Climate change is a hot topic again (no pun intended) so I want to talk about something that bothers me in some western environmentalist discussions--lack of awareness of pollution outsourcing, and a general tendency to see western countries as "trying harder" to combat climate change for their own regulations, when in reality they export their pollution and have simply moved operations. This is a similar situation to labor rights, but a lot more people are aware of outsourcing when it comes to cheap labor than pollution.
You can find a variety of studies on this topic, I'm going to link some here.
This study addresses the argument: "democracies are more environmentally friendly". "Democracy" in this context is referring to primarily wealthy liberal democracies. Although I have problems with essentially every mainstream method of calculating democracy (lol...) the study still proves the issue of pollution outsourcing:
We hypothesize that democracies can improve their record and become āgreenerā not only through genuinely domestic environmental protection, but also through outsourcing environmental impacts of their consumption to other countries. Analyzing data on greenhouse gas emissions, pollution offshoring, and democracy for more than 160 countries since the 1990s, we report evidence that the offshoring of environmental pollution contributes to the superior environmental record of democracies. The main policy implication is that democracies, per se, may not have a better environmental record than autocracies when considering global environmental impacts. This implies that democratic countries, in particular, should re-orient their environmental protection efforts from merely domestic to global environmental consequences of local economic activity.
For the record, the above study uses the V-Dem dataset for "democracy". If you choose to look that up, it looks about how you'd expect: US, UK, Western Europe, Australia, and Japan are perpetually in the freedom democracy zone for the most part each year.
The New York Times posted an article on pollution outsourcing in 2018 that includes some studies:
The United States, for its part, remains the worldās leading importer of what the researchers call āembodied carbon.ā If the United States were held responsible for all the pollution worldwide that resulted from manufacturing the cars, clothing and other goods that Americans use, the nationās carbon dioxide emissions would be 14 percent bigger than its domestic-only numbers suggest.
Between 1995 and 2015, the report found, as wealthier countries like Japan and Germany were cutting their own emissions, they were also doubling or tripling the amount of carbon dioxide they outsourced to China.
But when I say "pollution outsourcing" I am not exclusively referring to carbon emissions. I mean literally all forms of pollution are being outsourced. From Waste Colonialism: A Brief History:
Exporting trash involves more than just environmental harm; it reflects systemic inequality and a historical pattern of exploitation. The term draws a direct line between historical colonialism, where natural resources and labor were stripped from colonized regions, and the current waste trade, where the burden of environmental damage is once again pushed onto those least responsible for it.
The logic is elementary: when consumption ā primarily of plastic ā continues to rise, there are only two solutions to eliminate the waste: incineration or dumping. Incineration becomes the only plausible alternative if a country does not allow large-scale dumping within its borders. The problem? Incinerating plastic carries a significant carbon footprint, which most countries responsible for plastic waste are trying to reduce. As a result, some choose to avoid both options and instead export their waste elsewhere, preferably to a country with weaker waste regulations.
For years, high-income countries, especially across Europe, in the US, Japan, and Australia, have been exporting plastic waste abroad under the claim that it will be recycled, but the reality is far more complex. A report by the Environmental Investigation Agency (EIA) published last year revealed that in 2023, the Netherlands, Germany, the UK, Belgium, France, Italy, the US, Japan, and Australia were among the top waste exporters to non-OECD countries.
For over 20 years, China was the worldās biggest importer of plastic and other waste. Since it lacked local resources, starting in the 1980sā90s, the country accepted trash from richer countries to use as raw materials for its industries. However, this mechanism led to serious pollution, health risks and illegal dumping in the country. In 2018 China banned the import of plastic waste with its National Sword Policy. Since then, Western countries have been redirecting their exports to other parts of Asia and Africa. Countries like Malaysia, Indonesia, Vietnam, Thailand, and the Philippines have taken up much of the imports, many arriving illegally or misdeclared. As for Africa, Ghana is slowly becoming a dumping ground, and Mexico and Peru in Latin America are following its steps.
Worth noting a lot of countries dealing with outsourced pollution are also in a position to feel the most severe effects of climate change first. I'm sure a lot of you are already aware of this information, but it bears repeating right now...and ensure you aren't contributing to racist narratives in discussions about the environment...the right does pick up on this topic and has its own approaches.
origamiaround
tangentwithtanner
2087
jacobvanloon
snowghoul
vaporwave
blakekathryn
romaincrisis
titsay
