Arrangements for the first effectiveness evaluation of the Minamata Convention on Mercury

The Conference of the Parties,Welcoming the report on the proposed framework for the effectiveness evaluation and monitoring arrangements under the Minamata Convention,¹ and the complementing information developed by the ad hoc technical expert group on the basis of the mandates set out in decisions MC1/9 and MC-2/10,²¹UNEP/MC/COP.3/14.²UNEP/MC/COP.3/INF/15.Recognizing the efforts to advance the work on the effectiveness evaluation at the third meeting of the Conference of the Parties,

1.Invites parties to submit views on the indicators set out in annex I to the present decision and requests the secretariat to compile those views in advance of the fourth meeting of the Conference of the Parties;

2.Requests the secretariat to advance the work by securing services for drafting:

(a)Guidance on monitoring to maintain harmonized, comparable information on mercury levels in the environment, taking into consideration the draft structure set out in the note on background information on mercury monitoring;³³UNEP/MC/COP.3/INF/15.

(b)Reports set out in the framework in annex II to the present decision with the exception of the emissions and releases report, the monitoring report, and the modelling report.

Annex I to decision MC-3/10

Proposed indicators for evaluating the effectiveness of the Minamata Convention, by article

A: Article 1 (objective)(The indicator for article 1 is to be read with the relevant monitoring indicator set out in table 4 in document UNEP/MC/COP.3/14)		Source of information on the indicator	Baseline for the indicator
A1. Cross-cutting monitoring indicator	Levels of mercury in the environment and in humans due to anthropogenic emissions and releases	Attributive modelling	Amount in the first evaluation (if models are available)
Notes	Attribution is to be estimated using models yet to be developed; thus, information for this indicator may or may not be available for the first effectiveness evaluation cycle.Estimates from modelling are to be accompanied by relevant notes on modelling uncertainties.In case of non-availability of information from models, levels of mercury and trends in mercury levels (changes over time) could be used for attribution purposes.

B: Supply clusterArticle (mercury supply sources and trade); article 10 (environmentally sound interim storage of mercury, other than waste mercury); article 11 (mercury wastes)		Source of information on the indicator	Baseline for the indicator
B1. Overall process indicator for articles 3, 10 and 11	Proportion of parties that have implemented key provisions under this cluster (encompassing all process indicators below, i.e., B5, B6, B7, B8, B9 and B13)	Article 21 reporting	Amount in the first evaluation
B2. Additional cross-cutting outcome indicator for articles 3, 10 and 11	Estimated global supply of mercury, in tonnes per year	Synthesized information from individual indicators for articles 3, 10 and 11	Amount in the first evaluation
Article 3
B3. Outcome indicator for article 3	Total amount of mercury mined from primary mercury mines	2017 report on global mercury supply, trade and demandArticle 21 reportingASGM national action plan reports	Amount in the first evaluation
B4. Outcome indicator for article 3	Amount of mercury traded, broken down by specific purpose	Article 3 forms	Amount in the first evaluation
B5. Process indicator for article 3	Number of parties that have endeavoured to identify stocks and sources of supply	Article 21 reporting	Number in the first evaluation
B6. Process indicator for article 3	For those parties that have determined they have excess Hg, whether they have taken measures called for in article 3 para. 5 (b), and amount of Hg disposed of in accordance with those measure, if available	Article 21 reportingWorld Chlorine Council reports	Percentage in the first evaluation
B7. Process indicator for article 3	Number and proportion of parties trading in mercury	Article 21 reportingArticle 3 forms	Number and percentage in the first evaluation
B8. Process indicator for article 3	Volume of mercury being traded	Article 21 reporting	Amount in the first evaluation
Article 10
B9. Process indicator for article 10	Number and proportion of parties that have taken measures to ensure sound interim storage	Article 21 reporting	Number and percentage in the first evaluation
B10. Outcome indicator for article 10	Amount of mercury stored in an environmentally sound way (as identified in the inventory of stocks)	Article 21 reporting	Amount in the first evaluation
Article 11
B11. Outcome indicator for article 11	Amount of waste containing mercury or mercury compounds subject to final disposal	Article 21 reporting	Amount in the first evaluation
B12. Outcome indicator for article 11	Number of parties with facilities for final disposal of waste containing mercury or mercury compounds	Article 21 reporting	Number in the first evaluation
B13. Process indicator for article 11	Number of parties that have measures in place to manage mercury waste in an environmentally sound manner	Article 21 reporting	Number in the first evaluation
Notes	Data from non-parties could also be important in some instances.

