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.
