Los miembros de #BreakFreeFromPlastic, optimistas por el borrador cero para un tratado global de plásticos, piden negociaciones ambiciosas

Las próximas negociaciones del INC-3 en noviembre en Kenia determinarán la eficacia del tratado

Manila – Siguiendo el mandato que surgió del segundo Comité Intergubernamental de Negociación en París para un acuerdo global que ponga fin a la contaminación por plásticos, el Programa de las Naciones Unidas para el Medio Ambiente y el Presidente del INC, S.E. Sr. Gustavo Adolfo Meza-Cuadra Velásquez (Perú), publicaron el borrador cero del tratado que se negociará en el próximo INC-3 en noviembre en Nairobi, Kenia.

Dado que no todas las cuestiones que se abordarán en el instrumento jurídico han sido objeto de presentaciones y debates detallados por parte de los gobiernos, el proyecto de texto incluye muchas alternativas y diferentes opciones lingüísticas, que constituyen una buena base para futuros debates.

Las áreas más prometedoras presentadas en el borrador incluyen opciones para la reducción progresiva de la producción de plástico, la eliminación de polímeros y sustancias químicas preocupantes, la eliminación de plásticos problemáticos de vida corta y evitables, el reconocimiento de la necesidad de transparencia, la transición justa y el establecimiento de sistemas y objetivos de reducción y reutilización, entre otros.

Las disposiciones potencialmente problemáticas y ambiguas incluyen textos sobre el contenido de plástico reciclado, la responsabilidad extendida del productor y la gestión de residuos. Sin normas ambiciosas, estas áreas podrían desvirtuar el énfasis en las medidas de reciclaje y gestión de residuos, socavando la eficacia del tratado. Un elemento clave que debe reforzarse es el reconocimiento del liderazgo de los pueblos indígenas a lo largo de los diferentes puntos, que actualmente sólo se menciona en el contexto del intercambio de conocimientos y el desarrollo de capacidades.

Basándose en un análisis preliminar, los miembros de #BreakFreeFromPlastic reaccionan ante el borrador cero del Tratado global de plásticos:

Ana Rocha, Directora del Programa Global de Plásticos, GAIA (Tanzania), dijo:

“GAIA quisiera agradecer al Embajador Mesas-Cuadra y al Secretario del INC por proporcionar un borrador que incluye toda la gama de opiniones expresadas por los gobiernos durante el INC-1 y el INC-2. La presencia de una serie de disposiciones en el borrador cero establece una línea de base positiva para los próximos debates en el INC-3, que esperamos sea fiel a la Resolución 5/14 al hacer hincapié en el enfoque de ciclo de vida completo necesario para acabar verdaderamente con la contaminación por plásticos. El énfasis en la prevención, en línea con la jerarquía de residuos, es el único camino posible para garantizar que la salud humana y el medio ambiente se preservan de los daños de la producción no regulada de plástico.”

Lena Estrada Añokazi, Representante Mundial de los Pueblos Indígenas del PNUMA (Uitoto Indígena del Amazonas), dijo

“Los Pueblos Indígenas soportan una carga desproporcionada de los impactos de la contaminación plástica, con sus derechos socavados en cada etapa del ciclo de vida del plástico. El borrador del documento cero debe contemplar el marco de derechos, soberanía y el principio de libre autodeterminación de los Pueblos Indígenas como uno de los principios del Tratado sobre Plásticos. Para que haya una participación efectiva de los Pueblos Indígenas en el Tratado de Plásticos, los sistemas de conocimiento indígena que son conocimiento científico preexistente deben ser considerados al mismo nivel, no sólo como un intercambio de información sino en el reconocimiento de que estos sistemas de conocimiento indígena tienen que contribuir a la mitigación y prevención de la contaminación de todo el ciclo del plástico.”

Rafael Eudes, Alianza Basura Cero Brasil, Joven Embajador de BFFP, dijo

“Con un primer paso influyente al reconocer en el borrador cero la consideración de los niños y los jóvenes -la mayor población mundial y uno de los grupos titulares de derechos del proceso del tratado- las partes negociadoras tienen ahora el poder de definir la eficacia del tratado para las generaciones actuales y futuras. Depende de ellos determinar si tendremos un tratado fuerte, que tenga en cuenta un enfoque de equidad intergeneracional con respecto a los derechos humanos, o si el proceso resultará en un texto débil lleno de lagunas que permitirán perpetuar un futuro comprometido con daños irreversibles para la salud humana, nuestra fauna y nuestro ecosistema”.

Yvette Arellano, Directora Ejecutiva de Fenceline Watch (Texas, EE.UU.), declaró:

“El primer borrador da un paso en la dirección correcta, pero debe trabajar para forjar un camino globalmente vinculante. Los planes nacionales para proteger a las comunidades del plástico por sí solos no son suficientes. Esperamos un tratado que construya una base sólida para protegernos de los impactos multigeneracionales causados por el plástico que heredarán nuestros hijos.”

Notas al editor

  • INC-2 Fotografías disponibles  aquí

Acerca de BFFP – #BreakFreeFromPlastic es un movimiento mundial que imagina un futuro libre de contaminación por plástico. Desde su lanzamiento en 2016, más de 2700 organizaciones y 11000 simpatizantes individuales de todo el mundo se han unido al movimiento para exigir reducciones masivas de plásticos de un solo uso e impulsar soluciones duraderas a la crisis de la contaminación por plástico. Las organizaciones e individuos miembros del BFFP comparten los valores de la protección medioambiental y la justicia social y trabajan juntos a través de un enfoque holístico para lograr un cambio sistémico. Esto significa abordar la contaminación por plásticos a lo largo de toda la cadena de valor del plástico -desde su extracción hasta su eliminación-, centrándose en la prevención más que en la cura y aportando soluciones eficaceswww.breakfreefromplastic.org.

