Legal and Policy Frameworks to Address Marine Litter Through Improved Livelihoods

Summary

This chapter provides an overview of the international and regional legal and policy frameworks relevant to the prevention and management of marine litter. These instruments set the obligations and guidance for national action of participating countries. Legal and policy responses by governments provide an opportunity to address the many drivers of marine litter across the life cycle, from the design of products to the management of the waste they generate. Public awareness, consumer behaviour and industry engagement also play key roles in preventing marine litter. These interventions alone remain voluntary, fragmented and insufficient to tackle the marine litter problem. The national and/or regional responsibility of parties to prevent marine litter as established by these frameworks is not unique to the countries of Africa, and many of the barriers to effective compliance are shared with developing countries in other regions. The social context in which national implementation measures must operate can be unique to countries or regions. This chapter summarises the duties established by the legal and policy frameworks at the international and regional levels that may be applied to the issue of marine litter. It provides an African context to the barriers and drivers of effective implementation of national measures in compliance with international obligations. The scope of this chapter extends beyond the responsibility to prevent marine pollution, to establish a holistic and integrated duty of governments to provide a healthy environment and sustainable livelihoods as recognised in the global Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs). The review of these international, regional and national legal and policy frameworks therefore considers the inclusion of these broader principles to underpin prevention and management of marine litter.

4.1 Introduction

The development of effective policies and legal frameworks for the prevention and management of marine litter is driven by the responsibilities of governments to protect their environment, support the rights of their citizens, and, increasingly, public awareness of the consequences of the unsustainable generation of waste and inadequate management thereof. In addition, obligations are also set in legal and policy frameworks which aim to protect the global commons of the oceans and prevent transboundary harm to high seas marine environments and areas under the national jurisdiction of other coastal states.

The prevention of marine litter in African countries is hampered by challenges common to developing countries worldwide. These are areas to be considered for global and regional capacity building and funding opportunities to underpin short-, medium- and long-term solutions. Importantly, the design of legislative and/or policy response options must consider these challenges and integrate measures to remove or reduce their effect.

4.1.1 Poor, Inadequate and Fragmented Data, Information and Reporting

Across Africa, there are limited data on the quantities, composition and fate of marine litter (refer to Chap. 2 for more details). More broadly, there are similar limitations on data for rivers inputs and for waste management, particularly for rural areas (UNEP, 2018b). There are few exceptions, and some progress is being made. In South Africa, where research has been conducted over many years, beach litter has been tracked in a limited number of areas over time (Ryan, 2020). Kenya is also making progress in this regard. The need for establishing regular monitoring programmes, including beach litter surveys, has been well illustrated by the long-term data set developed in Seychelles, providing important data on litter fluxes to the islands (Dunlop et al., 2020).

4.1.2 A Lack of Targets and Metrics to Track Action and Progress Towards Goals

Without robust data, it is challenging to determine baselines from which targets can be set, including the development of indicators to provide the metrics to measure progress towards those targets. In the absence of such targets and metrics, it is possible to adopt regionally agreed targets and indicators that have been adopted and are appropriate to the local context. Some data may be extrapolated from the national reports transmitted on an annual basis by Parties to the Basel Convention; however, the quantitative data is often lacking and relates to waste generated and subject to transboundary movements overall rather than specifically relating only to marine litter. The 17 SDGs of the 2030 Agenda (UN, 2015) and associated indicators can also be adopted at the national level (see Annex 4.1: SDG targets and indicators relevant to preventing marine litter, livelihoods, and safe environment). In addition, the post-2020 Global Biodiversity Framework (CBD, 2021) includes targets and indicators relevant to the conservation of the marine environment, which the prevention of marine litter can help to achieve. In recognition of the lack of metrics, the United Nations Environment Programme (UNEP) and the International Union for Conservation of Nature (IUCN) developed the “National Guidance for Plastic Pollution Hotspotting and Shaping Action” (UNEP, 2020) to provide a common methodological framework that enables countries to prioritise interventions to abate plastic pollution—which makes up the largest volume of marine litter. The hotspotting methodology is being applied in Kenya, Mozambique, Tanzania and South Africa.

