By Marie Morice mmorice@csr-asia.com
Corporate Social Responsibility Asia
Vol. 5, Week 6
In one of my recent blogs, I came across the alarming issue of the toxic waste trade in Asia. Despite stricter international regulations, companies are increasingly dumping their unwanted waste in less wealthiest countries and polluting other people’s “backyard”. The case of Formosa Plastics Corporation, one of Taiwan’s leading corporations, is a great illustration of the complexity surrounding the issue of toxic waste management and trade and most importantly, the gap between rhetorical CSR and actual actions on the ground.
The Basel Convention on the Control of Transboundary Movements of Hazardous Wastes and their Disposal was adopted in Basel, Switzerland on 22 March 1989. The Convention was initiated in response to numerous international scandals regarding hazardous waste trafficking that began to occur in the late 1980s. The Convention entered into force on 5 May 1992 and today has its Secretariat in Geneva, Switzerland. As of January 1 1998, the Basel Ban decision effectively banned all forms of hazardous waste exports from the 29 wealthiest most industrialized countries of the Organization of Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD) to all non-OECD countries.
The Formosa Plastics case study highlighted below has been developed by BAN, the Basel Action Network, a US charitable organisation dedicated to prevent the globalization of the toxic chemical crisis and working in opposition to toxic trade in toxic wastes, toxic products and toxic technologies, that are exported from rich to poorer countries. More information can be found on their website at www.ban.org.
The waste site near the port of Sihanoukville, Cambodia, built in the late 90s, has been subject to an ongoing dumping scandal for more than a decade, which continues to attract attention from concerned parties around the world.
In mid-December 1998, environmental officials in Cambodia began to suspect that the waste site contained some seriously toxic substance from a Taiwanese shipment. A worker who had cleaned out the ship's hold died, along with two other nearby villagers who were scavenging the site, covered with 3,000 tons of a crumbly light and dark gray substance, spilling out white plastic bags. Four more people died in the traffic accidents caused by the panic and one in a riot against the corrupt officials who allowed the shipment and falsified the papers (Reuters, December 23 1998). Cambodia called out the army and repacked the waste in metal drums.
Samples of the substance were tested in Taiwan, Singapore and Japan, which were all found to be in excess of the recommended safety level of inorganic mercury (less than 0.2 ppm). Mercury that is leached into the water table can become organic mercury, be absorbed by plants and animals and move up the food chain to accumulate in the human body. Mercury attacks the central nervous system, leading to damage to vision, hearing, and brain function, to uncontrolled tremors of the extremities and even to death. Embryos and infants are especially sensitive to mercury contamination, and may be severely retarded and physically impaired. In addition, mercury affects respiratory, digestive, and urinary systems and may cause cancer.
The white plastic bags were labelled Nanya Plastics, one of the members of the Formosa Plastics conglomerate. Formosa Plastics acknowledged that the source of the material was a waste product (calcium carbonate (CaCO-3), salt (NaCl), and Magnesium oxide (Mg(OH)-2)), from the production of chlorine from salt for use in production of poly-vinyl chloride, a process which was phased out in Taiwan in 1989. However, the corporation denied responsibility for shipping it to Cambodia, since it had delegated the disposal to a contractor. Under Taiwan law, Formosa Plastics has no liability for damages resulting from the disposal of the waste. Formosa Plastics issued a statement describing the type of waste as being of relatively low and presumably safe mercury content.
Under international pressure, Formosa Plastics repacked the 3,000 tons of waste in metal drums, removed them from the site, and after being blocked in a proposal to send the waste to California, shipped the waste back to Taiwan on April 9, 1999. Investigators in Taiwan trying to find out how the waste got shipped to Cambodia found a trail of fraud and flagrant irresponsibility, not just abroad but at home as well. A comprehensive list of producers of this chloride-production waste was compiled, including seven Taiwan producers which had produced an estimated 130,000 tons of chlorine in the 1970's and 80's. The whereabouts of only about 10,000 tons is known for certain; the remaining 120,000 tons are still unaccounted for.
Unfortunately, the story doesn’t end here. Tests recently carried out by the National Institute for Minamata Disease, based in Japan, on waste at the dump site revealed extraordinarily high levels of inorganic mercury - up to 3,984 parts per million (ppm), up to 20,000 times higher than the recommended safety level. The World Health Organization has dismissed fears that people have been poisoned by mercury, but BAN and other stakeholders are worried that the all clear has been given too fast and too soon.
Some major questions arise from this case study:
Does Taiwan's Environmental Protection Administration (http://www.epa.gov.tw/en/) have the ability to deal with the rapid unregulated development of illegal toxic waste disposal in its own sites? How can they build their capacity to enforce current international and national regulations on the use of hazardous chemicals?
What is the responsibility of corporations such as Formosa Plastics when they sub- contract their waste disposal and ship dangerous mercury-contaminated waste to poor nations? How can they improve the long-term sustainability of their supply chains and suppliers?
How important is it for companies to publicly disclose their achievements as well as their failures to gain credibility and trust? I searched the Formosa Plastics Corporation website (www.fpc.com.tw) and couldn’t find any information related to the Cambodia incident despite their environmental policy stating the following: “We have sought to achieve economic growth based on the concept of equal emphasis on environmental protection and the economy. We have therefore made a number of advances in endpipe treatment as part of our environmental protection efforts, in order to conform to both present and future standards regarding pollution and discharge. We have worked to upgrade the level of environmental protection and reduce industrial pollution, while also seeking to progress from merely preventing pollution to following economically and environmentally sound procedures.”