C: Demand cluster Article 4 (mercury-added products); article 5 (manufacturing processes in which mercury or mercury compounds are used); article 7 (artisanal and small‑scale gold mining)		Source of information on the indicator	Baseline for the indicator
C1. Cross-cutting process indicator for articles 4, 5 and 7	Proportion of parties that have implemented key provisions under this cluster	Synthesized information from individual indicators for articles 4, 5 and 7	Percentage in the first evaluation
C2. Cross-cutting outcome indicator for articles 4, 5 and 7	Global use of mercury in the manufacturing of products or processes, in tonnes per application	Information from industry sources	Amount in the first evaluation
Article 4
C3. Process indicator for article 4	Number of parties having appropriate measures to prevent the manufacture, export or import of mercury-added products listed in part I of annex A	Article 21 reporting	Number in the first evaluation
C4. Process indicator for article 4	Number of exemptions per product category that are still valid	Registry of exemptions	Number in the first evaluation
C5. Process indicator for article 4	Number of parties that have taken two or more measures for the mercury-added products listed in part II of annex A	Article 21 reporting	Number in the first evaluation
C6. Additional outcome indicator for article 4	Volume, in tonnes of mercury-added products (a) imported and (b) exported, in units per year, for each product category in part I of annex A.	Trade and customs data	Amount in the first evaluation
Article 5
C7. Process indicator for article 5	Number of parties with exemptions for annex B, part I, processes that are still valid	Registry of exemptions	Number in the first evaluation
C8. Process indicator for article 5	Number of parties having measures in place to not allow the use of mercury or mercury compounds in manufacturing processes listed in part I of annex B	Article 21 reporting	Number in the first evaluation
C9. Process indicator for article 5	Proportion of parties that have processes subject to article 5, para. 3, that have taken all measures for the respective processes listed in annex B, part II	Article 21 reporting	Percentage in the first evaluation
Article 7
C10. Outcome indicator for article 7	Total amount of mercury used in ASGM globally, in tonnes per year	Article 21 reportingASGM national action plans and reviews thereofNotifications	Amount in the first evaluation
C11. Process indicator for article 7	Proportion of parties declaring more than insignificant ASGM that have submitted a national action plan	Notifications	Percentage in the first evaluation
C12. Process indicator for article 7	Proportion of parties that have submitted a national action plan and have reviewed it	Article 7 reviews	Percentage in the first evaluation
Notes	Some data on products may not be easily obtainable.

D: Pressure cluster Article 8 (emissions); article 9 (releases); article 12 (contaminated sites)		Source of information on the indicator	Baseline for the indicator
D1. Overall process indicator for articles 8, 9 and 12	Share of parties that have implemented key provisions under this cluster	Article 21 reporting	Percentage in the first evaluation
D2. Crosscutting outcome indicator for articles 8, 9 and 12	Total amount of mercury emitted and released	Global Mercury Assessment 2018InventoriesMinamata Convention initial assessments	Amount in the first evaluation
Article 8 (The indicators for article 8 are to be read with the monitoring indicators in table 4.)
D3. Outcome indicator for article 8	Total amount of mercury emitted for each point source category in annex D	Article 21 reporting Inventories	Number in the first evaluation
D4. Process indicator for article 8	Number of parties that require BAT/BEP or emission limit values consistent with the application of BAT	Article 21 reporting	Number in the first evaluation
D5. Process indicator for article 8	Number of parties that have put in place control measures for existing sources (per each of the measures set out in article 8, para. 5)	Article 21 reporting	Number in the first evaluation
D6. Process indicator for article 8	Number of parties that have established and maintained an inventory of emissions	Article 21 reporting	Number in the first evaluation
Article 9 (The indicators for article 9 are to be read with the relevant monitoring indicators in table 4.)
D7. Outcome indicator for article 9	Total amount of mercury releases in the inventory from relevant sources	Article 21 reportingInventories	Amount in the first evaluation
D8. Process indicator for article 9	Number of parties that have identified relevant sources	Article 21 reporting	Number in the first evaluation
D9. Process indicator for article 9	Number of parties that have established and maintained an inventory of releases from relevant sources	Article 21 reporting	Number in the first evaluation
Article 12
D10. Process indicator for article 12	Number of parties that have developed strategies for identifying and assessing sites contaminated by mercury or mercury compounds	Article 21 reporting	Number in the first evaluation
D11. Process indicator for article 12	Number of parties that have developed an inventory of contaminated sites	Article 21 reporting	Number in the first evaluation
Notes	There may be some data gaps, as parties are not obliged to share the information collected as part of their inventory.

E: Support cluster Article 13 (financial resources and mechanism); article 14 (capacity‑building, technical assistance and technology transfer)		Source of information on the indicator	Baseline for the indicator
Article 13
E1. Process indicator for article 13	Number of parties that have:Contributed to the financial mechanism referred to in article 13, para. 5Received Global Environment Facility resourcesReceived SIP resourcesMobilized national resources for implementing the Convention within the reporting period	Article 21 reporting	Number in the first evaluation
E2. Process indicator for article 13	Amount of resources provided by:Global Environment FacilitySIPBilateral support within the reporting period	Article 21 reportingOther public sources	Amount in the first evaluation
E3. Additional process indicator for article 13	Number of recommendations from the financial review reflected in the Global Environment Facility/SIP policy documents	Information from policy documents	Zero
Article 14
E4. Process indicator for article 14	Number of parties that have:1.Cooperated in providing capacity‑building and technical assistance to another party2.Requested technical assistance3.Received capacity‑building or technical assistance4.Promoted or facilitated technology transfer	Article 21 reportingOther public sources	Number in the first evaluation
Notes	The cycle of review of the financial mechanism may well not align with the effectiveness evaluation cycle.As the reporting format does not request dollar values for resources provided, other public sources may need to be consulted.