4.1.3 Limited Research into the Environmental and Social Impacts, Drivers and Solutions

The impacts of marine litter extend beyond environmental pollution and ecosystem degradation. Livelihoods, recreation and human health are also negatively impacted once plastics enter the marine environment. Research on human health impacts is ongoing, but socioeconomic studies are less common, particularly in Africa. Policy design must consider the social and economic effects of measures, particularly on vulnerable communities. In addition, understanding the drivers of marine litter, such as behaviour and access to services, will assist in the selection and design of cost-effective measures that target high-impact solutions and can scale nationally. In contrast, the banning of plastic products can lead to job losses (Godfrey, 2019), and careful consideration should be given to the broad spectrum of possible policy interventions to determine the most appropriate based on evidence.

4.1.4 Poor Compliance and Enforcement of Existing Legislation

A number of countries across Africa have adopted legislation or are in the process thereof, to ban or tax plastic bags of certain thickness, as well as a limited selection of single-use plastics (UNEP, 2018b). Poor enforcement of these measures has challenged their effectiveness (Oelofse and Godfrey, 2008; Jambeck et al., 2018; SADC, 2021). In addition, a lack of enforcement in one country can affect neighbouring countries. For example, the ban on plastic bags in Kenya has been undermined by the illegal trade in bags across land borders (Godfrey, 2019). Where economic incentives have been applied, such as the industry-led PETCO (the South African PET Plastic Recycling Company) system in South Africa, greater success has been achieved in the collection of plastic bottles and, therefore, a reduction in their contribution to marine litter. Despite these efforts, non-recyclable plastics and plastics of low value are still prevalent in the environment, prompting the South African government to move towards mandatory Extended Producer Responsibility schemes (see Box: EPR in the African context−the example of South Africa). It should be noted that without curtailing the escalating rates of production, the efficacy of even the most successful recovery schemes such as PETCO will continue to be challenged (Ryan et al., 2021a).

4.1.5 Absence of Integration of Environmental Justice in Waste Management

SDG 16 encourages the need for environmental justice through promoting peaceful and inclusive societies for sustainable development, providing access to justice for all and building effective, accountable and inclusive institutions at all levels (see Annex 4.1). This includes ensuring responsive, inclusive, participatory and representative decision-making at all levels (SDG Target 16.7) and ensuring the public has access to information (SDG Target 16.10). This applies to the degradation of ecosystem services and human harm caused by plastic pollution and associated chemicals, particularly the harm caused by the open burning of plastics (CIEL, 2019a, 2019b). Communities living in marginal lands near waste accumulation areas are more prone to water-borne and other diseases transmitted by pests and animals attracted to the waste (SADC, 2021). In some cases, the informal waste sector is dominated by women who are  often exposed to unsafe working conditions. The livelihoods of this sector can also be reduced should formal waste systems be introduced (such as EPR schemes) that do not adequately incorporate the informal sector by reducing access to waste streams traditionally in their domain (US EPA, 2020). South Africa developed the Waste Picker Integration Guideline (DEFF, 2020b), which could be adapted to the local context in other African countries.

4.1.6 High Level of Product Importation not Matched by Appropriate Waste Management Capacity

Historically, there was limited production of plastic products in Africa. However, despite a continued reliance on imports, production is on the increase, fuelled by growing economies in the region (Africa Business, 2021). However, waste management services and capacity have not kept pace with increasing plastic consumption and the resulting waste generation (UNEP, 2018b). The Southern African Development Community (SADC) lists some of the drivers of unsustainable waste management as high volumes of waste generation coupled with poor waste management capacity, primarily due to limited adoption and high costs of appropriate disposal technologies and methods (SADC, 2021). In addition, electronic and electrical waste and other wastes imported into African countries have contributed to the pressure on already stressed and inadequate waste management services. Therefore, it is strongly recommended that, where recycling facilities are not readily available for products, African countries should avoid producing or importing those items (UNEP, 2020) or work more closely with producers to appropriately manage the product at the end of life, including promoting the principle of design for reuse and recycling.

