2023-11-09 17:17:00
The burden of global environmental pollution caused by plastic waste is distributed very unevenly.
Photo: dpa/Marwan Naamani
The United Nations negotiating committee on global plastic pollution will meet in Kenya’s capital Nairobi from Monday. The aim of what is now the third meeting is to conclude a legally binding international agreement to combat environmentally harmful plastic waste by 2024. The participating government representatives will have access to two current publications on the subject of plastic. The two nature conservation organizations Greenpeace and World Wide Fund for Nature (WWF) presented reports on global plastic pollution this week.
While Greenpeace warns in the study about the threat of preferential treatment of European plastic exports to Latin America, the WWF criticizes the unequal distribution of the burden of environmental pollution. “The current plastics system shifts most of the costs onto those least able to handle the burden, without holding accountable those who make and use the products in the first place,” complains WWF’s Alice Ruhweza.
In its study, the environmental protection organization analyzes the structural inequalities in the plastic value chain, from the extraction of raw materials to production, use, disposal and environmental pollution from plastic waste. The so-called true costs of this value chain and who mainly has to bear them are also broken down. True costs are the effects of economic activities without these consequences being directly reflected in prices, as the Heinrich Böll Foundation explains. This is therefore damage that is not taken into account by those responsible, such as the producers of plastic.
The WWF report shows that the costs of plastic pollution are far higher in poorer countries than in rich countries. “In low- and middle-income countries, the true cost of plastic is eight to ten times higher, even though they use almost three times less plastic per capita than in high-income countries,” the publication says. The country case studies of Brazil, Kenya and Indonesia provide a concrete insight into the local situation and offer suggestions for fairer solutions.
“A strong UN agreement with binding, harmonized rules for production and consumption can create a fairer system and strengthen poorer countries in the fight against plastic waste,” emphasizes Laura Griestop, an expert on plastic and packaging at WWF Germany.
But this fight is difficult, as the current Greenpeace study shows, which deals with the agreement currently being negotiated between the European Union and the Mercosur states. The international association Mercosur forms a single market for the economically largest countries in Latin America, including Brazil, Venezuela, Argentina and Uruguay. According to Greenpeace, the agreement between the two economic blocs would increase trade in single-use plastics and would therefore stand in stark contrast to the ongoing negotiations over a global plastics agreement that is intended to significantly reduce plastic production and end waste pollution.
In addition, the agreement with the Mercosur states would contradict EU legislation, which aims to reduce plastic consumption and avoid plastic waste, criticizes Greenpeace. The study by the environmental protection organization shows that the planned free trade agreement would eliminate tariffs on plastic exports from the EU to South America. And tariffs on plastic items, the trade and use of which are prohibited within the EU, would also be abolished.
This applies, for example, to disposable plastic cutlery, which has been banned across the EU since 2021, but continues to be sold to Mercosur countries with a customs surcharge of up to 18 percent. According to Greenpeace, these would be gradually eliminated as part of the free trade agreement. Plastic cutlery, which is primarily intended for single use, is one of the most common forms of plastic pollution in the environment.
The agreement would also eliminate tariffs on polystyrene food and beverage containers. They have also been banned in the EU since 2021, but can still be sold to the Mercosur countries with an import duty. The situation is similar with PVC, which the EU is currently considering banning. In both cases, an import duty of up to 14 percent still applies.
According to a Greenpeace analysis of the UN database Comtrade, just over 20 percent of all plastic imports from Mercosur countries in 2022 came from the EU. Germany is the third largest exporter of environmentally harmful plastics to Latin American countries, behind the USA and China. The international environmental organization criticizes that it is therefore hypocritical to make speeches at international conferences about good European environmental policy when at the same time a trade agreement is being pushed forward that shifts the negative consequences of the European economy on the environment and health to other countries.
Because even if it is currently difficult to estimate how much the abolition of tariffs would have on the environment and human health, what is certain is that it would “offer new incentives for the plastics and petrochemical industries in Europe to continue to use environmentally harmful plastics to produce for export to third countries.«
#ndstays – Get active and order a promotional package
Regardless of whether it is pubs, cafés, festivals or other meeting places – we want to become more visible and reach everyone who values independent journalism with an attitude. We have put together a campaign package with stickers, flyers, posters and buttons that you can use to get active and support your newspaper.
To the promotional package
#Plastic #pollution #endless #plastic #waste #ndaktuell.de