Suchergebnisse

The Basel Convention has tempted developed nations into the practice of exporting hazardous waste into undeveloped nations' territories simply for money in the name of recycling. Being extremely business unfriendly, particularly for the recycling industry, this convention has not been welcomed by many developing nations, leading to serious policy and legal uncertainty in those jurisdictions. However, in the absence of any dedicated, enforceable international legal instrument, the Basel Convention currently remains the foundation of ship-recycling jurisprudence in the domestic courts of all dominant, ship-recycling states and the rest of the world, and the basis for curbing the movement of end-of-life ships proceeding to undeveloped states for recycling. Considerable debate exists amongst major stakeholders about the Basel Convention's application to end-of-life ships. Stakeholders associated with global shipping and the ship-recycling industry, including the governments of ship-owning states, firmly maintain that the Convention does not apply to the cross-border movement of end-of-life ships. On the other side, environmental activists strongly argue that the Convention should regulate end-of-life ships as hazardous waste. Through a doctrinal analysis breaking down key terms and provisions, this article seeks to address the contentious questions on the Basel Convention's relevance to end-of-life ships and their movement.

Distributed to some depository libraries in microfiche. ; Includes bibliographical references. ; Mode of access: Internet.

AbstractThe activities of nongovernmental organizations (NGOs) in international negotiations can constitute an incentive and a catalyst for the international community to address important issues, but can also represent a mere struggle for political influence and control. The negotiations which led to the adoption of the Convention on the Transboundary Movement of Hazardous Wastes and their Disposal encompassed both elements. They gave a prominent role to NGO participation in all phases of the negotiating process, especially to NGOs driven by environmental concerns and ``green issues.'' The Basel Convention and the negotiating process leading to its adoption became milestones in international environmental negotiations. However, the outcome of those negotiations as well as the role of all participants were significantly weakened in the course of this process.

Ukraine ratified the Basel Convention on the control of transboundary movements of hazardous waste and their disposal (hereinafter - the Basel Convention) as well as the Joint Convention on the Safety of Spent Fuel Management and on the Safety of Radioactive Waste Managemet. However, national legislation is more declarative than specific; it tends to copy basic general provisions of international documents in this field rather than creating concrete effective mechanisms for their implementation. The duplication and inconsistency of the provisions of Ukrainian legal acts in the field of hazardous waste management has attracted the attention of scholars. This article analyses the main provisions of Ukrainian legislation regulating hazardous waste management in terms of its compliance with the Basel Convention and the Directive 2008/98/EC.

AbstractInternational institutions are important regulators of the trade–environment relationship. Many of them deploy trade measures for environmental purposes, with mixed results. The Basel Convention is one case where trade restrictions have not succeeded in curbing movements of hazardous waste or protecting vulnerable countries from waste dumping. Current literature emphasizes North–South conflict under the Basel Convention as a main reason for these shortcomings. This paper returns to the fundamental question as to why countries engage in this trade. It contends that hazardous wastes are not only characterized by their environmental impacts, but are also distinct in the ways they are generated, distributed, and managed. I argue that global economic integration has commodified these wastes, and countries are increasingly diverging on their views of hazardous materials. This paper draws from the under‐utilized Basel Convention Database and other sources to piece together a holistic picture of the global hazardous waste movements. It identifies three types of countries with distinct trade orientations: industrialized countries trading the largest amounts of hazardous wastes and with considerable specialization; newly industrializing countries as influential players in hazardous waste generation and management; and least developed countries, which oppose waste trade yet suffer from waste dumping. As globalization deepens, management of hazardous wastes may require extensive trade of hazardous materials between countries of varying capabilities and interests. Contrary to its current trade minimization approach based on a crude North–South dichotomy, the Basel Convention may benefit from an approach that motivates capable countries to import wastes and one that builds capacity for intended waste importers.