Why 'trash for cash' mindset risks hurting Kenya's circular economy

As Kenya’s push for a circular economy gains momentum, there is a growing perception that waste is no longer something to throw away but something to cash in on. 

From old clothes and broken electronics to discarded household items, more Kenyans are beginning to view waste through a commercial lens, expecting payment in exchange for items once considered rubbish. 

But stakeholders in the waste management sector warn that this mindset, fuelled by the growing popularity of green initiatives, could undermine the very environmental programmes meant to reduce waste and promote sustainability. 

It is a mildly hot Saturday morning when The Standard visits Baraka Estate in Tassia, Embakasi East in Nairobi during a waste-collection drive in the area. Three organisations have teamed up to collect textile and electronic waste from residents. 

We arrive at around 10:30 am, Electronic-waste Producer Responsibility Organisation of Kenya (EPROK), E-waste Initiative (EWIK) and Africa Collect Textiles (ACT) have already set up their tents and collection has begun.

Soon after exchanging pleasantries, a black saloon car drives by and parks next to the estate’s main gate, where a collection point has been set up. Three occupants come out of the car with two big bags of textiles they want to dispose of. Their driver casually says that they have come to “sell” the items. I thought it was a joke. 

“They wanted money in exchange for the textiles they had brought,” EPROK Coordinator John Ayara later tells me. “They went back with their items when we said we are not buying,” he says, much to my amusement. 

I was left wondering what they were going to do with clothes, shoes and other textiles they were no longer using. To me, that was a waste. It’s just like donating items to a children’s home. But to Kenyans like that driver, it was an opportunity to get some “green cash.” 

The irony is that projects of such nature are usually expensive and often depend on donor funding, which is never guaranteed and is not sustainable in the long run. 

“That is why we are now shifting to initiatives that will help us generate our own income. We repurpose the materials we collect into wearable fabrics,” says Trizah Michelle from ACT. “We are already distributing uniforms to a security firm in Kenya,” she says. 

Her organisation contributes to the circular economy by collecting, sorting, and transforming used textiles into products that can be used again by consumers. The textiles are grouped into wearables, which ACT donates to needy communities, and non-wearables, which are shredded and repurposed into new products, a capital-intensive initiative. 

Although donor funding has grown over the years, Trizah says that’s still the biggest challenge the organisation faces. The other challenge is helping Kenyans understand the importance of disposing of waste, and doing so correctly. If not managed properly, waste can have devastating effects on both the environment and human health. 

“People don’t usually see used items as waste, especially when they have a sentimental attachment to them. Some need incentives to let go of electronic products that have reached their end of life,” says Ayara. 

EPROK has been partnering with major retailers to hand gift vouchers to volunteers during their collection drives, a strategy that works in areas like Tassia. In more affluent areas like Kilimani, residents are more open to green initiatives and don’t need incentives to give you their waste. 

But not all e-waste is valuable, and giving incentives may financially hurt organisations as returns are not always guaranteed. 

 “Some of the items we receive are too bad to be recycled or refurbished,” says Valyne Laibuta from EPROK. “Kenya does not have the technology to mine precious metals from e-waste formally, so we have to export to Dubai at a very costly price.” 

Kenya generates about 51,000 metric tonnes of e-waste annually, according to the Kenya National Bureau of Statistics (KNBS), with only one per cent of this volume being formally recycled. This means the majority of the country’s e-waste is handled by the informal sector, which is unable to manage waste sustainably. 

Concerns of environmental degradation and greenhouse gas emissions caused by improper waste management have intensified the push for a circular economy. There have also been initiatives to train informal waste pickers and recyclers on proper waste management.

At the same time, Kenya has passed several legislations, such as the Sustainable Waste Management Act (2022) and the Extended Producer Responsibility (EPR) Regulations (2024), in an attempt to bring sanity to the waste sector. Different Producer Responsibility Organisations (PROs) are now handling waste on behalf of polluters. All these attempts are aimed at creating green jobs. 

The commercialisation of green initiatives is thus not accidental. In the past, waste picking was considered a poor man’s job. But over the years, “there has been emphasis on converting trash into treasure, and Kenyans now know it’s a lucrative business,” says Anita Soina, an environmentalist and climate change advocate. 

Since proper waste management can be expensive, Soina argues that it is not strange for people to ask for money for waste because it’s a business. “It’s not like these organisations recycle waste to donate; they also sell, so it’s fair for them to pay for waste,” she says. 

The activist believes that this helps to create more green opportunities and no one should be victimised for wanting to get money out of green initiatives. 

“Whether it’s online activism, or a green project running in a community, or it’s an organisation that does formal recycling, money is always needed. As long as that’s not the main focus, then everyone should be able to get funds for what they do,” she says. 

As the country struggles with a high unemployment rate among young people, Kenya’s waste problem has become a tricky balance between creating opportunities for a restless youth and implementing stringent regulations to avert a runaway environmental and health crisis. 

On one hand, citizens are encouraged to reuse, repair or recycle products with the hope of reducing waste from landfills and associated emissions. On the other hand, the state is being accused by organisations like Greenpeace Africa of failing to ensure the quality of second-hand imports. Both electronic devices and used textiles (mitumba) come into the country without proper checks, worsening an already difficult crisis.