United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC), 1992. The pioneering agreement [PDF] was ratified by 197 countries, including the United States, and was the first global treaty to explicitly address climate change. It has created an annual forum known as the Conference of the Parties (COP) for international discussions aimed at stabilizing greenhouse gas concentrations in the atmosphere. These meetings produced the Kyoto Protocol and the Paris Agreement. To monitor other simultaneous trends and determine whether the Basel Convention or the ban have altered waste transfers beyond what would have been done anyway, we use a variant of the gravity model of international trade in Kellenberg and Levinson (2014). This is where our identification strategy is unique because of the limitation of the ban to a category of waste trafficking – the transfers from Schedule 7 to non-annex 7 countries – our unique identification strategy has power. While we have control over other national characteristics, we interact with the prohibition ratification indicators with the indicators of transfers from Schedule 7 to non-annex 7. We note that the Schedule 7 countries that ratify the ban appear to be exporting less waste to non-Schedule 7 countries, but this effect disappears if we include fixed effects specific to each country or pair of countries, which supports the proposal presented in Figure 2, which provides that the ban on waste exports by Schedule 7 countries leaves the current trends in waste export unchanged. As part of this debate, important climate agreements have developed in the pursuit of emissions reductions.
The Kyoto Protocol only required industrialized countries to reduce their emissions, while the Paris Agreement recognized that climate change was a common problem and called on all countries to set emission targets. Bratberg, Espen, Sigve Tjtta and Torgeir`ines (2005), ”Working voluntary international environmental agreements?”, Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, 50: 583-597. The main advantage of the convention and the ban for the study of the empirical effect of the IEA is that the UN comtrade database tracks the international shipment of all goods, including waste, whether countries have ratified the Basel Convention or the Basel ban. Unlike previous empirical work on IEAs, we can compare regulated activity for countries that have ratified it and have not ratified it. Of the more than 5,000 tariff codes in the harmonized system that describe international shipments, we focus on 60 that describe different types of waste. To remove this incentive and ensure that all countries meet their commitments, it makes sense to try to conclude a binding international agreement imposing sanctions in the event of no targets.