Transcript Document

e-Waste Management
in Western Africa
Mathias Schluep, David Rochat
EMPA – Swiss Federal Laboratories for Materials Science and Technology
www.empa.ch
St-Gallen / Switzerland
SBC – Geneva, 16-17 May 2009
Introduction
■ A bit of History
■
The Problem
■
Assessment Process: Components 1 and 2
■
Assessment Methodology
■
Conclusions
■ Tentative Project Approach
I. A bit of history (1)
■ EMPA: Swiss Federal Laboratories for Materials Testing &
Research
■ independent, neutral institution for multidisciplinary research
into sustainable materials and systems engineering.
■ competence center for e-waste hosted by the technology and
society laboratory
■ technical monitoring & control centre for e-waste on behalf of
the Swiss PRO
■ Experienced in e-waste since the mid-90’s!
■ Managing the Swiss global e-waste programme “knowledge
partnerships in e-waste management”. Projects in India,
China, South Africa, Colombia, Peru
I. A bit of history (2)
■
The fight against digital divide results in massive
imports of used and new computers in developing
countries, especially in Africa
■ e-waste will become one of the major challenges in
the field of waste management in developing countries
■ Several initiatives are looking for solutions to prevent
the problem:
 Swiss e-Waste Programme (Seco/ Empa) in South Africa
 e-Waste Management in Africa (HP/ DSF/ Empa in Morocco,
Kenya, Senegal and South Africa.
 Including Recycling in a refurbishment centre (Unido/
Microsoft/ Empa) in Uganda
 and more….
II. The problem (1)
II. The problem (2)
II. The problem (3)
II. The problem (4)
II. The problem (5)
■
Before implementing a suitable e-waste management
system, it is necessary to assess the current situation
in a relatively short time
■ Questions: what to assess?
■ How does e-waste and 2nd hand EEE enter the country?
 Component 1
■ How is imported and domestic e-waste managed within the
country?
 Component 2
■ E-waste assessment methodology developed by Empa
for component 2
■ Methodology for component 1 to be developed (life
experience)
III. The assessment process (1)
■
defining the organizational setup of the assessment
study
Steering committee
- funding agency
- programme management
National e-waste strategy
group
Assessment team
- international expert
- local expert
- government
- industry
- academia
- civil society
- other interest groups
III. The assessment process (2)
■ Mission of the international expert (approx. 1 week)
■
■
Mobilisation of local stakeholders and constitution of the national ewaste strategy group
Technical training of the local expert (general knowledge on e-waste
and training for assessment)
Public announcement of the project
■
■
Collection of data & Field visits
Technical report
■
■
Conclusions of the assessment study are discussed
Design of a roadmap or implementing an e-waste management
system
■
■ Assessment study (approx. 12 months)
■ Workshop organised by the national strategy group
 The technical report and the roadmap are used for further actions
IV. Assessment methodology (2) – country
background
■
■
■
■
Understanding of the
country’s characteristics
(WDI)
Allows better interpretation
of the assessment’s results
Shows which alternatives
are possible for the
country’s e-waste problem
Allows comparisons with
other countries
People
 Total population
 Average annual population
growth rate
 Share of economically active
children
 Unemployment
 Youth unemployment
 Population bellow
international poverty line
(Population bellow 1$ per
day, population below 2$ per
day)
 Gini index
Economy
 Gross domestic product
(GDP)
 Purchasing power parity
(PPP) conversion factor
 GDP per capita
 GDP (PPP) per capita
 GDP composition by sector
(agriculture, industry,
services)
 Labour force by sector
(agriculture, industry,
services)
 Consumer price index
Environment
 Land area
 Emissions of organic water
pollutants
 Energy use
 GDP per unit of energy use
 Rural population
 Urban population
 Population in urban
agglomerations of more than
1 million
 Population in largest city
 Household size
States & Markets
 Micro, small, and mediumsize enterprises
 Tax revenue collected by
central government
 Telephones access
 Households with television
 Personal computers per 1000
people
 Internet users per 1000
people
 Information and
communications technology
expenditures (% of GDP)
IV. Assessment methodology (3) – country background
■
e-waste related policies and legislations
■ General environment legislations (air, water, solid waste,
hazardous waste, etc.)
