To deal with the generation of e-waste, effective management practices must be implemented throughout the entire life-cycle of the product: from design stage (cradle) to the end-of-life stage (grave), adopting solutions that are environmentally friendly, including practicing reuse and recycling. While some e-wastes are treated at its origin, some are illegally exported to other countries for recycling and disposal. In fact, recycling and disposal of e-waste are a phenomenon increasingly encountered in developing countries. The quantity of e-wastes on the planet has reached crisis level on a global scale, the bulk of which is being generated by the industrialised nations of the world (Azuka, 2009). Because the process of e-waste management is both expensive and labor-intensive, exportation of e-wastes to developing countries is one of the routes which the industrialised nations have taken in dealing with this menace so as to dodge the expenses of disposal and close public scrutiny within their borders, as less than 10% of discarded electronic products are currently being recycled (Ladou and Lovegrove, 2008).
It should be noted that this movement of e-waste from industrialised nations to developing nations is never always ex-gratia. As a matter of fact, there is a booming trade in used
16
electronics, and by extension, e-waste. The export to developing countries is motivated entirely by economic forces (Azuka, 2009). The bulk of the e-waste generated by industrialised economies end up in developing countries after going through an export/import trail created by numerous players. Generators find it profitable because it saves cost and more often earns them income as they pass the used electronics to other persons to dispose off instead of incurring disposal cost, as well as provide them with the opportunity of complying with the legal/regulatory regions of the polity wherein they operate or dodging same. Middle men who could be called ‗waste merchants‘ are participants as a result of the income derivable from the trade in used electronics and e-wastes and end purchasers are involved in the venture for the same reason as the middle man. Recycling companies in developed countries stripe e-waste of its most valuable parts, before shipping it to brokers in developing countries. The transboundary movement of e-wastes is often justified in the name of
―recycling‖, a misleading phrase, for it is impossible to safely or effectively recycle many hazardous e-waste materials.
Limited information is available on the quantities of e-waste materials that move between countries. Approximately 10.2 million units of computers are exported annually from the US to developing countries including China, India, Pakistan, Nigeria and Ghana. The US e-waste recycling industry was reported to have once declared that about 80% of the e-waste they received was exported to Asia and 90% of which went to China (Hicks et al., 2005;
Antrekowitsch et al., 2006). It is estimated that South Korea exports about 1.8 million used computers to China each year (Toxic Dispatch, 2004). In the UK, 160, 000 metric tons of secondary and waste electronic equipment were exported in 2003; 133, 000 tons of which was IT/telecom equipment. An estimated value of 110, 000 tons of this was declared exports and properly documented while 23,000 tons were undeclared or grey-market exports going to non-OECD countries. The Basel Convention estimates that from 1993-2001, the amount of waste travelling between countries more than quadrupled. Despite laws that expressly prohibit it, most of the international movement of hazardous waste is from the rich countries to poor ones.
17
In Africa, the city of Lagos in Nigeria is believed to be the representative of developments rapidly taking place in other cities of Africa, with rapid and massive growth in cell phones and computer technology. While no official figures exist, it is apparent that a very significant portion of this growth is fueled by the importation of second-hand equipment from rich developed countries. Report (BAN, 2005) showed that 500 (40-foot) containers of used computers; with each containing about 800 monitors or CPUs, which amounts to about 400, 000 second-hand or scrap units, come into the port of Lagos each month, imported primarily from Europe and North America (Figure 2.2).
This amounts to an annual importation of an estimated 5 million scrap units or 60, 000 metric tons containing up to 18, 000 tons of plastic materials. This is estimated to an importation of 15, 000-45, 000 tons of hazardous wastes containing about 1000-3600 tons of lead (Nnorom and Osibanjo, 2008a). While some of the imported materials to Lagos is fully functional and is directly re-used, or can be repaired, there is nevertheless a significant quantity of the imported computer equipment or parts, estimated by local experts to be between 25-75%, considered junks (BAN, 2005; Ladou and Lovegrove, 2008; Nnorom and Osibanjo, 2008a).
