REPORT

Multi-Stakeholder Workshop on National Road Map for Paraquat Dichloride

Management in Indonesia and Implementation of the Rotterdam Convention

Crowne Plaza Jakarta

Jakarta, Indonesia

12 – 13 November 2019
Contents

Background ......................................................................................................................... 3
Objectives of the workshop ............................................................................................... 3
Expected outcomes of the workshop ............................................................................... 4
Organization and participation .......................................................................................... 4
Opening ceremony ............................................................................................................. 5
Structure of the workshop .................................................................................................. 5
Presentations ...................................................................................................................... 5
Summary of presentations, discussions and findings of break out groups................... 6
Roadmap for paraquat management ............................................................................... 7
Roadmap for the full implementation of Rotterdam Convention in Indonesia .............. 8
Closing ............................................................................................................................... 10
ANNEX I: List of Participants .......................................................................................... 11
Annex II: AGENDA ........................................................................................................... 15
Annex III: FINDINGS OF BREAK-OUT-GROUPS ........................................................ 17
Annex IV: Roadmap for Managing Paraquat Dichloride in Indonesia ......................... 20
Annex V: Roadmap for Full Implementation of Rotterdam Convention in Indonesia 23

2
Background

The Rotterdam Convention on the Prior Informed Consent Procedure for Certain
Hazardous Chemicals and Pesticides in International Trade is a legally binding
international instrument to promote shared responsibility and cooperative efforts
among Parties in the international trade of certain hazardous chemicals in order to
protect human health and the environment from potential harm. Its Secretariat is jointly
administered by the Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations (FAO)
and The United Nations Environment Programme (UNEP).

In line with the objective of Article 16 (Technical Assistance) of the Rotterdam

Convention, the Convention Secretariat can assist Parties of the Rotterdam
Convention in their efforts to develop the infrastructure and the capacity necessary to
manage chemicals to enable implementation of the Rotterdam Convention. The
technical assistance programme of the Rotterdam Convention covers a range of
activities that addresses the needs of individual countries or regions in order to assist
them fully implementing the Convention.

The needs to deliver technical assistance to the parties to ensure effective

implementation of the Rotterdam Convention have been raised in many occasions.
The Conference of the Parties (COP) at its 8th Meeting specifically requested the
Secretariat to undertake activities to assist parties in submitting notifications of final
regulatory action (FRA) for banned or severely restricted chemicals and pesticides and
proposal for severely hazardous pesticide formulation (SHPF), so that the number and
comprehensiveness of notifications and proposals could be increased in the future.

Following the statement made by an Indonesian representative at COP-9 that although

his Government could not support the listing of paraquat dichloride formulation in the
Annex III of the Convention at the current meeting owing to opposition from farmers in
his country, his Government however, stood ready to prepare a national roadmap to
reduce its use and to help farmers in obtaining alternatives, with a view to supporting
the listing of paraquat dichloride formulation at COP-10. Further to this decision,
Indonesia has officially informed the Rotterdam Convention Secretariat of its plan to
organize a national workshop aimed at developing a national roadmap for paraquat
dichloride management with the objective of reducing the use of paraquat dichloride
and finding suitable alternatives. To assist Indonesia to organize the workshop and in
order to ensure the success of the workshop in line with decision of COP-9, Indonesia
has submitted a request for the Secretariat to be involved in its organizing and provide
appropriate technical support and expertise.

Objectives of the workshop

The overall objective of the workshop was to assist Indonesia in its efforts to develop
the infrastructure and the capacity necessary to manage chemicals to enable effective
implementation of the Rotterdam Convention, in line with the requirement of Article 16
(Technical Assistance) of the Rotterdam Convention and to draft a national roadmap
on the management of paraquat dichloride.

The specific objectives of the workshop were:

3
 1. To inform about and explain the main obligations and benefits of the Rotterdam
Convention.
2. To raise awareness among all national stakeholders on the status of paraquat
dichloride formulations as a candidate chemical to be listed under Annex III of
the Rotterdam Convention as a severely hazardous pesticide formulation
(SHPF) and its implication to the parties once listed.
3. To facilitate information exchange on the availability and use of alternative
weeds management practices without paraquat dichloride.
4. To develop a national roadmap for the paraquat dichloride management with
the objective to gradually reduce its use, upon availability of viable alternatives.
This would enable Indonesia to potentially support the inclusion of paraquat
dichloride formulations in the Annex III at COP-10.
5. To strengthen the capacity of Designated National Authorities (DNA) to
implement the Rotterdam Convention by exchanging information related to
obligations under the Convention with all national stakeholders.
6. To foster cooperation and collaboration between DNA and all national
stakeholders as well as with other relevant partners.

Expected outcomes of the workshop

In addition to strengthening the cooperation of national stakeholders, the expected

outputs of the workshop were a:

1. Clear understanding of the Rotterdam Convention, its scope, obligations and

benefits, as well as the fact that listing under the Rotterdam Convention does
not constitute a global ban of the listed chemical.
2. Raised awareness among all national stakeholders on the status of paraquat
dichloride formulations as a candidate chemical to be listed under Annex III of
the Rotterdam Convention as SHPF and its implication to Indonesia once listed.
3. Facilitated information exchange on the availability and use of alternative
weeds management practices without paraquat dichloride.
4. A national roadmap developed for the paraquat dichloride management with
the objectives to gradually reduce its use.
5. With the development of the roadmap, Indonesia would consider supporting the
inclusion of paraquat dichloride formulations in the Annex III at COP-10.
6. Strengthened the capacity of DNAs to implement the Rotterdam Convention
and related obligations under the Convention in collaboration with relevant
national stakeholders.

Organization and participation

The workshop was organized by the Ministry of Environment and Forestry of Indonesia
in collaboration with the Rotterdam Convention Secretariat. The Government of
Indonesia generously offered to cover all local costs. The Rotterdam Convention
Secretariat covered its own costs and the costs of the participation of international
experts invited to the workshop.

4
The workshop was held at Crowne Plaza Jakarta, from 12-13th November 2019 and
attended by 62 participants from various ministries/agencies, industries, farmers and
civil societies from Indonesia. The workshop was also attended by one staff from the
FAO Rotterdam Convention Secretariat, Rome and four regional experts. The list of
participants appears in Annex I.

