PACE and MPPI overly represent industry interests.
“On the whole the document is moving in the right direction.   However BAN feels that it needs in some key instances to go beyond the work that was done in the PACE and MPPI partnerships.  It is a fact that the partnerships, as useful as they have been, have been heavily weighted toward industry participation and participation by OECD stakeholders.    There has been minimal environmental NGO and developing country involvement.  Consequently the work has not been as robust as is needed to control transboundary movements of electronic waste, which is currently out of control on the global stage resulting in great externalization of costs and harm to developing countries.”

From p. 1 of BAN response to Basel Secretariat. 2011. ‘Draft Technical Guidelines on Transboundary Movement of E-Waste, in Particular Regarding the Distinction between Waste and Non-Waste (Version: 21 February 2011 )’.
Electronic Waste »Electronic Waste
Draft Technical Guidelines »Draft Technical Guidelines
Issues »Issues
Scope of Technical Guidelines needs clarification »Scope of Technical Guidelines needs clarification
Technical Guidelines should harmonize with PACE and MPPI »Technical Guidelines should harmonize with PACE and MPPI
PACE and MPPI overly represent industry interests.
2011-02 Draft Technical Guidelines [2011 Feb] »2011-02 Draft Technical Guidelines [2011 Feb]
Basel Action Network »Basel Action Network
+Comments (0)
+Citations (0)