An interesting contrast between CSR policies at headquarters and actual facts on the ground.
The Basel Convention on the Control of Transboundary Movements of Hazardous Wastes and their Disposal was adopted in Basel, Switzerland on 22 March 1989. The Convention was initiated in response to numerous international scandals regarding hazardous waste trafficking that began to occur in the late 1980s. The Convention entered into force on 5 May 1992 and today has its Secretariat in Geneva, Switzerland. As of January 1 1998, the Basel Ban decision effectively banned all forms of hazardous waste exports from the 29 wealthiest most industrialized countries of the Organization of Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD) to all non-OECD countries.
The Formosa Plastics case study highlighted below has been developed by BAN, the Basel Action Network, a US charitable organisation dedicated to prevent the globalization of the toxic chemical crisis and working in opposition to toxic trade in toxic wastes, toxic products and toxic technologies, that are exported from rich to poorer countries. More information can be found on their website at www.ban.org.
The waste site near the port of Sihanoukville, Cambodia, built in the late 90s, has been subject to an ongoing dumping scandal for more than a decade, which continues to attract attention from concerned parties around the world.
In mid-December 1998, environmental officials in Cambodia began to suspect that the waste site contained some seriously toxic substance from a Taiwanese shipment. A worker who had cleaned out the ship's hold died, along with two other nearby villagers who were scavenging the site, covered with 3,000 tons of a crumbly light and dark gray substance, spilling out white plastic bags. Four more people died in the traffic accidents caused by the panic and one in a riot against the corrupt officials who allowed the shipment and falsified the papers (Reuters, December 23 1998). Cambodia called out the army and repacked the waste in metal drums.
Samples of the substance were tested in Taiwan, Singapore and Japan, which were all found to be in excess of the recommended safety level of inorganic mercury (less than 0.2 ppm). Mercury that is leached into the water table can become organic mercury, be absorbed by plants and animals and move up the food chain to accumulate in the human body. Mercury attacks the central nervous system, leading to damage to vision, hearing, and brain function, to uncontrolled tremors of the extremities and even to death. Embryos and infants are especially sensitive to mercury contamination, and may be severely retarded and physically impaired. In addition, mercury affects respiratory, digestive, and urinary systems and may cause cancer.
The white plastic bags were labelled Nanya Plastics, one of the members of the Formosa Plastics conglomerate. Formosa Plastics acknowledged that the source of the material was a waste product (calcium carbonate (CaCO-3), salt (NaCl), and Magnesium oxide (Mg(OH)-2)), from the production of chlorine from salt for use in production of poly-vinyl chloride, a process which was phased out in Taiwan in 1989. However, the corporation denied responsibility for shipping it to Cambodia, since it had delegated the disposal to a contractor. Under Taiwan law, Formosa Plastics has no liability for damages resulting from the disposal of the waste. Formosa Plastics issued a statement describing the type of waste as being of relatively low and presumably safe mercury content.
Under international pressure, Formosa Plastics repacked the 3,000 tons of waste in metal drums, removed them from the site, and after being blocked in a proposal to send the waste to California, shipped the waste back to Taiwan on April 9, 1999. Investigators in Taiwan trying to find out how the waste got shipped to Cambodia found a trail of fraud and flagrant irresponsibility, not just abroad but at home as well. A comprehensive list of producers of this chloride-production waste was compiled, including seven Taiwan producers which had produced an estimated 130,000 tons of chlorine in the 1970's and 80's. The whereabouts of only about 10,000 tons is known for certain; the remaining 120,000 tons are still unaccounted for.
Unfortunately, the story doesn’t end here. Tests recently carried out by the National Institute for Minamata Disease, based in Japan, on waste at the dump site revealed extraordinarily high levels of inorganic mercury - up to 3,984 parts per million (ppm), up to 20,000 times higher than the recommended safety level. The World Health Organization has dismissed fears that people have been poisoned by mercury, but BAN and other stakeholders are worried that the all clear has been given too fast and too soon.
Some major questions arise from this case study:
Does Taiwan's Environmental Protection Administration (http://www.epa.gov.tw/en/) have the ability to deal with the rapid unregulated development of illegal toxic waste disposal in its own sites? How can they build their capacity to enforce current international and national regulations on the use of hazardous chemicals?
What is the responsibility of corporations such as Formosa Plastics when they sub- contract their waste disposal and ship dangerous mercury-contaminated waste to poor nations? How can they improve the long-term sustainability of their supply chains and suppliers?
How important is it for companies to publicly disclose their achievements as well as their failures to gain credibility and trust? I searched the Formosa Plastics Corporation website (www.fpc.com.tw) and couldn’t find any information related to the Cambodia incident despite their environmental policy stating the following: “We have sought to achieve economic growth based on the concept of equal emphasis on environmental protection and the economy. We have therefore made a number of advances in endpipe treatment as part of our environmental protection efforts, in order to conform to both present and future standards regarding pollution and discharge. We have worked to upgrade the level of environmental protection and reduce industrial pollution, while also seeking to progress from merely preventing pollution to following economically and environmentally sound procedures.”
An interesting contrast between CSR policies at headquarters and actual facts on the ground.
2 comments:
that was so illegal to do this to cambodia! i think whoever did this ought to compensate and sued for wanting to damage cambodia's environment and people's health!
Hun Sen said Taiwan is not allow to do politic with Cambodia but it is O.K if Taiwan wishes to do business. This is one of their business with Cambodia.
Post a Comment