Opening ceremony

After hearing the national anthem, Ms. Rosa Vivien Ratnawati, the Director General of
Solid Waste, Hazardous Waste and Hazardous Substances Management, Ministry of
Environment and Forestry, Indonesia in her opening speech welcomed all participants
to the workshop, held in Jakarta. She expressed her appreciation to the Rotterdam
Convention Secretariat for their support to enable Indonesia hosting this workshop.
She mentioned that Indonesia is fully committed in ensuring the success of the
workshop and will play an important role in ensuring the effective implementation of
the Convention in the future. She wished the participants for a successful meeting.

Ambassador Yusra Khan, special adviser to the Ministry of Foreign Affairs on climate
change and environment issues, during the opening remark among others mentioned
that Indonesia is committed to achieve the objective of the workshop in the
development of roadmap for paraquat management in Indonesia aimed at reducing its
use and helping users to find alternatives.

Mr. Ageng Setiawan Herianto, the Assistant FAO Representative, Indonesia during
his opening remarks stated that FAO has been supporting the Government of
Indonesia inter alia to broaden the use of Conservation Agriculture (CA) and Integrated
Pest Management (IPM) for better natural resources management and greater
biodiversity towards achieving food self-sufficiency and food security objectives. He
also mentioned that, although listing under the Rotterdam Convention does not
constitute a ban, it is important to look into less hazardous alternatives for pesticides
that have been banned or restricted in some countries around the world for health or
environmental reasons.

Structure of the workshop

The workshop operated through a series of plenary sessions and 2 break-out groups
over the two days. The workshop was divided into four main sessions, namely; (i)
context, current situation, risks and challenges; (ii) Government’s policy and view; (iii)
Stakeholders’ view on the use of paraquat dichloride in specific crops and (iv)
Addressing the challenges - sustainable alternative and development of roadmap. The
agenda of the workshop is given in Annex II.

Presentations

During the 1st day of the workshop, the Secretariat provided overview presentations
on the objective of the workshop, key elements of the Convention and introduced the
status of discussion related to the paraquat dichloride formulation as a candidate
chemical to be listed under Annex III as an SHPF. Indonesia presented and discussed
their national experience in implementing the Convention. Indonesia also shared
5
information regarding the pesticide registration process, pesticide use and
incidences/poisoning cases associated with pesticides. All stakeholders (industries,
regulators, farmers and civil societies) shared their perspective regarding the use of
paraquat dichloride in Indonesia. Subsequent to that, the participants were divided into
three Break-Out-Groups (BOG) for in-depth discussions, of the pros and cons of
paraquat dichloride and alternatives as well as the challenges in finding alternatives.
The findings of all BOGs were presented to the plenary.

The 2nd day focused on information exchange on the availability of various alternative
methods in weeds management both chemical methods and non-chemical methods
without using paraquat dichloride, including examples of sustainable alternative
solutions of weed management in various crops from other countries. During the
development of the roadmap for paraquat dichloride management in Indonesia,
participants were divided into two Break-Out-Groups (BOG) to brainstorm on the
status of paraquat dichloride use, potential exposure, awareness and feasibility of
alternatives of paraquat dichloride in Indonesia. The BOGs then suggested specific
actions to be carried out, identified relevant actors responsible for those actions and
the expected timeframe. The findings of the BOG were then presented to the plenary.
Based on the findings a roadmap for paraquat dichloride management was developed.
The findings of all the BOGs is given in Annex III.

Summary of presentations, discussions and findings of break out groups

 From the presentations, participants became more aware of the key objectives of
the Convention and various obligations expected from parties. They were also
aware of the status of the implementation of Rotterdam Convention in Indonesia.
 Awareness among all national stakeholders on the status of paraquat dichloride
formulations as a candidate chemical to be listed under Annex III of the Rotterdam
Convention as SHPF and its implication to Indonesia once listed, was raised.
 After the presentations, and followed by explanations during the questions and
answers session, the understanding of the participants on implication of listing of
paraquat dichloride formulation in Annex III of the Convention became clearer.
They understood that even if paraquat dichloride formulation would be listed, any
party including Indonesia has every right to continue to import, produce and use
paraquat dichloride formulations, as listing does not constitute a global banning.
Indonesia is to provide an appropriate import response to inform other parties of
the status of paraquat formulations use in the country and their consent or no
consent to future imports.
 Participants were also exposed to the concept and principles of agroecology, which
can form the basis of more sustainable food production systems that not only
produce more food but with more socio-economic benefits and with less adverse
environmental consequences. While past efforts focused on boosting agricultural
output to produce more food, today’s challenges demand to include inter alia
climate change, thus need a new approach in agriculture, and agroecology is one
of the promising approaches and has been endorsed by FAO as one of the ways
forward.
6
 Participants became more knowledgeable of the availability of alternative methods
for weed management, both in terms of alternative herbicides to paraquat and non-
chemical sustainable methodologies. These alternative methodologies have been
practiced and used in most crop situations in many countries. Based on the
experience in the Philippines, the use of various non-chemical alternative methods
have been successfully adopted by farmers in rice cultivation and other crops and
herbicides are only used as the last resort. As regards oil palm, participants were
also exposed to an example of the practices of integrated weed management
(IWM) system in oil palm and rubber in one of the multi-national plantations in
Malaysia. This IWM system has already been practiced by the plantation for
several years now, without the use of paraquat dichloride formulations.
 As for the status of paraquat dichloride use in Indonesia, it became clearer during
the discussion that there were two opposite views regarding paraquat dichloride:
o The first view claimed that the use of paraquat dichloride in Indonesia has
been shown to be important in agricultural development, improved yields
and profitability for growers without adverse effects to human health and
impact to the environment. It claimed that the studies have shown that
paraquat dichloride use is without any problem. There has been no report
of incidents and poisonings to the users and farmers as a result of exposure
to paraquat. It was also claimed that the amount of pesticide active
ingredients use per hectare in Indonesia is among the lowest in the world,
thus the impact to the environment should be very minimal.
o The other view insisted that the use of pesticides, in particular paraquat
dichloride, has generally caused adverse effects to human health and
probably the environment. Current assessment of the paraquat use situation
is based on very limited data. What is lacking currently in Indonesia is the
reliable data and information on pesticide use and pesticides
incidents/poisonings in order to make a more accurate assessment of the
actual situation in the country. Non availability of local information on
adverse effects of pesticides reported does not mean everything is without
problems. During the presentation, it was mentioned that based on the
scattered and isolated data, paraquat dichloride has indeed caused
poisoning among the applicators in the field studied.
 It was revealed during the discussion that statistics on the import, production and
use of pesticides including paraquat dichloride are available in certain government
agencies. The industry confirmed that this information is regularly sent every six
months to the Ministry of Agriculture as well as the Ministry of Environment and
Forestry of Indonesia. The meeting agreed that this statistic should be analyzed
and shared among all stakeholders so that an assessment of the actual use trend
could be performed, in particular the use of paraquat dichloride.

