E-Waste Menace (Part 2): Think Globally, Act Locally
Following-up on my previous post, this part explores need for local action in tackling the “e-waste menace.” Delhi being the world’s e-waste capital sure raises several interesting questions. This is especially the case as one discovers that no other Indian state – with the exception of forward-looking Kerala – has any legislation in place to deal with the issue.
I am not in favor of widespread governmental micromanagement of anything and everything. So, I was initially happy to see the southern Indian cities – Bangalore, Chennai and Hyderabad (all of which are closely associated with the development of the Indian silicon valley) – boast of having the private sector involved in e-waste disposal. This demonstrated that sufficient economic incentives exist to invite private disposal of electronics waste. But then I started having second thoughts.
- » See also: India Calls for Elephant Range States to Address Increasing Elephant Deaths
- » Get EcoWorldly by RSS or sign up by email.
One part of my concern arises from the lack of proper health and safety measures at the death-end of the product, the end where individual recyclers deal with e-waste in developing countries. These poor people eke out a living by extracting the precious metals in the electronics goods. Much of the recycling is done using crude methods. They use open fires and physically tear out parts, ignorant of the noxious fumes and toxic chemicals released and without attention to short or long-term health and safety hazards. A lot of it is done by small children. (Examine this photo stream from Greenpeace India showing some of these crude recycling procedures). Naturally, not only would thorough laws need to be developed to improve these hazardous working conditions, but the laws must also be enforced well.
California’s Electronics Waste Recycling Act (2003) illustrates an interesting, good step in this direction. The act mandates a recycling fee from consumers at the time of purchase of electronics and then uses this money to pay the recyclers. It’s a good first step, but it is only that. Changes over time necessitate further steps: it has been observed that consumers do not realize that they are entitled to free-recycling or how they can get it. Another aspect that needs to be re-examined is the payment to recyclers: has the business been made doubly profitable with both the fees paid by government to recyclers and the revenues from the export of e-waste? Is the e-waste being recycled in appropriate ways and places? Are the recyclers disposing the e-waste in keeping with the intent of the law?
Another concern that is boggling my mind is if this is necessarily a Third sector issue. If we legislate for authorized, organized, firm-based (rather than individually handled) disposal of e-waste under license to the private stakeholder, are we necessarily doing the right thing? Will it turn-out that we will eventually legislate in the economic interest of private e-waste disposers? After all, in the absence of good e-waste disposal legislation, how do we ensure that private motives lead these recycling companies to do the right thing?
So here’s the critical question: if we decide in favor of private firms and if we really want to save the 13-year olds from health and safety hazards, what kind of regulation must be imposed over private recyclers? Are we finally just depriving the powerless poor of making a profit for themselves and only compelling them to do very similar work – albeit for a poor wage – for the richer, better organized, more vocal private disposers?
Image Credit: Greenpeace India from Flickr under Creative Commons License.
