tier coordination arrangement would give greater responsibility to the BCRCs/BCCCs in regional and national coordination; while the Basel Convention Secretariat retains the primary role for global coordination, which model would require consideration and approval by COP 13 and follow-up implementation strategy.
CA: Finally, will you be travelling to the triple COPs in Geneva in May, and if so, what are your expectations?
OO: Yes l will be traveling to the triple COP. My expectations are many and will share a few with you. I would love to see more active participation and greater involvement of delegates from developing and economic in transition countries in contact groups’ activities. This, together with improved and more predictable and sustainable funding mechanisms for implementing Chemicals and Waste MEAs in developing countries, would do much for tackling the waste issues in Africa.
New progammes on enhanced advocacy, awareness-raising and education on the global chemicals and waste issues would be welcome, with connectivities and implications for sustainable development, poverty alleviation and the creation of green jobs, for developing countries and countries with economies in transition.
CA: Thank you very much for your time.
OO: It is my pleasure. Thank you.
|
|
Abiola Olanipekun, Chief of the BRS Scientific Support Branch, explains that rigorous and inclusive scientific processes underpin the 3 conventions
Interview: Science as the Bottom Line
Interview with Abiola Olanipekun, Chief of the BRS Scientific Support Branch by Charlie Avis, BRS Public Information Officer
Charlie Avis: Abiola, why will a Science Fair accompany the forthcoming triple COPs of the Basel, Rotterdam, and Stockholm Conventions here in Geneva, from 7-9th May 2015?
Abiola Olanipekun: Thank you. We are staging a 3 day Science Fair in order to raise awareness amongst delegates, parties and stakeholders, concerning how science underpins the implementation of the three conventions. The event will feature interactive displays, special events, film viewings, hands-on exhibits, panel discussions, lots of presentations and posters, and this diversity reflects the enormous range of stakeholders who together are moving forward the agenda for sustainable management of chemicals and waste.
CA: How does science underpin the conventions’ implementation, then?
AO: The science/policy interface is of supreme importance, in a world shaped by often largely political and economic interests. Right since the negotiation and adoption of the three Conventions, a sound scientific base was seen as necessary to give the Conventions both the information, and the credibility, they need in order to pursue their goals of protecting human health and the environment.
CA: More specifically?
AO: Scientific analysis is central to every step of the process. For example, when a chemical is proposed for listing under the Stockholm Convention, a party is to submit a proposal, accompanied by a scientific justification for the need for global control. Scientific evaluation is carried out by experts from various countries from all United Nations (UN) regions, who are involved in the work of the respective technical subsidiary bodies under the Conventions. These experts sign a “declaration of conflict of interest” meaning that they will not pursue any financial interests or influence by a commercial entity to enter into their deliberations. Further steps requiring inputs from the scientific community include risk mitigation through identification of suitable alternatives and the search for Best Available Techniques and Best Environmental Practices. Guidelines for monitoring, capacity-building on the implementation of alternatives, assistance with reporting obligations, and a host of other activities are also undertaken based on state-of-the-art science and objective expertise.
CA: It sounds like a lot of work. Is it bearing fruit?
AO: Yes, the good news is that according to our data, people and the environment are less exposed to certain Persistent Organic Pollutants (or POPs) than previously. The trend is definitely downwards with respect to chemicals listed in the Convention annexes. But at the same time, we have our work cut out: since new chemicals are entering the market – and therefore entering our environment and our bodies, all the time.
CA: Please tell me about this good news, what are you actually measuring?
AO: We are mandated to carry out a global monitoring programme to measure POPs concentrations in the air, water and in human populations (breast milk and maternal blood) and have been implementing this global programme since the entry into force of the Stockholm Convention in 2004. Within 11 years of existence of the Convention, a rich and extremely valuable global POPs monitoring dataset has been generated. These data are compiled into Regional and Global Monitoring Reports every six years. The first reports were published in 2009, showing baseline concentrations of POPs in all UN regions, and the second round of reports are being issued in the next weeks and will focus on the identification of trends in exposure to POPs over time.
CA: And what do the data show?
AO: The trends are definitely downwards! This demonstrates the effectiveness of the Convention. For the first time, these monitoring data are also made available through a global monitoring plan data warehouse and information system which can be accessed at https://www.pops-gmp.org/ The development and adoption of technical guidelines for environmentally sound management of wastes under the Basel Convention is also critical in ensuring that hazardous wastes are managed in a manner to protect human health and the environment against the adverse effects which may result from such wastes.