Contacto para prensa global: 

Contacto para prensa regional:

By Kaziro Douglas, Bio Vision Africa, Uganda.

The 19th ordinary session of the Africa Ministerial Conference on Environment (AMCEN) took place from 14-18 August 2023 at the Ethiopian Skylight Hotel in Addis Ababa.  The session’s theme was Seizing opportunities and enhancing collaboration to address environmental challenges in Africa.  Prior to the meeting, UNEP major groups and Stakeholders (CSOs) held a meeting at Capital Hotel in Ethiopia on 12-13 August 2023 and drafted a Major Groups and Stakeholders statement which was read to the Ministers during the main session. 

AMCEN was established in December 1985, with a mandate of providing advocacy for environmental protection in Africa and ensuring that basic human needs are met adequately and in a sustainable manner.

The discussions for the 19th session focused on the twenty-eighth session of the Conference of Parties to the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change  (COP28) and the Africa Climate Summit (ACS), the sixth session of the United Nations Environment Assembly of the United Nations Environment Programme (UNEA6); Africa’s participation in the development of an international legally binding instrument on plastic pollution (INC process); Africa’s preparations for the sixteenth session of the Conference of the Parties to the United Nations Convention to Combat Desertification; preparations for the fifth session of the International Conference on Chemicals Management, the Kunming Montreal Global Biodiversity Framework and implementation of 18th  AMCEN decisions. 

I was a participant with support from GAIA, My focus was mainly on Africa’s participation in the development of an international legally binding instrument on plastic pollution (INC process), AMC 18/6 decision on phasing out opening burning in Africa, preparations for the fifth session of the International Conference on Chemicals Management, and most of my engagements pretty much nearly 90% were on the plastic treaty work. It was an interesting learning experience with good information to take home as a first-time participant in AMCEN meetings. 

Key highlights from the meeting included declarations, decisions and key messages adopted by the session notably the decision 19/2 African participation in the development of an international legally binding instrument on plastic pollution, including in the marine environment, which relates directly to our work and a declaration to appreciate the work of the African Group of Negotiators on plastics, and urged member states to support the African position on the establishment of a legally binding instrument. 

By and large, the discussions were fruitful, with few contestations from some countries, especially on the issue of raw materials for plastics being considered as plastics.  Also, there was a considerable representation from countries in the Global South. It’s important to mention that, going forward, the draft documents from this session can provide good information for our advocacy work as Civil Society organizations as we continue engaging with our National Focal Points within our various countries and ensure that the language and other key components that we desire to be in the Plastic treaty are well captured.

Ends.

Thanks to the tireless work of the #breakfreefromplastic movement and GAIA members around the world, last March, the United Nations Environment Assembly decided on a mandate to create the world’s first Plastics Treaty, a legally binding international law aimed at reducing plastic pollution worldwide, covering the full life-cycle of plastic. This is a historic step forward in the fight against plastic pollution, and would not have been possible without a diverse movement of waste pickers, frontline community activists, and zero waste advocates demanding systemic change. However, there’s still a long road ahead–there will be a series of meetings through the end of 2024 during which the treaty will take shape. GAIA and our allies will be present for the entirety of the negotiations to make sure our issues are represented, but it will take continuing pressure from people all over the world to ensure that we get a strong treaty that meets the scale of the crisis. Such a treaty must include plastic reduction targets, eradicate toxics, exclude false solutions like incineration, scale up zero waste solutions such as reuse, and center a just transition for waste pickers and other groups at the frontlines of the crisis.



News

Reflections on the Close of INC-2

The second round of negotiations for a global plastics treaty concluded on June 2, 2023 in Paris, France. While there were many attempts by industry and certain countries to stall progress and the United Nations Environment Programme limited civil society’s voice, the fight for a strong global plastics treaty advanced to the next stage.

GLOBAL SOUTH VOICES: INC-2 MEDIA BRIEFING

The Global Alliance for Incinerator Alternatives (GAIA) held a press conference along with representatives from Acción Ecológica México, Zero Waste Alliance Ecuador,, Alliance of Indian Waste Pickers, Kenya National Waste Pickers Welfare Association, and Community Action Against Plastic Waste to provide perspectives from civil society organisations in the global south as the second session of the Intergovernmental Negotiating Committee on Plastic Pollution commences.

GAIA RESPONSE TO NEW YORK TIMES OPINION: REDUCING PLASTIC POLLUTION IN OUR OCEANS IS SIMPLER THAN YOU THINK

Global Alliance for Incinerator Alternatives (GAIA) is compelled to respond to the harmful and damaging arguments published  recently in The New York Times opinion piece by The Ocean Cleanup founder Boyan Slat. This article perpetuates the false narrative that the Global South is somehow to blame for the plastic pollution problem, and that expensive downstream approaches are our best tool to fight it–downplaying the necessity of reducing plastic production, which advocates and experts around the world are pushing for at the upcoming global plastics treaty negotiations next week in Paris.

Press Release: New UNEP Report Sparks Controversy Ahead of Global Plastics Treaty Negotiations

Civil society organizations, academics, and frontline groups are expressing their concern over the UNEP Spotlight report’s promotion of burning plastic waste in cement kilns as a key strategy in the design and implementation of the Global Plastics Treaty.

