EconPapers    
Economics at your fingertips  
 

Financing for innovative technologies and best practices to reduce persistent organic pollutants

Ibrahima Sow, Robert Dixon (), Jie Pan, Anil Sookdeo, Evelyn Swain and Laurent Granier

Mitigation and Adaptation Strategies for Global Change, 2014, vol. 19, issue 1, 93-106

Abstract: Persistent Organic Pollutants (POPs) threaten human health and the global environment. Recognizing their dangers many countries began to limit or ban POPs production, use, and release in the 1990s. Eventually the Stockholm Convention on POPs, was adopted in 2001 and entered into force in 2004. The Global Environment Facility (GEF) provides financial support to developing country Parties for the implementation of the Stockholm Convention. The GEF’s POPs investment portfolio focuses on: 1) strengthening the capacity of developing country Parties to implement the Stockholm Convention; 2) establishing and supporting partnerships to develop and implement National Implementation Plans (NIPs), and 3) demonstrating and deploying best technologies and practices to reduce POPs emission, including development of safe alternatives. Since 2001 the GEF has committed US$568.8 million to POPs projects and leveraged some US$1474.5 million in co-financing from partners in the public and private sectors, bringing the total value of the GEF POPs portfolio to over US$2 billion. With GEF support, 108 developing country Parties have developed their NIPs. The GEF also financed 109 projects for the implementation of the Convention. Upon completion, these GEF POPs investments will contribute to the disposal of more than 70,000 tons of Polychlorinated Biphenyls (PCBs) oil, contaminated equipments, and waste, more than 40,000 tons of obsolete POPs pesticides and associated waste, and reducing dioxin/furan and mercury emission by introducing environmentally sound technologies and best practices. This paper summarizes: 1) direct and indirect GEF investments to support the goals of the Stockholm Convention; 2) investment case studies on PCB, DichloroDiphenylTrichloroethane (DDT), chlordane and mirex, medical waste, obsolete POPs and engaging civil society; and 3) lessons learned in terms of GEF financing strategies, best technologies and environmental practices to address POPs. Copyright Springer Science+Business Media Dordrecht 2014

Keywords: Stockholm Convention; Persistent Organic Pollutants; Global environment facility investment (search for similar items in EconPapers)
Date: 2014
References: View complete reference list from CitEc
Citations:

Downloads: (external link)
http://hdl.handle.net/10.1007/s11027-012-9428-9 (text/html)
Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.

Related works:
This item may be available elsewhere in EconPapers: Search for items with the same title.

Export reference: BibTeX RIS (EndNote, ProCite, RefMan) HTML/Text

Persistent link: https://EconPapers.repec.org/RePEc:spr:masfgc:v:19:y:2014:i:1:p:93-106

Ordering information: This journal article can be ordered from
http://www.springer.com/economics/journal/11027

DOI: 10.1007/s11027-012-9428-9

Access Statistics for this article

Mitigation and Adaptation Strategies for Global Change is currently edited by Robert Dixon

More articles in Mitigation and Adaptation Strategies for Global Change from Springer
Bibliographic data for series maintained by Sonal Shukla () and Springer Nature Abstracting and Indexing ().

 
Page updated 2025-03-20
Handle: RePEc:spr:masfgc:v:19:y:2014:i:1:p:93-106