F: Article 15 (Implementation and Compliance Committee)		Source of information on the indicator	Baseline for the indicator
F1. Process indicator	Proportion of issues that the Implementation and Compliance Committee was able to resolve, including indications of systemic issues, if any	Implementation and Compliance Committee report, as referred to in article 21	Percentage in the first evaluation
Notes	The Conference of the Parties is to consider the terms of reference of the Implementation and Compliance Committee at its third meeting.

G: Article 16 (Health aspects) (The indicator for article 16 is to be read with the relevant monitoring indicators indicated in table 4)		Source of information on the indicator	Baseline for the indicator
G1. Monitoring indicator	Mercury levels in selected human populations (as defined by the monitoring arrangements)	Existing monitoring data and activities	Number in the first evaluation
G2. Process indicator	Number of parties that have taken measures, such as fish advisories, to provide information to the public on exposure to mercury, in accordance with paragraph 1 of article 16	Article 21 reporting	Number in the first evaluation
G3. Process indicator	Number of parties that have taken measures to protect human health, in accordance with article 16	Article 21 reportingSubmissions to the secretariat	Number in the first evaluation
Notes	Mercury levels in biota are also to be considered.

H: Information and research cluster Article 17 (information exchange); article 18 (public information, awareness and education); article 19 (research, development and monitoring)		Source of information on the indicator	Baseline for the indicator
Article 17
H1. Process indicator for article 17	Number of parties with designated national focal points	Article 21 reporting	Number in the first evaluation
H2. Process indicator for article 17	Number of parties that have facilitated the exchange of information related to mercury	Article 21 reporting	Number in the first evaluation
Article 18
H3. Process indicator for article 18	Number of parties that have taken measures to implement article 18	Article 21 reporting	Number in the first evaluation
H4. Process indicator for article 18	Average number of measures under paragraph 1 of article 18 that are being implemented by parties	Derived from article 21 reporting	Number in the first evaluation
H5. Process indicator for article 18	Number of parties that have public information on mercury levels in air, humans and biota within their territory	Article 21 reporting	Number in the first evaluation
H6. Process indicator for article 18	Number of parties undertaking risk communication relating to mercury intake through food and water consumption within their territory	Article 21 reporting	Number in the first evaluation
Article 19
H7. Process indicator for article 19	Number of parties that have undertaken research, development and monitoring, in accordance with paragraph 1 of article 19	Article 21 reporting	Number in the first evaluation
H8. Process indicator for article 19	Number of parties contributing data and knowledge to integrated assessments	Existing monitoring networks, databases, scientific data and literature	Number in the first evaluation
H9. Additional process indicator for article 19	Number of regions contributing to a regional dataset	Existing monitoring networks, databases, scientific data and literature	Number in the first evaluation
Notes	Submissions to the secretariat that supplement article 21 reporting

I: Article 20 (implementation plans)		Source of information on the indicator	Baseline for the indicator
I1. Process indicator	Number of parties submitting implementation plans	Secretariat report to the Conference of the Parties on implementation plan submissions	Zero
Notes	Parties are not obliged to prepare an implementation plan. Some parties have nevertheless found it useful to prepare such a plan and submit it to the secretariat.

J: Article 21 (reporting)		Source of information on the indicator	Baseline for the indicator
J1. Process indicator	Proportion of parties reporting on time	Article 21 reporting	Percentage of the first submission on time
J2. Process indicator	Proportion of reports received on time	Article 21 reporting	Percentage not available in the first reports
J3. Process indicator	Proportion of parties indicating that information is not available for specific questions	Article 21 reporting	Percentage not available in the first reports
Notes	Parties are to report every two years.

Abbreviations: ASGM, artisanal and small‑scale gold mining; BAT/BEP, best available techniques/best environmental practices; SIP, Specific International Programme to Support Capacity‑building and Technical Assistance.

Annex II to decision MC-3/10

Framework for the effectiveness evaluation of the Minamata Convention

Figure 1 – Information and analysis flow

Figure 2 – Framework institutional arrangements

Abbreviations: COP, Conference of the Parties to the Minamata Convention on Mercury; ICC, Implementation and Compliance Committee; MIA, Minamata initial assessment; NAP, national action plan; NIP, national implementation plan; SIP, Specific International Programme to Support Capacity‑building and Technical Assistance.

The United Nations Portal on Multilateral Environmental Agreements

Arrangements for the first effectiveness evaluation of the Minamata Convention on Mercury

Table of Contents

Arrangements for the first effectiveness evaluation of the Minamata Convention on Mercury

Annex I to decision MC-3/10

Proposed indicators for evaluating the effectiveness of the Minamata Convention, by article

Annex II to decision MC-3/10

Framework for the effectiveness evaluation of the Minamata Convention

Figure 1 – Information and analysis flow

Figure 2 – Framework institutional arrangements

Get informed

Browse by environmental topic

Browse by regions

Free courses

Organizations