ENG
ESP

Press Release: Closing of INC-1

The first intergovernmental committee meeting (INC-1) for an internationally legally binding instrument on plastic pollution convened by the United Nations Environment Programme (UNEP) concluded today with a mix of high and low moments, setting the stage for a two-year-long process that could result in one of the most significant multilateral environmental agreements in history.

Press Release: Historic Recognition of Waste Pickers in Plastics Treaty Negotiations

The formation of a Group of Friends of Waste Pickers was announced on November 29, 2022 at the negotiations towards a global plastics treaty. This historic moment marks unprecedented recognition of the rights, skills, and importance of the informal waste sector; never before have countries formally committed to advocate on behalf of waste pickers in the context of international negotiations.


Policy Briefs/Submissions

GAIA Submission Part B- Input on the Potential Areas of Intersessional Work to Inform the INC-3: Further Information

This submission provides detailed GAIA recommendations to orient intersessional work and global plastics treaty negotiations. It includes criteria and processes to set plastic production freeze and phasedown targets and schedules and their supporting measures, and a framework to identify high-risk plastic products and materials for priority action, as well as polymers and other chemicals of concern, among other issues.

ENG

GAIA Submission to INC-3 Part B: Roadmap for intersessional work

ENG

GAIA Submission on Treaty Scope and Principles

The future plastics treaty’s scope agreed in UNEA resolution 5/14 covers all plastics and all plastic pollution across the full lifecycle of plastics. In addition to the Rio Principles, human rights, the principle of prevention and inter-generational equity must also be reflected in treaty control measures and means of implementation. 

ENG

GAIA’s Key Demands for INC-2

This document is an overview of the key GAIA asks for INC-2. More detail can be found in the GAIA INC-2 submission

ENG
FR
ESP

GAIA Commentary on INC-2 Options Paper

Read GAIA’s select comments on document UNEP/PP/INC.2/4 Potential options for elements towards an international legally binding instrument, based on a comprehensive approach that addresses the full life cycle of plastics (Options Paper).

ENG
ESP
FR

Plastics circularity: beyond the hype 

References to the “circular economy of plastics” and  “plastics circularity” have multiplied around the plastic treaty negotiations. This brief considers the following questions:

  • What is circularity – is it the same as recycling? 
  • Is circularity always good for the environment?  
  • For whose profit and at whose expense is plastic waste traded for “global plastics circularity”?
  • What are the challenges with plastic recycling, and what future does it have?  
  • What safeguards are needed for the rights of workers who collect and recycle plastic wastes? 
ENG
FR
ESP

This document contains an overview of the status of the negotiations thus far, as well as a negotiations timeline.

ENG
FR
ESP

Defining Plastic Products, Materials and Polymers: A Proposal

Adequate definitions of plastic products and polymers are needed in the global plastic treaty to capture the full range of sources of plastic pollution (November 2022).

ENG
ESP

The Pros and Cons of EPR: Lessons from France

In the context of the upcoming plastic treaty negotiations in Paris (INC-2, May-June 2023), Extended Producer Responsibility (EPR) schemes are often put forward as an essential policy approach to address the global plastic pollution crisis, especially as a source of funding and a way to incentivize redesign for reuse and plastic waste prevention. France is often cited as an EPR pioneer, particularly in the use of eco-modulated fees to encourage reuse and eco-design.

This paper draws lessons from France’s EPR experience in packaging and other sectors, and explores to what extent EPR schemes can truly promote reuse and other eco-design, reduce low-quality recycling and plastic burning, as well as effectively fund the costs of the plastic pollution crisis.

FR

Submission to INC-2

Read GAIA’s key recommendations for INC-2 from May 29-June 2 2023.

Submission to the INC Process on Plastic Pollution July 15, 2022

GAIA’s recommendations for the negotiation process towards a global instrument on plastic pollution.


Issues in Focus

Plastics Crisis: Challenges, Advances and Relationship with Waste Pickers

Negotiations must include the recognition of the historical work of those who have recovered more materials and in the most efficient way: the waste pickers.

ENG
ESP
PT
Rommel Cabrera/GAIA, 2019. Waste pickers collecting separated waste from households. Tacloban City, the Philippines.

Overview of the Plastics Treaty/Tratado sobre plásticos

Plastic pollution does not respect borders. It is in the air we breathe, the food we eat, the water we drink, and even in our bodies. A new binding legal instrument, covering the entire lifecycle of plastic, is required to tackle this planetary crisis.

ENG
ESP
FR

The Plastic Waste Trade

Top exporters such as the United States, Germany, the UK, Japan and Australia are placing a disproportionate toxic burden on the environment and communities in importing countries. A Global Plastics Treaty can enact stricter measures on the waste trade to prevent environmental injustices.

ENG
ESP
FR

Plastic and Waste Pickers/Recicladores

Plastic takes up a large percentage of the waste handled by waste pickers. Consequently, they are one of the most vulnerable occupation groups that stand to be impacted by the global plastics treaty. The treaty must establish the legal frameworks required to improve working conditions for waste pickers.

ENG
ESP
FR

Toxics and Health

Plastic contains toxic chemicals that leach into our food, water, and soil. Out of about 10,000 chemicals used as plastic additives, few have been widely studied, let alone regulated. A treaty must address plastic’s toxic burden.

ENG
ESP
FR

Plastic and Climate Change/Los plásticos y el cambio climático

Plastic is a significant contributor to climate change throughout its lifecycle. By 2050, emissions from plastic alone will take up over a third of the remaining carbon budget for a 1.5 °C target. A plastics treaty must impose legally-binding plastic reduction targets.