■ Specific laws applying to e-waste, if any
■ Social legislations / policies (child labor, workers rights,
programs fostering employment, etc.)  informal sectors
■ Institutional framework
■ Organization of the legislative, executive and judiciary
systems in the context of waste management
■ Governmental bodies related to environmental management,
at local and national level (ministries, municipalities,
administrations, etc.)
IV. Assessment methodology (4) – Stakeholder analysis
■ Identify the actors involved and their role in e-waste
management by groups of stakeholders
■ Who are they? How are they organised?
■ What’s their role?
■ What impact do they have on e-waste management?
■ Stakeholders’ interest in e-waste management:
■ What are their motivations?
■ Possible coalitions and conflicts
 Set of qualitative and quantitative indicators
IV. Assessment methodology (5) – Stakeholder analysis
Component 1
Component 2
Product
Consume
Waste
Collect
Function
v
Importers
Manufacturers
Energy
Dispose
v
Consumer
Retailer & Trader
Recover
Material
Collection
2nd hand Market
Recyclers
Inciniration
Disposal
IV. Assessment methodology (6) – Stakeholder analysis
List of stakeholders involved in e-waste management (1)
Stakeholder Group
Description
Producers
(including
manufacturers &
importers)
Hardware brands and their associations (IT
association, consumer electronics, electronic
components, etc...), but also of "unidentified"
producers, when the equipments are non
branded.
Any boday selling the equipments directly to
the consumers, including retailers, 2nd hand
markets, organisations providing donated
equipments, etc.
Any body that consumes electric and
electronic equipments and discard them as
waste when they have reached the end of their
useful life. Consumers are usually separated
between households, private sector (large and
small & medium sized enterprises) and public
sector (government, education, NGOs)
Can be collection points (municipal points,
drop-offs, retail shops) or an organised pick-up
service (formal or informal)
Distributors
Consumers
Collectors
Type of information collected
(qualitative / quantitative)
Marketing strategy, CSR programs, special economic
schemes, etc.
Brands and market shares, growth, number of
employees, % import vs. domestic, number of SMEs,
etc.
Modes of distribution, business models, take-back
schemes, etc.
Number of retail shops, importance of 2nd hand
markets, % retail vs. 2nd hand market
Level of environmental awareness, waste management
habits, access to ITC technology, etc.
% private vs. corporate, % rural vs urban, life span of
equipments, penetration rate (# equipments/1000
cap.), e-waste generated / cap.
-
Refurbishers
Recyclers
comprises all the repair units, service centres,
etc, that extend the life time of equipments and
feed the second hand market
Any organization dismantling, separating
fractions, and recovering material from ewaste.
-
Organised or left to informal sector? Does the
consumer pay or is he paid for e-waste? Take-back
schemes?
E-waste collected / cap., employment generated,
income per ton e-waste, etc.
Organisation of the sector, formal or informal, etc.
% of repairable equipments, e-waste produced by a
repair shop, lifespan of refurbished equipments, etc.
Organisation of the sector, formal or informal,
disposal of hazardous fractions, etc.
Employment generated, resulting fractions, income
per ton, % formal vs. % informal.
Collectors
small & medium sized enterprises) and public
sector (government, education, NGOs)
Can be collection points (municipal points,
drop-offs, retail shops) or an organised pick-up
service (formal or informal)
-
Organised or left to informal sector? Does the
consumer pay or is he paid for e-waste? Take-back
schemes?
E-waste collected / cap., employment generated,
income per ton e-waste, etc.
Organisation of the sector, formal or informal, etc.
% of repairable equipments, e-waste produced by a
repair shop, lifespan of refurbished equipments, etc.
Organisation of the sector, formal or informal,
disposal of hazardous fractions, etc.
Employment generated, resulting fractions, income
per ton, % formal vs. % informal.
Which kind of industry, local or international, formal
or informal, etc.
% of raw material coming from e-waste, income per
ton, etc.
IV. Assessment methodology (7) – Stakeholder analysis
-
comprises all the repairinvolved
units, service centres, in- e-waste management (2)
Refurbishers
List
of stakeholders
etc, that extend the life time of equipments and Recyclers
Downstream
vendors
Final disposal
feed the second hand market
Any organization dismantling, separating
fractions, and recovering material from ewaste.
the industries buying the fractions (e.g. copper,
plastics, metals, gold, etc.) produced by the
recyclers. They can be national or
international, and vary from jewellers to
smelters, etc..
Organizations in charge of the final disposal of
waste through incineration or landfilling.