4.1.7 Underfunded Waste Management Services and Limited Use of Market-Based Instruments

A lack of end markets for the reuse, recycling and recovery of wastes is a key contributor to poor waste services in Africa (UNEP, 2018b). Several market-based instruments have been implemented worldwide under differing socioeconomic contexts. These provide examples of best practices for incorporating the polluter pays principle through financial incentives (and disincentives). They can also promote the waste hierarchy, providing support for recycling (BRS, 2013, 2019a, 2019b; OECD, 2018).

Despite these limitations, waste pickers in South Africa have formed an association to promote and protect their livelihoods. The South African Waste Pickers Association (SAWPA) has met with waste pickers in Kenya to promote the establishment of a similar association and formally bring the various waste picker groups of Kenya together. These associations intend to advocate for good working conditions and gain recognition for waste picking as an essential service by decision-makers and other stakeholders. The waste picker groups recognise the need to strengthen this network across Africa further to “help fight false solutions that are presented in the waste sector” (GAIA, 2020).

4.2 The Role of Legal and Policy Frameworks in the African Context and the Promotion of Equity

The international legal framework broadly provides for the prevention of marine pollution, thereby establishing the duty to protect the marine environment from plastic pollution. Only a handful of binding international agreements address the issue of marine litter directly or include measures that would directly contribute to the prevention thereof. The binding agreements include the Basel Convention (Convention on the Control of Transboundary Movements of Hazardous Wastes and Their Disposal, 1989), the Stockholm Convention (Convention on Persistent Organic Pollutants, 2001), MARPOL (International Convention for the Prevention of Pollution from Ships) Annex V (Regulations for the Prevention of Pollution by Garbage from Ships, 2011) and the London Convention (Convention on the Prevention of Marine Pollution by Dumping of Wastes and Other Matter, 1972). The United Nations (UN) Law of the Sea Convention mandates the prevention of marine pollution from all sources, including plastics, and applies to land-locked countries that contribute to marine plastic pollution via rivers and other pathways. The UN Fish Stocks Agreement requires the minimisation of wastes, discards and catches resulting from abandoned, lost, or otherwise discarded fishing gear (ALDFG), which is mostly made of plastics. Some voluntary global instruments target marine litter directly, such as SDG 14, which focuses on life below water and specifically targets a reduction of marine litter. Regional instruments have been adopted to protect the oceans in different regions, including those surrounding Africa. Implementation of international and regional instruments occurs at the national level, and the role of these instruments, both binding and voluntary, is to harmonise and facilitate national action. In some cases, initiatives taken by nongovernment institutions have provided a valuable basis for strengthening and the implementation of the legal and policy frameworks (see Sect. 4.4.3 on relevant regional and sub-regional marine litter initiatives). An approach across geographical scales is important; international strategies mobilise resources while increasing awareness on a global scale, however, awareness and will for action on a national level is essential to address the issue of marine litter. This is one of the key tracks but not the only one. An international treaty would allow to place the problem on the environmental agenda at the global level, mobilising resources, but without a awareness and will at the local level, the issue might remain a matter for experts preaching to the convinced.

The issue of marine litter raises several governance failures beyond the environmental degradation of marine ecosystems. Failure to protect the marine environment from marine litter damages the livelihoods of many who rely on these ecosystem services, particularly subsistence fishers. Thus, the right of individuals to a healthy and productive environment (Knox, 2020) is undermined. In addition, the right to decent work and economic growth (SDG8), sustainable cities and communities (SDG11) and, importantly for Africa, poverty eradication (SDG1) through job creation is denied. These factors are critical for security, peace and reducing displacement.

