Human beings have progressed over time and the process of using resources has also changed along with it. After each use, some residues are created which have no value and are destined for disposal. Such residues are known as wastes. At first, among the primitive deer, people managed their waste on an individual level, but over time, the problem of waste management began to take on global interests. Similarly, the issue of electronic waste or e-waste is getting serious consideration nowadays, especially as the rate of production of these wastes is increasing at an alarming level due to technological inventions.
Introduction
The myth that technological development contributes to the industrial and economic development of a nation may be true. But at the same time, everyone forgets that it also irreversibly damages the environment and human life.
Everything in this world has its use, but after its use, it becomes more and more useless or unusable. In such a situation, such useless things become waste. But these worthless wastes are not without meaning. If these wastes are thought of in an innovative way, they can become valuable resources that can support even the largest of the major economies, and at the same time, if not handled in the right way, they can become the bane of all mankind.2 wastes also have a huge ecological impact Waste can degrade the natural ecosystem and thereby cause great harm to the health of all living creatures, including humans. Waste can lead to all kinds of pollution, such as air pollution, water pollution, etc.
Therefore, it is necessary to manage waste efficiently and environmentally. gadgets turn into e-waste or e-waste after use or after losing their usefulness. This e-waste also has a huge environmental impact, and as technological innovation crosses all the boundaries of civilizations, it also introduces a whole range of new wastes that, if not handled properly, can have serious consequences.
Electronic waste (e-waste) is a potential and vulnerable source of environmental pollution. Rapidly changing technology, changing lifestyles, dependence on high-speed communications and computing systems further contribute to environmental degradation with increasing numbers of computers, computer peripherals, mobile phones and televisions. "Stability" and the desire for "sophisticated devices" for a comfortable life are the reasons for faster changes in the information technology and electronic industry, making electronic products and devices obsolete in a short time. Research and innovation on a continuous basis promotes the replacement of existing computers, computer components, models, devices in a short period of time with the latest versions, which leads to the accumulation of "electronic" waste.
Innovation in the field of information technology has brought faster changes in the use of computers and their components. A "personal computer" today is not a symbol of social status, but is a necessary part of life regardless of economic conditions and social background. The use of computers in education, employment, trade, commerce, industry, communications, transport (land, sea, rail and air), space and satellite research and electronic media has increased. It goes without saying that there is no sector or organization that remains without the use of computers. The computer became inseparable from a person and his personal belongings.
The increase in demand for computers stimulated the production of computers of various models in large numbers. There is constant research to update computer technology and components. Computer updates are not the task of the day. It is a never-ending process that results in the retirement of outdated computers and their components that cannot meet the speed and needs of the day. Old computers and components become obsolete. They create and generate “e-waste”. This problem is not only for India but for every developed and developing country. Most countries do not have enough systems or capabilities to deal with this problem.
Although the Basel Convention prohibits the export or import of hazardous waste, market players have adopted various indirect methods, such as selling used goods, sent in the process of donation or donation to charities or other trusts, as well as misdescriptions and mislabelling.
The import of computer scrap from developed countries thus contributes to the local problem of increased computer waste. Internal and external technological events and the environment are putting pressure on the units involved in the disposal of "e-waste", a strategic plan and policy must be formulated to mitigate environmental depletion and raise awareness of the adverse impact of "e-waste". on the environment.
International law and waste management
International law and waste management in general, waste regulation deals with the control of waste management in a domestic context. International environmental law plays a significant role in three main areas.
First, the Organization for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD) has played an important role in harmonizing international definitions of waste, which in turn is reflected in the European List of Waste.
Second, international law has had a major impact on preventing dumping of waste at sea. The United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea (UNCLOS) establishes a general obligation to prevent marine pollution, which includes dumping (Art. 19-4). Specifically, the 1972 London Convention for the Prevention of Marine Pollution by Dumping of Wastes and Other Substances provides a global framework for controlling the disposal of wastes or other substances at sea, with various regional agreements such as Oslo 1992. The Paris (OSPAR) Convention for the Protection of the Marine Environment of the North-East Atlantic – relating to specific geographical areas.
Third, as waste regulation has become more stringent in some countries, disposal costs have risen and it has become common practice to export hazardous waste to developing countries where it can be disposed of at lower costs – primarily due to lower environmental standards. The management of the movement of hazardous waste across national borders is regulated at the international level by the Basel Convention on the Control of the Movement of Hazardous Waste across National Borders and its Disposal. The Convention entered into force in May 1992 and was ratified by the United Kingdom on 7 February 1994.
