State of MEAs Implementation and Achievement Report by Caribbean Community (CARICOM)

STATE OF MEA s IMPLEMENTATION AND ACHIEVEMENT REPORT

CARIBBEAN COMMUNITY (CARICOM)

Caribbean Community (CARICOM) State of MEAs Implementation and Achievement Report

2024 SBN 978-976-600-518-4 (Paperback)

This publication may be reproduced in whole or in part in any form for educational or non-profit services, with permission from the copyright holder, and provided acknowledgement of the source is made. The Caribbean Community (CARICOM) Secretariat would appreciate receiving a copy of any publication, in any form, that uses this publications as a source.

This publication may not be used for resale or any other commercial purpose without prior permission in writing from the CARICOM Secretariat.

Disclaimer:

This document has been produced with the financial assistance of the European Union (EU) under a joint partnership between the EU and the Secretariat of the African, Caribbean, and Pacific Group of States, globally coordinated by UN Environment, with project activities implemented by CARICOM Secretariat in the Caribbean region. The contents of this report do not necessarily reflect the views or policies of the CARICOM Secretariat, or contributing individuals or institutions. The views expressed herein can in no way be taken to reflect the official opinion of the European Commission or the United Nations Environment Programme (UNEP).

Design by: design-environment.com

Photo: lifeforstock on Freepik

FOREWARD

Caribbean Community (CARICOM) State of Multilateral Environmental Agreements (MEAs) Implementation and Achievement Booklet

For the past three decades, governments of CARICOM Member States have been engaging in international fora to ensure the survival of the species and ecosystems that underpin human civilization. We know that our planet is in crisis, and consequently, people are in crisis. Human existence relies on having clean air, food and a habitable climate, all of which are regulated by the natural world. For example, 95% of the food we eat is produced in the soil, yet up to 40% of the world’s land is severely degraded by unsustainable agricultural practices. Agriculture contributes as much as 18% of total GDP for most CARICOM countries and biodiversity is the foundation of the agroeconomy. More than half of global GDP – estimated at US$41.7 trillion – is dependent on the healthy functioning of the natural world.

Within the past five years, the challenges associated with sustainable management of chemicals and waste in the Caribbean have escalated. This highlights the urgency of promoting the enforcement of environmental treaties to which Member States are signatories. The goals and targets promoted in those Treaties can influence policies and legislative frameworks to effectively implement related commitments made by CARICOM Member States. Supporting the implementation of MEAs in the chemicals and waste and biodiversity cluster by identifying gaps, and building capacity to close these gaps at the national and regional levels bolsters the development of stronger compliance and enforcement measures. This will help Member States address the challenges associated with the sound management of chemicals and waste, as well as loss of biodiversity.

FOREWARD

The CARICOM Secretariat, along with partner organisations - the European Union, the Organization of African, Caribbean and Pacific States (OACPS), and United Nations Environment Programme (UNEP) - have been utilising optimal opportunities as the Caribbean Hub of the Capacity Building relating to Multilateral Environmental Agreements in African, Caribbean and Pacific (ACP) Countries Project (ACP MEAS) to promote urgency of action at the highest levels. Such initiatives directly support strengthening environmental governance and supporting MEAS that will contribute to safeguarding the Community’s natural resources.

CARICOM’s diverse geography, which includes Small Islands and Low-lying Coastal Developing States (SIDS), makes the Region an outstanding global center of biodiversity. The people and the economies of CARICOM rely significantly on terrestrial and marine ecosystems for their livelihoods. Farming, fishing, forestry, and tourism are all important economic sectors in the Region and are heavily dependent on the wealth of plants, animals, and other natural resources. However, overuse and deterioration of the region’s natural resources are clear and present threats. Land degradation and desertification, caused by depletion in the soil quality and land utility, negatively impact food production and livelihoods.

These events are compounded by prolonged instances of deforestation, poor agricultural practices, and pollution due to poor solid waste disposal, and adversely impact human and environmental health. Land-based sources of pollution, including runoff of agricultural pesticides and fertilizers, contribute to the degradation of mangroves, coral reefs, and other vital coastal and marine ecosystems. Caribbean SIDS are also facing the brunt of global environmental change, yet are limited in their capability to respond to these hazards due to shortcomings in human, technological, and financial capacity.

Our current reality presents a well-known challenge, as we continue to grapple with our economic, social and environmental vulnerabilities. It is therefore timely that, as a community, we re-examine our relationship with nature, recognising that despite all our advances, we will always remain dependent on healthy and vibrant ecosystems for our water, food, medicines, clothes, fuel, shelter and energy.

Taking stock of the status of implementation of the MEAS which address these challenges at the global level through national and regional action is important. This publication is therefore a critical step in effective environmental monitoring via data acquisition, processing, and reporting on key criteria. Its global relevance is reflected in its alignment with the goals, targets and indicators of the Sustainable Development Goals, Kunming Montreal Global Biodiversity Framework and Chemicals and Waste cluster of MEAs.

The analytical approach undertaken in this review will help to provide a status on the achievements and assessment of MEAs reporting in CARICOM Member States, along with a framework for ongoing assessment and capacity development. The expectation is that it will be used to continue to generate much needed discussion on safeguarding our biodiversity resources at the national and regional level.

CARICOM SECRETARIAT GEORGETOWN, GUYANA

ACKNOWLEDGMENTS AND CREDITS

Coordination: CARICOM Secretariat (Teshia Jn Baptiste, Shunae Samuels)

Lead Author: DE Design + Environment Inc. – Dr. David N. Oswald

Contributing Author: DE Design + Environment Inc. – Dr. Agnes Balazsi

Design and Layout: DE Design + Environment Inc. – Lisa Edward

Virtual Consultation Participants: D. Allen, C. Amoroso, M. Astwood, A. Bellamy, T. Braithwaite, S. Browne, J. Crandon, S. Cruz, J. Edmund, L. Evans, J. Franco, J. Gabriel, P. Gangaram Panday, K. Gardiner, T. Glod, P. Haynes, J. John-Norville, R. Kanhai, M. Livan, , T. Maharaj, T. McNichols, S. Miller Cartwright, L. Morton, E. Parry, R. Payne, P. Pile, A. Prevatt, C. Prospere, D. Ramkhelawan, A. Reeves, L. Sampson, L. Sosa, C. Valcin, F. Wiggins, and V. Wood

Support: The CARICOM Secretariat gratefully acknowledges the European Union for financial support delivered through the ACP MEAs project.

Citation: CARICOM Secretariat

State of MEAs Implementation and Achievement Report

Front Page Photo Credit: Molly Jimenez/iStock

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

Multilateral Environmental Agreements (MEAs) are essential elements to achieving global sustainable development and are particularly important for Caribbean Small Island Developing States (SIDS) as they help to identify critical vulnerabilities as well as opportunities. This project focuses on three Biodiversity MEAs (Convention on Biological diversity (CBD), Convention on the Illegal Trade of Endangered Species (CITES), Convention on Migratory Species (CMS)) and four chemicals MEAs (Basel, Rotterdam, Stockholm, and Minamata) and provides an assessment of their state of implementation; the environmental data gaps they have, and national, regional, and international data sources they may use; and provides a monitoring framework which can be used to rapidly evaluate their implementation.

The recent adoption of the Global Biodiversity Framework (GBF) for the CBD at COP 15 in December of 2022 makes this a particularly important time for such an evaluation because this new set of ambitious targets and goals requires clear oversight and monitoring for implementation. CITES and CMS are closely linked to the CBD and similarly require status review and efficient and effective ways of assessing implementation. Planetary boundaries for biodiversity and ecosystem health are being reached and these biodiversity MEAs help to guide policy development which can help to reduce ecological degradation and promote global biospheric integrity.

