PAN applauds the strides made by the international community to combat malaria this past year and efforts in place to find alternatives to DDT used in vector control.
However, it notes that funds for the work of the DDT Expert Group and the Global Alliance for Alternatives to DDT mainly focused on chemical alternatives to DDT with little concern for non-chemical alternatives.
In the roadmap developed by the DDT Expert group, we welcome the focus on the judicious and safe use of resources for malaria control as well as the removal of obsolete stockpiles of DDT and other hazardous pesticides.
The work of Non-Governmental Organizations, civil society groups on the ground with communities as well as documents on DDT published by the Stockholm Convention Secretariat shows that there are serious discrepancies in how insecticides like DDT are used.
Adequate safeguards while conducting indoor residual spraying with DDT in homes in many African countries is often missing. In many cases, countries are often understaffed and not qualified to be able to monitor rigorously the sprayings. Increased resistance of mosquitoes to DDT and other insecticides remains a major concern where further efforts must be made.
PAN strongly recommends greater involvement of civil society organizations, with funding and adequate resources for the development of long-term solutions of malaria control that are truly safe, efficient and sustainable, with special emphasis on non-chemical alternatives.
NGOs working in the field often have a good understanding of local realities and solutions, and should be partners in the process of finding alternatives to DDT and in the research and dissemination of alternatives to DDT.
To this end, their participation in the regional workshops in Asia and Africa on the sound management practices of DDT and promotion of sustainable alternatives to DDT should be supported.
Thank you