Roadmap for paraquat management

Based on the discussion and exchange of views among all stakeholders during the
plenary and break out groups, as well as after taking stocks of paraquat dichloride use
in Indonesia coupled with unavailability of certain key information to assess the actual
situation, the meeting endorsed the following action plan with the objective to collect
more information in order to assess the current state of paraquat use in Indonesia, so
7
that a more concrete roadmap for paraquat management in Indonesia could be
developed. They are clustered under the following four headings:

1. Assessment of use of paraquat dichloride in Indonesia

1.1. To analyze available data provided by industry to the Ministry of
Agriculture and the Ministry of Environment and Forestry on
production, import and distribution of pesticides (including paraquat
dichloride).
1.2. To collect data on paraquat dichloride usage in plantation
1.3. To collect total number of users trained for using paraquat dichloride

2. Assessment of exposure and potential poisoning with paraquat dichloride in

Indonesia
2.1. To carry out blood testing of farmers, workers and their families
2.2. To reinstate the poisoning centres
2.3. To collect independently generated data on human health effects or to
review respective industry data by an independent body
2.4. To collect independently generated data on environmental effects or to
review respective industry data by an independent body
2.5. To carry out a monitoring survey/interviews of farmers and workers
who use paraquat dichloride

3. Assessment of awareness on the risk of paraquat dichloride in Indonesia

3.1. To collect information on the training of farmers on pesticide proper use
and risk
3.2. To continue to raise awareness not only among farmers but also
among other target groups e.g. medical staff, FFS and consumers
(through public campaign)

4. Assessment of feasibility and acceptability of alternatives to paraquat dichloride

in Indonesia
4.1. To conduct pilot projects on alternatives
4.2. To organize study visit in other countries
4.3. To research alternatives and make the information available
4.4. To organize a series of national workshop for experience and
information exchange
4.5. To collect documentation of reasons for banning in other countries
4.6. The government to enact appropriate policy on alternatives

A detailed roadmap with action plans, the stakeholders involved and the timeframe is
given in Annex IV.

Roadmap for the full implementation of Rotterdam Convention in Indonesia

The meeting also took note of the status and progress of the implementation of the
Rotterdam Convention in Indonesia. Recently, Indonesia submitted notifications of
final regulatory actions on 44 chemicals that have been banned and severely restricted
on the ground of human and environmental health reasons. Since none of these
8
submission fully met the requirements of Annex I of the Convention, the Secretariat
offered to work together with the DNA to discuss what information is missing to
improve the notifications.

There are still 34 outstanding import responses to be submitted to the Secretariat, and
the list of those chemicals and pesticides appears in the Rotterdam Convention
website as cases of failure to transmit a response.

As for proposals for severely hazardous pesticide formulations (SHPF), Indonesia is

yet to make use of this opportunity and to submit any proposal to the Secretariat.

Based on the status of implementation of the Convention in Indonesia by 2019 an

additional action plan based on the four main obligations as indicators has been
developed. Below is a list with the main actions to be carried out by Indonesia to
ensure full implementation:

1. Import response
1.1. To submit import response for missing 34 chemicals and pesticides
1.2. To establish a procedure to ensure timely submission in the future; better
coordination between Ministries
1.3. To establish a procedure to communicate the import decisions to those
concerned within the country
2. Notification of final regulatory action
2.1. To enter into communication with the RC Secretariat to clarify what
information is missing on the 44 notifications
2.2. To collect and fill the information required by Annex I where available with
collaboration from all relevant stakeholders
2.3. To make use of notifications that are published in the PIC Circulars as reference

3. Proposal for SHPF

3.1. To meet with stakeholders related to health, discuss any evidence on past
incidents and agree on reporting on any future incidences, e.g. through
hospital reports. DNA can routinely approach health to collect information
3.2. To create awareness among pesticide users on potential impacts on health,
symptoms etc.
3.3. To create awareness among medical personal on potential pesticide
poisoning
4. Export notification
4.1. DNA is to ensure timely acknowledgement, and then informs relevant
authorities of the export notification
4.2. DNA uses this information to improve future regulatory measures to reduce
associated risks to workers, consumers and the environment, and to inform
customs.
4.3. DNA is to contact the importers to inform them of the export notification and
of any future implications.

9
 4.4. To check all/any past export notifications and review them in collaboration
with relevant authorities

A detailed roadmap with action plans, the stakeholders involved and the timeframe is
given in Annex V.

Closing

Dr Christine Fuell in her closing remarks expressed appreciation to the generosity of

the Government of Indonesia for jointly organizing the workshop with the Rotterdam
Convention Secretariat. She thanked the participants for their active participation and
contributing their experiences during the discussions. She hoped the workshop
achieved the objective of developing a national roadmap for paraquat management in
Indonesia. She looked forward to further opportunities to work with all stakeholders in
particular the government of Indonesia within the scope of the Rotterdam Convention.

Ms. Yun Insiani in her closing speech thanked all the participants for attending and
participating actively during discussion. She was very grateful for the assistance and
support provided by the Rotterdam Convention Secretariat to enable the workshop
been organized successfully. The Government of Indonesia is committed for the full
implementation of the Rotterdam Convention in Indonesia and will continue to engage
with the Rotterdam Convention Secretariat if need be. She hoped with the
development of the roadmap for paraquat dichloride management, it will help the
Government Indonesia to decide their position on the listing of paraquat dichloride
formulation under the Convention at COP-10.