Harmful chemicals such as persistent organic pollutants (POPs) and mercury-containing compounds can have extremely deleterious effects on human and ecosystem health. The chemicals MEAs address a variety of aspects of their use, transport, regulation, and the recognition of the risks they pose. There is a cross section of organizations and involved with their management such as environmental agencies, customs and border control, and industrial regulators, and cross cutting implementation of these MEAs is important to ensuring their efficacy. Therefore assessing the status of their implementation requires broad consultation and review of pertinent literature.

This report summarizes the results of an extensive literature review and virtual stakeholder consultations which focused on evaluating the strengths and weaknesses and any key issues that exist with each of their implementation in Caribbean SIDS. Several important concerns are noted, and suggestions are made to address them. A monitoring framework for MEA implementation is proposed for all the Conventions assessed (and potentially other MEAs). The objective with the monitoring framework is to be able to formulate a high-level diagnostic across key indicators which could potentially be applied in several Caribbean SIDS to get a regional perspective on MEA implementation.

The initial responses to the monitoring framework and the evaluation of biodiversity MEAs by biodiversity MEA focal points and national statistical office (NSO) representatives who attended a regional workshop was positive but also highlighted the complexity of establishing a representative assessment of implementation with an abbreviated set of high-level data points. Therefore, this report should be considered a first step in a longer process of assessing the efficacy and efficiency of biodiversity and chemicals MEAs implementation in the Caribbean SIDS.

Photo: Thruston Benny/Unsplash

ABBREVIATIONS

ACP African, Caribbean, and Pacific (States)

ASGM Artisanal and Small-Scale Gold Mining

BCRC Basel Convention Regional Centre

BIOPAMA Biodiversity and Protected Areas Management

BRI Biodiversity Research Institute

BRSM Basel, Rotterdam, Stockholm, and Minamata (Conventions)

CAHFSA Caribbean Agriculture Health and Food Safety Agency

CANARI Caribbean Natural Resources Institute

CARICOM Caribbean Community

CARPHA Caribbean Public Health Agency

CBD Convention on Biological Diversity

CEP Caribbean Environment Program

CITES Convention on International Trade in Endangered Species

CLME+ Caribbean Large Marine Ecosystem

CMS Convention on Migratory Species

CRFM Caribbean Regional Fisheries Mechanism

ECOFEL Egmont Centre of FIU Excellence and Leadership

EPIC Environmental Protection in the Caribbean

EU European Union

FAO Food and Agriculture Organization

GBIF Global Biodiversity Information Facility

GEF Global Environmental Facility

GMOS Global Mercury Observation System

GMP Global Monitoring Program

HR Human Resources

IAF Inter-American Foundation

IAS Invasive Alien Species

ICCM International Conference on Chemicals Management

ICLEI International Council for Local Environmental Initiatives

IDB Interamerican Development Bank

INTERPOL International Criminal Police Organization

IUCN International Union for Conservation of Nature

LAC Geographic Latin America and Caribbean Geographic

M&E Monitoring and Evaluation

MAPs Mercury-Added Products

MEAs Multilateral Environmental Agreements

MIA Minamata Convention Initial Assessment

MS Migratory Species

MTTC Marine Turtle Tagging Centre

NBSAP National Biodiversity Strategic Action Plan

NIP National Implementation Plan (Stockholm Convention)

NGO Non-Governmental Organization

NSO National Statistical Organization

OAS Organization of American States

ODA Official Development Assistance

OECD Organization for Economic Co-operation and Development

OECS Organization of Eastern Caribbean States

PAs Protected Areas

PAHO Pan American Health Organization

PIC Prior Informed Consent

POPs Persistent Organic Pollutants

SDGs Sustainable Development Goals

SOS Save our Sea Turtle

SPAW Special Protected Areas and Wildlife

TBM Transboundary Movement

TNC The Nature Conservancy

UNCCD United Nations Convention to Combat Desertification

UNCTAD United Nations Conference on Trade and Development

UNECLAC United Nations Economic Commission for Latin America and the Caribbean

UNEP United Nations Environment Program

UNEP GRID United Nations Environment Program Global Resource Information Database

UNEP ROLAC United Nations Environment Program Regional Office for Latin America and the Caribbean

UNFCCC United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change

UNIDO United Nations Industrial Development Organization

UN ILO United Nations International Labour Organization

UN WCMC United Nations World Conservation Monitoring Centre

UPOPs Unintentional Persistent Organic Pollutants

WBCSD World Business Council for Sustainable Development

WHO World Health Organization

WIDECAST Wider Caribbean Sea Turtle Conservation Network

WWF World Wildlife Fund

Photo: Hugh Whyte/Unsplash

PROJECT OVERVIEW

Photo: Claudio Trigueros/Unsplash

Context

The populations and environments in island nations in the wider Caribbean are facing increasing threats that are brought about by various drivers of change. These include demographics, and economic growth, along with environmental change induced from climate change and other factors. Impacts on the environment include loss of biodiversity and habitat, sea level rise, coastal erosion, and ecological degradation. Socio-economic risks are growing because of environmental changes and some notable examples include threats to the tourism industry, faltering food security, and disruption of economies due to natural disturbances.

Multi-lateral Environmental Agreements (MEAs) are legal instruments with binding effects on countries that have agreed to become parties. They are also avenues through which global agreements and direction can be achieved on critical environmental and sustainable development issues such as climate change, loss of biodiversity, management of harmful chemicals, and the degradation of land. Meeting the directives set out in MEAs requires evidence-based reporting using information gathered from, and shared between, various governmental agencies and organizations.

This project falls within the third phase of the Action for Capacity Building Related to Multilateral Environmental Agreements (MEAs) Project. The first two phases focused on mainstreaming environmental management issues into institutions and national development plans of various Caribbean African Caribbean and Pacific (ACP) countries. The third phase builds upon the results achieved in the previous phases and will foster support and capacity for the effective implementation, enforcement, monitoring and reporting of MEAs and related commitments in the chemicals and waste clusters as well as biodiversity commitments.

Objectives

This project seeks to achieve these outcomes:

• Enhanced capacity, processes and infrastructure to enforce and comply with selected MEAs related to biodiversity and chemicals and waste.

• Improved national frameworks, legislations and mechanisms for the effective implementation of MEAs related to biodiversity and chemicals waste.

• Improved knowledge, knowledge sharing, guidelines and mechanisms for the effective implementation of MEAs related to biodiversity and chemicals and waste.

• Effective communications, outreach and awareness-raising increases stakeholder engagement, including political will among decision-makers.

The activities and outputs of this project align with the achievement of the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) in the beneficiary countries. The SDGs of particular interest are:

• SDG 2: Zero Hunger

• SDG 3: Good Health and Well-being

• SDG 6: Clean Water and Sanitation

• SDG 12: Responsible Consumption and Production

• SDG 13: Climate Action

• SDG 14: Life Below Water

• SDG 15: Life on Land

• SDG 16: Peace, Justice, and Strong Institutions

• SDG 17: Partnerships for the Goals

Synergy between reporting on these SDGs and the MEAs linked to chemicals and waste and biodiversity were examined throughout the project.

