Prevention of accumulation of obsolete pesticides is often closely integrated into other processes related to general pesticide management. Many of the organizational activities that help to prevent accumulation have already been referred to, and are summarized below.
FAO supports agricultural production that reduces reliance on pesticides as far as possible through the implementation of IPM. This is promoted through FAO's own programmes as well as through the Global IPM Facility in which FAO is a partner with the World Bank, UNEP and UNDP, with financial support from the governments and people of the Netherlands, Norway, Switzerland, the United Kingdom and the United States.
In acknowledging that pesticides are still widely used, FAO has issued and is currently updating the International Code of Conduct on the Distribution and Use of Pesticides. In addition, the Organization works to improve pesticide regulation and management in developing countries. Many other FAO publications support better pesticide management and contribute to the prevention of accumulation. Among these are specific guidelines on the prevention of accumulation of obsolete pesticides (FAO, 1995b).
UNEP Chemicals works extensively to promote better management of chemicals in all sectors. Often this is done in collaboration with other organizations having expertise in specific areas of chemical production, use and management. In the case of pesticides this would normally be FAO for agricultural products, and WHO for health-related products.
The POPs process aims to stop the production and use of specific chemicals, most of which are pesticides. Where these have residual ongoing uses, UNEP is working to help find alternatives to these chemicals. Where possible such alternatives are based on integrated pest control techniques (IPM, IVM), non-chemical controls or least hazardous pesticides.
The OECD Pesticides Working Group generates guidance and policy, and creates opportunities for information and experience sharing on matters relating to pesticide regulation. Better pesticide regulation and management result in less obsolescence and, while the group primarily responds to the needs of OECD countries, many of its outputs are relevant for use in developing countries and economies in transition.
The OECD-DAC Guidelines on Pest and Pesticide Management advocate donor support for IPM as a development strategy, as well as strengthening pesticide management capacity in developing countries. In addition, the guidelines call for better donor coordination to avoid oversupply of pesticides and the accumulation of obsolete stocks, and positive donor response to recipient country-led initiatives such as disposal of obsolete pesticides.
In order to prevent accumulation of obsolete pesticides, WHO works to raise awareness among regulatory authorities and helps to ensure that good regulatory and management systems for health sector pesticides are in place. WHO wants better coordination among different national authorities including import authorities. For the purposes of better pesticide regulation and management, WHO and FAO have been requested to consider the preparation of an instruction manual on the use of OECD data for pesticide registration and re-registration.
To minimize pesticide use, WHO has developed and offers training in the use of prediction tools for pest outbreaks and integrated control methods, which reduce the need for emergency responses that rely on high chemical inputs. In addition, WHO is researching alternatives to DDT in malaria vector control.
However, it should be noted that, despite these efforts, WHO continues to recommend the use of chemical pesticides for the control of many disease vectors because of the lack of viable alternatives. Such pesticides are frequently supplied in bulk to countries and health authorities that have weak regulatory regimes and control mechanisms. The pesticides can then become obsolete and be diverted from their intended uses, thereby causing serious health and environmental problems in their own right.
UNIDO is supporting cleaner and safer pesticide production with moves towards less hazardous products based on botanical or biological agents. Wider use of these products will result in reductions in the imported chemicals that contribute to obsolete pesticide stockpiles. Helping pesticide producers in countries that do not belong to OECD to adhere more closely to the International Code of Conduct on the Distribution and Use of Pesticides will also help reduce obsolescence through basic improvements such as good and secure labelling, more robust packaging and higher quality products.
UNITAR's support to the production of national profiles on chemical management and subsequent action plans based on full stakeholder participation is helping to improve chemical management in developing countries. Ultimately this will lead to reduced obsolescence of pesticides, as well as other chemicals.
SBC is concerned with the generation and handling of hazardous waste. Prevention of further accumulation of obsolete pesticide stocks is a concern, and SBC is keen to support or facilitate prevention. While the majority of SBC expertise is in the management of waste, it sees a role in supporting the development of strategies that could keep future problems under control. For example, developing solutions for the ongoing management of pesticide containers and small amounts of pesticide waste is within the remit of SBC and would help to prevent the accumulation of stockpiles.
To a considerable extent, bulk donations of pesticides are a thing of the past. Most aid agencies have now adopted strategies that avoid the procurement of bulk quantities of pesticides and instead support IPM and the transition to a market economy. However, some donor strategies designed to help developing countries produce food and deal with pest outbreaks unwittingly contribute to the oversupply of pesticides, and in some instances to the accumulation of new stocks of obsolete pesticides.
Some donor institutions play contradictory roles. For example, while the EC has a policy of promoting IPM and better pesticide management (CEC, 1998), and funds these activities with a portion of its budget, it also has programmes that support or encourage intensive pesticide use by continuing to fund bulk pesticide purchases (Dinham, 2000). The French Government does not seem to procure pesticides for development programmes, but the French International Cooperation Centre on Agrarian Research for Development (CIRAD) recommends their extensive use (Ton et al., 2000).
There are a vast number of donor agencies operating in developing countries. The activities of the larger and more prominent donors tend to be more noticeable, but the role of smaller donors should not be ignored. It may be useful to carry out a survey of donors and their activities and how they comply with the OECD-DAC Guidelines on pest and pesticide management.
