The LRTAP POPs Protocol and its Relevance to the Global POPs Negotiations

Report an error

Summary

AI-generated

This summary is written by a language model reading the source document. It is not the publisher's words and is not a substitute for the original.

Learn more about AI enrichment

The document assesses the Protocol to the Convention on Long-Range Transboundary Air Pollution on Persistent Organic Pollutants (LRTAP POPs Protocol) against the needs of global negotiations. It argues that while the Protocol is a useful first step, it is an inadequate model for a global treaty because it focuses on risk management and emission control rather than total elimination, lacks provisions for developing countries, and relies on a regional framework of developed nations.

Key insights

AI-generated

These insights are written by a language model reading the source document. They are not the publisher's words and are not a substitute for the original.

Learn more about AI enrichment
  • The LRTAP POPs Protocol is considered an inadequate model for a global agreement because it focuses only on the transmission of POPs through air, lacks provisions for technical and financial assistance, and does not address compensation or liability for damages in developing countries.
  • The Protocol's stated objective is to "control, reduce or eliminate" POPs, which the author argues reflects a risk management and "end-of-pipe" approach rather than the total elimination and pollution prevention required for a global treaty.
  • The Protocol regulates 16 substances across three categories: Annex I for elimination (including aldrin, PCBs, and DDT), Annex II for restricted use (DDT, PCBs, and HCH), and Annex III for emission reductions of by-products (PAHs, dioxins, furans, and HCB).
  • Specific exceptions to elimination are granted for PCBs and DDT, partly due to disclosures by Russia regarding their continued production and use.
  • The process for adding new chemicals to the Protocol's annexes is criticized for requiring consensus among parties, which effectively grants any single party a veto and politicizes a decision that should be based on scientific criteria.
  • The Protocol lacks substantive mechanisms for technology transfer or funding to help countries with economies in transition (CETs) phase out POPs-dependent technologies.

Cite the original document

APA
Saladin, C. (n.d.). The LRTAP POPs Protocol and its Relevance to the Global POPs Negotiations. Center for International Environmental Law. https://www.ciel.org/wp-content/uploads/2015/03/LRTAPPOPsProtocolGlobal.pdf
Chicago
Saladin, Claudia. The LRTAP POPs Protocol and its Relevance to the Global POPs Negotiations. Center for International Environmental Law, n.d. https://www.ciel.org/wp-content/uploads/2015/03/LRTAPPOPsProtocolGlobal.pdf.
Wikipedia
{{cite report |last1=Saladin |first1=Claudia |title=The LRTAP POPs Protocol and its Relevance to the Global POPs Negotiations |publisher=Center for International Environmental Law |url=https://www.ciel.org/wp-content/uploads/2015/03/LRTAPPOPsProtocolGlobal.pdf |access-date=17 August 2026 |via=Climate Insights Directory}}
BibTeX
@techreport{saladinndlrtap, author = {Saladin, Claudia}, title = {{The LRTAP POPs Protocol and its Relevance to the Global POPs Negotiations}}, institution = {Center for International Environmental Law}, url = {https://www.ciel.org/wp-content/uploads/2015/03/LRTAPPOPsProtocolGlobal.pdf}, urldate = {2026-08-17}, note = {Indexed by Climate Insights Directory} }

Full text

Collected · Record updated