3Rs of managing waste, addressing plastic pollution crisis at source come up at INC-3

The 3Rs of waste management, ‘Reduce, Reuse, Recycle’ and addressing the plastic pollution crisis at source, were some of the issues that came up at the ongoing third session of the Intergovernmental Negotiating Committee (INC-3) at the United Nations Environment Programme headquarters in Nairobi, Kenya.   

“The legacy of colonialism is still perpetuated by countries in the Global North through waste dumping, reinforcing and deepening centuries of oppression on the people of the Global South. We need to break free from the system that prioritises single-use plastic in the name of convenience and development over the health, safety, and ecological boundaries of the planet. This crisis can’t be solved by the same technofixes, we need to address the problem at source,” a  South African representative of a global movement against plastic pollution Break Free From Plastic (BFFP) said on Day 4 of INC-3. 

“If you continue business as usual, the current surge in plastic production will drown out other real solutions that need to be focused on in the treaty. The solution is to drastically reduce plastic production and we need ambitious targets for that to happen. We need you to govern and rise up to the occasion for the interest of your people, of our people (referred to concerned Africans and South Asians). It is your mandate to respect our human rights and to protect the interest of common people, not corporate interest. And also, not of the 1 per cent (population) that benefits from the production of plastics and the extraction of fossil fuel,” he added while addressing the chair at INC-3.

Prior to this, on the sidelines of Day 3 proceedings, BFFP carried out a panel discussion focused on prioritising reuse solutions in the global plastics treaty. The discussion addressed by expert panellists from Europe, Indonesia, Spain and other countries came up with innovative solutions on the topic key to addressing the plastic crisis.

The economics of reuse in Europe was brought up Joan Marc Simon, the Director of Zero Waste Europe, a network working towards the elimination of waste.

“We all have heard (the phrase) Reduce, Reuse, Recycle. The reason why we hear these three terms in order instead of hearing ‘Recycle, Reuse, Reduce’ is because there is supposed to be an order of priority; something not to be taken for granted. What you cannot recycle, reuse is what you should do for it. And what you cannot reuse anymore should go to recycling. But not many people get it and Brussels (in Europe) where I come from has a problem with this not being practiced. It’s very important that we understand that for reuse to play in equal conditions with single use. It (reuse) should have its own infrastructure dedicated for the purpose, and it should be optimised the same way as single-use has been optimised over the last decades.”

Only a third of total plastic waste generated by Europe is recycled, and half of the plastic collected for the purpose of recycle gets exported to countries outside European Union for the purpose of being treated, according to a report by newspaper Washington Post.

Simon brought up examples of economy of reuse, mentioning one in India. “In only one city Kolkata (in West Bengal), for example transitioning about 80,000 street food vendors to reusables (stainless steel), would reduce plastic waste by over 86 per cent, create over 2,250 jobs and give a return on investment of 21 per cent over a payback period of 2.3 years,” he said.   

The discussions were overall focused on scaling reuse systems and deposit-return systems.

Key messages from the discussions

The challenges of implementing a Deposit Return Scheme (DRS) in Latin America and the efforts being made to include all stakeholders, including waste pickers, in the process were brought up by Miguel Roset, Executive Director of Retorna, a Spanish environmental non-profit. 

 “We must support the wastepickers to be involved from the outset of the introduction of the systems and in ensuring that industries do not exclude them. Also, in ensuring that they have a primary role. We should also make sure that governments support them and their knowhows and infrastructure are respected,” Roset said.

Closed system for plastic reuse

UNEP suggested focusing on closed systems as an easier and less invasive way to shift towards reuse. Many public buildings, sports stadiums, museums, schools, and music festivals already have washing facilities that could be utilised for such systems, it pointed out in a message and emphasised the need for a gradual plan to make necessary changes in the systems.

The programme also acknowledged the experience of Manuel Mateo from the Ministry of Environment and Sustainable Development in Argentina, who highlighted the significance of working with termability systems. 

A question was raised from BFFP about ensuring that plastic-free, toxic-free reuse is prioritised over the circularity of plastics in the global plastics treaty. UNEP responded that reusable materials don’t necessarily have to be single-use plastics and the right criteria around safety and reusability could help move away from reusing plastic items. 

Over 200 NGOs have signed a manifesto for future free from plastic pollution, the BFFP claimed.

In other candid discussions that unfolded between Day 3 and 4 of INC-3 proceedings, delegates shared both preferences for and aversions to certain elements that could form part of the future treaty on plastic pollution. 

Stumbling blocks pitting developing countries against developed countries arose during the discussions. One of them is provision of technology to developing countries. There was ambiguity on whether such a transition should be on mutually agreed terms—which to some is a reference to commercial terms—or should it be on preferential terms. 

“The latter is sometimes seen as a threat to private sector interests, who more often than not develop and thus, possess proprietary rights over these technologies. In the case of plastic pollution, such technologies extend from those used for remediation to mechanical sorting or recycling. If we are to move at the same pace in order to save the world from drowning in plastic waste, technology transfer will remain a core component,” one of the delegates said.

But how will the future instrument ensure that it is shared equitably and transparently, and in a manner that does not impose upon, but rather is attentive to developing-country needs and preferences, the delegate further asked.