Basel Convention on

the Control of
Transboundary
Movements of
Hazardous Wastes and
their Disposal
Fernando Magallanes Mato
Felipe Mañanes Santos
Fernando Magallanes and Felipe Mañanes RRII-TI

Introduction

The Basel Convention on the Control of Transboundary Movements of

Hazardous Wastes and their Disposal is usually simply referred to as the Basel
Convention. This convention was adopted in the year 1989 and came into force in 1992.
Its primary goal was to prevent the exports of hazardous wastes to developing countries:
as a result of the increase in technology and production, there has also been an increase
in hazardous waste. As it is very difficult and expensive for countries to get rid of these
wastes and dispose of them properly, it used to be a common practice to send them to
poor nations who were in dire need of foreign currency payments. Least Developed
Countries (LDCs) and its population were the main victims of such trade. Ecological
consciousness increased in the late 1980s and The Basel Convention was created so as a
to prevent these exports. Apart from this, it was also designed to ensure that the
management of these dangerous and toxic materials was properly done. As of 2018, 186
countries plus the European Union members take part in the agreement.

1. What is the history (and the science) of the Basel Convention? Which issues
were pushing for its adoption?

The main objectives of the Basel Convention were to prevent the export of
hazardous wastes and to help governments manage those wastes properly. Firstly, the
historical context in which this Convention will be addressed. This Convention came as
a result of a series of events that took place during the 1970s and 1980s and increased
the ecological consciousness of the population in developed countries. With respect to
the background in which the agreement was created, the official website of the Basel
Convention states the following:

Awakening environmental awareness and corresponding tightening of

environmental regulations in the industrialized world in the 1970s and 1980s
had led to increasing public resistance to the disposal of hazardous wastes – in
accordance with what became known as the NIMBY (Not In My Back Yard)
syndrome – and to an escalation of disposal costs. This in turn led some
operators to seek cheap disposal options for hazardous wastes in Eastern Europe

1
Fernando Magallanes and Felipe Mañanes RRII-TI

and the developing world, where environmental awareness was much less
developed (Basel Convention , 2011).

As we can infer from this extract, developed countries took advantage of the
lack of regulations in developing countries. The Not In My Back Yard syndrome refers
to the opposition of the population of industrialized countries to live next to hazardous
wastes that are detrimental to their health and living conditions.

There were two incidents that led to the consciousness increase that we have
mentioned. The first one is the Khian Sea waste disposal incident: in 1986, a ship was
loaded with roughly 14,000 tons of ash that came from incinerators in Philadelphia. The
crew tried to take the waste to New Jersey but failed; after that, they tried to go to the
Bahamas, but they had the same problem. This is when the incident starts:

After the ship was barred by the Bahamian Government from dumping the ash,
it wandered the Caribbean for 18 months, leaving at least 2,000 tons of ash in
Haiti before making an attempt to enter Delaware Bay. Its later travels took it to
West Africa, the Mediterranean and the Indian Ocean. It was turned away from
ports in at least 11 countries, including the Bahamas, the Dominican Republic,
Honduras, Costa Rica, Guinea-Bissau and Cape Verde. (Associated Press,
1988).

In 1989-at least in part due to the misadventures of the Khian Sea-33 countries
met in Basel, Switzerland, and agreed to limit international shipment of toxic waste,
especially from the richer countries of the world to the poorer ones (Cunningham &
Mary, 2004). Another episode that we can mention in this regard is the Koko incident
of the year 1988. The two countries involved are Italy and Nigeria. Koko is a Nigerian
coastal community that became known worldwide because of this incident. Highly toxic
wastes were being left at these shores: two Italian firms had arranged for the storage of
18,000 drums of hazardous waste with Koko residents. The containers were disguised
as building materials and offloaded into a local man’s vacant yard for $100 per month.
(Buck, 2017). When this was discovered, there was worldwide outrage and Italy agreed
to remove the waste: the containers were leaking and causing odors and sicknesses.

