BIMCO has drafted a paper to submit to the Conference of the Parties to the Basel Convention (BC COP-17), asking for more clarity and for obstacles to be removed as the Hong Kong Convention enters into force in two months. The document warns that inconsistencies between the Basel and Hong Kong Convention affecting ship recycling will slow down progress.
The paper has been prepared by BIMCO’s recently established Ship Recycling Alliance, which represents both the global shipping as well as the main ship recycling industries located in Bangladesh, India, Pakistan and Türkiye. With the document, the Alliance aims to present a full overview and increase the understanding of the process up until today.
Also read: New alliance seeks to align ship recycling conventions
Contradictions between conventions
On 26 June 2025, the Hong Kong International Convention for the Safe and Environmentally Sound Recycling of Ships (the Hong Kong Convention) will enter into force alongside the Basel Convention on the Control of Transboundary Movements of Hazardous Wastes and their Disposal (the Basel Convention).
The Hong Kong Convention offers significant advancement in harmonising global standards of the ship recycling industry. This includes an improved reporting system for ships destined for dismantling and an approach to address the ships’ entire lifespan as opposed to only addressing end-of-life ships via the BC’s Prior Informed Consent (PIC) Procedure.
‘The Hong Kong Convention is only two months from entering into force,’ says David Loosley, BIMCO Secretary General & CEO. ‘While it is crucial for the future of safe and sound ship recycling, for people and the environment, inconsistencies and contradictions between the conventions still exist. If these obstacles are not removed, we fear it will slow down the progress of improving the global ship recycling industry.’
Also read: CirclesOfLife pursues circular shipbuilding
Overlaps and conflicts
Currently, there are several overlaps and conflicts with the provisions of the Basel Convention. One important example is that the Hong Kong Convention relies on the concept of the flag State and the recycling State. This contradicts the Basel Convention’s procedures that focus on exporting and importing States.
The Alliance stresses that the current documents on the table, among which is the International Maritime Organization’s provisional guidance, is not yet sufficient. While Article 11 of the Basel Convention allows for Parties to enter bilateral, multilateral, or regional agreements that ensure environmentally sound management of hazardous wastes, it is not considered a viable long-term solution for ship recycling.
Also read: ‘IMO has to solve disparities in ship recycling conventions’
Harmonised approach needed
Loosley: ‘The interplay between the two conventions will result in significant challenges for ship recycling. We ask that all states which are both party to the IMO and to the Basel Convention urgently examine the conflicts and agree on solutions. The shipping and ship recycling industries need a harmonised approach that can ensure a coherent set of regulations.’
In that process, the co-existence of UN Conventions also needs to be better defined and the interplay between the ship and the shore urgently needs to be further clarified.
Picture: Ship recycling in Bangladesh (by IMO).
