Informal processing of electronic waste at Agbogbloshie,Ghana: workers’ knowledge about associated health hazards and alternative livelihoods

Design and participants

A qualitative cross-sectional study was conducted during the months of May and June 2012 to gather empirical information on e-waste workers’ knowledge about the potential hazards associated with their work and the livelihood alternatives to e-waste recycling with a sample consisting of twenty all-male electronic waste workers at the Agbogbloshie scrap metal yard in Accra, Ghana. Subject/participant recruitment was conducted following an initial community sensitization process by first informing the chairman of the recyclers who in turn informed all the community members about the planned field research activities/field data collection exercise and the dates of planned visits. This study took advantage of the existing strong relationship between the research team and the community members. The research team has a long history of conducting research in the community which has ultimately led to the establishment of a formal partnership (aiming to reduce community exposure to environmental toxins associated with e-waste recycling activities in the area) between the research team and non-governmental organizations (NGOs), namely Green Advocacy and Blacksmith Institute on the one hand and the community members on the other hand. Under the recruitment criterion that workers had to have at least one year of continuous experience in e-waste processing, twenty e-waste workers, who specialized in different specific work capacities (e.g. scavenger, dismantler, and/or burner), were approached and randomly selected to participate in the study. Consent forms were read and explained, and e-waste workers willing to participate provided consent. Research ethics approval was obtained from the Ghana Health Service Ethical Review Board.

Data were collected through in-depth, open-ended interviews with the use of a semi-structured guide with questions related to the study objectives. All interviews were conducted and recorded in Dagbani, the predominant language of the northern region of Ghana. The interviews, lasting 25–30 mins on average, were conducted in person by two male experienced interviewers who were native Dagomba, fluent in both Dagbani and English, with one participant at a time in a secluded environment so as to avoid interruptions by other people.

The interviews focused on the health hazards that the e-waste workers encountered, or believed that they themselves or others in the area encountered as a result of e-waste recycling activities. Information was also collected on the livelihood alternatives that the e-waste workers would prefer if authorities were contemplating social and/or environmental interventions. Theme saturation—a point where new data collected no longer brought additional insights to the stated objectives—was reached after the twentieth in-depth interview. At this point the interviews were discontinued as previously published (10). All interviews were audio-recorded and field notes were taken.

Analysis

The two experienced interviewers separately transcribed and translated verbatim all the interviews into English in a word processing program. In a situation where there was no consensus, the interviewers reviewed the transcriptions and the original recordings until consensus was reached. The transcripts and expanded notes were stored as electronic files and coded manually for textual analysis to gather empirical evidence on e-waste recyclers’ knowledge about health risks associated with e-waste recycling activities (41,42). As required in qualitative thematic analysis (41–43), the coding process involved identifying major themes and subthemes in each of the transcripts. The identified themes, or concepts, were then compared across the transcripts to determine differences and similarities in the participants’ knowledge about the hazards associated with their work as well as their preferred livelihood alternatives if given the opportunity. The themes were interpreted in the context of extant literature in a meaningful way to reach conclusions without attempting to generate a theory since our interest was in gathering empirical evidence to guide health promotion activities among e-waste workers and to inform health policy reforms.

Participants’ characteristics

As previously published (10), a total of 20 e-waste workers took part in the study. All participants were male, between the age of 13 and 34 years, with the majority in their twenties. All participants were from the northern region of Ghana and belonged to the Dagomba ethnic group. Of the 20 participants, five had a junior high school education, five had no formal education, and the rest had received some level of primary education. There were three distinctive e-waste processing roles: (1) scavengers, who engaged in electronic wastes and metal scrap collection; (2) dismantlers, who engaged in manual separation of e-waste components/metal scrap; and (3) burners, who used open-fires to burn away components that could not be manually removed by the dismantlers (10). Seven of the participants were scavengers, seven were dismantlers, and six were burners.

Knowledge and awareness of potential health hazards

Knowledge and awareness of the hazards associated with informal e-waste processing among the workers was low. This was illustrated in various ways, and we present these ways in detail below.

Views about personal health problems

Participants reported experiencing various health issues within the past year: eye pains, body pains, catarrh, fever, hemorrhages, coughs, and abdominal pain. However, the majority of the participants did not believe their work played any role in these symptoms. Symptoms like coughing, fever, and abdominal pain were described as experienced by them and observed in others who did not work in e-waste processing. In addition, participants reported that such symptoms affected them even before they entered the e-waste recycling occupation. As recounted by one participant:

I was sick of [sic] catarrh in the year. It gave me headache and blocked my nostrils; I can’t tell whether this sickness is as a result of my job because even when I am not doing this job, while in the north I still occasionally experience the same health problems.

In addition, a few of the participants reported suffering from fever (which they equated to malaria) during the past year and erroneously attributed the cause to the scorching sun and the heat from the burning process. As stated by one participant: “This year I was seriously sick of [sic] malaria which I think was partly caused by the heat I experience while burning electronic wastes.”

Participants were able to correctly identify a limited number of health problems due to their work, specifically eye pains and physical injuries like cuts and burns. As stated by one participant: “This year I had occasional eye pains especially when I bend [sic] down just after burning.” Another described how one could get injured in the dismantling component of e-waste processing: “You would [sic] get injured when you are hitting the computer to dismantle it. This is especially so when you are not well versed in how to do the dismantling of the electronic waste.” Some participants also acknowledged that smoke from the burning process was a potential health concern. One participant reported: “The smoke can go deep into your chest…” while another described that the smoke can “… enter inside your eyes and make it [sic] red-looking.”

