review2-1.6

MEA News

Biosafety Protocol: Large Agenda, Little Time

Negotiators will meet for the fourth time in Montreal from 5-13 February to continue working towards a protocol on biosafety. The biosafety protocol is being negotiated in the context of the Convention on Biological Diversity (ratified by 169 governments). The mandate of the working group is to `develop a protocol on the safe transfer, handling and use of living modified organisms, specifically focusing on transboundary movements of any living modified organism that may have an adverse effect on biological diversity and human health, setting out appropriate procedures for advance informed agreement'. The negotiation process, started in July 1996, is expected to conclude in December 1998.

Delegates will attempt to streamline draft text reflecting the multiple options for protocol articles put forward by governments at the nego-tiating group's last meeting in October 1997 (see Bridges Vol. I, No. 5, p. 9). This will be a difficult task, as on many of the key issues propo-sals range from `no provision' to more than ten often conflicting options.

Among such key issues are the so-called Advance Informed Agreement (AIA) clauses, as well as risk assessment and management provisions. Heated discussion, barely begun as yet, is expected regarding liability and compensation, trade with non-Parties and illegal traffic. Most of these are also key components of the PIC Convention under construction (see below) as well as the Basel Convention's Liability Protocol (see cover story). Positions are polarised on the inclusion of socio-economic considerations in the protocol (generally supported by developing countries), as well as provisions dealing with non-discrimination in line with the WTO principles of most favoured nation treatment and national treatment.

The scope for international trade in biotechnology products is tremendous. The difficulty lies in effectively limiting risks and providing compensation for damage caused by cross-border movements of LMOs without hampering the growth of trade in biotechnology products. Countries with strong or nascent bio-technology industries tend in general to favour a `looser' agreement than those likely to be at the receiving end of biotechnology trade.

The fifth meeting of the Ad Hoc Working Group on Biosafety is tentatively scheduled from 29 June to 10 July in Montreal. The last negotiating session, to be followed by an adoption ceremony, is tentatively scheduled for early December 1998.

Contact: CBD Secretariat, tel: (1-514) 288-2220; fax: 288-6588; e-mail: chm@biodiv.org; Internet: http://www.biodiv.org

Nota bene: Please note that the special protocol on biodiversity benefit sharing, briefly described in Bridges Vol. 1 No. 6, was discussed in an informal forum co-organised by the UNEP Regional Office for Latin America and the Caribbean and the Colegio de Mexico. Its recommendations were not in any way adopted or endorsed by UNEP. The recommendations and the papers presented will be published by the co-sponsors later in the year .

Contact: Enrique Leff, UNEP/ROLAC, tel: (52-5) 202-4841; fax: (52-5) 202-0950; e-mail: Educamb@latino.rolac.unep.mx

New Round of Pesticide Negotiations

The fifth meeting of the intergovernmental negotiating committee preparing an international convention on the `prior informed consent' (PIC) procedure for trade in hazardous chemicals and pesticides, will take place in Brussels from 9-14 March (for a report of the previous negotiation round, see Bridges Vol. I, No. 5, p. 9).

The treaty would make the currently voluntary PIC procedure legally-binding. Under the procedure, in practice in 154 countries, exports of twenty-two hazardous chemicals and pesticides which are banned or severely restricted in a number of countries need to be notified in advance to authorities in importing countries. Participating countries must also notify their decisions to ban or severely restrict chemicals domestically (it should be noted that such substances often continue to be manufactured for export). The binding instrument in-the-making aims to clearly spell out the notification obligations of both exporters and importers, establish a liability regime and determine criteria for inclusion of chemicals or pesticides in the `PIC list'. The current list consists of 17 pesticides and five industrial chemicals, including PCBs, lindane, aldrin, dieldrin and other highly harmful pesticides such as monocrotophos and parathion. Shipments of these can only proceed once the importing country has indicated its `prior informed consent' to receiving them.

The negotiations will be closely watched both by those involved in the development of the Liability Protocol under the Basel Convention and those working on the Biosafety Protocol under the Convention on Biological Diversity. Many of the questions are the same: who is responsible for damage the exporter, the person(s) in charge when an accident happens, the importer or some combination of these? What is the responsibility of transit countries? What legislation to apply? Where will compensation come from? How much information must an exporter provide on the composition of its products?

After the March session, only one short meeting is envisaged in December for finalising the Convention, followed by a signing ceremony (exact dates are not yet available). The consolidated negotiating text for INC-5 is available from UNEP Chemicals as UNEP/FAO/PIC/INC.5/2 (see address at the end of the story below).

Beyond PIC: Eliminating POPs

Whereas the PIC treaty will require mandatory controls of dangerous pesticide and chemical shipments labelling, export notices, etc. the negotiations due to start next June on persistent organic pollutants (POPs) will aim at reducing and eliminating the production of the most hazardous and long-lasting pollutants. Some of these compounds such as PCBs, may persist in the environment for periods of years and may bioconcentrate by factors of up to 70,000 fold. POPs are noted for their long-range transport through the atmosphere: they have been measured on every continent, including remote regions such as open oceans and deserts, where no significant local sources exist.

The initial twelve substances on the POPs list are: DDT, aldrin, dieldrin, endrin, chlordane, heptachlor, mirex, hexacholorobenzene (HCB), toxaphene, dioxins, furans, and PCBs. Endosulfan and organotins both commonly used as pesticides in developing countries have been proposed for inclusion in the list. These subs-tances are often either banned or severely restricted in their countries of origin but continue to be manufactured in/shipped to developing countries by multinational chemical companies. Even where the governments of these countries ban or restrict the use of the pesticides, enforcement remains problematic and illegal traffic is widespread. The principal aim of the POPs convention would therefore be to phase out the production of the most dangerous compounds altogether.

The first session of the POPs negotiations is tentatively scheduled for 28 June to 3 July in Montreal and the second for 7-12 February 1999 in Geneva.

Contact: UNEP Chemicals (IRPTC), tel: (41-22) 979-9111, fax: (41-22) 797-3460, e-mail: IRTPC@unep.ch