-
-
-
Most affected
communities
Other stakeholders
Communities that have – by close
neighbourship relations to collection points,
recycling centres or disposal areas – key
interests in the development of an e-waste
management system, such as the sector’s
economic possibilities or interests in limiting
soil, water and air pollution.
Institutions having the capacity to support the
implementation of an e-waste management
system within the country
-
Private or public, restrictions for landfill space,
controlled or wild landfills, infrastructure for
hazardous waste, etc.
Landfill capacity, hazardous waste capacity,
characterisation of solid waste stream, % formal vs. %
informal, etc.
Serious health risks to the community, quality of jobs,
impact on other socio-economic activities, etc.
Cases of negative health impacts, number of jobs
provided, share of low-skilled jobs provided, etc.
Active in solid waste management, working with informal
workers, international funding agencies, university
institutes, etc.
IV. Assessment methodology (8) – Mass flow
assessment
■
the stakeholder analysis allowed to
■ map the interconnections between the different actors
■ Gather indicators to quantify e-waste flows and stocks
■ Mass flow assessment is a way to describe and
quantify flows and stocks in a simplified system, it
obeys to 2 sets of equations
■ Mass balance equations: ΔS = ΣFin – ΣFout
■ Parametric equations: Fi+1 = f (ki+1, Fi, S)
■ F = flow
■ S = Stock
■ K is the transfer coefficient
IV. Assessment methodology (9) – impact overview
■ The objective is to highlight in a qualitative way where
the priorities are (environmental, social and economic)
Social
Impacts
 Impacts on
employees
 Impacts on local
communities
 Impacts on
society
Environmental
Impacts
 Emissions to air
and water
 Solid waste
production
 Impacts on
human health
 Pressure on
resources
 Pressure on
ecosystems
Economic
Impacts
 Positive
impacts
(income
generation)
 Negative
impacts
(induced costs)
IV. Assessment methodology (10) –
conclusions & recommendations
■ Participants from 6 African countries have participated
to the Durban conference in Oct. 2008
■ Formulation of “Durban Declaration”, recommending
to:
■
■
■
■
■
■
■
create a national work group including all relevant stakeholders;
integrate the regional and international network;
Component
conduct a baseline assessment and publicly share the data;
1&2
Propose a roadmap based on the findings of the national work group;
examine synergies with neighbouring countries;
develop feasibility studies;
implement and evaluate pilot activities.
IV. Assessment methodology (11) –
conclusions & recommendations
■ Formulation of specific recommendations for the
following fields:
■ Policy and legislation
■ Industry involvement and producer responsibility
■ Technology and Infrastructures
■ Monitoring and Data collection
■ Awareness and education
■ National and international exchange platforms
Conclusions
■ The methodology provides a good overview of the situation
■
■
 allows to draw a roadmap for implementation
The methodology was improved after being tested in various
countries
Some difficulties and necessary adjustments appeared:
■
■
■
■
Need for a proper training to the methodology of the local expert
mass flow analysis often relies on poor data and provides a rough
assessment
unregulated imports of e-waste and 2nd hand equipments remain difficult to
assess  need to dedicate time and resource (component 1!)
the standardized approach of the methodology sometimes leads to
confusion, as some common expressions are understood differently among
stakeholders and cultures
Tentative Project Approach (1/2)
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
Start with Nigeria (& Benin) for Comp 1 & 2
Realize synergies for Comp 3 (Öko Institut) –
especially with Comp 2 (national e-waste strategy
group, stakeholder assessment)
Generate life experience for Comp 1 and refine
approach for other countries
Include preleminary results from Comp 1 “European
harbours” (Öko Institut)
Execute Comp 1 in the other target countries
Tentative Project Approach (2/2)
■ Include the StEP network to improve quality of the
work and include the major international stakeholders
■ Major industry involvement (manufacturer, recyclers, …)
■ Broad participation of other UN organizations
■ Includes some relevant governmental bodies (US EPA, Seco,
GTZ, …)
■ Gives access to the scientific community active in research
related to e-waste.
THANK YOU FOR YOUR ATTENTION!
http://ewasteguide.info
[email protected]
[email protected]
Tentative Timeplan
2009
Comp 1
Comp 2
Comp 3
EU
Nigeria
Benin
Ghana
Côte d’Yvoire
Liberia
Nigeria
Benin
(Ghana)
Nigeria
(Ghana)
2010
2011