It is unmarketable due to either its lack of computing effectiveness, or due to the fact that it is un-economic to repair. Because most of the exports/imports are not pre-tested for functionality, it is not possible to know whether these exports are legally defined as hazardous wastes (i.e. requiring disposal whole or in part and being hazardous) under the Basel Convention. Once in Nigeria, they are put into the market and are bought as ―tested‖ or
―non-tested‖ electronics/electrical appliances (Hawari and Hassan, 2008).
E-waste is shipped to Africa under various guises. Amongst them is the movement to Africa and other third world nations subsequent to an agreement between the recipient and the generating country wherein the latter promises aids, money or the execution of a project within the territory of the recipient nation. This is the same ruse that is put to use in the movement of hazardous or toxic waste to Africa (Clapp, 2000). Governments of Africa countries have repeatedly entered into agreement with industrialised nations that will enable the latter stockpile and dump their waste which are often toxic, hazardous and
18
Figure 2.2: Transboundary movement of e-scrap from developed to developing nations under the disguise of digital gap. (BAN, 2005)
19
radioactive (Azuka, 2009). The economies of developing countries tend to be weak and unstable. They are often confronted with an urgent need to finance both domestic and international debt. In their desperate attempt to finance such debt, the governments of these countries are likely to offer their natural resources for sale at a discount (Ahmed, 2004;
Kimani, 2009). In 1988 for example, the government of Guinea-Bissau, one of Africa‘s poorest nations, briefly agreed to accept over 15 million tons of toxic waste for 600 million dollars- four times its Gross National Product. The Minister for Trade and Tourism simply explained: ―we need money‖ (African Business, 1988). In the same year, the government of Benin negotiated a bilateral deal with the French government to import radioactive and industrial waste in return for $1.6 million down payment and 30 years of economic assistance (adapted from http://www.american.edu/TED/benin.htm).
Also disheartening is the fact that the generators and waste merchants target illiterate and semi illiterate businessmen, offering them money so as to lure them into accepting the wastes they generate and deal in. For example, in 1987, a toxic waste trade between Italian and Nigeria businessmen took place in Koko, Nigeria. Italian businessmen shipped toxic waste of several Italian industries to Nigeria for storage in the backyard of a Nigeria businessman, who described them merely as miscellaneous construction materials. 18, 000 drums of hazardous waste were stored for approximately $100 a month. Months later, a scandal over the toxic waste was publicised after the barrels of waste began leaking into the surrounding area (adapted from http://www.american.edu/TED/NIGERIA.htm).
These used electronics, especially computers as well as their accessories and peripherals are also shipped to developing countries ostensibly for the purpose of helping to bridge the digital divide between the industrialised economies and the former. This is what they make the unsuspecting public within the country of generation believe or the charade which the generators and dealers in used electronics and e-waste put up when they seek to frustrate the provisions of municipal legislation within the country of generation requiring the recycling or disposal of waste in an environmental-friendly manner. It is indebatable that the trade in e-waste as well as its mechanics is fuelled by sheer economics (Azuka, 2009). This goes to
20
affirm the assertion that economic activity is both the cause of environmental harm in its diversified manifestations and paradoxically, the means by which resources can be generated that is capable of being put to use in addressing environmental harm.
African nations have become favored destinations for the export of e-waste emanating from US and the EU as the ―cost of doing business‖ is minimized and profit is guaranteed (Green diary, 2007; Azuka, 2009). It is believed that the endemic poverty, high foreign debt burden, corruption, lack of environmental regulation or the existence of lax regulation coupled with inept enforcement mechanism as well as the pervasive lack of scientific/medical expertise and knowledge of the effect of e-waste on human health and its environmental impact has made Africa a target for e-waste merchants (Olawuyi, 2007). It is estimated that while it costs about $50 to recycle a personal computer in the US, unscrupulous importers pay no more than $15 a piece, which translate to a net gain of $35 for a US recycler. By extracting the usable parts and then dumping it at the backyard scrap-trading outfits, an importer can generate profit of about $10 per piece, thus giving birth to a win-win situation for all (Basu, 2008). This waste is shipped from ports in the countries of generation to the ports of countries that are prone to serious lack of regulation and are usually shipped with a sprinkling of a few functional electronic/electrical appliances.