The Convention establishes a system whereby waste exporters must obtain approval from regulatory authorities in the importing country before shipping waste. This consent must contain a written confirmation that the waste importer will handle the waste in an environmentally friendly manner. In cases where the shipment of waste cannot be carried out - for example, in circumstances where it would not be handled in an "environmentally friendly manner" - the waste exporter is obliged to take over the waste within ninety days.
Although the Basel Convention has attempted to legislate the position in relation to the export of hazardous waste to developing countries, it has been argued that the Convention legitimizes the trade in hazardous waste, which can be abused through vague subjective standards such as managing the transfer in an "environmentally friendly manner" ” and lack of effective monitoring and control. As a result, there is a risk that waste is still being imported into developing countries illegally or without proper consideration of the risks associated with its use.
The EU regulation on the supervision and control of waste transport within, into and out of the Community brings the Basel Convention into force throughout the EU.
The regulation subjects the movement of all waste (not just that which is hazardous) between countries to a system of "prior informed consent" by regulatory agencies in the two countries concerned. The Regulation has direct effect, but the UK subsequently ratified the Basel Convention in 1994 and its requirements are now implemented under the Transboundary Shipments of Waste Regulations 2007 and the UK Waste Shipment Plan.
This plan sets out the policy behind the regulations. It is advisory and non-binding (although it takes effect through the Regulation.) The type of notification that needs to be made varies depending on the nature of the waste being transported, whether the waste is intended for recovery or disposal, and whether the waste is being transported between two Member States or outside the EU. The waste that is transported for disposal is relatively simple and must meet the requirements of the Basel Convention. In the UK, the Waste Shipment Plan prohibits all exports of waste for disposal and prohibits most imports for disposal, except in exceptional cases where wider environmental considerations apply. Waste transported for recovery is controlled by a more complex system.
The EU regulation adopts two processes:
- A prior written notification and consent process used for hazardous and semi-hazardous waste intended for recovery.
- An information-based procedure where shipments are accompanied by certain information that is used for non-hazardous waste intended for recovery.
The procedure is linked to two lists Waste:
The "green list" waste listed in Annex III of the Regulation is subject to an information-based procedure. Shipments of "green list" waste must be accompanied by a contract between the parties involved in the shipment, basic information such as the description of the waste, the quantity shipped, the name and address of the person to whom the waste is transferred, and a description of the applicable recovery operation.
In addition, such shipments are permitted if the waste is managed in an environmentally friendly way throughout its transport and if it is managed using techniques that are essentially equivalent to those used in the EU - i.e. according to the Framework Directive on wastes. Finally, the person sending the waste and the recipient must keep a copy of the completed documentation for three years.
Waste on the "Amber List" can be found in Annex IV of the Regulation. The shipment of "amber" waste must be subject to the notification procedures specified in the Basel Convention. As part of the notification procedure, the notifier (waste shipper) must submit a notification to the "home" regulatory authority, which will then send it to the regulatory authorities at the destination and in all transit countries. Regulators have thirty days to express their approval (with or without conditions) or to raise objections. If the transport cannot be completed, the notifier must take the waste back.
Legislation on defects in cross-border transport
The importance of effective cross-border legislation increases as the cost of domestic waste disposal increases; the availability of cheaper disposal methods abroad becomes attractive – especially if credit can be obtained for recycling and recovery under domestic schemes. In 2005 and 2006, it was found that more than 50 percent of shipments did not comply with the requirements of regulations on transboundary shipments of waste.
Most of the violations involved mixtures of wastes taken from municipal waste streams. Inspections showed that they were exported as "green list" or "notifiable" wastes, while the actual legal status was that they should have been notified to the Environment Agency. Other illegal shipments were exported to countries that did not wish to receive them. One of the key changes in the amended regulation is therefore the introduction of stricter controls on the movement of "green list" waste. For the first time, it concerns the movement of waste outside the EU. In addition, there is now an obligation to ensure "green" management of all waste during transport and during its recovery and disposal.
Other defects related to the importation of hazardous waste, as shown by the saga of the importation of the so-called US Ghost Ships. The US Maritime Administration (MARAD) owned old warships that needed to be dismantled. The ships were unsafe due to small amounts of hazardous waste such as PCBs and asbestos inside the structures. MARAD approached a British company to carry out work on thirteen ships at the dock in Hartlepool. MARAD applied for a Transboundary Transport Consent (TFS) in June 2003.