The existing legal and policy frameworks, both international and regional, present a fragmented approach to preventing and managing marine litter. The current frameworks are commonly assessed by evaluating those instruments that aim to prevent marine pollution, protect species and biodiversity or manage chemicals and waste (UNEP, 2017). In the absence of a global agreement to govern plastic pollution, the option to strengthen measures under the current framework and the coordination thereof towards a common goal remains a viable option to reduce marine litter. The elements of a new global agreement to address plastic pollution will be negotiated under the mandate of Resolution 5/14 adopted at the resumed fifth session of the United Nations Environment Assembly (UNEA). However, ignoring the co-benefits obtained from preventing marine litter presents a missed opportunity to address SDG8 on decent work and economic growth, SDG11 on making human settlements inclusive, safe, resilient and sustainable and SDG1 on ending poverty. Addressing these SDGs in the context of marine litter will move Africa towards achieving SDG12 on responsible consumption and production, thereby reducing the generation of wastes that may become marine litter.

The 17 SDGs are elaborated in relevant targets specific to achieving each goal. More than 250 indicators further support these targets for measuring progress towards each goal. Poverty reduction under SDG1 is particularly important in the African context. Poverty is a primary contributor to environmental degradation in developing countries (Masron & Subramaniam, 2019). A key component in achieving poverty reduction is economic growth (Ladan, 2018). Indicator 1.2.1 tracks progress towards halving the population living below the national poverty line. More specific to the drivers of marine litter, and in support of the right to a healthy environment and livelihoods, is target 11.6, aiming to reduce by 2030 the adverse per capita environmental impact of cities, by paying particular attention to municipal and other waste management, tracked through indicator 11.6.1 on the proportion of municipal solid waste collected and managed in controlled facilities. Target 12.5 aims to substantially reduce waste generation by 2030 through prevention, reduction, recycling and reuse, using indicator 12.5.1 to track national recycling rates and tonnes of material recycled.

Underpinning these duties by States is the need to develop domestic systems for sustainable financing to subsidise waste management systems and address leakage of litter into the marine environment. By incorporating the polluter pays principle, whereby producers must contribute financially and physically to the management of their products at the end of life, African countries can increase private sector investment in waste management services and create sustainable jobs. This will, in particular, benefit the informal waste sector (US EPA, 2020). Such policies can assist in measuring progress towards the goal of ensuring significant mobilisation of resources from a variety of sources to implement programmes and policies to end poverty in all its dimensions. This is tracked through SDG indicator 1.a.1 with a metric of the proportion of domestically generated resources allocated by the government directly to poverty reduction programmes.

By focusing on these targets and indicators, Africa can move towards achieving SDG14 on life below water, for which target 14.1 aims to prevent and significantly reduce marine pollution of all kinds, in particular from land-based activities, by 2025, including marine debris. Indicator 14.1.1 lists floating plastic debris density as a metric for this target. To address the challenges prevalent in Africa that exacerbate the drivers of marine litter, this chapter focuses on the national duties established under international and regional instruments to:

• Prevent and remove marine litter from land- and sea-based sources;

• Provide a healthy and productive environment;

• Provide sustainable economic growth that supports sustainable livelihoods with no environmental harm;

• Strengthen the science–policy interface through improved knowledge management relevant to Africa, support for scientific research and greater regional cooperation, including sharing of best practices and

• Establish mechanisms for sustainable financing of waste management, with a focus on job creation and geographic coverage of collection systems.

Integration of the above principles and duties to develop holistic waste management services using a source-to-sea approach (UNEP, 2021a, 2021b, 2021c) can assist countries in working towards a number of global priorities. These include the contribution of all phases of the plastics life cycle to climate change (CIEL, 2019a), to human health (CIEL, 2019b), the Post-2020 Global Biodiversity Framework towards the vision of living in harmony with nature (CBD, 2021), and the management of chemicals and waste beyond 2020 (SAICM, 2021). Together with the development of circular systems, integrating these approaches will improve the current fragmented policy frameworks and help deliver on the three global priority issues of climate, biodiversity and pollution (UNEP, 2021a, 2021b, 2021c).

