GAIA Reacts to ‘Narrow’ Focus and ‘Unfair’ Global South Narrative on Plastic Pollution
FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE | September 10, 2024 – The latest study published in Nature on A Local-To-Global Emissions Inventory of Macroplastic Pollution ignores the injustices in the Global South from imports of waste and polluting “technofixes” such as incineration, chemical recycling, pyrolysis, and many more. Solely focusing on improper waste management as a source of microplastic emissions discounts other sources such as textiles, construction, electrical and electronics, and sea-based sources. This is an attempt to redefine “plastic pollution” to a narrow subset of emissions that fails to account for the full lifecycle of plastics—from extraction and production to transport and consumer use— thus excluding critical sources of pollution like upstream emissions, microplastics, and the categories above mentioned.
Such a limited definition contradicts UNEA Resolution 5/14, which the study claims to support. This study, offered as a tool to advance the plastics treaty negotiations, clearly endorses the narrative of the major petrostates: plastic pollution is the fault of consumers, not the companies’ and countries’ unregulated overproduction.
The study’s claim that developed countries are only responsible for 0.3% of plastic pollution is misleading and contradicts prior research, which indicates a more substantial contribution (e.g., Kara Lavender Law et al., 2020). Wealthy countries like the US use far more plastic and, despite more complete waste collection, still struggle to capture all the plastic waste.
Additionally, the study misrepresents plastic pollution with its narrow focus on macroplastics alone and fails to consider significant upstream and midstream impacts, including high greenhouse gas emissions during production, hazardous pollutants affecting communities, and health risks from plastic particles in food. Excluding critical data on the plastic waste trade, particularly unreported or underreported cases, further distorts the true ramifications of plastic pollution. In fact, there is direct correlation between top polluting countries as also receiving large waste imports.
This unfair narrative on the Global South ignores the fact that most of the plastic waste is being produced by large multinational corporations headquartered in the Global North. This push by large consumer companies to displace pre-existing, more sustainable economies in the Global South is a primary cause of the plastic pollution crisis.
There is ample evidence that current levels of plastic production are already beyond the capacity of existing waste management systems. As we prepare for the 5th Intergovernmental Negotiating Committee (INC-5) of the global plastics treaty, we must advocate for a comprehensive full life cycle approach to plastic pollution as mandated by the UNEA resolution 5/14. It is imperative to implement significant reductions in plastic production to address the core issue effectively. We must stress that solutions go beyond waste management and prioritize Zero Waste hierarchy.
How long will the developed world and the big polluting corporations hide behind this colonialist and unjust narrative?
Reactions from GAIA members in the Global South
Nalini Shekar, Hasiru Dala, INDIA
“There are some practices that need to change. Large corporations have been using mono-polymers in their packaging in both developed countries and developing countries with smaller populations. These polymers can be easily dealt with; however, the same brands and the same products in India use MLP (multi-layered plastic), which is a cheaper option but creates packaging waste that cannot be easily collected or processed. In all our MRFs (Materials Recovery Facilities), 40% of inorganic waste is MLP. Who is responsible for this branded litter that cannot be managed easily? The study should be broad-based to look at different practices and assess the pollution rather than labeling a country as polluted. It’s a very narrow way of looking at the problem.”
Mageswari Sangaralingam, Consumers Association Penang, MALAYSIA
“Capitalism, unsustainable plastic production, and consumerism are major drivers of escalating waste generation, largely perpetuated by developed countries. In the Global South, we not only manage our own waste but are also inundated with waste from nations like Japan, the United States, and European countries. These countries should be responsible for their own waste, yet they continue to offload it onto developing, resource-constrained nations in the Global South under the guise of recycling or donations. Households in developed countries, who diligently separate their waste, often don’t realize that their ‘recyclables’ are shipped across the world to be recycled or dumped, severely impacting local and indigenous communities, leading to environmental degradation and serious health hazards.”
Daru Setyorini, ECOTON, INDONESIA
“The discourse around plastic pollution must break free from the narrow confines of waste management and confront the reality of its global origins and impacts. Plastic pollution is not merely a problem of waste disposal; it is a crisis rooted in the insatiable consumption patterns of wealthy nations. The focus must shift to a comprehensive mass balance of plastic waste in affluent countries, examining the staggering per capita waste generation, the excessive reliance on disposable items, the inadequate recycling efforts, and the disturbing practice of exporting plastic waste under the guise of recycling.
Developed countries, despite their advanced waste management systems, bear a disproportionately high per capita plastic waste footprint and perpetuate a cycle of environmental exploitation by dumping plastic waste onto the Global South. Meanwhile, the Global South, despite having lower per capita plastic waste and implementing innovative eco-friendly alternatives, is unfairly stigmatized as the primary polluter. This skewed narrative ignores the fact that the real culprits are the oil companies, petrochemical industries, and multinational corporations from the North, who continue to flood the planet with new plastics and disposable products.
