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

This legal opinion by the Center for International Environmental Law (CIEL) analyzes the obligations of OECD members regarding the trade of plastic wastes following the OECD's failure to reach a consensus on incorporating the Basel Convention's Plastic Waste Amendments into the OECD Decision on the trade of wastes. The analysis concludes that plastic wastes classified as "other wastes" under the Basel Convention fall outside the scope of the OECD Decision, meaning OECD members who are Parties to the Basel Convention must apply Basel's control and prohibition mechanisms. CIEL further argues that separate agreements, such as those between the US and Canada or within the EU, fail to meet the equivalence requirements of Article 11 of the Basel Convention and are therefore invalid for bypassing Basel controls.

• The OECD failed to reach a consensus on how to treat 'other plastic wastes' (those in Annex II of the Basel Convention) within the OECD Decision on the trade of wastes. While members agreed to incorporate Annex VIII amendments regarding plastic wastes containing hazardous substances, they could not agree on other plastic wastes and pledged to revisit the issue before 2024.
• Because no consensus was reached, plastic wastes designated as 'other wastes' in the Basel Convention are excluded from the scope of the OECD Decision. Consequently, OECD members that are Parties to the Basel Convention and have not opposed the Plastic Waste Amendments must apply Basel's control and prohibition mechanisms for these wastes, regardless of whether the trading partner is a Party to the Convention.
• OECD members that are Parties to the Basel Convention have two primary obligations regarding regulated plastic wastes: they must only allow trade of Annex II plastic wastes according to Basel procedures (including prior informed consent and guarantees of environmentally sound management), and they are prohibited from trading these wastes with non-Parties to the Convention, including the United States.
• The 2020 arrangement between the United States and Canada for trading plastic wastes is deemed invalid under Article 11 of the Basel Convention. CIEL identifies two main failures: the agreement is explicitly non-binding, and its control procedures—which rely on 'existing controls normally applied in commercial transactions'—do not guarantee environmentally sound management or include a system of prior informed consent.
• The EU Waste Shipment Regulation is argued to be an invalid Article 11 agreement because it fails to provide equivalent protection to the Basel Convention. Specifically, it allows free trade of non-contaminated plastic wastes for a broader range of 'recovery' operations (including harmful practices like waste-to-energy) and permits free trade of certain plastics—such as PVC and PTFE—and mixtures that the Basel Convention requires to be subject to prior informed consent.
• While some OECD members, specifically Canada and Turkey, notified the Secretariat that they could not accept the Plastic Waste Amendments, they are still practically obligated to apply Basel controls. This is because their trading partners who have ratified the amendments must ensure prior informed consent and environmentally sound management regardless of the legislation in the importing country.

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} }