10
ANNEX I: List of Participants

11
A. Ministry of Environment and Forestry Ph: 081285872680
1. Yun Insiani 16. Siti Maesaroh
Email: mrtjkt.pb3@gmail.com Email:
Ph: 08161989541 maeesa09@gmail.com
2. Yunik Kuncaraning Purwandari Ph:
Email: yunikkuncar@gmail.com 0857421677461316831110
Ph: 082262575774 17. Astuti
3. Harry Ahmad Fakri Wahyuningsih
Email: harryahmadfakri@gmail.com Email: -
Ph: 082117637313 Ph: 081398720696
4. Retno P. L. 18. Safai
Email: emc_actep@yahoo.com Email: -
Ph: 021 7560981 Ph: 08121038963
5. Dewi Ratna Ningsih
Email: dewinino@yahoo.com B. Ministry of Foreign Affair
Ph: 08128110681 19. Bellarini
6. Erini Yuwatini Email:
Email: - bellarini@kemenlu.go.id
Ph: 081314470048 Ph: 081399236116
7. Shabira Damarti 20. Yusra Khan
Email: shabiradamarti@gmal.com Email:
Ph: 0816765201 yusrakhan@hotmail.com
8. Indrawan Mifta P. Ph: 081210991601
Email: indramifta@gmail.com
Ph: 082233933969 C. Ministry of Agriculture
9. Ariyastuti 21. Siwi H. P.
Email: ariyastuti297@gmail.com Email:
Ph: 085742167746 subdit.pestisida@yahoo.com Ph:
10. Nina Romapurnamasari 085641518549
Email: ninarps@gmail.com 22. Dyah Ayu
Ph: 082297332007 Email:
11. Aditia Nugraha subdit.pestisida@yahoo.com Ph:
Email: aditianugraha89@gmail.com 081399110070
Ph: 087824790685 23. Eka T. P.
12. Annisa Lutfiati Email:
Email: annisa.lutfiati@gmail.com subdit.pestisida@yahoo.com Ph:
Ph: 081542314908 085780966267
13. Widianingrum Permatasiwi 24. Asep Nugraha
Email: widianingrum@gmail.com Email: asena020361@gmail.com
Ph: 081287054157 Ph: 081380659961
14. Fifi Dwi Pratiwi 25. Budi Hanafi
Email: fifipakef@gmail.com Email: hanaf@yahoo.co.id
Ph: 0857930791976 Ph: 081289233050
15. Ade Ashriah
Email: ade82ria@yahoo.com D. Ministry of Finance (Custom)

12
 26. Rossi Amal Sholih Email:
Email: rossiamals@gmail.com Ph: witta.kartika@yahoo.com
085885850721 Ph: 085697858103
27. Johon F. P.
Email: - H. Pesticide Technical Team
Ph: 082237952935 39. Nanik Sriyani
Email:
E. Ministry of Health nanik.sriyani@punila.ac.id
28. Iwan Nefawan Ph: 08127907140
Email: iwan_nefawan@yahoo.com 40. Taufikurahman
Ph: 085888309845 Email:
pipik.taufikurahman@gmail.com Ph:
F. Ministry of Trade 08121494812
29. Afif Rahmat M. 41. Ari Budiawan
Email: - Email:
Ph: 0817119808 ari.budiawan@sigenta.com Ph:
30. Fitria 081317130436
Email: fis.depdag@gmail.com Ph: 42. Dono Wahyuno
08129993282 Email:
31. Siti Nurrahmah dwahyuno@yahoo.com Ph:
Email: rahmah_fajwa@yahoo.com Ph: 08158090846
081310829862
32. Ochy Suryatama I. NGO (Gita Pertiwi)
Email: 43. Rossana Dewi R.
ochy.suryatama@kemendag.go.id Ph: Email:
08382895125 dewiross@yahoo.com Ph:
33. Reshita Satya Devi 08122977165
Email: reshita.satya@kemendag.go.id Ph:
081314156113 J. Palm Oil Association
34. Irma R. S. 44. Henny Hendarjanti
Email: Irma_sianipar@yahoo.com Ph: Email: hherndarjanti@astra-
081212874436 agro.go.id Ph: 0811929547
35. Arina Haggo H.
Email: arina.haggo@kemendag.go.id Ph: K. Alishter
081299153099 45. Mirna
Mutiara
G. Indonesian Institute of Science Email: -
36. Agus Haryono Ph: 081289447468
Email: haryonolipi@yahoo.com 46. Ade Rusamsi
Ph: 087880223995 Email:
37. Yenny Meliana aderusamsi@gmail.com Ph:
Email: 08156008745
meliana2303@yahoo.com Ph: 47. Dwi
08158196433 Susilowati
38. Witta Kartika Restu Email: -

13
 Ph: 08111927811 Email:
48. Mirdzon Zohamuni ageng.herianto@fao.org Ph:
Email: - 081328303949
Ph: 0818851201 61. Sarojeni Rengam (PANAP)
49. Agus Benteng Email: sarojeni.rengam@panap.net
Email: agusbenteng@yahoo.com.sg Ph: -
Ph: 08129548343 62. Chito Medina (The Philippines)
50. Vicky Rizki A. Email: chito.medina197@gmail.com
Email: Vicky.arneldi81@gmail.com Ph: +639175442196
Ph: 081281566181
51. Nanin Noorhajati
Email: naninnoorhajati@gmail.com
Ph: 08121105531
52. Rusmanto
Email: rosmanto@biotis.co.id
Ph: 08129436313
53. Yongki Pamungkas
Email: yongki@salimagro.com
Ph: 087781638590
54. Didik Tri
Email: didik@pt-sgi.com
Ph: 0811923868
55. Nanin Noorhajati
Email: naninnoorhajati@gmail.com
Ph: 08121105531

L. GAPKI
56. Norman
Email: normanfajar@gmail.com
Ph: 081295457370

M. FAO Secretariat
57. Christine Fuell (FAO RC Secretariat)
Email: christine.fuell@fao.org
Ph: +393469883222
58. Halimi Mahmud (FAO)
Email: halimi.mahmud@fao.org
Ph: +60129178377
59. Meor Badli Shah (Sime Darby Plantation
Malaysia)
Email: moer.headli-
shah@simedarplantation.com
Ph: +60198837672
60. Ageng Setiawan Herianto (Assistant FAO
Representative, Indonesia)

14
Annex II: AGENDA

Multi-stakeholder workshop on national road map for paraquat dichloride

management in Indonesia and implementation of the Rotterdam Convention

Jakarta, Indonesia
Crowne Plaza Jakarta
12 – 13 November 2019

Day 1 (12 Nov 2019)

