Although African countries are leaders in plastic bans, they remain vulnerable when it comes to the plastic pollution crisis. The lobby for the petrochemical and plastics industry in Africa sees an opportunity for its growth.
In the current era of globalization, there is an increase in the production of plastic-based goods. This continues to weaken Africa's national regulations, making them new centers for unregulated disposal of plastic waste.
Although fossil fuel lobbyists outnumber national delegations, scientists and front-line communities at INC4, negotiators finally made progress with increasingly decisive support among parties on the need for the treaty to include plastic reduction targets, with more support From 50 countries.
As the world prepares for the fifth and final session of the Intergovernmental Negotiating Committee at the end of this year, to develop a legally binding international instrument on plastic pollution, the focus must be on saving communities from social and environmental injustices across the life cycle of plastic, from extraction to disposal.
In the struggle to manage ever-increasing plastic waste, some African governments are forced to resort to dumping and open burning because they lack sufficient resources and recycling capacity. This makes matters worse because burning fossil fuel-based plastics produces even deadlier chemicals, exacerbating the health threat and exacerbating climate change.
It is estimated that we will produce 26 billion tons of plastic waste by 2050. We cannot manage this level of waste generation sustainably, and without global policies to reduce plastic production, the unequal exchange of plastic waste from high-income countries to others will continue. Non-high-income countries.
Dumping of plastic waste in vulnerable countries has led to widespread pollution and subsequent health impacts despite improvements in technologies and waste management practices.
People are exposed to harmful chemicals from plastics during their production, transportation, use, and disposal. Since plastics are not labeled, this makes it difficult for people to know which hazardous chemicals are used.
The social and environmental cost of plastics is unevenly distributed around the world and among social groups. Vulnerable groups, such as children, poor communities, informal sector workers and small island developing States, are disproportionately affected.
For example, children are vulnerable to adverse health effects from toxins and chemicals used in plastics. Studies indicate that children are most affected by plastic ingestion. Studies have revealed that chemicals used in children's toys have potential; To harm children's health.
Many of the adverse health effects of plastic are due to its endocrine disrupting properties.
Children raised near landfills are at high risk of developing respiratory diseases such as asthma because they inhale polluted air filled with toxins. Some areas of children's exposure to plastic are through toys, baby formula containers, and dental materials.
Although women play a central role in the use and recycling of plastics, they are uniquely exposed to environmental threats while facing limited access to social protection and resources to build resilience. Women, in particular, bear the brunt of plastic-related toxicity risks due to higher overall exposure to plastics in the home and even in feminine care products.
According to the International Pollutants Elimination Network (IPEN), there is evidence of the effects of several chemicals found in common plastics on human health, including changes in male and female reproductive development and infertility. A shocking study has revealed the presence of microplastic particles in the human placenta, indicating the risk of toxins being transferred from a mother to her newborns.
To understand the full range of social impacts related to plastics, there must be a step-by-step understanding of each stage of the plastic life cycle, from production to disposal, and how each of these stages impacts vulnerable communities. .
At the production stage, vulnerable communities located near petrochemical facilities face significant toxic exposures.
These communities have fewer options other than plastic products, making them socially disadvantaged. During the production phase, emissions are released that can impair the nervous system and cause reproductive and developmental problems, cancer, leukemia, and genetic effects such as low birth weight.
Communities located near production sites and workers working in production facilities are affected by the daily threat of exposure to toxic substances, potential accidents/accidents, or death.
During final disposal, these communities are also harmed by plastics because landfills and landfills are often placed in or near their communities. For example, let's explore Dandora landfill, Kenya's main landfill located within the city.
The Dandora dump is an informal workplace for about 10,000 women, children and a few men who rummage through piles of rubbish daily. Walking near the landfill will be greeted with choking smoke.
The situation in Dandora depicts the state of landfills in most African countries. Despite studies showing that air pollution is linked to childhood cancers and cognitive impairment in both children and adults, communities and schools live with landfill making it a deadly means of survival.
According to the World Health Organization, up to 14 percent of all children between the ages of 5 and 18 have asthma, and every year, more than half a million children under the age of five die from respiratory diseases linked to air pollution. However, children from vulnerable communities close to landfills in Africa bear the brunt of social and environmental injustice caused by plastic producers, and even worse by those who use chemicals and additives to make unnecessary plastics.
Research by the International Pollution Elimination Network and Arnica has shown that even brand new toys made from recycled plastic, hair accessories and kitchen utensils in African markets are affected by the unregulated toxic recycling of BFR-bearing plastic waste into new products.
The impact of plastics on vulnerable populations goes far beyond ineffective and non-existent waste management systems. It delves deeper into the health impacts and socioeconomic disparities. According to a report by the United Nations Environment Program titled “Impacts of the Dandora Municipal Landfill Site in Nairobi, Kenya” – skin disorders, cancers, respiratory disorders and blood disorders are just some of the public health impacts that can occur due to environmental pollution caused by Garbage. location.
Every year, Kenya faces 5,100 metric tons of e-waste. Waste comes in the form of cheap cables, used toys, new clothes adorned with LEDs, cheap vaping devices, and countless other small consumer items that consumers often don't recognize as e-waste.
These huge amounts of e-waste find their way under the guise of repair and reuse. Even though e-waste can be highly toxic and harmful to people's health, and although Africa is not necessarily responsible, it does end up on the continent. Waste pickers who work at these landfills are at risk of health hazards.
Growing evidence suggests that as global plastic production escalates, Africa is disproportionately affected by exposure to toxic chemicals and plastic waste that ultimately pollute our food chain and communities. Uncontrolled dumping of these chemicals and additives into plastic leads to health risks and poisons the food chain.
In a recent study conducted by CEGAD Kenya with its international partners on free-range chicken eggs in African countries, it was demonstrated that POP contamination was present and high in the food chain near plastic waste disposal sites and facilities. Egg samples were collected at sites where plastic waste is disposed of, incinerated to produce energy or processed for recycling across East and West African countries.
The eggs were analyzed for contamination with dioxins, highly toxic byproducts resulting from incineration of persistent organic pollutants or reprocessing and recycling technologies. Products must be designed for reuse, durability and ultimately safe recycling.
Waste pickers who work at the landfill face many challenges ranging from working without the proper equipment to direct impacts from hazardous plastic waste and toxins from contaminated waste. Economically, waste pickers are exploited for low wages when they sell recyclable materials.
The Global Plastics Treaty represents an opportunity for them to ensure their livelihoods are improved and their historic contribution to mitigating plastic pollution through their waste management services is recognized.
At the same time, traditional approaches to organizing environmental issues often ignore issues of environmental justice and access to remedies. Current responses to address plastic pollution face this limitation, underscoring the need for a human rights-based approach.
It is therefore crucial that the treaty prioritizes initial measures, starting with measures that can lead to a gradual reduction of plastic production to sustainable levels compatible with human health, human rights and the environment.
It must ensure that waste pickers and frontline communities are included, integrated and accessible in national waste management policies and the Global Plastics Treaty.
Patricia Cumbo, Communications Officer, Center for Environmental Justice and Development (CEGAD)
