World Bank / infoDev International seminar on e-

International case studies

Initial presentation November 30, 2010 The Basel Convention 1

► Basel Convention on the Control of Transboundary Movements of Hazardous 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 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 ’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

InfoDev - International seminar on eWaste - international benchmark 08/12/2010 1 USA – A legislative patchwork 2

► No federal law  a variety of state laws ► Recyclers and other stakeholders in the system have to deal with numerous sets of regulatory requirements and standards ► Consumers are not homogenously informed and have difficulty knowing their obligations ► Exchanges between states cannot be regulated

InfoDev - International seminar on eWaste - international benchmark 08/12/2010 2 USA – comparative analysis of three states 2

Maine Minnesota Oregon

Law (signed in 2004, effective in Law (May 2007, Aug 2007) Law (2007, 2009) states that 2006) requires municipalities to engages producers to register with manufacturers must register to send waste and the state, pay a registration fee participate in programs monitors to consolidation and have to set up an e-waste and provide collection sites for e- centers that are fully-funded by recycling program waste manufacturers The manufacturer’s Manufacturers encouraged to Manufacturers may choose to responsibility starts at the create their own takeback program meet the requirements consolidation points (lower resgistration fee) independently or by joining the No recycling targets Producers are required to meet “state contractor plan” specific recycling targets with Minimum mandatory collection possibility of credits for exceeding goal targets Return share based model (pay Market share based model (pay Return Share with partial market according to volumes returned) according to recycling targets set share (pay volumes returned using Includes orphan waste on previous year market share) a fee set according to market Does not include orphan waste share) Includes orphan waste Producers pay for transport, Manufacturers pay for collection, Manufacturers in the state consolidator handling transportation, and recycling contractor plan will pay a recycling Municipality pays collection fee

InfoDev - International seminar on eWaste - international benchmark 08/12/2010 3 Japan 3

Home Appliance Recycling Law Enacted 1998, fully enforceable 2001

Discharge Person discharging 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. Manifest ex) air-conditioner 3,500JPY, television 2,700JPY, 4,600PY, (

2,400JPY Recycling ticket)

Transportation Collection Collection and

Retailer Municipality Obligation to collect issue/ delivery 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

Designated collection site

Association for Electric Home Manufacturer/ Importerand Designated corporation Appliances (AEHA) designated Obligation to collect legal entity

Recycling Manufacturers and Importers have a responsibility to collect

specified appliances formerly manufactured or imported by them. Municipality Designated corporation collect appliances in the following cases. a) absence of a party responsible for collection and recycling Monitoring of due to bankruptcy of manufacturer, etc. implementation b) Consignment by medium and small businesses Obligation of recycling Manufacturer, importerand designated corporation have a responsibility to recycle more than recycling rate standards.

InfoDev - International seminar on eWaste - international benchmark 08/12/2010 4 South Africa – Fact Sheet 4

► 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.

InfoDev - International seminar on eWaste - international benchmark 08/12/2010 5 South Africa – SWOT Analysis 4

Strengths Weaknesses

► The financial and operational support from Swiss EMPA enabled launching and developing actions ► The existing legislation is not precise enough on the regarding e-waste management in Cape Town. The financial scheme and the breakdown of pilot was launched under the collaboration of small responsibilities between companies and public recyclers and bigger producers. bodies, which hinders the development of a large- scale e-waste management scheme. Furthermore, ► The existing legislation makes the definition of an the law is not coercive, which may not foster IWMP compulsory for producers and importers. speeding up the process. Those actually develop an IWMP through a non-profit company e-WASA. ► There is no large-scale solution for the treatment of e-waste in South Africa. The law exists but collection ► The Consumer Protection Act forces retailers to is not organized, which make it difficult for small accept take-back from consumers buying a new businesses to reach a financial balance and for the product. bigger recycler to develop at a national level. ► Scavengers are more and more kept out of the ► Small recycling companies and bigger producers landfills, which make it easier to develop recycling could not find a compromise yet between the businesses. They may then focus on collection. financial stress of the first and the environmental policy requirements of the latter. ► Awareness on the need to control second hand e- products import is raising. ► The development of the IWMP is deemed too slow ► There are High Hazardous Waste Landfills that by some of the non-eWASA actors. provide a solution for the management of some non- ► There are not enough downstream industrial actors recyclable elements. to facilitate the management of all by-products. ► EPR is already actually enforced for bags and tires.

InfoDev - International seminar on eWaste - international benchmark 08/12/2010 6 South Africa – Insights 4

► 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.

InfoDev - International seminar on eWaste - international benchmark 08/12/2010 7 India – Fact Sheet 5

► 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.

InfoDev - International seminar on eWaste - international benchmark 08/12/2010 8 India – SWOT Analysis 5

Strengths Weaknesses

► A considerably open dialogue among relevant stakeholders (NGOs, government agencies, ► The drafted legislation does not outline collection and producers, recyclers, collectors) and is helping the treatment schemes, nor does it provide incentives government to move quickly to define India’s e-waste (financial) for the involvement of the informal sector. strategy. ► Past environmental legislation has been poorly ► Some voluntary take-back initiatives are already enforced, and if reproduced for e-waste legislation, underway (Nokia, for example). the movement for proper e-waste management will be threatened. ► Awareness-raising campaigns in the community often accompany formal recycling activities, although not ► There are very few formal e-waste treatment centers. always on a large scale. Technology and facilities already exist, but more need to be developed to handle the potentially large ► National e-waste legislation can act as a potentially volumes of collected waste. strong driver for proper e-waste management. ► Insufficient awareness-raising measures to date have ► A successful initiative to integrate the informal sector e-waste stakeholders and notably consumers in the in Bangalore is serving as a model to be reproduced dark about the importance of the issue. in other Indian cities. ► Licensing guidelines for treatment facilities are not ► Awareness-raising by public and private actors could yet streamlined by the Central Control serve to increase consumer knowledge about e- Board. waste and increase collection rates.

InfoDev - International seminar on eWaste - international benchmark 08/12/2010 9 India – Insights 5

► 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.

InfoDev - International seminar on eWaste - international benchmark 08/12/2010 10 India – WEEE Recycle 5

InfoDev - International seminar on eWaste - international benchmark 08/12/2010 11 Costa Rica – Fact Sheet pending case study 6

► 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 ► 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

InfoDev - International seminar on eWaste - international benchmark 08/12/2010 12 Romania – in the early stages 7

► 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

InfoDev - International seminar on eWaste - international benchmark 08/12/2010 13 Contact

Richard ABDELNOUR Ernst & Young / Climate Change and Sustainable Development Tel.: +33 1 46 93 72 51 Fax.: +33 1 58 47 10 57 Email: [email protected] www.ey.com/fr/sustainability

InfoDev - International seminar on eWaste - international benchmark 08/12/2010 14