<http://www.iisd.ca/>   Earth Negotiations Bulletin

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .     
 A Reporting Service for Environment and Development Negotiations

 

PDF Format
 Spanish Version
French Version
IISD RS
web coverage <http://www.iisd.ca/chemical/pops/cop3/> 
 <http://www.iisd.ca/download/pdf/enb15153e.pdf> 
 <http://www.iisd.ca/vol15/enb15153s.html> 
 <http://www.iisd.ca/vol15/enb15153f.html> 


Published by the International Institute for Sustainable Development
(IISD) <http://iisd.ca> 

 

Vol. 15 No. 153
Friday, 4 May 2007

POPS COP-3 HIGHLIGHTS: 

THURSDAY, 3 MAY 2007

The Committee of the Whole (COW) met throughout the day to: hear reports
of the budget, technical assistance, non-compliance and effectiveness
evaluation contact groups; and to discuss national implementation plans
(NIPs), synergies, POPs wastes and information exchange. The COW also
considered draft decisions on, inter alia: revised process for the
review of entries in the register of specific exemptions; guidelines on
best available techniques (BAT) and draft guidance on best environmental
practices (BEP); standardized toolkit for identification and
quantification of releases; reporting; and DDT.

The contact groups on technical assistance and the budget met throughout
the day and evening. Informal consultations were held on non-compliance
and POPs wastes. A Friends of the Non-Compliance Contact Group Chair met
in the evening to resolve outstanding issues. 

COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE

CONTACT GROUP REPORTS: Budget Co-Chair John Roberts summarized his
group's work and noted that participants would address substantive
issues such as the budget's size and distribution. 

Technical Assistance Co-Chair Angelina Madete reported the group's
progress on the selection process of regional centers and underscored
bracketed texts remained on centers' location and work plan. She noted
the group was yet to begin working on financial resource issues. CHINA
stressed the importance of starting discussions on financial resource
issues as soon as possible.

Non-Compliance Chair Anne Daniel reported that the group agreed she
would conduct informal bilateral consultations throughout Thursday and
that a Friends of the Chair meeting would convene Thursday evening on
outstanding issues. 

Effectiveness Evaluation Co-Chair Ivan Holoubek noted agreement on a
draft decision, including: the amended global monitoring plan (GMP); the
amended implementation plan; GMP report; establishment of regional
organization groups and their duties; and the establishment of a
coordination group.

 NIPs: The EU encouraged parties to finalize their NIPs and to clearly
identify national priorities in order to explore synergies with other
international chemical regimes such as SAICM, and supported using the
draft guidance on socioeconomic assessment for implementing NIPs in a
flexible manner. MALI requested a faster and simpler financial procedure
for NIPs. CAMBODIA urged the Secretariat to continue providing technical
assistance. Noting that the great majority of parties did not use the
socioeconomic guidance when elaborating NIPs, BRAZIL underscored the
need for capacity building. DJIBOUTI highlighted the need for financial
resources to comply with Convention obligations. 

ARGENTINA, TONGA, BENIN, TURKEY and TAJIKISTAN reported completion and
submission of their countries' NIPs. UGANDA noted that his country has
not yet completed the NIP due to lack of experience and capacity. 

GRULAC noted that GRULAC countries are not able to fulfill the
requirement of reporting within the timeframe set forth in
UNEP/POPS/COP.3/21
<http://www.pops.int/documents/meetings/cop_3/meetingdocs/cop3_21/21-K07
60636%20POPS-COPS3.pdf>  because it was not available early enough to do
so, and requested it be translated into the UN languages. TURKEY
explained his country's activities to implement the Convention,
including: testing POPs concentration in human blood; organizing
training programmes on PCBs; conducting inventories; and developing
regulations. 

The ROTTERDAM CONVENTION SECRETARIAT highlighted the importance of
synergies among the chemical and waste conventions in elaborating NIPs.
He emphasized that revision of the NIP guidance document should take
into account the linkages of the three chemical-related conventions. The
US supported developing the guidance document on socioeconomic cost
assessment, but encouraged peer-reviewed cost-benefit models. COW Chair
Blaha asked countries to complete their NIPs as soon as possible, and
requested the Secretariat prepare a draft decision on the issue.