Under the Regulations, the Environment Agency was only allowed thirty days within which consent had to be granted or deemed to have been granted. Once TFS approval was granted, there was no way to revoke it. The Environment Agency issued its approval in July 2003. It subsequently emerged that there were a number of problems with the proposed restoration processes to be carried out on the ships.
The planning permission for the site was invalid and the existing waste management permit had to be amended to include the proposed uses. As a result, American ships could not be dismantled because the necessary permits did not exist. However, the ships have already left for the UK. The agency's attempt to modify a waste management permit was violated at a nearby conservation site. Friends of the Earth canceled the modification at the High Court.
The ghost ship saga has shown that, as in other areas of environmental regulation, many overlapping powers and responsibilities need to be clearly coordinated. The importation of hazardous waste requires a number of related consents or permits in addition to the TFS approval requirement. The thirty-day consent period is too short to allow proper consideration of the overall implications of the importation and there is no formal process of consultation with statutory bodies or the public.
European law and waste management policy
European waste policy is largely based on broad objectives centered around the 'waste hierarchy'. However, one of the weaknesses of the ubiquitous EU Environmental Action Programs (EAPs) has been the vagueness of specific methods of enforcing the waste management hierarchy. The sixth EAP, Environment 2010: Our Future, Our Choice, identified waste and resources as one of four priority areas for action. The program generally follows a waste hierarchy in setting targets for prevention, recycling and reuse.
Various waste streams are identified for specific measures and the idea of an integrated product policy in waste reduction is emphasized. The general objectives set out in the sixth EPA are complemented by a more specific thematic waste prevention and recycling strategy, which sets out plans to identify priority wastes, measures to ensure their recycling and collection and tools to support the creation of markets for recycled materials. With the latest framework directive (2008/98/EC), the hierarchy of waste management now has a firmer statutory basis.
Waste hierarchy
The cornerstone of all waste legislation is to meet, as far as possible, the waste hierarchy, with policies and laws designed to support measures as high up the hierarchy as possible. The hierarchy is as follows.
Prevention
The primary goal is to prevent waste at source through proper product and process design. This is linked to such initiatives as the development of an integrated product policy, clean technologies, eco-labels and product life cycle analysis.
Recycling and reuse
The second objective is the recycling or re-use of the waste produced, with particular emphasis on the use of waste as a source of energy, for example through combined heat and power systems linked to waste incinerators. An obvious example of the EU's role in this area is its development of producer responsibility obligations, which apply to such waste streams as packaging waste, end-of-life vehicles, batteries and electrical and electronic waste.
Proper management and disposal
A third objective is for waste to be disposed of safely, preferably by incineration, with landfills used only as a last resort.
European law on waste management is based on directives that lay down general principles such as the creation of a licensing and control system to ensure that waste management does not harm human health and the environment. These general principles can be found in the broad framework directive on waste (2008/98/EC). These general principles are complicated by more detailed legislation. These cover two main areas.
Firstly, there are a number of important directives that deal with waste management methods, including the Landfill (99/31/EC) and Industrial Emissions (Integrated Pollution Prevention) Directives (2010/75/EU). This directive sets standards for waste management – such as dioxin emissions from incinerators and the type of landfill line – and prohibits the landfilling of certain products – such as liquid waste and tyres.
Secondly, there is a group of waste directives that deal more with the management of specific types of waste. Some of these directives deal with particularly hazardous wastes, while others seek to reduce the amount of waste generated in certain waste streams.
European waste list
While the Framework Directive generally sets waste targets and controls, there are more specific obligations regarding waste categorization. Article 7 of the framework directive requires the drawing up of a list of wastes. It was originally found in the European Waste Catalog, which classified waste into one of twenty main groups.The waste catalog was subsequently supplemented with the European waste list.
Waste Management Directive
In addition to the general principles established by the framework directive, the second group of European directives deals with waste management methods. For example, the Industrial Emissions (Integrated Pollution Prevention and Control) Directive regulates waste management and promotes waste minimization as part of many major industrial facilities, including landfills and incinerators.
This directive overlaps with two other important waste management directives on landfill and waste incineration (the waste incineration directive will be repealed from January 2014). The latter directives introduce specific standards for waste management (e.g. emission and performance standards), while the former directive applies a general framework of standards and targets to waste treatment facilities as a whole. The extent of these overlaps has been improved by the inclusion of the main substantive provisions in the Environmental Permitting (England and Wales) Regulations 2010.
