Plastic Pollution: Africa can reverse climate change if it’s being funded

 Plastic Pollution:

 

Africa can reverse climate change if it’s being funded

 

By Daily News Reporter

 

Africa’s fight against the use of single-plastics, causing a recurring environmental degradation-involving various players-Governments, producers interest groups alike, might veer off course unless there an urgent call to action is initiated without further delay at the height of climate change.

Undeniably, the United Nations through its Environmental Assembly has stepped up efforts to remedy the scourge caused by plastics as adduced by its earlier meeting last year in Nairobi where it sought to devise a regulation to address every aspect of plastic pollution.

The ultimate goal when formulation the regulation is premised on the effective utilization of a science-based policy when drafting this agreement that would envelope at plastic pollution related matters.

These would require put restrictions in the usage of plastics that are chocking oceans, landfills and rivers-a deceptive way of aiding climate change which can be avoided with political will from the continent’s leadership.

Although an estimated 30 African countries, Kenya, Rwanda, among others, have stepped up and banned single-use plastic bags, there is less remedy done.

There is undying need for effectiveness of policies on plastic production, use and waste management needs to be improved by all countries, Zambia included as capacity and mechanisms for monitoring and evaluation of these solutions are still nascent or in existence.

Various independent assessments undertaken by interest groups show a gloomy picture of the future of the world and Africa in particular if no action is taken now.

Unless there is concerted actions taken, like yesterday to reverse plastic pollution, more plastics will fill oceans than fish by 2050 is political will by Governments on the continent is not turned into policy formulations.

In West Africa, plastic pollution has reached its crescendo. Five years ago, 17 coastal countries had generated 6.9 million tons of plastic waste, with Nigeria alone accounting for 4.7 million tons per year.

Of this, 20% was produced within 30 km of the coast, with most of it ending up in the ocean.

The numbers are now rising despite the interventions by the West African Coastal Areas Management Porogramme (WACA) securing $563 million funding from the World Bank and its partners to determine the impacts of plastic pollution.

The problem was similar in Senegal which sought to fend off and manage the end-of-life Polyethylene terephthalate (PET) bottles in Senegal, and an e-book with resources to help people create their own rationale for mobilizing action.

“These bags are some of the five million plastic bags that Dakar inhabitants use every day before discarding them in the streets”.

Wearing his bizarre outfit made of plastic waste collected from the streets, Modou Fall, also known as Mr. Plastic, has been building awareness on plastic pollution for years,” a report reads.

The cost of the damage caused by marine plastic pollution in West Africa is estimated at around $10,000 to $ 33,000 per ton of plastic waste.

Sectors particularly hard hit by the plastic pollution are fisheries and aquaculture, marine-linked tourism, waterfront property values, and biodiversity and ecosystems.

Out of 17 coastal areas, eight of them are among the top 20 with the least effective plastic waste management practices – up from five in 2015. This has worsened marine pollution and adversely affected activities in the region.

Coastal provinces account for about 56% of West Africa’s GDP and one-third of the population lives there. In 2018 the regional member states opted to form the WACA, hoping to protect and restore the ecological, social and economic assets of coastal areas, though trouble still brews.

Hypothetically, the WACA was tasked to address coastal erosion, flooding and pollution and funding has consistently been provided.

The World Bank’s total financing of the project has hit US$492 million but hazards still lie on the road and more action is needed.

Kenya made similar attempts at resolving the plastic use and banned the single-use plastic bags in 2017 to reduce plastic pollution, but a lack of similar rules in neighboring countries resulted in plastic bags piling up in Kenya.

Plastic bags continue to pollute Kenya through porous borders which give way to the smuggling of the bags in shipments of plastic materials exempt from the ban, like packaging products.

The sustained influx of plastics has affected people and livestock, recording some fatality in goats affected with swollen stomachs and fatal health issues caused by the ingestion of plastic bags.

Rwanda, remains one of the continent’s case study since it slapped a blanket ban in 2008. This groundbreaking decision made Rwanda, one of the first countries in the world to take such a bold and comprehensive action is the remedy premised on four key prime parameters.