The Basel Convention on the control of transboundary movements of hazardous wastes and their disposal

Rotterdam Convention on the Prior Informed Consent Procedure for Certain Hazardous Chemicals and Pesticides in International Trade

Chemicals and Waste

Stockholm Convention on Persistent Organic Pollutants

Biodiversity

United Nations Convention for Biological Diversity (CBD)

Convention on Migratory Species (CMS)

Minamata Convention on Mercury

Convention on International Trade in Endangered Species of Fauna and Flora (CITES)

ASSESSMENT OF BIODIVERSITY MEA s REPORTING

Photo: Julian Berengar Solter/Unsplash

The literature review revealed many challenges the countries faced while implementing biodiversityrelated MEAs. Several are general issues that developing countries are confronted with, while others are region-specific problems that need focused attention. There are some persistent challenges that appear to continuously plague countries across the Caribbean, but incremental progress can be observed on a country-by-country basis, often dictated by national circumstances. Assessing progress on biodiversity-related MEA reporting is difficult in the sense that simply looking at the required reports may not provide a comprehensive assessment of the situation. Consulting a cross section of literature, in addition to the required MEA reports, revealed pressing issues. These results can be triangulated with the input gathered through the stakeholder consultation meetings.

Photo:A

Overall Challenges

• Inadequate financial resources for biodiversity conservation, especially actionable habitat and species conservation measures. Dependence on external resources, not just regarding financing, but also specialists, expertise, and technology in habitat and species conservation.

• Acceptance and integration of biodiversity management and conservation into other sectorial policies and decisions (i.e. mainstreaming) is still a considerably lacking at the national level.

• Economic development agendas are often a priority over the NBSAPs. Growth-oriented economic policies dominated environmental decisions to the detriment of sustainable consumption and production of ecosystem goods and services.

• Responsible institutions (reporting agencies and Focal Points) are underfinanced and lack human resource capacity. Inadequate institutional support for implementation, including legislation, data management systems, and ongoing monitoring and evaluation (M&E) of biodiversity MEAs implementation.

• Linkages between CBD, CITES, CMS and the other two Rio Conventions (UNFCCC, UNCCD) must be strengthened.

• Most countries lacked a central repository for up-to-date environmental data and information. Some countries have realized significant achievements be developing their own environmental data portals. There remain issues with a lack of standardized methodologies for collecting and storing environmental data.

• Sustained effort and investment in public awareness and engagement with biodiversity-related issues is a challenge. Various organizations are working in different capacities on this issue –NGOs, government agencies, academic institutions, but integrated and upscaled efforts are required.

• NGOs and other organizations complement the capacities and efforts of governmental agencies, but cooperation appears to occur on an ad hoc basis rather than through systematic and strategic plans and programs. NGOs need stable sources of support and financing from governmental and other sources.

CBD Key Issues

1. Slow but steady progress in realizing biodiversity governance infrastructure and means for biodiversity conservation (e.g., habitat and species mapping, establishing protected area networks, establishing responsible entities and management plans for them, conservation of some species/ habitats, monitoring for many species, but very few centralised monitoring systems).

2. Self-evaluation for many countries showed partial-, insufficient- or unknown progress in meeting self-established targets set out by the CBD.

3. NBSAPs ended recently or are approaching the last year, so a new cycle of plans must be delivered in the upcoming years. The expectations/formats have changed globally, so the new plans must align with the Global Biodiversity Framework.

4. CBD reports varied in format, length, language, and the quality of information provided. The 6th National Reports were more standardized but still offered space for vague information compared to the CITES or CMS reporting formats (old ones).

5. The last NBSAPs were straightforward and contained quantifiable actions, responsible institutions, estimated periods of implementation, and costs.

6. Chances that biodiversity will be included in sectorial planning and used in decisionmaking were improved.

7. Some countries still used the same information for reporting as written for the NBSAPs (copy-paste) or used great concepts such as ecosystem services, sustainability, and green economy, with fewer real measures reported.

8. Data collection, monitoring systems, and environmental information systems need practical improvements.

CITES Key Issues

1. CITES information on international data portals is quasi-outdated for all countries, where the last reports cover the period of 2019-2021. Most reports were not accessible for public consultation; others were general with very little information about the actions taken.

2. A new reporting system is in place. The following 1-2 years might reveal more specific information about CITES species and the efforts implemented in the Caribbean Region.

3. Improvements for conservation of the Queen Conch under the international project Seizing the trade and business potential of Blue BioTrade products for promoting sustainable livelihoods and conservation of marine biodiversity in selected Eastern Caribbean States in Grenada, Saint Lucia, Saint Vincent, and the Grenadines1. This is a good example of a species-focused intervention which was well-documented.

4. Most countries were in the process of improving legislation2 (CITES Country Profiles, 2023). Countries with legislation accepted by the Secretariat of CITES were the Bahamas, Barbados, Guyana, Jamaica, and Saint Kitts and Nevis.

5. Export quotas were established for Belize3 (CITES Export Quotas for Belize, 2023), Guyana4 (CITES Export Quotas for Guyana, 2023), Jamaica5 (CITES Export Quotas for Jamaica, 2023), and Suriname6 (CITES Export Quotas for Suriname, 2023).

CMS Key issues

1. CMS is relevant only for Antigua and Barbuda and Trinidad and Tobago; both countries have a report from 2019 with available information about species’ major threats, challenges, and needs for implementing this policy.

2. The literature review was limited to only a few sources with poor data. Some positive examples were mentioned for Antigua and Barbuda, but the measures reported still have a generalist approach to the CMS. The main difficulties relate to shortcomings in financial, human resource, and technical capacity7 (Government of Antigua and Barbuda, 2019).

3. Trinidad and Tobago initiated the removal of five migratory waterfowl from the list of game species and have implemented conservative (e.g., beach patrols of locals for Leatherback turtles), educative, and legislative actions for some of the species.

4. A recent project started for (FAO, 2023) Strategies, Technologies, and Social Solutions to manage By-catch in Tropical Large Marine Ecosystem Fisheries Project in Barbados, Guyana, Suriname, and Trinidad and Tobago8.

Stakeholder Consultation Results

A virtual stakeholder consultation process was conducted in which biodiversity focal points were asked a series of questions and provided an opportunity to share their perspective. A rapid evaluation of eight questions was conducted using online polls during the meeting. The results for four of the questions are shown below and on the right:

How well are the CBD/CITES reports and the information within them communicated / disseminated in your country on a scale of 1 to 5? How can each be improved? What are the key overall issues?

What is the status of environmental data acquisition for CBD/CITES on a scale of 1 to 5? How can each be improved? What are the key overall issues?

What is the status of environmental data processing for CBD/CITES on a scale of 1 to 5? How can each be improved? What are the key overall issues?

Data Sharing

What is the status of human resource capacity for CBD/CITES reporting on a scale of 1 to 5? How can each be improved? What are the key overall issues?

CBD/CITES Data Processing

CBD/CITES HR Capacity

Photo: Julian Berengar Solter/Unsplash

Key Overall Issues

• Monitoring levels of persistent chemical pollutants requires consistent temporal analysis of multiple media (air, water, soil, blood, tissue, milk) with sufficient spatial resolution. The costs of such monitoring campaigns can be extremely prohibitive in developing countries.

• Variability of data in the region and its low recurrence in the same locations makes it difficult to detect trends

• Logistical issues have caused some changes in location of in-situ monitoring sites which make it difficult to have consistent data that can be used to assess trends.