Directive on Waste Incineration
The Waste Incineration Directive 2000/76/EC (repealed by the Industrial Emissions Directive in January 2014) replaced and extended the two previous directives on municipal and hazardous waste incineration. The directive has a general application both to normal incinerators and to those installations in which the incineration of waste is used primarily as a fuel to produce energy or other products (Article 1). This would include waste for power plants and things like cement kilns. All incinerators must be subject to a permit, and the permit or permit must have conditions stating the type and amount of hazardous and non-hazardous waste that can be processed, the capacity of the incinerator or co-incineration plant, and sampling and measurement. procedures to be used (Article 4). The Directive sets the minimum time and temperature for incineration of waste to guarantee complete combustion of waste (Article 5) and emission limit values (ELV) are set for atmospheric emissions. of certain substances such as heavy metals, dioxins and furans and greenhouse gases (appendices II and V).
Landfill Directive
The main objective of the landfill directive is the harmonization of waste management standards in all member states, with particular emphasis on standards for the design, operation and aftercare of landfills. It is also intended to act as the first major stimulus for waste recovery and recycling. The main part of the directive sets targets for reducing the amount of biodegradable municipal waste deposited in landfills and thereby reducing the amount of methane produced. Art. 5 of the Directive therefore calls for the amount of biodegradable municipal waste that is landfilled to be reduced in three stages: by 25 percent, 50 percent, and 65 percent of the 1995 level by 2006, 2009, and 2016, respectively. Even these deadlines can be extended in cases where, as in the UK, more than 80 percent of biodegradable municipal waste was landfilled in 1995 (ie the deadlines are 2010, 2013 and 2020).
In addition to these waste reduction objectives, Directive:
- It defines different categories of waste (municipal waste, hazardous waste and inert waste landfills) (Articles 2 and 4).
- It prohibits the joint disposal of hazardous, non-hazardous and inert wastes in the same landfill and completely prohibits the landfilling of certain hazardous wastes, liquid wastes and tires (Articles 5 and 6).
- It introduces waste acceptance criteria at all sites to reduce risk and requires all waste to be pre-treated before disposal, which includes sorting and compacting waste (Article 6).
- It requires the operator to provide adequate funding for maintenance and aftercare (Article 10).
- It sets general standards for all landfills, including such things as leachate collection and control and for gas and leachate produced at landfills (Annex I). In particular, all landfill gases must either be used to generate energy or incinerated; only a minority of current sites do this.
The importance of the Landfill Directive can be assessed against the background of disagreements between Member States, which are delaying the adoption of the Directive by approximately nine years. The Directive has already had a major impact on current policy and practice and the introduction of landfill quotas, a ban on joint disposal and waste acceptance criteria should mark a move away from the UK's historic reliance on landfill.
Basel Convention
The Basel Convention was opened for signature on 22 March 1989 and entered into force on 5 May 1992. This convention consists of 186 states and the European Union is a member party to the Basel Convention. Haiti and the United States are the two countries that have signed and concluded but not ratified the convention. The Basel Convention is also known as the Basel Convention on the Control of Transboundary Movements of Hazardous Wastes and their Disposal, which is an international treaty specifically designed to limit and control the movement of hazardous waste from developed to less developed countries (LCDs).149 , the Basel Convention does not address radioactive waste . The primary objective of the Basel Convention is to minimize the generation of toxic wastes and to ensure their environmentally sound management up to the source, as well as to assist LDS in managing the hazardous and other wastes they produce in an environmentally sound manner.
This convention is a United Nations treaty signed in 1989 in Basel, Switzerland and entered into force in 1992. The main objective of the convention is to limit the transboundary movement of hazardous wastes and to limit the movement of these wastes especially from developed countries to least developed countries. Countries, least developed countries. One of its goals is also to reduce the quantitative toxicity of hazardous waste in order to eliminate the risks of ecological degradation. It also provides protection to the least developed countries against the irregular movement of hazardous waste into their territory and seeks to empower them technologically so that they are able to manage waste in an environmentally friendly manner. However, this particular convention does not deal with radioactive waste.
The Convention defines the parameters and characteristics of hazardous waste based on Annex I and Annex II. If any waste is listed in Annex I or has any of the characteristics listed in Annex III, such wastes shall fall within the scope of this Convention. In short, to become hazardous, a waste must be listed and have certain characteristics such as toxic, flammable, explosive or corrosive.