Time OPAL ROOM, 3rd floor Speaker/ Facilitator

Session 1 : Context, current situation, risks and challenges

08.30 Registration of participants
08.55 National Anthem of the Republic of Indonesia
09.00 Remarks Mr. Ageng Setiawan Herianto (Assistant FAO
Representative, Indonesia)
09.10 Remarks H.E. Yusra Khan (Director for Development,
Economy and Environment, Ministry of Foreign
Affairs)
09.20 Opening remarks Ms. Rosa Vivien Ratnawati (Director General of
Solid Waste, Hazardous Waste and Hazardous
Substances Management, Ministry of
Environment and Forestry)
09.30 Workshop objectives, approach and Ms. Christine Fuell (FAO RC Secretariat)
expected outcomes
09.40 Local arrangements, house keeping Ms. Yunik Kuncaraning Purwandari (Ministry of
Environment and Forestry)
09.50 The Rotterdam Convention: overview, key Ms. Christine Fuell (FAO, RC Secretariat)
benefits and obligations
10.20 Morning tea & Group photo
Session 2 : Government’s Policy and View
Moderated by Mr. Des Alwi (Ministry of Foreign Affairs)
10.35 Status of implementation of the Rotterdam Ms. Yun Insiani (Director for Toxic and
Convention in Indonesia Hazardous Substances Management, Ministry
of Environment and Forestry)
11.05 Pesticide registration and pesticide use in Mr. Rahmanto (Acting Director for Fertilizer and
Indonesia, and the use of paraquat Pesticides, Ministry of Agriculture)
dichloride in specific crops
11.40 Pesticides poisonings/incidences in Mr. Iwan Nefawan (Functional Staff at
Indonesia Directorate of Environmental Health, Ministry of
Health)
12.10 Q & A Moderator (Chair)
12.30 Lunch (BERANDA Cafe, 2nd Floor)
Session 3: Stakeholders’ view on the use of paraquat dichloride in specific corps
Moderated by Mr. Des Alwi (Ministry of Foreign Affairs)
13.30 Paraquat dichloride: why is it a candidate Mr. Halimi Mahmud (FAO)
chemical to the RC?
14.00 Industry’s view Mr. Midzon Johannis (Senior Advisor
ALISHTER- Aliansi Stewardship Herbisida
Terbatas)
14.20 Farmers’ view Mr. Bambang Dwi Laksono (GAPKI –
Gabungan Pengusaha Kelapa Sawit
Indonesia/ Indonesian Palm Oil Association)
14.40 Civil society’s view Ms. Rossana Dewi (Gita Pertiwi)

15
14.50 Introduction to break out groups Mr. Halimi Mahmud/Ms. Christine Fuell (FAO,
RC Secretariat)
15.10 Afternoon tea
15.20 Break out groups (FAO facilitators)
 Pros & cons of using paraquat dichloride
and other HHPs
 Challenges & difficulties to finding
alternatives
15.50 Groups report back & discussion All Participants
(Facilitator & rapporteur)
16.10 Videos e.g. “Coffee without endosulfan” (FAO, RC Secretariat)
– “Quelea management with falcons in Africa”,
16.30 “Alternatives to hazardous pesticides in the
Pacific Islands”
Day 2 (13 Nov 2019)
Time EMERALD ROOM, 3rd Floor Speaker/ Facilitator

Session 4 : Addressing the challenges - sustainable alternative solutions

Moderated by Ms. Yunik Purwandari (Ministry of Environment and Forestry)
09.00 Paraquat dichloride: available info on Mr. Chito Medina (The Philippines)
alternatives
09.30 Agroecology, IPM and other less Ms. Sarojeni Rengam (PANAP)
hazardous methods for weed control
10.00 Work on alternatives – examples from the Ms. Christine Fuell (FAO, RC Secretariat)
Rotterdam Convention
10.30 Integrated Weed Management in Oil Palm Mr. Meor Badli Shah (Sime Darby Plantation
and Rubber in Malaysia : Managing Weeds Malaysia)
Without Paraquat
11.00 Morning tea
11.15 Questions and Roundtable discussion (Facilitator FAO)
11.45 Introduction to drafting of a road map to Mr. Halimi Mahmud/Ms. Christine Fuell (FAO,
replace paraquat dichloride by less RC Secretariat)
hazardous alternatives
12.15 Lunch
13.15 Break out groups (Facilitator FAO)
Analyzing challenges & possible solutions
 How to assess the use of paraquat
dichloride in Indonesia?
 How to assess the exposure and
potential poisoning with paraquat
dichloride in Indonesia?
 How to assess the awareness on the
risk of paraquat dichloride in Indonesia?
 How to assess the feasibility and
acceptability of alternatives to paraquat
dichloride in Indonesia?
14.15 Groups report back & discussion All Participants
(Facilitator & rapporteur TBD)
15.15 Afternoon tea
15.30 Actions to draft a road map to replace Co-chaired by Ms. Christine Fuell (FAO) and
paraquat dichloride by less hazardous Ms. Yun Insiani (Ministry of Environment and
alternatives Forestry)
15.50  Commitments for action & Summary Ms. Christine Fuell (FAO, RC Secretariat)
–16.15  Closing remarks Ms. Yun Insiani (Director for Toxic and
Hazardous Substances Management, Ministry
End of Workshop of Environment and Forestry)

16
Annex III: FINDINGS OF BREAK-OUT-GROUPS
BOG SESSION 1
Discussion topics
1. Pros and cons of using paraquat dichloride and other HHPs
2. Challenges and difficulties to finding alternatives
1. Pros and cons of using paraquat dichloride and other HHPs
Advantages of paraquat dichloride
1. Effective for weed control
2. Economic
3. Accessible
4. If used properly, have no significant
impact
5. Insignificant impact to the environment:
microorganism, arthropode and worm
6. Not easily soluble on the ground so it
does not pollute the environment
7. Could be an erosion control
8. Speed of activity enhanced, and
increases planting index
9. Suitable in tropical countries
10. Rain fastness
11. Broad spectrum (good in controlling
tough/noxious weeds)
12. Fit with resistance management
13. Contact mode of action (food
safety/crop)
14. Good for soil conservation
15. Minimum impact to the environment
under proper recommendation
Disadvantages of paraquat dichloride
1. Low LD50 value, so more toxic
compared to other herbicides
2. Special training needed for applicators of
paraquat dichloride
3. Shorter weed control compared with
other herbicides (weed grows faster)
4. Data regarding adverse effects of
paraquat dichloride in Indonesia is still
limited, although there are many studies
of impact of paraquat dichloride on
international scale
5. There are adverse impacts of paraquat
dichloride in Indonesia that are still not
published yet (e.g. study by Institute
Pertanian Bandung, IPB)
6. Paraquat dichloride has been banned in
many countries already.
7. In Indonesia, paraquat dichloride is
classified as restricted pesticide, but the
information about its use and adverse
effects among the users is not fully
monitored
8. Although paraquat was banned in the
country of origin, it continued to be
exported to other countries, this
indicates the pesticide is very dangerous
9. The use of paraquat dichloride empty
containers among farmers is rather
widespread due to lack of knowledge on
its danger
10. Impact of paraquat dichloride usage in
women is higher than the men.
11. The right of workers in the plantation are
not commensurate with the impact of
exposure to pesticide
17
 2. Challenges and difficulties to finding alternatives