ENG
ESP
FR

Chemical “Recycling” and Plastic-to-Fuel

Faced with increasing pressure from lawmakers and civil society to reduce plastic production and greater awareness of the limits of mechanical recycling, the petrochemical industry has been peddling chemical “recycling” and “plastic-to-fuel” as a primary solution to plastic pollution. However, after billions of dollars and decades of development, these approaches do not work as advertised. A plastics treaty stands to be undermined if it embraces these industry-backed false solutions.

ENG
ESP
KOR
FR

Waste Incineration and Burning Waste in Cement Kilns

Burning waste emits climate pollution and other toxic chemicals, and is the least energy-efficient and most costly method of energy production. A plastics treaty must adopt a moratorium on new incinerators and encourage a roadmap to phase out all existing incinerators by 2030.

ENG
ESP
FR

Burning Waste in Cement Kilns

Burning plastic in cement kilns results in toxic emissions, threatening the health of workers, communities and the environment, especially in low-income countries in the Global South. Widespread burning of waste in cement kilns would also worsen the already devastating carbon footprint of the cement industry. A plastics treaty must phase out burning plastic waste in cement kilns.

ENG
ESP
FR

Plastic Neutrality and Credit

The global plastics treaty provides an important opportunity to officially discourage or ban the use of plastic credits before they become widespread. Doing so would avoid the incredible amount of regulatory oversight needs —both in the private and public sectors— to organize and
manage international plastic credit markets. The collective efforts could be better spent on reducing plastic production rapidly.

ENG
ESP
FR

Zero Waste Finance

A transition from a plastic-reliant economy toward a circular zero waste economy requires effective mobilization and allocation of financial resources. Public and private finance have distinct and intersecting roles to play in supporting and scaling up innovations for waste prevention, redesign, alternative delivery and reuse systems as well as improving existing waste collection and recycling systems.

ENG
ESP
FR

Extended Producer Responsibility

Extended producer responsibility (EPR) policies seek to improve the environmental and social performance of products by holding producers and brand owners accountable for the entire lifecycle of their products. The global plastics treaty must embed well-designed EPR policies in it, guiding producers to prioritize upstream solutions.

ENG
ESP
FR

Bioplastics

The global Plastics Treaty must focus on plastic reduction and reuse, instead of substituting a plastic single-use item for a bio-based, biodegradable, or compostable one.

ENG
ESP
FR

No More Empty Promises

By Ndyamuhaki Isaac, Green Africa Youth Organization Uganda, Circular Economy Programs Manager.

Uganda’s communities and people find themselves in the clutches of top-polluting corporations. Incidentally, plastic pollution is an injustice to the environment, wildlife, climate, human health and general social life, making it a growing global problem. Research shows that approximately 7 billion of the 9.2 billion tonnes of plastic produced between 1950-2017 became plastic waste, ending up in landfills or dumped. Plastic pollution can alter habitats and natural processes, reducing ecosystems’ ability to adapt to climate change, and directly affecting millions of people’s livelihoods, food value chains and social well-being. 

Brand Audits elevate people’s understanding of the structural causes of plastic pollution, gather hard data proving that corporations are responsible for producing excessive amounts of single-use plastic packaging and reveal the disproportionate harm these corporations are causing to vulnerable communities. In 2018 when the first brand audit was carried out, unique achievements, challenges and breakthroughs were realized, putting a spotlight on major plastic-polluting companies across global and local scales.

End Plastic Pollution conducted a brand audit on River Rwizi in Mbarara City in 2021/ This generated significant evidence of a flowing river with plastics where 56 brands and 32 companies were identified as visibly damaging the river with plastic waste. The top polluting brands were The Coca-Cola Company, Pepsi, and BIDCO Africa, as well as Mbarara-based companies like Yausafi Ventures and Ice Love Company.

The 2022 brand audit carried out on the showers of lake victoria and Kireka landfill jointly conducted by Green Africa Youth Organization Uganda and End Plastic Pollution was the most significant year for brand audits. The global plastic pollution crisis marked the 5th Anniversary of the global brand audits. This brand revealed a remarkable consistency of results; year after year, the same Fast Moving Consumer Goods companies with the largest market share are generating the most plastics polluting the environment. A total of 32 companies were exposed, with The Coca-Cola Company, Pepsi and Unilever making the top three polluters. Six hundred fifty-six items were audited, 49% were food packaging, and 11% were personal care products. By material type, 49% of the items audited were PET, and 22% were HDPE. 

Through these brand audits, key findings contained the contribution of the brands and the key players in plastic pollution in  Kampala and Mbarara cities. A total of 1487 plastic items were collected and sorted. It was found that 137 brands produced by  39 parent companies were responsible for the plastic waste collected. By material type, 673 items were PET bottles, 424 items were HDPE bottles, and other items, including sachets and baby diapers, were 273.  The exercise also found 97 unbranded items, including plastic footwear and plastic cutlery. The Coca-Cola Company was the biggest plastic polluter with 312 items found,  followed by Pepsi with 124 items, BIDCO Africa with 115 items found,  Unilever in fourth place with 107 items and Mukwano Industries fifth with 99 items.

However, less than 10% of all the plastic ever produced globally has been recycled. According to the plastic coalition, 99% of plastics are made from fossil fuels and their production is poised to quadruple by 2050. There exists, therefore, a dire need to control plastic pollution before the entire ecosystem is eaten up and rendered inhabitable. 