The Convention defines the parameters and characteristics of hazardous wastes by virtue of Annex I and Annex ii. If any waste falls under the list in Annex I or possess any characteristics of those which are provided in Annex iii then such wastes will come under the scope of this convention. In short, a waste to become hazardous must be both listed as well as must have certain characteristics like that of being toxic, flammable, explosive or corrosive. Moreover, if any law of the exporting or importing countries or the countries in transit defines any waste as hazardous then that waste may fall within the purview of this convention. The term disposal is also defined under this convention and Annex which provides the methods that are held as disposal or recycling under this convention.
The Convention besides laying down conditions upon import and export of cross border movement of wastes also provides for notices, consent and tracking for cross border movement of wastes. It provides for a general prohibition on cross border movement of wastes with the exception that if any party or non party is under any other treaty has the capacity to transfer wastes.
Article 4 prohibits import of wastes from any party of the convention. It encourages the member nations to reduce waste generations by keeping it close to the source of its generation so that internal pressure may force to recycle such wastes to reduce pollution. It however, speaks about illegal trafficking of hazardous wastes as illegal but it lacks any enforcement action.
Article 12 makes the parties liable to adopt protocols for defining the liabilities for damage caused due to movement of hazardous wastes.
The Convention discourage exports of hazardous and other wastes, which should only be allowed if the exporting state does not have the capacity, facilities or suitable sites to dispose them off in an environmentally sound manner, or if the wastes are required as a raw material for recycling or recovery in the importing state , or in accordance with other criteria decided by the parties. Moreover, parties may not transfer to importing or transit states their obligation under the convention to carry out environmentally sound management, and can impose additional requirements consistent with the convention to better protect human health and the environment.
The transport and disposal of hazardous and other wastes may only be carried out by authorised persons, and transboundary movements must conform to generally accepted and recognised international rules and standards of packaging, labelling and transport, and take account of relevant internationally recognised practices, and be accompanied by a movement document until disposal.
The Convention sets forth details for the international regulation of transboundary movement of hazardous and other waste between parties based upon a system of ‘prior informed consent’. The exporting state, generator or exporter must notify the states concerned of any proposed transboundary movement, including the information specified in Annex v (A). The importing state responds by giving its consent with or without conditions, denying permission, or requiring additional information and no transboundary movement may commence until the exporting state must not allow transboundary movement to commence until it has the written consent of the transit state.
The Convention allows for general notification and consent to cover a twelve-month period where wastes having the same characteristics are shipped regularly to the same disposer via the same exit office of the exporting state, entry office of the importing state and custom office of the transit state. Importing state and transit States, that are parties, may require the wastes to be covered by insurance or other guarantee. When a Transboundary Movement cannot be completed in accordance with the terms of the contract, the exporting state must take back the wastes if alternative arrangements cannot be made for their disposal in an environmentally sound manner.
Parties can enter into bilateral, multilateral or regional agreements or arrangements regarding transboundary movement of wastes provided that they do not derogate from the requirements of the convention and provided they stipulate provisions that are no less environmentally sound than the convention. The Convention does not affect transboundary movement taking place entirely among the parties to such agreements, which must be notified to the secretariat, provided that they are compatible with the requirements of the convention. The parties are subject to detailed reporting requirements, and the Convention provided for consultations on liability to be held as soon as possible. The Convention is kept under review by a Conference of the Parties and a secretariat.
At the fifth Conference of the Parties, held in December 1999, the Parties adopted a Protocol on Liability and Compensation. Compared to many other environmental agreements, the Convention sets out relatively detailed tasks for the secretariat, including gathering and sharing information, and examination of notifications and other aspects of transboundary movement. Until the first Conference of the Parties, which was held in November 1902, UNEP carried out the secretariat functions on an interim basis. The second Conference of the Parties, held in March 1994, approved an immediate ban on the export from OECD countries to non-OECD countries of hazardous waste intended for final disposal and also agreed to ban the export of wastes intended for recovery and recycling by 31 December 1997.
The ‘Basel Ban’, as it became known, was not formally incorporated into the Convention by the second Conference of the Parties, and disputes arose as to whether it was legally binding on the Parties. To resolve this dispute, it was proposed at the third Conference of the Parties, September 1995, that the Basel Ban be formally incorporated into the Basel Convention as an amendment. The Basel Ban Amendment adopted by the third Conference of the Parties does not refer to OECD and non-OECD countries, but rather bans hazardous waste exports for final disposal and recycling from Annex VII parties (member of the EU, OECD and Liechtenstein) to non-Annex VII parties.
