[stevage]

Well that's the story. Already the value of secondhand clothes in Africa has gone way down as people have access to the internet and can see they are not the latest fashion.

Clothes that won't be worn should be recycled in the country of origin, not sent to Africa to be dumped in landfill.

[pas]

How are the donated clothes getting there if there's no real demand? Are there clueless importers and NGOs with money to burn? :o

[stevage]

I think they can sell enough to make it worthwhile, and disposing of the rest is extremely cheap because of the lack environmental regulations etc.

[pas]

but that means people are buying it. it's arguably good that they have this option.

and if there is a problem with waste, then that should be addressed, not the import.

[chimpanzee]

> If used clothing is the problem, why not prohibit it altogether? The answer is that countries tried. In 2016, a group of East African countries joined forces to ban imports of secondhand clothing. In retaliation, the Trump administration threatened to remove the countries from the program that is at the core of U.S.-Africa trade policy if they followed through. No surprise that a lobby group representing used clothing sorters backed the move. The only country that stood firm was Rwanda and, to this day, its duty-free apparel benefits under AGOA remain suspended.

[pas]

there's no point in banning it. clothing is extremely well suited for a market-based solution.

if there are problems with waste and recycling then that's an argument for taxing it and using that revenue to fund waste management.

[chimpanzee]

The trash is being foisted upon them in exchange for other economic considerations. The demand is artificial.

Did you read the article?

[pas]

No I haven't read it as I don't have a WaPo subscription anymore.

So someone is sending free textile shipments to Africa?

How is the demand "artificial", is someone masquerading as buyers?

So is it about environmental issues, is it about protectionism, both?

[chimpanzee]

I don’t have a subscription either yet I managed to read it directly via the posted link. Please do so as well before asking more questions, unless of course, you’re just grinding an axe and the details would get in the way.

> So someone is sending free textile shipments to Africa?

Trash clothes are bundled with good clothes because proper disposal would be more costly.

> How is the demand "artificial", is someone masquerading as buyers?

There are no ultimate buyers for the trash clothes. They are imported only because they are bundled into good clothes. The importer has no export-side employee vetting the shipment. And the importer has no homeland authority with the power to ensure that the importer doesn’t eventually offload the disposal costs onto the environment and future generations. The exporter knows this and happily takes advantage (along with a little help from government power and threats to revoke “free-market” incentives, ironically).

> So is it about environmental issues, is it about protectionism, both?

It’s about protectionism and environmentalism as a reaction to the use of power in service of greed to offload home-grown externalities onto desperate third-world countries. Or, if you choose not to read the article, it’s just about environmentalism and protectionism and their evil anti-market ways. Your choice.