71

Overview of the Implementation of the Minamata
Convention and Future Challenges
Eisaku TODA*
Secretariat of the Minamata Convention on Mercury, United Nations Environment Programme (UNEP)
11-13, Chemin des Anemones- 1219 Chatelaine, Switzerland*E-mail: eisaku.toda@un.org

Abstract
The Minamata Convention on Mercury was adopted at a diplomatic conference in October 2013, entering
into force in August 2017. It had 113 parties at the time of the third meeting of the Conference of the Parties(COP) in November 2019. The first three COP meetings were held yearly, establishing rules and guidance
needed for implementing the Convention. The objective of the Convention is to protect human health and theenvironment from anthropogenic emissions and releases of mercury. The largest source of anthropogenic
mercury emissions to air is artisanal and small-scale gold mining (38%), 75% of which is from parties to theConvention. Their efforts to develop and implement national action plans are expected to curb this. Coal
combustion and other point sources contribute to 47% of global emissions, 82% of which is from parties. The
parties have legal obligations to take emission control measures as soon as practicable. Minamata Convention
Initial Assessments being carried out in 111 countries provide critical information on parties’ needs that will
support targeted assistance for the effective implementation of the Convention by developing countries. Work
towards the effectiveness evaluation, which is to be done six years after entry into force, started at COP-1 in
2017, and this will be one of the main agenda items for COP-4 in 2021. The interface between science andpolicy is being strengthened through groups of experts nominated by parties and scientific meetings such as
the International Conference on Mercury as a Global Pollutant. The views expressed herein are those of theauthor and do not necessarily reflect the views of the United Nations.
Key words :	effectiveness evaluation, heavy metal, mercury, Minamata Convention, UNEP

1. Background
Mercury is one of the ten chemicals of major healthconcern identified by the World Health Organization(WHO). It exists in various chemical forms — elemental,
inorganic and organic, with different levels of toxicity to
the nervous, digestive, immune and other systems. Oneof the most toxic forms of mercury is methylmercury,which caused Minamata Disease in Japan in the 1950s
and 1960s with devastating neurological and developmental
effects on those who consumed fish from Minamata Bay
and the surrounding seas, and those exposed prenatally.
Mercury pollution is of a global nature. Once emitted
to the environment, it travels a long distance through theatmosphere, deposits on land and water and is re-emitted
to the atmosphere. It is methylated in the ecosystem,
bioaccumulates in organisms and through the food chain,and finds its way into human body through the diet.
Although mercury is a naturally occurring element, theUnited Nations Environment Programme (UNEP) (2019)
estimates that the total atmospheric concentration of
mercury is 450 percent higher than the natural level,
Global Environmental Research
24/2020: 071-078
printed in Japan

戸田.indd71

including the contribution of historical anthropogenic
emissions.
When industrialized countries started to tackle
widespread environmental pollution in 1960s and 1970s,
mercury was one of the target pollutants. The
Organization for Economic Cooperation andDevelopment issued a Council Recommendation on
Measures to Reduce all Man-Made Emissions of Mercury
to the Environment in 1973. WHO selected mercury for
its first Environmental Health Criteria series published in
1976.
In the 1990s, the international community started toaddress mercury pollution as a transboundary and global
issue. The Aarhus Protocol on Heavy Metals under theConvention on Long-range Transboundary Air Pollutionof the United Nations Economic Council for Europe wasadopted in 1998. UNEP published its first Global
Mercury Assessment in 2002, which presented
information on the chemistry, toxicity and risks ofmercury, its production and use, environmental pathways,
and preventive and control measures. Based on the key
findings of the Assessment, the Governing Council of©2020 AIRES