CA: Very impressive indeed. What are the major challenges for the Conventions, in terms of the scientific underpinning for implementation?
AO: Capacity. Many developing countries lack the capacity – or resources - to effectively engage in the scientific processes, meaning that it is challenging to ensure that their inputs are properly integrated. This is especially problematic because exposure to certain types of chemicals and pollutants is often higher in developing countries than elsewhere – for example in the by-hand and informal recycling of electronic waste.
CA: How do you respond to that?
AO: The Secretariat has a very full technical assistance programme, and all efforts are made to include the regional perspectives, including through the designated Basel and Stockholm Conventions Regional Centres, and by bringing developing country delegates to the relevant meetings. Financial support from our “donor” partners is very necessary for this. But beyond that, we need to better assist parties to mainstream scientific approaches and evidence into national development planning processes, to encourage sharing of information between parties and between sectors, to integrate the chemicals and wastes issues into the wider development agenda, and to ensure that these issues are properly reflected in the planning and definition of the Sustainable Development Goals. We need to strengthen the “synergies” at all these different levels and scales.
CA: And the Science Fair, is it the first step towards that?
AO: Not the first step, but a very significant step, yes. There is no time to waste. I would like to thank the donors and hosts of the Science Fair – the governments of Finland and Switzerland respectively – for supporting us to highlight the importance of Science to Action: Working for a Safer Tomorrow.
|
|
Why is Capacity-Building crucial for implementing the Conventions? An Interview with the Chief of the BRS Technical Assistance Branch, Maria Cristina Cardenas, tells us why.
Focus on Technical Assistance and Capacity-Building
Charlie Avis: Maria Cristina, you are Chief of the BRS Technical Assistance Branch, please tell us what “capacity-building” means to the Secretariat, and why is it important?
Maria Cristina Cardenas: Thank you. The capacity building programme aims to assist parties to create the enabling environment necessary for enhanced or strengthened efforts to implement their obligations under the conventions. It is important because only by implementing the conventions will we achieve the objectives set out, namely to protect the environment and human health from the effects of chemicals and hazardous wastes.
CA: What are the main capacity gaps at national level, and where are the gaps (geographically) most acute?
MCC: According to the recent needs assessment that was undertaken by the Secretariat, the main needs are in the fields of the environmentally-sound management of priority waste streams, in particular on e-wastes, used lead-acid batteries, persistent organic pollutants wastes and mercury wastes; the collection of data for undertaking inventories for POPs and for reporting ; the monitoring of human health or environmental incidents at the national level, in order to prepare proposals for listing severely hazardous pesticide formulations; the identification of alternative substances or methods to substitute for newly-listed chemicals, and the collection of information for updating NIPs and for reporting.
In terms of the geographical scope the needs vary between and among regions as well as between the conventions themselves.
CA: The webinar series seems to have been especially effective, with more than 1,100 participants benefitting last year alone. How long has the BRS Secretariat been staging webinars?
MCC: The webinar programme was officially launched by the Stockholm Convention Secretariat in February 2011, and one year later it was expanded to include the Basel and Rotterdam Conventions (when the 3 Secretariats were officially merged into one).
CA: Can you please give me a concrete example of a webinar (title, scope, length, speakers, number and origin of participants)?
MCC: Webinars are training or information sessions with a duration of maximum 60 minutes. They are generally organized twice a week on Tuesdays (10-11am) and Thursdays (4-5pm Geneva time) in order to provide an opportunity for participants from different time zones to connect. The sessions are hosted and chaired by Secretariat staff, who introduces the presenter for the session. He or she is usually an invited expert on a specific topic or a Secretariat staff member who responsible for a particular programme. Presentations take about 30 minutes, leaving ample time for participants to ask questions and engage with the presenter. Typically there are 20 to 30 participants attending each webinar session. Of course there are always exceptions and for instance the up-coming webinar sessions on briefings for the COPs are scheduled for 90 minutes. This is to allow for the presenter to provide the full overview of the COPs as well for the participants to be able to ask questions. The majority of our webinar sessions are recorded and thus if you miss one you can always view the recording of the presentations and download the questions asked.
CA: How do you deal with the language needs of participants?
