World Bank / infoDev International seminar on e-waste International case studies Initial presentation November 30, 2010
World Bank / infoDevInternational seminar on e-waste
International case studies
Initial presentation November 30, 2010
► Basel Convention on the Control of Transboundary Movements of Hazardous Wastes and their Disposal (ratified in 1992)
► Governed by the United Nations Organization, 175 countries Parties
► Goal: Protect human health and the environment from negative effects caused by waste, in particular hazardous waste, and their transboundary shipments.
► Principles and implementation
► Regulation of exports, guidance on proper treatment and reduction and the source, reporting requirements
► Regional Centres for Training and Technology Transfer in several countries provide training and guidance on technical and technological issues as well as advice on enforcement aspects of the Convention.
► A key driver of hazardous waste management that has to be more equally and properly enforced to avoid obsolescence
► Transposition in national law varies significantly from one country to another
► Interagency consultation and regional cooperation can be strengthened
► The Basel Action Network’s eWaste Stewardship Initiative
► The BAN is an NGO based in the USA and active worldwide in fighting “toxic trade”
► The initiative encourages best practices in eWaste treatment through a certification program
► Involves every step of the value chain as it targets recyclers and the businesses who use their services
The Basel Convention
08/12/2010 1InfoDev - International seminar on eWaste - international benchmark
1
USA – A legislative patchwork
► No federal law a variety of state laws
► Recyclers and other stakeholders in the system have to deal with numerous sets of regulatoryrequirements and standards
► Consumers are not homogenously informed and have difficulty knowing their obligations
► Exchanges between states cannot be regulated
08/12/2010 2InfoDev - International seminar on eWaste - international benchmark
2
USA – comparative analysis of three states
Maine Minnesota Oregon
Law (signed in 2004, effective in
2006) requires municipalities to
send waste computer and
television monitors to consolidation
centers that are fully-funded by
manufacturers
Law (May 2007, Aug 2007)
engages producers to register with
the state, pay a registration fee
and have to set up an e-waste
recycling program
Law (2007, 2009) states that
manufacturers must register to
participate in recycling programs
and provide collection sites for e-
waste
The manufacturer’s
responsibility starts at the
consolidation points
No recycling targets
Manufacturers encouraged to
create their own takeback program
(lower resgistration fee)
Producers are required to meet
specific recycling targets with
possibility of credits for exceeding
targets
Manufacturers may choose to
meet the requirements
independently or by joining the
“state contractor plan”
Minimum mandatory collection
goal
Return share based model (pay
according to volumes returned)
Includes orphan waste
Market share based model (pay
according to recycling targets set
on previous year market share)
Does not include orphan waste
Return Share with partial market
share (pay volumes returned using
a fee set according to market
share)
Includes orphan waste
Producers pay for transport,
consolidator handling
Municipality pays collection
Manufacturers pay for collection,
transportation, and recycling
Manufacturers in the state
contractor plan will pay a recycling
fee
08/12/2010 3InfoDev - International seminar on eWaste - international benchmark
2
Japan
Dis
ch
arg
e
Payment of fees for collection and recycling
Most of the Recycling fees are between 1,700JPY and 6,000JPY.
It depends on manufacturer and how it is collected and transported.
ex) air-conditioner 3,500JPY, television 2,700JPY, refrigerator 4,600PY,
washing machine 2,400JPY
Person discharging
Co
llectio
n a
nd
Tra
nsp
orta
tion
Obligation to collect
Retailers have a responsibility to collect appliances below.
a) Specified kinds of appliances sold by the retailer
b) Specified kinds of appliances collected when new appliances
are purchased
Obligation to transfer
Retailer
Designated collection siteM
un
icip
ality
Re
cyclin
g
Obligation to collect
Manufacturers and Importers have a responsibility to collect
specified appliances formerly manufactured or imported by them.
