Stockholm Convention On Persistent Organic Pollutants - Controversies

Controversies

Although some critics have alleged that the treaty is responsible for the continuing death toll from malaria, in reality the treaty specifically permits the public health use of DDT for the control of mosquitoes (the malaria vector). While the Stockholm Convention attempts to reconcile the need for DDT and the need to eliminate DDT, it is ultimately ineffective. The deficiencies of the Stockholm Convention suggest an alternative solution. The Convention should be amended to eradicate the ultimate goal of a global ban of DDT, and instead explicitly acknowledge the need for DDT to combat malaria. Additionally, the Treaty should be amended to make qualifying for an exemption to use DDT easier. The continued use of DDT is justified given a balancing of its benefits against its costs. The immediacy of the benefits of DDT warrants allowing countries to continue to use the chemical for limited health purposes, even at some potential cost to the environment. From a developing country perspective, a lack of data and information about the sources, releases, and environmental levels of POPs hampers negotiations on specific compounds, and indicates a strong need for research.