MCC: Sessions are offered in the official UN languages depending on the interest of the topic. Generally we schedule sessions mainly in English, French and Spanish, however we have also run them in Arabic and in Russian. We hope to soon offer webinars with simultaneous interpretation into a second language, after we have overcome some technical obstacles.
CA: What kind of feedback have you received – from participants, from parties, for your colleagues?
MCC: Overall the feedback that we receive from parties and participants is very positive. Stakeholders around the globe are happy to be able to join the webinars and be in touch with experts and the Secretariat in real time without having to move away from their desks. Many find it to be a very useful training tool in addition to the face-to-face activities that the Secretariat organizes.
CA: You mention face-to-face training: In addition to webinars, what else is the BRS Secretariat doing to fill these capacity needs?
MCC: The Secretariat’s technical assistance programme builds upon the strengths and best practices of the individual programmes for the delivery of capacity-building support under each of the 3 conventions. We have four main components: Needs assessment; Development of supporting tools and methodologies; Capacity-building and training activities; Partnerships and regional centres . The idea is to provide a full suite or awareness-raising and technical support across the spectrum of themes and issues of relevance to the conventions, globally.
CA: What plans do you have for the future, for BRS capacity-building?
MCC: We are currently exploring the different avenues offered by technology, in particular we are looking into expanding the use of virtual, electronic, platforms. We will soon be launching online training modules, and we are also working with academia to developing some massive open online courses (MOOCs). In addition we will continue to strengthen our face-to-face training programme by promoting the use of hands-on training methodologies and information exchange during practical training activities and workshops.
CA: And the “flagship” webinar programme will undoubtedly continue. Last question, will capacity issues be prominent at the triple COPs, and if so, where, and what kind of decisions/commitment can we expect?
MCC: Yes indeed, the Webinar programme will continue to run and be strengthened. As for the COPs, capacity issues will be quite prominent, and technical assistance is an agenda item under each of the three COPs. It will be introduced during the joint session of the triple COPs on the first day, and is expected to be discussed in a contact group which will be operating during the 3 COPs. Parties will be provided with an overview of what the secretariat has undertaken since the last COPs as well as a proposed programme on technical assistance for the three conventions. This programme is basically a continuation of the programme which was set up in 2012 after the re-organization of the 3 secretariats into one. It also takes into account the needs assessments that were carried out for each of the conventions in 2014. In addition the Basel and Stockholm COPs will evaluate the performance and sustainability of the 23 regional centres serving the Conventions.
CAA: So, all-in-all, it is expected the COPs will recognise the importance of capacity-building for fulfilling the conventions’ objectives, leading to a renewed mandate for the next two years. Maria Cristina, thank you very much for your time.
|
|
The 2nd meeting of the Strategic Approach to Integrated Chemicals Management, OEWG, takes place in Geneva 15 to 17 December 2014. The Executive Secretary's speech is now available.
Executive Secretary addresses SAICM Open-Ended Working Group
Speaking notes for Rolph Payet on the Basel and Stockholm Regional Centres 15 December 2014
Dear participants,
The Basel Convention provides in Article 14 for the establishment of Regional Centres for Training and Technology Transfer (BCRCs) regarding the management of hazardous wastes and other wastes and the minimization of their generation, and the Stockholm Convention provides in Article 12 for the establishment of regional and subregional centres for capacity-building and transfer of technology (SCRCs) to assist developing country Parties and Parties with economies in transition to fulfil their obligations under the Convention.
The 14 Basel Convention Regional Centres and 16 Stockholm Convention Regional Centres, where 7 serve as joint regional or sub-regional centres, are established and operating pursuant to the relevant provisions of the Basel and Stockholm Conventions and decisions of the Conference of Parties. Their primary purpose is to provide services, mainly technical assistance, capacity building and in many cases project implementation and coordination for the implementation of the Conventions to the Parties served by the Centres.
At our last regional centres meeting three weeks ago, heads of those centres called for a more integrated approach to chemicals management and they are ready to implement not only the decisions of the Basel, Rotterdam and Stockholm Conventions, but also decisions within the chemicals area provided financing is available, such as from the GEF, UNEP SAICM QSP, and voluntary contributions to the BRS Secretariat among others.
All Centres are indeed catalysts for the promotion and implementation of policies aimed at life-cycle of chemicals and integrated waste management. They are suitable forum where programmes’ synergies could be established or where their potential could be exploited.