Designated corporation collect appliances in the following cases.
a) absence of a party responsible for collection and recycling
due to bankruptcy of manufacturer, etc.
b) Consignment by medium and small businesses
Obligation of recycling
Manufacturer, importerand designated corporation have a
responsibility to recycle more than recycling rate standards.
Manufacturer/ Importerand Designated corporation
Mu
nic
ipality
Manifest
(Home Appliance
Recycling ticket)
issue/ delivery
Monitoring of
implementation
08/12/2010 4InfoDev - International seminar on eWaste - international benchmark
3
Home Appliance Recycling LawEnacted 1998, fully enforceable 2001
Association for Electric Home
Appliances (AEHA) designated
legal entity
South Africa – Fact Sheet
► EXISTING LEGISLATION► Solid waste – both hazardous and non-hazardous – is regulated by several acts, especially:
► Consumer Protection Act, 2009
► National Environmental Management: Waste Act , 2009
► Environmental Conservation Act, 2008
► National Environment Management Act, 1998
► POLICY & ORGANIZATION► Environment legislation is still somewhat recent, especially regarding waste management. Forums are still being held by SA environmental
officials to explain the implementation of the Waste Act of 2009.
► Breakdown of the roles is not precisely defined between manufacturers, retailers, consumers and municipalities.
► One of the essential elements of the Waste Act is that manufacturers and importers must define an Industrial Waste Management Plan
(IWMP) before selling products in South Africa (in principle, this is equivalent to an EPR). Role of retailers is not defined. This obligation is
not coercive.
► No specific financial legislation was taken to enforce a specific financial scheme.
► MARKET STRUCTURE► The e-waste flow is estimated between 100,000 and 400,000 tons per year.
► The informal sector does not focus on e-waste as dismantling e-waste to get to the valuable materials is generally too complicated. Cables
and CRT copper coils are the main exceptions.
► Producers and importers gathered in the e-Waste Association of South Africa (eWASA) to implement their IWMP. Its operational and
financial design is still ongoing.
► In Cape Town, 5 companies work on e-waste recycling or refurbishing. Those are small-scale companies and are rather new. A bigger
company, Desco, exists in Johannesburg and has been operating for 15 years.
► ACCESS TO FEEDSTOCK► Various initiatives exist regarding collection and treatment. The small Capetownian companies mostly get their waste from businesses.
Bigger businesses issue tenders and sell their e-waste.
► Cooperation with the informal sector also takes place, with a small retribution of scavengers that bring back e-waste.
08/12/2010 5InfoDev - International seminar on eWaste - international benchmark
4
South Africa – SWOT Analysis
08/12/2010 6InfoDev - International seminar on eWaste - international benchmark
4
Weaknesses
► The existing legislation is not precise enough on the
financial scheme and the breakdown of
responsibilities between companies and public
bodies, which hinders the development of a large-
scale e-waste management scheme. Furthermore,
the law is not coercive, which may not foster
speeding up the process.
► There is no large-scale solution for the treatment of
e-waste in South Africa. The law exists but collection
is not organized, which make it difficult for small
businesses to reach a financial balance and for the
bigger recycler to develop at a national level.
► Small recycling companies and bigger producers
could not find a compromise yet between the
financial stress of the first and the environmental
policy requirements of the latter.
► The development of the IWMP is deemed too slow
by some of the non-eWASA actors.
► There are not enough downstream industrial actors
to facilitate the management of all by-products.
Strengths
► The financial and operational support from Swiss
EMPA enabled launching and developing actions
regarding e-waste management in Cape Town. The
pilot was launched under the collaboration of small
recyclers and bigger producers.
► The existing legislation makes the definition of an
IWMP compulsory for producers and importers.
Those actually develop an IWMP through a non-profit
company e-WASA.
► The Consumer Protection Act forces retailers to
accept take-back from consumers buying a new
product.
► Scavengers are more and more kept out of the
landfills, which make it easier to develop recycling
businesses. They may then focus on collection.
