Study on options for global control of mercury

This report, prepared by the Center for International Environmental Law (CIEL) for the United Nations Environment Programme (UNEP), analyzes various voluntary and legally binding international options to reduce risks to human health and the environment from mercury pollution. It evaluates these options against seven global priorities, including reducing atmospheric emissions, managing mercury waste, and curbing global supply.

• Legally binding international instruments are generally more effective than voluntary commitments because they signal that a problem is serious, create more credible commitments, and are less likely to vary in implementation when governments change.
• Legally binding approaches can create an economic "level playing field" that discourages "free riding," encourages innovation, and accelerates the global transition to alternative technologies.
• A high-level political declaration and plan of implementation could raise awareness and strengthen political will, but would likely require intensive negotiations and a permanent secretariat to be effective.
• A non-legally binding code of conduct on mercury could establish recommended practices for national legislation and corporate standards, though it may struggle to influence the informal sector, such as artisanal and small-scale gold mining (ASM).
• Technology transfer and assistance, including public-private partnerships and GEF support, are critical for developing countries to access environmentally sound technologies, such as emissions control devices for coal-fired power plants.
• Eco-labeling and certification programs can discourage the use of mercury by stimulating consumer demand for mercury-free products, particularly in the gold market to address ASM emissions.
• The Basel Convention is currently developing technical mercury waste guidelines and pilot projects to promote the environmentally sound management of mercury wastes.
• Adding industrial uses of mercury to the Rotterdam Convention's prior informed consent (PIC) list could incrementally reduce global mercury demand and supply by discouraging trade in listed chemicals.
• Listing methylmercury in the Stockholm Convention's Annex C would likely only cover unintentional anthropogenic releases, such as those from land use change, municipal waste landfills, and sewer sludge application.
• The Kiev PRTR Protocol to the Aarhus Convention provides a legally binding mechanism to ensure the public's right to know about mercury releases from industrial sources, which can pressure companies to reduce pollution.
• Synergies exist between climate change mitigation and mercury reduction, as policies reducing coal combustion for greenhouse gas (GHG) mitigation also reduce atmospheric mercury emissions.
• Amending the Stockholm Convention to include mercury could utilize existing institutions and financial mechanisms, but risks creating a "split regime" where different Parties are bound by different versions of the treaty.
• Opening the LRTAP Convention and its Heavy Metals Protocol to global participation could address major stationary combustion sources of mercury but lacks a financial mechanism for developing countries.
• A mercury protocol to the Stockholm Convention would allow for comprehensive coverage of mercury while avoiding the risks of amending the parent treaty and utilizing the existing Stockholm financial mechanism.
• A free-standing mercury convention would offer the most flexibility in scope and depth but would incur higher administrative costs and require the establishment of a new financial mechanism.

APA

Center for International Environmental Law (2007). Study on options for global control of mercury. https://ciel.org/Publications/UNEP_Mercury_2007.pdf

Chicago

Center for International Environmental Law. Study on options for global control of mercury. 2007. https://ciel.org/Publications/UNEP_Mercury_2007.pdf.

Wikipedia

{{cite report |author=Center for International Environmental Law |title=Study on options for global control of mercury |date=20 August 2007 |url=https://ciel.org/Publications/UNEP_Mercury_2007.pdf |access-date=17 August 2026 |via=Climate Insights Directory}}

BibTeX

@techreport{centerforinternationalenvironmentallaw2007study, author = {{Center for International Environmental Law}}, title = {{Study on options for global control of mercury}}, institution = {Center for International Environmental Law}, year = {2007}, month = aug, url = {https://ciel.org/Publications/UNEP_Mercury_2007.pdf}, urldate = {2026-08-17}, note = {Indexed by Climate Insights Directory} }