Defining E-Waste "Racism": Part 2 Fly-And-Lie

- Fly and Buy:   A trip to inspect used electronics, to be purchased for export.   The goal of the buyer is to make sure the load is at least 85% working and repairable after damage in shipping and elective upgrades.  See also "waste tourist".

- Fly and Lie:  A trip to inspect the exported electronics in the country which received them.   The goal is to  support a political agenda.  The "waste tourist" typically films only the 15% which was not reused, or films end-of-life product (generated on continent), emphasizing the most primitive aspects of the informal sector.

There is a double standard for "waste tourists"... people who fly over oceans to witness used electronics.  The waste tourists flying from North to South are called "watchdogs".  Those who fly from South to North are called "criminals".   People lose their life savings or go to jail based on how their trip is profiled.

When the WATCHDOG tourists fly to Africa, the working units aren't on the ground - they are in doctors offices, internet cafes, dormitories.  Admittedly, it's difficult to find the good-goods all in one place (though FIXERS manages to interview the repairpeople).  But the watchdog tourists take lots of film of the residue.  I felt like going ballistic when I previewed Fedele's E-Wasteland last week, as it used the 200,000 tons of import statistic from the 2011 UNEP studies, but seemed to ignore the rest of the UNEP study - the part that said 170,000 tons of it was reused and repaired, and most of the material at Agbogbloshie was generated by Africans after a decade of use.

We accept as normal in the West that 11% of brand new electronics sold are returned to the store as non-functional.  But when 15% of used goods brought to Africa fail, it means African businessmen are "criminals".   The math perplexes environmentalists, who can't seem to figure out that 85% of the imports are in doctors offices, internet cafes, and universities.  

To the African businesspeople, this is all about numbers.  Dollars, statistics, shipping costs, repair costs, distribution, and profit.  The higher the resale value, the greater the financial return.  These are not do-gooders, nor are they greedy, not any more than Bruce Springsteen is "greedy" for charging money for his concert in Dublin last week.  They have payrolls, they have family, they have risks, and no guarantee of rewards.

AFRICANS COME AND INSPECT AND BUY THE USED ELECTRONICS.

AFRICANS PAY MONEY FOR THE ELECTRONICS.

AFRICANS DON'T WANT TO PAY SHIPPING COSTS FOR JUNK.

AFRICANS REDISTRIBUTED USED GOODS AND TAKE BACK WORN OUT GOODS.

AFRICANS HAVE HAD TELEVISION IN THE CITIES SINCE THE 1980S.

AFRICANS GENERATE MOST OF THE E-WASTE FILMED AT THEIR DUMPS

AFRICANS ARE BEING ACCUSED OF "EWASTE" CRIMES THEY DIDN'T COMMIT.

The African business people fly-and-buy to inspect product before they pay $10 each and another $10 to ship them.   Without them, the percentage of junk in loads could be much, much higher.

This is not about some unscrupulous white "ewaste" recycler filling a boat and finding a beach in Africa to dump on.  Those "criminals" have never been found, because they don't exist.  

Interpol labels the African Fly-and-Buy  "Waste Tourists" (Daily Telegraph, 2009) "criminals".  Journalists and watchdogs, like Greenpeace, Basel Action Network, NRDC, CBS 60 Minutes, and Europol  also fly to see the goods, after they are received.  These are also "white waste tourists".  They make their livings denigrating the African businessman's trade.  But unlike the African "waste tourist", all they have invested is their plane ticket - or in the case of Greenpeace a sabotaged (to be unrepairable) television and a GPS tracking device (which they got back).

"Man held after tonnes of illegal e-waste are exported to Africa'Scavenger children' at risk from toxic fumes produced by broken equipment"

- The Independent headline, November 2009 

Basel Action Network Agrees: Ghana Is Good

The Report from Ghana showing 85% reuse - not "80% primitive dumping" has finally taken traction.  People are wondering what is going on.  Basel Action Network had previously, repeatedly, claimed that 80-90% of the used electronics imported into Ghana were "toxic junk".

Last week, BAN tried to "spin" the report in their blog.  They announce it as "just released" (I spoke to them about it when it was released in April).  But perhaps they've now had a chance to review it.  Mike at BAN describes the study as follows:

The Environmental Protection Agency of Ghana just published their “e-Waste Country Assessment,” based on actual data from Customs authorities, field visits and meetings with key stakeholders — that is, from credible, in-country, official sources...

Ghana reports that at least 35% (and perhaps much more) of imported, second-hand electronic and electrical equipment (EEE) is non-functioning, most of that coming from the EU and the USA. Some is repairable — but fails soon and adds to Ghana’s growing e-Waste crisis.

The functioning equipment does create opportunities. But the dumping and burning of the rest results in serious consequences on the environment and a threat to public health. “Even children, sometimes as young as 5 years old, were observed to be involved in the recovery of materials from WEEE recycling, earning less than US $20 per month.”

BAN tries to impugn the repair market by including material documented as being professionally repaired in the "unacceptable" category, boosting the bad export number to 35%.  It is still LESS than HALF what BAN has told reporters.  And the repaired material is not described as "fails soon"... and the report says nothing about "(and perhaps much more)".

This post from BAN completely agrees with everything I've said.  Exporting more than 1/3 "waste" to Africa is economically impossible.   While I disagree with including "successfully repaired" with "waste", and think 15% is the problem, I'll concede for the moment that one third may be bad.

This now puts BAN in my corner about "waste tourism".   I now invite BAN to agree with me that the Europol and Interpol reports which describe African screeners (who buy and source the equipment in Europe and the USA) as "waste tourists".    I now invite BAN to join me in declaring the Europol conclusion that "organized crime" is behind the exports to be racist, bigoted, hogwash.

Next, if we can agree that the "problem" is somewhere between 15% and 35%, and that most of the waste being burned in Ghana's dumps was imported decades ago and was in active use for years, can we not also agree that the good part of the imports - 65-85% - should be continued?  Can we not use the economics to generate fair trade solutions, giving incentives for the repair markets (like the one EPA Lisa Jackson visited in Ethiopia) to become take-back and recycling programs, like our WR3A partners in Mexico and Malaysia?

Thank you to BAN for addressing this important study, and for admitting that MOST exports to Africa are good people trading good things with other good people.  Now, can BAN take the next step. and publicly denounce "no intact unit" as an export standard?  The percentage of "waste" in shredded equipment is higher than the percentage of waste in repaired equipment.   E-Stewards should not be allowed to destroy working equipment?

I'm going to invite BAN representatives to present with me at a Sustainability Forum here at Middlebury College.   They can meet geeks of color like Wahab of Accra Ghana, Oslo of Egypt, Ow Fung of Malaysia, and Jinex of Peru.  Looking the Technicians in the eye, and saying you now understand they are not about "80%" e-waste, that they are not "primitives"... Maybe BAN can help my friends to source even BETTER material, and more of it, and to join us in Fair Trade Recycling.  Maybe they can donate equipment to our UN partners, or to Meltwater Academy?  Neil of Cascades, a fellow RPCV, could moderate.

Join me?