industry and environment - DTIE

More documents

Recommendations

Info

Chemicals management chain. In this respect, the development of a global strategy provides an opportunity to build a new partnership approach to chemical safety. A high level of cooperation on global chemical issues has already been achieved between producers and governments, notably in the Rotterdam and Stockholm Conventions and the High Production Volume (HPV) Chemicals Initiative of the International Council of Chemical Associations (ICCA). 10 Further enhancement of cooperation among all stakeholders is needed in order to bridge the gap in chemicals management between developed and developing countries, as one of the key goals of the strategy. It is important in this context to note that the UNEP GC/GMEF recently decided that there is a need to prepare an intergovernmental strategic plan for technology support and capacity building. 11 Governments, NGOs and industry are involved in a political process aimed at developing a strategic framework that consists of principles, elements and concrete measures concerned with safe production, use and disposal of chemicals and chemical products across the product chain at the global level. This strategy, which will be embedded in the overall issue of sustainable consumption and production, will contribute to sustainable development. It should be recognized that not only will the strategy have impacts on the chemical industry’s business, but it will also have much broader consequences affecting other industries, our customers and (directly or indirectly) the final consumer. These impacts may be social or environmental as well as economic in nature. Development of the strategy will clearly be influenced by national/regional chemical policies, trade and economic aspects, environmental and health policies, agriculture and industry policy, and (in principle) countries’ general public policy. Opportunities The chemical industry sees the strategic approach as an excellent opportunity to improve public confidence in the safe and environmentally sound management of chemicals, and to further promote the benefits of chemistry to the global society. From the chemical industry perspective, it is key that the strategy provides the means to bridge the gap in chemicals management between developed and developing countries. It is a prerequisite that chemicals policy will become a building block of a more general public policy. The strategy should build on the obligations and responsibilities for safe use of chemicals that are shared by producers, distributors, users and governments and are obtained as a result of a new partnership approach towards chemical safety. This approach should involve all stakeholders (particularly governments, business and representatives of civil society), keeping in mind the need to reduce or eliminate the differences between developed and developing countries as agreed at the WSSD. Capacity building (in the sense of building infrastructure, and promoting and supporting education and training for using cleaner technologies and handling chemicals safely) should therefore be a key element of this strategy. A global strategy should be integrative. To ensure efficiency, consistency and coherence in the basic concepts required for regulatory approaches, it should provide mechanisms for the improvement of internal and external coordination at the governmental and intergovernmental levels. It should also enhance synergies and cooperation among relevant international and regional treaties, secretariats and agencies. SAICM could provide the opportunity to remove trade barriers, so as to reduce and (further) avoid unnecessary costs and bureaucracy, streamline regulatory approaches, promote voluntary activities, and provide public access to information on the safe management of chemicals and processes, while protecting legitimate corporate interests in technical or commercial information. The strategy should encourage the development of efficient and transparent mechanisms and a policy framework for sharing best practices among companies in the global product chain, as well as among governments. It should provide the means to eliminate unnecessary barriers to innovation, and to set up conditions to ensure that industry can share best practices and use cleaner and (whenever possible) best available technologies and innovative products for the benefit of the global society. The strategy should be the basis for a consistent global approach, to be implemented regionally and/or nationally in ways that support innovation, avoid duplication, and maximize sharing of knowledge and the use of synergies. Implementation in specific regions and countries should consider the differences in national or regional regulatory approaches and in societal, economic and political conditions. In line with this vision, the chemical industry has actively contributed (with governments and other stakeholders) to the development of regulations and is publicly engaged in providing its technical expertise to ensure better chemicals management at the local level. Risks However, there are also threats on the horizon. This strategy framework could be the basis for additional, even more stringent, legally binding regulatory approaches at the national, regional or international levels, which would not always contribute to more effective chemical safety. Differences in societal, economic, cultural and political conditions at the national/regional level may lead to greater divergence in the implementation of regulatory systems, resulting in contradictory measures. This would widen even further the gap between developed and developing countries in terms of safe chemicals management and have a negative impact in respect to WTO free trade rules. Taking into account the importance of the chemical business globally, the consequences could affect the living conditions of large populations, notably those most in need. It is also obvious that the call for a life-cycle assessment approach and its implementation will impact on downstream users of chemicals, especially small and medium-sized enterprises. These businesses, whether