The network of the Basel and the Stockholm Conventions Regional Centres is also working with the regional offices of UNEP and FAO. The Regional Centres are conducting training programmes, workshops, seminars and pilot projects in the field of the environmentally sound management (ESM) of hazardous wastes and the elimination of POPs, transfer of environmentally sound technology and minimization of the generation of hazardous wastes, with specific emphasis on training of trainers, disseminating information, including promotion of public awareness, identifying, developing and strengthening mechanisms for the transfer of technology.
The Regional Centres are also organizing meetings, symposiums, missions in the field and carrying out joint projects in cooperation with UNEP, UNDP, UNIDO, FAO, UNITAR, WHO and industry and non-governmental organizations. In doing so, the centres work closely with SAICM.
We fully endorse and support the request by the SAICM regional meetings that the Basel and Stockholm Conventions regional centres continue to act as regional delivery centres for SAICM and that our regional centres are key actors in the implementation of various projects at the regional level. We wish to recognize and support the contribution of the SAICM Quick Start Programme to several of the projects carried out by the regional centres.
We are working together to support countries to enhance their capacity to achieve the sound management of chemicals and wastes for a better living and contributing to the three dimensions of sustainable development. We thank you for your support and efforts.
We invite countries that are willing to enhance their capacity for the sound management of chemicals and wastes, including the implementation of the Basel, Rotterdam, Stockholm and Minamata Conventions, to continue to submit their needs for capacity building of human resources and strengthening of the institutions to the BRS Secretariat or the Basel and Stockholm Regional Centres.
I take the opportunity to bring to your attention information document SAICM/OEWG.2/INF/8 and especially the table which summarizes the main areas of cooperation.
Finally, I like to highlight that the United Nations Environment Assembly of UNEP in its Resolution 1/5 on chemicals and waste acknowledged the role of the regional centres of the Basel and Stockholm Conventions to support the implementation of those conventions and all relevant activities, as well as the role that they play in contributing to other chemicals –and waste-related instruments and in mainstreaming the sound management of chemicals and waste.
Thank you for your attention!
|
|
As 2015 begins, David Ogden, Chief of the Conventions Operations Branch, tells us why.
Why are the meetings of the COPs Important ?
Charlie Avis: David, please tell me, why are the triple COPs in 2015 important?
David Ogden: Well, the triple COPs - or the 2015 Meetings of the Conferences of the Parties to the Basel, Rotterdam and Stockholm conventions, to name them in full - are the principal platform for proposing sustainable solutions, based on sound science, to protect human health and the environment from the possible adverse effects of hazardous chemicals and waste. Together, the three conventions represent not just a governance structure, but also a set of tools and shared capacities for assisting governments implement these solutions. So what happens at the triple COPs in May next year will influence the direction the Parties take sustainable chemicals and waste management for the next two years, and beyond.
CA: What will be discussed?
DO: Some key guidance documents, which are developed to assist countries put in place the necessary arrangements for implementation, will be discussed at the COPs. In particular, draft Technical Guidelines on E-Waste, on POPs waste, and on Mercury waste, will be on the agenda. Also, Parties have put forward a number of new chemicals for possible inclusion in the Rotterdam and Stockholm Convention processes: this is a key step for sustainably managing those substances, if they are found to present harmful threats to human and environmental health. Also, the new work programme for 2016-17 will be discussed, including a number of key initiatives such as ensuring appropriate technical assistance for the regions, and an evaluation of the effectiveness of the Stockholm convention.
CA: E-waste sounds interesting. Why is E-waste on the agenda?
DO: E-waste is a rapidly growing waste stream – mobile phone usage is very high across the world and many devices don’t last very long. We need proper recycling, reuse, and disposal of these appliances, because they are for example full of heavy metals and other potentially hazardous substances. Gram for gram, there is more gold in a mobile phone than in retrievable gold ore, so it is also an opportunity and a real, economic, resource. But recycling and disposal needs to be done in a way which is also safe for workers, good for society as a whole, and also good for the environment. Hence the draft Technical Guidelines, which will assist governments with appropriate procedures on transboundary movements of E-waste.
CA: You mentioned science in your opening remarks: why is science so important to all of this?