These standards are apparently being observed by both the Government and the citizens to stop pollution of the agricultural soil, clogging wetlands, and harming wildlife.

The law in Rwanda, expanded in 2019 covers production, importation, sale, and use of these plastics. The ban was expanded in 2019 through a law forbidding the use and sale of single-use plastic like bottles, straws, plates, and forks.

Rwanda’s success has been based on four things:

Political will: These laws reflect the government’s commitment to improving Rwanda’s environment and the well-being of its people. And while there is a lot left to accomplish, ongoing implementation assures steady progress.

Empowering Communities and Raising Awareness:

The law has made everyone responsible for their action and the need to protect environment and advises on the health consequences of plastic pollution, making mindset change and compel people to take ownership through communities.

Innovations in alternatives and infrastructure:

The ban stimulates the development and adoption of alternative materials, paper, bamboo, and cloth, all eco-friendly and biodegradable, including those made of.

The country now transforms plastic waste into a valuable product, including fabrics and building materials. Rwanda has invested heavily in recycling and waste management too.

The private sector and Government have joined and created eight recycling facilities to ensure the proper collection, sorting, and processing of plastic waste.

By embracing circular economy models, Rwanda is transforming plastic waste into a valuable resource, used to create fabrics, building materials, hexagonal roadblocks, and other products.

Regional and global collaboration Rwanda has collaborated widely to end plastics pollution as evidenced in Rwanda and other parts of East Africa.

Kenya followed Rwanda's lead and implemented its own tough ban on plastic bags in 2017. Tanzania and Uganda have also initiated measures to curb plastic pollution.

In 2014, in Ghana with the use plastic water containers, the predicted child mortality rate fell by 42 % . Kirène is now expanding its recycling activities with partners such as Recuplast.

In 2022, Rwanda and Peru co-sponsored a resolution that was adopted by the Fifth Session of the United Nations Environmental Assembly. It paves the way for the creation of a binding international agreement aimed at ending plastic pollution.

In Most Least Developed Countries, Bangladesh, India, Guatemalla, among others, there are various initatives underway to eradicating plastic pollution. Presently over 100 countries are moving towards banning plastic bags including taxes or other restrictions.

However various players including the Worldwide for Fund for nature (WWF) have extended their helping hands in fighting plastic pollution at various levels, according its report. It estimates low-income countries, despite consuming less plastic, incur a total lifetime plastic cost that is 10 times higher than wealthier countries.

• The structural inequities built into the current plastics value chain not only distribute the burdens of plastic pollution unequally among countries, the burdens are also disproportionately borne by those least equipped to remedy them, thereby worsening the crisis.

• All governments should agree on a treaty with harmonized, binding global rules that can remove inequities reinforced and exacerbated through our current take, make, and waste plastics system.

WWF-commissioned report developed by Dalberg1 warns that the true cost of plastic on the environment, health and economies can be as much as 10 times higher for low-income countries, even though they consume almost three times less plastic per-capita, than high-income ones.

The report estimates that the total lifetime costs of a kilogram of plastic is around US$150 in low- and middle-income countries, which is eight times the US$19/kilogram incurred by high-income countries2. When comparing just low-income countries and their wealthier counterparts, the cost differential rises to 10 times with low-income countries hit with costs of US$200 a kilogram.

These unequal costs have substantial implications for low- and middle-income countries like Kenya, where negotiators will converge from 13-19 November for the third negotiations of the global treaty to end plastic pollution.

Six years ago, Kenya took a bold step against plastic pollution by banning single-use plastic bags.

Today, the country continues to struggle with illegal imports of single-use plastic bags, highlighting the problem’s Trans Boundary nature and the crippling inequities inherent in the current plastics value chain that put countries like Kenya at a disadvantage no matter what bold action they take.

