Author: Corey Portell

Global North
vs.
Global South:
A Case Study in Lead
Poisoning Prevention in the United States and India

By Corey Portell, Science and Society, HONR 204, Fall 2008

Introduction:
Lead has been mined widely throughout the world since the days of the Greeks; however, the utilization of lead has changed over time. As nations have developed, so has the use of lead. The Romans used lead for the debasement of coinage, glassmaking, and warfare, all which evolved as the Roman information spread (3).
Today, lead is still utilized, though not nearly as heavily as it once was. Lead can be found in use in almost every nation of the world in the form of solder, leaded-glass or crystal, leaded petroleum, lead-acid batteries, etc (10). Typically, these stable forms of lead are accepted in most countries; crystal and lead-acid batteries are seen as luxuries and necessities in the industrialized world. In the United States, lead-acid batteries have powered our cars for decades, and in India, lead was a major player in building and running the ancient cities of Harappan and Mohenjodaro (10). The problem, however, comes into play when hazardous forms of these legal materials are not dealt with properly.
In the United States, a long-fought battle with the toxicity of lead began as early as 1705 AD in the American Colonies. Conversely, while the United States was getting acquainted with lead, India’s relationship with lead had been in full swing since 2000-1000 BCE and continues to this day. Both nations have and intricate relationships with lead, both necessary and negative.
Since, like every metal, the price of the virgin lead and the price of the recycled lead greatly impacts the feasibility of lead-acid battery recycling domestically (in industrialized countries), the US industry, for example, has all but ceased to exist (14). The logical question would be, where do these hazardous materials, such as lead-acid batteries go to be recycled? The answer: to Third World nations such as India, China, and Indonesia. This begins an exploration into the idea of Third World recycling; why do nations, specifically India for the sake of this presentation, take control of the industry, and what is or is not being done to accommodate the incurred health risks? The situation gets even stickier when children are affected by an activity they should be nowhere near, especially since the activity, that of shipping recyclable leaded materials to other nations, is illegally done internationally (15).

http://www.faqs.org/health/images/uchr_08_img0833.jpg

http://www.luc.edu/faculty/afitch/Sublime%20Lead/CHAP1A.2003.pdf

Background:
Certain points of information are necessary in order to understand the different nature of lead and the relationship with lead in both the US and India:
Children are more sensitive to lead poisoning than adults; for that reason they are often the “barometers” in environments and are studied more than adults (10).
A current cut-off point, when it is considered toxic lead poisoning, is over 10 µg/dL, however, it is known that lead below those levels can also hinder in children's’ developmental processes, especially in fetuses (5).
Other than chelation therapy, a diet rich in calcium helps to decrease the effects of lead poisoning due to the similar natures of lead and calcium. The uptake of either element effects how the other is absorbed (10).
The Basel Convention of the 1980s was set in place to control the transboundary movements of hazardous waste. In this current decade (2000-2010), the Basel Convention is still working on the implementation of its rules, regulations, and monitoring across the globe (15).
Both the US and India have utilized lead in many industries and have outlawed use after recognition of harm, namely with leaded petroleum. The US stopped using leaded gasoline in the 1980s (10), and India only recently ceased its use from 1996-2000. Because India only recently stopped its usage of leaded petroleum, blood-lead levels are still high, across the board, but they are decreasing. Children were found to have a mean blood-lead level of 18.1 µg/dL during the use of leaded petrol, but now post-2000, children have mean blood-lead levels of 12.1 µg/dL, still above the hazardous levels (18).
Blood-lead levels of US children range from place of residence, but approximately 19 percent of children under the age of six have blood-lead levels of 10 µg/dL or higher.
India ratified the United Nation’s Convention on the Rights of the Child in 1992, therefore, by international law, the Indian government should be protecting children from the harmful effects of lead, per the Convention’s description of the right to survival and protection. Ultimately, this means that if these goals are not achieved, international intervention is applicable (13).

