The reality of an increasingly warming Earth due to the emission of so-called greenhouse gases which absorb part of the sun's rays and redistribute them in the form of radiation in the earth's atmosphere, is no longer a mystery for a large majority of the world's population.  Even if the fight for the protection of a common home comes up against climate-sceptical points of view which limit themselves to trivializing a reality which has tangible consequences on a global scale, the situation is truly urgent, and it is caused by an anthropogenic agent which has a very great responsibility in global warming.

According to environmentalists, each of our actions produces greenhouse gases. “The modes of transport we use, the food we eat and the electricity we use, are at the origin of our carbon footprint, which is an indicator that allows us to measure the environmental impact of a person, a company and a Territory. » And the recommendations to remedy this situation are numerous. Indeed, between limiting the use of electricity to which a large majority of African populations do not have access, and limiting food and clothing waste, including in geographical contexts where populations have difficulty feeding and clothing themselves adequately, we can say that the task promises to be even more difficult for a continent where energy poverty is even more marked, and where populations depend greatly on international aid in addition to feel the full force of the consequences of global warming, like everywhere else.

The principle of using an object that has been thrown away in order to make a new one, is an ecological transition solution that all countries in the world have chosen to adopt depending on the contexts, and their respective financial means, in a set of Territories where even if everyone has their share of responsibility in global warming, the richest have a greater responsibility compared to those considered poorer due in particular to the existence in these areas of multiple indicators of underdevelopment such as insufficient access to electricity, landlocked roads, high rates of underemployment and the presence of an informal sector which contributes massively to the gross domestic product of African countries, notably the sale of second-hand clothing which in addition to being an income-generating activity, also allows the limitation of waste of a set of articles which still have a market value.

A beneficial solution which, however, also has limits because the countries importing second-hand clothing in Africa in particular are not able to properly manage the waste resulting from this activity. Clothes very often end up in non-compliant landfills, and in locations or landfills operated by waste management services which already have difficulty managing household waste effectively given that conventional dump points are very often overwhelmed to the point where the creation of artificial deserts is developing across the continent. Everything suggests that we are more concerned with extending the market value of clothing on a global scale, without however taking into account the environmental impact that this activity could cause on the Territories of importing countries.

Faced with such scenarios in a set of Territories where the populations seem to have become accustomed to the nauseating environments, we are very often in a hurry to point the finger at the laxity of the leaders and the incivism of the populations who are not the only ones responsible. Image : © Kevin McElvaney/ Greenpeace

Perhaps exporting countries have said to themselves that if there is one place where they should not worry about the environmental impact generated by the end of the cycle of second-hand clothing, it is in Africa? Indeed, the facts are overwhelming. The sometimes improvised drop-off points in order to get rid of what we no longer want, create environmental and health problems which require colossal resources that Africans countries do not always have at their disposal. If we must blame the incivism of the populations, and the incapacity of local authorities to remedy this situation, we must not fail to point out the responsibility of the countries exporting second-hand clothing because, they also have their share of responsibility in the fact that in sub-Saharan Africa in particular, end-of-cycle clothes have completely colonized the spaces.

An investigation published in June 2022 by Green Peace shows that the real final destination of clothes that many people no longer want in Europe in particular, is not always the recycling stage. In Africa, “their cheap clothes end their short life, thrown away and burned in huge open-air landfills, along rivers or the sea, with serious consequences for local populations and the environment."

Faced with such scenarios in a set of Territories where the populations seem to have become accustomed to the nauseating environments, we are very often in a hurry to point the finger at the laxity of the leaders and the incivism of the populations who are not the only ones responsible. The State certainly has an obligation to manage its waste well, and populations have a duty to respect conventional household waste deposit points even if they are insufficient in a set of contexts where the demographic value is constantly dynamic, but the countries exporting second-hand clothing have their share of responsibility in the sense that they are only concerned with selling and collecting money, without however worrying about whether the countries in question have the technical and especially financial means to avoid the multiplication of artificial reliefs generated in particular by clothes arriving at the end of the cycle.

Local traders are only adjusting to a sneaky rhythm imposed and desired by exporting countries which provide no after-sales services. After having invaded and conquered commercial spaces in Africa thanks to the sale of second-hand clothes, they behave as if the environmental impacts generated by this activity do not concern them. Indeed, well aware of what is happening, they prefer to turn a blind eye to an activity that has tragic consequences for ecosystems. Africa has become a dumping ground of choice for second-hand clothes. Landfills are overexploited, artificial landforms are multiplying, as are unsanitary nooks and crannies alongside precarious housing in spontaneously created neighbourhoods. All this in part because of the sale of second-hand clothing in Territories where demand is considerable, and favourable to the use of “disposable clothing” having changed the appearance of towns and villages where everything is thrown away anywhere. The need to adopt virtuous and environmentally friendly actions has been subtracted from Satisfying the need to offer a clothing solution at a lower or affordable price.