The ambiguous wording of Article 17.5 of the Basel Convention led to three opposing views on the number of ratifications required in order for the Ban Amendment to come into force. The depository took the view that Article 17.5 requires two-thirds of current members (169 in 2006) to ratify the Amendment; some non- governmental organisations espoused the view that the Amendment requires two-third of the total number of states parties at the time of the Amendment’s adoption in 1995; other argued that the Amendment requires two-thirds of those states parties present and voting in 1995.
At the Ninth Conference of the Parties, consensus could not be reached to adopt a new interpretation of Article 17.5 that would adopt a "fixed time" approach to allow the amendment to enter into force. In 2007, the UN depositary settled on a "current time" approach, which requires three-quarters of all States Parties. The Basel ban has not yet entered into force, as only sixty-eight parties have so far ratified the amendment.
Basel Amendment to the ban
After the Basel Convention was adopted, several least developed countries claimed that they had failed to limit the movement of hazardous wastes in their territories, rather many developed countries justified such movements in the name of recycling. It only introduced the concept of prior informed consent, but it rarely had any impact. As a result, several regional treaties such as the Bamako Convention have emerged. So some of the least developed countries came together and initiated this change. This ban convention has not yet entered into force due to strong opposition from many developed countries and industries, especially OECD countries, as this treaty established an absolute ban on the transboundary movement of hazardous wastes for some of the developed countries.
Regulation of trade in electronic waste
The convention also restricts the movement of hazardous e-waste that contains elements such as lead, mercury, arsenic, hexavalent chromium and similar other toxic substances with the aim of protecting and protecting the environment. If any e-waste contains any of the above elements, it will automatically fall under the scope of the Basel Convention.
Bamako Convention
The Koko case and the failure of the Basel Convention marked the beginning of this particular convention. It was found that apart from the validity of the Basel Convention, developed countries were able to export hazardous waste to LDCs. This convention was initiated as an improvement on the Basel Convention and even included radioactive wastes that were excluded from the Basel Convention.
This convention is also based on the same format as the Basel Convention, but is an improvement to the extent that it provides strict provisions to limit the movement of wastes across national borders and has also included radioactive wastes in its scope.
The Convention on the Ban on Imports into Africa and on the Control of the Transboundary Movement and Management of Hazardous Wastes in Africa (1991 Bamako Convention) was adopted by African governments following negotiations under the auspices of the Organization of African Unity. It establishes a regional regime that prohibits trade in wastes, implementing the position taken by many African governments in the 1989 Basel Convention negotiations. The 1991 Bamako Convention largely follows the approach adopted in the 1989 Basel Convention, but in a number of it deviates from it in important respects.
First, and most notably, as the former Lomé Convention of 1989 (which is no longer in force, but subjected the EU to a blanket ban on all direct or indirect exports of hazardous waste and radioactive waste from the EU to the ACP (African, Caribbean and Pacific area) and requires ACP States to prohibit the direct or indirect import of such waste from the EU or any other country), the Bamako Convention prohibits trade in hazardous waste. Contracting Parties must prohibit the importation of all hazardous wastes into Africa from non-Contracting Parties and treat such imports as illegal and criminal.
The second difference is that the contracting parties must ensure that the hazardous wastes to be exported are handled in an environmentally sound manner in the state of import and transit, and only authorized persons can store such wastes.
Third, the definition of hazardous waste adopted by the Bamako Convention is broader than the definition in the Basel Convention. The Bamako Convention contains several other subtle but significant differences.155 Wastes to be used as raw materials for recycling and recovery must not be exported, and parties must appoint a national body to act as a "dump watch" and coordinate governmental and non- government bodies.
In addition, the parties may not choose not to require prior written consent; the parties may not authorize the use of a general notice; the rule requiring transit state notification applies to cross-border movements from a party through a state or states that are or are not parties, and illegal shipments can only be returned to exporters. The Bamako Convention is administered by its own Conference of the Contracting Parties and the Secretariat, whose functions were temporarily performed by the OAJ (now the AU) and the UN Economic Commission for Africa. Significantly, the Bamako Convention Secretariat is given greater powers than the Basel Convention Secretariat, as it can verify the substance of allegations of violations of the Convention and submit a report to all parties. In addition, it provides for the apparently mandatory jurisdiction of the ad hoc dispute settlement body or ICJ.156
Convention of Waigani
The Convention on the Prohibition of the Importation of Hazardous and Radioactive Wastes into Forum Island Countries and on the Control of the Transboundary Movement and Management of Hazardous Wastes in the South Pacific Region (Waigani Convention 1995) was adopted by South Pacific governments following negotiations under the auspices of the South Pacific Forum. The Waigani Convention was modeled after the Bamako Convention and, like the latter, prohibits the importation of hazardous and radioactive waste into the area of jurisdiction and regulates the transboundary movement of such waste between contracting parties.
