Millions of metric tonnes of used clothing, electronics, and other goods are sent annually from industrialized countries to the Global South, often with little regard for the environmental and health impacts these items leave behind. In Accra, Ghana, the Kantamanto Market—one of the world's largest secondhand clothing markets—receives thousands of garments each week. Some of these items are resold and given new life, but many are deemed unsellable or of poor quality and end up in dumps, waterways, or informal landfills. The environmental accountability that would apply to these goods in countries like Europe or North America often stops at the border. This creates a paradox: while materials circulate globally, the responsibility for managing their environmental impact does not. This issue was recently highlighted at a symposium titled "When the Global South Inspires the Global North," held during the 93rd Acfas (Canadian-French Association for the Advancement of Science) congress. Researchers discussed how products often travel without the responsibility mechanisms, eco-taxes, or funding that should accompany them. As a result, the environmental and social costs of a product’s end of life are frequently shifted to regions with fewer resources to manage them. Electronic waste is a prime example. According to the Global E-waste Monitor 2024, the world generated 62 million metric tonnes of e-waste in 2022, but only 22.3% was officially collected and recycled. The rest often follows complex, hard-to-trace global supply chains, where the environmental and health risks are concentrated in the regions where the products end up. In many African cities, waste pickers extract valuable metals like copper and aluminum from discarded electronics. Their work helps recover resources that would otherwise be lost, but it is often done without proper safety equipment and under precarious conditions. Canadian scholar Max Liboiron refers to this as an "unequal distribution of pollution," where some populations benefit from the economic value of recycling, while others bear the brunt of the environmental and health risks. The textile industry offers a similar example: large volumes of used clothing are exported to secondhand markets in Africa, Latin America, and Asia. When a significant portion of these shipments consists of low-quality or unsellable clothing, the receiving countries are left with waste management challenges they did not create. While the Kantamanto Market is often celebrated as a circular economy success story, it also faces the reality of mountains of clothing no one wants, with the environmental burden falling on Ghana. The concept of a circular economy—defined as a model that reduces resource extraction and waste through reuse, repair, and recycling—has gained traction in recent years. However, researchers have warned that discussions around circularity often focus on material flows and technical solutions, while neglecting the social, political, and territorial dimensions of waste management. In the Global South, circular practices are often rooted in local systems of repair and reuse that have existed long before industrialized nations began promoting formal models. These systems create value, reduce waste, and support resource recovery, but they are rarely included in the financial or governance structures of the circular economy. The issue is not just about recycling—it’s about how global responsibility is distributed. While the Basel Convention regulates the movement of hazardous waste, gaps remain in how used goods and electronics, intended for reuse, are managed across borders. There is a growing call for a broader definition of responsibility, one that ensures the benefits of bringing a product to market and the costs of its end of life are not confined to national borders. A truly sustainable circular economy must involve not just the circulation of materials, but also the circulation of responsibility, funding, and protections. This does not mean ending global trade in used goods, which supports economic activity and creates jobs in many regions. The challenge lies in ensuring that financial and regulatory responsibilities follow the products themselves. In Canada, for example, recycling systems are built around national or provincial borders, even though the waste generated from consumer products is part of global supply chains. While sorting waste more carefully is a good start, a true shift toward circularity requires understanding where products go after leaving our homes, who is responsible for them, and what resources support that responsibility. If waste crosses borders, so too must accountability.