|
Geneva, Switzerland. June 25, 2024. On January 1, 2021, the Basel Convention Plastic Waste Amendments, meant to curtail and control the dumping of plastic waste in developing countries, took effect. More than three years on, we are seeing little real progress in reducing plastic waste trade or addressing unsustainable waste recycling. A side event at the upcoming Basel Convention OEWG-14, hosted by Basel Action Network (BAN) and Break Free From Plastic (BFFP), with support from the International Pollutants Elimination Network (IPEN) and Geneva Environment Network (GEN), explored the ongoing challenges and the need for more rigorous enforcement of the new rules.
The panel discussed how global trade data revealed a slight decrease in plastic waste exports between 2020 and 2021 when the new rules took effect. However, by 2024, exports from Japan, the EU, the UK, and the USA have steadily increased, surpassing 2020 levels in countries like Mexico, Indonesia, and Vietnam. The panel argued that while exporting countries bear much of the responsibility, importing countries are also failing to equip their agencies to effectively implement the new amendments, inspect shipments, and prosecute illegal activities.
“Once waste brokers get the message that there is lax enforcement on the ground at either the exporting country or destination ports, the plastic waste will flow towards developing economies like Malaysia in a tsunami of waste, devastating our environment,” said Pui Yi Wong, researcher for the Basel Action Network (BAN) in Malaysia.
The panel also raised the concern that while the Basel Convention’s new plastic waste listings were supposed to cover all plastic waste, this in practice is not the case as other listings for certain types of plastic waste such as synthetic textiles, rubber waste, plastic waste impregnated fuel pellets, and plastics mixed into waste paper, represents almost half of the global plastic waste generation but it is not covered by the Convention despite causing significant environmental harm around the world.
“There is no scientific reason that the massive amounts of plastic ‘rubber’, plastic used clothing, refuse-derived fuel and plastic found in paper bales are not subject to the new control procedures under Basel,” said Lee Bell of International Pollutants Elimination Network (IPEN). “These plastics are being shipped around the world and causing serious harm when dumped or burned.”
The panel also explained how the actual recycling processes for plastics also fall short of environmentally sound management standards even in locations which are supposed to be the “best in class”.
“The recycling facilities cannot manage the toxic chemicals used as plastic additives in the waste and cannot possibly even know which of these 16,000 chemicals are arriving at their facilities before they are supposed to process them,” said Jim Puckett, Executive Director of the Basel Action Network (BAN). “They end up being released as deadly pollution or find their toxic way into the recycled plastic products.”
“Similarly, the recycling plants cannot help but exacerbate the environmental problem of plastic by releasing almost 13% of what they receive as micro and nano plastics which travel through the air, the wash waters and the facilities,” said Sedat Gündoğdu, a professor at the Çukurova University, Turkey. “Often plastic recycling plants become microplastic factories. The Basel Convention requires that waste management always be environmentally sound, but with problems like toxic chemical additives and microplastics, one wonders if is this even possible with plastic waste.”
The panel concluded by making the following recommendations necessary to realise the Basel Convention Plastic Waste Amendments' original promise of safeguarding human health and the environment from hazardous plastic waste:
-
Better Enforcement and Implementation: The trade data leads one to strongly believe that the new restrictive requirements on plastic trade are not being fully or properly implemented. Parties must redouble their enforcement and implementation efforts.
-
Address Environmental Mismanagement: Anecdotal information from plastic waste importing countries such as Malaysia and Turkey, indicates indiscriminate dumping and burning of unrecycled residual material and microplastic releases as the norm. This is not environmentally sound management as required under the Convention. Exports and imports to such operations must cease until it is certain that such releases are halted.
-
Legislation and Guidance by the Secretariat: Many Parties, including importing states, are failing to properly implement the PIC procedure for plastic waste imports. Often the import authority is passed to agencies that are not Basel competent authorities. Often control is based solely on standing import permits. Model legislation and guidance on implementation of the amendments should be prepared by the Secretariat.
-
Close the Loopholes: We must ensure that all plastic waste is covered by the Convention; current estimates indicate that only half of all generated plastic waste falls under its purview. It fails to cover plastic textiles, plastic rubber products, paper mixed in bales, refuse-derived fuels made from plastics etc. The annexes need to be amended to close these loopholes.
-
Take Due Cognisance of Hazardous Waste: Despite the knowledge that plastic waste always contains additives, many of which are hazardous, we continue to ignore this fact. Plastics exhibiting hazardous characteristics must be considered hazardous waste. When additive content is unknown, these also must be considered hazardous waste.
In conclusion, while the 2019 plastics amendments are a significant achievement, they have not yet lived up to their full potential. We must intensify our efforts to implement these rules effectively, close the loopholes that allow some plastics to evade trade controls, and ensure that all plastics recycling facilities operate in a truly environmentally sound manner.
Access the event recording here.
| 
