A COMPARATIVE ANALYSIS TO EVALUATE WHETHER HUMAN RIGHTS HINDER OR HELP WASTE MANAGEMENT MEASURES IN THE USA AND KSA ENVIRONMENT LAWW

Abstract

Waste is the most conspicuous environmental adverse effect resulting from human activities. Efficient waste management has significant potential to succeed in environmental protection efforts. The United States and Saudi Arabia are two leading countries that are facing challenges of waste in the form of greenhouse gas emissions, hazardous waste, and solid waste thanks to their rapid economic development, an influx of international migration, growing urbanization, and growing population. Waste management hierarchy classifies four most preferred to least preferred measures as source reduction and reuse, recycling and composting, energy recovery, and treatment and disposal . Since not all wastes can be managed by recycling and composting, energy recovery or other low-cost measures, waste reduction is considered the most preferred waste management measure in the hierarchy due to its potential sustainability and healthy environmental implications . To live in a clean and safe environment is our fundamental right. All waste management measures, in fact, advance and support our right to a clean and safe environment . When we implement waste management measures particularly the measure of waste reduction at source, we have to face many serious challenges that negatively affect the results of waste management measures and hinder the same. While considering and comparing demographic, economic, social, cultural, and political conditions of the United States and Saudi Arabia, such challenges further intensified as they involve human rights thanks to a conflict between waste management measures and human rights. Waste avoidance and reduction measures require that we need to avoid, reduce and minimize waste at the source which further requires that there should be low population growth, limited social and economic activities and development work, low urbanization, simple lifestyle, and restriction and check on exploitation of natural resources attached to personal property. These measures are directly in conflict with human rights including reproductive rights, social, economic, and cultural rights, rights development, right to freedom of movement and reside, bundle rights attached to a property, and right to improve quality of life. In this dilemmatic situation, the solution lies in a middle way where neither of human rights is damaged or violated to the extent that there is a total deprivation and alienation of such human rights. To save our future and that of generations to come, we must take immediate steps to protect our environment. The United States and Saudi Arabia must urgently devise an effective, prompt, and long-term plan to save the environment thanks to their already over-burdened ecosystem and their larger contribution to global greenhouse gas emissions.