Rotterdam Convention on Hazardous Chemicals: A Meaningful Step Toward Environmental Protection?, The

Georgetown International Environmental Law Review, Summer 2004 by Barrios, Paula

Considering all the multinational corporations that control the global pesticides market have several subsidiaries in the South, the requirement that they effectively test their products under the physical and environmental conditions of the regions or countries of use does not seem too onerous.

In summary, although the elimination of double standards could be seen as the solution to the problems posed by hazardous pesticides in the South, it can be problematic in practice, because big Northern corporations and a few local companies are producing (or have the capacity to produce) hazardous pesticides in developing countries. Because the Rotterdam Convention deals only with the international trade of hazardous chemicals, an export ban could thus increase production in the South both by foreign and national manufacturers. Therefore, unless a ban on the production of certain hazardous chemicals was introduced, the problem would be displaced rather than addressed. These practical difficulties, however, do not justify the existence of export double standards, particularly when one considers the context in which the export of hazardous chemicals takes place.

III. TRADE IN HAZARDOUS CHEMICALS IN CONTEXT

The transfer of hazardous chemicals and pesticides from developed to developing countries does not take place in a vacuum. This section presents a brief overview of context in which this transfer occurs, concentrating the analysis on the disparities between developed and developing countries, and on the increasingly globalized and liberalized international trading system. It argues that these two circumstances have facilitated, if not promoted, the export of chemicals that are banned or severely restricted for reasons of the environment or health in the North to the South.

A. THE NORTH-SOUTH DIVIDE

Regardless of its origins and of colonial history, it has been widely recognized that there is an economic and technological gap between the industrialized or developed countries of the "North" and the developing and less developed countries of the "South."122 This gap translates not only into different capacities to manage hazardous substances, but also into different levels of economic and political power to make decisions that are environmentally desirable. This means that even if the countries of the South are concerned about the environmental and health implications of importing hazardous chemicals that they will not be able to handle in a safe manner, they might still choose to import them because they are constrained by more pressing economic and social problems, which go beyond the short-term economic pressures borne by every Northern government in its pursuit of environmental protection. In the case of hazardous chemicals and pesticides, the choice is even more limited because the economy of a great number of developing countries largely depends on export agriculture, and thereby on pesticides to sustain it. Likewise, many developing countries need low-priced pesticides in order to control vector-borne diseases such as malaria, dengue and yellow fever. Unfortunately, the pesticides that these countries can purchase are often older (and thus cheaper, since patents no longer protects them) and generally more toxic.