Managing Waste

"We should recycle, but it is not the first thing we should do, it is the
last. Redesign first, then reduce, reuse and finally recycle, if there is no
other alternative"

Bill McDonough, co-author, Cradle to Cradle

Globally, electronics are changing the way we live. And in the wake of this
revolution looms a disaster that is sure to damage the quality of our lives, our
planet and that of generations to come. The problem of electronic waste or
e-waste requires urgent action.

E-waste is now one of the fastest growing waste streams and contributing more
than 5% of the total solid waste worldwide. According to the Manufacturers
Association of Information and Technology, India, every year, around 3,80,000
tonnes of e-waste is generated from computers, TVs and mobile phones.

Current Situation in India

Besides domestic generation, the large scale, unethical and sometimes
illegal export of e-waste by the developed nations to developing countries such
as India is shifting the onus of management of wastes to countries and
communities that are ill-equipped to deal with such waste. So, trade in e-waste
is often camouflaged and is a thriving business in India conducted under the
pretext of obtaining reusable equipment or donations from the developed
nations.

Currently, most of the e-waste in India is handled by the informal or
backyard recyclers despite the existence of ten odd authorized e-waste recycling
plants in India. Estimates suggest that only around 3% of e-waste is actually
treated by authorized recyclers while the rest goes to the backyard recycling
yards which exist in major Indian cities like Delhi, Mumbai and Bengaluru.
Though referred to as informal backyard recycling, it is often well organized
and networked, and has established and stable partnerships at both endsone
level up and below on the supply chain. Though, backyard recycling is an
important value addition in e-waste recycling, material recovery and disposal
practices in backyard recycling are extremely polluting, thus causing
environmental risks and negative externalities while directly jeopardizing the
health of people in the sector and surrounding communities.

In addition, the e-waste not captured by this sector is mixed with other
municipal solid waste (MSW) and freely disposed. In short, there is no system
currently in India to ensure environmentally sound management of e-wastes. There
are also no specific laws dealing with this problem in India, and its import and
export. E-waste comes mixed with other categories of computers, including second
hand computers as donations, and there is no specific check to monitor its entry
into the country.

Extending Responsibility

Because of its complexity, very short lifecycles and toxic substances used
in its manufacturing, electronic waste needs a more integrated waste management
approach to avoid environmental problems associated with its disposal. A full
lifecycle approach to electronic waste which involves producers, governments,
state bodies, international organizations and consumer offers the best hope of
limiting e-waste environmental problems. There is no doubt that the major
solution to the environmental problems of electronic waste lies with the
original manufacturer of electronic goods.

Producers are the ones that are in the best position to effect the
environmental impacts of their products. Producers can prevent waste and
environmental problems at the source by changing the design of their products.
They can design products to use less material, more recyclable material and
fewer toxins. They can design products to be more durable, repairable,
upgradeable or reusable.

India is not the only country confronting the problem of e-waste. Many OECD
countries began encountering this problem a few years back. These countries
embraced the principle of extended producer responsibility (EPR) and its refined
version, individual producer responsibility (IPR) at the core of their strategy
to address the issue.

It is obvious that the management of such high-tech and sophisticated wastes
needs a specific and dedicated regulatory mechanism with clear responsibility
and liability clauses to tackle its specific characteristics. Extended producer
responsibility (EPR) conjoined with the precautionary principle provides a legal
framework which helps in strengthening the management of e-wastes by fixing a
clear liability on producers, while accelerating the mainstreaming of the
downstream management (recycling and disposal) and strengthening the upstream
production (product design). This would also enable a situation where the future
policies can be made more responsive and effective in addressing this issue.

Modalities of EPR

EPR is a policy principle which makes producers responsible for the entire
lifecycle of productsproduction, usage and finally disposal. EPR also means
adopting the same operating standards regardless of location.

This gives way to a further refinement of the EPR concept, through individual
producer responsibility (IPR). IPR could be essential for the new or future
products because the responsibility of each producer would relate to the
characteristics of their products and product systems. Market mechanisms offer
opportunities to complement and go beyond command and control laws that usually
favor the lowest common denominator. EPR/IPR uses market instruments to create
incentives to encourage companies to continuously develop smart and flexible
solutions to be ahead of the innovation curve like eliminating additional
harmful substances like PVC to improve recycling rates and reduce recycling
costs. Moreover, command and control legislation is always late in addressing
environmental concerns.

In such a case, individual producer responsibility (IPR) which is an emerging
refinement of the EPR offers much more space to innovate and reduce the end-of
the-life cost. The latter principle tends to be applied collectively by all
companies making specific products, so that they become jointly responsible for
their end-of-life costs.

To support the market mechanisms and encourage competition within the sector,
each company should pay for the end-of-life costs of its own products only. Each
brand owner should be individually responsible.

In conclusion, it is worth noting that the answer to the looming e-waste
crisis lies not in finding new downstream hiding places for this waste; it lies
not in exporting it to the desperately poor, but in moving upstream to prevent
the problem at its manufacturing source. The prevailing trash and buy cycle
comes with a monumental price that we are just beginning to pay.

Applying the principles of EPR formally through a policy in India provides
exciting opportunities because of certain aspects specific to Indiathe small
stock of domestic historical waste, big share of corporate users, lucrative
downstream businesses and the existence of business practices like trade-in and
voluntary take-back.

Challenges that exist in the Indian context are manageable. Most of these
challenges are symptoms of deviant behaviors in the market economywhether they
are illegal imports, polluting recycling, or gray markets which should be
corrected at any cost whether or not an EPR program is established.

While EPR is a market based principle and draws invaluable lessons from the
existing voluntary practices in the business world, the governments
intervention now is a much required springboard. In fact, some so-called
voluntary programs have been a response to pre-empt any proactive legislation
rather than a pure business initiative. Regardless of the form of intervention,
to provide any leverage, an intervention must be made to reward the good like
innovators and punish the bad like free-riders. While there are a few examples
where a producer initiates his own EPR program, these voluntary business
practices are exceptions rather than the rule.

EPR should become the Indian standard for dealing with electronic waste. To
make EPR an effective and strong enough policy tool to manage e-waste in India,
three fundamentals are vital:

• A formal recycling sector, which also mainstreams most of the existing
  informal recycling facilities with an effective end-to-end material recovery
  facility
• Transparent monitoring and reporting infrastructure with a product
  tracking mechanism
• Additional financial flows from the identifiable producers to the formal
  downstream operators

If we are able to do these three, it would create an effective EPR system and
a level playing field; and importantly create the ability to tackle the menace
of e-waste proliferation head-on in the real world!

Abhishek Pratap & Sanjiv Gopal

The authors are senior campaigner, Greenpeace, & campaign manager,
Greenpeace, respectively

maildqindia@cybermedia.co.in