Introduction

Background

The rise of waste shipments to developing countries

3Increasingly demanding governmental waste recycling targets, landfill bans, rising landfill taxes in developed countries, and containerisation have led to the rapid rise of global waste shipments, mostly to developing countries. This is mostly due to the lower labour costs and environmental standards in receiving countries. Nowhere is this more visible than on the shipbreaking beaches of the Indian subcontinent.

5When looking at plastic waste for instance, its low value, the lack of industries in most developed countries that produce plastic goods and the avoidance costs of adequate treatment, mean that it is appealing to the less conscientious waste broker to exported it illegally. Highly contaminated waste is often shipped fraudulently through falsification of customs forms, or fraud through over- or under invoicing costs and mis-declaring income. The waste itself may even be concealed behind good quality material when being loaded into containers, and it is also common that the ultimate final destination is not revealed to authorities.

Enforcement issues

8Regulation of waste activities can be split across various national bodies, with one regulating waste shipments and another waste management licensing. These silos make it difficult to monitor waste shipments from cradle-to-grave, especially when the responsible parties may be ‘waste tourists’, locating themselves in an exporting country for sometimes only a few months, or a ‘few shipments worth’ at a time, shipping waste to their home country. This is typical for the waste electrical and electronic equipment trade, with west African countries being a major destination for over fifteen years.

9Waste shipment inspectors may also be responsible for regulating other regimes, such as chemicals and producer responsibility legislation. It may seem easy to tell what is legal and what is illegal, but this is not always the case with legislative loopholes and ‘grey areas’, i.e. when officers have incomplete documentation in front of them, for example when inspecting a container with used electronic equipment, which seems to be too old to realistically be put back on the market. Organisations’ priorities change depending on resources, political will and undeniably media pressure. The latter brought about the massive change to the controls surrounding shipments of plastics that will come into force on 1 January 2021.

10The global trade in household recyclates involves many different players, such as recycling companies, waste traders, dealers and hauliers, making traceability and control of the waste difficult for investigating officers. Curtain-siders move easily from western to eastern Europe, using a network of transport operators. Co-operation with other authorities regulating at national frontiers can also be lacking. Within the EU, co-operation with Customs authorities is relatively high, with 81% of environmental competent authorities having formal or informal working arrangements with Customs.⁵ However, this still leaves a significant proportion of European authorities lacking the support of their national Customs. Anecdotally, the situation is much worse outside Europe. This makes the illegal waste trade a low risk business for criminals, enticing them to move high volumes to maximise profit.

11Despite, ‘intelligence-led’ operations being the flavour of the day, and rightly vaunted by Police networks, many environmental authorities lack intelligence capacity. In a survey conducted by IMPEL (Network for the Implementation and Enforcement of European Environmental Law), only 44% of European agencies had access to intelligence systems.⁵

12The nature of waste shipments crime is of course that they are transnational. Environmental regulators tend to be a collaborative and enthusiastic group. However, they work across different time zones, meaning it can be difficult to communicate easily. Coupled with this, authorities in developing countries may use personal email addresses because their own organisations cannot provide them with accounts. Although a seemingly minor issue, this can mean the exchange of information is immensely difficult or forbidden.

13And then there is the issue of ‘port hopping’; the practice whereby illegal waste shippers avoid frequently inspected transport hubs and move their waste through less well-regulated ports or roads. Like water, waste crime always finds the lowest level.

The future of enforcement

14So how is this situation to be improved? In the EU, the 2014 amendments to the Waste Shipment Regulation (WSR) addressed some fundamental issues for European regulators; namely, reversing the burden of proof on to shippers of waste and requiring each country to have an inspection plan. Enforcement can only be as strong as the weakest points in the regulatory chain however. The WSR is undergoing its next five-year review, with issues on reporting against inspection plans being addressed.

16There are plenty of regulatory tools being developed by other European and UN-funded projects. For example, the WasteForce Project seeks to provide Prosecutors with training and guidance. The problem is embedding these ways of working and maintaining co-operation. It is recommended that environmental regulators co-operate more with customs, police and other regulatory authorities, and that formal service-level agreements be considered. Awareness-raising that waste crime is an important threat to security, people and the environment amongst enforcement communities needs to continue apace. Sharing cases on the involvement of other types of crimes, such as major tax fraud and tax avoidance may assist.

17The involvement of existing international bodies such as the United Nations Office on Drugs and Crime (UNODC) and the World Customs Organization (WCO) is very welcomed and should continue. The WCO is ramping up its efforts to assist in enforcing the provisions of the Basel Convention, having recently joined the Basel Convention’s ENFORCE network and running its Operation Demeters which have a joint focus on transboundary movement of hazardous waste.

18Collaboration between different regions of the world tends to work well whilst key and enthusiastic officers are in place. Verification of sites of destination is a ‘must’ for exporting countries, and the channels of communication need to be as effective as possible. It is often the case that receiving countries are either unaware or unsure about invoking the ‘repatriation requirement’ whereby an illegal shipment should be taken back to the country of origin. If this was to become regular practice, it would surely act as a deterrent to parties involved in illegal exports and ensure those responsible for waste meet their ‘duty of care’ by checking downstream treatment operations. Strengthening regional and sub-regional enforcement approaches needs to be considered by reinstating networks such as the successful Regional Enforcement Network for Chemicals and Waste in the Asia and Pacific region, which share best practice.

19Mapping of the scale, routes and hazardous nature of the waste involved can only help mount political pressure. This in particular has led to the recent focus on the illegal trade in waste plastics. Perhaps this can address the main issue at the base of all this illegal activity: the need to strengthen national legislative frameworks and regulatory agencies. All in all, there is a long way to go on the enforcement of waste shipments.