In addition, the "other parties", namely Australia and New Zealand, are required to ban the export of hazardous wastes to all island countries and forum territories in the convention area. Other similarities with the Bamako Convention include the Waigani Convention's ban on the dumping of hazardous wastes at sea and its requirements that any transboundary movement of hazardous wastes be covered by insurance, bonds or other guarantees that may be required or agreed to by the importer. or transit party.
157 The Waigani Convention also replicates the provisions of the Bamako Convention regarding the national definition of hazardous wastes and the obligation to re-import, although in the case of permitted transboundary movement of hazardous wastes that cannot be completed by export, a party need not re-import those wastes if alternative measures are taken for waste disposal in an environmentally friendly manner.
The Waigani Convention also allows for the use of a general notification procedure where "hazardous wastes with the same physical and chemical characteristics are regularly sent to the same disposer through the same customs office of exit of the exporting party, through the same office of entry of the exporting party". importing party and in the case of transit through the same customs office of entry and exit of the party or parties of transit.
In addition to the prohibition of trade in waste, other objectives of the convention are: to reduce the transboundary movement of hazardous waste to a minimum in accordance with their environmentally friendly management; handle hazardous waste and dispose of it as close to the source as possible in an environmentally friendly manner; and minimize the generation of hazardous waste. As under the Bamako Convention, the wastes covered by the Waigani Convention include certain radioactive wastes, but do not include wastes arising from the normal operation of a vessel whose discharge is covered by another international instrument.
The Convention is administered by the Conference of the Parties with the assistance of a secretariat which is to cooperate with the secretariat of the Basel Convention. An innovative provision of the convention requires the Conference of the Parties to establish a "revolving fund" for temporary use in emergency situations to minimize damage caused by disasters or accidents involving the transboundary movement or disposal of hazardous wastes in the convention area.
North America
The 1989 Mexico-United States Hazardous Waste Agreement requires the exporting country to notify the importing country of individual shipments or series of shipments over a twelve-month period, to which the importing country must respond within forty-five days expressing its agreement, or without conditions or its objection. The exporting country must re-accept any shipment that may be returned by the importing country for any reason. The United States-United States-Canada Agreement on the Transboundary Movement of Hazardous Waste requires the exporting country to notify the importing country of proposed transboundary shipments of hazardous waste, and states that if no response is received within thirty days, the importing country will be deemed to have given its consent. The United States also has bilateral agreements to export hazardous waste from Costa Rica, Malaysia, and the Philippines.
Some international organizations and initiatives for monitoring e-waste management:
More than treaties and regulations, positive action is needed to solve a specific problem. For this reason, several international organizations and initiatives have been adopted to address the growing burden of e-waste. Some of these initiatives and organizations will be discussed under this heading. These organizations and initiatives will help us to know how attempts are being made at the international level to reduce the increasing burden on humanity of the dangers of e-waste.
- International Environmental Technology Center, IETC:
ITEC was established to transfer technology to developing countries and countries with economies in transition. More recently, in 2005, the Bali Strategic Plan for Technology Promotion and Capacity Building together with the UN Environment Resolution on Chemicals and Waste acted as a reinforcement of this center. It focuses on holistic waste management for a sustainable solution to the environmental problems of developing countries. works with national and local governments of different countries to reduce and recycle their wastes, improve their waste management capacities, increase their capabilities in mitigating climate change, provide better job opportunities in their projects, etc. works basically in the main directions, by providing knowledge about products needed for environmentally friendly management as well as best practices, providing technical and advisory support to countries to introduce environmentally friendly technologies and approaches, and promoting and disseminating environmentally friendly management methods and practices. 161 The IETC also plays an important role in the management of e-waste. Since e-waste is a product of technology, much can be done by regulating the process of technological innovation taking place around the world to control the rate of generation of e-waste before it is actually produced. It has worked with the United Nations Environment Assembly to tackle the ever-increasing amount of e-waste. It can also promote such useful and economical technologies that can help in reducing e-waste as well as handling or recycling it in an environmentally friendly manner.
