![]() |
TV at dump in Ghana. Imported.. but when? |
Dr. Josh Lepawsky of Memorial University in Newfoundland sent me this link to film of recycling in Detroit. It appears in NY Times as a short, "Dismantling Detroit", and the young men interviewed serve as kind of a comparison to the "Scrap Boys" in Agbogbloshie.
Josh and his grad student Chris McNabb came down to visit our "fair trade recycling" pilot recycling plant in Mexico two weeks ago (Third Video: PBS on Las Chicas Bravas at Retroworks de Mexico). Josh has written about the theory he's studying, The Pollution Haven Hypothesis, which is that avoided disposal costs explain geographic displacement of PCs.
The cost of disposing the junk (or surplus) product here in the OECD represents a value that could partially offset the cost of geographic displacement. The environmental and social benefit of OECD's higher standards may be assumed lost, or be a cost to the recipient. But what was good about the item, which caused African entrepreneurs to pay for its relocation? Is this also about externalizing value, or only costs?

- What's the cost (or value) of properly recycling it in the new location?
- What's the retained value after pollution haven is debited... i.e. what is the raw material and reuse haven value?
Below I make my case for the "Reuse Haven" hypothesis. Both depressing films focus on symptoms. If we stop world trade, will we make the symptoms go away? What other effects would that cause? Can the third film - on Retroworks de Mexico - offer a compromise?