PLASTIC WASTE MANAGEMENT AND LAWS ON WASTE DISPOSAL

ABSTRACT:

The ever-growing proliferation of plastic waste has emerged as one of the most pressing environmental crises of the modern era, necessitating an urgent and holistic legal response. The nuanced approach between consumer culture, industrial production, and insufficient waste management practices has led to the pervasive contamination of ecosystems and grave public health risks. This article critically examines the evolving legal architecture designed to curb plastic pollution, focusing on the regulatory paradigms governing waste disposal and plastic waste management. It explores the array of legislative interventions, from global conventions such as the Basel Convention to national laws mandating extended producer responsibility (EPR) and the ban of single-use plastics. Additionally, it delves into the complex architecture of waste disposal laws, analyzing legal mechanisms for waste segregation, recycling mandates, and the emerging realm of waste-to-energy solutions. By evaluating the effectiveness of these legal instruments and their enforcement, the article underscores the challenges of implementation, particularly in jurisdictions with limited infrastructure. The role of corporate accountability, public participation, and judicial recourse is also scrutinized as integral components of a comprehensive legal strategy for combating plastic pollution. Through this discourse, the article delves into a robust legal future that fosters sustainability, encourages innovation, and steers society toward a circular economy, where plastic waste is no longer a pollutant but a resource for future generations.

INTRODUCTION:

Plastic waste is a major environmental challenge due to its widespread use in consumer products, packaging, and industries. While plastic is versatile, durable, and cost-effective, its non-biodegradable nature means it can take centuries to decompose. As a result, plastic waste often ends up in landfills and oceans, harming wildlife and ecosystems. This global crisis has led to urgent calls for sustainable waste management practices and stronger laws to address its environmental impact.

Plastic waste management involves a range of strategies aimed at reducing, reusing, recycling, and disposing of plastic materials in an environmentally responsible manner. These strategies are critical not only for waste reduction but also for conserving natural resources and reducing pollution.

The legal landscape surrounding plastic waste management varies significantly across regions, with governments and international bodies implementing various laws to address plastic pollution. At the national level, laws governing waste disposal and recycling are designed to regulate waste management practices, promote recycling initiatives, and encourage the reduction of plastic waste at its source. These laws are often supplemented by international agreements and conventions aimed at tackling global plastic pollution.

Data by the Ministry of Environment and Forestry reported that the rubbish pile in Indonesia weighs at 1,75,000 tons a day or 64 millions tons a year(Suyanto; et al, 2015), 15% of the rubbish is plastic waste. In 2016, the Ministry of Forest and Environment reported that 9.85 billion of plastic bags were produced from around 90,000 modern retail stores within Indonesia.

This situation is concerning given the impact of plastic on humans and other living creatures .Plastic pollution is a global problem, not only for those living in urban areas but also for the people living in rural villages.

The World Bank has estimated that 1.3 million plastic waste is produced by urban areas, and the number will increase to 2.2 million by 2025. In 2012, the Global Industry analysis revealed that the use of plastic worldwide has reached 297 million tons by the end of 2015.

Plastic waste management at tourist destinations is critically important due to the elevated levels of waste generated by the influx of visitors. These locations, often renowned for their natural beauty, are increasingly susceptible to plastic pollution, including disposable items like bottles, packaging, and straws. Improper disposal of such waste poses a threat to biodiversity, ecosystems, and the aesthetic integrity of these sites.

From a legal perspective, effective plastic waste management at tourist spots necessitates the enforcement of regulatory frameworks aimed at waste reduction, recycling, and promoting sustainable practices. Legislative measures such as bans on single-use plastics, extended producer responsibility (EPR) policies, and eco-tourism regulations are key to minimizing environmental harm. Additionally, legal obligations for waste segregation and recycling programs at these sites are essential to ensure compliance and safeguard the ecological value of these popular destinations. In this context, the implementation of robust waste management laws not only preserves the environment but also secures the long-term viability of tourist destinations.

Laws and regulatory bodies play a pivotal role in waste disposal by establishing frameworks and enforcing policies that guide and govern how waste, including plastic waste, should be managed. These legal mechanisms help ensure that waste is handled in an environmentally responsible manner, reducing its harmful effects on ecosystems, human health, and public spaces. Laws enable the prosecution of illegal dumping and pollution activities, ensuring that individuals or organizations that improperly dispose of waste face legal consequences. Regulatory bodies are tasked with investigating violations and taking legal action to protect public health and the environment.

