Bridges Trade BioRes • Volume 4 • Number 20 • 5th November 2004

Basel Convention Fails to Move on Ban Amendment

Do More

Subscribe to the BioRes

* Required Field

Email Address: *

Country: *

Employment Sector (Academia, Govt., Private Sector, NGO, IGO): *

First Name:

Last Name:

Organisation:

Enter the letters shown above:*

Download this issue

Volume 4 Number 20 PDF • 0.4 MB

The Basel Convention’s seventh Conference of the Parties (COP-7), which took place from 25-29 October in Geneva, succeeded in affirming that toxic ship dumping is to be controlled, but failed to make progress on securing the entry into force of the Ban Amendment. The Amendment was negotiated by the third Conference of Parties in September 1995 in an effort to give the Convention greater force. If ratified, the amendment would ban hazardous wastes exports for final disposal and recycling from OECD countries to non-OECD countries. However, a number of countries, including Australia, the US, Canada, Japan, and the UK, as well as various organisations, such as the International Chamber of Commerce and the UN Conference on Trade and Development (UNCTAD) oppose the ban.

Advocates argue that most developing countries cannot manage hazardous waste and that countries will only stop the production of such wastes when they have nowhere to offload it. Critics counter this argument by saying, inter alia, that some developing countries, especially in Asia, may have better capacities for environmentally sound management of wastes than certain OECD members. Furthermore, a ban would most likely not resolve cases of illegal traffic in hazardous waste nor assist in the creation of waste treatment and recycling capacity in developing countries. The critics also question the need for the ban as the Convention already allows countries to prohibit the import of any waste they declare hazardous under domestic legislation. Regarding the trade implications of the amendment, a study commissioned by the International Council on Metals and the Environment raises concerns that the ban might be “GATT-inconsistent and trade-disruptive”, arguing that it would discriminate between countries where the same conditions may prevail. Thus far, 44 countries have ratified the Basel Ban Amendment, and 62 are needed before it enters into force.

For daily reports and summary of COP-7, see IISD’s Earth Negotiations Bulletin.

“Basel Convention Export Ban Amendment: A Business Perspective,” ICC RELEASE, 1 November 2004; “The Basel Convention,” GREENPEACE TOXICS CAMPAIGN; “The Seventh Meeting Of The Conference Of The Parties To The Basel Convention,” LINKAGES, 29 October 2004; “Toxic Ship Dumping To Be Controlled: Greens Declare Victory Over Shame of Shipping,” BAN/GREENPEACE PRESS RELEASE, 29 October 2004; “The Basel Convention Export Ban Amendment: Arguments Against Ratification,” ICME.