Basel: Most parties hasn't even responded

When the Basel Convention invited comments on used textiles and textile waste, responses arrived from governments, industry associations, NGOs, charities, academics and international organisations.

On paper, the process is open to all 191 parties to the convention. In practice, only a small share submitted formal comments. Twelve parties and twenty-two observers participated in the consultation.

The limited participation raises important questions. Countries with extensive policy resources often have greater capacity to engage in technical consultations, while many developing countries face competing priorities and resource constraints.

The responses reveal a significant divide in how stakeholders understand the problem.

Many environmental NGOs and activist organisations argue that current systems allow waste to be exported under the label of reuse. They generally support tighter definitions, stronger controls and greater traceability.

Industry groups, reuse organisations and many actors involved in second-hand trade tend to focus on the benefits of reuse. They argue that exported clothing is intended for continued use and warn that excessive restrictions could undermine circular systems that already exist.

The disagreement is therefore not simply about regulation. It is about the underlying diagnosis of the problem. Is the primary issue waste disguised as reuse, or is there a risk that functioning reuse systems are increasingly being treated as waste?

The Reuse News investigation offers a clear answer to that, but how this will be handled during Basel workshops is another story.