The Persistent Organic Pollutants Review Committee of the Stockholm Convention has decided to invite the Food and Agriculture Organisation to undertake studies on integrated pest management alternatives to endosulfan. The decision was taken as a follow up to the decision of the Conference of Parties to the Convention in April to list endosulfan and its isomers for elimination with exemptions for specified crop-pest complexes. It had requested the review committee to assess alternatives to endosulfan. The committee, which met in Geneva last week, resolved to establish an ad hoc working group to review and identify information gaps on alternatives to endosulfan and to assess endosulfan alternatives. It also invited governments, intergovernmental organisations, and non-governmental organisations to provide technical and financial resources to support the committee to employ a consultant to carry out the review of information and assessment of alternatives. The meeting was attended by 29 of the 31 committee members, observers, and representatives of non-governmental organisations. During the deliberations, India raised question on how to assess the alternatives, in the absence of complete information on the 84 suggested alternatives. Chair Reiner Arndt (Germany) explained that modelling could be used in the absence of data, IISD Reporting Services said in its bulletin. The committee subsequently created a ‘Friends of the Chair' group, led by Bettina Hitzfeld (Switzerland), to consider methodologies, prioritise alternatives, and offer options to address missing data. This group will also consider the preparatory work for the assessment of alternatives to DDT, the bulletin said. The committee requested the Convention Secretariat to collect information from parties and observers to facilitate intercessional work and access to information on endosulfan alternatives and provide guidance to strengthen the capacity of countries to use alternatives. Sharing the country's experience in eliminating endosulfan in coffee production, Colombia suggested the FAO coordinate an examination of such success stories. Switzerland raised concerns regarding the feasibility of conducting risk assessments of all the proposed alternatives and suggested focussing on alternatives for the specific crop-pest complexes for which there are exemptions. Argentina underscored the need to assess alternatives not only in light of their persistent organic pollutant (POP) characteristics but also to consider their socioeconomic effects. The Chair agreed that the committee could assess POP characteristics as well as other unwanted properties, but underscored that individual countries would have to assess the local suitability of alternatives, the bulletin said. (The Earth Negotiations Bulletin is published by the International Institute for Sustainable Development.)