Australia's lagging e-waste laws

Australia’s management of electronic waste is poorly implemented, lags behind international best practice and is based on outdated recycling targets, according to researchers from the University of New South Wales (UNSW).

Writing in the Journal of Environmental Management, honours student Ashleigh Morris and Professor Graciela Metternicht stated that Australia is one of the top 10 consumers of electrical and electronic products in the world, yet legislation for the management of WEEE (waste electrical and electronic equipment) is in its infancy. Comparing Australia’s e-waste laws to those of two international leaders in the field of e-waste recycling, the study authors found Australia’s approach is ineffective and requires greater compliance measures to prevent hazardous pollutants from ending up in landfill.

“What is worrying is that our legislation is unable to keep pace with the amount of e-waste we’re now generating,” said Professor Metternicht. “Our recycling targets may have been good 10 years ago, but they are ineffective today. We recommend the targets be revised.”

The UNSW team analysed four key pieces of legislation, including the National Waste Policy 2009 and the National Television and Computer Recycling Scheme 2011, and established ‘indicators of effectiveness’ by which to evaluate them. They surveyed stakeholders and experts to validate these indicators, and compared Australia’s legislative environment and waste management practices to those of Japan and Switzerland.

While the introduction of e-waste laws in Australia resulted in an overall increase in recycling, the researchers identified major flaws, claiming that the “rate and types of WEEE generated in Australia far exceed the measures prescribed in legislation to address or even curb the problem”. The authors state:

• The scope of what is considered e-waste under Australian law is not broad enough and that new categories of e-waste legislated for recovery and recycling would reduce public confusion and help meet the objectives of the laws.
• There is a lack of clarity over the role of stakeholders including consumers, retailers and local governments, which are responsible for the majority of e-waste collection. More effective waste management hinges on more clearly defined roles.
• There are education and accessibility issues, with consumers in some regional locations in Australia needing to travel more than 100 km to recycling depots or drop-off sites. Local councils need additional support to improve access.
• Auditing, compliance and reporting measures are weak in every stage of the e-waste recycling system in Australia and need to be improved.
• Australia needs to reassess its recycling target and associated time frame in a holistic manner if it is to address the increasing e-waste generated by our society.

“We’re not saying the rules need to be completely overhauled or rewritten, but compared to other countries, our auditing and compliance measures certainly need to be enhanced,” said Professor Metternicht.

“We can have the most ambitious targets in the world, but without the necessary enforcement and compliance measures these would be meaningless.”

Morris stressed that the legislation needs to better support local councils, saying, “The current legislation places no responsibility on consumers to dispose of e-waste, and the councils who manage the largest volumes of this hazardous and valuable form of waste are not supported to do so.”

She added that the problem is as much a social issue as an environmental one, with Australians currently the second largest producers of waste per person in the world.

“This is a culture that we need to move away from, but until Australians stop seeing waste as an ‘out of sight, out of mind’ problem, the issues with e-waste will continue to grow exponentially,” she said.

Image credit: ©iStockphoto.com/Lya_Cattel