1. There are alternative chemicals such as sulfentrasol, glufosinate and addition of

adjuvant but alternatives are more expensive than paraquat dichloride
2. Non-chemicals alternatives such as manual and mechanical weeding are time
consuming and labour intensive and expensive
3. The alternative chemicals can be considered if the price is reduced
4. Government is to come out with the policy to encourage the use of alternatives such as
providing subsidy scheme
5. Searching for alternative weed management may require carrying out of pilot project on
the alternative
6. To do research on the impact of paraquat dichloride on human health in order to
convince the use of alternatives
7. To enhance capacity building for all stakeholders in pesticide management
8. Support from all stakeholders is needed for research.

3. SWOT analysis

Strength Weaknesses

1. Speed of activity enhanced, and 1. Short term period of control, 1-4 months
increases planting index for open condition and 3-4 months under
2. Suitable in tropical countries shade
3. Rain fastness 2. Cannot control Imprata cylindrica
4. Broad spectrum (good in controlling 3. As pesticide, it is poisonous
tough/noxious weeds)
5. Fit with resistance management
6. Contact mode of action (food
safety/crop)
7. Good for soil conservation
8. Minimum impact to the environment
under proper recommendation

Opportunities Threats

1. Increasing planting index (yield 1. Black/negative campaigns

production and food security) 2. Non trade barriers
2. Low cost, so economic benefits for 3. International conventions
farmers (country prosperity made food 4. Political pressure
self sufficient) 5. No supply
3. Reduce hard labour, addressing labour
shortage in certain regions
4. Reduce slashing and burning practices
5. Make sure of availability of sloped
land/tidal swap (typical Indonesia’s
condition)
6. Contribute to GDP 115 million USD in
industry only, excluding value chains
7. Development of latest application
technologies to reduce to chemical
(cartridge sprayer)
18
BOG SESSION 2

Discussion topics

1. How to assess the use of paraquat dichloride in Indonesia?

2. How to assess the exposure and potential poisoning with paraquat dichloride in Indonesia?
3. How to assess the awareness on the risk of paraquat dichloride in Indonesia?
4. How to assess the feasibility and acceptability of alternatives to paraquat dichloride in
Indonesia?

1. How to assess the use of paraquat
dichloride in Indonesia?
 To collect data on import,
production, sale and use from
industry
 To analyze database on the usage
from Ministry of Agriculture
 To estimate the percentage of use
for individual crop and trend analysis
of use on yearly basis
 Training of user’s on the use of
paraquat
 To provide sufficient budget for
training
 To involve all groups in the training
2. How to assess the exposure and
potential poisoning with paraquat
dichloride in Indonesia?
 To carry out independent monitoring
survey on the incidents/poisonings
of paraquat dichloride
 To collect and analyze data on
poisonings from the Ministry of
Health or other responsible
agencies
 To present and share already
available data of the study on
pesticides adverse effects from
Institute Pertanian Bandung (IPB)

3. How to assess the awareness on the
risk of paraquat dichloride in Indonesia
 To provide training to famers and
workers
 To support the use of PPE
 To use FFS as the medium for
raising awareness
 To provide more training to farmers
4. How to assess the feasibility and
acceptability of alternatives to paraquat
dichloride in Indonesia
 To have more pilot projects on
alternatives
 To do study visits to other counties
 To conduct more research
 To organize more national
workshops
 To collect documents and reasons
for the banning in other counties
 To come out with strong government
policy on the use of alternatives
 To research to find renew molecules

19
Annex IV: Roadmap for Managing Paraquat Dichloride in Indonesia

1. Assess the use of paraquat dichloride in Indonesia

Collecting information on paraquat uses

 What systems are in place to collect information on pesticide uses?
 Are there data available of paraquat use in Indonesia?
 Where information on pesticide use is collected, is there a mechanism to report it in a structured way to the Government?
 What process would need to be put in place in order for such information to be made available to the decision makers (Ministry of
Agriculture and Ministry of Environment and Forestry)

What action needs to be taken? Who has to do that? Timelines

Available data provided by industry every 6 months on production,  Ministry of Agriculture  Every 6 months –
import and distribution (sales and exports) of individual products to the  Ministry of Environment and on an ongoing
Ministry of Agriculture (Pesticide and Fertilizer Division) and the Forestry basis
Ministry of Environment and Forestry and with Ministry of Health need
to be analyzed by both Ministries in order to assess the actual status
of paraquat use in Indonesia.

To include data:
 Total volume of import, produce and use in Indonesia
 Estimated % volume per crops
Collect data on paraquat usage in plantations Oil Palm Plantation Associations yearly
and other relevant associations
Collect total number of users trained for paraquat use Ministry of Agriculture yearly

20
 2. Assess the exposure and potential poisoning with paraquat dichloride in Indonesia

Data regarding health effects in Indonesia still limited, although many studies available on international scale.

Collecting information on paraquat dichloride poisoning incidents

 What systems are in place to collect information on pesticide poisoning incidents (human health or the environment)?
 Are there data available of paraquat dichloride poisonings in Indonesia?
 Are medical centres and medical personal aware?
 Where information on pesticide poisoning incidents is collected, is there a mechanism to report it in a structured way to the
Government?
 What process would need to be put in place in order for such information to be made available to the decision makers (Ministry of
Agriculture)?

Implementation and Enforcement

 To what extent are the incident report forms developed by the Secretariat used to collect information on pesticide poisonings?
 What role might be played by non-governmental organizations (NGOs) in collecting information on pesticide poisoning incidents?
 What are the challenges faced by the DNA in preparing a proposal on an SHPF and submitting it to the Secretariat?