► Awareness on the need to control second hand e-
products import is raising.
► There are High Hazardous Waste Landfills that
provide a solution for the management of some non-
recyclable elements.
► EPR is already actually enforced for plastic bags and
tires.
South Africa – Insights
► The legal framework is encouraging, even if some elements might need to be
further defined (finance and collection). eWASA (equivalent of a European eco-
organism) is considering an Advanced Recycling Fee (ARF) – where advanced
means “in advance” – i.e. an equivalent of the French eco-tax, which may
constitute a sustainable source of funding.
► HP does not want a fund to be created but not used – if no solution exists
► EnviroSense considers that this ARF should be used also to develop capacity, i.e. to cover
CAPEX, not only OPEX.
► Second-hand e-products sent to SA (and to many other African countries)
constitute a serious issue as many of them are actually e-waste.
► The EPR has become systematic – with mandatory IWMPs – but this may lead to
a lack of consistency in governmental control and operation. It might be relevant
to define priority waste.
► Technological solutions are to be considered keeping in mind social issues.
“Screwdriver operations” might be relevant where unemployment is high and
qualification is low.
► All the governmental funding seem to go now to eWASA, which leaves nothing to
SMEs and NGOs.
08/12/2010 7InfoDev - International seminar on eWaste - international benchmark
4
India – Fact Sheet
► LEGISLATION► India’s E-Waste (Management & Handling) Rules 2010 were drafted in March 2010. A modified version taking into account stakeholder
comments was published online mid-October, and should be voted into law in the near future. The new law will be enforced starting January
1, 2012.
► The law is modeled after the EU WEEE Directive and incorporates the EPR principle (same scope of e-waste, although CFL are not
included).
► It nonetheless remains vague on collection and financing schemes for implementation.
► POLICY & ORGANIZATION► With the lack of e-waste legislation (although imminent), formal collection and treatment of e-waste is not widespread.
► However, a GTZ-ASEM project in Bangalore, which has been successful in formalizing informal actors and helping them work with
producers, is being used as a model for collection schemes throughout India,
► The collection scheme is currently being deployed in 4 other major Indian cities. Local governments are playing an active role in these
initiatives.
► MARKET STRUCTURE► MAIT, an industrial association in India, has estimated that 400,000 tons of e-waste is produced each year in the country.
► Collection and recycling in India is almost completely performed by the informal sector, with around 95% of total WEEE being captured by
the informal sector.
► Few formal e-waste recyclers exist, although this is changing. Most recyclers are pre-processors (dismantling and segregation of waste to
be recycled).
► As of today, only 1 integrated waste management facility (involved in the recuperation of precious metals), Attero Recyling, exists in India.
► Groups of informal recyclers like E-WarDD in Bangalore are now emerging and progressively contributing to the organization of the sector.
► The formalization of the informal sector remains a key issue in ensuring proper e-waste management once the national legislation comes
into force.
► ACCESS TO FEEDSTOCK► The formalization and organization of the informal sector is a crucial element in ensuring constant e-waste flows for collection and
treatment.
► One formal treatment actor with 5 facilities in India (Earth Sense) has stated that the viability of their business depends on this
transformation of the informal sector. Low collection rates have already been an issue for formal actors.
08/12/2010 8InfoDev - International seminar on eWaste - international benchmark
5
India – SWOT Analysis
08/12/2010 9InfoDev - International seminar on eWaste - international benchmark
5
Weaknesses
► The drafted legislation does not outline collection and
treatment schemes, nor does it provide incentives
(financial) for the involvement of the informal sector.
► Past environmental legislation has been poorly
enforced, and if reproduced for e-waste legislation,
the movement for proper e-waste management will
be threatened.
► There are very few formal e-waste treatment centers.
Technology and facilities already exist, but more
need to be developed to handle the potentially large
volumes of collected waste.