“Our take, make, waste plastics system is designed in a way that unfairly impacts our planet’s most vulnerable and disadvantaged countries. Instead of resolving the world’s plastic pollution crisis in the most efficient way, the system shifts the bulk of the costs to those least equipped to manage them, with no accountability placed on those who produce and use the products in the first place,” said Alice Ruhweza, WWF International’s Senior Director of Policy, Influence and Engagement.

Overall, low and middle-income countries now bear a disproportionately large burden of the costs associated with plastic pollution as a direct result of three structural inequities that reinforce the current plastics system:

Inequities: The system places low- and middle-income countries at a disadvantage in that they have minimal influence on which plastic products are produced and how they are designed and yet are often expected to manage these products once they reach their end-of-life.

Product and system design considerations are typically made further upstream in countries with extensive plastic production and by multinational companies headquartered in high-income countries. Four years ago, only 9% of plastic waste is being recycled.

Currently, around 60% of global plastic production is for single-use products, which are designed to be (and so cheaply valued that they can be) thrown away after just one use.

Inequity:

The rate of plastic production, particularly for single-use plastic, is far outpacing the availability of technical and financial resources for waste management when it reaches its end-of-life in low- and middle-income countries.

Without reducing plastic production and consumption, low- and middle-income countries will continue to bear the highest burden of plastic pollution’s direct environmental and socio-economic impacts.

Inequity is that the system lacks a fair way for holding countries and companies to account for their action, or inaction, on plastic pollution and its impact on our health, environment and economy including mandatory extended producer responsibility schemes in each of the countries they operate in.

With no common obligations across all jurisdictions and companies for supporting a circular, just and non-toxic plastics economy, low- and middle-income countries end up paying the steeper price.

Remedy:

Establishing and implementing a UN global plastic pollution treaty based on harmonized and binding global rules can help us create a fairer system that empowers low- and middle-income countries and prioritizes the most effective and efficient solutions.

Countries should embrace the private sector-producers of plastics a introduce law regulating the most high-risk plastic products, polymers and chemicals - those that can cause the most harm or are most likely to cause pollution to lessen the strain on countries with fewer resources, in managing plastic waste.

Create a global product design rules to ensure that products are designed to be reused and/or recycled regardless of which country they are produced or used in.

When all is said and done, one hurdle lingers: What is the true cost of pollution? A WWF report dubbed: “Who Pays for Plastic Pollution? Enabling Global Equity in the Plastic Value Chain” it’s difficult to quantify, convincingly.

“While many of the costs cannot be quantified, reflecting the gaps in available data and understanding of the full impact of plastic pollution, it does include quantifiable costs such as the cost of producing virgin plastic, greenhouse gas emission costs, costs on ecosystem services of marine ecosystems and direct waste management costs.” It reads

Though presented as ‘monetary costs’ of one kilo of plastic, it’s important to note that countries do not actually pay these costs, the costs are used as an indication of the disproportionate burdens plastic poses on countries with different national incomes.

The total lifetime cost for one kilogram block of plastic waste in a high-income country for example, is US$19, compared to eight times that for middle and lower-income countries at an average of US$150, and 10 times that for lower-income countries, at US$200.

Farmers, however are victims of the plastic pollution through land and animal grazing when there is environmental degradation especially countries that rely on livestock for their livelihood.

“Our land and cattle are our only wealth. When plastic is burnt in our fields, no plant can grow, and no seed can germinate. Our cows, goats, and sheep consume the plastic that is everywhere in the landscape and are killed.” Kaolack, Senegal, Ndiouck Mbaye, President of the Senegalese Rural Women’s Association expresses her concern.”

Breton Woods’s institution-The World Bank remains supporting throughout Africa to undertaken various assistance at every stage of the plastic lifecycle and support countries with projects worth over $2.5 billion focusing on plastic pollution management and prevention.

It also provides expertise, encourages private investments, and builds the capacity of regional institutions to bring cross-border solutions.

Global production of plastics is estimated around 430 million metric tons per annum and is rising, a call for recycling, though inadequate.

How Plastic pollution can end in Africa:

The COP 28 is here once again where African people sit in various negotiation meetings on various climate change related discussions as the continent grapples with Loss and Damage Losses.