GEOS2121 Lecture Notes - Lecture 10: Municipal Solid Waste, Electronic Waste, Basel Convention
23 May 2018
School
Department
Course
Professor
Globalisation and Uneven Development
Introduction:
1. Introducing logic of disposing of pollution. Electronic consumption to sites of electronic
disposal. Explore different economic arguments for/against the move of global e-waste
2. How e-waste moves around the world
3. Globalisation and uneven development in e-waste
a. Globalisation and uneven development is a spatial strategy to overcome crisis
tendencies of capitalism
b. The exploitation of nature and workers
The Globalisation of Pollution
Dirty Idustries: Just etwee you ad e should’t the World ak e eouragig MORE igratio
of the dirty industries to the Lesser Developed Countries? Lawrence Summer
• The argument is that lower developed countries have higher pollution rates, greater
mortality rates and lower wages therefore the damage would have a small impact on the
economy. The economy as a whole would suffer less if we move waste and pollution to
poorer countries.
• African countries in particular have less pollution than places like Mexico City etc., he
believes there is a globally uneven distribution of pollution and African countries should be
getting their fair share.
• The demand for a clean environment for aesthetic and health reasons is income elastic -
which means that people with higher incomes would pay more for clean environments than
those with lower incomes.
• Poor people and poor countries would rather economic development (even if this means to
exacerbate pollution) than a clean environment
It is true that the above thoughts are used to make decisions about environmental waste
distribution. For example, the trade in solid waste and now this waste is thoroughly globalised and
goes mostly to poorer countries for disposal, rich countries were costs of disposal are high waste
gets transported to areas where environmental and labour regulations are much less strict and costs
of disposal is loer. For eaple, the “outh Australia Goeret o takig uh of the orlds
nuclear waste. In June decided no more and this was an economic development strategy
A global geography of e-waste
E-waste: household and corporate machines that are at their end of life
• Televisions, personal desktop and portable computers, cell phones and mobile devices
• Only 2% of municipal solid waste
• But impact is much higher, as very high proportion of heavy metals in landfill comes from
disarded eletrois Also, there a groig aste eause osuptio is ireasig
massively, higher turnover rate (Robbins et al 2014, chapter 17)
• The US is the largest producer of e-waste and largest consumer
find more resources at oneclass.com
find more resources at oneclass.com
• E-waste can have an effect on the kinds of resources that end up in landfills e.g. lead and
mercury chemical pollution
• In 1970-80s there was an objective environmental regulation with the concern when an
industry emerged around e-waste.
The pollution haven hypothesis:
"Some countries might voluntarily reduce environmental regulations in order to attract
foreig diret iestet - producers would relocate to areas where it was cheaper to get
rid of hazardous waste.
To prevent this the Basel Convention emerged:
• An international treaty starting 1992: desiged to preet ealthier outries fro
dupig hazardous aste o less deeloped outries - instigated to protect the
exploitation of uneven environmental and labour regulations. This converting explicitly bans
rich countries form sending hazardous waste to poor countries.
This meant a change in the regional distribution of e-waste, e-waste has now become regionally
dispersed than globally. For example, Ghana manages the e-waste from Africa only rather than the
US and/or other rich nations.
This also means that there is a problem with these new and emerging economies whose middle
incomes are growing and are becoming greater consumers of technology. One of the effects of this
regulation is to regulate the dispersal of e-waste around the world but it also means that there has
been a shift in the way that e-waste is designated. There has been a shift away from the mass
dumping of e-waste towards the emphasis on recycling of e-waste. Rather than exporting large
amounts of junk many junk is exported as some usable goods for recycling.
According to environmental economic reasoning this international trade of waste could potentially
benefit all participants to this trade. People who received these gods would be able to use the waste
for raw material input extracting valuable materials embedded in e-waste and sell that or use it in
new production (manufacturing or industrial purposes). For instance e-waste can be mined
particularly for copper but also gold and silver this also creates jobs for people extracting the
materials. So these economists argue that it is better for e-waste to be recycled than for it to be dug
up in new mines and the jobs opportunities that arise from this make it a beneficial economic
arrangement for those receiving e-waste.
This doesn't mean however that there are some externality costs associated with this economic
transaction. This is the spillover effects of this transport in e-waste. The spillover effects of the jobs
and the markets producing copper and gold/silver.
As the value of some of these waste products increase (copper) there is more useful waste that it
staying in sites of production. At USYD there are incentives for the university to hold onto old
computers and give them back to the production end and recycling takes place. Valuable resources
are likely to stay in place rather than exported.
There are two major sites where people talk about e-waste;
1. Ghana - Agbogbloshie
find more resources at oneclass.com
find more resources at oneclass.com
