In 2017, China announced a stop on the import of 24 types of waste beginning 1 January 2018. This decision, coupled with the fact that under China’s Operation National Sword, the illegal smuggling of waste would also be monitored, revealed the ugly side of waste colonialism.
What is Waste Trade?
The practice of exporting waste from higher-income countries to lower-income countries, which are often ill-equipped to handle this waste, is a form of environmental racism or waste colonialism. Waste trade is often referred to as ‘waste colonialism’ due to the unequal and exploitative dynamics involved in the global movement of waste. The term highlights the power imbalance between economically developed countries of the Global North, typically the exporters of waste, and the less affluent nations that serve as recipients.
Rather than finding better solutions to manage their waste problem, developed countries place the burden of their waste on the environment and communities, especially in the Global South. Externalising their waste problem to other countries by using the waste recipient’s land for disposal is a form of colonialism.
For instance, after China’s mandate, new dumping grounds were identified in Southeast Asian countries, such as Malaysia, Thailand and Indonesia. As waste began to pile up in Global North, these countries became the top destination for the world’s waste, both legal and illegal, where the latter involves false declaration in the bill of ladings, false description of the traded waste, avoiding customs controls or outright concealment in the consignment.
For decades, communities and civil society organizations have highlighted the adverse impacts of indiscriminate waste dumping on health and the environment. Waste colonialism also contributes to the emergence of illegal recycling plants that operate without permits, using low-end technology and environmentally harmful disposal methods such as open dumping and burning.
A mapping exercise on waste trafficking presented in the United Nations Office on Drugs and Crime (UNODC) report shows how criminal actors have exploited regulatory loopholes and environmental vulnerabilities for financial gain. The waste sector is reported to be highly vulnerable to corruption as criminals see opportunities to bribe officials to issue permits, falsify documents, overlook violations and obstruct inspections.
Besides the air pollution caused by burning waste and emissions from recycling plants, soil and water bodies were also polluted. Recipient countries also grapple with the consequences of microplastics produced in the recycling process that ultimately infiltrate water bodies. As we know, microplastics are pervasive and present in virtually every corner of the world, and our bodies, causing adverse impacts.
Developed nations, such as Japan, the United States of America, and European countries should be able to manage waste generated in their countries. However, they continue to dispose of their refuse in developing and resource-constrained countries under the pretext of recycling or donations. Moreover, households in developed countries who separate their waste have no idea that the “recyclables” are sent worldwide to be recycled or dumped, severely impacting local and indigenous communities and leading to environmental degradation and health hazards.
What Drives Waste Trade?
Capitalism, unsustainable production practices and consumerism are among the major drivers of the escalating waste generation. The capitalist system manufactures more products than we need, lures consumers to buy more and then discards these products when newer ones are introduced.
From fast fashion and gadgets to single-use items, waste is growing at an unprecedented rate. This leads to millions of tonnes of waste being shipped annually. In some cases, shipping the waste is much cheaper than managing or disposing of it in an environmentally sound manner in the regions where it is produced.
Despite implementing import restrictions, bans, and protective measures to safeguard their environments, and even multilateral environmental agreements like the Basel Convention, Asian nations had to bear the brunt of EU plastic waste, arriving through both illicit and legal channels. The ETC CE 2/2023 report The Fate of Plastic Waste indicates that plastic waste leaving the EU is of much lower quality than that traded within the EU.
Waste should not be sent to economies that don’t have the capacity to manage it. For example, Japan, which has a reputation for good waste management practices, is a top exporter of plastic waste to non-OECD countries that have less capacity to deal with waste and weaker waste management systems. Out of 606 million kg of plastic waste exported by Japan to other countries in 2023, 189 million kg was sent to Malaysia, increasing from 179 million kg in 2022. Effective and just waste management should be based on the principle of proximity.
When Asian countries began pushing back and campaigning against waste dumping, we found that plastic waste simply shifted to destinations such as Myanmar and Laos. An investigation by collaborative newsroom Lighthouse Reports and six partners found that some of the waste dumped in Myanmar comes from the West, based on samples collected from a neighbourhood in Yangon. The investigators identified international exporters in the US and Canada through customs records databases. They analysed how transit countries underreport the plastic they send to Myanmar based on bills of lading and shipping data.
Fast fashion where the production and consumption of clothes has accelerated leads to an increase in textile waste. Low-quality clothing is ending up in the Global South in the guise of charitable donations or to be sold in second-hand textile markets. For instance, every week, Ghana is inundated with a staggering 15 million garments, a significant portion of which up to 6 million ends up as waste, being dumped in landfills or burned.
Additionally, there are hidden plastics that come with other materials, such as plastics in imports of paper bales, plastics in electronic and electrical products, textile waste, rubber, and tyre waste. There is also the trade of refuse-derived fuel — in short, processed waste that is incinerated for energy generation — which may include upto 30 to 50 per cent plastic waste.
IPEN reports that the trends over the last decades show that the amount of plastic waste has increased along with the waste trade in categories that include plastics made up of toxic chemicals, such as electrical and electronic wastes.
Basel Action Network finds that despite the Basel Convention’s hazardous waste trade regulations, some questionable recycling companies broker the export of electronic waste to less developed countries. These companies cut costs by offloading dismantling and recycling to impoverished countries with lax labour laws, weak environmental regulations, and poor human rights track records.
The Basel Convention on the Control of Transboundary Movements of Hazardous Wastes and Their Disposal has provisions on waste generation and minimization. However, these provisions are voluntary guidance that have failed to curb the waste crisis.
What is to be done next?
Recognizing the impacts of its waste trade, the EU which exported 35 million tons of waste in 2023 set out stricter controls on waste trade with its new Waste Shipments Regulation which entered into force on 20 May 2024. This happened after years of advocacy by both European and waste-receiving countries’ civil society organizations.
To be effective, the Waste Shipment Regulation must be accompanied by robust, adequately resourced monitoring and enforcement measures both in the exporting and importing countries. Loopholes must be plugged and hopefully, the implementation of this regulation will help put an end to the environmental and human health harm in recipient countries.
However, these measures are only by the EU. What about other large economies?
The UNODC Turning the Tide report recommends that governments must adopt a holistic approach and identify vulnerabilities throughout the waste trade supply chain. This includes developing effective policies, taking decisive enforcement action and building institutional capacities. The corruption and involvement of organized criminal groups in waste trafficking require a strong criminal justice response.
The Basel Convention with stronger governance and implementation powers is required to curb the toxic waste trade. The Global Plastics Treaty, currently in the throes of international negotiations ahead of its finalization in 2025, has the potential to be a legally-binding instrument to address plastic pollution in many ways, including international rules for plastic design, production and disposal to protect health, human rights and the environment.
Waste colonialism perpetuates social and environmental injustice. To end waste colonialism, developed nations must be held accountable for their own waste management and disposal and ensure that the waste management systems are environmentally and socially sound.
Merely ending unjust waste trade is not enough, the world needs to immensely reduce the unsustainable production and consumers be mindful of the choices they make to minimise the impacts of their consumption behaviour on others and the environment. Zero waste policies and systems are the way forward to end the waste crisis.
Written by:
Mageswari Sangaralingam
Chief Executive at Consumers’ Association of Penang &
Honorary Secretary of Sahabat Alam Malaysia (Friends of the Earth)
