Bridging the Divide between Toxic Risks and Global Chemicals Governance

• Published date: 01 July 2014
• DOI: http://doi.org/10.1111/reel.12082
• Author: Baskut Tuncak,Daryl Ditz
• Date: 01 July 2014

Bridging the Divide between Toxic Risks and Global

Chemicals Governance

Daryl Ditz and Baskut Tuncak

Over the past four decades, a set of global environmen-

tal agreements has developed to address certain issues

in chemicals management at the global level. In addi-

tion, the global community has proclaimed the goal of

achieving the sound management of chemicals by

2020. Recognizing the need to implement existing

agreements, this article examines the current cluster of

global agreements for chemicals and waste, and their

ability to achieve the sound management of chemicals

in 2020 and beyond. The Basel, Minamata, Rotterdam

and Stockholm Conventions, as well as the non-

binding Strategic Approach to International Chemi-

cals Management, are analyzed using core elements of

environmental treaties, including principles and

approaches of international environmental law. From

this analysis, five challenges are identified: supporting

implementation; ensuring adequate finance; filling

global information gaps; expanding the narrow scope

of current legally binding instruments; and avoiding

the development of a ‘treaty thicket’ in the global gov-

ernance of chemicals and waste.

INTRODUCTION

At the United Nations Conference on the Human Envi-

ronment in 1972, countries confronted the reality of

dire threats to human health and the environment and

pledged to respond. Over the subsequent four decades,

these efforts have produced a set of multilateral envi-

ronmental agreements (MEAs), including several that

address specific chemical issues, including ozone deple-

tion, trade in hazardous chemicals and waste, persis-

tent organic pollutants and mercury pollution.

At the 2002 World Summit on Sustainable Develop-

ment, heads of State from around the world proclaimed

the goal of achieving the sound management of chemi-

cals by 2020,1which eventually resulted in a non-

binding policy framework: the Strategic Approach to

International Chemicals Management (SAICM). Many

countries, intergovernmental organizations, members

of civil society and other stakeholders are endeavouring

to make progress toward this ‘2020 Goal’.

While much has been accomplished on chemicals since

1972, major gaps remain. Looking ahead, at the 26th

Session of the United Nations Environment Pro-

gramme (UNEP) Governing Council in 2011, members

noted ‘that further action may be needed to strengthen

the sound management of chemicals and wastes glob-

ally up to 2020 and beyond’.2This article explores what

‘further action’ is necessary. Without enhanced effort to

prevent their adverse effects, chemicals will continue to

impose staggering health and environmental costs on

present and future generations. By failing to adequately

address the harmful effects of dangerous chemicals, the

status quo inhibits the development and substitution of

innovative, safer alternatives.

ANALYSIS OF THE CURRENT

CLUSTER OF CHEMICALS AND

WASTE AGREEMENTS

In considering challenges and opportunities for

improving international laws for chemicals manage-

ment, the key elements of international environmental

law should inform the analysis. Legally binding global

environmental agreements typically contain certain

elements. These elements are: (i) objective(s) that

define the overarching purpose; (ii) obligations that

bind parties to specific actions; (iii) principles and

approaches that guide obligations, their application

and the future development of the agreement; (iv) insti-

tutions that are responsible for governance; (v) imple-

mentation mechanisms that assist parties to meet

obligations; and (vi) decision-making processes that

enable changes or adjustments to the agreement or its

implementation. This section explores the purpose

of these elements, how they are reflected in four

chemicals and wastes treaties and SAICM, and, if fully

1Johannesburg Plan of Implementation, in: Report of the World

Summit on Sustainable Development (UN Doc. A/CONF.199/20, 4

September 2002), at paragraph 23.

2United Nations Environment Programme Governing Council (UNEP

GC), Decision 26/12, Enhancing Cooperation and Coordination within

the Chemicals and Wastes Cluster (24 February 2011).

bs_bs_banner

Review of European Community & International Environmental Law

RECIEL 23 (2) 2014. ISSN 2050-0386 DOI: 10.1111/reel.12082

© 2014 John Wiley & Sons Ltd, 9600 Garsington Road, Oxford OX4 2DQ, UK and 350 Main Street, Malden, MA 02148, USA.

181