This audit proposed various recommendations to different stakeholders in Uganda: The corporations were recommended to freely reveal and share information about the true extent of their plastic footprint, reduce the amounts of plastics they produce and also redesign their packaging to involve reusable material. The government was recommended to hold accountable the corporate polluters, as voluntary commitments seemed to have failed; to ensure that no new plastics are produced. It was also tasked to invest in waste reduction measures and zero-waste systems that are in line with the national climate action plans. Plastic pollution is one of the greatest threats to life and the ecosystem. There is, therefore, a need for an immediate response, especially in holding accountable the perpetrators of plastic pollution. 

ENDS.

By Xavier Sun, Taiwan Zero Waste Alliance

We know most plastics can be recycled, turned into recycled plastic pellets in recycling facilities, and sold to other plastic manufacturing factories (domestic or abroad) to be processed into new plastic products.  However, we have very little knowledge about the (hazardous) chemicals that are also “recycled” during this process.

It is actually a “toxins in, toxins out” situation. Take PVC for example. The first products made of “virgin” PVC may contain many other “functional chemicals”, such as phthalates and fire retardants. While the lifecycle of these virgin PVC products ends in recycling facilities (although better than incinerators), the functional additives stay in the newly processed and recycled PVC pellets.

Since 2018, many countries have found hazardous substances in imported toys. The International Pollutants Elimination Network (IPEN) reveals in their report,  “Toxic Loophole” that worldwide, toys made from recycled plastic, contain toxic substances such as dioxins and brominated flame retardants. 

Meanwhile, the report, “Worldwide Contamination of Recycled Plastic Globally”, analyzed recycled High-Density Polyethylene (HDPE) pellets from different countries and all were found to contain a broad spectrum of hazardous chemicals including UV-blockers, brominated flame retardants, and bisphenol-A (BPA) (See Figure 1). The three chemicals found by the study have been conclusively proven to have endocrine-disrupting properties and can cause harm to human health. 

Figure 1. The “high concern” and ”hazardous” chemicals found in recycled HDPE plastic pellets.

The report also discloses the lack of regulation or data transparency of the chemicals present in both virgin and recycled plastic pellets. In manufacturing plastic, UV-blocks and flame retardants could be added in most upstream plastic pellets due to the flammability of most plastic products and their vulnerability to sunlight. In the recycling process, these chemicals are retained and will still be present in the recycled pellets. The BPA detected in almost all samples tested might indicate mis-sorting of recycled polycarbonate with HDPE. Hence the inclusion of hazardous and high-concern chemicals may re-enter the whole life cycle of plastics again and create a “Toxic Circular Economy”.  

With the lack of transparency and government regulations, the ingredient list of recycled pellets is not certain, and there could be more hazardous chemicals that may be transferred into recycled-plastic-made products that the study was not able to identify.

With the massive overproduction of virgin plastic pellets, the trend and amount of plastic recycling must increase accordingly. However, given the concerns raised by the IPEN’s research, transparent data on chemicals in plastic pellets and the mandatory testing of plastic pellets (both virgin and recycled) using reliable but cheap testing methods should be established so that people can have a clear idea of “what kind of products made by these pellets are acceptable”.

References: 

  1. Straková, J., DiGangi, J., Jensen, G., et al (2018 October) Toxic Loophole: Recycling Hazardous Waste into New Products. International Pollutants Elimination Network.  https://ipen.org/documents/toxic-loophole-recycling-hazardous-waste-new-products
  2. Brosché, Ph.D.1 , S.,  Strakova, MSc.1,2, J., Bell, MSc.1, L.,  Karlsson, Ph.D, T., (2021 December) Widespread Chemical Contamination Recycled Plastics Globally.  International Pollutants Elimination Network, https://ipen.org/documents/widespread-chemical-contamination-recycled-plastic-pellets-globally
  3. International Pollutants Elimination Network (2022 February) How Plastics Poison the Circular Economy. https://ipen.org/news/plastic-poisons-circular-economy
  4. Center for International Environmental Law (2017 September) Fueling Plastics: Fossils, Plastics, and Petrochemical Feedstocks. https://www.ciel.org/wp-content/uploads/2017/09/Fueling-Plastics-Fossils-Plastics-Petrochemical-Feedstocks.pdf

Durante dos días 18 miembros de 15 organizaciones de 7 países de América Latina y el Caribe se reunieron en el primer encuentro regional miembros para fortalecer el movimiento, mejorar la cooperación entre organizaciones, y desarrollar estrategias conjuntas para implementar las campañas y acciones de Break Free From Plastic.

Las organizaciones que asistieron al encuentro fueron: Taller Ecologista, de Argentina; Alianza Basura Cero Brasil, Instituto Polis e Instituto Ecosurf, de Brasil; Fundación El Árbol, Fundación Basura y Fundación Lenga, de Chile; MarViva, de Costa Rica; Mingas por el Mar y PlástiCo Project, de Ecuador; Colectivo Ecologista de Jalisco y Fronteras Comunes, de México; y Greenpeace Andino con grupos en Chile, Colombia y Argentina. Todas estas organizaciones trabajan fuertemente en sus territorios para combatir la crisis de la contaminación por plásticos, exponer las falsas soluciones, y proponer acciones que realmente ataquen el problema desde la raíz. Además, representantes de Break Free From Plastic en América Latina están participando como observadores en las históricas negociaciones del futuro tratado global de plásticos de la UNEA.