2
Fernando Magallanes and Felipe Mañanes RRII-TI

By the time Nigerian authorities identified the scheme, the drums were leaking,
and people were getting sick. The story was published by a local newspaper in Italy. In
the words of Babade:

“In Italy, a body called Chain of Saint Antuan which specialized in the
“marketing” of industrial toxic and radioactive wastes was soon found to be
behind the incident. This group had a chain of global connection and was always
in search of dumping grounds among the developing countries, to dispose of
Italy’s dangerous waste materials.” (Babade, 2014, pag. 14)

These two are examples of toxic colonialism. This term was coined by
Greenpeace in 1992 the dumping of industrial wastes of the West on territories of the
Third World (Buck, 2017). This concept represents the context and the preoccupations
around which the Basel Convention was born. Thus, in accordance to its official
website, the provisions of the Convention have the following aims:

The reduction of hazardous waste generation and the promotion of

environmentally sound management of hazardous wastes, wherever the place of
disposal; the restriction of transboundary movements of hazardous wastes except
where it is perceived to be in accordance with the principles of environmentally
sound management; and a regulatory system applying to cases where
transboundary movements are permissible. (Basel Convention , 2011).

The definition of hazardous wastes is further developed in the Annex I of the

Convention, where a list on the types of hazardous wastes can be found. Among the
many kinds of hazardous wastes, we would particularly like to highlight the following:

- “Clinical wastes from medical care in hospitals, medical centers and

clinics

- Wastes from the production and preparation of pharmaceutical products

[…]

- Wastes from heat treatment and tempering operations containing

cyanides

- Waste mineral oils unfit for their originally intended use […]

3
Fernando Magallanes and Felipe Mañanes RRII-TI

- Wastes from production, formulation and use of inks, dyes, pigments,

paints, lacquers, varnish [...]

- Residues arising from industrial waste disposal operations” (Basel

Convention, 1989)

The risks posed by hazardous wastes to humans and the environment is why
proper management and disposal is vital. Burning wastes can be seen as the most
efficient way to deal with it but it can actually be worse (Pope, 2017, pág. 309). The
residues that the Basel Convention covers includes wastes constituted by metal
carbonyls or, for example, mercury compounds. However, we must note that this
Convention does not address the problem of radioactive waste. This condition can be
found in Article 1.3 of the Convention, which reads as follows:

“Wastes which, as a result of being radioactive, are subject to other international

control systems, including international instruments, applying specifically to
radioactive materials, are excluded from the scope of this Convention.” (Basel
Convention, 1989, pag. 9)

This particular issue of radioactive wastes can be seen as the tip of the iceberg.
Nowadays, it is important to mention the enormous wastes derived from cell phones and
computers that the Basel Convention also covers. In the following section, we will
address the limited scope of the Convention, and the problem about countries disguising
their waste trade as recycling.

2. Has it been successful and, if so, to what extent and why?

The Basel Convention was definitely a step in the right direction that was agreed
upon as a result of the terrible incidents that have been described in the previous
section. However, many have deemed this convention to be very limited in its aims:
environmental organisations have argued that it did not go far enough. Gary Cox (2010)
explains the following about the negotiations of the Convention and its scope:

The negotiations were difficult and contentious. The focus of debate centred
on North-South issues and the threat of illegal waste dumping in developing
countries. This was despite the fact that the vast majority of transboundary

4
Fernando Magallanes and Felipe Mañanes RRII-TI

waste transfers at the time were between OECD countries. Members of the
Organisation of African Unity (now the African Union) played a dominant
role in advocating a complete ban on all transboundary movements of
hazardous waste. (Cox, 2010, pag. 271)

This position was strongly supported by environmental NGOs like Greenpeace,

while those who opposed such ban on trade were the majority of large industrialised
countries (Cox, 2010, pag. 271). The problem for these organizations is the fact that the
Basel Convention does not prohibit waste exports as long as there is a consensus
between trader and receiver. The system is known as PIC: Prior Informed Consent, and
we can see it in Article 6 of the Basel Convention, which reads as follows:

The State of export shall notify, or shall require the generator or exporter to
notify, in writing, through the channel of the competent authority of the State
of export, the competent authority of the States concerned of any proposed
transboundary movement of hazardous wastes or other wastes. (Basel
Convention, 1989, pág. 19).

The procedure for the trade is subsequently explained in the document. Many
believed this was not sufficient to truly prevent the trading of hazardous wastes.
Moreover, countries started disguising their waste trade as recycling. The
disillusionment with the Basel Convention started in the negotiations as they were
rushed up: in the adoption ceremony of the Convention, the Organization of African
Unity’s announced that the African States felt that the new convention did not take their
concerns sufficiently into account, and that they were not prepared to sign it (Kummer,
1998, pág. 229). In this regard, Kummer (1998) states that without a ban on hazardous
waste transfer to developing countries, it would do nothing more than increase the
paperwork required for such transfer, thereby legitimizing the use of poor countries as a
dumping ground for the rich (Kummer, 1998, pág. 229).