they are located in developed or developing countries, are generally not well prepared technically or economically to respond to complex demands such as those related to lifecycle assessments. Last but not least, regulatory approaches based on this strategy could have an impact on the innovation and competitiveness of the chemical industry and other industry sectors if unbalanced or one-sided regulations come into force, imposing unnecessary obstacles along the value chain. Conclusion Despite the present lack of a clear picture in respect to SAICM, the global chemical industry perceives in this process a chance for a balanced outcome, levering the need for command and control systems with a sound, flexible and practical strategic approach that will promote and support industry’s stewardship of chemicals, and one that is aimed at more regulatory efficiency, integration, coherence and consistency, less bureaucracy, and the strengthening of industry voluntary activities and cooperation among all stakeholders in a new partnership. Implementation of the Globally Harmonized System of Classification and Labelling (GHS) 12 is a good example of an active contribution to capacity building by the chemical industry, jointly with governments and intergovernmental organizations (e.g. UNITAR 13 ), and a step forward towards chemical safety globally. Notes 1. www.basel.int. 2. www.pops.int. 3. www.pic.int. 4. www.unep.org/governingbodies/governingcouncil_seventh.asp; www.chem.unep.ch/saicm. 5. www.who.int/ifcs/Documents/ Forum/ ForumIII/f3-finrepdoc/Bahia.pdf. 6. www.unep.org/GC/GC22. 7. www.chem.unep.ch/saicm/prepcom1. 8. www.chem.unep.ch/saicm/prepcom2. 9. www.un.org/esa/sustdev/documents/ WSSD_ POI_PD/English/WSSD_PlanImpl. pdf. 10. www.icca-chem.org/section02b.html. 11. www.unep.org/DPDL/cso/Documents/ K0471247_decision_SS-VIII-1.doc. 12. www.unece.org/trans/danger/publi/ghs/ officialtext.html. 13. http://www.unitar.org/cwm/pag/ghstrain. html. ◆ 8 ◆ UNEP Industry and Environment April – September 2004
Chemicals management The Rotterdam Convention: why is it here and what is it trying to achieve? William Murray, Programme Officer, Rotterdam Convention Secretariat,Plant Protection Service, Plant Production and Protection Division, FAO, Viale delle Terme di Caracalla, 00100 Rome, Italy (pic@fao.org) Sheila Logan, Scientific Affairs Officer, Rotterdam Convention Secretariat, UNEP Chemicals, 11-13 Chemin des Anémones, CH-1219 Châtelaine, Geneva, Switzerland (pic@unep.ch) The 20 th century saw a dramatic increase in the use of a range of synthetic chemicals, particularly in manufacturing industries and in agriculture. Many of these chemicals were later shown to have a range of undesirable characteristics, including persistence in the environment, a tendency to biomagnify in the food chain, and negative effects on the environment. Some chemicals were also shown to cause cancer or birth defects. Others were very hazardous even after a very limited exposure. In the 1970s and 1980s there were concerns that actions taken in some countries to ban or restrict the use of certain chemicals for effects such as these could result in the chemicals being exported to other countries where regulatory systems, infrastructure and resources were sometimes not adequate to manage their risks. In response to these concerns, the FAO developed the voluntary International Code of Conduct on the Distribution and Use of Pesticides (the Code). The Code was adopted in 1985. It was amended in 1989 and again in November 2001 to reflect changing trends in pest and pesticide management. In parallel with these initiatives, UNEP developed the London Guidelines for the Exchange of Information on Chemicals in International Trade to assist countries in managing risks associated with industrial chemicals. Both the FAO Code of Conduct and the London Guidelines were amended in 1989 to address issues related to the export of chemicals (including pesticides) from a country that had banned these chemicals. At that time, the governing bodies of FAO and UNEP agreed to work cooperatively. In 1992 they implemented a joint programme on the Prior Informed Consent (PIC) Procedure. The United Nations Conference on Environment and Development (UNCED) recommended in 1992 that the PIC procedure be further developed into a legally binding instrument by 2000 (Agenda 21, Chapter 19, paragraph 19.39d). Following this recommendation, the FAO Council and the Governing Council of UNEP authorized the convening of an Intergovernmental Negotiating Committee (INC). Its mandate was to prepare an international legally binding instrument for the application of the PIC procedure to certain hazardous chemicals and pesticides in international trade. Commencing in March 1996, UNEP and FAO convened five meetings of the Intergovernmental Negotiating Committee. Governments, intergovernmental organizations and NGOs attended the negotiating sessions. The fifth and final negotiating session was held in Brussels, Belgium, on 9-14 March 1998. The text of the Rotterdam Convention on the Prior Informed Consent Procedure for Certain Hazardous Chemicals and Pesticides in International Trade was adopted on 10 September 1998 in Rotterdam, The Netherlands. This was two years ahead of the target set by UNCED. In recognition of the importance of the Convention, it was agreed by the Conference of Plenipotentiaries that the voluntary PIC procedure should continue to operate pending the entry into force of the Convention. The Conference therefore adopted a resolution on interim arrangements to bring the original PIC procedure into line with the provisions in the Convention. The Convention entered into force on 24 February 2004. The first meeting of the Conference of the Parties (CoP) was convened for September 2004. The Convention’s two main provisions: information exchange and the PIC procedure The overall objective of the Convention is to promote shared responsibility and cooperative efforts among Parties with respect to the international trade of certain hazardous chemicals, in order to protect human health and the environment from potential harm and to contribute to environmentally sound use