On this last post of “The Land of Electronics”, I will be examining what Nigeria’s government has done to control and regulate the challenge of electronic waste in the informal sector.

In 1988, the exportation of hazardous wastes to developing countries garnered global attention after 3,800 tonnes of toxic wastes were found to be dumped in a dirt lot in Koko, Nigeria, as a deal arranged by an Italian waste trader (Liu, 1992). In response to this incident, the Nigerian Government has subsequently enacted the ‘Harmful Wastes Decree’, which provides a legal framework to regulate the disposal of toxic and hazardous waste into the environment of Nigeria, creating the Federal Environment Protection Agency (FEPA) in the process (Ideho, 2012). Under their National Policy on Environment, Nigeria further states that appropriate agencies are responsible to set up a regional framework and standard to combat against the transboundary movement of hazardous waste, which electronic waste falls under (Ideho, 2012).

However, there are certain significant limitations to this policy that reduce its effectiveness in managing the environmental pollution of electronic waste. Firstly, the hazardous electronic wastes imported into Nigeria are often imported under the ‘guise’ of them being second-hand goods. Furthermore, Amechi and Oni (2019) has found that these ‘second-hand goods’ are brought into Nigeria through used vehicles, of which are not subjected to inspection and control by regulatory agencies as compared to import routes through containers.

Most significantly, the challenge with ridding the country of the  hazardous and polluting electronic wastes derives from the fact that much of the informal Nigerian community depends on the transnational trade of e-waste for their livelihoods. For example, it was found that the formal refurbishing sector in Nigeria provided income to more than 30,000 people (Amechi and Oni, 2019). This suggests that the illegal importation of electronic waste has provided even more jobs for those operating in the informal sectors. Through the importation of these e-wastes, trades such as dismantling, repairing and refurbishing emerge as new opportunities for settlers that are unable to find formal employment.

In hindsight, the challenges of managing electronic waste are more complicated than perceived due to the conflicting socioeconomic benefits that electronic waste trade provides. Furthermore, it can be observed that policies can only do so much to regulate the on-the-ground realities of waste regulation. Through these observations, I believe that in order to truly curb the environmental pollution in these marginalised countries, the accountability lies in the hand of the consumers that make the decision to consume such products and services.

References