African nations viewed the Basel negotiations as inadequate. As a result, the

Bamako Convention was born. According to Gary Cox (2010):

The result was the development of the 1991 Bamako Convention on the Ban
of the Import into Africa and the Control of Transboundary Movement and
Management of Hazardous Wastes within Africa. The Bamako Convention

5
Fernando Magallanes and Felipe Mañanes RRII-TI

closely followed the structure of its Basel counterpart. However, it included

radioactive waste within its scope. It included a regime for the management
of hazardous waste within Africa itself, specifically adopting the
precautionary approach. (Cox, 2010, pág. 272)

Significantly the Bamako Convention applied a common commitment ‘to

prohibit the import of all hazardous wastes, for any reason, into Africa. This is
something that is particularly different when compared to the Basel Convention.

The key to this is the third meeting of the Basel Convention Conference of
Parties, known as COP-3, which took place in 1995 and established a Ban Amendment.
This Amendment would ban transboundary shipments of hazardous wastes for any
reason, including recycling, from the member states of the European Community, the
Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD), and Liechtenstein,
to other Parties (Ripley, 2016). As we can see, this Amendment prevents recycling from
being used as a façade for waste trading so that developed countries are not able to get a
free pass for their actions. The ratification of this Amendment has not happened to this
day since it requires three quarters of the member states of the convention to accept it:
at least 66 of the 87 Parties at the time the Amendment was adopted in 1995 (Ripley,
2016).

3. How would you measure the degree of failure or success?

The best way to measure the relative success or failure of the Basel Convention
is to analyse the progress that has been made in its implementation. In this sense, the
web portal specialised in the aforementioned convention (http://www.basel.int), which
includes a section dedicated to the "implementation" of the latter, is very useful. If we
take a look, we observe that in recent years numerous initiatives and projects have been
adopted within the framework of the Convention, which reveals that at least work is
being done on it and that action has not been paralysed. However, in 2011 the
Conference of the Parties recognized that despite efforts taken and progress achieved in
the first twenty years of the Basel Convention, the volume of hazardous and other
wastes continued to increase on a global level, and transboundary movements of

6
Fernando Magallanes and Felipe Mañanes RRII-TI

hazardous and other wastes had not diminished. The direct consequence of this situation
was the adoption of the Cartagena Declaration on the Prevention, Minimization and
Recovery of Hazardous Waste and Other Wastes, by virtue of which:

Parties thereby committed to actively promote and implement more

efficient waste prevention and minimization strategies, to take measures
to decouple economic growth and environmental impacts, and to
encourage more systematic and comprehensive global and regional
efforts for improved access to cleaner production methods, including
through capacity building and technology transfer. (Basel.int: 2019)

As a result of this declaration, a Working Group was established with the

purpose of implementing its objectives, as well as a Road Map with the necessary
instructions (Basel.int: 2019).

On the other hand, another instrument that serves to measure the implementation
of the Basel Convention consists of the strategic framework that was adopted by
decision BC-10/2 and which runs from 2012 to 2021. This reveals that the participation
of the parties involved has been a success, because beyond the material results obtained,
the reality is that their involvement in the subject dealt with by the Convention is more
than evident. Moreover, thanks to the Prior Informed Consent procedure, which
imposes "strict requirements for transboundary movements of hazardous wastes and
other wastes" (Basel.int: 2019), institutional cooperation between the States involved
has been strengthened, which is also a sign of their relative success in international
cooperation in this area.

To conclude with this section, we can finish by saying that another measure of
the success of the Basel Convention is the use of technological resources to achieve its
objectives. In this sense, the states involved, especially developing countries or
countries with economies in transition, have opted for proportional technical assistance
in different areas, such as human resources, policies to be implemented, legal
framework, etc. All this is carried out through face-to-face and, in particular, online
training through various computer resources. Moreover, within the framework of
distance education initiatives, an MOOC is offered on the E-waste Challenge which is a

7
Fernando Magallanes and Felipe Mañanes RRII-TI

very useful means of understanding the objectives and goals of the Basel Convention
(accessible at
http://www.basel.int/Implementation/TechnicalAssistance/MOOC/tabid/4966/Default.a
spx).

4. What are the main political, ethical and philosophical issues “under the

issue” being dealt by the Basel Convention?

