Connect with us

Environment

Addressing hazardous waste within Africa

Newsroom

Published

on

In mid-February, government representatives from across the African continent will come together in Brazzaville, Republic of the Congo to work towards a safe chemicals and waste future. Read on for more about the process and what it means.

What is the Bamako Convention?

The Bamako Convention on the Ban of the Import into Africa and the Control of Transboundary Movement and Management of Hazardous Wastes within Africa (Bamako Convention) is a treaty prohibiting the import into Africa of any hazardous—including radioactive—waste. The Convention was adopted under the auspices of the Organization of African Unity in 1991 and came into force in 1998.

What is the purpose of the Convention?

The Convention aims to protect human and environmental health by:

prohibiting the import of all hazardous and radioactive wastes into the African continent, no matter the reason

minimizing and controlling transboundary movements of hazardous wastes within the African continent

prohibiting all ocean and inland water dumping or incineration of hazardous wastes

ensuring that disposal of wastes is conducted in an environmentally sound manner

promoting cleaner production over the pursuit of a permissible emissions approach based on assimilative capacity assumptions

establishing the precautionary principle—a principle expressed in the Rio Declaration which stipulates that, where there are “threats of serious or irreversible damage, lack of full scientific certainty shall not be used as a reason for postponing cost-effective measures to prevent environmental degradation”.

What does the Convention cover?

The Convention covers more wastes than those covered by the Basel Convention, as it not only includes radioactive wastes but also considers any waste with a listed hazardous characteristic or with a constituent listed as a hazardous waste. The Convention also covers national definitions of hazardous waste. Other products also covered under the Convention include those that have been severely restricted or prohibited.

Why does the Bamako Convention Conference matter?

The worldwide concern about the transboundary movement and disposal of hazardous wastes was heightened in the late 1970s and early 1980s. Expectedly, the major concern was the transboundary shipment of hazardous wastes from industrialized nations for cheap disposal in inadequately prepared sites in developing countries. This concern ignited a new urgency to develop and implement international controls, culminating in a landmark global convention under the United Nations to control the transboundary movement of hazardous wastes and their disposal, commonly called the Basel Convention. The Bamako Convention is a solution and an African response to the perceived legal loopholes and weaknesses of the Basel Convention on the Control of Transboundary Movements of Hazardous Wastes and Their Disposal.

What outcomes are expected in 2020?

The Secretariat of the Bamako Convention and the Republic of Mali are expected to report to parties on the status of the roadmap for the transfer of the Secretariat to Mali.

The Secretariat will review and adopt a draft decision on the road map and scenarios, including for the personnel and transfer of the Secretariat to a new seat in Bamako, Mali.

The Conference of the Parties will review and adopt the new proposed list of substances which have been banned, cancelled or refused registration by government regulatory action, or voluntarily withdrawn from registration in the country of manufacture, for human health or environmental reason under paragraph 1(d) of Article 2 of the Bamako Convention.

A new scale of assessment reflecting balanced contributions among parties to the Convention will be considered.

The meeting is expected to contribute to ongoing dialogue on synergic and coherent implementation of the hazardous and chemicals-related conventions and frameworks in Africa.

The meeting is expected to garner the prior appropriate political momentum for the sound management of hazardous waste and chemicals, including plastic in Africa.

How is the Bamako Convention related to other conventions?

Although the Basel and Bamako conventions share similar historical background and goals, there are areas of divergence in their specific provisions. The scope of wastes covered by the Bamako Convention is wider than that of the Basel Convention. In terms of import of waste, the most significant difference between the Basel and Bamako conventions is the total ban imposed by the Bamako Convention upon all imports of hazardous and nuclear wastes into Africa. Other conventions include the Rotterdam and Stockholm conventions which together with Basel cover key elements of cradle-to-grave management of hazardous chemicals, most comprehensively in the case of persistent organic pollutants, which are covered by all three treaties. The cradle-to-grave process touches on all the components of waste management including its generation and by-products, transportation, testing, treatment and disposal.

Membership

In February 2020, the Convention has 29 parties.

What is the structure of the Convention?

The Convention consists of the Member States—or the Conference of Parties —who, at the start of the first meeting of its ordinary session, elect a president, three vice-presidents and a rapporteur. These officers constitute the Bureau of the Conference.

What is the role of the Bureau?

The Bureau of the Bamako Convention is responsible for assisting the president in the general conduct of the business of the Conference. The members of the Bureau are elected by the Conference at every ordinary session.

