The perfect example of how to misinterpret information so it fits your narrative

The digital publication The Exchange recently published an article about the negative consequences of second-hand import and trade in Uganda. Unfortunately, the author has completely mixed up figures and conclusions. Why, one might wonder?

The article begins by stating that the proportion of textile waste from the import of second-hand clothing in Uganda is massive: “up to 48 tonnes discarded daily, most of it ending up in landfills.”

Article in The Exchange

How the author arrives at this figure is explained later in the article, where reference is made to a study on the subject conducted by WasteAid, the Management Training and Advisory Centre, and the Uganda Tailors Association.

According to this study, Uganda generates a total of 48 tonnes of textile waste per day, which corresponds to 3 percent of the country’s total waste. Converted into annual figures, this amounts to 17,520 tonnes per year.

However this figure includes all textile waste, regardless of its origin. The authors interpretation of this seems to be that all textile waste in Uganda comes directly from imported second-hand clothing, which is a somewhat strange conclusion.

Textile waste normally consists of clothing and textiles that have gone through several life cycles and can no longer be used. In most countries through both Africa and Europe the total amount of textile waste is considered to be around 2-4 per cent. of the total waste stream, which is why this figure is't in any way controversial.

However, further down in the article, it turns out that there are actual figures on how much of the imported second-hand clothing is considered unusable and therefore regarded as waste upon arrival. According to the study it is around one percent of the imported second-hand clothing. This equates to 800 tonnes annually.

So, how can 800 tonnes annually suddenly become 17,520 tonnes annually?

The difference is quite substantial, which makes the conclusions in the article rather difficult to understand.

All clothing, wether it is recently produced or reused will eventually become waste. Also, if Uganda didn't import second-hand clothes, it would probably import new clothes or produce them domestically. These clothes will also one day become waste.

Unfortunately, this is yet another example of the misinformation that has been spread for years in both African and European media – and which has been disproved countless times by investigations and studies.

The difference this time is that the article actually refers to relevant figures – but draws the wrong conclusions.

Link: The Exchange Article Link: Misconceptions about textile waste in Africa threatens the circular textile economy

Link: Report on second-hand clothing in Uganda & Tanzania