Table 8.

Examples of successful processes and of challenges in banning paraquat described by seven current/former pesticide regulator respondents, along with their recommendations for the future implementation of paraquat bans in other countries

Successful processes:

• Training growers in the use of alternatives • Demonstrating the use of spray shields for taro as a method to protect vulnerable crops from alternative herbicides with systemic action • Enlisting border control and customs and setting heavy fines for illegal imports The creation of an “Alternative to Paraquat Committee: comprising relevant public and private sector members • An assertive awareness program was conducted in collaboration with various stakeholders to educate growers on how to use an integrated approach for the use of safer alternatives • Relevant stakeholders were engaged in developing national policy on paraquat. Successful policies were formulated by an independent advisory panel to the pesticide regulator, consisting of experts from health, agriculture, environment, customs, and occupational health established under the law governing pesticide control. The law provided necessary provisions for the control of import, distribution, marketing, sale and use of pesticides • Information about the government’s decision to remove paraquat, along with information on the toxicity of paraquat to human health, the reproductive system, and the environment was widely disseminated through various government channels, involving agricultural, health, and environmental departments and via mass media agencies • Farmers’ access to information was strengthened by an information system disseminated via village’s organizations such as village management board, Farmers’ Union, Women’s Union, Youth Union, and village health care services

Challenges:

• Management of illegal smuggling of paraquat from neighboring countries where paraquat is still legally sold or produced • Inadequate bans that allow registration of paraquat via alternative formulations • Limited stocks of alternative herbicides • Insufficient time to evaluate alternative methods before the ban was implemented due to lack of a transition period • Difficulty of convincing farmers because they do not view health and safety as a priority concern; they often appear more concerned with the cost and quick effectiveness of paraquat (a transition time allows for alternatives to be evaluated and demonstrated to farmers)

Recommendations made by regulators consulted:

• It is important to establish a credible and strong scientific evidence-based process in reviewing and decision-making • Throughout the banning process, pesticide regulators should work closely with the health sector, regularly review and make improvements to the decision-making process based on the feedback from the field, and coordinate closely with the pesticide industry • Regulators should consult with stakeholders before a ban, including, farmers, pesticide sellers, and pest management experts • A transition period is recommended before a full ban is implemented so as to give sufficient time to conduct research on alternatives and to train farmers • It is essential to convince farmers to use safer alternatives and encourage non-herbicide methods • Regulators have a responsibility to act to prevent suicides from paraquat. The most effective action is to ban paraquat