The first session of the ad hoc Open-Ended Working Group on the Science-Policy Panel (OEWG-1.2) is taking place in Bangkok, Thailand, from 30th of January to 3rd of February 2023 with a focus on the Panel’s scope and principal functions. Three IPCP Board Members are in attendance and are providing their daily recaps.
Monday, January 30, was the first day of the OEWG meeting. The meeting schedule is provided here: https://owncloud.unog.ch/s/lr19OxAdLxWriaf. There were two plenary sessions in the morning and in the afternoon and a “deep dive” session from 1-3 pm on the scope of the SPP. The morning plenary dealt with a wide range of organisational matters (i.e., election of bureau members, election of the chair of the meeting, etc.). The “deep dive” session included four brief presentations given by Valerie Hickey (World Bank), Santos Virgilio (Angola: A developing-country perspective on the needs from the new panel), Ahmad Andsari (ZDHC, Zero Discharge of Hazardous Chemicals, an industry group in the textile sector: Human impact and SPP scope), and Martin Kayser (BASF, International Council of Chemical Associations).
Important statements (selection) from the four presentations in the “deep dive” session included:
Valerie Hickey pointed out that the approach of “grow now, clean up later” does not work and that all economic activities need to be balanced with the costs, including costs of damage to human and environmental health. Furthermore, the scientific and economic description of the impacts needs to be used to raise the profile and urgency of chemicals and waste issues among countries. Her point was that the urgency of climate change and biodiversity issues only followed after damages were quantified. She also commented that such information needs to be made accessible to non-experts by effective science communication.
Santos Virgilio presented the problem that the many oil exploration sites off the coast of Angola and neighbouring countries such as the Democratic Republic of Congo, cause oil pollution. To try to address damage, it is very difficult for the state of Angola to claim compensation from the oil companies because they, as large multinationals, have technical experts where information is generated to absolve them of blame. Hence, it is very difficult to win the court cases for damage. He was very clear in stating his frustration of the double standard played by such multinationals – one for their operations in developed countries, and one for their operations in developing countries. The SPP will be needed to provide the necessary evidence (environmental impacts, human health impacts, social impacts, economic impacts – all of these matter and need to be documented). Development has to find a new pathway (less damage, no longer “grow now, clean up later”).
Ahmad Andsari described how the textile and leather sector has improved management of waste streams by using a holistic, life cycle approach including the material and waste streams. In his presentation he illustrated how industries can play a role in developing and implementing solutions.
Martin Kayser expressed the support of the global chemical industry for the new panel and their willingness to contribute to the process. The chemical industry is facing multiple transitions (i.e., circular economy, safe and sustainable by design, new supply chains, etc.) that will require huge efforts, both in terms of organisation and innovation as well as financially. Working with the new panel will be an activity that will be a part of all these long-term processes. In the afternoon plenary, the question of the scope of the new panel was addressed.
Many countries presented their “country statements”. A common theme was that the UNEA resolution 5/8 should be the starting point for the set-up of the panel and the definition of its scope, which should be broad and allow the panel to identify relevant issues with sufficient flexibility (few countries opted for a narrower scope). This also implies that the description of the scope and objective provided in the document UNEP/SPP-CWP/OEWG.1/4 (see Meeting Documents tab: https://www.unep.org/oewg1.2-ssp-chemicals-waste-pollution will be modified. IPEN spoke as one of only three observers (only few observers were able to speak due to time limitations). IPEN presented a concise criticism of the description of the panel’s scope and objective as it is provided in the document UNEP/SPP-CWP/OEWG.1/4. IPEN’s intervention was based on the “IPEN Views on OEWG-1.2” (available here: https://owncloud.unog.ch/s/2pPoNiY2bDsBT8jn. The discussion of the scope and objective of the panel will be continued in the plenary session in the morning of day 2.
In the evening of day 1, the Government of Thailand kindly invited all participants to a reception with food and drinks (which were excellent).
Longer daily reports prepared by the International Institute for Sustainable Development, Earth Negotiations Bulletin are available at: https://enb.iisd.org/oewg1-2-science-policy-panel-contribute-further-sound-management-chemicals-waste-prevent-pollution
Read our next IPCP Bangkok daily briefing: https://www.ipcp.ch/news/ipcp-bangkok-briefings-20230131