4.3 International Legal and Policy Frameworks of Relevance to Marine Plastic Pollution in Africa

The global community has made significant strides in establishing international frameworks that support countries in addressing marine pollution challenges within and beyond their jurisdictions. In a period spanning 50 years, numerous international legal and policy instruments have been adopted, comprising conventions, or agreements, regulations, strategies, action plans, programmes, guidelines, etc. (see Annex 4.2). Some of the international instruments are legally binding to Parties that have expressed consent to be bound. In contrast others provide for voluntary participation or coordination and cooperation by States and other relevant actors. A number of studies, such as Lebreton and Andrady (2019), UNEP (2017) and Bergmann and others (2015), have highlighted the successes and limitations of the implementation of existing instruments in addressing marine litter. Some of the gaps identified include deficiencies in legislation or lack of implementation thereof, low cooperation and insufficient participation of States, inadequate data on marine litter and a fragmented framework. Recommendations arising from these studies towards addressing the gaps include exploring measures going beyond basic amendment to existing instruments and the need to develop an internationally legally binding agreement on addressing plastic pollution.

Many regions and States have incorporated into national law, as needed, some of the obligations enshrined in the international instruments and put in place measures to address marine litter. Yet, for many States or regional groups of States, ratified legal instruments such as treaties may be directly applicable and have primacy over national law, including before national courts, without having the necessity to adopt transposing national measures. Indeed, some regional instruments go further in addressing the gaps in international instruments by developing regional measures and action plans specific to marine litter (UNEP, 2017a, 2017b). For example, several African States have established measures such as prohibiting certain leakage-prone products (see Sect. 4.5). The shortcomings of the current global regulatory framework (see Sect. 4.2) were highlighted in the 2020 African Group contribution towards the UNEA 5 process¹. There are instances where some frameworks allow a margin of discretion to Parties wishing to adopt more stringent measures.

The following subsections highlight some of the key legally binding international instruments that may support efforts by countries to address marine litter and plastic pollution within their scope of mandate and the various voluntary strategies, action plans, programmes and guidelines that have been adopted as support mechanisms.

The key legally binding instruments analysed in Sect. 4.3.1 are outlined in Table 4.1.

Table 4.1 Number of African countries out of 54 that have ratified, accessioned or approved the various global instruments in this section (Data sources: United Nations Treaty Collection database; and convention websites)

4.3.1 Global Conventions and Protocols

The various conventions and protocols outlined herein define the scope of the legally binding international governance framework for countries to strengthen mechanisms to protect the marine environment from human activities. Nearly all African countries have signed or ratified three global instruments: the UNCLOS, Basel and Stockholm conventions, but less than 30% have signed to the London, MARPOL Annex V and UN Watercourses Conventions (Table 4.1, details in Fig. 4.1a, b). Despite the domestication and implementation of the obligations of the international legal governance framework, recent assessments continue to highlight the worsening problem of marine plastic pollution and present an undesirable future outlook under a business-as-usual scenario where the total amount of plastic waste entering the ocean is projected to nearly triple by 2040 (Pew Charitable Trusts & SYSTEMIQ, 2020; Boucher et al., 2020; Williams & Rangel-Buitrago, 2019; Geyer et al., 2017). Global plastic waste generation is projected to triple from an estimated 60 to 100 million tonnes in 2015 to 155–265 tonnes by 2060, with Africa and Asia contributing disproportionately large shares of the total (Lebreton & Andrady, 2019). This points to the need for further scientific and policy exploration on alternative complementary or new instruments and platforms to effectively slow down plastic leakages into the environment and for increased efforts to strengthen implementation and compliance to existing instruments. Among the proposed policy responses to be debated through the UN Environment Assembly (UNEA) process is to establish a global treaty on plastics to reduce or eliminate the flow and leakage of related litter to the marine environment. A potential plastics agreement aims to address ongoing governance gaps and combat plastic pollution throughout its life-cycle stages. Three of its key goals could be to reduce virgin plastic production and consumption, facilitate for safe circularity of plastics and eliminate plastics pollution in the environment (Simon et al., 2021).