2020/07/30

16:28:52

72

E. TODAUNEP agreed at its 22nd meeting in 2003 that there wassufficient evidence of significant global adverse impacts
from mercury to warrant further international action to
reduce the risks to human health and the environment.
The 23rd Governing Council in 2005 established a Global
Mercury Partnership as a non-legally-binding mechanism
to reduce the environmental and health risks of mercury.
UNEP convened meetings of the open-ended working
group on mercury in 2007 and 2008, and based on theoutcome of these meetings, the 25th Governing Council
in 2009 decided to elaborate a legally binding instrument
on mercury, and established an intergovernmental
negotiating committee (INC) with a mandate to prepare a
global legally binding instrument by 2013. This timeline
was comparable with that of a similar committee for
persistent organic pollutants (POPs), which wasestablished in 1997 in view of the global nature of POPs,and finalized a draft for the Stockholm Convention on
POPs in 2001.
UNEP convened an ad hoc open ended working
group meeting to prepare for the INC in 2009. The INC,
through five meetings, finalized the draft for the
Minamata Convention on Mercury in January 2013. The
Convention was formally adopted at the Conference ofPlenipotentiaries held in Kumamoto, Japan on October
10 and 11, 2013. This meeting was preceded by aceremonial opening held in Minamata City on October 9,2013. The Convention was opened for signature on
October 10, and was signed by 91 countries and theEuropean Union in Kumamoto during the first two days.
It was open for signature until October 9, 2014, and thefinal number of signatories became 128. The Convention
entered into force on August 16, 2017, 90 days after the50th instrument of ratification, acceptance, approval oraccession was deposited. At the time of the third meetingof the Conference of the Parties (COP) in November

2019, the Convention had 113 parties.
The Minamata Convention consists of a preamble,
35 articles and 5 annexes. Its preamble recognizes thesubstantial lessons of Minamata disease, and the need toensure proper management of mercury and the preventionof such events in the future. Article 1 sets out theobjective of the Convention to protect human health andthe environment from anthropogenic emissions andreleases of mercury and mercury compounds. Articles 3
to 12 establish the obligation of parties to control thewhole life cycle of mercury—from its supply to trade,use, emissions, releases, storage and disposal, and the
management of contaminated sites (Fig. 1). Articles 13 to
15 provide for measures to support the parties in
implementing the Convention. Articles 16 to 20 relate to
information and awareness raising. Articles 21 to 35
concern administrative and procedural matters regarding
the Convention.

2. Overview of Implementation
2.1	Development of Tools and Guidance for
Implementation
After the adoption of the Convention, the INC met
twice to prepare for the entry into force andimplementation of the Convention. After the Convention
entered into force, the first meeting of its COP was heldin Geneva in September 2017. Building on the
preparatory work by INC, COP-1 adopted rules andguidance for implementing the Convention, including
rules of procedure for COP, financial rules and guidanceon the financial mechanism, leaving a few unsettled
issues in brackets. It also adopted technical guidance andformats on mercury trade, identification of mercury
stocks, artisanal and small-scale gold mining (ASGM),
mercury emissions and national reporting.

