Devin N Perkins1, Marie-Noel Brune Drisse1, Tapiwa Nxele1, Peter D Sly2. 1. Department of Public Health, Environmental and Social Determinants of Health, World Health Organization, Geneva, Switzerland. 2. World Health Organization Collaborating Centre for Children's Health and Environment, Queensland Children's Medical Research Institute, The University of Queensland, Brisbane, Australia. Electronic address: p.sly@uq.edu.au.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Waste from end-of-life electrical and electronic equipment, known as e-waste, is a rapidly growing global problem. E-waste contains valuable materials that have an economic value when recycled. Unfortunately, the majority of e-waste is recycled in the unregulated informal sector and results in significant risk for toxic exposures to the recyclers, who are frequently women and children. OBJECTIVES: The aim of this study was to document the extent of the problems associated with inappropriate e-waste recycling practices. METHODS: This was a narrative review that highlighted where e-waste is generated, where it is recycled, the range of adverse environmental exposures, the range of adverse health consequences, and the policy frameworks that are intended to protect vulnerable populations from inappropriate e-waste recycling practices. FINDINGS: The amount of e-waste being generated is increasing rapidly and is compounded by both illegal exportation and inappropriate donation of electronic equipment, especially computers, from developed to developing countries. As little as 25% of e-waste is recycled in formal recycling centers with adequate worker protection. The health consequences of both direct exposures during recycling and indirect exposures through environmental contamination are potentially severe but poorly studied. Policy frameworks aimed at protecting vulnerable populations exist but are not effectively applied. CONCLUSIONS: E-waste recycling is necessary but it should be conducted in a safe and standardized manor. The acceptable risk thresholds for hazardous, secondary e-waste substances should not be different for developing and developed countries. However, the acceptable thresholds should be different for children and adults given the physical differences and pronounced vulnerabilities of children. Improving occupational conditions for all e-waste workers and striving for the eradication of child labor is non-negotiable. Crown
BACKGROUND: Waste from end-of-life electrical and electronic equipment, known as e-waste, is a rapidly growing global problem. E-waste contains valuable materials that have an economic value when recycled. Unfortunately, the majority of e-waste is recycled in the unregulated informal sector and results in significant risk for toxic exposures to the recyclers, who are frequently women and children. OBJECTIVES: The aim of this study was to document the extent of the problems associated with inappropriate e-waste recycling practices. METHODS: This was a narrative review that highlighted where e-waste is generated, where it is recycled, the range of adverse environmental exposures, the range of adverse health consequences, and the policy frameworks that are intended to protect vulnerable populations from inappropriate e-waste recycling practices. FINDINGS: The amount of e-waste being generated is increasing rapidly and is compounded by both illegal exportation and inappropriate donation of electronic equipment, especially computers, from developed to developing countries. As little as 25% of e-waste is recycled in formal recycling centers with adequate worker protection. The health consequences of both direct exposures during recycling and indirect exposures through environmental contamination are potentially severe but poorly studied. Policy frameworks aimed at protecting vulnerable populations exist but are not effectively applied. CONCLUSIONS: E-waste recycling is necessary but it should be conducted in a safe and standardized manor. The acceptable risk thresholds for hazardous, secondary e-waste substances should not be different for developing and developed countries. However, the acceptable thresholds should be different for children and adults given the physical differences and pronounced vulnerabilities of children. Improving occupational conditions for all e-waste workers and striving for the eradication of child labor is non-negotiable. Crown
Authors: Lauren Zajac; Roni W Kobrosly; Bret Ericson; Jack Caravanos; Philip J Landrigan; Anne M Riederer Journal: Environ Res Date: 2020-02-15 Impact factor: 6.498
Authors: Yeongran Hong; Damien Thirion; Saravanan Subramanian; Mi Yoo; Hyuk Choi; Hyun You Kim; J Fraser Stoddart; Cafer T Yavuz Journal: Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A Date: 2020-06-22 Impact factor: 11.205
Authors: Mark A Goddard; Zoe G Davies; Solène Guenat; Mark J Ferguson; Jessica C Fisher; Adeniran Akanni; Teija Ahjokoski; Pippin M L Anderson; Fabio Angeoletto; Constantinos Antoniou; Adam J Bates; Andrew Barkwith; Adam Berland; Christopher J Bouch; Christine C Rega-Brodsky; Loren B Byrne; David Cameron; Rory Canavan; Tim Chapman; Stuart Connop; Steve Crossland; Marie C Dade; David A Dawson; Cynnamon Dobbs; Colleen T Downs; Erle C Ellis; Francisco J Escobedo; Paul Gobster; Natalie Marie Gulsrud; Burak Guneralp; Amy K Hahs; James D Hale; Christopher Hassall; Marcus Hedblom; Dieter F Hochuli; Tommi Inkinen; Ioan-Cristian Ioja; Dave Kendal; Tom Knowland; Ingo Kowarik; Simon J Langdale; Susannah B Lerman; Ian MacGregor-Fors; Peter Manning; Peter Massini; Stacey McLean; David D Mkwambisi; Alessandro Ossola; Gabriel Pérez Luque; Luis Pérez-Urrestarazu; Katia Perini; Gad Perry; Tristan J Pett; Kate E Plummer; Raoufou A Radji; Uri Roll; Simon G Potts; Heather Rumble; Jon P Sadler; Stevienna de Saille; Sebastian Sautter; Catherine E Scott; Assaf Shwartz; Tracy Smith; Robbert P H Snep; Carl D Soulsbury; Margaret C Stanley; Tim Van de Voorde; Stephen J Venn; Philip H Warren; Carla-Leanne Washbourne; Mark Whitling; Nicholas S G Williams; Jun Yang; Kumelachew Yeshitela; Ken P Yocom; Martin Dallimer Journal: Nat Ecol Evol Date: 2021-01-04 Impact factor: 15.460
Authors: Augustine A Acquah; Clive D'Souza; Bernard J Martin; John Arko-Mensah; Paul K Botwe; Prudence Tettey; Duah Dwomoh; Afua Amoabeng Nti; Lawrencia Kwarteng; Sylvia Takyi; Isabella A Quakyi; Thomas G Robins; Julius N Fobil Journal: Int J Ind Ergon Date: 2021-02-23 Impact factor: 2.656