It was observed that a few participants were informed about the dangers of e-waste processing and how the job could lead to potential health problems by city authorities and environmental advocacy groups; however, they did not know the specifics nor did they observe it amongst their co-workers. As described by one individual: “The whites have been frequenting this place in the last 3 years to tell us that our job can cause health problems but we are yet to see these problems.” Another stated: “I heard this work may lead to some sicknesses, but I do not know the specific sicknesses.”

Views about community health

Most of the workers involved in the burning process of e-waste recycling believed that the smoke from the burning process was a health hazard associated with their work; however, they did not believe the smoke had any health implications for the people living and working around them. “I can’t tell if my job affects the health of other people in the market who do not do the same electronic waste job.” According to participants, the smoke was largely a nuisance to people, specifically to the nearby companies. The neighboring companies would often complain and when that happened, the burners would reschedule the large-scale burning activities for the evenings, after the companies had closed for the day. “Our work doesn’t disturb people so it is only the companies around that complain. When they do, we try to reserve the large-scale burning activities for the evening or night after those companies close.”

Participants who were scavengers and dismantlers did not believe that their work harmed anyone in the community, except for the occasional injuries that may be caused if someone walked too close to their work: “When I drop the waste, somebody can step on it and get injured.”

Sources of treatment

Participants explained that when they were ill, they would attempt to ‘self-cure’ first. Many reportedly used herbal remedies to cope with the symptoms: “On the few occasions I suffered stomach ache, I just smoked ‘wee’ and became fine.” When herbal remedies failed, participants reported that they would go to the drugstore and speak with the pharmacist about their health problems to obtain medications, for they are a cheaper option than going to see a doctor. As told by one participant: “I don’t go to hospital when I am sick, I only buy medicine… my friends help me with money to buy medicine and I use my own money when I have [sic].” Generally, medications were reported to help; however, in some extreme cases, hospitalization was necessary: “One of our brothers got sick and had to be sent to Korle Bu hospital and later northern region [sic]. He reduced drastically in weight and according to the hospital his body had lost some water.”

Views on work environment

The participants described their work environment as “disturbing” and “dirty.” The site was observed to be littered with rubbish, with piles of e-waste materials waiting to be burned or dismantled. The ground was a mixture of dirt, broken glass, rubbish, and pieces of half-embedded materials such as computer monitors.

Amongst the participants, there were mixed opinions on the conditions of the work environment. Some participants argued that they would like to keep the area the way it was to avoid losing the space. As illustrated by one participant: “We want our working place to remain dirty because if it becomes clean other workers in this market will locate their containers here. That means our working place would be taken over.” Others wanted a cleaner environment and tried to advocate for it, reportedly through “talks on how to make the environment clean” or “contributing some money to get this place cleaner.” One participant even stated that “as the rubbish around disturb [sic] … we burn them in the evening” to help keep the work environment clear of rubbish.

Personal protective measures

All participants reported little to no usage of personal protection equipment (PPE). Many burners reportedly wore safety shoes to protect themselves from burns: “I don’t use anything to protect myself…. I only use shoes when burning to protect my leg [sic] from the fire.” Interviewees who did not participate in the burning process stated that they would protect themselves from the smoke by avoiding the area or sometimes they used a piece of cloth to cover their mouth and nose. One participant who was a dismantler stated:

I use heavy shoes to protect me [sic] from cuts in my legs. I don’t use gloves, but what I do is [sic] I don’t get close to where they do the burning and in case am passing by I use a duster to cover my face, nose, and eyes.

Another participant who was a scavenger reported that “After going to the bush to buy computers, I leave my truck and rush to the house so that I don’t inhale the smoke… I protect myself from the smoke by making sure I don’t stand close to it.”

A few participants stated that they used gloves sometimes to protect against cuts and burns. Many of the participants occasionally reported using mask-like materials such as dusters or banners to cover their faces. Some reported being provided with face masks; however, these were rarely used. “We are not able to continuously use nose masks because the sweat easily spoils it [sic].”

Preferred livelihood alternatives

All participants stated their desire to eventually find another job that would provide a more sustainable source of income. They described the e-waste business as difficult work with no viable future. The following statement represents what many interviewees reported: “I don’t foresee doing this work for the rest of my life because I think this work has no future for me.” One reason why the e-waste business was viewed by workers to be unsustainable was the irregular income: “Our challenge is making the money… we are not usually able to save, we just work to feed ourselves.” Another reason was the lack of skills that one could gain: “This work does not give any skill. Although money is important, it is useless if a job does not improve your skill but only gives you money.” Another participant similarly stated: “I will [sic] like to change my job because this job is not job [sic]; this is just business, not handwork or skill.”

When asked about the type of employment they would like to do, participants mentioned various fields: transportation, agriculture, hospitality, and services. Specifically, participants mentioned occupations in professional driving, butchering, tailoring, auto mechanics, carpentry, retail, and farming. One participant stated his desire to go back to school: “I intend to get enough money to go back to school; that is why I am doing this job.” Despite the strong interest to seek other job opportunities, there were financial constraints that prevented them from being able to leave and learn another trade/skill to apply to future occupations. One participant stated:

I prefer to leave this job and become a tailor. I don’t think so much about contact [sic] people to learn from, like one particular tailor in Konkomba market, because I need to get the money first through the burning of electronics.

The e-waste business served as an avenue for workers to save and raise capital towards another occupation.

The locations of these desired job opportunities were also investigated. All participants wanted to be employed in the northern region of Ghana. The main reason for wanting to return to the northern region was that they wanted to be close to their families. As explained by one participant: “If anybody decides to help me I would prefer he helps me do a job that would not leave me far from my parents in the north.”