Fig. 1 Control measures and technical guidance under the Minamata Convention

戸田.indd72

2020/07/30

16:28:52

Minamata Convention and Future Challenges
The rules of procedure stipulate that the first three
COP meetings were to be held on a yearly basis, andthereafter every two years. The second and third COP
meetings were held in November 2018 and November
2019 respectively, and agreed on guidance documents on
the interim storage of mercury and management ofcontaminated sites. COP-4 will be held in Bali, Indonesia
in November 2021.
Work on technical issues continued between the
COP meetings. A group of technical experts on mercury
waste thresholds was established after COP-2. Buildingon the group’s report, COP-3 agreed on a definition ofwastes consisting of and containing mercury. COP-3 did
not agree between two approaches to define waste
contaminated with mercury—one based on total mercury
content in waste and the other based on leachingpotential. The group will continue to work towards COP4. A group on mercury releases into water and land wasestablished after COP-2, and it will also continue to workon guidance on the releases inventory. The group on
effectiveness evaluation submitted a proposal to COP-3
for the framework for the first evaluation to be done in
2023. COP-4 will discuss the arrangements for the firstevaluation further.
2.2 Support to Parties
Article 13 requires each party to provide resources
for implementing the Convention, through domestic,
bilateral and multilateral funding, as well as private sector
involvement. The financial mechanism defined in that
article to support developing country parties and parties
with economies in transition in implementing their
obligations under the Convention includes two elements:
the Global Environment Facility (GEF) and SpecificInternational Programme to support capacity-building
and technical assistance (SIP).
GEF was supporting mercury-related projects even
before it was nominated as part of the financial
mechanism of the Minamata Convention. During its 5th
replenishment negotiations in May 2010, it agreed to set
aside USD 10 million of resources for assessment-type
activities to support the development of a mercury
agreement, and an additional USD 10 million was
authorized for the funding of an early action preratification program for the Minamata Convention inJune 2013. The 6th and 7th replenishment cycles (2014 –2018 and 2018 – 2022) indicatively allocated USD 141
million and USD 206 million respectively to
implementing the Minamata Convention. The resources
programmed for mercury-related activities until June2019 are summarized in Table 1. Enabling activities
include the development of the Minamata Convention
Initial Assessments (MIA) in 111 countries and the
National Action Plans (NAP) on ASGM pursuant to
Article 7 of the Convention in 35 countries. Mediumsized (below USD 2 million) and full-sized (over USD

戸田.indd73

73

Table 1 GEF funding programmes for mercury-related activities(in million USD).
GEF-5
July 2010 –June 2014

GEF-6
July 2014 –June 2018

GEF-7
July 2018 –June 2019

Enabling activities

7.9

34.3

1.7

Medium-sized projects

11.3

1.2

0.9

Full-sized projects

1.9

34.9

15.3

Project type

Programs
Total

-

64.0

4.8

21.1

134.3

22.6

Compiled from GEF’s report to COP. The figures do not include agency
fees and project preparation grants.

2 million) projects support the fulfilment of theobligations under the Convention by parties. One major
example of the programmatic approach is planetGOLD,in which USD 45 million was granted to address the useof mercury in ASGM in Burkina Faso, Colombia,
Ecuador, Guyana, Indonesia, Kenya, Mongolia, Peru and
the Philippines. The project aims at reducing mercury use
in ASGM through the formalization of the sector,
improved access to finance and the gold market, anddemonstration of alternative technologies.
SIP is the other component of the financial
mechanism of the Minamata Convention. This
programme is intended to support capacity-building andtechnical assistance for implementing the Convention,with voluntary contribution from donors. COP-1 adopted
guidance on the programme, and agreed that the
programme be open for 10 years, with a possibility ofextending it no more than seven years. It supports
projects undertaken by developing country parties andparties with economies in transition for implementing theConvention with amounts between USD 50 and 250
thousand. The Governing Board, consisting of 10
members nominated by parties, reviews the applications
and approves projects for funding. So far the Board has
reviewed two rounds of applications, approving 15
projects for a total amount of USD 3 million. Major
financial contributions to the Programme have been
provided so far by Norway and Switzerland, as well as byAustria, Denmark, Germany, the Netherlands, the United
Kingdom and the United States.
There are also other arrangements for supporting
capacity-building, technical assistance and technology
transfer for implementing the Convention. UNEP’s
Chemicals and Waste Management Programme supports
institutional strengthening for implementing multilateralenvironmental agreements including the Minamata
Convention. The Minamata Convention website includes
a database of projects under multilateral and bilateralarrangements to support implementation of theConvention. The secretariat also implements capacitybuilding and technical assistance projects with funding
from donors. One significant example is a project withfunding from the European Union of half a million euros