UN Environment

Environment

Mobile game aims to bridge gap between citizens and leaders on climate action

Newsroom

Published

on

UN staff and their families gather at UN Headquarters in New York in support of the youth-led global climate strike. UN Photo/Loey Felipe

Millions of people worldwide will get to share their views on climate action through a UN campaign launched on Thursday aimed at connecting them with Governments and policy makers. 

The Mission 1.5 campaign is built around an internet and mobile video game that educates people about climate policy and allows them to vote on possible solutions. 

The campaign was developed by the UN Development Programme (UNDP), alongside experts in game development, climate science and public polling. 

“Together with partners from across the private and public sectors, we have the ability with this campaign to connect millions of people with their governments in an innovative two-way discussion on solutions to the climate crisis, and increase ambition ahead of the COP26 climate talks in Glasgow later this year”, said Achim Steiner, UNDP Administrator. 

Mission 1.5 takes its name from the collective effort to limit global temperature rise to 1.5 degrees Celsius, as agreed by world leaders meeting in Paris in 2015. 

Described as the world’s biggest survey of public opinion on climate change, it aims to give 20 million people a chance to have their say. A previous survey ahead of the Paris talks canvassed 10,000 people in 76 countries. 

Players will take on the role of climate policymakers who make decisions to meet the 1.5 degree goal. 

Afterwards, they will vote on key climate actions that they would like to see adopted. The data will be analyzed and delivered to Governments. 

The hope is that the game will bridge the gap between citizens and governments on climate action.  

“People often feel disconnected from the leaders that must make urgent decisions on the climate crisis,” said Cassie Flynn, UNDP Climate Change Advisor. 

“Mission 1.5 is a way to help people understand climate solutions and make their voices heard. In many ways, it is the People’s Climate Vote.” 

Continue Reading

Environment

WWF: US Will Suffer World’s Biggest Economic Impact Due to Nature Loss

Newsroom

Published

on

A new World Wildlife Fund report reveals for the first time the countries whose economies would be worst affected over the next 30 years if the world doesn’t act urgently to address the global environmental crisis.

The study, Global Futures, which calculated the economic cost of nature’s decline across 140 countries ranging from India to Brazil, shows that if the world carries on with “business as usual,” the United States would see the largest losses of annual GDP in absolute terms, with $83 billion wiped off its economy each year by 2050 – an amount equivalent to the entire annual GDP of Guatemala.

“This groundbreaking report shows that the U.S. will suffer the world’s biggest economic impact due to nature loss,” said Rebecca Shaw, chief scientist, World Wildlife Fund. “We cannot envision a just and stable country, and a prosperous economy, if forests disappear, pollinators vanish, biodiversity collapses and rivers and the ocean are depleted. Continuing with business as usual could lead to disastrous outcomes. We need governments and corporations to halt nature loss and tackle this planetary emergency.”

The Global Futures study used new economic and environmental modeling to assess what the macroeconomic impact would be if the world pursued “business as usual,” including widespread and land-use change, continued increase in emissions of greenhouse gases, and further loss of natural habitats. It found this status quo approach would cost the world at least $479 billion a year, adding up to $9.87 trillion by 2050 – roughly equivalent to the combined economies of the UK, France, India and Brazil.

In contrast, under a scenario in which land-use is carefully managed to avoid further loss of areas important for biodiversity and ecosystem services, which the study terms the ‘Global Conservation’ scenario, economic outcomes would be dramatically better, with global GDP rising by $490 billion per year above the business as usual calculation.

Japan and the UK also stand to lose staggering amounts – $80 billion and $21 billion every year respectively. The projected economic losses in the United States, Japan and UK are due largely to expected damage to their coastal infrastructure and agricultural land through increased flooding and erosion as a result of losses of natural coastal defenses such as coral reefs and mangroves.

Developing countries will also be badly affected, with Eastern and Western Africa, central Asia and parts of South America hit particularly hard, as nature loss impacts on production levels, trade and food prices. According to the report, the top three countries predicted to lose the most as a percentage of their GDP are Madagascar , Togo and Vietnam , which by 2050 are expected to respectively see declines of 4.2 percent, 3.4 percent and 2.8 percent per year.

“It’s difficult for many people to conceptualize the true value of nature and the many benefits it provides to humanity,” says Shaw. “This report translates nature loss into country-specific economic terms – a tangible and powerful way to galvanize action from private sector leaders and government officials.”