 LEGAL FRAMEWORK ON PLASTIC WASTE:

1. BASEL CONVENTION-

The Basel Convention on the Control of Transboundary Movements of Hazardous Wastes and their Disposal was adopted on 22 March 1989 by the Conference of Plenipotentiaries in Basel, Switzerland, in response to a public outcry following the discovery, in the 1980s, in Africa and other parts of the developing world of deposits of toxic wastes imported from abroad.

[1] The main goal of the Basel Convention is to safeguard the environment and public health from the harmful impacts of hazardous wastes and other wastes that need special attention. Its use encompasses a broad variety of wastes classified as “hazardous wastes” according to their composition, origin, and other attributes.
In order to meet the unique requirements of various regions and subregions, the Convention also calls for the creation of regional or sub-regional centers for technology transfers and training pertaining to the management of hazardous wastes and other wastes as well as the reduction of their generation (article 14). There are now fourteen of these centers. In the regions, they conduct capacity-building and training initiatives.

In the case, Collector of Central Excise, Kanpur vs M/S Matador Foam and Ors, on 5^th January, 2005, it was held that

[2]“The Monitoring Committee comprises of experts in the field. It has recommended destruction of the consignment by incineration. The PCBs may be within permissible limit insofar as parameters of Basel Convention are concerned but, at the same time, it has to be kept in view that parameters fixed by the Basel Convention are only guidelines and the individual countries can provide different criterion in their national law to lay down the limits of concentration of PCBs so as to label it as hazardous waste.

EXTENDED PRODUCER RESPONSIBILTY AND THE ROLE OF MANUFACTURERS:

EPR is a policy strategy that holds producers responsible for the end-of-life consequences of their goods. EPR enables proper collection and disposal of items after use by assuring responsible manufacturing methods, and it extends beyond that to encourage waste reduction and environmental impact in general.

For a variety of items, EPR laws and initiatives are well-established in Europe, Canada, Japan, and South Korea. For the four waste streams that are governed by EU Directives—packaging, batteries, end-of-life vehicles, and electrical and electronic equipment—all EU Member States have put in place EPR programs. EPR programs are starting to be used in several developing or less developed nations, especially in Asia and Latin America. When properly implemented, EPR programs can offer a variety of advantages and opportunities, such as higher rates of collection and recycling, lower public waste management expenditures, lower overall waste management costs, and innovations in product design that improve durability (or compostibility) and reusability.

EPR IN DEVELOPED COUNTRIES:

CANADA: Canada. Another significant environmental issue is the improper disposal of spent oil. The “Western Canada Used Oil Program,” an efficient EPR approach that makes use of an upstream DRS, has effectively solved issue in Canada (Walls, 2006). This industry-run initiative imposes an environmental handling tax (EHC) on the sale and import of old oil, oil containers, and oil filters. For each liter of oil, container, and filter that is recycled or reused by the authorized collectors, transporters, and recyclers, the charge thus received is utilized to pay incentives known as “return incentives” (RI). The relevant nongovernmental organizations (NGOs) that operate in each province choose the charge amount.

EPR IN DEVELOPING ECONOMIES:

[3] Colombia. Batteries, lightbulbs, and computers are among the WEEE streams that are the focus of the Colombian EPR (OECD, 2014). The Ministry of Environment, Housing, and Regional Development must approve the waste management and separate collection plan that the producers create. Producers can fulfill their responsibilities individually, collectively, or by forming a PRO. To fulfill their responsibilities, producers may also engage waste management firms that hold environmental licenses from the local environmental authorities. Retailers act as a collection location for manufacturers and take discarded goods from customers for free. Consumers are responsible for separating the products covered under the scheme from the municipal solid waste and bringing them to the retailers. Awareness among the consumers about the scheme is brought about by the municipalities.