• Most of the scientific research that is used to support back trajectory analysis (which can be used to identify trends) refers to other parts of the world, making it difficult to apply to the Caribbean region due to improper model parameterization

• Financial resources are lacking for sophisticated analysis that requires highly skilled personnel and for fundamental analysis performed using active sampling and passive air monitoring

• The bulk of financing for existing monitoring activities comes from external sources rather than nationally financed programs leading to inconsistencies and discontinuities in chemicals waste monitoring program operation

• Technological capacity for laboratory analysis has increased over time, largely through the implementation of UNEP/GEF projects. Although progress has been made, regional labs still fall behind in their interlaboratory performance exercises, indicating that further support is required. This is particularly important as Conventions progressively add new chemicals/compounds to their lists

• Regional Action Plans (RAPs) are required for some chemicals-waste MEAs, particularly those that require large scale spatial and temporal monitoring such as for POPs (Stockholm Convention). Data is required from Caribbean countries to ensure quality monitoring.

• Education and awareness training pertaining to harmful chemicals is required to help people be more aware of the risks they pose to humans and ecosystems

Basel Convention Key Issues

The Basel Convention on the Control of Transboundary Movements of Hazardous Wastes and Their Disposal is the most comprehensive environmental agreement on hazardous and other wastes, so some of the issues faced with its implementation are addressed in more detail with the other conventions.

1. Actions under the Basel Convention at the country level are to align with the SDGs (particularly 12.4 and 12.5) therefore there needs to be data sharing and collaboration with in-country groups who are responsible for progress on the SDGs

2. Verifiable baseline data is required to assess progress on various targets. Sound sources of data are therefore required for this in addition to monitoring processes and systems.

3. Data availability is a critical issue. Clear sources of data need to be mapped with those that have been used consistently given priority, and additional sources identified.

4. Clear communication and understanding of both process and outcome indicators needs to be established for all key stakeholders. This will facilitate collective action towards advancing the objectives of the Basel Convention.

5. PIC (Prior Informed Consent) should be emphasized as one of the key elements of addressing TBM (transboundary movement) of waste. As outlined in the strategic framework for implementation of the Basel Conventions9 (Basel Convention, 2023).

6. National legislation needs to align with the objectives of the Basel Convention. As the move towards a life cycle, or circular economy approach, should be reflected in national legislation.

Rotterdam Convention Key Issues

1. Considering that the Rotterdam Convention is an ‘early warning system’ for potentially inbound harmful chemicals, attention must be paid to the process of informing and consent. Ongoing training and capacity development is required to ensure PIC (Prior Informed Consent) is upheld. In-country personnel need this knowledge and experience (Basel, Rotterdam, Stockholm Conventions, 2023)10

2. Risk assessment methodologies and processes must be continuously updated with changing chemicals and changing environmental conditions (i.e. climate change impacting processes).

3. Firm regulatory measures/tools are required for in-country agencies to apply when Convention procedures are not followed (e.g. dangerous chemicals are imported without notification), or when restricted substances are used, posing scientifically based risks to people (e.g. insecticides, crusticides, paint thinners, etc). Studies have shown that ratification of the Rotterdam Convention has led to roughly a 7% reduction of imports of hazardous chemicals, but this is based on there being sound environmental policies in the country11 (Nunez-Rocha and Martinez-Zarzoso, 2019). Enforcing regulations remains a challenge in the Caribbean despite the proven positive effects.

4. Public education and awareness of the human and ecological health risks of pesticides is an ongoing challenge. More in-country efforts are required to sensitize the public to these risks12. (Fernandez, 2007)

5. Practical training on harmful chemical use and naming for farmers is required13 (FAO, 2023)

Stockholm Convention Key Issues

1. Monitoring for POPs requires consistent sampling over time and space. This has proven to be a challenge in the Caribbean region14 (Stockholm Convention on Persistent Organic Pollutants, 2021).

2. Laboratories in the Caribbean have had capacity developed through GEF projects but there remain shortcomings in capability as demonstrated by translaboratory exercises with labs in Europe (Stockholm Convention on Persistent Organic Pollutants, 2021)14

3. Ongoing capacity development is required as new chemical compounds are added to the watch list. Financial resources are required to ensure this continues sustainably.

4. Caribbean countries are particularly vulnerable due to small land masses and high population density making risk of chemical exposure greater

5. Weak institutional capacity and inadequate regulatory frameworks have led to limited POPs management in the region15 (UNIDO, 2018)

6. Chemicals waste management plans need to be updated on an ongoing basis and POPs inventories are required

7. Strategies for dealing with UPOPs (unintentionally produced POPs) are required, involving assessment of waste disposal and incineration (medical especially) (UNIDO, 2018)15

Minamata Convention Key Issues

Even though there is progress being made in reporting both by Parties and non-Parties to the Minamata Convention, there remain distinct challenges that need to be addressed:

1. There are significant data gaps. A lack of quality data was reported in most of the National Reports and National Implementation plans. The reasons varied and were largely contextual. For example in Guyana, a large component of mercury use is in the ASGM (Artisanal and Small-Scale Mining) sector. A significant portion of this sector is comprised of “Pork Knockers / Punters”, which are very smallscale miners – often having only a few people in their operation. Data pertaining to these operations was scarce (Government of Guyana, 2021)16

2. Formulation of new legislation and policy remains to be a challenge in some countries. Saint Lucia noted that greater legal, institutional, and technical capacity for managing the import and disposal of MAPs (MercuryAdded Products) as well as enforcing standards for mercury content of MAPs is required17 (Government of Saint Lucia, 2021). Suriname indicated in their First Full National Reports of the Minamata Convention on Mercury 2021 that they were still in the process of creating the necessary decrees regarding mercury emissions.

3. Public awareness related to the risks of mercury exposure is an issue, as is awareness of new methods and technologies which avoid the use of mercury. It was noted that in Guyana there have been GEFfinanced pilot projects which have demonstrated new ‘mercury-free’ mining processes that have been relatively successful. However, the results of these efforts need wider communication within the mining sector16 (Government of Guyana, 2021). More effort and investment are needed in public awareness of mercury exposure risks as well as new ‘mercury free’ innovations in industry and business.

4. Financial assistance and capacity development is required to support reporting to the Minamata Convention, data gathering, education and awareness, and general progress on reducing mercury emissions, waste, and human/environmental exposure18 (Government of Jamaica, 2021c).

Stakeholder Consultation Results

A virtual stakeholder consultation process was conducted in which chemicals-waste MEAs focal points were asked a series of questions and provided an opportunity to share their perspective. A rapid evaluation of eight questions was conducted using online polls during the meeting. The results for each four of the questions are shown below:

How well are the BRSM Conventions reports and the information within them communicated / disseminated in your country on a scale of 1 to 5? How can each be improved? What are the key overall issues?

BRS

What is the status of environmental data processing for BRSM Conventions on a scale of 1 to 5? How can each be improved? What are the key overall issues?

BRS Data Processing

What is the status of human resource capacity for BRSM Conventions reporting on a scale of 1 to 5? How can each be improved? What are the key overall issues?

HR Capacity

BRS

KEY

ENVIRONMENTAL DATA GAPS AND INFORMATION SOURCES

Photo: Mariella Francis/Unsplash

Overview

The goal of the environment data needs assessment is to provide a set of key aspects of reporting for each MEA, the data required for assessing these aspects, the current gaps in this data, and suggested ways of addressing these gaps. This analysis was done for all study countries (15) and each MEA (biodiversity and chemicals waste). Due to the high volume of reports to review, a rapid analysis methodology was chosen in which only key reports were assessed for each MEA. These were usually the periodic (annual, biannual, etc.) reports that are required by the MEA secretariats such as the National Biodiversity reports for the UNCBD, or the annual report of mercury waste for the Minamata Convention. These reports were reviewed with a view to formulating a regional perspective on each issue being assessed. In the case of some MEAs, there were only a few countries that had substantial reports to assess so the findings were based on that information and the results therefore may not be fully representative of the wider Caribbean region. The high-level summary of the results of the analysis ca be found below in tables for each biodiversity and chemicals-waste related MEA reviewed.

