Interview with Niek van der Graaff, Chief of FAO's Plant Protection Service, and Gerold Wyrwal, Agricultural Officer Pesticide Information
Van der Graaff: Countries have decided that they do not want certain pesticides any more. This has a great influence on their agriculture and also on protection of their environment. Certainly, the chemicals that have gone into the PIC procedure up to now are disappearing from international trade. Wyrwal: When we add a pesticide to the PIC list then, in many countries, it triggers an official ban to import and use. We issue a document that clearly highlights the hazards of the compound and indicates which country has already banned it. Obviously, if the United States or the European Union has banned the compound, then developing countries that cannot do the analysis will more or less follow the position taken by more developed countries and put a national ban on the compound. I think there's clear evidence that once we put a chemical on the list, after a while there are probably a hundred countries that refuse to accept further imports. What additional benefits can be expected when PIC becomes a legally binding instrument? Van der Graaff: The voluntary procedure has already led to a greater awareness that appropriate pesticide regulation and management is required. Developing countries hope that once the Convention is signed, it will help them to further strengthen the implementation of not only PIC but pesticide management in general in their countries. The voluntary procedure is a relatively simple procedure. But using this relatively easy but loose procedure, gradually we started to see a number of legal problems that needed to be addressed. It proved to be practically impossible to include a large group of chemicals, namely pesticides, that are hazardous under certain conditions of use in developing countries. In the new procedure governments will make the decisions about which chemicals go in the list of so-called PIC chemicals. Also, if governments bind themselves, they will also bind themselves not to export. So what was a moral obligation becomes a legally binding obligation. There are also some disadvantages. It will be difficult to add new pesticides to the list. The speed of the procedure will certainly decrease. What will such an instrument mean to the pesticide industry? Will it lead to a reduction in products, or a move towards more "environment friendly" products? Van der Graaff: On the one hand, the pesticide industry is unhappy that certain compounds may disappear from the market as one can assume, in general, that a pesticide that gets on the PIC list will largely disappear from international trade. But in the long term this is in the industry's interest, as it creates a market for new pesticides that are safer for human health and the environment. Wyrwal: It removes a number of old compounds from the market that are not protected by patents any more and are produced by anybody who wants to. Those compounds are broad spectrum and have very negative effects on human health and the environment. If they disappear from the market, then the market becomes free for other products that are more specific, more friendly to human health and to the environment. So in the long term, I believe, in the interest of the industry. Currently, the watchlist contains 22 pesticides and five industrial chemicals. Is this list likely to be expanded? Van der Graaff: In March or April there will be the adoption of the Convention, we hope, in a diplomatic conference. Up till that day we can include further pesticides and industrial chemicals. However, the closer we come to that date the more difficult it becomes. We are prudent and not very keen on adding very much at this moment, as this may influence the negotiations. One should also realize that the Convention will probably not come into force for another two years. At the next meeting of the InterGovernmental Negotiating Committee, a working group will look into how the voluntary procedure can continue in the meantime. We have asked the FAO Conference to approve any changes to be made to the procedure at the diplomatic conference. What sanctions will be imposed on countries not complying? Van der Graaff: No sanctions are foreseen at the moment. Developing countries have requested technical support in implementing the legally binding convention. What form will this take? Van der Graaff: It will support strengthening regulatory infrastructure, so that countries can evaluate the information produced by the Secretariat and the countries that have banned or severely restricted the material. Only if they have this ability can they make informed decisions. Wyrwal: There is a technical assistance clause in the Convention which says that countries that have a better developed infrastructure should help countries with less well developed infrastructures. There is, of course, scope for developing countries to assist each other, but a lot of the assistance will come from OECD developed countries. FAO's Technical Cooperation Programme (TCP) would be a good vehicle for this type of assistance because it's relatively short term. What was the Conference's response to progress made so far under the PIC procedure? Wyrwal: They were very happy with the progress made. They supported FAO's participation in the future interim and the Convention Secretariat, and will allow changes in the voluntary procedure if so decided by the diplomatic conference. Related links | ||||