- The Partnership for Action on Computing Equipment, PACE
It is established as a multi-stakeholder partnership to manage used and retired computing devices in an environmentally friendly way. The PACE Working Group is made up of PC manufacturers, governments, environmentalists and experts from other relevant sectors who determine the scope of their issues and activities.
This organization was founded at the Bali COP of the Basel Convention in 2008. PACE aims to promote sustainable development by recycling end-of-life computer equipment in an environmentally friendly way. This organization provides a platform for computer manufacturers, governments of developing and least developed countries, various experts and others to discuss the topics of how to manage e-waste in a way that serves the triple aim of social, environmental and economic progress and well-being. This organization also focuses on building capacity in poor countries to enable them to effectively manage such waste.
- Global Partnership for Waste Management, GPWM:
Launched in 2010, it functions as a partnership platform for governments, international organizations, local authorities, academia, NGOs, etc. It works primarily with the goals of building political capacity, sharing ideas and information, creating awareness, bridging information gaps, and the like. other activities to promote resource conservation and resource efficiency. These objectives are to be achieved by the manner in which wastes are managed in order to prevent environmental and health hazards due to improper management of such wastes. They advocate international cooperation and advanced capacity building to strengthen the waste management system and at the same time to reduce waste production at the source itself. It also applies to e-waste, making it a prominent consideration when dealing with e-waste management initiatives.
- Global e-waste monitor, 2017:
The Global E-waste Monitor is a comprehensive effort jointly carried out by the International Telecommunication Union (ITU), the United Nations University (UNU) and the International Solid Waste Association (ISWA). It provides information on the volume of e-waste produced across regions, the results of different recycling methods and the implementation status of various e-waste legislation. It strives to achieve the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs by managing e-waste information standards. It also emphasizes the importance of proper data analysis on e-waste management).
References:
- http://shodhganga.inflibnet.ac.in/bitstream/10603/194221/8/ii%203.pdf
- https://www.linkedin.com/pulse/history-e-waste-karan-thakkar
- http://unpan1.un.org/intradoc/groups/public/documents/apcity/unpan050303.pdf
- https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4858409/
- https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/m/pubmed/19846207/
- https://www.thehindubusinessline.com/info-tech/indias-ewaste-growing-at-30- annually/article8686442.ece
- https://www.nytimes.com/2019/01/11/world/asia/india-air-pollution.html
- https://m.timesofindia.com/home/environment/pollution/80-of-Indias-surface-water-may- be-polluted-report-by-international-body-says/articleshow/47848532.cms
- https://www.downtoearth.org.in/news/waste/e-waste-contaminating-delhi-s-groundwater- and-soil-59522
- https://www.downtoearth.org.in/news/environment/chennai-s-soil-and-delhi-s-air-most- contaminated-due-to-pcb-concentration-study-57217
Articles:
- P.K. Jaindra and K Sudhir- E-waste Management: A Case Study,III(VI),IJHSSS,407(2017).
- Ashim Hazarika, Forest Management and Forest Conservation in Assam,(Sept.10.2018,10:23 PM), https://www.cbd.in/doc/meetings/abs/emabschm-01/others/embschm-010india-en.pdf
- Kanchi Kholi,Introduction to Waste Management, National Commitments and Achievements,LOAD.ORG( Nov. 01 2018,11:23 PM), https://load.org.gov.in/wp-content/uploads/2016-17/NTP*2007/Kanchi*20kohli.PDF.
- Shalini Bhutani, The Business of Waste Management, DNA 2019(Jun 01,2020,10:11 PM) https://www.dnaindia.com/analysis/column-the-business-of-waste-management-2345668
- Shova Devi & Manchikanti Padmati, Waste Management: APre-Condition to Waste Tracking under the Indian Biological Diversity Act, 2002, https://docs.manupatra.in/newline/articles/Upload/707A5F04-313A-4883-ABIB-HGTFTRSF.pdf.
Books:
- L Lakshmi, Waste Management-Environmental impact (The Icfain University Press) (2008)
- Vimlendu Jha, Waste Management, Mobile Seva, e-book,Swissaid,India),(2017)
- Biodiversity Management Committee, Operational Tool KIT,Assam State BiodiversityBoard,2013
- Waste Management:A Mechanism For Empowering Local People,Assam State Biodiversity Board,2018
- Handbook On Waste Management And Its Laws, National Law School of India University, Bangaluru,2017
Award Winning Article Is Written By:
- Shivangi Misra - LL.M. Student, Amity University
- Ms. Jyotsna Singh - Assistant Professor, Amity University
Authentication No: AP347717564012-21-0423
