Transcript Governing Environmental Problems in the Arctic

Governing Environmental
Problems in the Arctic
Learning Outcomes
• Be exposed to a form of regional government.
• Recognize the role of First Nations as part of
decision making.
• Appreciate the complexity of governing global
environmental problems.
• Evaluate tradeoffs in environmental policies.
• Be familiar with the Persistent Organic Pollutants
Treaty (POPs).
Re-Cap: DDT and Silent Spring
1962
www.alternatives2toxics.org/
From Last-Time: pathways
UNEP GRID-Arendal Author : Philippe Rekacewicz
Organization : UNEP-GRID, Arendal, Norway.
Sources : Macdonald and Bewers 1996, Sugden 1982.
Date of creation : 1997
What are PCBs and DDT?
• PCBs:
– Polychlorinated Biphenyls (PCBs) chemically
stable, fire resistant, insoluble in water, but are
soluble in fatty substances.
– PCBs were used extensively as insulators in
electrical equipment.
• DDT:
– dichlorodiphenyltrichloroethane.
– Cheap insecticide.
– Used extensively after WWII until 1960s in agriculture,
forestry and combating mosquito born diseases.
Bio-Accumulation
Environmental Health Perspectives Volume 106, Number 2, February 1998, on
line edition. http://ehpnet1.niehs.nih.gov/qa/106-2focus/focus.html [Accessed
November 15th, 2003]
DDT and PCBs: the evidence
• Reproductive failure in
birds of prey (thin egg
shells).
• In some areas 40-65% of
women have levels of
PCBs in their blood that
are up to 5 times higher
than the guidelines.
• Some studies link these
with attention span and
memory problems in
children.
TimePix.
http://www.nhc.rtp.nc.us:8080/ts
erve/nattrans/ntwilderness/essay
s/carsonb.htm.
The response
• International Treaty Banning use and
manufacture of:
– “dirty dozen” highly toxic chemicals, (DDT
and PCBs),
Canada’s Interest
• Lots of Arctic
• Inuit Vulnerable
• Domestic sources
of POPs already
limited
The Process
• Science, science, science.
– Physical evidence of problem (1980s).
• POPs on UN’s Regional European agenda.
– Regional POPs protocol.
•
•
•
•
POPs on UN Environment Programme’s Agenda.
Multi-lateral Negotiations (1998).
Final Treaty 2001 signed in Stockholm.
Needs 50 countries to ratify it.
Stakeholder Input
Before each of the
five sets of
negotiations Cdn
government held
stakeholder
consultations.
Inuit communities
and NGOs played a
crucial role.
International Opposition
Malaria versus DDT
“Malaria kills over one million people, mainly
children, in the tropics each year, and DDT
remains one of the few affordable, effective
tools against the mosquitoes that transmit the
disease. … the scientific literature on the need
to withdraw DDT is unpersuasive, and the
benefits of DDT in saving lives from malaria
are well worth the risks.”
Commentary in Nature Medicine.
6(7) July 2000, pp. 729-732
Malaria: the evidence
• 250-400 million
cases/a worldwide.
• 1 million deaths world
wide.
• Used to be wider
spread but has now
been eradicated from
the North (Italy WWII
had Malaria, Ontario
in 19thC had it too).
National Institute on Deafness and other Communication Disorders
http://www.nidcd.nih.gov/news/releases/02/10_21_02.htm
2/5 of the world’s population is at
risk.
Image courtesy of the Malaria Vaccine Initiative, PATH. See: http://www.malariavaccines.org.uk/1.shtml [November 20th, 2003]
Malaria and DDT: the evidence
• After spraying (early
1960s) Malaria had
dropped from 2.8
million cases and 7300
deaths to 17 cases and
no deaths.
• After banning DDT Sri
Lanka had 500,000
cases of malaria (1969).
Sri Lanka
DDT use and Malaria
Attaran, et al. (2000). Balancing risks on the backs of the poor. Nature Medicine 6(7). 729-732. Online
http://www.nature.com/cgi-taf/DynaPage.taf?file=/nm/journal/v6/n7/full/nm0700_729.html&filetype=PDF. [Accessed November
20th, 2003].
History of DDT Use
www.alternatives2toxics.org/
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/africa/902915.stm
How much DDT?
• Agricultural Use in the 1960s.
– Dusting a single 100-hectare cotton field can require
more than 1,100 kg of DDT over 4 weeks.
• Malaria Control in the 2000s.
– Spot spraying on interior surfaces.
– Half a kilogram /year can treat a large house.
• Guyana could be treated using the same amount of
DDT as would be have been used on 0.4km2 of
cotton.
Stakeholder Participation in
POPs Treaty
“When measures to control the use of DDT became
controversial and pitted North against South, we
stated clearly that Inuit would refuse to be party to
an agreement that threatened the health of others.
Having been decimated by smallpox and other
introduced diseases in the early years of the 20th
century, we sympathized acutely with those in
tropical lands losing thousands of people per year to
malaria.”
Sheila Watt-Cloutier
President of the Inuit Circumpolar Conference.
http://www.ourplanet.com/imgversn/124/watt.html [November 20th 2003].
Breaking the logjam
“The Inuit insisted on a convention
that would address the public health
concerns of mothers in all parts of
the globe.”
Ken Mcartney.
DFAIT, Canada.
http://www.ligi.ubc.ca/_conferences/110402envsec/media/Conference%20Summary.pdf [November 20th, 2003].
Post-Soviet Era: new
opportunities for cooperation
New opportunities for Arctic circumpolar
cooperation emerged in the late 1980s…
Environmental cooperation was identified as a
first step in promoting comprehensive security in
the region…in 1996, Foreign Ministers of the
Arctic states agreed in the Ottawa Declaration,
to form the Arctic Council with a mandate to
undertake a broad programme to include all
dimensions of sustainable development.
1996, the Arctic Council
• 1996 Circumpolar Nations met to address
security.
• Eight Arctic States
• Indigenous northern peoples as Permanent
Participants
Why the Arctic Council?
“Transboundary pollutants, loss of
biodiversity and climate change are of deep
concern in the Arctic and gaining acceptance
as an indicator of the world’s environmental
health.”
Mary Simon
Canada’s Ambassador for the Arctic
2001
This logic holds true for other
regions
• New Economic Partnership for African
Development (NEPAD).
– Mandate to develop new socio-economic development
strategy for Africa www.nepad.org
• Nile Basin Initiative
– Originally electric and water interests now broader
mandate: http://www.nilebasin.org/
• Mekong River Council
– To promote co-management in Mekong river:
www.mekongriver.org
Why Regional Governance?
• UN System
ineffective since it
can’t/doesn’t impose
sanctions for
environmental
problems
• Gorbichav proposed
green helmets has
gone nowhere.
• WEO discussion
have gone nowhere
• UNEP has tiny
funding base.
Why Regional Governance?
• Environmental problems fall outside of nation states
Why Regional Governance?
• Need to move beyond specific
problems…natural pathways provide good
jurisdictions for environmental governance.
http://www.dallas-swcd.org/watersheds.html
The POPs Today
• 40 countries have ratified it as of 2003
•Still needs 10 more
•
http://www.pops.int/documents/signature/world-signatories.pdf
Learning Outcomes
• Appreciate the complexity of governing global
environmental problems.
• Evaluate tradeoffs in environmental policies.
• Recognize the role of First Nations as part of
decision making.
• Be familiar with the Persistent Organic Pollutants
Treaty (POPs).
• Be exposed to forms of regional government.