SECTION 4:
RISKS OF SUSTAINABILITY AND DIGITALIZATION

4.1 E-Waste – A Growing Problem

Digitalization requires an increasing element for computers, data centers, mobile phones, crypto mining nodes, batteries, and networks. In 2019, ICT produced a record 53.6 million metric tons of e-waste globally (Bogdan-Martin 2022). These numbers suggest that e-waste is the fastest-growing domestic waste stream, with 17.4 percent of e-waste being collected and recycled
(International Telecommunication Union [ITU] 2020), and only 78 countries having legislation for e-waste management (Forti, Balde, Kuehr, and Bel 2020). As such, digitalization and circular economy must be interlinked to enable tracking, recovering, and recirculating of minerals used in tech production.

Production of computer hardware makes up 75 to 85% of the environmental impact of the digital world.

Regulatory frameworks to raise awareness of circular economy, product lifecycle, and sustainable purchasing behavior must be encouraged.

E-waste poses a significant challenge in the region, where there is little capacity to handle the recycling challenge. In West Asia, e-waste is commonly disposed of using general waste, open dumps, and open burning. The disposal, dismantling, and recycling of e-waste through illegal methods or methods that
are informal and fall below the international standards for e-waste management are primary drivers of the negative impact of e-waste on the environment.

Egypt, Jordan, Lebanon, and the United Arab Emirates have all adopted legislation or regulations governing ESM for e-waste. However, e-waste legislation on management of the waste remains inadequate in the region. Nevertheless, e-waste should be considered in well-developed legal and regulatory frameworks on hazardous waste. Yet, in countries without legal and regulatory frameworks, e-waste is treated as municipal waste, which in most cases is dumped in landfills (Iattoni et al. 2021).

The Regional E-Waste Monitor for the Arab States 2021 report found an overwhelming lack in e-waste collection information. This is due to absence of official data and inconsistency in the collection infrastructure. Of the 12 West Asian countries with e-waste generation data presented in Figure 1, only four countries provided data on e-waste collection: the State of Qatar, the Hashemite Kingdom of Jordan, the United Arab Emirates, and the State of Palestine. Jordan collected the highest amount of e-waste for ESM, amounting to 1.3 kt, followed by the United Arab Emirates at 0.7 kt, then Qatar at 0.2 kt and finally the State of Palestine at 0.08 kt (Iattoni et al. 2021).

A study in the UAE estimated that 85% of respondents purchased one to three e-devices every year. The e-waste generation rate is also 17.3 kg/capita/year, most of which is disposed of in household trash. The rest is donated, repaired, or sold.

Figure 3: 
Kilotons of E-waste Generated in West Asia in 2019 (Iattoni et al. 2021).

A preventative approach to reduce the impact of e-waste is the Extended Producer Responsibility (EPR) strategy. It is a policy approach encouraging EEE producers to shoulder financial and physical responsibility for the disposal, recycling, and treatment of post-consumer products (Iattoni et al. 2021). It encourages producers to reduce the environmental impact of products and
their packaging throughout all product life cycles. According to the Regional E-Waste Monitor for the Arab States 2021, several West-Asian countries aim to further combat the impacts of the informal handling of e-waste through the EPR principle. The West-Asian United Arab Emirates introduced the principle of
EPR for e-waste and battery waste through the legislative Cabinet Decree No. 39 of 2021. Following in UAE’s footsteps, Jordan’s Ministry of Environment is establishing an EPR system, as well as Lebanon, whose 2019 national strategy foresighted the adoption of EPR (Iattoni et al. 2021).

It is recommended that countries work on preventing e-waste generation, adopting necessary legislation and policies such as EPR and E-waste specific ESM strategies, also making collection and treatment plants available and improved. Policymakers should consider institutional support and recognize women waste workers in policymaking.

4.2 Digital Technologies and Carbon Footprint

GHG emissions from the ICT industry, include energy consumption from ICT manufacturing processes, emissions from the mining and extraction of essential earth metals used in ICT production, the operation of ICT devices, and the disposal and recycling of them. According to United Nations Information Portal on Multilateral Environmental Agreements (InforMea), countries in West Asia have witnessed dramatic increases in the number of users per 100 inhabitants between 2010 and 2021. In terms of growth over the years, WestAsian Iraq is in the lead among the region with an increase of 2900% percent from 2.5 internet users per 100 inhabitants in 2010 to 75 users in 2021. Regarding 2021 estimates, Bahrain, Qatar, Kuwait, Emirates, Saudi Arabia, and Oman have all come close to full integration of the internet among their population, with an average of 98.16 users per 100 inhabitants (InforMea 2022).

Digital assets, especially Bitcoin which use computers to mine digital assets, have an estimated yearly use of 58 Terawatt-hour (TWh) electricity. This number represents 0.21% of global energy consumption. Electricity use from crypto mining amounts to the same energy consumption as Switzerland (Baraniuk 2019). The issue with the forecasted emissions of cryptocurrency mining and its expected contribution to global warming by 2040 lies in its potential violation of the Paris Agreement COP21, UNFCCC (Mora et al. 2018). According to Cambridge Bitcoin Electricity Consumption Index’ (CBECI) latest monthly average estimates, Arab countries have significant rankings among global countries for global mining. Kuwait and Libya accounted for 0.13% and 0.10% of the global bitcoin mining hash rate, Oman had 0.06% of the global hash rate share (CBECI 2021). However, the industry is responding to develop alternative validation methods to create a token that use less energy, including the recent Ethereum Fork, Algorand, Cardano Stellar Nano and Hedera Hashgraph (Bogna 2022).

4.3 The Digital Divide

The Global Risk Report 2021 indicates that growing dependency on digital systems, especially during the COVID-19 pandemic, drastically sharpened societal inequalities (World Economic Forum [WEF] 2021). Digitalization will also continue broadening this digital divide: the WEF’s report marks digital inequality in the top ten of the most concerning short-term threats (0-2 years) (WEF 2022). These inequalities will likely harm the already most vulnerable, with long-term consequences that policy makers should not ignore.

The digital divide is a result of structural injustices and power disparities that need to be addressed, among other things, by implementing agile governance frameworks, making public investments in digital infrastructure, and promoting digital literacy. It goes beyond inequalities in access to the internet. It includes different levels of access to the tools, technologies, information, skills, and agencies in driving digitalization. The digital divide also exists along gender lines, with fewer women compared to men having access to and engaging with digital platforms.