The World Bank has established a binding safeguard policy on pest management which stipulates that its financed projects involving pest management follow an IPM approach. Furthermore, the policy provides criteria for the selection of pesticides. The policy itself does not pay specific attention to the prevention of obsolete pesticides, but this issue will be specifically addressed in a guidebook that is currently under preparation and aims to assist World Bank staff with implementation of the safeguard policy on pest management.
The World Bank is a funding partner of the Global IPM Facility, which promotes agricultural production systems that minimize or eliminate their reliance on chemical pesticides.
Nevertheless, the World Bank also continues to provide loans for the procurement of pesticides and employs pesticide industry staff who develop strategies that promote pesticide sales.
GCPF supports the transition from state-controlled pesticide procurement to a market-driven system. This tends to lead to pesticides being imported in quantities, container sizes and formulations that will be bought and used by the local population, without wastage. This results in less obsolescence. However, there is also evidence that private traders are reluctant to declare obsolete stocks of pesticides for fear of being punished.
GCPF also extends training to its distributors to ensure best practice in storage and handling, and appropriate stewardship of products. These practices contribute to reduced obsolescence.
GCPF companies and regional trade organizations support some container collection schemes that will reduce the number of containers accumulating and needing disposal, and will ensure safe handling of those containers collected.
However, not all pesticide trade and use in developing countries, even from GCPF companies, can be said to adhere fully to the requirements of the International Code of Conduct on the Distribution and Use of Pesticides. The second questionnaire on implementation of the code shows significant weaknesses in industry compliance with articles of the code relating to its activities (e.g. Article 8: Distribution and Trade; Article 10: Labelling, Packaging, Storage and Disposal) (FAO, 1996c). Much still remains to be accomplished. Responsibility for implementation of the code lies with governments.
Industry claims that, in regions where the greater problems exist, such as Africa, pesticide trade is least profitable and there is reluctance to invest in product stewardship, safe-use programmes, etc. Similarly, the technologies that can make pesticide use safest and reduce obsolescence to a minimum (for example, plug-in packs for tractor-mounted sprayers) are expensive and, therefore, difficult to introduce into developing countries. Other technologies, such as soluble packaging, are sometimes unpopular because dose rates and tank mixtures are hard to manipulate and these practices are often unsafe.
NGOs and donors differ among themselves. Some NGOs support rural development programmes that are heavily reliant on pesticides. Others insist that agriculture in developing countries should be based solely on non-chemical controls using indigenous methods for pest control. Within countries, some NGOs play a leading role in the implementation of IPM, while other NGOs in the same country perpetuate farmers' reliance on pesticides and chemical fertilizers.
There is no single NGO network or umbrella organization that can develop and transmit policy to all organizations. However, several networks are active in trying to eliminate pesticide hazards, support IPM and other sustainable agricultural production systems, eliminate environmental hazards including those from obsolete pesticides, and carry out other similar relevant activities. Prominent among the NGO networks is the Pesticides Action Network (PAN) with centres in Africa, Asia, Europe, Latin America and North America and affiliated organizations around the globe. The International POPs Elimination Network (IPEN) links over 200 organizations on issues related to POPs and other chemicals. The close association between POPs and obsolete pesticides means that IPEN is concerned with the safe elimination of stockpiles while ensuring that they do not recur.
Several factors contribute to reductions in the accumulation of obsolete pesticides. These include:
It is reasonable to assume that the rate of accumulation of obsolete pesticide stocks is slower now than it was a decade ago. However, pesticides are still becoming obsolete and are being added to existing stocks. In some of the countries where obsolete stocks have already been disposed of, new obsolete stocks are accumulating. The situation is therefore not under control and more action is needed in the key areas described in the following sections.
Strategic stocks are being held in susceptible countries, particularly in Africa and the Near East. Many of the pesticides supplied remain unused beyond their expiry dates and thus become obsolete.
A change in strategy is urgently needed to prevent further accumulation of obsolete pesticides while providing assurances to affected countries that their economies and food security will not suffer in the event of a locust outbreak, for example.
In most countries, the procurement and distribution of pesticides for the control of disease vectors remain in the public domain. The involvement of the health sector, alongside the agricultural sector, has been limited with respect to best practices in pesticide management.
Inadequate training, a lack of resources to ensure good stores, and poor information transmission, for example, on pesticide usage and pest infestation levels, frequently lead to oversupply and subsequent obsolescence of pesticides.
The health sector must be fully included in national and international efforts to prevent the accumulation of obsolete pesticides.
Most pesticides have a shelf-life of two years. In many cases it takes almost two years, and some cases more, for pesticides to reach their point of use in remote parts of developing countries. At the point of use, plant protection officers, health officials or farmers are in no position to turn away products that they need without knowing that a replacement is available.
Greater effort needs to be made to provide alternative means of pest control to communities in remote areas, and to ensure rapid delivery of products with a limited shelf-life to these areas when necessary.
Sometimes obsolete and even banned pesticides are delivered for use against pests for which no alternative control is known locally, although alternatives may be identified if efforts were directed towards seeking alternatives. This is an extreme symptom of over-reliance on chemical pesticides in which a chemical solution is sought in preference to a non-chemical one.
All parties, including IGOs, governments, development agencies and donors, NGOs and researchers, should collaborate to develop and promote pest management methods that reduce reliance on chemical pesticides.