of these chemicals. There are two key provisions: information exchange and the PIC procedure. Information exchange applies to any chemical banned or severely restricted by a Party. The PIC procedure applies to chemicals listed in Annex III of the Convention. For these chemicals, countries are invited to take an informed decision regarding their future import. Exporting Parties are obliged to respect these decisions. The Rotterdam Convention is not designed to ban or eliminate the use of chemicals at the international level, but rather to provide countries with a means to assess the risks associated with included chemicals and make an informed decision about whether they will allow future imports of chemicals subject to the PIC procedure and therefore listed in Annex III of the Convention. At present, 27 chemicals are listed in Annex III of the Convention. These are both pesticides and industrial chemicals. Chemicals can be subject to the PIC procedure and listed in Annex III following their ban or severe restriction in two countries from two regions, or on the basis of advice from a developing country that a specific formulation is causing health or environmental problems under normal conditions of use within that country. During the interim arrangements mentioned above, a further 11 chemicals were identified, with another four chemicals scheduled to be considered at the last meeting of the Intergovernmental Negotiating Committee in September 2004. The first meeting of the CoP will decide whether these chemicals (which it was agreed would be made subject to the interim PIC procedure) should be added to Annex III of the Convention. The recommendation to include these chemicals in the interim PIC procedure was based on a review by the Interim Chemical Review Committee, a subsidiary body of the Intergovernmental Negotiating Committee. The Interim Chemical Review Committee examined chemicals if at least two notifications of final regulatory actions to ban or severely restrict them had been received from at least two regions. The Committee looked at the notifications and determined whether they met the Convention’s criteria for listing. Where this was the case, the Committee started to prepare a decision guidance document. In a number of cases the notifications did not meet the criteria set out in Annex II (which contains criteria for consideration by the Chemical Review Committee), often because one or both of the notifications had not been based on a risk evaluation. In these cases, the Interim Chemical Review Committee recommended that the chemical not be included at this stage. To facilitate its work, the Interim Chemical Review Committee also prepared a range of policy and guidance documents that clarified how the work of the Committee had been carried out, with the aim of ensuring consistency and establishing a basis for future similar decisions. They also oversaw the development of a guidance document and forms for indicating health or environmental problems with severely hazardous pesticides. In addition, they developed guidance for groups developing decision guidance documents to ensure consistent content and formatting. The INC has facilitated a series of workshops held around the world, primarily to train designated national authorities in the working of the Convention. These workshops have been organized by the secretariat on a regional or sub-regional basis. Eight regional training workshops have been held for Latin America and the Caribbean (English-speaking countries) in May 2002; Africa (French-speaking countries) in June 2002; the Near East in October 2002; Central and Eastern Europe in November 2002; Africa (English-speaking countries) in February 2003; the South- West Pacific in September 2003; Latin America and the Caribbean continued on page 10 ☞ UNEP Industry and Environment April – September 2004 ◆ 9
Page 1 and 2: UNEP ISSN 0378-9993 Industry and En
Page 3 and 4: E d i t o r i a l Balancing the ben
Page 5 and 6: Chemicals management priority basis
Page 7: Chemicals management Global strateg
Page 11 and 12: Chemicals management Chemicals subj
Page 13 and 14: Chemicals management Figure 2 Test
Page 15 and 16: Chemicals management substances wit
Page 17 and 18: Chemicals management they may migra
Page 19 and 20: Chemicals management Integrated che
Page 21 and 22: Chemicals management ◆ supporting
Page 23 and 24: Chemicals management The Montreal P
Page 25 and 26: Chemicals management Softening the
Page 27 and 28: The future of pesticide use in worl
Page 29 and 30: Chemicals management The first Dani
Page 31 and 32: Chemicals management ferred easily
Page 33 and 34: Effects of an environmental tax on
Page 35 and 36: Chemicals management the prices of
Page 37 and 38: Chemicals management The Africa Sto
Page 39 and 40: Chemicals management The evolution
Page 41 and 42: Chemicals management potential, how
Page 43 and 44: Chemicals management Cleaner produc
Page 45 and 46: Chemicals management gases such as
Page 47 and 48: Chemicals management Implementation
Page 49 and 50: Chemicals management Aliphatic comp
Page 51 and 52: Chemicals management its recovery);
Page 53 and 54: Chemicals management Figure 1 Drum-
Page 55 and 56: Chemicals management Annual energy
Page 57 and 58: Chemicals management GREENPEACE/MOR
Page 59 and 60:
Chemicals management the dirtier op
Page 61 and 62:
Chemicals management and cleaning o
Page 63 and 64:
Chemicals management Achievements o
Page 65 and 66:
Chemicals management Transparency a
Page 67 and 68:
Chemicals management Communication
Page 69 and 70:
Other topics promoting and establis
Page 71 and 72:
Other topics Training courses The C
Page 73 and 74:
Other topics 4. Identification of I
Page 75 and 76:
Other topics Technical consideratio
Page 77 and 78:
N e w s plagued industrialized coun
Page 79 and 80:
N e w s ered paper to make their pr
Page 81 and 82:
N e w s Saving the world’s seas a
Page 83 and 84:
N e w s Measuring Your Company’s
Page 85 and 86:
N e w s Responsible Care Canadian C
Page 87 and 88:
THE UNEP DIVISION OF TECHNOLOGY, IN
show all

industry and environment - DTIE

Create successful ePaper yourself

Delete template?

Save as template?