2020/07/30

16:28:52

74

E. TODAto support parties in implementing the Convention’s
provisions on mercury trade and emissions.
The Minamata Convention has a mechanism forpromoting implementation of the Convention andreviewing compliance with it. Article 15 establishes an
Implementation and Compliance Committee consistingof 15 members elected from among the parties. The
Committee examines issues of implementation andcompliance in a facilitative manner, and makes
recommendations to COP as appropriate. The Committee
considers issues on the basis of submissions from parties
with respect to their own compliance, national reporting
and requests from COP. So far the Committee has met
twice and elaborated on its rules of procedure, terms ofreference and template for written submissions.
2.3 Secretariat
The secretariat of the Minamata Convention ishosted by UNEP. It is headed by the Executive Secretaryand consists of 15 staff positions. It is located in Geneva,
Switzerland, where the secretariat of the Basel, Rotterdam
and Stockholm Conventions and the Chemicals and
Health Branch of UNEP are also located. These three
entities have established a joint task force to focus onprogrammatic and other collaboration in the work ofchemical and waste management. COP-1 agreed on theinitial arrangements for the secretariat, and COP-2
decided to continue that arrangement. COP-3 requested
enhanced cooperation within the UNEP’s chemicals andwaste cluster by setting up inter-secretariat working
groups under the overall steering of the task force tocooperate on administrative, programmatic and technicalmatters, and to continue sharing services between the twosecretariats.
2.4 Initial Implementation Efforts by Parties
As discussed in Section 2.2, GEF supports
developing country parties and parties with economies intransition in developing their MIA, which consists of thefollowing:•	A National Mercury Profile, including identification ofsignificant sources of emissions and releases, as wellas inventories of mercury and mercury compounds;•	An overview of structures, institutions and legislation
already available for implementing the Convention;•	Challenges to implementation, including identificationof legal and/or regulatory gaps to be addressed prior to
ratification•	Capacity building, technical assistance as well as otherneeds required for implementing the Convention.
MIA reports provide a basis for examining parties’
needs for capacity-building and technical assistance. The
secretariat analyzed 39 MIA reports submitted by August
2019, and found that mercury-added products (Article 4)
and mercury waste (Article 11) are recognized as priority
areas by almost all the parties (Secretariat of the戸田.indd74

Minamata Convention, 2019). Other major priority areas
include ASGM (Article 7), emissions (Article 8), releases(Article 9) and monitoring (Article 19).
Control measures under the Convention havediffering timelines. Obligations on mercury trade under
Article 3 have immediate effect. Parties can export
mercury only if they receive written consent from theimporting country, and only for the purposes allowed
under the Convention or for environmentally soundinterim storage. UNEP (2017) examined the pattern ofinternational trade in mercury, and observed that the
mercury export bans enforced in the European Union andthe United States in 2011 and 2013, respectively, hadcaused a major shift of mercury trade to international
hubs such as Hong Kong, Singapore, Viet Nam andTurkey. It also observed that the increase in mercury
prices in the global market had provided incentives toincrease mercury mining in countries such as Indonesia
and Mexico, and export from these countries. Since
parties are to report on the import consents that they havereceived as a part of their first short reporting under
Article 21 by the end of 2019, it is expected that a clearer
picture on mercury trade will be available soon.
Although parties are making efforts to control
mercury trade, illegal and illicit trade in mercury remains
a major challenge. UNEP (2020) estimates that 15 major
ASGM countries informally import mercury in the rangeof 365–1075 tonnes per year, whereas the reported
mercury import in these countries was about 375 tonnes
per year. Confiscation of dozens of tonnes of illegally
traded mercury and mercury compounds have beenreported in Brazil, Indonesia and other countries, but themain routes for illegal trade of mercury and otherhazardous chemicals pass through places where
regulation or monitoring is weaker.
Another control measure that has a relatively shorttimeframe is stipulated in Article 4 and Annex A, which
do not allow the manufacture, import or export of certain
mercury-added products after 2020, unless parties register
exemptions for up to five years. Exemptions have beenregistered by 11 parties only. China, the largest
manufacturer and exporter of many mercury-added
products such as batteries and medical devices (UNEP,
2017), registered exemptions for the manufacture ofclinical thermometers and sphygmomanometers, but notfor their import or export. Therefore, the manufacture,import and export of mercury-added products are
expected to decrease considerably after 2020.
Control of mercury emissions has a longer
timeframe. Parties are required to take control measureson new and existing emission sources as soon aspracticable but no later than five and 10 years after theentry into force of the Convention respectively. Annex D
to the Convention lists five point source categories
controlled under the Convention: coal-fired power plants,
coal-fired industrial boilers, non-ferrous metal

2020/07/30

16:28:52

Minamata Convention and Future Challenges

75

Table 2 E stimated mercury emissions into air (2015, in metric tonnes).