► Insufficient awareness-raising measures to date have
e-waste stakeholders and notably consumers in the
dark about the importance of the issue.
► Licensing guidelines for treatment facilities are not
yet streamlined by the Central Pollution Control
Board.
Strengths
► A considerably open dialogue among relevant
stakeholders (NGOs, government agencies,
producers, recyclers, collectors) and is helping the
government to move quickly to define India’s e-waste
strategy.
► Some voluntary take-back initiatives are already
underway (Nokia, for example).
► Awareness-raising campaigns in the community often
accompany formal recycling activities, although not
always on a large scale.
► National e-waste legislation can act as a potentially
strong driver for proper e-waste management.
► A successful initiative to integrate the informal sector
in Bangalore is serving as a model to be reproduced
in other Indian cities.
► Awareness-raising by public and private actors could
serve to increase consumer knowledge about e-
waste and increase collection rates.
India – Insights
► One of the most pressing issues for e-waste management success is the
integration of the informal sector. In India, members of the extensive informal
network have taken steps towards organizing their activities by creating
“informal actor associations” (ex. e-WaRDD). The presence of such associations
seems to have facilitated the relationship between formal and informal actors.
► A neutral agency (GTZ-ASEM) supporting the government’s priorities as well as
the informal sector has eased once hostile reactions on the part of various
actors.
► Stakeholders, although optimistic about the development of the e-waste
management market, fear that unenforced legislation will act as a major
hindrance.
► Financial incentives for informal collectors and individual consumers returning
their e-waste emerged as a recurring theme during stakeholder interviews. This
is a topic that has yet to be undertaken by the government, but is key to
participation.
08/12/2010 10InfoDev - International seminar on eWaste - international benchmark
5
India – WEEE Recycle
08/12/2010 11InfoDev - International seminar on eWaste - international benchmark
5
Costa Rica – Fact Sheet pending case study
► Sustainable Strategy to Minimize and Manage Electronic Component Wastes in
Costa Rica
► Result of a bilateral cooperation with Holland : partnership between the Central American
Association for Economics, Health and Environment ACEPESA and the Dutch association
WASTE Advisers on urban environment and development
► 1st Latin Americana and Caribbean country to approve a comprehensive
Producer Responsibility regulation for electronic products:
► Reglamento para la Gestión Integral de Residuos Electrónicos / Regulation for the
comprehensive Management of Electronic Waste
► May 2010
► Key principles:
► EPR,
► Registry for waste movements,
► Monitoring and verification obligations, thanks to :
► A National System for the comprehensive management of electronic waste, SINAGIRE
► An Executive Committee, CEGIRE (Comite Ejecutivo para la Gestion Integral de los
Residuos Electronicos), to oversee the operational implementation of SINAGIRE
08/12/2010 12InfoDev - International seminar on eWaste - international benchmark
6
Romania – in the early stages
► UE member since 2007
► Average salary per month: 350€
► Decreasing population
► But a fast-growing number of e-waste
► European WEEE transposed and applied since 2005
► 6 Eco-organisms have been created so far (including EcoTIC)
► Strong legislative framework aligned on EU requirements
► Involvement of all the stakeholders
► EPR and “Extended Distributor Responsibility”
► Regular education campaigns organized by eco-organisms and NGOs
► Significant local recycling utilities
► Significant obstacles lay ahead
► Population ill informed on how and why they should recycle
► Poor collection infrastructures and absence of market for recycled products
► Absence of regulation on informal sector (not taken into account in policy)
► Frequent changes of central and local government hinder long term solutions
08/12/2010 13InfoDev - International seminar on eWaste - international benchmark
7
Contact
Richard ABDELNOUR Ernst & Young / Climate Change and Sustainable Development Tel.: +33 1 46 93 72 51Fax.: +33 1 58 47 10 57Email: [email protected]/fr/sustainability
08/12/2010 14InfoDev - International seminar on eWaste - international benchmark