The United States:
Lead, as a hazardous material, was lastly stricken from the markets of the general public in the US through the lead paint business. Though most of these companies “voluntarily” submitted to ridding their products of lead, lawsuits were still brought forth decades later, trying to hold the company accountable for the refurbishment of lead-contaminated homes (10). This is one such example of how the United States has been a champion for the health of its citizens in the arena of lead poisoning, especially when it comes to leaded products still on the market.
Lead-acid battery disposal can still be an issue, but many US states have taken action. Many states have restricted the quantity of lead-acid batteries in their state, increased refunds for recycling, or banned them from municipal waste plants altogether (6). This poses a serious problem; if over half of US states do not allow the disposal of lead-acid batteries, how are they disposed? Many foreign markets have answered that question by creating a scrap-metal recycling industry where the monetary incentive for recycling is high, especially for lead-acid batteries (14). Industrialized countries like the United States know full well the repercussions of lead-poisoning because they themselves have experienced it , and for this reason, want to get rid of any leaded item that could potentially be dangerous. This poses a problem when recycling is done internationally because of the 1980 Basel Convention, which seeks to minimize the amount and traveled distance of all hazardous waste, and requires all nations to provide documentation (15). The big problem is when states send this waste to dirty, polluting factories in Third World countries (14).
The United States, as a consuming nation, does not fully regard the repercussions of its consumption; someone must deal with our hazardous waste. Unfortunately, many of those people are children.

United States Housing Units with a High Risk of Lead Hazards

http://www.scorecard.org/env-releases/lead/

India:
The prevalence of lead in India is great; it can be found in old mine shafts, in air breathed, in water, in occupational recycling, etc (1). Because it is so widely dispersed, and in such high amounts around large groups of people, countless Indians are affected by lead poisoning, many of them children.
According to one study based in Lucknow, India in 1994, newborns were found to have blood-lead levels of 16 µg/dL, enough above the 10 µg/dL cutoff for hazardous to children (19). By 2000, children’s blood-lead levels were a mean of 12.1 µg/dL, most likely due to the eradication of leaded petroleum, but over 50 percent of children in urban areas still had over 10 µg/dL (3,5).
Laws and standards have been passed in India to help lower the amount of lead consumption, but most took place only in 1999, and were solely workshops, not actual legislation. An incredibly minor effort on behalf of the government, the focus of only one city, Delhi, was made even more ridiculous because it was directed at foreign aid, not domestic practices (19).
Most action taken in India, at least the most effective, is done by international (The Basel Convention) and state NGOs (7). Though there is recognition of the harmful effects of the international lead-acid battery recycling industry, the Indian government does not, or is incapable of stopping it. Since 1881, including the pre-independence government, the Indian government has passed seven labor laws that “directly affect health,” the earliest, Factories Act, was even in the name of child labor. The issue, however, from then until now, has been enforcement of these laws. Historically, though legislative processes have since made issues such as child labor, and therefore direct exposure to lead illegal, the enforcement of such laws are difficult when industries disagree, as is the case in India (1). In the end, workers are harmed by lead, as are their families.
Even more troubling is India’s fight with corruption. Internationally, India is recognized as having one of the most corrupt governments in the world; bribery and crooked political parties are not only perceived, but are concretely real (16, 20). India’s lead problem is broad and rampant, but hardly anything is being done.

http://www.luc.edu/faculty/afitch/Sublime%20Lead/CHAP2A.2003.pdf

Why So Different?:
As highlighted earlier, the US and India have very different relationships with lead in today’s world. Not only does the industrialization status of each country play a role, but the differences in the evolution of each nation does as well. Structurally, the United States and India differ.
Since the realm of international politics has been documented and studied, namely since WWII, the way the hegemonic powers have functioned, namely consumption and the stabilization of power, ultimately affect the Third World and has shifted how industrialization works (12). This size of the world’s population, especially populations in Third World countries, and the rate of technological application has increased continued to increase greatly. This means that there are more people and more materials, therefore, there is more pollution, comparatively (2).
It is also important to consider that as a winner of WWII, the US has had a longer period of industrialized success as the sole hegemonic power (12). This has allowed the US government, as well as private companies, to firmly establish research in the field of health; the US had the monetary means, India did not.
Though both the US and India have fairly similar structure in governmental bodies, they ways in which they function are very dissimilar. The authority of the United States’ government is fairly concrete. If a private business, for example, harms the public, as was the case with the lead contaminated houses in Rhode Island, the US government will take the business to court. In India, the court systems are slow and ineffective, for instance, it took 13 years to deliberate a 1993 terrorism trial, and few of the terrorists were even convicted (4). If a nation does not take care of terrorism, why would it take care of an industrial problem? If an industry does not wish to comply, there is no logical reason why it should, and Indian business do not always comply (1). The way the US and India function in regards to lead poisoning is starkly different, because of this, so is their legislative/judicial effect.

