The export of textile waste from the European Union is causing negative environmental and social impacts on communities far beyond the borders of its Member States. By introducing concepts of Circular Economy to the textile industry, and holding producers responsible for the sustainable management of their textile waste, the proposed amendments to the EU Waste Framework Directive seek to address this. However, the question remains whether the proposed amendments are sufficient to end the negative ‘transboundary impacts’ of Europe's textile waste or if it is merely codifying a doctrine of ‘waste colonialism’.
The fashion industry is a big polluter throughout the lifecycle of its products, and Europe is one of its biggest consumers. In 2020, the average person in the EU consumed 14.8kg of textiles, footwear, and clothing. Due to a lack of sufficient recycling and reuse capacities, the EU exports vast amounts of used textiles every year, nearly 1.7 million tonnes in 2019. The same year, 46 per cent of exports ended up in Africa and 41 per cent in Asia, causing negative social and environmental impacts on the receiving communities, including pollution, landfill overload and harm to human health. This practice of transboundary disposal of waste by high-income countries exporting their waste to low-income countries is what some refer to as waste colonialism. One place where the effect of this practice is prevalent is at Kantamanto Market in the heart of Accra, Ghana.
Kantamanto Market
Kantamanto Market is the largest second-hand market in the world, receiving approximately 15 million individual used garments every week. None of these garments are from Ghanaian consumers. Rather, the clothes are from countries in the Global North.
Once arrived in Ghana, the garments are handled by Kantamanto’s 30,000 vendors, who recirculate nearly 25 million garments every month. The vendors buy unseen bales of imported garments, and according to research conducted by The Or Foundation, a non-profit working with vendors at Kantamanto, each garment leaves retailers with an average debt of $1.58 by the time they receive and unpack the clothing. That is due to the poor quality often associated with fast fashion decreasing the overall value of clothes. As expressed by some, selling products of lower quality is proving difficult as consumers demand more durable items. Consequently, retailers lack the necessary resources to invest in improving the quality of lower-grade garments, ultimately leading to their disposal as waste. It has also eliminated large parts of the local textile industry, which cannot keep up with the immense volumes of cheap second-hand items flooding the market.
As a result, a shocking 40 per cent of these used textiles end up as waste within a system that has long surpassed its capacity to handle this vast volume of waste. Most of these garments end up in landfills or are washed to sea, leaving the once waste-free beaches of the West African country filled with textile scraps and up to 30-metre-long tentacles of textiles, plastics and metals tied together by the currents of the sea – impacting the marine environment, the fishing industry, and people's quality of life.
The Proposed Amendments: Holding Producers Accountable
As part of the European Union's Green Deal, the Circular Economy Action Plan seeks to make ‘sustainable products the norm’, including within the fashion industry. In line with the objectives of the ‘EU Strategy for Sustainable and Circular Textiles’, the end-of-life stage of textile garments is an area in which the EU is currently expanding its regulatory framework.
Amendments to the Waste Framework Directive 2008/98/EC in 2018 introduced requirements of separate collection of textiles from 1 January 2025, which requires Member States to strengthen their collection and sorting capacities as well as infrastructure for recycling and reuse - potentially minimising EU export volumes. On 5 July 2023, the European Commission proposed new amendments to the Waste Framework Directive, notably to reduce textile waste generation and transition the industry into a circular economy. The Commission proposed the establishment of a harmonised Extended Producer Responsibility, building on the prevention and polluter-pays principles. This entails holding producers responsible for funding the management of the end-of-life for their products. Regarding textiles, the aim is to maximise the sector's circularity and secure funding for R&D and recycling systems by adding a cost for importers and producers ‘placing textiles on the EU market’. Producers can take this responsibility further by establishing Extended Producer Responsibility Funds (EPR Funds), allowing producers to pool money together for a desired purpose. For the textile industry, an EPR Fund may provide for financial contributions towards efforts in communities affected by textile waste. Fast fashion giant Shien is one company that has established such a fund, with The OR Foundation being the first expected recipient of donations.
Although EPR Funds have the potential to mitigate the impact of textile waste they do not reduce the amount of waste generated. It has been suggested that to ensure producers cannot simply pay their way out of selling unsustainable products, a Pre-market Producer Responsibility is necessary. Where Extended Producer Responsibility fails to promote waste prevention, other approaches, such as Ecodesign Requirements and labelling, can contribute to extending product lifetime. However, the main problem for textiles remains overproduction, and making producers pay for that should be the starting point of any effective preventive policy.
Moreover, the proposal addresses negative transboundary impacts of the EUs’ textile waste by including measures to reduce ‘illegal exports of textile waste’ disguised as reusable items to ‘countries ill-equipped to handle it’. It clarifies ‘what constitutes [textile] waste and what is considered reusable textiles’ in line with the expected regulation on waste shipments. If effectively enforced, the proposal is a promising step towards the reduction of lower-grade garments ending up in places like Kantamanto and their adverse effects on the environment and human health.
A New Future for Kantamanto?
In a statement from July 2023, the OR Foundation, calls for the EU’s Extended Producer Responsibility to be made globally accountable. They suggest that unless EPR Funds are transferred to communities and countries handling the garments’ end-of-life, the gap between financing and establishing circular infrastructure and ensuring environmental health will never be closed. Quoting the Director of Waste Management at Accra Metropolitan Assembly, Engineer Solomon Noi: ‘if passed without amendment, the Proposal will make Waste Colonialism an official EU doctrine, undermining efforts to improve working conditions in global second-hand markets, to create necessary infrastructure for circularity, and to mitigate environmental damage already caused by decades of overflowing volumes of clothing waste’.
Nearing the end of Waste Colonialism?
As it currently stands, the proposed amendment of EU regulation to harmonise Extended Producer Responsibility is not equipped to end ‘waste colonialism’. From the ground at Kantamanto, the message is loud and clear: The only way to achieve environmental and social sustainability in the second-hand market for textiles is to reduce production volumes and prevent excessive waste generation. While awaiting the final outcome of the legislative revision, the future of second-hand markets for textiles and of the 30,000 vendors at Kantamanto is more uncertain than ever.