DO: The Basel, Rotterdam, and Stockholm processes are scientifically-driven. There is a need first to identify and then to understand the risks from chemicals and waste, in order to be able to propose alternatives and sustainable approaches to their management. “Science is the judge” for whether chemicals and waste are listed, and eventually banned, or not. After that, socio-economic factors influence the types of measures used to address the risks. All aspects of the Conventions’ decision-making are therefore underpinned by rigorous, international, cooperative scientific analysis. To help explain how this works, this time we are organising a Science Fair to bring these complexities to a wider audience.
CA: What is the Science Fair?
DO: Together with our partners – governments as well as civil society, and the private sector – we will stage a three-day Fair, highlighting how science is used to inform all the different steps for deciding and implementing the different aspects of the three conventions. From 7th to 9th May, we will showcase work from all over the world, employing a variety of media including videos, interactive exhibits, panel discussions and others. The Fair reflects the overall theme of the meetings of the COPs, which is “From Science to Action: Working for a Safer Tomorrow”.
CA: For a Safer Tomorrow: a good place for us to stop. Thank you for your time.
|
|
In collaboration with WIPO related to e-waste, the “Patent Landscape Report on Electronic Waste Recycling and Material Recovery Technologies” to provide insight into how the patent and business literature can be probed to advance technical progress and maintain a competitive environment.
Kerstin Stendahl delivers opening remarks at the launch of the Patent Landscape Report on E-Waste Recycling Technologies
Opening remarks by Kerstin Stendahl, Deputy Executive Secretary of the Basel, Rotterdam and Stockholm Conventions, at the Launch of the Patent Landscape Report on E-Waste Recycling Technologies prepared in collaboration between WIPO and UNEP/BR
Geneva, 12 December 2013
Welcome everyone at the International Environment House and thank you to the Geneva Environment Network, who organized this event and provided the refreshments.
We are happy to present the result of a fruitful collaboration with WIPO related to e-waste, the “Patent Landscape Report on Electronic Waste Recycling and Material Recovery Technologies” to provide insight into how the patent and business literature can be probed to advance technical progress and maintain a competitive environment.
Concern about environmental damage caused by careless handling and disposing of e-waste was raised already more than a decade ago. E-waste is a priority waste stream under the Basel Convention since 2006.
Additional focus on hazardous flame retardants in e-products, the PBDEs, came up under the Stockholm Convention a few years later and lead to the ban of these compounds in 2009.
Environmentally sound management of e-waste is a complex task where issues of refurbishment, reuse, recycling, material recovery and disposal have to be considered. But also issues of waste avoidance and minimization including product design play an important role if we want to manage the life-cycle of e-products in a sustainable manner.
Clearly, a multi-stakeholder approach is needed where different groups and organizations with specialized expertise work together and contribute to a common goal.
We have the chance in Geneva to have many different UN organizations and we noticed with satisfaction a growing interest from many of them on matters related to e-waste.
The Secretariat is working closely, amongst others, with the ITU on a handbook on “Life-cycle management of ICT equipment’, with the International Labour Organization (ILO), which is, for example, exploring the flows of e-waste, the risks it poses to e-waste workers and the environment, as well as labour issues and regulatory frameworks and with WHO on e-waste and child/vulnerable populations’ health initiative.
All work areas are extremely important pieces of the mosaic we try to put together to get a better understanding of the complex picture of environmentally sound management of e-waste.
I give the floor first to WIPO and thereafter to Mr. Bradley, who will moderate and facilitate the discussion.
Today’s presentations will be available on the Geneva Environment Network website.
|
|
Collective global action agreed to in our multilateral environmental agreements coupled with implementation supported by the Global Environment Facility is helping to reduce threats posed by the use of chemicals.
Kerstin Stendahl calls for increased awareness & safer alternatives to unsound chemicals
Collective global action agreed to in our multilateral environmental agreements coupled with implementation supported by the Global Environment Facility is helping to reduce threats posed by the use of chemicals.
|
|
Clayton Campanhola, Executive Secretary of the Rotterdam Convention, Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations (FAO).
Remarks by Clayton Campanhola (FAO) at the opening of the ordinary and extraordinary meetings of the conferences of the parties to the Basel, Rotterdam and Stockholm conventions, 28 April 2013, Geneva, Switzerland
28 April to 10 May 2013
Presidents, excellencies, distinguished delegates, ladies and gentlemen,
I would like to join my colleague Jim Willis in welcoming all of you here this morning.