This pioneering method of analysis was created through a partnership between WWF , the Global Trade Analysis Project at Purdue University, and the Natural Capital Project, co-founded by the University of Minnesota.

Steve Polasky, Co-Founder of the Natural Capital Project, said: “The world’s economies, businesses and our own well-being all depend on nature. But from climate change, extreme weather and flooding to water shortages, soil erosion and species extinctions, evidence shows that our planet is changing faster than at any other time in history. The way we feed, fuel and finance ourselves is destroying the life-support systems on which we depend, risking global economic devastation.”

Thomas Hertel, Executive Director of the Global Trade and Analysis Project, said: “The science and economics are clear. We can no longer ignore the strong economic case for restoring nature. Inaction will cost us far more than actions aimed at protecting nature’s contributions to the economy. To ensure positive global futures, we need to achieve more sustainable patterns of production and land use, and reform economic and financial systems to incentivize nature-based decision making.”

Continue Reading

Environment

Why Australia’s 2019-2020 bushfire season was not normal, in three graphs

Newsroom

Published

on

Data from satellite sources assembled by the United Nations Environment Programme’s (UNEP) World Environment Situation Room confirms that the wildfires in Australia in the last two months of 2019 and the first six weeks of 2020 were far from normal.   

WESR Global Surface Temperatures

2019 was the second hottest year on record since 1880, and Australia recorded its warmest temperatures ever in December 2019.

The number of fires in New South Wales remained fairly constant from 2003 to 2018, but more than trebled in 2019 (Fires recorded by MODIS (NASA), trend analysis, UNEP/GRID-Geneva).

“The trend is very clear: 37 of the last 40 years were the warmest recorded since 1880, and the six warmest years recorded were the last six years,” says Pascal Peduzzi, Director of UNEP’s Global Resource Information Database in Geneva. “For those who think Australia is always burning, the following graphs clearly show that these fires were exceptional.”

The months of November and December 2019 saw much greater wildfire activity than usual. The data indicates that it was mainly evergreen forest that caught fire. (Fires detected by MODIS, intersected with MODIS landcover and by province. Data sources: NASA, Data Analytics : UNEP/GRID-Geneva)

“This service, accessible via the UNEP’s World Environment Situation Room, is provided for all countries at national and provincial levels. It identifies trends in wildfire activity since 2003, when the data first became available and monitoring began. We have sliced and diced the satellite-based data on wildfires worldwide from 2009 to the present day. We analyse the wildfires’ data by month, type of land cover, protected area, province and nation to produce information products,” Peduzzi adds.

World Database on Protected Areas (WDPA). Even protected areas, mostly forests, were affected. The graph shows fires detected by MODIS (NASA), intersected with province, landcover and World Database of Protected Areas information (UNEP/WCMC, analytics. UNEP/GRID-Geneva)

UN Environment

Continue Reading

Publications

Latest

South Asia2 hours ago

Minority Abuse: A Slice Of Life In Modi’s India

It is not uncommon for colonial governments to enact sedition laws with the purpose of stifling dissent; it is, following...

Newsdesk4 hours ago

UNIDO to support Albania’s post-disaster reconstruction

A delegation from the United Nations Industrial Development Organization (UNIDO) has taken part in the international donors’ conference “Together for Albania”....

Intelligence6 hours ago

Modi’s extremism: Implications for South Asia

Hindutva is a main form of Hindu nationalism in India this term was popularized by Vinayak Damodar Savarkar in the...

Terrorism8 hours ago

Escaping IS: What Exiting an Armed Group Actually Takes

Authors: Dr Siobhan O’Neil and Dr Mara Revkin* Although Islamic State’s territorial control of large swathes of Iraq and Syria came to an...

Tourism10 hours ago

Greece Welcomes UNWTO Support for Sustainable Tourism Growth

Secretary-General Zurab Pololikashvili was in Athens for high-level talks with political leaders, as well as high-level representatives from across the...

Americas12 hours ago

Trump Plans to Keep U.S. Troops Permanently in Iraq

A reliable and exceptionally knowledgeable source, who doesn’t wish to be publicly identified, has confidentially informed me that an agreement...

East Asia14 hours ago

China is not alone in fighting against the Coronavirus epidemic

Authors: Yang Yizhong & Paul Wang Since the coronavirus outbreak was officially announced several weeks ago, it has stirred many...

Trending