Study on options for global control of mercury

The document evaluates strategies for the global control of mercury, comparing voluntary measures—such as high-level declarations, codes of conduct, and eco-labeling—against legally binding instruments. It explores utilizing existing treaties like the Basel, Rotterdam, and Stockholm Conventions, as well as the possibility of creating a new free-standing mercury convention or a protocol to the Stockholm Convention. The analysis includes a detailed set of response measures for seven global mercury priorities, including reducing atmospheric emissions, managing mercury waste, and curbing global supply.

• Legally binding instruments are generally more likely to be implemented and complied with than voluntary ones because they signal that a problem is viewed as "serious and the commitments as credible."
• Legally binding approaches can create an economic "level playing field" that discourages "free riding," encourages innovation, and accelerates the global transition to alternative techniques.
• A high-level political declaration and plan of implementation could raise awareness and strengthen political will, but would lack a mandatory financial mechanism, likely relying on voluntary trust funds that tend to be under-funded.
• Intergovernmental codes of conduct can establish recommended practices for mercury priorities, but are often ineffective in the informal sector, such as artisanal and small-scale gold mining (ASM), unless accompanied by significant resources.
• The Basel Convention is currently developing technical mercury waste guidelines and pilot projects to support 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, though it cannot prevent the diversion of "legitimate" trade to unapproved uses.
• 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 for the public's "right to know" about mercury releases from industrial sources, but requires communication and governance infrastructure that may be lacking in developing countries.
• 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 anthropogenic emissions from stationary sources, but the instrument lacks a financial mechanism for developing countries.
• A mercury protocol to the Stockholm Convention is presented as a way to comprehensively address mercury while avoiding the risks of a "split regime" and utilizing the Convention's existing financial mechanism and institutions.
• A free-standing mercury convention would allow for a broad or narrow scope and a framework or control measures approach, but would incur higher administrative costs and require 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} }