Durante el encuentro, se desarrollaron una serie de actividades, sesiones de trabajo y presentaciones, en las que se abordó por ejemplo, los avances sobre el tratado de plásticos, las demandas y participación de los recicladores de base de la región y su posición respecto a la transición justa. Asimismo, se discutieron temas clave para el crecimiento del movimiento en la región como ¿Qué es ser un movimiento? Y ¿Cómo vemos este movimiento en América Latina?

Joao Malavolta del Instituto Ecosurf, Brasil comenta que “el encuentro fue estimulante, ya que he estado luchando contra la contaminación plástica en el océano durante muchos años. Esos tres días me regresaron a los sentimientos más nobles que tuve cuando comencé a trabajar con Ecosurf, viendo que realmente no estamos solos en nuestras “utopías” de vida. El encuentro significó para mí un verdadero sentimiento de unidad entre América Latina y el Caribe para una región que puede esforzarse por construir una unidad continental para enfrentar el avance de la contaminación en el medio ambiente y crear verdaderas soluciones para el reemplazo y alternativas a los problemáticos plásticos que están mal gestionados en las ciudades y se filtran a los mares y océanos. Los aspectos más valiosos del encuentro tienen que ver con la calidad de la construcción de propuestas de organización y acción que cada institución y participantes ofrecieron al grupo, dentro de las oportunidades y limitaciones de cada país y región. Además, la capacidad del BFFP para reunir una red de personas y organizaciones tan poderosas que realizan un trabajo extraordinario e inspiran proyectos en todo el mundo.”

Por otro lado, para Saúl Muñiz de Colectivo Ecologista de Jalisco, México, que con 16 años fue el participante más joven, el encuentro fue mucho amor, mucho trabajo y mucha energía. Me llevé muchas cosas valiosas, sobre todo a las personas, las ganas y la inspiración. Apenas estoy en el proceso de aprender, pero me da tanta alegría e inspiración que hay gente que quiera cambiar las cosas y que además tienen un corazón. El encuentro nos ayudó a abrir más el panorama de opciones y reforzar la idea que tenemos de inspirarnos de otras iniciativas y ver que son viables, que ya se están haciendo. Me llevo, la experiencia muy bonita de conocerles a todos y eso es lo más valioso, y no se me va a olvidar nunca.

Otro de los temas más importantes del encuentro fue el desarrollo del proyecto Reuso, que pronto se lanzará en todo el mundo, y cómo desde América Latina podemos participar en campañas globales sin perder nuestra identidad cultural y lingüística. Por eso, se trabajó en la narrativa que quieren los miembros para la campaña y los acuerdos y compromisos base para su ejecución en la región.

La reunión terminó con un sentido aún más profundo de compromiso y determinación para seguir trabajando en conjunto en la lucha contra la contaminación por plástico y las falsas soluciones en América Latina, y con la convicción de que las soluciones locales y de basura cero son el camino que debe liderar la región. 

by Daru Setyorini Ecological Observation and Wetlands Conservation (ECOTON) Indonesia

At the Global Day of Action 2022, the Nusantara River Expedition Team of the Ecological Observation and Wetlands Conservation (ECOTON) visited the head office of PT Unilever Indonesia Tbk to deliver three boxes of sachet waste to the President Director. Collected from Indonesian rivers, the boxes of sachet waste represent the current state of the once-pristine rivers.

The Nusantara River Expedition or Indonesian Rivers Expedition (IRE) is an initiative by ECOTON that establishes collaboration with local river communities, researchers, and journalists to raise awareness of the issue. Headed by Prigi Arisandi and Amirudin Muttaqin, the river expedition investigates river health and documents the condition of 68 rivers in Indonesia, starting from Wonosalam at the upstream area of the Brantas River in East Java to the islands of Sumatra, Kalimantan, Sulawesi, Maluku, Papua, Nusa Tenggara, and Bali. The journey is estimated to take 10 to 12 months.

The Indonesian Government Ordinance PP 22/2021 mandates that all Indonesian rivers must have zero trash as required in the annex to River Water Quality Standards for all water use classifications. Unfortunately, the Nusantara River expedition found that rivers in Indonesia are still being flooded with plastic, and this condition is very common in the country. As rivers clogged with plastic have become commonplace, the government and communities do not consider it a serious problem and see no urgent need to stop it. However, plastic waste occurs not only in Java’s most populated coasts and rivers. In Sumatra, Borneo, Sulawesi, Mollucas, and Papua, a lot of plastic waste, especially sachets, is scattered in rivers and beaches.

A microplastic analysis of the water samples collected by the team found that 99% of Indonesia’s rivers are contaminated with microplastics from the degradation of plastic.

Plastic bags, styrofoam, straws, plastic bottles, and sachets break down into small pieces not larger than 5mm in size. Microplastics enter the human body and accumulate, which can cause long-term health effects. Microplastics contain toxic additives such as phthalates, BPA, or PFAS that have endocrine disruptors and carcinogenic effects.

The Nusantara River Expedition Team also visited the eastern region of Indonesia, including North Maluku Province at Ternate, Tidore Islands, North Halmahera, and Central Halmahera; Maluku Province at Ambon City and West Fiber District; and Papua Province at Sorong City and Sorong Regency. In these three provinces, brand audits have shown that Unilever sachets dominate the composition of plastic waste, mostly from brands such as Sunsilk, Royco, Rinso, Molto, TRESemme, Sunlight, Lifebuoy, and Dove. According to the Indonesia Waste Management Law 18/2008, sachet waste is categorized as residual waste, and as such, every producer must take responsibility to reduce and treat it properly under the Extended Producer Responsibility (EPR) scheme.