Reasons for lower-risk of lead
poisoning in United States Today:
Long history with lead
Government control/legislation
Decent/good nutrition
Less direct-use of lead

Reasons for higher-risk of lead
poisoning in India Today:
Occupational hazard rampant
Prevalent and easily accessible
Malnutrition
Lack of government control

Conclusion:
In a way, the exportation of leaded waste products to the Third World makes sense in more than monetary terms; toxic waste is no longer a problem for the industrialized First World countries that can afford to get rid of it(12). If one has the ability to pay to get rid of hazardous materials, one will logically get rid of them.
Two major conclusions can be drawn from these case studies. First, it seems that, by power of example, Third World countries are doomed to the former life of current First World countries; to eradicate lead, they must first experience its harmful effects. Just like the United States before them, India and other Third World countries appear to utilize lead for its power of monetary stimulation without serious regard to its toxicity. Governments see the import of hazardous materials as good for their economies; they get paid to process them through recycling. The issue, however, is when the waste is sent to plants that pollute nearby water-supplies and the air close to villages (14). Since citizens of these Third World nations do not see concrete disdain for leaded products, they continue to use them for industrial reasons and even for heat sources (9). Nations like India must, unfortunately, recognize and experience the negative consequences of lead use before serious change is imparted.
Secondly, there also seems to be a correlation with political corruption and legislative failure; in this case, the more focused lawmakers are on putting money in their own pockets, the less aware and willing they are to seriously aid their citizens. From 2004-2005, 74-80 percent of the population of India perceived its government as corrupt (16). Since citizens do not see their own government as legitimate, two things are visibly occurring. First, the nation’s people are not taken care of; lead poisoning still effects adults and children alike every day because the government fails to intervene. Second, when the government does intervene, industries and factories refuse to cooperate (1). As a country in the second-highest quintile for countries most affected by bribery, India has a long ways to go before it can take care of its own people (20).
Ultimately, the reasons for such a dichotomy between specifically the US and India, but broadly between the First World and the Third World, are many. Differences in stages of industrialization, economy, scientific knowledge, types of government, corruption level, and more all impact how health standards and health legislation is decided. The ability to rise above status, at any level, is difficult; the eradication of lead poisoning seems a bleak possibility.

http://www.okinternational.org/images/batbreak.jpg

Solutions?:
There is no easy way to get rid of lead; it has been dispersed for centuries across the globe, and only now do we fully recognize that no blood-lead level is healthy (10). In order to protect our lives, as well as the lives we affect around the world, we must take action and provide solutions to the problems that we create.
The Basel Convention provides hope; their theories and practices are foundational in the steps towards the reduction of leaded-waste and other hazardous materials (15). Their policy is that the less a hazardous waste travels, the less chance it has to affect any being, and through this alone countless lives could be saved.
The implementation of proper precautionary materials by industries, factories, and workers who handle leaded waste materials, both domestically and abroad, would help to decrease the occupational hazards, the poisonings, that come with working with lead.
Sometimes, it is as simple as going and riding a bike. The longer we make lead-acid batteries last, the less we will need to consume. By utilizing other means, or public means of transportation, the chances are good that our gross consumption will lessen.
The interest of governments of nations that recycle old scrap metal, namely lead, should be directed towards the protection of its citizens, and less on monetary gain and corrupt practices (20). By the institution and the follow through of stricter production, zoning, and health laws , companies would decrease not only the toxic exposure that workers feel, but also the exposure caused by careless, polluting factories. Idealistic though it may be, it is a sure-fire way, as has been seen in the United States, to reduce the amount of lead-poisoning cases occupationally as well as accidentally.

http://www.lead-battery-recycling.com/images/recyclingloop.jpg

	highest 20% of states
	second highest 20% of states
	middle 20% of states
	second lowest 20% of states
	lowest 20% of states

Map Legend: Number of Housing Units with a High Risk of Lead Hazards