SYNERGIES :  The Secretariat provided a brief summary of the first
meeting of the Ad Hoc Joint Working Group on Enhancing Cooperation and
Coordination Between the Stockholm, Basel and Rotterdam Conventions
(UNEP/FAO/CHW/RC/POPS/JWG.1/4
<http://www.pops.int/documents/meetings/cop_3/meetingdocs/ahjwg1_rep/K07
61122%20AHJWG1%20report.pdf> ). Working Group Co-Chair Kerstin
Stendahl-Rechardt (Finland) noted that the Group identified activities
already underway, future activities, and activities regarding decision
making and oversight. The EU, INDIA, SWITZERLAND, the AFRICAN GROUP,
SUDAN, GRULAC, FINLAND, JAPAN and JORDAN stressed the importance of
synergies. NORWAY, the AFRICAN GROUP, KIRIBATI and GRULAC supported
integrating Basel regional centers and Stockholm regional centers to
promote practical synergies at the regional level. JAPAN and SWITZERLAND
inquired about the cost of convening a second meeting of the Ad Hoc
Joint Working Group (AHJWG). The US supported cost-saving synergies as
opposed to substantive and institutional consolidation synergies. IPEN
highlighted the closed nature of AHJWG and need for stakeholder
involvement in future meetings.

POPS WASTES: The Secretariat reported on guidelines relating to POPs
wastes adopted by the COP to the Basel Convention (UNEP/POPS/COP.3/9).
The EU drew attention to a draft prepared with SWITZERLAND
(UNEP/POPS/COP.3/CRP.8) that further incorporated linkages with the
Basel Convention. JAPAN supported the draft, whilst GRULAC and the
AFRICAN GROUP requested more time to consider it. Supporting the
EU-Switzerland proposal, Togo stressed the importance of integration
between the conventions. Norway proposed modifications to the
EU-Switzerland text and suggested a working group revise it, but Canada,
CHINA and INDIA favored the Secretariat draft. INDIA and ARGENTINA
proposed creating an intersessional working group. IPEN and the
International trade union confederation expressed concern over the
chemical concentrations in both drafts, stressed they pose health risks
and that many developing countries classify lower concentration of POPs
as hazardous.

COW Chair Blaha established an informal group on POPs wastes, and
requested the main actors consult, reach a compromise on the
controversial issues and report the results to the COW. The group met in
the afternoon and Jane Stratford (UK) reported back to COW that the
group valued the Basel guidelines but could not reach agreement on the
drafts.

INFORMATION EXCHANGE: The EU expressed hesitance about establishing a
clearing-house mechanism on POPs and taking a decision that may
jeopardize the effectiveness of the AHJWG work. However, he said the EU
supported a decision taking into account the above. COW Chair Blaha
asked the Secretariat to prepare a draft decision. 

CONSIDERATION OF THE DRAFT DECISIONS: Revised process for the review of
entries in the register of specific exemptions: Regarding the bracketed
text in the annex to the draft decision on UNEP/POPS/COP.3/CRP.5, JAPAN
and CANADA questioned the appropriateness of tasking the Secretariat
with developing a recommendation on extension of exemptions, and
proposed giving POPRC the task instead. Delegates agreed to alter
language to request the Secretariat "prepare a report," and COP-4 will
make a "sunset" review of this task. The COW agreed on the draft
decision as amended. 

Evaluation of the continued need for the procedure under paragraph (b)
of Article 3: The COW agreed to forward the draft decision
(UNEP/POPS/COP.3/CRP.6) without amendment. 

Guidelines on BAT and draft guidance on BEP: On the draft decision
UNEP/POPS/COP.3/CRP.10, the EU suggested deleting text referring to the
GEF, preferring that all GEF-related items be compiled in a single
decision. MOROCCO, supported by CHINA, emphasized the importance of
referring to the GEF.  COW Chair Blaha suggested, and the COW agreed, to
put a footnote in the draft decision stating that the text would be
moved to the draft decision on the GEF. With this change, the COW agreed
on the draft decision. 

Standardized Toolkit: : COW Chair Blaha presented the draft decision on
guidelines on the standardized toolkit for identification and
quantification of releases (UNEP/POPS/COP.3/CRP.9). BRAZIL welcomed the
draft decision but underlined the need to review and update the section
on dioxins and furans. The COW agreed to the draft decision with minor
amendments.

Listing chemicals in Annexes A, B or C of the Convention: COW Chair
Blaha presented the draft decision on listing chemicals in Annexes A, B
or C of the Convention (UNEP/POPS/COP.3/CRP.14). INDIA stressed the need
to disclose information on production. COW Chair Blaha said that these
concerns would be noted in the meeting report and proposed, and COW
agreed, to send the draft decision to plenary.

Reporting: COW Chair Blaha presented UNEP/POPS/COP.3/CRP.15 on reporting
to which the COW agreed. 

DDT: COW Chair Blaha presented draft decision UNEP/POPS/COP.3/CRP.7 on
DDT. The EU proposed additional language including collaboration with
the WHO. INDIA proposed several changes, including the need to give
further importance to countries in malaria regions when nominating
experts. As no agreement was reached, COW Chair Blaha requested the
Secretariat prepare another draft decision to be considered by plenary. 

