By RIYA BHAGWAN
Despite years of warnings and various national efforts, plastic waste in Fiji keeps piling up, threatening food security, marine life, and the very livelihoods of coastal communities.
A report co-authored by Fiji’s Permanent Secretary for the Ministry of Environment and Climate Change, Dr Sivendra Michael, UNDP Fiji Resident Representative Munkhtuya Altangerel, and UNCTAD Senior Economist Henrique Pacini warns that ocean plastic pollution could double—from 152 tonnes in 2020 to 300 million tonnes by 2040—if current trends continue, placing Fiji at increasing environmental and economic risk.
A 2021 report by the International Union for Conservation of Nature (IUCN) revealed that plastic accounts for a staggering 15,000 tonnes of Fiji’s 140,000 tonnes of annual solid waste, highlighting the growing scale of plastic pollution in the country.
Even more alarming is the impact of plastic pollution on marine life–the United Nations (UN) reports that nearly 17 percent of marine species are affected by entanglement or ingestion of microplastics, which they mistake for food, often leading to suffocation.
Fijian communities, many of whom rely heavily on seafood and processed foods, also face growing health risks linked to environmental contamination.
With the presence of microplastics in the ocean and food chain making seafood a potential carrier of harmful substances, research warns that consuming microplastic-contaminated food can contribute to serious health issues, including cancer, hormonal imbalances, reduced fertility, weight gain, and insulin resistance.
In August 2017, the Fijian government introduced a 10-cent levy on plastic bags to reduce their use and promote the adoption of reusable alternatives, followed by a complete ban on the use of single-use plastic bags that came into effect in January 2020.
In 2021, Fiji further strengthened its environmental efforts by introducing a ban on polystyrene products.
Fiji’s active participation in local, regional, and international conferences and workshops highlights its ongoing commitment to addressing the plastic waste crisis.
Other NGOs working to address waste management issues also continue to advocate for proper plastic disposal and recycling efforts.
However, despite these efforts, progress in combating the plastic crisis remains hampered.
Where are we falling short?
Dr David Rohindra, Acting Deputy Head of School of Learning, Teaching, Quality and Research in the Discipline of Biological and Chemical Sciences at the University of the South Pacific, highlighted that current recycling efforts are ineffective due to a lack of understanding about proper recycling practices and existing educational gaps.
“Plastics are classified into seven categories – PET, HDPE, PVC, LDPE, PP, PS, and miscellaneous,” the chemistry expert said. “Each of these types of plastics can be recycled for different purposes, but for this to happen, they must be separated, and this is the issue – people are not educated about this, and that’s where we fall short.”
“When plastics are mixed, they can’t be recycled and end up in landfills, meaning the plastic stays in the environment,” he added.
“For example, with a water bottle, the bottle, cap, and label all need to be separated in order to recycle the plastic.”
He pointed out the lack of properly categorised recycling bins and the insufficient awareness efforts to support recycling initiatives.
Dr Rohindra also highlighted the lack of recycling companies that could provide incentives for recycling efforts. He emphasised that when the public sees their recycling ending up in landfills, they become less motivated to participate in recycling initiatives.
“If you’re going to collect recyclables, that effort should be put to good use,” he said. “For example, if there’s no recycling bin nearby, you might walk an extra five metres to dispose of it, but if you see the rubbish truck picking everything up and dumping it in the same bin, the next time you won’t make the efforts–you’ll just throw it anywhere, knowing it will end up in the same place.”
He called for bridging the education gap and implementing practical, effective recycling practices that can be operational and sustainable.
According to Amitesh Deo, Founder of the Pacific Recycling Foundation, a major challenge in tackling the crisis is the lack of decisive action from both the government and international partners.
Commenting on the failure of workshops to translate into tangible change, Mr Deo said, “While they organise these workshops and we get invited as speakers, they need to stop using us as tokens, because there’s an element of tokenism—that we are just put there to speak but they aren’t really listening.”
“The other major problem is there is a lot of talk, a lot of money goes into organising conferences and meetings, but not enough is being done on actionable things,” he added.
“We fly in consultants from overseas to talk about issues. We pay hundreds and thousands of dollars to experts from foreign countries, but our own people know the issues. Our own elders in the community know the issues. We already have solutions, but money is not diverted into projects where we can see actual change.”
Deo argued that if the government and international partners had taken meaningful action, Fiji would already be much further along in the fight against plastic pollution.
Other environmental stewards at USP shared similar sentiments, highlighting the lack of tangible action on the ground to drive meaningful change.
“Policies are there, but it’s just on paper; there is no action on the ground,” final-year student in Social Work and Psychology, Busra Sakib, said.
Another environmental steward at USP, Kelvin Gounder, said, “We need to focus more on reducing plastic use from the outset, as the issue requires action at its source.”
How can we move forward?
Dr Rohindra made a strong call for finding alternatives to plastics.
“People have become so accustomed to plastic that we can’t just ban it like that now. We have to find an alternative, and so if you have an alternative, we get rid of the plastic,” he said.
“Just like when polystyrene was banned, we had paper as the alternative. We need similar alternatives for plastics.”
He emphasized the need to consider broader solutions and implement alternatives that can be effective on a larger scale.
The use of cloth bags to replace plastics is one viable alternative that can be both sustainable in the long term and practical on a larger scale.
A practical alternative to plastic bottles, which contribute significantly to the plastic crisis, has been introduced by the American-based company Cove, which produces 100 per cent biodegradable bottles that break down without generating microplastics, offering a fully eco-friendly solution, according to the Forbes, an American business magazine.
The company uses the natural material PHA (polyhydroxyalkanoate) instead of using petroleum-based plastic in its production.
Call for urgent action
The economic burden of plastic waste in Fiji was estimated to be between $32.5 million and $44.2 million in 2019 alone.
Projections suggest that if the current trend continues, plastic pollution could cost the country over $4 billion between 2023 and 2040.
Even more concerning is the harm plastic pollution poses to human health, with risks expected to rise significantly if robust action is not taken soon.
At the heart of it, tackling plastic pollution is not just about policies or numbers–it is about protecting the way we live and the future we want to leave behind.
Riya Bhagwan is a third-year student at The University of the South Pacific, Laucala Campus.
