Australian billionaire’s $630m waste-to-energy plant in Fiji exposes global colonial waste trade and neocolonial energy extraction

Fijian traditional landowners like Inoke Tora embody the *vanua* worldview, where land is not a resource to be commodified but a living ancestor (*kabani*). The incinerator project violates *qoliqoli* (customary fishing rights) and *vanua* governance, reducing waste management to a profit-driven transaction. Indigenous Pacific resistance to waste colonialism dates back to the 1980s, when Māori and Samoan activists blocked foreign waste shipments. This project continues a legacy of extractive industries imposed without free, prior, and informed consent (FPIC).

The Basel Convention (1989) was explicitly designed to curb 'waste colonialism' after revelations of toxic waste dumped in Africa and the Pacific, yet wealthy nations exploit loopholes to export waste. Australia has a history of dumping waste in the Pacific, including the 2006 *Probo Koala* scandal where toxic sludge was offloaded in Ivory Coast. Colonial-era land tenure systems in Fiji were repurposed to facilitate foreign corporate land grabs, a pattern now repeating with waste infrastructure.

In India, waste-to-energy plants have displaced Dalit communities and exacerbated caste-based pollution burdens, mirroring Fiji’s risks. Ghanaian e-waste dumps show how 'green energy' projects often externalise harm to marginalised groups. Pacific Island nations like Vanuatu and the Marshall Islands have rejected similar projects, prioritising circular economy models rooted in indigenous knowledge. The contrast between Fiji’s petition-driven resistance and Australia’s corporate lobbying reveals divergent governance cultures.

Waste-to-energy incinerators emit dioxins, particulate matter, and heavy metals, disproportionately harming vulnerable populations near facilities. Studies show that incineration reduces waste volume but often increases toxicity, contradicting claims of 'clean energy'. Fiji’s coral reefs, already stressed by climate change, face additional threats from air pollution and water contamination. Life-cycle assessments consistently show that waste reduction and recycling are more sustainable than incineration.

Fijian artists like Losalini Raravuya have depicted waste colonialism in performances critiquing foreign exploitation of *vanua*. The incinerator’s smokestacks evoke colonial 'smoke signals' of domination, while local dances like *meke* symbolise resistance to imposed modernity. Spiritual leaders in Fiji have framed the project as a violation of *sevusevu* (sacred offerings to land spirits), linking environmental harm to cultural desecration.

If approved, this project could set a precedent for similar ventures in Samoa, Tonga, or Papua New Guinea, exacerbating regional environmental injustice. A circular economy model—with local recycling hubs, composting, and extended producer responsibility—could create 10x more jobs than incineration while reducing emissions. Fiji’s 2050 Climate Action Plan prioritises waste reduction, but corporate lobbying risks derailing these goals. Scenario modelling suggests that by 2035, waste-to-energy plants in the Pacific could displace 50,000+ people.

Fijian women’s groups, such as the *Diverse Voices and Action for Equality*, have highlighted how waste incinerators disproportionately harm women’s health and livelihoods. Waste pickers in Suva, predominantly Indo-Fijian migrants, face exclusion from formal waste systems yet bear the brunt of pollution. The project’s economic promises ignore Fiji’s informal sector, which employs 20% of the workforce in waste management. Indigenous women like Adi Litia Cakobau have led legal challenges against foreign land grabs, yet their voices are sidelined in mainstream coverage.