Methodology

A series of key issues were identified for each MEA examined. These issues were determined through the literature review and stakeholder consultations that had occurred during early stages of the project. There are several common issues amongst the MEAs studied, but some unique to each one. For each issue the data that is required to address them was delineated based on evaluation of the reporting requirements and policy needs for the MEAs. The reports and related documentation and information sources used for reporting to each MEA were evaluated to determine if there was sufficient data available and where there wasn’t, these gaps were noted.

A thorough review of data sources was also conducted for the key issues identified for each MEA. International, regional, and national information sources were documented. The information for the environmental data gap analysis and environmental information sources is included in the following tables for each MEA. Feature initiatives in the different countries studied were also identified.

CBD Data Gaps and Information Sources

Key Issue Data Needs

National legislation and the NBSAPs’ role in environmental decision-making and planning

Human and technological capacity to implement biodiversity policies

Reports and documentation that demonstrate efficacy of implementation (legislation, NBSAP, regulatory instruments)

Gaps

Measures for integrated biodiversity conservation are partially effective. Species-related laws developed, but government changes slow the process. Difficult keeping up with changing reporting requirements (all MEAs)19, 20, 21, 22

Develop monitoring protocols for legislation developed. Make the case for mainstreaming biodiversity with political leaders and other stakeholders – align with SDGs.

Sources

National legislation

CANARI23

Global Americans24

Cataora-Vargas et al, 202225

Rodriguez-Rivera, 202126

CBD Secretariat27

InforMEA28

Biodiversity conservation infrastructure: Protected areas network (PA), PA management agencies, and management plans

Data pertaining to amounts of human resources and their effectiveness as well as technological capacity.

Biodiversity data availability accessibility at national levels

Data on habitat and species distribution, protected areas, and management plans and supporting reports.

Reports indicate shortcomings in HR capacity but with little specific data. Some countries are specific29. Generally there is a disconnect between reporting requirements and HR capacity30

National level data is weak, fragmented or missing in many countries often with a mosaic of project data36 Low administrative capacity with new PAs37- limits confidence38

Number of biodiversity data portals and extent of availability of data through sharing as well as statistical capacity.

Several countries do not regularly collect data44 and lack a central repository. Data that is collected is not fully utilized45 Shortage of data sharing processes46 and disconnects with NSOs.

National assessments of capacity requirements. Continuous funding for capacity development. Specific data about HR levels and require-ments to help funding

Investments in biodiversity platforms and management capacity for PAs including data acquisition. Funding for biodiversity data and synergy with EIAs/SEAs

CBD Focal Points

UN ECLAC31

OECS32

UNEP ROLAC33

FAO34

UN ILO35

Prioritize data standardization and ensure funding is in place for data acquisition and management. Emphasize comprehension in data products. Encourage interagency collaboration, particularly NSOs.

Environment related agencies

Conservation Authorities in-country NGOs

LAC Geographic39

TNC40

IUCN41

UN Biodiversity Lab42

McCallum et al, 201543

Environmental agencies

NGOs, community groups, Universities

Dutch Caribbean Biodiversity Database47

Verweij et al, 201948

CANARI, 2019 – Caribbean

Regional Biodiversity Hotspots49

GBIF50

UNEP GRID51

World Bank - Global Species Database52

IBAT53

CBD Data Gaps and Information Sources cont’d

Key Issue Data Needs Data Gaps

Monitoring of biodiversity and monitoring of biodiversity-related actions

Cooperation with stakeholders, awareness, and support for conservation

Data pertaining to national monitoring protocols, guidelines, costs and initiatives.

Lack of monitoring protocols54 in some cases and there is insufficient expertise55. Training needed for the community too to help with data56

Data on partnerships and collaboration protocols with stakeholders as well as documentation of aware-ness raising

Financial resources for conservation and monitoring biodiversity

Data on available national and international funds. Costs of activities and programs including communications.

Inventory of activities caried out – govt and non-govt.

Research projects are sporadic63 and collaboration is not formalized, nor does it tend to be documented or included in strategies64. Lack of familiarity of non govt groups with NBSAP65

National funds established but not practically implemented in cases71. Lack of detailed data on species monitoring and habitat assessment costs as well as operational costs (human and technology). Costs for infrastructure are often not documented.

Potential Solutions Information Sources

Elaborate monitoring protocols and offer training for staff and community. Align national monitoring with EIA and SEA processes and other projects. Use national surveys to gather awareness data. Encourage documentation of collaborations. Continuous investments in, and documentation of, awareness raising and stakeholder engagement

UNCBD Focal points

CLME+57

CARICOM 201858

UN CBD NBSAP monitoring59

WWF60

ICLEI61

UN WCMC62

National media organizations (radio, TV, websites/blogs). Google analytics, Biodiversity Focal Points

Alvarado et al, 202266

Canari, 201267

CBD Toolkit68

OECD, 201869

IUCN, 202270

Need clear list of national and international funding with sources. Ensure data is gathered for operational costs as well as education and awareness raising

CBD Focal Points, Donor reports on in-country spending

Suriname’s Nature Fund72

Caribbean Biodiversity Fund73

Critical Ecosystem Partnership Fund74

The GEF75 IDB76

Feature Countries: Antigua and Barbuda, Barbados, and St. Kitts and Nevis.

Invasive and Alien Species (IAS) can have significant ecological and economic impacts in the Caribbean. The GEF project “Preventing COSTS of Invasive Alien Species (IAS) in Barbados and the OECS (2018-2022) focused on strengthening IAS policy, control and management of IAS impacts, and strengthening institutional capacity. The outputs of this project contributed to IAS reporting for the CBD in the target countries77 (GEF Database).

CMS Data Gaps and Information Sources

Key Issue Data Needs Data Gaps

National legislation and environmental decision-making extended to migratory species (MS)

Human, technical and financial capacity

Information on legislation that applies to MS and synergies with other MEAs and impacts.

Little data on cross sectoral synergies and regulations. Limited data on MS which can be used to support de-cision making – more needed for PAs. Some data on cross sectoral integration with Antigua and Barbuda but efficacy not explained78

Data pertaining to amounts of human resources and their effectiveness as well as technological capacity.

Protected area (PA) management and monitoring and MS conservation embeddedness

Integration of MS conservation in national or local strategies and planning

Data on PA and conservation practices linked to MS. Data about MS – distribution, conservation status.

Little data on HR and technical capacity, particularly level of expertise in specific species conservation, habitat quality, and connectivity.

Little data on effectiveness of PAs on MS. Conservation efforts are often project based – data not continuous, difficult to find systematic data on MS and PAs.

Data on MS targets in NBSAP and other national planning policies and programs

Gaps in MS related information in NBSAPs and other planning policies and programs. MS integration not reported in Trinidad and Tobago reports91 , referenced in others but not clear if implemented92

Feature Country: Barbados

Potential Solutions Information Sources

Document legislation and strategies that explicitly outline cross-sectoral synergies. Improve governance arrangements for MS by guidance and document cross-sectoral collaboration.

National legislation79 UNEP80

SPAW protocol81

Regional assistance for capacitybuilding opportunities for staff or local communities involved in conservation and MS. Separate funds for capacity building besides conservation funds.

Connecting the management of PAs and conservation initiatives with MS conservation. Establish networks of protected areas throughout the migration range of endangered species.