CONTACT GROUPS

BUDGET: The Secretariat presented a revised draft decision on the
2008-2009 financing and budget. Several participants asked the
Secretariat to improve the budget format regarding synergies to ensure
parties know the expenditure of each convention for cooperative
activities. Many participants also requested the Secretariat look into
UN best practices on budgeting and strategic indicators. Negotiations
were expected to continue until 11:00 pm.

TECHNICAL ASSISTANCE: Co-Chair Jozef Buys explained the technical
assistance group agreed to draft decisions on: the MoU between the COP
and the GEF Council; resource mobilization in the financial issues
package; and guidance relating to the technical assistance package. The
group was expected to work through the night on draft decisions related
to: ToRs for the second review; needs assessments; regional centers; and
additional guidance on financial resources. 

IN THE CORRIDORS 

Delegates entered the congress center on the fourth day of negotiations
looking slightly tired after another evening of contact groups. Some
speculated that because financial issues will be addressed by the
technical assistance group, it may act as a "carrot" to hasten agreement
on regional centers. As rumors circulated, others doubted it, saying
that conference organizers had booked returning buses to nearby hotels
up until 4:00 am. In the COW, some participants were surprised by one
country's seemingly random reference to "ducks and nuts," others
wondered if the expression was a code for some secret message!

ENB SUMMARY AND ANALYSIS: The Earth Negotiations Bulletin summary and
analysis of COP-3 will be available on Monday, 7 May 2007, online at:
http://www.iisd.ca/chemical/pops/cop3/

This issue of the Earth Negotiations Bulletin (c) <[EMAIL PROTECTED]
<mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > is written and edited by Karen Alvarenga, Ph.D.,
Melanie Ashton, Sikina Jinnah, Olivia Pasini and Kunbao Xia. The Digital
Editor is Joe Nyangon. The Editors are Pia M. Kohler, Ph.D.
<[EMAIL PROTECTED] <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > and Pamela S. Chasek, Ph.D.
<[EMAIL PROTECTED] <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]> >. The Director of IISD Reporting
Services is Langston James "Kimo" Goree VI <[EMAIL PROTECTED]
<mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]> >. The Sustaining Donors of the Bulletin are the
United Kingdom (through the Department for International Development -
DFID), the Government of the United States of America (through the
Department of State Bureau of Oceans and International Environmental and
Scientific Affairs), the Government of Canada (through CIDA), the Danish
Ministry of Foreign Affairs, the Government of Germany (through the
German Federal Ministry of Environment - BMU, and the German Federal
Ministry of Development Cooperation - BMZ), the Netherlands Ministry of
Foreign Affairs, the European Commission (DG-ENV) and the Italian
Ministry for the Environment and Territory General Directorate for
Nature Protection. General Support for the Bulletin during 2007 is
provided by the Swiss Federal Office for the Environment (FOEN), the
Norwegian Ministry of Foreign Affairs and the Ministry of Environment,
the Government of Australia, the Austrian Federal Ministry for the
Environment, the Ministry of Environment of Sweden, the New Zealand
Ministry of Foreign Affairs and Trade, SWAN International, the Japanese
Ministry of Environment (through the Institute for Global Environmental
Strategies - IGES) and the Japanese Ministry of Economy, Trade and
Industry (through the Global Industrial and Social Progress Research
Institute - GISPRI). Funding for translation of the Earth Negotiations
Bulletin into French has been provided by the International Organization
of the Francophonie (IOF) and the French Ministry of Foreign Affairs.
Funding for the translation of the Earth Negotiations Bulletin into
Spanish has been provided by the Ministry of Environment of Spain. The
opinions expressed in the Earth Negotiations Bulletin are those of the
authors and do not necessarily reflect the views of IISD or other
donors. Excerpts from the Earth Negotiations Bulletin may be used in
non-commercial publications with appropriate academic citation. For
information on the Bulletin, including requests to provide reporting
services, contact the Director of IISD Reporting Services at
<[EMAIL PROTECTED] <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]> >, +1-646-536-7556 or 212 East
47th St. #21F, New York, NY 10017, USA. The ENB Team at POPs COP-3 can
be contacted by e-mail at <[EMAIL PROTECTED] <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]> >.

You are currently subscribed to enb as: [EMAIL PROTECTED] 
To unsubscribe send a blank email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
- Subscribe to IISD Reporting Services' free newsletters and lists for 
environment and sustainable development policy professionals at 
http://www.iisd.ca/email/subscribe.htm

Reply via email to