The Basel Convention is not an isolated milestone in history, but relates to a

deep background of political, ethical, and philosophical ideas that have shaped the
action of global leaders over the past several decades. In this sense, we can relate the
Convention to a global concern for ecological and environmental issues that are the
priority theme of numerous summits, congresses and conferences that began in the
iconic date of 1972 with the Earth Summit held in Rio de Janeiro (Brazil) within the
framework of the United Nations (Avilés: 2014). This international event brought
together many experts, politicians and activists from all corners of the globe to discuss
environment, development, climate change and biodiversity. Indeed, the interest in
ecology came from afar, as its scientific roots date back to the 19th century, when the
German Ernst Haeckel defined this science (Avilés: 2014). At the same time, the second
half of the last century saw the emergence of environmentalism, a movement
characterized by the defense of the environment that would soon move from urban
protests to the front line of politics to become a central issue on the agenda of
organizations such as the United Nations.

In this sense, and together with the will to maintain the health of the planet
especially in the era of technology, the Basel Convention was signed to treat hazardous
waste. This, moreover, had important ethical implications. The control of this type of
waste is not due to individual, national or state interests, but corresponds to a universal
desire to take care of the planet. It is therefore an ideological approach that fits with the
notion of cosmopolitanism created by Kant at the time of the Enlightenment and with
the liberal current within International Relations (Sánchez Meca: 2010). In this way, by
cooperating with all states in the treatment of dangerous waste generated by the
technology we currently possess, we are acting altruistically and for the benefit of

8
Fernando Magallanes and Felipe Mañanes RRII-TI

humanity as a whole. In this sense, we can also frame the Basel Convention with the
idea of sustainable development that advocates economic, social and above all human
development without jeopardizing the resources that future generations will inherit in
the future (Rogers: 2007).

5. Do you identify any possible solutions or ways to improve the implementation of

the convention?

A feasible solution to improve the implementation of the Convention would be

the full ratification of the 1995 Ban Amendment. There is a debate as some experts have
also deemed this Amendment to be detrimental to legitimate actions of recycling among
countries. As we have mentioned, such ratification would require 66 of the 87 Parties
that were members of the Convention at the time the Amendment was passed to accept
it. Nonetheless, there is an open debate as we could see in the ninth reunion of the Basel
Convention Conference of Parties; there was a disagreement over the ratification of the
Ban: is it legitimate to ratify using three fourths of the Parties that were Party to the
Basel Convention when the Ban was adopted? Or is it better to use three fourths of the
Parties of the Convention as of nowadays? As of the writing of this paper, 95 countries
have accepted the amendment.

9
Fernando Magallanes and Felipe Mañanes RRII-TI

References

Associated Press. (27 de November de 1988). “After 2 Years, Ship Dumps

Toxic Ash.” The New York Times.

Avilés, J., Pardo, R. y Sepúlveda, I. (2014): Las claves del mundo actual. Una
historia global desde 1989. Madrid, Editorial Síntesis.

Babade, J. A. (2014). “The Koko Incident: The Law Of The Sea And
Environmental Protection PROTECTION.” University of Lagos Faculty
of Law, 14.

Basel Convention . (2011). Basel Convention: Overview. Retrieved from Basel

Convention :
http://www.basel.int/TheConvention/Overview/tabid/1271/Default.aspx

Basel Convention site (accessed 20/04/2019):

http://www.basel.int/TheConvention/Overview/tabid/1271/Default.aspx.

Buck, S. (26 de May de 2017). “In the 1980s, Italy paid a Nigerian town $100 a
month to store toxic waste—and it’s happening again.” Timeline .

Cox, G. (2010). “The Trafigura Case and the System of Prior Informed Consent
Under the Basel Convention – A Broken System?” Law, Environment
and Development Journal .

Cunningham, W. P., & Mary, A. (2004). Principles of Environmental

Science.McGrw-Hill Further Education.

Kummer, K. (1998). The Basel Convention: Ten Years On. RECIEL Volume 7
Issue 3.

Pope, E. S. (2017). “The Shadowy World Of Hazardous Waste Disposal: Why

The Basel Convention’s Structure Undermines Its Substance.” South
Carolina Journal of International Law & Business.

Ripley, K. (2016). “South African Ratification Brings Ban Amendment Closer

to Entry into Force.” SDG Knowledge Hub.

10
Fernando Magallanes and Felipe Mañanes RRII-TI

Rogers, Peter (2010). An Introduction to Sustainable Development. Routlegde,

New York.

Sánchez Meca, Diego (2010): Historia de la filosofía moderna y

contemporánea. Dykinson, Madrid.

UNEP. (1989). Basel Convention on the Control of Transboundary Movements

of Hazardous Wastes and their Disposal.UNEP. United Nations .

11