BirdsCaribbean82

WIDECAST83

Caribbean Shark Coalition84

IUCN85

Spatial data about protected areas 86

Bahamas National Trust87

Belize Audubon Society88

BIOPAMA89

UNEP + CEP90

Agreement at the policy level on MS research priorities. Priorities for MS need to be clearly established in CMS reports. Effective action on these priorities needs to be periodically assessed and documented.

Antigua and Barbuda NBSAP93 EPIC94

BIOPAMA89

Coral Reef Alliance95

Barbados is home to the regional Marine Turtle Tagging Centre (MTTC) located at the University of the West Indies. The MTTC is maintained by WIDECAST and operated by the Barbados Sea Turtle Project. This important initiative aims to strengthen and coordinate dozens of small-scale tagging projects and encourage collaboration amongst different Caribbean countries with respect to sea turtle tagging. The MTTC efforts to distribute tags to different research organizations has greatly improved data availability pertaining to migratory sea turtles and ultimately CMS implementation108 (WIDECAST)

CMS Data Gaps and Information Sources cont’d

Key Issue Data Needs

Data accessibility for public

Public awareness and support for conservation

Data on public databases with MS information, information sharing on MS through expert networks. Data availability on human impact on MS Bycatch, invasive species, disturbance and habitat destruction

Data on MS campaigns and education programs, media coverage and indices of uptake (i.e. website visits, social media metrics). Surveys on comprehension where possible.

Collaboration between national agencies, NGOs, the private sector, and locals.

Financial resource mobilization and accession for MS conservation

Data on collaboration – projects, initiatives between ministries, with private sector, and public. Data on funding for community MS projects.

Data Gaps

Reports are available but specific raw data is not. Data is shared between agencies and NGOs on request. Data to document these processes would be helpful.

Potential Solutions Information Sources

Document the number of MSrelated data sources that are publicly accessible and how they can be accessed. Establish lists of networks of experts in MS and document it. Monitoring and data acquisition programs need to identify the drivers of environmental degradation.

CARICOM – workshops, information sheets, databases, publications

Birds Caribbean96

IUCN Red List and database97

Motus Wildlife Tracking System98

CMS Secretariat99

Data on international donor finance, national spending, and other investments (private sector etc.) on MS

Little indication of how well MS issues are being understood by public. No lists of experts who can serves as public information sources Not much information on data sharing and collaboration protocols nationally. Some reports for individual projects lacking quantitative data. No data on costs of conservation efforts for MS. Govt. expenditure on MS governance not listed. Some indication of separate funds for MS93 and increase in resources without foreign doners – no specifics though94 .

Document and log, both quantitatively and qualitatively, public awareness activities. Document the impact of the events as well, if possible (behaviour change, education gained, etc.)

CARICOM – workshops, information sheets, databases, publications

Google Analytics

Advertising/Media Reports

CMS Focal Points

Formalize partnerships with stakeholders (NGOs, academia, etc). Accessing/funding projects where stakeholders can be partners or beneficiaries. Document and log the number of community initiatives related to MS.

Birds Caribbean – Caribbean96

Motus Collaboration100

EPIC94

Flora and Fauna Internationa101

Motus Wildlife Tracking System98

Vermont Center for Ecostudies102

American Bird Conservancy103

Turtle Village Trus104

SOS – Save Our Sea Turtle105

Belize Audubon Society106

Birdlife International107

Document financial outlays for various aspects of MS conservation activities. Use baseline financial information to rationalize further resource allocation.

Turtle Village Trust105

National Focal Points

GEF

UNEP

European Community

CITES Data Gaps and Information Sources

Key Issue Data Needs

Status of legislation

Ability to report on time, avoid data fluctuations

Legislation in compliance with CITES.

Gaps Potential Solutions Information Sources

Some countries provided draft legislation to the Secretariat, but it is challenging to find data on the implementation of CITES-related legislation.

Creation of panel data/indicators that represented regulatory / legislative progress on CITES implementation.

Specific legislative Acts

CARICOM

FAO109

CITES Secretariat110

UNEP - ACP MEAs 111

INTERPOL112

ECOFEL113

Capacity of management authorities to collect and centralize data

Data on reports, issued permits vs. permits used, illegal trade cases, and trade suspensions

Annual reports and illegal trade reports (now required) are not accessible for public.

Implementation reports are available but often outdated. Permission are not fully monitored – issued permits not used are bot recorded. Data sharing is weak.

Data at different management authorities about permits, authorizations, illegalities. Information about the existence and the quality of databases.

Illegal trade data is collected and held by customs offices or other judicial authorities and is not directly accessible by management authorities – difficult to monitor. Limited data without implementation reports submitted. Only international databases are available, and not all information is public.

Could establish knowledge platforms on which CITES reports can be publicly shared. Reporting on permits that have been used annually. Sticking to implementation reports and formulating capacity needs. Data sharing processes set up between key agencies (Environment, Border Security, Port Authority, etc.)

CITES Secretariat110

CITES Focal Points

Protocols can be established between ministries and other pertinent groups for data sharing - particularly illegal trade reports. Data collection and centralization protocols to be established. Communication with CITES Secretariat and other authorities.

Birds Caribbean114

CITES trade database115

CITES species116

Flora and Fauna International101

Birds Caribbean114

Government of Belize117

WIDECAST118

Caribbean Regional Fisheries Mechanism (CRFM) Working Group on Queen Conch119

CITES Data Gaps and Information Sources cont’d

Key

Permission systems

Data on types of permission systems in place: paper-based, excel-based (manual entry), or electronic (ePermits).

Documentation on permission systems –level of development and capacity requirements are lacking.

Automated, electronic permission system will help with data centralization, reporting, and monitoring. Permit real-time access to the public, experts, and decision-makers.

CITES – Secretariat120

CITES Permit System121 e-CITES122

Feature Countries: Saint Lucia, Grenada, and Saint Vincent and Grenadines

The countries were beneficiaries of the Blue BioTrade Project, which focused on promoting sustainable livelihoods and conservation of marine biodiversity. The study evaluated the value chain of the queen conch production, which is a CITES species. The outcomes of this analysis informed the Blue BioTrade Action Plan which was directed at improving compliance with CITES. This is an excellent example of focused economic and environmental research whose outputs can improve MEA reporting123 (UNCTAD, 2022a, 2022b, 2022c)

Basel Convention Data Gaps and Information Sources

Key Issue Data Needs

National legislation and environmental decision making extended to transboundary movement of hazardous waste

Human, technical and financial capacity for transboundary movement of hazardous waste

Data pertaining to the movement of hazardous waste from and to the country as well as toxicity of hazardous waste.

Gaps

Customs records may in some cases may not be managed well with accessible records. Human and environmental health risks tend to lack data.

Data related to number of staff, technical capacity of staff, and financial capacity for implementation.

Transboundary movement of hazardous waste protocols implementation

Data accessibility for transboundary movement of hazardous waste

Data on national policies and legal frameworks for hazardous waste management and monitoring. Inventory of hazardous waste and infractions.

Number of data platforms for hazardous waste. Ease of public access to information pertaining to hazardous waste

Number of staff not reported

Capacity of staff not reported. There is robust information from tracking systems. The amount of financial investment is not listed in reports

Tends to be well managed

Solutions Information Sources

Ensure that the customs import, and export tracking systems are aligned with Basel Convention reporting. Establish a recommended baseline of data required to ascertain the human and ecological health risks due to hazardous chemicals.

Identify number of staff involved in reporting. Report on quality of tracking systems. Connect financial investment vs human and technical capacity.