What action needs to be taken? Who has to do that? Timelines

1. Carry out blood testing of farmers, workers and their families  Ministry of Health  Q2 of 2020
2. Reinstate the poisoning centres  Ministry of Agriculture
3. Collect independently generated data on human health effects or  Other related Ministries
review respective industry data by an independent body
4. Collect independently generated data on environmental effects or
review respective industry data by an independent body
5. Carry out monitoring/survey and interviews of farmers and workers
using paraquat

21
 3. Assess the awareness on the risk of paraquat dichloride in Indonesia

Collecting information on knowledge and awareness among users on pesticide risk

 What systems are in place to raise awareness on the risk?
 How effective is the awareness program on the risk?

What action needs to be taken? Who has to do that? Timelines

1. Training of farmers and workers on proper use and risks  Ministry of Agriculture  Q3 of 2020
2. Training and awareness campaigns with Farmer Field Schools  Extension Services
3. Training and awareness campaigns for Medical staff  Ministry of Health
4. Awareness campaigns adapted to consumers (public campaign)

4. Assess the feasibility and acceptability of alternatives to paraquat dichloride in Indonesia

Collecting information on availability and practicality of alternatives

 What systems are in place to raise awareness on alternatives?
 Are alternative methods being practiced in Indonesia and what are the challenges?

What action needs to be taken? Who has to do that? Timelines

1. Conduct pilot project on alternatives  Ministry of Environment and Forestry  Q3 of 2020

2. Study visit in other countries (e.g. Malaysia) – South South
Cooperation
3. Research on alternatives and make the info available
4. Series of national WS for experience and info exchange
5. Collect documentation of reasons for banning in other countries
6. Government enacting policy on alternatives
 Sime Darby Plantation Malaysia (Willing
to accept study visit from Indonesia to
learn about the integrated weeds
management (IWM) in oil palm and
rubber plantations in Malaysia)
 Sri Lovely Malaysia (Willing to accept
study visit from Indonesia to learn about
the adoption of agro-ecology/organic
farming in the community)

22
Annex V: Roadmap for Full Implementation of Rotterdam Convention in Indonesia

23
 1. Import response (Article 10)
Scope: Import responses for Annex III chemicals
Channel of communication: between Party and Secretariat; within a Party

Objective: Ensure that all stakeholders understand the scope and purpose of an import decision in the context of the PIC procedure, and
the importance of a clearly defined process for taking national import decisions and submitting them to the Secretariat. Stakeholders also
need to understand the country’s obligations in relation to imports and exports of chemicals in Annex III.

Taking import decisions and submission to the Secretariat

o What is the legal or administrative basis for taking an import decision for chemicals listed in Annex III (e.g. these chemicals may
have been banned, subject to use restrictions, registered without use restrictions, never registered in Indonesia)?
o What information is considered in taking import decisions for chemicals listed in Annex III, and to what extent is the Decision
Guidance Document considered in taking such decisions?
o Is there a procedure in place to ensure timely decision making and submission of an import response to the Secretariat?
o What are the challenges in implementing a procedure for the preparation and submission of import responses under Article 10?
Implementation and enforcement
o Are there legislative or administrative measures in place to communicate all import decisions for chemicals in Annex III of the
Convention as reported in the PIC Circular, to those concerned within Indonesia (identify who communicates to whom, how, when
and what)?
o Are those concerned aware of the implications of your national import decisions, e.g. need to cease local production in case of no
consent?
o Are there legislative or administrative measures in place to ensure that any export of the chemicals listed in Annex III complies
with import decisions of importing Party (identify how is the procedure and who are responsible)?
o What are the challenges associated with enforcing national import decisions and ensuring the import decisions of importing
countries are respected?
Current legal infrastructure/ What has been done? What needs to be done? Timelines
administrative procedure  17 import responses  submit import response for missing 34  By 1 April 2020: submit
 Ministry of Environment for pesticides and chemicals and pesticides import responses for 34
and Forestry (MOEF) and industrial chemicals  Establish a procedure to ensure timely pesticides and industrial
Ministry of Agriculture have been submission in the future; coordination chemicals
(MOA) provide official submitted until Nov between MOEF and MOA  MOEF and MOA meet at
Designated National 2019  Establish procedure to communicate your least once per month
import decisions to those concerned within

24
 Authorities to the Indonesia (Ministries, public, identified
Convention. importers, customs, health, industry,
 MOEF prepares the import others?)
responses in cooperation
with MOA
INFORMATION EXCHANGE
o To what extent are the import responses of other countries (as listed in the PIC Circulars) considered in chemicals management
decision making in Indonesia?

25
 2. Notifications of Final Regulatory Actions (Article 5)
Scope: All chemicals that are banned or severely restricted in your country
Channel of communication: between Party and Secretariat

Objective: Ensure that DNA understand the scope and purpose of a notification of final regulatory action for banned or severely
restricted chemicals, the information required for such notifications and the importance of a clearly defined process for the preparation
and submission of notifications at the national level. Increase awareness of how notifications of final regulatory actions in other countries
might be used to improve chemicals management in Indonesia.
Taking final regulatory actions on chemicals and notifying the Secretariat
o Describe the process followed in taking final regulatory actions on chemicals in Indonesia (who is involved and how would you
characterize the result, e.g. are chemicals banned (negative list of chemical), permitted for use without restrictions (positive list),
permitted but subject to use restrictions.
o Briefly describe the basis for final regulatory actions to ban or severely restrict a chemical, e.g. are they based on a hazard
evaluation, a risk evaluation, regulatory decisions taken in other countries etc.?
o How is a final regulatory action taken and what are the reasons underlying the decision documented, e.g. why a chemical may be
banned or severely restricted?
o Which processes are in place to notify the Secretariat of any/all final regulatory actions to ban or severely restrict a chemical in
line with Article 5?
Implementation and enforcement
o What are the challenges to taking final regulatory actions to ban or severely restrict chemicals?
o Which challenges are faced by the DNA in notifying the Secretariat of final regulatory actions to ban or severely restrict
chemicals?
Current legal infrastructure What has been What needs to be Who is Timelines
/ administrative procedures done? done? responsible/involved and  contact the
 Regulation of Minister of  Indonesia has  Enter into how to proceed? Secretariat by 1st
Agriculture No. 39 submitted 44 communication  Pesticide DNA is to take February 2020
SR.330/7 Year 2015 notifications of with the RC the lead to retrieve  submit updated FRA
regarding Procedure and final regulatory Secretariat necessary information for 44 notifications in
 Requirement for Pesticide action in April  Clarify what from the agency steps and at the
Registration. There are 70 2019 to the information is responsible for the latest by 31/03/2020
pesticides that are Convention missing banning of those 44  MOEF and MOA
prohibited or strictly used. Secretariat  Collect and fill the pesticides meet once per month
through the information  Discuss with RC
permanent required by Annex I Secretariat potential