FAO’s Director General, Mr. José Graziano da Silva, ask me to present his apologies for not being able to be here today, but he will be with us for the High-level Segment.
This is my first Conference of the Parties as Executive Secretary of the Rotterdam Convention and I am very honoured to address all three Conferences of the Parties, Basel, Rotterdam and Stockholm today at the opening of these very special meetings, which reflect the progress we have made with regard to synergies.
I would like to take the opportunity to talk about agriculture, not just because this is FAO’s mandate but above all because it is central to the Rotterdam Convention and to world society.
Over the last 60 years agriculture production has been able to respond to the world’s rapidly rising demands for food, but this has occurred at significant human and environmental costs. Those include, among others, negative effects of pesticides and fertilizers on human health and on natural resources.
Agriculture in the 21st century needs to be both safer and more sustainable. More sustainable, because agriculture needs to produce more to eradicate hunger in the world, while contributing to reducing poverty and protecting our precious natural resources. And safer because, in addition to providing environmental benefits, the agricultural sector will have to produce safer and healthier products for consumers.
The central theme of the Conferences of the Parties for these two weeks is “sustainable synergies”. The Rotterdam Convention is a concrete example of FAO’s commitment to promote synergies. The Rotterdam Convention Secretariat, jointly hosted by FAO and by UNEP, is one of the first examples of synergies in the history of the 3 Conventions! The restructuring of the UNEP part of the Secretariat provided challenges in the synergistic way we work together, however, all colleagues in Rome and in Geneva are strongly committed to building and nurturing close and fruitful working relationships between our Secretariats to support Parties to protect human health and the environment from hazardous chemicals and wastes.
The Memorandum of Understanding between UNEP and FAO, approved by the 2nd conference of the parties to the Rotterdam Convention and signed by the Director-General of FAO and the Executive Director of UNEP in December 2005 sets out the arrangements to perform jointly the Secretariat functions of the Rotterdam Convention and requests each organisation to assume responsibilities on the basis of their areas of competence, comparative strengths and experience; in particular, FAO having primary responsibility for pesticides and UNEP taking primary responsibility for other chemicals.
The activities of the FAO part of the Rotterdam Convention Secretariat are closely in line with those of FAO’s Pesticides Management Programme responsible for example for the implementation of the International Code of Conduct on the Distribution and Use of Pesticides; highly hazardous pesticides, and the prevention and disposal of obsolete pesticides.
Their activities address pesticides throughout their life-cycle and complement each other in the implementation of the Rotterdam Convention, but also in the implementation of Basel and Stockholm related issues in the area of pesticides.
The Rotterdam Secretariat also benefits from the close cooperation with the technical officers in the 16 Regional and Subregional Offices of FAO, as well as of the currently 96 FAO representations worldwide. I would like to take the opportunity to draw your attention to the FAO stand which provides further in-depth information on this unique cooperation and mutual support. Next week 2 side events with FAO participation will take place, featuring highly hazardous pesticides and Sustainable Synergies through Sustainable Agriculture, the latter being opened by the Director General of FAO.
A range of issues related to synergies and joint activities for the programmes of work for the next biennium will be presented to you for decision. Given that the majority of all chemicals addressed by the 3 Conventions are pesticides, we believe that the synergy process offers excellent opportunities for all 3 conventions to benefit from FAOs network of expertise.
The individual COPs will also have to take important decisions as own legal entities. My colleague Jim already highlighted the exciting opportunity to come to an agreement on the compliance mechanism – and this is where we hope to benefit from the Basel Conventions’ expertise. Another challenge will be the adoption of a programme of work and budget that considers specific and joint activities.
At the core of every COP is of course the consideration of chemicals to add to the so called PIC procedure and Jim perfectly pronounced the names of all 6 of them – so I will not even try. Being also FAO’s Director of the Plant Production and Protection Division, I would like to mention, in particular, the pesticide azinphos-methyl and the liquid formulations of paraquat dichloride at or above 276 g/L, which would be the first severely hazardous pesticide formulation to be included since the entry into force of the convention.
This is a great example of how the Convention gives developing countries the opportunity to raise global awareness on the specific problems they face with pesticides. If this so called SHPF and the pesticide will be listed in the course of this meeting, this will prove once again how extremely useful the Rotterdam Convention is particularly to developing countries where agriculture plays an important role, but where conditions of use of pesticides often put farmers at high risk.