Social development and well-being

Satisfactory development must be reasonable, and not limited solely to economic satisfactions which do not fully contribute to environmental well-being because of textile dumps. The low cost of second-hand clothing has more considerable consequences in the environment of populations forced to live with “waste”. But these items, or “waste” for some, do not always complete their cycle in the open air because they are bad. If elsewhere, those who no longer want a piece of clothing have the possibility of dropping it off at specific points for recycling, it is not the case elsewhere, and particularly in Africa in Africa where, if the garment is not given to another person, it simply ends up in the street or in landfills. By having too many, they become boring to the point of wanting to constantly and cheaply renovate the contents of the cupboards with a set of items that very quickly become bulky. When they are not thrown into conventional landfills, they are all simply thrown into rivers as if these blessings of nature were intended to be places for garbage dumping.

The reality of ecosystem pollution in Africa is partly due to the marketing of second-hand clothing. According to a Green Peace investigation published in 2O22, and whose field of study is Kenya and Tanzania, 69% of clothing fibres are made of synthetic materials (especially polyester). This means they are made of petroleum-based plastics and are not biodegradable. They remain in the environment in the form of plastic microfibers and enter the human food chain while polluting the air and harming human health “when they are burned in the open air."

Rivers are diverted from their true uses, namely promoting biodiversity, in particular by providing drinking water and supporting agricultural and industrial activities. There is no doubt, as noted by an investigation by Swiss Radio and Television (SRT) into the environmental disaster of the second-hand clothing circuit, Europe externalizes its “overconsumption problems” in countries that lack the infrastructure and financial resources to manage waste from the sale of second-hand clothing, particularly in Africa. Hence the creation of artificial reliefs in a set of Territories which are characterized by high urbanization and relatively weak waste management policies which favour the development of arbitrary dumping points favourable to the development of precarious and unsanitary housing where improvised dumps are located. Hence the need to impose a carbon tax in order to finance development and ecosystem restoration projects that the marketing of second-hand clothing has contributed to polluting.

Africans, like many other peoples, also need to live in healthy environments. Image : © Kevin McElvaney/ Greenpeace

The Organization for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD) says it has no right to import waste into a country that is not a member. If we have to stick to this point of view, we must simply say that if we have to look for the origin of poor quality clothing denounced very often by traders in Africa, Perhaps it is not necessary to look for it in the 38 member countries of this organization even if insisting on the quality of the articles does not take away from the fact that they are partly responsible for the environmental disaster caused by this activity in Africa.

Importing countries do not have the means to bear alone the ecological disaster caused by second-hand clothing. Even if we consider that Africans countries must manage their waste by themselves, what is this commercial activity where we have no guarantee on the quality of the goods? It looks like an auction where each importing country obtains a product without having a guarantee of quality. And that’s what happens when you’re not structured well from the inside. We accept everything because we have a need or several needs met by States that would not accept similar disasters on their respective Territories. Africans, like many other peoples, also need to live in healthy environments. If public authorities have difficulty guaranteeing healthy environments due to the catastrophic consequences of this mercantile activity on their environments, exporting countries must finance the management of the waste generated by their products because African countries do not have the means to eliminate them properly when they reach the end of the cycle. This is also what we call solidarity. We must not only promote the benefits of globalization, but also take responsibility for the environmental disasters it generates.

Another way to stop the environmental impact generated by these clothes in Africa would be to produce less, so as not to cause overproduction, and the increase in waste production in Africa. In addition to this, there should also be add an eco-tax for each of these imported products in order to gradually resolve the environmental problems generated by this lucrative and environmentally disastrous mercantile activity, particularly in Africa. The carbon tax is a compulsory levy for the benefit of a given public service. Africa needs it to manage these environmental disasters which will have, and even already have, consequences on a planetary scale, and in particular the poorest countries when we already know that after agriculture and transport, the textile sector is the most polluting in the world. The textile industry produces harmful emissions that harm the environment and human health. According to a study published on the footbridge website, a service offering designed and developed to meet the challenges of more responsible fashion, “this industry requires a considerable number of resources (especially during the first phases of production), and also produces large quantities of solid waste, in particular textiles which are not biodegradable. Furthermore, the dyeing and finishing of clothing represents approximately 36% of chemical releases." Talking only about recycling is a possible solution which itself also has environmental impacts. What Africa needs most currently is to eradicate these artificial deserts and completely restore waterways polluted by non-biodegradable textiles which have colonized spaces, thus compromising the health of ecosystems and that of humans in particular.

English|French

The marketing of second-hand clothing: A profitable activity that adjusts to the purchasing power of the populations of sub-saharan Africa

Inclusive development:Is the salvation of Africa found in the sale of second-hand clothes

Education of consciences and prevention of aggressive, desperate and immodest acts in places of learning

Quality school infrastructure assurance of production of good human capital despite the different standings

Social decadence, one of the consequences of choosing success by all sulphurous means possible: what solutions?

__________________________________________________________________________________

Recommendation:

Fast fashion: The challenges of textile waste in Africa