Basel Convention Secretariat124

Basel and Stockholm Conventions Regional Centre for the Caribbean125 European Chemicals Agency126 ParlAmericas127

Tends to be well managed

OAS128

ECLAC31

Chemicals Framework129 ICCM130

Public awareness and support for transboundary movement of hazardous waste monitoring/ management

Public awareness of health/environmental risk of hazardous waste. Safe practices for management of hazardous waste

No data platforms were reported in annual reports reviewed. Not much mention was made of efforts to facilitate public access to information pertaining to hazardous waste.

Cases of illegal traffic of hazardous chemicals are tracked and reported. Not a lot of effort put into public awareness of health/ environmental risks

Data platforms may be a way of increasing public awareness of the health risks of hazardous. Gather data on any activities that facilitate public access to information.

Basel and Stockholm Conventions Regional Centre for the Caribbean125 Basel Convention Secretariat124

OECD echem portal131

Basel and Stockholm Conventions Regional Centre for the Caribbean125 Global Pesticide Use and Trade Database132

Gather data on any activities that facilitate public awareness of human/environmental risks of hazardous waste.

ECLAC31

Chemicals Framework129

Basel Convention Data Gaps and Information Sources

Key Issue Data Needs

Data about direct impacts of transboundary movement of hazardous waste

Civil support for national agencies, from NGOs, private sector and local communities

Number and nature of reported health impact incidents from hazardous waste Number of NGOs and private sector organizations actively contributing to Hazardous Waste reporting.

Effects on human health are documented in the annual reports when they occur.

There were no reports of NGOs contributing to hazardous waste. Private sector organizations are provide data for hazardous waste recovery and disposal

N/A

Document the number of private sector organizations reporting. Document engagement of NGOs and community groups.

UNIDO133

CARPHA134

WHO135

FAO Stat136

CARICOM137

IAF138

CANAR139

UNEP140

WBCSD141

IUCN138

Financial resource mobilization and accession

Amount of total finance allocated annually to Basel Convention implementation.

Financial investments in monitoring and reporting on hazardous waste were not documented in annual reports

Feature Country: Trinidad and Tobago (BCRC)

Document the amount of funding applied to help track progress vs. spending

The GEF143

OECS144

ECLAC31

The Basel Convention Regional Centre (BCRC) for Training and Technology Transfer for the Caribbean has created a fantastic public awareness and education campaign about persistent organic pollutants (POPs) called “Stop the Pops” (https://www.stopthepops.com). This campaign uses vibrant colours, animations, and interactivity to communicate to a variety of audiences (children, farmers, firefighters, and others) about the risks of different POPs. One of the challenges of the chemicals Conventions is raising public awareness of human and environmental risks of harmful chemicals and this campaign is an exemplary example of what is possible125

Rotterdam Convention Data Gaps and Information Sources

Key Issue Data Needs Data Gaps Potential Solutions Information Sources

National legislation and environmental decision making extended to PIC for hazardous chemicals

Human, technical, and financial capacity for PIC for hazardous chemicals

Data related to banned or severely restricted chemicals.

Import/export responses in relation to chemicals listed in Annex III

Data related to number of staff, technical capacity of staff, and financial capacity for implementation.

No data gaps –import responses reported regularly by parties and communicated through PIC Circular

Number of staff not reported. Staff capacity not reported. Financial resources for implementation and reporting not reported.

Explore possibility of research partnerships and knowledge sharing platforms for impacts of hazardous chemicals if additional awareness raising is required.

Identify number of staff involved in reporting. Report on quality of tracking systems. Connect financial investment vs human and technical capacity.

Basel and Stockholm Conventions Regional Centre for the Caribbean125

UNEP140

Rotterdam Convention Secretariat145

PIC for hazardous chemicals implementation

Data accessibility for public for PIC/ general information for hazardous chemicals

Number of import/ export notifications created, ‘final regulatory actions’ on a chemical, ‘proposals on severely hazardous pesticide formulations causing problems’.

Number of public data platforms for hazardous chemicals. Ease of public access to information pertaining to hazardous chemicals

Public awareness of PIC for hazardous chemicals

Percentage of users who use proper PPE when handling chemicals, who use safe chemical application practices.

Data available but not tallied

Parties to tally data and document on an annual basis

ECLAC31

OECS144

OAS128

ILO145

Chemicals Framework129

Basel and Stockholm Conventions Regional Centre for the Caribbean125

Rotterdam Convention145

Some parties have electronic platforms for hazardous chemicals, yet they are not reported on.

Not reported yet noted as a significant issue148

Parties to document number of public data platforms for hazardous chemicals. Conduct survey of core stakeholder groups (i.e. farmers) to assess how accessible they feel hazardous chemical information is.

Conduct field assessment of proper PPE use, safe chemical application practices and report results. Field assessment of stakeholder comprehension of risks of harmful chemicals and report results.

Basel and Stockholm Conventions Regional Centre for the Caribbean125

OECD echem portal131

EU Pesticides Database147

FAO Stat148

Basel and Stockholm Conventions Regional Centre for the Caribbean125

Chemicals Framework129

Rotterdam Convention Data Gaps and Information Sources cont’d

Data about direct impacts of Hazardous Materials

Civil support for national agencies, from NGOs, private sector and local communities

Financial resource mobilization and accession

Number and nature of reported health and environmental impact incidents from hazardous chemicals

Number of private sector, community groups, and NGOs engaged with hazardous chemical reporting

Amount of total finance allocated annually to Convention implementation.

Not reported yet noted as a significant issue159

Not reported

Total finance allocated annually not reported

Tally and document health impact incidents annually

UNEP149

CARPHA134

PAHO150

WHO135

Parties to document private sector, community groups, and NGOs engagement with hazardous chemical reporting

Parties to document the amount of financing dedicated to implementation and reporting on an annual basis, including project specific funding.

CARICOM137

IAF138

CANAR139

UNEP140

WBCSD141

IUCN138

The GEF143

OECS144

ECLAC31

Stockholm Convention Data Gaps and Information Sources

Key Issue Data Needs

National legislation and environmental decision making related to eliminating or restricting the production of POPs.

Human, technical and financial capacity for eliminating or restricting the production of POPs.

Data pertaining to the production of POPs in industry, impact on human/ ecosystem health.

Data on migration and transport of POPs.

Data related to number of staff, technical capacity of staff, and financial capacity for implementation. Data on the amount and quality of testing infrastructure including laboratories.

POPs management implementation

Information on country-specific health and environmental impact of POPs not readily available.

Audit of the baseline type of data pertaining to human health and environment impacts of POPs could help address this issue. Enhance national capacity for chemicals monitoring.

Stockholm Convention Secretariat151

Basel and Stockholm Conventions Regional Centre for the Caribbean125

CAHFSA152

Data accessibility for public for POPs management

Data pertaining to national policies and legal frameworks for toxic chemicals management. Users and suppliers of toxic chemicals, and inventory of POPs chemicals

Number of public data platforms for POPs. Ease of public access to information pertaining to POPs.

Number of staff not reported. Staff capacity not reported. Financial resources for implementation and reporting not reported. POPs monitoring capacity is reported on14 .

Information wellcovered in NIPs

Identify number of staff involved in reporting. Report on quality of monitoring systems. Connect financial investment vs human and technical capacity.

ECLAC31

OECS144

OAS128

ILO145

Chemicals Framework129

Data on the number of public data platforms does not appear to be readily reported. Public access to POPs data is reported on an anecdotal basis in several NIPs and the GMP125

Parties should be consulted to determine whether they are considering developing publicfacing POPs data platforms.