PartiesNon-parties

Total

ASGM

624

213

838 (38%)

Stationary combustion of coal

409

65

474 (21%)Non-ferrous metal production

257

70

327 (15%)

Cement production

186

47

233 (10%)

Waste from products

103

44

147

Waste incineration

132

15 (0.7%)

Others

153

38

191

Total

1,745

479

2,224

( 7%)

( 9%)

Calculated from data in UNEP (2019).

production, waste incineration and cement clinker
production. These sources account for 47% of total
anthropogenic mercury emissions to the atmosphere(Table 2). Of this, 82% originates from parties to the
Minamata Convention. As UNEP (2019) found thatanthropogenic mercury emissions to the atmosphere arestill on an upward trend, with emissions in 2015 20%
higher than in 2010, implementation of Article 8 of theConvention is very important for reversing this trend.
Although parties have more time to comply with Article
8, it is encouraging to note that many of the large emitting
countries, such as China, India and Indonesia, havealready established regulations to limit mercury emissions
from major point sources (Secretariat of the Minamata
Convention, 2020).
One important immediate obligation of parties isnational reporting under Article 21. Parties are to report
to COP, through the secretariat, on the measures they
have taken to implement the Convention, effectiveness ofsuch measures, and challenges in implementing theConvention. COP-1 agreed on the timing of the reportingand format for it. Parties must submit a short report every
two years starting from December 31, 2019, and a fullreport every four years starting from December 31, 2021.
The short report addresses four topics: primary mercury
mining, stocks and supply of mercury, export of mercury
and facilities for the final disposal of waste consisting of
mercury. An on-line reporting tool is available to facilitate
the submission and compilation of biennial reports. The
secretariat will put together information on reporting andsubmit it to COP, which will review the report pursuant
to paragraph 5(c) of Article 23. National reports will also
be used by the Implementation and Compliance
Committee (Article 15), and for evaluating theeffectiveness of the Convention (Article 22). COP-3
requested the secretariat to draft guidance for the fullreport to be used in the first full reporting in 2021.

戸田.indd75

3. Future Challenges
3.1 Responding to Parties’ Needs
The Minamata Convention in its preamble stresses
the importance of financial, technical, technological andcapacity-building support, particularly for developing
countries and countries with economies in transition.
Article 13 on financial resources and mechanism statesthat the overall effectiveness of implementation of theConvention by developing country parties will be related
to effective implementation of that article.
Many developed countries had already implemented
obligations under the Conventions when they became
parties, as notified by Canada, Japan and the UnitedStates pursuant to Paragraph 4 of Article 30, and as
shown in legislative instruments established at the time of
becoming parties, such as the European Mercury
Regulation (EU, 2017; and also see the European
Commission’s proposal for regulation (COM/2016/039
final), which includes an explanation on the coverage of
Minamata obligations by European legislation). Major
challenges remain for developing country parties andparties with economies in transition. It should also be
noted that many countries with considerable production,use, emissions and releases of mercury are still to become
parties to the Convention.
111 countries have developed, or are in the processof finalizing, MIA reports that include an overview of
mercury inventories, existing legislation and challenges
in implementing the Convention. These reports will be an
important source of information on identifying theparties’ needs and delivering support based on the needs
identified. The first short national reporting by 31
December 2019 included a question on possible
challenges in meeting the objectives of the Convention.
Although a response to this question was not mandatory,
responses from even some parties will also be useful inconsidering effective support to parties. As shown in

2020/07/30

16:28:52

76

E. TODA

Fig. 2 Minamata Convention Parties.
As of November 2019. Although the European Union is a party to the Convention, EU member states are colored according towhether the state is a party.