Including a substance in Annex III of the RC is not constituting a ban! But it enables all parties to take informed decisions on future imports of the most hazardous chemicals.
I would like to add that the discussions on listing these chemicals could not take place without the outstanding work of the Chemical Review Committee including their inter-sessional work and I would like to thank its members and the chair for this.
In the spirit of synergies this technical body will hold its next meeting back to back with the Stockholm Persistent Organic Pollutants Review Committee and we are looking forward to hosting these meetings in October in the Headquarters of FAO in Rome.
Rome would also have been the venue of this present COP based on the provisions of the Memorandum of Understanding, which foresees alternating the COPs between the seats of the Secretariats. However, due to the synergy decisions taken at COP5, the Joint Bureaux, based on the Joint Secretaries proposal, have decided to convene this event in Geneva. I would like to take the opportunity to express my gratitude to the Government of Switzerland for hosting us here, for their warm welcome and for supporting this meeting in an exceptional manner.
I would like to join Jim in thanking the many donors for their substantive financial contributions that made possible participants travel to this important meeting. My thanks go also to the Joint Bureaux and the 3 Presidents for their outstanding preparation of this Meeting and I wish them all success for the coming two weeks.
Before closing, let me return again to agriculture. Overall, sustainable intensification of agricultural production creates both positive and negative impacts on human welfare and livelihoods, particularly to those developing countries where agricultural exports are the main source of revenue. The challenges for agriculture production to assure global food security and sustainable management of natural resources are highly complex.
I believe that global agreements such as these three Conventions are outstanding examples of what we can do together to build up a world free of hunger and malnutrition and at the same time conserve the global environment and take the advantage of the natural services provided, such as pollination, natural biological control of pests, carbon sequestration, beneficial invertebrates in soil and so on. FAO is committed to supporting the implementation of international agreements, codes of conduct and standards aimed at protecting, conserving and restoring natural resources.
Presidents, excellencies, distinguished delegates, Ladies and Gentlemen, these Conventions are not just about chemicals. They deal with empowerment of poor countries and poor consumers and producers. I hope that in undertaking your work over the next two weeks you will keep the theme “ sustainable synergies” in mind. I consider these Conventions as truly output- oriented and concrete outcomes of the many international efforts towards sustainable development in recent years. Certainly, they are modest steps in the face of the challenges that lie ahead, but they can make a major difference.
Ladies and Gentlemen, let me finish with assuring you my sincere commitment to the practice of our Secretariats of working closely together to provide a high level of support to Parties.
I wish you very successful meetings and expect they can bring us important contributions.
Thank you!
|
|
Bakary Kante, Director of the Division of Environmental Law and Conventions (DELC), United Nations Environment Programme.
Remarks by Bakary Kante (UNEP) at the opening of the ordinary and extraordinary meetings of the conferences of the parties to the Basel, Rotterdam and Stockholm conventions, 28 April 2013, Geneva, Switzerland
Sunday, 28 April 2013, Geneva, Switzerland
Madame President Magdalena Balicka,
Mr. President Osvaldo Álvarez-Pérez,
Mr. President Franz Perriz,
Excellences, distinguished delegates,
Ladies and gentlemen,
It is a distinct honour to address you this morning on behalf of UNEP Executive Director Achim Steiner, on the occasion of the opening of this historic set of conferences of the parties to the Basel, Rotterdam and Stockholm conventions.
I am delighted to be here in Switzerland on the occasion of the second extraordinary meetings of the conferences of the parties to the Basel, Rotterdam and Stockholm conventions, the eleventh ordinary meeting of the Conference of the Parties to the Basel, Convention, the sixth ordinary meeting of the Conference of the Parties to the Rotterdam Convention, and the sixth ordinary meeting of the Conference of the Parties to the Stockholm Convention.
Madam and Mister Presidents, the Government and the people of Switzerland deserve our deep thanks for the warm welcome and hospitality afforded to delegates meeting here in the beautiful city of Geneva.
Mr. Steiner regrets that he could not be with you today. He very much looks forward to joining you next week to participate in the discussions of the high-level segment and closing session of these extraordinary meetings.
Ladies and gentlemen, distinguished delegates,
This marks a milestone in the development of these three legally autonomous agreements.
The manner in which the meetings are organized is but one indication of the innovative spirit which has flowed into chemicals and waste MEAs’ work, a process captured by the phrase, ‘sustainable synergies’.
