Less than a century ago, most products in Asia were made mainly from natural materials and were built to last or to biodegrade easily. People wrapped food in leaves or paper and carried it in reusable containers; returned glass milk bottles so that they could be sterilized and used again; and ate in restaurants using ceramic plates and stainless-steel cutlery. Low-income communities in particular embraced a prevalent micro-retail culture of buying small quantities of condiments and other household kitchen needs. The plastic bag had yet to be invented.
All this changed dramatically after World War II, when many parts of Asia underwent rapid industrialization and urbanization. The introduction of single-use plastics appealed to an ideal of convenience and hygiene, nurturing a mindset that ushered in disposability on an unprecedented scale. Companies started wrapping their products in single-use plastics and effectively hacked Asia’s micro-retail culture by emphasizing how the region’s poorer consumers could benefit by purchasing small packaged amounts.
Plastic has thus been the most popular and ubiquitous material in Asia for decades, and more than half of the world’s plastic is produced there, but the increasing use of plastic is having adverse environmental effects that extend far beyond the vast quantities that litter land and clog bodies of water across the region.
Illustration: Yusha
To gauge the nature and scale of this pollution crisis and identify possible solutions, the Heinrich Boll Foundation and Break Free From Plastic Asia Pacific collaborated with the Institute for Global Environmental Strategies Japan to produce the Plastic Atlas Asia Edition.
The atlas includes facts and figures about the toxic world of synthetic polymers and shows how pervasive plastics have become in nearly all aspects of our lives, from clothing, food and tourism to human and environmental health. For example, we might not realize how much plastic we wear in the form of polyester and other synthetic fibers made from petroleum or natural gas. Making a polyester shirt might emit 3.8kg to 7.1kg of carbon dioxide. Plastic waste and microplastics in the world’s oceans are much-discussed problems, but few realize that plastic pollution of agricultural lands can be between four and 23 times higher.
The atlas provides comparative regional data as well, especially on grassroots issues such as illegal dumping of waste from more developed countries, the unequal gender impact of exposure to plastic, and the plight of waste pickers and waste workers in Asia who play a critical role in diverting plastic residuals from open dumps, incinerators and the environment.
Moreover, it outlines the responsibilities of Asian governments and corporations in tackling the threat of plastic pollution.
Although the region’s plastic pollution was bad before COVID-19, the pandemic has exacerbated the problem. Plastic production and pollution have accelerated as demand for single-use plastics — including for online merchandise and food delivery during lockdowns — has surged.
This has jeopardized previous hard-fought gains, with the oil and gas industry planning to ramp up investments in production of plastic products and byproducts — more than 99 percent of which comes from fossil-fuel feedstocks — in the next few years. As a result, the environment is most likely to become a long-term casualty of this public-health crisis.
At the same time, a rising tide of community-based organizations and grassroots-led initiatives across Asia could lead to the emergence of a more inclusive, sustainable and just economic system that could address the entire lifecycle of plastic pollution.
Members of the #breakfreefromplastic movement believe that decentralized, community-led innovation represents the way forward in addressing the plastic pollution crisis.
These groups have demonstrated how an approach involving ecological resource management and at-source use reduction, with an emphasis on product redesign and systematic waste separation and collection, can help to counter the growing environmental threat posed by plastics.
In some Asian cities, such as San Fernando in the Philippines and Kamikatsu in Japan, and in Kerala state in India, Break Free From Plastic’s grassroots member organizations are implementing zero-waste management programs that divert huge amounts of waste from landfills, thereby preventing it from polluting land and entering waterways.
Such initiatives have shown that the false solutions — including chemical recycling, plastics-to-roads, ecobricking, plastic credits and plastic collection in exchange for basic goods for low-income families — that are being pushed by industry groups and corporations are merely greenwashing. Their methods require ongoing extraction of resources, because they fail to keep valuable materials within a circular economy and generate harmful emissions of heavy metals, persistent organic pollutants and greenhouse gases.
Asian governments must enact and properly implement policies and regulations that can help scale up grassroots initiatives and hold plastics producers accountable for addressing the crisis, such as by filing lawsuits and demanding remediation of the pollution and its effect on health, human rights and environment.
Companies urgently need to abandon their aggressive growth targets for plastic production and use, which is expected to quadruple by the early 2050s, and offer credible alternative delivery systems and reusable packaging for their products.
Generations of Asians have become accustomed to the apparent convenience of plastic, but without the continent significantly reducing its production, the world cannot hope to stop the plastic pollution crisis.
This year’s Earth Day theme was Restore Our Earth. To do that, we need to foster innovative ideas and solutions that can repair the world’s ecosystems.
With the publication of the Plastic Atlas Asia Edition, we hope to shine additional light on a complex regional crisis and spur further efforts to combat it.
Jed Alegado is senior communications officer of Break Free From Plastic Asia Pacific. Clemens Kunze is deputy director of the Heinrich Boll Foundation’s Hong Kong office. Kevin Li is program manager for environment in the Heinrich Boll Foundation’s Hong Kong office.
Copyright: Project Syndicate
The gutting of Voice of America (VOA) and Radio Free Asia (RFA) by US President Donald Trump’s administration poses a serious threat to the global voice of freedom, particularly for those living under authoritarian regimes such as China. The US — hailed as the model of liberal democracy — has the moral responsibility to uphold the values it champions. In undermining these institutions, the US risks diminishing its “soft power,” a pivotal pillar of its global influence. VOA Tibetan and RFA Tibetan played an enormous role in promoting the strong image of the US in and outside Tibet. On VOA Tibetan,
Sung Chien-liang (宋建樑), the leader of the Chinese Nationalist Party’s (KMT) efforts to recall Democratic Progressive Party (DPP) Legislator Lee Kun-cheng (李坤城), caused a national outrage and drew diplomatic condemnation on Tuesday after he arrived at the New Taipei City District Prosecutors’ Office dressed in a Nazi uniform. Sung performed a Nazi salute and carried a copy of Adolf Hitler’s Mein Kampf as he arrived to be questioned over allegations of signature forgery in the recall petition. The KMT’s response to the incident has shown a striking lack of contrition and decency. Rather than apologizing and distancing itself from Sung’s actions,
US President Trump weighed into the state of America’s semiconductor manufacturing when he declared, “They [Taiwan] stole it from us. They took it from us, and I don’t blame them. I give them credit.” At a prior White House event President Trump hosted TSMC chairman C.C. Wei (魏哲家), head of the world’s largest and most advanced chip manufacturer, to announce a commitment to invest US$100 billion in America. The president then shifted his previously critical rhetoric on Taiwan and put off tariffs on its chips. Now we learn that the Trump Administration is conducting a “trade investigation” on semiconductors which
By now, most of Taiwan has heard Taipei Mayor Chiang Wan-an’s (蔣萬安) threats to initiate a vote of no confidence against the Cabinet. His rationale is that the Democratic Progressive Party (DPP)-led government’s investigation into alleged signature forgery in the Chinese Nationalist Party’s (KMT) recall campaign constitutes “political persecution.” I sincerely hope he goes through with it. The opposition currently holds a majority in the Legislative Yuan, so the initiation of a no-confidence motion and its passage should be entirely within reach. If Chiang truly believes that the government is overreaching, abusing its power and targeting political opponents — then
RSS