Fig. 2, some countries, especially non-parties in Central
and West Asia and North Africa, have not started MIA
projects, and these countries may need support forbecoming parties to the Convention.
ASGM is the largest source of emissions andreleases of mercury to the environment. Under Article 7,
all Parties that have ASGM in their territory have an
obligation to reduce, or eliminate where feasible, the useof mercury in ASGM. Those Parties with more thaninsignificant ASGM are required to develop a NAP. GEF
has supported 35 countries in developing NAPs. By theend of 2019, two plans had been submitted to thesecretariat, and many others were expected to be available
soon. Parties have an obligation to implement the plan,and review in progress every three years. COP-3
specifically requested the secretariat, in cooperation with
the UNEP Global Mercury Partnership, to develop
guidance on the management of ASGM tailings in the
NAP guidance document adopted at COP-1. There may
be a need for revisiting other parts of the guidance inview of the three-yearly review of progress on NAP.
Mercury use in ASGM is closely related tocontrolling mercury trade. The Convention does notallow the use of primary-mined mercury and excess
mercury from the decommissioning of chlor-alkali plants
in ASGM. However, illegal and illicit trade in mercury
may compromise this restriction. Capacity-building in thecontrol of mercury trade is a priority.
The second largest source of mercury emissions iscoal combustion, followed by non-ferrous metal
production and cement production. In terms of the global
consumption of mercury, ASGM is followed by mercuryadded products, vinyl chloride monomer production andchlor-alkali production (UNEP, 2017). GEF has provided
resources for technical assistance targeted to these
sectors, and is expected to continue to do so, as well as

戸田.indd76

other funding sources. The effectiveness of these support
measures will be evaluated in the effectiveness evaluation
under Article 22.
Mercury-added products and waste management arerecognized as priority areas in most of the MIA reports
reviewed so far. SIP supports several projects in theseareas: out of 15 projects approved for SIP, Article 4(mercury-added products) and Article 11 (mercury waste)
are included in the scope of nine and eight projects
respectively. The outcomes of these projects are expected
to be disseminated and replicated by other parties.
3.2 Effectiveness Evaluation
The Minamata Convention has a mechanism forevaluating its effectiveness embedded in its text. Article
22 requires COP to evaluate the effectiveness of theConvention beginning no later than six years after its
entry into force, and to initiate the establishment of
arrangements for using comparable monitoring data forthis purpose. COP-1 established an ad hoc group of
experts consisting of members nominated by parties andobservers to discuss an effectiveness evaluation
framework and monitoring arrangements. The groupconsidered these issues, learning from the experience of
the Stockholm Convention on POPs which has a similar
provision, and submitted a report to COP-2. COP gave
the group a further mandate to elaborate an effectivenessevaluation framework, methodology, schedule and use ofmonitoring data. The group submitted a report to COP-3.
The report proposed the following four policyquestions as a basis for evaluating effectiveness:•	Have the parties taken actions to implement theConvention?
•	Have the actions taken resulted in changes in mercury
supply, use, emissions or releases into the environment?
•	Have those changes resulted in changes in levels of

