One of the important aspects of successfully managing e-waste in India is the ability to regulate the integration of the informal sector into the formal waste processing industry
We live in a world where the electronic product you buy today is considered obsolete in less than a year, replaced by another with more "advanced" features. For example, smartphone manufacturers release a new model with new features every year, and for many people, not replacing a fully functional smartphone with the latest model is “obsolete”.
By shifting the burden of electronic waste management to manufacturers, the EPR framework theoretically creates momentum for greener product designs. As manufacturers bear the processing costs, their designs will use materials that are less toxic and easy to recycle, thereby reducing the need for input materials because more input is reused.
Is there any change in the e-waste situation in India? We report our findings in an upcoming research article in the Journal of Industrial Ecology. First, according to the data provided by the Central Pollution Control Commission, the number of registered (regulated) waste treatment units has increased from 23 to about 150. Despite the increase, our estimates indicate that only about 5-15% of e-waste is transported through the formal sector.
Secondly, the situation of electronic product manufacturers is disappointing. Electronic product manufacturers are the main persons in charge of e-waste management in Mumbai under the EPR framework. Although most of the manufacturers we sampled provided information on how to store old equipment, when we actually contacted them as customers, we realized that not much was happening on the ground. Except for a few of the more than 20 manufacturers we studied, no one can clearly tell us how to actually store e-waste. On the consumer side, most institutional waste generators, such as educational institutions and industries that generate nearly 70% of e-waste, do not understand the rules and continue to sell their e-waste to the informal sector. Overall, the impact of e-waste rules is limited, which is disappointing.
How do we explain the failure of these rules to have a significant impact? In the absence of targets, and in a relatively loose regulatory environment, manufacturers have little incentive to ensure the collection of used products. They just claim that they have set up collection centers for those willing to store their products. Only consumers with high environmental awareness will look for the nearest recycling center. In contrast, people picking up rubbish will go to consumers' homes to pick up rubbish, and the most important thing is to pay consumers.
The e-waste rules were recently revised and now include collection targets and requirements for manufacturers to implement a deposit refund system (DRS). In DRS, the consumer is charged an advance payment when the product is purchased, and the deposit is refunded when the product is safely returned to the manufacturer. Although this tool has been successful elsewhere (in the context of the bottle), its success here will depend on the political will to implement the revised rules.
In a country like India, one of the important aspects of successfully managing e-waste is the regulation of the ability to integrate the large informal sector into the formal waste processing industry. Unfortunately, even the revised electronic waste disposal rules completely ignore the informal sector. Millions of garbage collectors come to collect garbage, and their livelihood depends on their ability to collect garbage and sell it to informal recyclers.
Governments and manufacturers must recognize the informal sector and find a mechanism to incorporate it into formal waste management. The results of some of the ongoing efforts will help us better understand how successful waste management includes all stakeholders.
0 Comments