Synergies mean much more than the organization of meetings, more than the combining of the secretariats of the three conventions into an integrated, comprehensive organization.
Synergies is the spirit in which work on implementation of the conventions is done, one that combines an approach for the sound management of chemicals and waste at all levels that responds in an effective, efficient, coherent and coordinated manner to new and emerging issues and challenges.
The synergies process among the Conventions constitutes the first international effort to streamline environmental governance and as such has been on the leading edge of efforts to harmonize and improve cooperation and coordination between MEAs.
It is a key part of the long-term effort to gear international environmental governance to the challenges of the 21st century.
I applaud your courage in taking the synergies process to the next, higher stage of development, one that breaks the mold and continues to recast the framework of global environmental governance.
Ladies and gentlemen, distinguished delegates,
The adoption of The Future We Want at Rio+20 and its endorsement by the UN General Assembly has reaffirmed the target, set in 2002 at the World Summit on Sustainable Development in Johannesburg, to by 2020 ensure that" chemicals are produced and used in ways that minimize significant adverse impacts on human health and the environment".At the Rio conference, Governments recognized the significant contributions to sustainable development made by the chemicals and wastes multilateral environmental agreements. In the year following the Rio+20 Conference, the world’s attention has been riveted on chemicals and waste management as never before.
The 3rd International Conference on Chemicals Management, meeting under UNEP’s auspices in Nairobi last September, agreed to take forward work on five emerging issues,including hazardous substances within the lifecycle of electronic products.
The publication of the first Global Chemicals Outlook and the Costs of Inaction report have demonstrated the unacceptable toll on human health the mismanagement of pesticides place on developing countries.
The agreement reached in Geneva last January on the future global instrument on Mercury was another major step toward securing The Future We Want.
The release of the State of Science of Endocrine Disrupting Chemicals 2012 and Summary for Decision-Makers at the UNEP Governing Council, and the adoption by that same body of a substantive decision on Chemicals and Waste Management, in February of this year, testified to the sobering challenges we face and the need to press ahead in the search for sustainable solutions to chemicals and waste management issues.
Ladies and gentlemen, distinguished delegates,
The conference agenda of Basel, Rotterdam and Stockholm conventions before you respond to these challenges.
To illustrate with but a few examples, the parties to the Basel Convention, will consider adoption of guidelines to address the environmentally sound management of electronic and electrical waste.
The parties to the Rotterdam Convention will consider proposals next week to add to the Convention’s Annex III pesticides and industrial chemicals to ensure informed actions can be taken to protect human health and the environment against their harmful effects.
And the parties to the Stockholm Convention will consider adding a widely used industrial chemical to the Convention’s Annex A, putting it on course for elimination from most applications.
Ladies and gentlemen, distinguished delegates,
As you move forward, UNEP may be counted upon as a close partner. With the strengthened mandate UNEP received following Rio+20 and the decision of the UN General Assembly to open UNEP up to universal membership, UNEP is now in an even better position to contribute to the success of the conventions.
UNEP and FAO have undertaken a review of the arrangements adopted pursuant to the “Synergies Decisions” on cooperation and coordination among the Basel, Rotterdam and Stockholm Conventions.
The report provides an assessment of the progress made towards the implementation of the synergies decisions with the objective of establishing how the synergies process has contributed to enhancing cooperation and coordination at all levels. It is our hope that the findings of the review will assist you in developing further synergies among your conventions.
Ladies and gentlemen, distinguished delegates,
We have moved the chemicals and waste agenda from a position of once relative isolation to centre stage on the development agenda. This is clearly where it belongs.
With your help, the conventions will remain on the centre stage until we deliver enduring, sustainable solutions for 2020 and beyond.
Thank you.
|
|
In a wide-ranging interview with Geneva International Cooperation, Executive Secretary Jim Willis speaks about the global impacts of the Basel, Rotterdam and Stockholm conventions, the “synergies process” and some key challenges facing management of chemicals and hazardous wastes today.
Geneva is the global centre of international chemicals and waste management work
In a wide-ranging interview with Geneva International Cooperation, Executive Secretary Jim Willis speaks about the global impacts of the Basel, Rotterdam and Stockholm conventions, the “synergies process” and some key challenges facing management of chemicals and hazardous wastes today.
|