2020/07/30

16:28:53

Minamata Convention and Future Challenges
mercury in the environment, biotic media or vulnerable
populations that can be attributed to the Convention?
•	To what extent are existing measures under theConvention meeting the objective of protecting humanhealth and the environment from mercury?
Sources of information were identified for
addressing these questions, methodologies for compiling,synthesizing and integrating such information were
described, and a list of indicators for evaluating
individual provisions of the Convention was proposed.
COP-3 reviewed the report of the group anddiscussed the evaluation framework extensively. In spiteof the week-long discussion at COP, no agreement could
be reached on the full details of the evaluation framework
such as terms of reference for the EffectivenessEvaluation Committee or global monitoringarrangements. It was concluded that a further exchange ofviews was needed on the evaluation indicators, and that a
guidance document on monitoring needed to be
developed. The COP-3 decision included a schematiceffectiveness evaluation framework depicting information
flow (Fig. 3) and mentioning five reports to be preparedin the process: a synthesized report on national reporting;a trade, supply and demand report; an emissions andreleases report; a monitoring report; and a modelling
report. However, COP only agreed to request thesecretariat to work on the first two reports by COP-4.
3.3 Policy Making Based on Sound Science
The history of the Minamata Convention started withshared scientific knowledge on the global nature of
mercury pollution. The work of COP to support
implementation of the Convention, including the work of
the ad hoc group of experts on evaluating effectiveness,has been carried out on the basis of scientific and77

technical expertise provided by experts, including thefour Global Mercury Assessment reports.
At its first three meetings, COP adopted guidance on
implementing the control measures under the Convention,with the support of technical experts nominated by parties
and observers (Fig. 1). These documents need to becontinuously reviewed and updated in view of the
progress in scientific and technical knowledge. COP-3
agreed on intersessional work towards COP-4 in fiveareas: (1) review of annexes A (mercury-added products)
and B (manufacturing processes using mercury); (2) use
of customs codes for identifying mercury-added products;(3) dental amalgam and its alternatives; (4)methodologies for developing inventories of mercury
releases to land and water; and (5) establishment ofthresholds for mercury waste. The expert groups andpartnerships are expected to continue to provide scientificand technical input to this process. It should also be notedthat the work on the environmentally sound managementof mercury waste is undertaken in close collaboration
with the Basel Convention, since the Minamata
Convention requires the parties to manage mercury waste
taking into account the guidelines developed under the
Basel Convention. The intersessional work on evaluating
effectiveness described above also needs to be based on
sound science.
The International Conference on Mercury as a
Global Pollutant (ICMGP) is an important avenue forscientific-policy interface in relation to the Convention.
Established in 1990, ICMGP has worked as a primaryforum to advance mercury science such as environmental
and health assessment, the global mercury cycle andcontrol technology. The 13th ICMGP meeting in July
2017 included a series of sessions on understanding
implications of the Minamata Convention and the role ofFig. 3 Framework for evaluating the effectiveness of the Minamata Convention.

戸田.indd77

2020/07/30

16:28:53

78

E. TODAscientific assessments in informing the implementation of
the Convention. Selin et al. (2018) provide an overview
of the discussion on mercury science-policy interface in
Ambio (and other articles in the same edition of Ambio
summarize the sessions on science-policy interface at
ICMGP 2017). Chen et al. (2018) review the contributionof ICMGP to international mercury policy. COP-3
included a special lunchtime session on mercury science,
inviting co-chairs of the 14th and 15th ICGMP meetings
held in 2019 and to be held in 2021 respectively. The
panelists of the session proposed to establish a scientificadvisory panel consisting of the top mercury scholars
worldwide, linked with ICMGP. Innovative ideas may beneeded for creating such mechanisms without excessive
formalities, conflicts of interest or regional, disciplinary
or gender bias.
3.4 Linking with Broader Agendas
The Minamata Convention has an important role inthe broader agenda of chemicals management,
environmental protection and sustainable development.
Agenda 21, adopted at the United Nations Conference on
Environment and Development in 1992, outlined
measures to be taken by governments to reduce
environmental and health risks of toxic chemicals. It
observed that concerted activities by governments could
encompass both regulatory and non-regulatory measures,such as promoting the use of cleaner products andtechnologies; emission inventories; product labelling; uselimitations; economic incentives; and the phasing out orbanning of toxic chemicals that pose an unreasonable andotherwise unmanageable risk to the environment orhuman health and those that are toxic, persistent and bioaccumulative and whose use cannot be adequately
controlled. The Minamata Convention is consistent withthis overall approach in chemical management, andconstitutes a building block of the global efforts towards
sustainable development.
The coming years towards 2022 are expected to be apivotal period for protecting the global environment andachieving sustainable development, celebrating 50 years
after the UN Conference on Human Environment and 30
years after the Rio summit. The 5th International
Conference on Chemicals Management, originallyplanned for 2020 but postponed until 2021, is expected toagree on arrangements for chemical and waste
management, building on the Strategic Approach toInternational Chemicals Management, which had 2020 as
its target year. Biodiversity COP-15, which was also
postponed, is expected to adopt its post-2020 biodiversity
framework. The Paris Agreement will govern the post2020 climate regime. In addition to pursuing specificlinkages between the Minamata Convention and thesebroader agendas, such as the biodiversity and land-use
implications of ASGM and co-benefits of reduced
dependence on coal, UNEP is committed to promoting