Unilever is included in the top 5 global sources of plastic pollution along with Nestle and Coca-Cola. Their products are widely used in Indonesia and reach even remote villages such as communities near Barito, Kuin, and the Martapura Rivers.

The government should seriously increase waste management services in Indonesia and stop waste from getting into waterways. Producers such as Unilever, Wings, Indofood, Mayora, Ajinomoto, P&G, Unicharm, Danone, Coca Cola, and Nabati must take responsibility for cleaning up their waste so that it does not threaten the health of the residents of Banjarmasin and South Kalimantan or the rest of Indonesia. Producers must also participate and aim at reducing polluting plastic packaging. In addition to redesigning these packaging, producers must also clean up the plastic waste that has come to contaminate Barito, Martapura, Kuin, and other river communities.

The river expedition team asked PT Unilever to take full responsibility for polluting Indonesian rivers with sachet waste and immediately take the following actions:

  1. Establish detailed, clear, and firm targets and roadmaps to stop selling multilayer sachet and disposable plastic packaging, aim for a reusable refillable distribution system, and announce Unilever’s serious commitment and roadmap to prevent and reduce plastic waste generation to the public.
  2. Stop investing in counterfeit solutions for handling waste, such as downcycle recycling, which stops the circulation of plastic materials, chemical recycling, and refuse-derived fuel (RDF) that release carbon emissions and hormone-disrupting toxins and microplastics.
  3. Increase investment in real solutions to overcome the plastic crisis by developing materials, technology, and distribution systems that are safe and sustainable, replace single-use plastics with reuse-refill systems, and implement EPR to increase the collection and sorting of plastic waste from consumers for all their packaging.
  4. Expand the area for implementing trials/pilots selling reusable packaging and building a distribution network for refill kiosks to remote and remote areas of Eastern Indonesia – areas that are not reached by the formal waste management services of the local government.
  5. Support the efforts of the government and the communities in building and replicating independent waste management areas to encourage the implementation of the responsibility of citizens who produce waste every day, by applying the principle of zero waste in bulk through reducing waste generation, segregating waste from sources, and operating organic waste processing facilities in each village and sub-district settlement area.
  6. Make efforts to prevent contamination of toxic chemicals and hormone-disrupting and carcinogenic microplastic particles on products and product packaging that is marketed.
  7. Carry out efforts to clean up and collect sachets and plastic waste scattered in Indonesian waters, including in Eastern Indonesia, including the coastal waters of Ternate City; Weda City Coastal Waters; Sorong City waters; Ambon City waters; Bandarlampung City Beach; Bengkulu City Beach; Batang Arau estuary in Padang; Tapak Tuan Beach, South Aceh; Deli River in Medan; Batanghari River in Jambi; Musi River in Palembang; Kapuas river; Martapura River; the Kuin River; the Barito River in South Kalimantan; Kandilo River in Tanah Grogot Paser City; Mahakam River, Karang Mumus River in East Kalimantan; Poso Lake and River in Tentena District, Poso Regency, Donggala Coast; Palu Bay and Tondano Lake.
  8. Educate consumers about the dangers of plastic and invite them to switch to a reuse and refill distribution system through massive and mass public advertisements on television, print, and online media.

These demands aim to put a stop to Unilever and other fast-moving consumer goods companies from continuously defacing not just Indonesia’s rivers but our ecosystem.

By Melody Ifechi Enyinnaya, Environmental Rights Action/ Friends of the Earth Nigeria

The recent ban on Green taxation on single-use plastics (SUPs) by the Nigerian Government means several environmental and social impacts for grassroots individuals. This is because the very purpose of green taxation which was to reduce plastic waste and encourage the adaptation of more sustainable alternatives has been defeated. 

The ban means increased waste generation and plastic pollution for grassroots individuals because with the suspension of the tax, there will be an increase in the consumption of SUPs. This could lead to higher levels of waste generation and plastic pollutions, as SUPs are not biodegradable and grassroots individuals will face the direct consequences of this increased waste and pollution in their communities as the single-use plastics usually find their way to the oceans and water bodies and causes pollution that affect local water bodies, landfills & ecosystems, creating health hazards and damaging natural habitats.

Limited Incentives for sustainable practices: The green tax which served as an incentive for businesses and consumers to adopt more sustainable practices. The ban means there will be fewer financial incentives for grassroots individuals to choose environmentally-friendly alternatives over harmful ones. This may make it harder for individuals to prioritise sustainable choices when they are often more expensive than their less eco-friendly counterparts. 

Degradation of Natural Resources: Without the green tax, there may be a higher demand for non-renewable resources like fossil fuel which is use in SUP production, leading to increased extraction and further degradation of the environment. Grassroots individuals who rely on natural resources for their livelihoods, such as fishing or agriculture, may suffer the consequences of resource depletion and degradation.

Awareness and Education: The green tax initially aimed to raise awareness among individuals regarding the negative impact of SUPs on the environment. With its suspension, it will make it difficult for grassroots individuals to fully understand the consequences of using non-sustainable products.

Sustainable Alternatives may be neglected: The ban might reduce the motivation for businesses to invest in and promote sustainable alternatives to harmful products. This can limit the availability and accessibility of eco-friendly options for grassroots individuals, making it harder for them to adopt sustainable practices.

