Análisis jurídico de las consecuencias de la determinación no consensuada de la OCDE sobre la enmienda de plásticos de Basilea

The document argues that because the OECD failed to reach a consensus on the Basel Convention's Plastic Waste Amendments, plastic wastes classified as "other wastes" (Annex II) fall outside the scope of the OECD Decision. Consequently, OECD members that are Parties to the Basel Convention must apply the Convention's control and prohibition mechanisms to these wastes. The analysis further concludes that separate agreements, specifically between the US and Canada and among EU member states, are invalid under Article 11 of the Basel Convention because they do not provide equivalent levels of environmental protection and control.

• The OECD's inability to reach a consensus means that plastic wastes categorized as "other wastes" under the Basel Convention are excluded from the scope of the OECD Decision on the trade of wastes.
• OECD members that are Parties to the Basel Convention and have not opposed the Plastic Waste Amendments must apply the Convention's control and prohibition mechanisms to these wastes, regardless of whether the trading partner is a Party to the Convention.
• The 2020 arrangement between the United States and Canada is considered invalid under Article 11 of the Basel Convention because it is not legally binding and lacks a system of prior informed consent or specific controls to ensure environmentally sound management.
• The EU Waste Shipment Regulation is deemed invalid as an Article 11 agreement because it allows the free trade of certain plastic wastes (such as PVC and PTFE) and permits a broader range of "recovery" operations, including waste-to-energy, which are more permissive than the Basel Convention's requirements.
• While some OECD members, such as Turkey and Canada, notified the Secretariat of their inability to accept the Plastic Waste Amendments, they are still practically obligated to apply Basel Convention controls due to the requirements of their trading partners.

APA

Azoulay, D., & Eisen, N. (n.d.). Análisis jurídico de las consecuencias de la determinación no consensuada de la OCDE sobre la enmienda de plásticos de Basilea. Center for International Environmental Law. https://www.ciel.org/wp-content/uploads/2021/07/Análisis-jurídico-de-las-consecuencias-de-la-determinación-no-consensuada-de-la-OCDE-sobre-la-enmienda-de-plásticos-de-Basilea_FINAL.pdf

Chicago

Azoulay, David, and Nathaniel Eisen. Análisis jurídico de las consecuencias de la determinación no consensuada de la OCDE sobre la enmienda de plásticos de Basilea. Center for International Environmental Law, n.d. https://www.ciel.org/wp-content/uploads/2021/07/Análisis-jurídico-de-las-consecuencias-de-la-determinación-no-consensuada-de-la-OCDE-sobre-la-enmienda-de-plásticos-de-Basilea_FINAL.pdf.

Wikipedia

{{cite report |last1=Azoulay |first1=David |last2=Eisen |first2=Nathaniel |title=Análisis jurídico de las consecuencias de la determinación no consensuada de la OCDE sobre la enmienda de plásticos de Basilea |publisher=Center for International Environmental Law |url=https://www.ciel.org/wp-content/uploads/2021/07/Análisis-jurídico-de-las-consecuencias-de-la-determinación-no-consensuada-de-la-OCDE-sobre-la-enmienda-de-plásticos-de-Basilea_FINAL.pdf |access-date=17 August 2026 |via=Climate Insights Directory}}

BibTeX

@techreport{azoulayndanlisis, author = {Azoulay, David and Eisen, Nathaniel}, title = {{Análisis jurídico de las consecuencias de la determinación no consensuada de la OCDE sobre la enmienda de plásticos de Basilea}}, institution = {Center for International Environmental Law}, url = {https://www.ciel.org/wp-content/uploads/2021/07/Análisis-jurídico-de-las-consecuencias-de-la-determinación-no-consensuada-de-la-OCDE-sobre-la-enmienda-de-plásticos-de-Basilea_FINAL.pdf}, urldate = {2026-08-17}, note = {Indexed by Climate Insights Directory} }