Since the 1980s, exporters of hazardous waste have targeted developing countries. Some of this waste is destined for dumping or disposal, while other waste is directed to resource recovery, recycling, or reuse. To protect developing countries from the dangers associated with hazardous waste, the international community adopted the Basel Convention on the Transboundary Movements of Hazardous Wastes and their Disposal, which first regulated and then banned the trade of hazardous waste. Although lauded as a landmark for global democracy and environmental justice, the ban has created a dilemma for developing countries with large recycling industries that rely on hazardous waste imports for their continued operation.

Environmental problems arising from the disposal of hazardous waste in developing countries did not gain international attention until the late 1980s, when several incidents of dumping were reported in African nations. One of the most serious cases occurred in 1987. Several thousand tons of highly toxic and radioactive waste, labeled “substances relating to the building trade,” were exported from Italy to Koko, Nigeria, and stored in drums in a backyard. Many of these drums were damaged and leaking; workers packing the drums into containers for retransport to Italy suffered severe chemical burns and partial paralysis, and land within a 500-meter radius of the dump site was declared unsafe. The Italian government eventually accepted the return of the waste, and the Nigerian government has since imposed the death penalty on the waste importers. In 1988, Guinea-Bissau was offered a US$600 million contract—four times its gross national product—to dispose of 15 million tons of toxic waste over five years. The contract was never concluded because of public concern within Guinea-Bissau, but many similar arrangements were reported in the 1980s in countries such as Namibia, Guinea, Sierra Leone, and Haiti. In some cases, dumping took place with the consent of the government in question, while in other cases it was part of an illegal operation. Since then, numerous incidents of dumping in developing countries have been reported throughout the world.

Logic of the Market

Although precise estimates of the worldwide generation of hazardous waste are difficult to obtain, the United Nations Environment Programme (UNEP) estimated in 1992 that approximately 400 million metric tons of hazardous waste were generated annually, with 80 percent of this waste coming from countries in the Organisation for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD). This figure is likely to be significantly higher today.

The disposal of hazardous waste has become a major issue for countries that are large waste-generators. Before the dangers associated with disposal were understood, most of this waste was deposited in landfills, causing serious problems for surrounding areas. A well-documented example is the “Valley of the Drums” in Kentucky, a seven-acre site with 17,000 drums of hazardous waste that has contaminated nearby soil and water. As a result of incidents like this, most developed countries introduced stringent environmental and safety measures for the disposal of hazardous waste. This trend led to increasingly limited and costly disposal options in developed countries.

Developing countries became targets for waste generators—mostly developed countries—since they provided disposal options for a mere fraction of the equivalent cost in the state of origin. According to a study by Katharina Kummer in International Management of Hazardous Wastes, disposal costs for hazardous waste in developing countries in 1988 ranged from US$2.50 to US$50 per ton, compared with costs of US$100 to US$2,000 per ton in OECD countries. The cost of incineration was even higher, at US$10,000 for one ton of hazardous waste in the United Kingdom. The lower disposal costs in developing countries generally stem from low or nonexistent environmental standards, less stringent laws, and an absence of public opposition due to a lack of information concerning the dangers involved. Given these considerations, the economic logic for exporting hazardous waste to developing countries is indisputable.

The Basel Convention

International concerns about the export of hazardous waste to developing countries led to the negotiation of the 1989 Basel Convention, which became binding in 1992. As of August 2001, 148 countries had ratified the Convention. Unfortunately, the United States, which generates approximately 60 percent of the world’s hazardous waste, has yet to ratify.

The Basel Convention itself does not ban the transboundary movements of hazardous waste, except to Antarctica. Rather, it seeks to control and limit the movement of waste based on a process of prior informed consent. Hazardous waste exports cannot proceed unless the pertinent authorities in the recipient and transit countries are notified in advance and provide written consent. Any movement of hazardous waste without a movement document or prior notification is illegal under the Basel Convention. This Convention requirement applies to both hazardous waste exported for final disposal and waste exported for recycling. The Convention also requires parties to prohibit the import of hazardous wastes when it is likely that the waste will not be managed in an environmentally sound manner.

The Basel Convention initially focused on protecting developing countries from hazardous waste dumping by developed countries. But by 1992, at the First Meeting of the Conference of the Parties (COP-1), concerns had already shifted to hazardous waste traded for recycling or recovery. Jim Puckett of the Basel Action Network estimates that from 1980 to 1988, only 36 percent of hazardous waste exports to developing countries were destined for recycling. In 1992 these exports had risen to 88 percent, and in 2001 they are likely to constitute over 95 percent of all waste exports.

The lack of a distinction between “waste” and “products” in the Convention and its vague criteria for “hazardous” allowed the continued export of hazardous waste to developing countries for recycling on the basis that the toxic substances exported were commodities rather than wastes. Some exports of waste are for “sham” recycling, but even when recycling takes place, this waste presents environmental and health risks to developing countries that lack the technology to handle the waste safely. For instance, Greenpeace and the Basel Action Network have not encountered a single hazardous waste recycling facility in a non-OECD country that does not cause serious pollution. In addition, Greenpeace estimates that more than 2.5 million tons of hazardous waste were exported to developing countries between 1989 and 1994. Dissatisfaction with the Basel Convention resulted in over 100 developing countries unilaterally imposing regional or national waste-import bans.