Presentation on theme: "Tuesday, 7 May 2013 Prof. Mohamed Besri"— Presentation transcript:
Tuesday, 7 May 2013 Prof. Mohamed Besri email@example.com
Presentation content: Global Consumption of MB in A5 countries MB phase out in A5 countries Issues of Critical Use Nominations (CUN) Proposed items for discussion
Global Consumption of MB in A5 countries Global consumption of MB for controlled uses was estimated to be about 64,420 tonnes in 1991. It falls to 5,187 tonnes in 2011. A5 consumption was reduced to 20% in 2011 (3,164 tonnes). Most A5 Parties have continued to make substantial progress in achieving reductions in MB consumption. Only 25 A5 Parties reported consumption in 2011 Africa has phased-out 92% of its regional baseline (consumption average 1995-1998)
MB phase out in A5 countries MB phase-out over the next eighteen months is critical for developing countries as they move towards achieving the 100% phase-out deadline of 1st January 2015. Complete phase-out has been achieved in many A5 countries before the 2015 deadline, often with support investment projects funded through the MLF but also through bilateral cooperation and farmers. Early MB phase-out has proven beneficial to A5 parties in many instances by improving production practices, increasing the competitiveness of agricultural products in international markets and training large numbers of growers, technical staff and other key stakeholders. MBTOC is nevertheless aware that challenges remain in certain intensive production sectors including vegetables, ornamentals and strawberry fruits and runners.
Issues of Critical Use Nominations (CUN) Article 5 countries can apply for CUE in crops where they may not be able to find alternatives. The CUN handbook has been updated and adapted to the A5 needs. The handbook helps parties to submit CUNs on a yearly basis. According to decision IX/6, the nominating party should demonstrate that: Lack of availability of methyl bromide for that use No technically and economically feasible alternatives available All technically and economically feasible steps have been taken to minimise the critical use An appropriate effort is being made to evaluate, commercialise and secure national regulatory approval of alternatives. That research programmes are in place to develop and deploy alternatives and substitutes
Key issues 1. How to select and transfer available alternatives demonstrated with various financial supports? 2. How to stimulate wider use of these alternatives 3. How to coordinate efforts at national and regional levels ? 4. Conclusion
Issue 1: How to select and transfer available alternatives ? (a) MBTOC considers that technically and economically feasible alternatives are available for almost all uses of MB. Article 5 Parties have reduced consumption by approximately 80% of baseline, which is well ahead of phase out schedules, but further efforts are still necessary to ensure the full phase out deadline of January 2015 can be met. The key non chemical alternatives (soilless culture, grafting, resistant varieties, biofumigation, solarization) continue to expand in Africa for growing vegetables, ornamentals and Tobacco. Phase-out for the remaining MB uses in Africa will be greatly influenced by the registration of several key chemical alternatives, including 1,3-dichloropropene, chloropicrin, DMDS, methyl iodide.
Issue 1: How to select and transfer available alternatives ? (b) For each country, to select and transfer alternatives, the following information should be available : What is the current MB consumption per commodity compared to the base-line ? What are the sectors for which technically and economically feasible alternatives have been developed ? What efforts have been made to adopt and transfer the available technologies? What is the adoption rate ? What are the current challenges and barriers per sector ?
Issue 2:How to stimulate wider use of alternatives and to overcome barriers ? Training and capacity building. Publication of technical manuals, toolkits, etc Registration of new chemical alternatives. Combination of chemical and non-chemical alternatives in an IPM programs Research and experiments on alternatives for the control of the key and new emerging pests. Improvement of the available equipments for pre harvest and post harvest alternatives Availability of the alternatives kits: Floating trays, fertilisers, chemicals, grafted plants etc… Reduction of alternatives costs.
Issue 3: How to coordinate efforts at national and regional levels ? Issues of funding: A5 countries should start looking for alternative sources of funding, after end of multilateral fund and bilateral cooperation. Establishment of regional centres of excellence in Africa for vegetables, tobacco and ornamentals for training of the stakeholders (farmers, Phd students, advisers…) and experimentation in all production systems : IPM, irrigation, plant breeding, fertilizers, soil less culture, plastic uses etc… Development of regional joint training, experimental and research programs. Exchanging information, materials (varieties, rootstocks etc..) and organising visits for all the stakeholders Establishment of an African advisory panel including growers, scientists and others. The advisory panel will propose to UNEP-UNIDO on the strategies to be developed in training, research and experimentation.