The concept of Extended Producer Responsibility (EPR) is designed to ensure that producers are held accountable for the entire lifecycle of their products, particularly when it comes to waste management. EPR schemes have been implemented in various forms, each with a unique approach to addressing environmental impacts. These approaches can generally be categorized into three major types:

1. Mandatory EPR: In this approach, the government enforces strict regulations that require producers to take responsibility for the collection, recycling, or safe disposal of their products once they reach the end of their life cycle. These laws often set specific targets for the quantity of waste that must be recycled or repurposed, with penalties for non-compliance. This method ensures that producers are legally obligated to mitigate the environmental impact of their products.
2. Negotiated EPR: This approach involves a more collaborative process where producers, industry groups, and governments engage in negotiations to establish waste management targets and responsibilities. Negotiated EPR schemes allow for flexibility and adaptation to local circumstances, but they typically require significant cooperation between various stakeholders to achieve effective results.
3. Voluntary EPR: Under voluntary EPR, producers take the initiative to adopt sustainability practices and waste management solutions without formal legal requirements. While this approach is less coercive, it relies on the producers’ commitment to reducing environmental impacts through innovation, sustainable packaging, and recycling programs. However, the effectiveness of voluntary EPR schemes often depends on the industry’s commitment to self-regulation.

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION LAWS AND PLASTIC WASTE:

Every person has the right to a good and healthy environment, according to Articles 28A and 28H of the Republic of Indonesia’s 1945 Constitution. The 1945 Constitution, as a written document, has served as the supreme legal authority for governing environmental protection laws. This idea implies that the nation has a responsibility to uphold its residents’ rights to a healthy environment. A number of legislation, including Law Number 2 of 2009 concerning the Protection and Management of Environment, notably Article 5, section (1) covering the rights for a good and healthy environment, regulate the constitutional duty to preserve everyone’s rights.

[4]Issues revolving around waste have been regulated in Law Number 18 of 2008 Concerning Waste Management. Other preceding rules have also been established as a part inseparable from waste management law. As many as 60% to 70% of the waste produced by human is organic. The percentage of the inorganic waste is estimated at 30% to 40%, 14% of the garbage is plastic materials [12]. The data by the Ministry of Forestry and Environment reports that the waste produced by 100 retail stores (the members of the Indonesian Retailers’ Association, henceforth APRINDO) has reached 10.95 million plastic bags in a year, which is equal to 65.7 ha of plastic.

CONCLUSION:

[5]Plastic waste issues become crucial and thus requires special attention. To cope with the problems and to reduce the number of wastes, ensuring sustainable environmental protection in coastal areas is essential. Integrated law enforcement, therefore, needs to be implemented to promote awareness of people regarding the issue.

 The pervasive issue of plastic waste and the corresponding legal frameworks governing waste disposal represent both formidable challenges and invaluable opportunities for advancing environmental stewardship. As plastic pollution continues to imperil ecosystems, wildlife, and public health, the urgency for robust and efficacious waste management legislation has never been more pronounced. Legal mechanisms such as Extended Producer Responsibility (EPR), plastic waste prohibitions, and mandatory recycling directives are indispensable in mitigating the deleterious environmental consequences of plastic waste. Each EPR model—whether mandatory, negotiated, or voluntary—offers distinct advantages in aligning producer accountability with environmental sustainability, yet their success hinges upon the synergistic cooperation of governments, industries, and consumers alike.

While progress has been made through legislative intervention and regulatory oversight, the journey ahead necessitates continued innovation, rigorous enforcement, and heightened public awareness. Through fortifying the legal infrastructure surrounding plastic waste disposal, fostering the adoption of sustainable practices, and ensuring diligent compliance, society can inch closer to realizing a future where plastic waste is significantly curtailed, and environmental degradation is effectively thwarted. The management of plastic waste is not merely a legal obligation but a collective moral responsibility, one that safeguards the integrity of our natural world for the benefit of generations to come.

REFERENCES:

1. https://www.basel.int/theconvention/overview/tabid/1271/default.aspx
2. [1]https://indiankanoon.org/docfragment/156277318/?formInput=basel%20convention
3. https://www.researchgate.net/publication/280098372_Review_of_extended_producer_responsibility_A_case_study_approach/link/
4. https://www.e3s-conferences.org/articles/e3sconf/pdf/2021/35/e3sconf_icesd2021_03006.pdf
5. file:///C:/Users/Admin/Downloads/Plastic_Waste_Environmental_Legal_Issues_and_Polic.pdf

[1] https://www.basel.int/theconvention/overview/tabid/1271/default.aspx

[2] https://indiankanoon.org/docfragment/156277318/?formInput=basel%20convention

[3] https://www.researchgate.net/publication/280098372_Review_of_extended_producer_responsibility_A_case_study_approach/link/

[4] https://www.e3s-conferences.org/articles/e3sconf/pdf/2021/35/e3sconf_icesd2021_03006.pdf

[5] file:///C:/Users/Admin/Downloads/Plastic_Waste_Environmental_Legal_Issues_and_Polic.pdf