戸田.indd

78

cooperation, coherence and synergies among multilateralenvironmental agreements, not only in responding toenvironmental challenges but preserving human wellbeing, healthy ecosystems and food security (Andersen,2019).

References
Andersen, I. (2019) Speech at the Opening of the Conference of
the Parties to the Minamata Convention on Mercury. Retrieved
from https://www.unenvironment.org/news-and-stories/speech/
speech-opening-conference-parties-minamata-conventionmercury (Accessed 28 December 2019)
Chen C.Y., Driscoll, C., Eagles-Smith, C.A., Eckley, C.S., Gay,
D.A., Hsu-Kim, H., Keane, S.E., Kirk, J.L., Mason, R.P., Obrist,
D., Selin, H., Selin, N.E. and Thompson, M.R. (2018) A criticaltime for mercury science to inform global policy. Environmental
Science & Technology. 52(17), 9556–9561. Retrieved fromhttps://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6200401/(Accessed 28 December 2019)
EU (2017) Regulation (EU) 2017/852 of the European Parliamentand of the Council of 17 May 2017 on mercury, and repealing
regulation (EC) No 1102/2008.
Selin, H., Keane, S.E., Wang, S., Selin, N.E., Davis, K. and Bally,
D. (2018) Linking science and policy to support theimplementation of the Minamata Convention on mercury.
Ambio, 47(2), 198 –215. Open access publication www.kva.se/en.
Secretariat of the Minamata Convention (2019) Analysis ofnational priorities from Minamata initial assessments. Retrieved
from http://www.mercuryconvention.org/News/fromtheConvention/
ICMGP2019/tabid/8131/language/en-US/Default.aspx (Accessed
28 December 2019)
Secretariat of the Minamata Convention (2020) Report of the AsiaPacific regional workshop on the reduction of mercury emission
from coal combustion. Retrieved from http://www.
mercuryconvention.org/Meetings/Othermeetings/tabid/8102/
language/en-US/Default.aspx (Accessed 28 December 2019)
UNEP (2017) Global Mercury Supply, Trade and Demand.
Retrieved from https://web.unep.org/globalmercurypartnership/
global-mercury-supply-trade-and-demand (Accessed 28
December 2019)
UNEP (2019) Global Mercury Assessment 2018. Retrieved fromhttps://www.unenvironment.org/resources/publication/globalmercury-assessment-2018 (Accessed 28 December 2019)
UNEP (2020) The Illegal Trade in Chemicals. Retrieved fromhttps://www.grida.no/publications/474 (Accessed 28 December
2019)

Eisaku TODA
Eisaku Toda has served as senior programme
officer at the Secretariat of the Minamata
Convention on Mercury, United Nations
Environment Programme (UNEP), since July
2017. He is responsible for scientific andtechnical matters regarding the Convention.
Before joining UNEP, he worked in several
positions for the Ministry of the Environment of Japan, including directorof the International Strategy Division, Chemical Evaluation Office and Risk
Assessment Office. During this time, he served in a number of international
initiatives such as vice-president of the International Conference on
Chemicals Management, and chair of the OECD’s Working Group on Test
Guidelines.
(Received 16 January 2020, Accepted 16 May 2020)

2020/07/30

16:28:54