The world’s plastic crisis cannot be resolved through piecemeal solutions like waste-to-energy technologies, incineration, or so-called chemical recycling. The only way forward is for the Global North to own up to its excessive plastic production, curtail its output, and manage its own waste. The era of plastic waste colonialism must end. It is high time for developed nations to take responsibility for the environmental havoc they wreak, cease their exploitative waste exports, and recognize that the Global South has its own challenges to address without being unfairly burdened by the waste of the wealthier world.”
Mohamed Kamal, Greenish Foundation, EGYPT
“Africa is a net importer of plastics and its 54 countries are only responsible for less than 5% of global plastic production. Most African countries have very low production levels of plastics and only very few produce plastic polymers. Thus, the pollution within those countries is a result of an imported product and material, that African countries haven’t had the chance to develop their waste management systems to handle and manage. The research shows the scale of the problem but misses the context of why the problem is there.”
Weyinmi Okotie, GAIA Africa Clean Air Program Manager, NIGERIA
“The study’s findings on plastic pollution in the Global South are misleading and lack context. In Nigeria, I can attest that the issue of plastic pollution in our country is compounded by the practice of wealthy nations like the US sending their waste to our shores as second-hand items (thrift). This outsourcing of plastic waste is not acknowledged in the study, yet it plays a crucial role in the pollution experienced in many Global South nations. This not only exacerbates our environmental challenges but also highlights the need for a strong global plastic treaty that ends waste colonialism and the dumping of waste on the African continent. It’s also crucial to recognise that Africa is not a net producer of primary plastic. For instance, the sheer number of oil refineries in the Global North alone underscores the fact that the Global South is not the primary source of plastic production. Addressing this issue requires shifting to a broader perspective that considers the global inequalities and imbalances in waste production across different parts of the world.”
Alejandra Parra, Plastics and Zero Waste Advisor, GAIA Latin America & the Caribbean
“This article aims to contribute to the discussion on the global plastics treaty, but in reality, its approach represents a step backward in the discussions. Since the launch of the proposed resolution to start drafting this treaty, we have been campaigning for a full life-cycle approach to move the focus away from waste management, as it does not matter how much we improve the collection, disposal, and recycling of plastics if plastic production continues to increase. Furthermore, this article puts the blame back on countries that are recipients of plastic products rather than producers, where unscrupulous companies sell more low-quality plastic products targeted at low-income segments, further flooding these countries with plastic, regardless of the fact that they do not have the money to manage the waste these products leave behind. To solve the plastics crisis, we must once and for all move beyond the focus on waste management and begin to drastically reduce the production of this toxic material as a first and enabling step for everything that follows to be truly effective”.
Larisa de Orbe, Colectiva Malditos Plásticos, MEXICO
“To argue that countries in the Global South are responsible for plastic pollution is to ignore the array of toxic emissions that are discharged into the air, soil and water during the production, disposal, burning, incineration, co-processing and destruction of plastics. It also diverts attention from the serious problem of shipping plastic waste to countries in the South. We warn the parties negotiating the Plastic Treaty to reject these discourses that shift the responsibility to our countries in order to divert attention from the real culprits. This only exacerbates environmental injustice, perpetuates and justifies toxic colonialism, and promotes false solutions such as incineration, chemical recycling, burning in cement kilns, plastic credits, among others.”
Coordination team Alianza Basura Cero ECUADOR
“The study’s narrative oversimplifies a deeply complex issue, diverting attention from the real causes. A significant portion of the plastic flooding our countries originates from more developed economies, which often choose to burn their waste—exacerbating pollution—or worse, export it to poorer nations. Blaming the countries that have long been the dumping grounds of Global North waste instead of holding producers and consumers accountable is an injustice that we cannot allow. At Alianza Basura Cero Ecuador, we urge a deeper reflection: the solution doesn’t lie in blaming the victims of a bad system but in addressing the root causes—plastic overproduction, irresponsible consumption, the absence of global policies mandating corporate responsibility throughout a product’s life cycle, waste colonialism, and false solutions.”
Contact:
Dan Abril, GAIA Asia Pacific
dan@no-burn.org | +63 917 419 4426
Carissa Marnce, GAIA Africa
carissa@no-burn.org | +27 76 934 6156
Camila Aguilera, GAIA Latin America & the Caribbean
camila@no-burn.org | +56 9 8913 6198
Agnes Mampusti, GAIA Global
agnes@no-burn.org | +63 917 117 4224
References:
For more information about GAIA’s treaty advocacy, please visit no-burn.org/unea-plastics-treaty, follow us on X @gaianoburn, and read our Press kit.
