This book includes a plain text version that is designed for high accessibility. To use this version please follow this link.
Pesticide management in Sri Lanka


Pesticides used in agriculture, public health, industrial, veterinary and domestic use can potentially end up in the water, either through seepage into groundwater, run-off into streams or via the municipal wastewater collection systems. On their way they often threaten human and environmen- tal health. Balancing the desired benefits of pesticide use, whilst minimizing the potentially harmful side effects of these potent chemicals primarily remains the responsibility of governments.


Sri Lanka’s high yielding crop varieties, such as tea and rice, are susceptible to pest damage, resulting in a need for safe and effective pest control. Sri Lanka has prohibited a large number of highly toxic chemicals without affecting its agri- cultural production and today produces one of the world’s cleanest teas with regards to all persistent organic pollutants (POPs) and WHO hazard class Ia and Ib chemicals. How was this achieved?


The Office of the Registrar of Pesticides, established within the Department of Agriculture looks at product registration, provides laboratory analysis for monitoring programmes and coordinates enforcement of the Control of Pesticides Act No 33 of 1980, guided by a multi-disciplinary and multi- sectoral Technical Advisory Committee. One of the keys to pesticide management is chemicals registration. Prerequi- sites are the conformation to international standards such as those of FAO and WHO; and the registration status in other countries. The Rotterdam Convention is one of the key international instruments providing governments with guidelines and detailed information on product use and risk profiles.


The adoption of international standards and cooperation is cost-effective in countries with limited financial and labora- tory capacity. Some challenges remain, but given that most of Sri Lanka’s pesticide control only started a little over two decades ago, the progress that has been made thanks to the institutional arrangements, legislation, and enforcement, has been remarkable.


(Source: Manuweera, 2007; Manuweera et al, 2008) 66


APPROPRIATE TECHNOLOGY AND INNOVATION


There are numerous examples where attempts to transfer tech- nologies from one place to another fails. Different approaches to wastewater management are required for different regions, rural and urban areas, with different population sizes and dif- ferent stages of economic governance depending on capacity to manage wastewater and capacity for governance. Approaches can also vary depending on the quality standard required for end users or end-point disposal. The sanitation ladder provides a useful instrument to assess the local status of sanitation in a community, municipality or region, pointing to optimal waste- water management strategies.


Cradle-to-cradle – can we do away with wastewater?


The cradle-to-cradle philosophy suggests a new form of pro- duction using processes that rely on reusable, biodegradable or consumable materials. No waste, as we know it at all and in fact the possibility of using production methods to improve the environment, for example water going out cleaner than it came in. With cradle-to-cradle there is no end, as discarded products once they have served their purpose should provide food for the biosphere or be completely recyclable in the technosphere. Examples include carpets that are made of a polymer that is completely recyclable – it can be depolymerized and used again and again or textiles that are made from completely non-toxic material, tested down to parts per million, that are completely biodegradable and nutritious for the environment.


Why is it currently acceptable, even in developed countries with environmental guidelines, for manufactures and consumers to demand products whose production and or disposal damage the environment? We tolerate products that are inherently poi- sonous, are poisonous to make and have a toxic legacy. We need international regulations to drive innovation so that cradle-to- cradle becomes the norm. Companies are now starting to adopt cradle-to-cradle production and finding that it is economic to have design principles, that are “good” rather than “less bad”.


(Source: McDonough and Braungart, 2002)


Page 1  |  Page 2  |  Page 3  |  Page 4  |  Page 5  |  Page 6  |  Page 7  |  Page 8  |  Page 9  |  Page 10  |  Page 11  |  Page 12  |  Page 13  |  Page 14  |  Page 15  |  Page 16  |  Page 17  |  Page 18  |  Page 19  |  Page 20  |  Page 21  |  Page 22  |  Page 23  |  Page 24  |  Page 25  |  Page 26  |  Page 27  |  Page 28  |  Page 29  |  Page 30  |  Page 31  |  Page 32  |  Page 33  |  Page 34  |  Page 35  |  Page 36  |  Page 37  |  Page 38  |  Page 39  |  Page 40  |  Page 41  |  Page 42  |  Page 43  |  Page 44  |  Page 45  |  Page 46  |  Page 47  |  Page 48  |  Page 49  |  Page 50  |  Page 51  |  Page 52  |  Page 53  |  Page 54  |  Page 55  |  Page 56  |  Page 57  |  Page 58  |  Page 59  |  Page 60  |  Page 61  |  Page 62  |  Page 63  |  Page 64  |  Page 65  |  Page 66  |  Page 67  |  Page 68  |  Page 69  |  Page 70  |  Page 71  |  Page 72  |  Page 73  |  Page 74  |  Page 75  |  Page 76  |  Page 77  |  Page 78  |  Page 79  |  Page 80  |  Page 81  |  Page 82  |  Page 83  |  Page 84  |  Page 85  |  Page 86  |  Page 87  |  Page 88