MONITORING AND CONTROLLING MICROPLASTICS
MONITORING AND CONTROLLING MICROPLASTICS
Several government agencies in the
Philippines are involved in monitoring and controlling the problem of
microplastics. While each agency fulfills its respective mandate, there appears
to be no centralized body that coordinates all efforts. This lack of a unified
approach raises concerns about the efficiency and effectiveness of the
country's response to microplastic pollution.
A proper strategy for tackling microplastics
should involve estimating their volume in gross tonnage and setting a target
timeline for their removal, even as new microplastics continue to enter the
environment. Without a concrete numerical target, it will be difficult to
assess the success or failure of such initiatives.
But how exactly is the incidence of
microplastics measured? Should we focus on the total volume of plastics
released into the environment, or only on the fraction that degrades into
microplastics? More importantly, should microplastic management be implemented
at the local government unit (LGU) level? Perhaps all LGUs should be challenged
to conduct their own microplastics removal programs, with performance
benchmarks that allow for comparison.
Quezon City, for example, has taken a
proactive approach by banning single-use plastic packaging, including shopping
bags. If more LGUs followed suit, we could see a significant reduction in
plastic pollution nationwide.
A possible solution to the lack of
centralized coordination is expanding the role of the National Plastic Action
Partnership (NPAP). As a multisectoral body, the NPAP could take the lead in
organizing and integrating efforts to combat microplastics. It could be
strengthened by including other agencies such as the Department of Science and
Technology (DOST), the Department of Health (DOH), the National Solid Waste
Management Commission (NSWMC), the National Research Council of the Philippines
(NRCP), and the Food and Nutrition Research Institute (FNRI).
The Department of Trade and Industry (DTI)
should also be involved due to its oversight of consumer and industrial waste.
The Department of the Interior and Local Government (DILG) must play a role
because solid waste management is ultimately a local responsibility.
Beyond governance, it is essential to study
where microplastics are coming from. For instance, microplastics can be
generated from the friction of rubber tires on roads. This suggests that the
Department of Transportation (DOTr) and the Department of Public Works and
Highways (DPWH) should also be part of the discussion.
The Philippines has already taken several
steps toward addressing plastic pollution, with multiple LGUs banning
single-use plastics. The NPAP, supported by the World Economic Forum (WEF), is
working on transitioning to a circular economy where waste is minimized, and
resources are reused.
However, is the government doing enough?
Should companies receive more tax incentives for investing in plastic waste
reduction programs? Is there a national database monitoring the extent of
microplastic pollution? These are crucial questions that need to be addressed
if the country is to develop an effective and coordinated response to this
growing environmental problem.
Addressing microplastic pollution requires a
holistic, multi-agency effort, clear numerical goals, and active participation
from both national and local governments. If we do not act decisively, the
accumulation of microplastics will continue to threaten our environment, our
health, and future generations.
Ramon Ike V. Seneres, www.facebook.com/ike.seneres
iseneres@yahoo.com, 09088877282,
senseneres.blogspot.com
05-24-2025
Comments
Post a Comment