It is highly important the government considers the impacts of the suspension on grassroots individuals when evaluating the green tax ban on SUPs. To us at ERA/FoEN and GAIA Nigeria, the suspension/ban on green taxation seems like a major setback in the work we’ve done in the waste sector but then we see it as a challenge to put in more strategic efforts and in the coming days we’ll be engaging with federal actors in the waste management sector in series of dialogue which will push them to action for a relieve of the ban thereby prioritising education, awareness, and sustainable alternatives to mitigate the negative consequences and support grassroots individuals in making environmentally-conscious choices.

Ends.

Sachets are low-value multi-layered single-use plastic; they are used to sell small and cheap quantities of products like shampoo, detergent, condiments and coffee. According to GAIA Asia Pacific’s Sachet Economy: “Sachets are widely perceived as affordable, convenient, and indispensable, but only because their true costs are externalised, unaccounted for by corporations that have profited handsomely from the sachet economy, and disproportionately paid for by society.” In Nigeria alone, the UN Environment Programme reports that 50-60 million used water sachets are discarded every day. Civil Society Organisations across the world are calling for the phasing out of sachets and the scaling up of reusable alternatives to plastic products.

End Plastic Pollution, Sustainable Research and Action for Environmental Development, Association de l’Education Environnementale pour les Futures Générations, groundWork, and Green Africa Youth Organisation share their thoughts on the state of sachets in Africa. 

End Plastic Pollution, Nirere Sadrach

Big brands are extending the huge cost of cleaning up and managing waste to communities that cannot afford it. Local communities do not have the infrastructure to collect this waste, and yet if you cannot collect enough of a waste product, it cannot be repurposed, reused or even recycled.

Sustainable Research and Action for Environmental Development,  Sarah Onuoha

Sachet plastic pollution, especially the pure water sachets, is a lake without an end in Nigeria.

Association de l’Education Environnementale pour les Futures Générations, Semia Gharbi

In Tunisia, 4.2 billion sachets are consumed annually, of which one billion are produced locally and then thrown away in the environment because they can’t be recycled. The Ministry of Environment decided to ban the use of sachets in bakeries, to decrease the use of sachets. It was a good step, but more is needed. Unfortunately, in Tunisia, we don’t see these big multinational brands acting in favour of protecting the environment by decreasing the use of plastic.

Furthermore, sachets impact waste pickers. Waste pickers must spend additional time and effort sorting out these non-recyclable items, which slows down their work and reduces their productivity. Unrecyclable plastics directly impact their income and financial stability as they offer waste pickers limited or no economic returns. Sachets, especially bulky or non-compact items, add weight to the waste collected by waste pickers. This increases waste pickers’ transportation and storage costs, as they need more time, effort, and resources to manage larger volumes of unrecyclable plastics. Moreover, these types of plastic, particularly those that are sharp, contaminated by toxic substances, or hazardous, can pose health and safety risks and exposure to waste pickers.

groundWork, Asiphile Khanyile

The plastic crisis’s lasting impacts have already been externalised onto the communities and natural environment (land and marine). It’s a game of profits versus the people. Sachets are hard to separate, sort and recycle due to their nature of multilayered materials. Not only that, sachets cause drain blockages (increasing the rate of flooding), litter, and harm animals. Since they are multilayered, they are hard to recycle and take more than 100 years to biodegrade. The waste belonging to multinational corporations ends up overburdening the waste management systems of countries, especially those in the developing world, because of their failure to provide adequate and effective services and systems in place to deal with this waste. The unrecyclable plastic makes waste pickers work for longer because they have to sort through unwanted waste. The argument is that we do not produce what we do not need. Waste pickers are also on the frontline of waste management; whether it is in (landfills, dumpsites, communities and on the streets) hence, they are exposed to other unsafe conditions.

Green Africa Youth Organisation

Richard Matey, The impact of the big brands failing to pay a levy to support the collection of their plastic products is the evidence of increased flooding of homes and communities as the drainages systems are chocked with plastics from these big brands. These plastic products have become a nuisance to sanitation leading to the spread of malaria and other diseases.

Efua Nyamekye Appiah, The double standards displayed by multinational corporations continuously exacerbated plastic pollution and its detrimental effects on the environment. These corporations actively produce and promote single-use plastics while simultaneously sponsoring global climate conferences like COP; for instance, at COP27, the was a lot of discussion on sponsorship by Coca-Cola, with an intent to create an illusion of environmental responsibility. This hypocritical approach prioritises short-term profits over long-term sustainability and hinders efforts to address the plastic pollution crisis. Additionally, the lack of corporate accountability, coupled with deceptive greenwashing practices, further contributes to the problem, increasing the monetary value of such organization and their scope but adversely affecting vulnerable communities facing huge plastic waste problems. Plastic pollution poses severe threats to wildlife, ecosystems, and human health, necessitating stricter regulations and greater corporate responsibility to curb plastic production, usage, and disposal. Addressing these challenges requires genuine commitment from governments, civil society, and consumers to hold.

Muzzafar-Din Essel, In Ghana, informal waste pickers face several difficulties in managing unrecyclable plastics. Among these, there is competition from the formal waste management sector where informal waste pickers independently collecting and selling recyclables are only able to make minimum value out of the waste collected because unrecyclable plastics are mixed with valuable recyclables while formal waste management companies that have advanced sorting technologies and infrastructure get all the value there is. Additionally, waste pickers are in direct line of health hazards. Unrecyclable plastics usually include items like single-use bags, styrofoam containers, or other types of packaging materials that are not only non-recyclable but can also pose health hazards to waste pickers. For example, burning unrecyclable plastics to reduce volume can release harmful toxins and pollutants into the air, leading to respiratory issues and other health problems for waste pickers.

ENDS.