The issue of microplastic pollution is not just isolated to one or two countries, but a global problem experienced by everyone, regardless of where they come from. The ocean’s microplastic stew was created by people from all parts of the world. While some governments. While some governments have turned a blind eye to the cries of help from the environment, other governments have taken steps to implement policies that somewhat or specifically tackle the problematic microplastic pollution. Today we look at some of these solutions and evaluate (briefly) their impacts and potential for long-term change.
United Kingdom
In 2016, the House of Commons Environmental Audit Committee released its Fifth Special Report which focused specifically on microplastic pollution. On 3rd September 2016, the UK government announced that it will ban the manufacture and sale of cosmetics and other personal care items that contained microbeads which could adversely affect the marine ecosystem (House of Commons, 2016). Two years later on 2nd June 2018, this ban came into effect. On top of the ban, the government has promised to continue doing the relevant research on the negative effects that microbeads have in the environment in order to continue forming policies that could mitigate some of the negative impacts.
Besides the microbead ban, the UK has also been actively working towards reducing plastic usage in everyday life, including the Marine Strategy Part Three: UK Programme of Measures. They have also imposed charges for single-use plastic bags, which aim to reduce plastic bag usage by almost 6 billion. The government’s stand on plastic and microplastic pollution is clear and in favour of reducing – its policies have also shown its commitment to tackling the issue.
United States
On 8th December 2015, the US Food and Drug Administration passed the Microbead-Free Waters Act of 2015, which bans the “manufacturing, packaging, and distribution of rinse-off cosmetics containing plastic microbeads”, inclusive of cosmetic and non-prescription drugs (Center for Food Safety and Applied Nutrition, 2020). Larger scale bans on plastics have only been erected in 3 states: California, New York and Hawaii. However, we also see that many states have pre-emptive laws which prevent its legislators from passing plastic bans at all; often times these laws are pushed by those in support of the plastic industry. (Pytel, 2020) Given the lack of a compromise on national-level plastic bans, it is difficult to ascertain the government’s true stance on microplastic usage.
Many critics, however, pointed out that the act only covered cosmetic products that contained microbeads, but did not include other products like detergents and sandblasting powders that also made use of microbeads (Kaufman, 2017). As a result, while the cosmetic industry had to take down its products, other companies were able to continue adding their microbeads to their products, simply because they were able to exploit the loophole in the act.
Bibliography:
Center for Food Safety and Applied Nutrition. (2020). The Microbead-Free Waters Act: FAQs. U.S. Food and Drug Administration. Retrieved 8 October 2020, from https://www.fda.gov/cosmetics/cosmetics-laws-regulations/microbead-free-waters-act-faqs
House of Commons. (2016, November). Environmental impact of microplastics: Government Response to the Committee’s Fourth Report of Session 2016–17. https://publications.parliament.uk/pa/cm201617/cmselect/cmenvaud/802/802.pdf
Kaufman, A. (2017). Obama’s Ban On Plastic Microbeads Failed In One Huge Way. The Huffington Post. Retrieved 8 October 2020, from https://www.huffpost.com/entry/obama-microbead-ban-fail_n_57432a7fe4b0613b512ad76b
Pytel, B. (2020). A Third of the US Has Laws Preventing Plastic Bans. Earth Day. Retrieved 8 October 2020, from https://www.earthday.org/a-third-of-the-us-has-laws-preventing-plastic-bans/
