Environmental Engineering Reference
In-Depth Information
The grassroots pressure that social movement networks exert on electronics
fi
rms
comes not only from their own activist membership and sta
,but also from the consumers
of these technologies. Given that such a high percentage of citizens in the North are con-
sumers of computer and electronic products, this provides a considerable pool of poten-
tial activists who might be mobilized to pressure or even boycott any number of
companies.
The Basel Action Network (BAN), the Silicon Valley Toxics Coalition (SVTC) and
other NGOs created the Computer TakeBack Campaign (CTBC), a national coalition to
promote extended producer responsibility - the principle that manufacturers and brand
owners must take responsibility for the life-cycle impacts of their products, including
take-back and end-of-life management. The CTBC articulates an environmental injustice
frame:
21
ff
the recycling or direct dumping of the material results in a serious and immoral export of pol-
lution to those countries [in the South]. Environmental protections in developing countries are
usually poor, but regardless of the levels of protections, the export of pollution to countries due
to their economic status is contrary to principles of environmental justice and moreover serves
as a disincentive for manufacturers to prevent hazards and wastes upstream through product
design. That is, rather than internalizing real environmental costs, manufacturers have been
externalizing these costs to Asians and their environment.
22
Activists from other NGOs who have worked on the e-waste problem concur. As a com-
muniqué from the GrassRoots Recycling Network (GRRN) declared in response to the
USEPA's decision to allow e-waste exports, 'Asian peoples are now asked to accept pollu-
tion that we have created simply because they are poorer.'
23
Responding to similar reports,
Von Hernandez, a Philippines-based activist with Greenpeace and the International
Campaign for Responsible Technology, stated, 'Asia is the dustbin of the world's haz-
ardous waste.'
24
BAN and SVTC have also contributed to successful e
orts to pass such legislation in the
European Union. They work closely on e-waste recycling campaigns with social movement
organizations in many nations, including the Clean Production Network (Canada),
Greenpeace International, Greenpeace China, Toxics Link India (India), Shristi (India),
SCOPE (Pakistan), and the International Campaign for Responsible Technology.
A much broader umbrella network to which all these groups belong is the International
Campaign for Responsible Technology (ICRT). To better coordinate transnational move-
ment activities concerning the electronics industry, in 2002, 50 scholars and activists from
around the world convened in San Jose, California to launch the group. They recognized
that the development and sharing of information and critical knowledge across borders
were key elements to ensuring a more just and sustainable high-technology industry. In
addition to supporting advocacy campaigns and legal initiatives around electronics in the
USA, Latin America, Asia, Africa and Europe, a central component of the ICRT's work
involves documentation, research and publication. Toward that end, the network pub-
lished
Challenging the Chip: Labor Rights and Environmental Justice in the Global
Electronics Industry -
a topic co-authored by more than 30 activists and scholars from a
dozen nations in Asia, Europe, North America and Latin America.
25
The ICRT is an international solidarity network that promotes corporate and govern-
ment accountability in the global electronics industry. Ted Smith, one of the ICRT
ff