26
 There is no list of mission to the UN where available support through a
permitted pesticides in Geneva. None with collaboration consultant
existing. of them meets from all relevant
 Before deciding to list Annex I stakeholders
prohibited pesticides, information  make use of
Ministry of Agriculture and requirements. notifications
Ministry of Environment published in PIC
and Forestry carry out Circulars
health risk test in
cooperation with
universities and research
centers. Currently, there
are 28 universities and
research centers across
Indonesia which have
capability to conduct the
health risk test.
 Final decision on listing
banned pesticides are
taken by the National
Commission for Pesticides
which consists of
government
representatives from
various ministries and
academics.
INFORMATION EXCHANGE
o To what extent are notifications of final regulatory actions of other countries (as summarized in the PIC Circular) considered in
Indonesia’s chemicals management activities?
o How is/might this information be used to strengthen national decision making on chemicals?

27
 3. Proposals for SHPF – Severely hazardous pesticide formulations (Article 6)
Scope: Any pesticide formulation that causes severe health or environmental problems under the conditions of use in your country.
Channel of communication: within a Party; between Party and Secretariat

Objective: Ensure that all stakeholders understand the scope and purpose of a proposal on a severely hazardous pesticide formulation,
the information required to support such a proposal and the importance of a clearly defined process for the preparation and submission
of a proposal at the national level. Stakeholders will also have a greater awareness of how the information on pesticide poisoning
incidents in other countries might be used to improve chemicals management in Indonesia.
Collecting information on pesticide poisoning incidents and submitting proposals to the Secretariat
o What systems are in place to collect information on pesticide poisoning incidents (human health or the environment)?
o Are there data available of paraquat poisonings in Indonesia?
o Where information on pesticide poisoning incidents is collected, is it sufficiently detailed to support a proposal regarding a SHPF
under Article 6?
o What process would need to be put in place in order for such information to be made available to the DNA and for the DNA to
use this information to prepare and submit a proposal to the Secretariat under Article 6?
Implementation and Enforcement
o To what extent are the incident report forms developed by the Secretariat used to collect information on pesticide poisonings?
o What role might be played by non-governmental organizations (NGOs) in collecting information on pesticide poisoning incidents?
o What are the challenges faced by the DNA in preparing a proposal on a SHPF and submitting it to the Secretariat?
Available infrastructure for What has been What could be done in the Who is Timelines
pesticides poisoning report done? future? responsible/involved  MOEF and MOA
 28 health risk assessment  No systematic  Meeting with stakeholders and how to proceed? meet once per
centres at the moment data collection related to health to discuss  DNA approaches month, invite also
which spread out at  No SHPF past incidents and how to Ministry of Health Ministry of Health
universities and research proposal organize reporting on any and MOA for
centers submitted by future incidences, e.g. through incident reports
Indonesia hospital reports. DNA can  Ministry of Health
routinely approach Ministry of initiates process to
Health to collect information reinstate the
 Find out who was responsible poisoning centres
for poisoning centres and how
to reinstate them
 Creating awareness among
pesticide users on potential

28
 impacts on health, symptoms
etc.
 Create awareness among
medical personal on potential
pesticide poisoning and where
to report to
INFORMATION EXCHANGE
o To what extent are the proposals for SHPFs from other countries (as summarized in the PIC Circular) considered in Indonesia’s
chemicals management activities?
o How is/might this information used to strengthen national decision making on chemicals?

29
 4. Export notification (Article 12)
Scope: chemicals banned or restricted in the exporting party
Channel of communication: between Parties

Objective: Ensure that all stakeholders understand the scope and purpose of an export notification, how it differs from the PIC
procedure, and the need for a clearly defined process for managing export notifications at the national level. Stakeholders should
increase their awareness of how the information contained in an export notification might be used to improve chemicals management in
Indonesia.
Implementation and Enforcement
o What process is in place for acknowledging the receipt of export notifications?
o What would be necessary to ensure timely acknowledgement (identify who communicates to whom, how, when and what)?
o What are the challenges in developing and implementing a process for the timely acknowledgement of export notifications?
In addition for exporting countries: Preparing /submitting an export notification and preparing information (Art 12) to accompany
shipment (Art 13)
o What system in place to control and monitor the export of chemicals that are banned or severely restricted at national level?
o What system in place to ensure that export notifications are sent prior to export of chemicals that are banned or severely restricted at
national level?
o What system in place to ensure that the information requirements under Article 13 of the Convention are met when banned or
severely restricted chemicals are exported (identify, who communicates to whom, how, when and what)?
o Ensure that
- the specific Harmonized System customs codes developed by the World Customs Organization (WCO) is provided;
- the exporters apply these Codes and customs authority in your country check them;
- labels in one of the official languages of the importing country are provided;
- a safety data sheet is provided;
o What are the challenges in developing and implementing the necessary processes and who would need to be involved?
Current practice What has been What needs to be done? Who is responsible/involved Timeline
 DNA issued done?  DNA ensures timely and how to proceed?  DNA sends circular
acknowledgment  Acknowledgment acknowledgement, and  DNA sends circular to all by 18th December
of any export of export informs relevant authorities providing No 2019
notifications notifications sent authorities of export Objection/permit to
 Tracking of export by DNA notification importers, so that
notifications by  DNA uses this information authorities can directly
MOEF to improve future advice each importer on
regulatory measures to checking the status of the

30
 reduce associated risks to chemical in the exporting
workers, consumers and country.
the environment, and to  DNA gives public
inform customs. announcements, and
 DNA contacts importers to emails importers on their
inform them of the export obligation to check with
notification and of any exporting company on the
future implications. status of the chemical in the
 Check all/any past export exporting country, in order
notifications and review to reduce potential export
them in collaboration with
relevant authorities
INFORMATION EXCHANGE
o What use is made of the information contained in an export notification in tracking the entry of potentially hazardous chemicals
into Indonesia?
o How might the information contained in an export notification be used to strengthen national decision making on chemicals?
o What use, if any, is made of the information that accompanies shipments of exported chemicals under Article 13?

31