Stockholm Convention Secretariat151

Basel and Stockholm Conventions Regional Centre for the Caribbean125

EU Pesticides Database147

OECD echem portal131

Stockholm Convention Data Gaps and Information Sources cont’d

Key Issue Data Needs

Public awareness and support for POPs management.

Data about direct impacts of POPs

Adherence to POPs-related regulations, policies, and guidelines. Public awareness of health risk of POPs. Safe practices for management of intentional and unintentional releases of POPs

Number and nature of reported health and environmental impact incidents from POPs.

Civil support for national agencies, from NGOs, private sector and local communities

Financial resource mobilization and accession

Number of private sector, community groups, and NGOs engaged with POPs related issues and reporting.

Amount of total finance allocated annually to Convention implementation.

Little information related to how well the public adheres to POPS-related regulations and awareness raising for the public. Minimal data on public education about health and environmental effects of POPs.

Inconsistent levels of monitoring health and environmental impacts.

Not reported

Data indicating the number of infractions. Sustained financing for public awareness raising with monitoring of activities. Investment in public education of the health and environmental risks of POPs with monitoring of impact

Basel and Stockholm Conventions Regional Centre for the Caribbean125 Chemicals Framework129

Total finance allocated annually not reported

Gather data on chemicals-related (POPs) health and environmental incidents. This can support risk assessment.

Parties to document private sector, community groups, and NGOs engagement with POPs related issues and reporting.

UNEP149

CARPHA134 PAHO150 WHO135 FAO Stat136

CARICOM137 IAF138 CANARI139 UNEP140 WBCSD141 IUCN138

Parties to document the amount of financing dedicated to implementation and reporting on an annual basis, including project specific funding.

The GEF143 OECS144 ECLAC31

Minamata Convention Data Gaps and Information Sources

Key Issue Data Needs

National legislation and environmental decision making extended to mercury-related issues

Human, technical and financial capacity for Minamata Convention implementation Minamata Convention on mercury implementation

Data accessibility for public for mercury-related issues

Data related to the environmental and human impacts of mercury as well as its use in various sectors.

Data related to number of staff, technical capacity of staff, and financial capacity for implementation.

Gaps

Data gaps were reported in import data and in ecosystem and human health impacts.

National Reports have a section for reporting on resource application, but data reported is minimal with the answers largely being yes/no.

Solutions Information Sources

The data overall is comprehensive. In each MIA report there are specific sections that highlight where assumptions are made, these can identify specific data issues.

Gather more specific data: number of individuals, skills and capability of staff, and specific amounts of financial resources applied to implementation.

BCRC125

Minamata Convention Secretariat153

Chen et al, 2018154: World Health Organization135

Public awareness and support for mercury related issues

Data related to the efficacy of efforts to implement various aspects of the Minamata Convention.

Data such as the number of publicly available data platforms for mercury

Too early to see gaps. Implementation of a M&E program can help identify gaps.

Parties are required to report on Article 7: Information exchange, in their annual reports. The data provided is quite limited – mainly yes/no.

Amount of public communication through various media and measures of awareness.

Detailed data on awareness is lacking in the Annual Reports. Some public awareness data is included in the MIAs but again, there lacks detail.

Start M&E activities to gather data and track progress.

OAS31

OECS144

ECLAC128

ILO145

Chemicals Framework129

Start tracking systems of the number of public data platforms or access points.

BRI155

Minamata Convention Secretariat153

Information about the number of public awareness campaigns and their reach. Measures of engagement such as google analytics on key websites.

BRI155

Bolanos-Alvarez et al, 2024

BRI – Global Biotic Mercury156

Synthesis Database157

GMOS158

UNEP Global Mercury Partnership159

ECLAC128

BCRC125

Chen and Driscoll, 2018160

Chemicals Framework129

Data about direct impacts of mercury

Data pertaining to the human and environmental impacts of mercury.

Parties are required to report on Article 16: Health Impacts in their annual reports. However, responses are yes/no.

More detailed data about specific risks posed by mercury throughout the countries would be beneficial.

UNIDO161

CARPHA134

PAHO150

Zolnikov and Ortiz, 2018162

WHO135

Minamata Convention Data Gaps and Information Sources cont’d

Key Issue Data Needs

Civil support for national agencies, from NGOs, private sector and local communities

Financial resource mobilization and accession

Data pertaining to the number of NGOs, private sector or local community groups that are engaged with the Minamata Convention.

Gaps

There is no detailed summary of the number of NGOs, private sector, and community groups engaged with actions related to the Minamata Convention

Gather data on how many NGOs, private sector companies, and community groups are active in addressing mercury-related issues.

CARICOM137

IAF138

CANARI139

UNEP140

WBCSD141

IUCN138

Amount of financial resources applied to actualization of the Minamata Convention on an ongoing and project-by-project basis.

Feature Country: Guyana

Few reported specific amounts of financial resources allocated.

Detailed financial figures for policy initiatives would help assess the overall cost of implementation.

The GEF143 OECS144

ECLAC31

BCRC125

Guyana has developed a “National Action Plan for Artisanal and Small Scale Gold Mining” which seeks to comprehensively address many of the challenges associated with the health and environmental risks linked to mercury releases from mining. The action plan concomitantly considers economic livelihoods that are dependent on mining and the biophysical risks of mercury and mercury compounds. The inclusive approach taken, and the depth of research has helped to fortify Minamata Convention implementation in Guyana.

FRAMEWORK FOR

Photo: Scott Taylor/Unsplash

Overview

The review and assessment of biodiversity and chemicals-waste MEAs in the initial phase of this project revealed distinct patterns with respect to implementation of MEAs. Implementation of carefully selected indicators, supported by panel data, can be an effective means of monitoring how these patterns change over time. Having a continuous source of highquality panel data for MEA implementation can help to strategically direct resources (financial, technological, and human) at the areas that require it the most, therefore providing greater return on investment and ideally higher quality reporting.

Panel data is commonly used in social and economic research to make data-based inferences about causal relationships between variables in society and it can be used as a ‘Monitoring Framework’ for MEA implementation. For the monitoring framework to be useful the data must be gathered over a time horizon appropriate to the question being asked. In the case of assessing MEA reporting in the Caribbean panel data can serve as a means of monitoring how effective implementation practices are in each country. It can help create a ‘snapshot’ of key performance indicators for MEA implementation at the national and regional level.

Methodology

The indicators chosen to provide panel data for MEA monitoring are based on the literature review, consultations, and analysis that was conducted during the initial phases of this project. They reflect the different aspects of MEA reporting that are essential to successful implementation. For each indicator data is recommended, including potential sources. The analytical value is explained in terms of how the data can be used to provide insights into how aspects of the MEA are being implemented. The goal was to create a diagnostic tool which uses data that is relatively easy to gather, yet still represents the in-country situation.

MEA Monitoring Framework

Indicator Description

National legislation supporting MEA implementation

Level of implementation of MEA

Has there been national legislation or regulations established that support MEA objectives?

This indicator is intended to provide an overall diagnostic of how well the MEA has been implemented.

Number of human resources

Skill capacity of human resources

This indicator can be a quick diagnostic of how many dedicated resources there are.

A measure of the level of skills and knowledge of those reporting to the MEA.

Technological capacity

Financial capacity

Gender mainstreaming

Assesses how technologically equipped countries are.

A concrete measure of financial resources applied to MEA reporting.

Gender equity is a main issue across MEA reporting. As it is a cross-cutting issue.

Level of MEArelated data acquisition

Data availability and accessibility

Data is critical to monitoring progress on parameters set out by MEAs.

Data availability can mean if there are accessible environmental information systems in place, data sharing agreements, or if there is an open data policy.