Fig. 4.1

African countries covered by relevant international conventions (ratified or accessioned)

4.3.1.1 UNCLOS

The United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea sets out the obligation for Parties to take all measures consistent with this Convention necessary to prevent, reduce and control pollution of the marine environment from any source (UNEP, 2017a, 2017b). The Convention addresses pollution from a number of sources, including land-based, seabed activities, dumping, from vessels and from or through the atmosphere. It prohibits dumping within the territorial sea and the exclusive economic zone or onto the continental shelf without the expression of prior approval of the coastal State. It mandates States to adopt the necessary laws and regulations and harmonise policies at the appropriate regional level. A recent study noted that many African States have not legislated their full maritime zone benefits available under UNCLOS nor defined the extent of their sovereign rights, obligations and jurisdictions through such legislation (Surbun, 2021). For example, Okonkwo (2017) notes that several unresolved maritime boundary disputes have slowed down the maritime boundary delimitation process, which seems not to be a priority in the absence of incursions by neighbouring countries. This context underlines the overall absence of political will to legislate the Convention’s obligations fully and together, with lack of resources, undermines its full implementation by countries.

The Convention recognises pollution as the direct or indirect addition of substances or energy into the marine environment resulting in deleterious effects, including harm to living resources and marine life, hazards to human health, a hindrance to marine activities, including fishing, and other legitimate uses of the sea, impairment of quality for the use of seawater and reduction of amenities. Thus, at the national level, the implications of these provisions aim to safeguard the ecological benefits that the oceans provide, thereby supporting economic development. For example, South Africa’s Ocean Economy is projected to contribute US $ 12 billion to the national GDP by 2033 and create over one million jobs (DEFF, 2017), and figures that rise if all African States are considered. Additional detail on the value of Africa’s Blue Economy is provided in Chap. 1.

4.3.1.2 London Convention and Protocol

The 1972 London Convention and 1996 Protocol on the Prevention of Marine Pollution by Dumping of Wastes and Other Matter) promote the effective control of all marine pollution and prevention of ocean pollution by dumping of wastes and other matter. They require contracting parties to cooperate in reporting vessels, and aircrafts observed dumping at sea, with exceptions for possibly acceptable wastes or spoilt cargo as prescribed in guidance. The London Protocol prohibits the dumping in all maritime zones of wastes generated on land that contain plastics. As a new and emerging issue for the London Convention and Protocol, its Governing bodies recommended action to combat marine litter through identification and control of marine litter at source, monitoring, additional studies and knowledge-sharing. As of 2019, 16 African countries were parties to the Convention and 10 to the Protocol (IMO, 2019a), with only six being Parties to both.

The International Maritime Organization (IMO) has outlined some benefits to countries that are party to the London Protocol.² Some of the benefits outlined include social, political and economical, such as those derived from a healthy marine environment or efficiencies in trade negotiations.

4.3.1.3 MARPOL Annex V

The International Convention for the Prevention of Pollution from Ships (MARPOL) 73/78 includes several Annexes, of which the regulations for the control of pollution by garbage from ships are contained in Annex V. These regulations seek to reduce, and if possible, eliminate the amount of garbage discharged into the sea from vessels and cover all types of vessels from pleasure crafts and merchant ships to fixed or floating platforms. The garbage addressed includes all kinds of food, domestic and operational waste, all plastics, cargo residues, incinerator ashes, cooking oil, fishing gear and animal carcasses generated during normal shipping operations. Despite it being one of three “Optional Annexes” in the Convention that States can choose to decline to accept, it has received ratification by more than 150 countries globally, thereby enabling its widespread enforcement (IMO, 2021)³. According to the International Maritime Organization, the effective implementation of Annex V is mainly dependent on adequate port reception facilities, especially within MARPOL designated special areas, including the Mediterranean Sea, Red Sea and “Gulfs” area, all of which are connected to the African States and Islands. Within the context of Annex V and its implementation in Africa, higher protection and special mandatory methods are required within the special areas, more than in other sea areas as defined by oceanographic and ecological conditions and sea traffic (IMO, 2019)⁴.

Chapter 2 provided an in-depth analysis on the state of implementation of the MARPOL Annex V and expands on the challenges faced by African countries in fulfilling the provisions of the Convention. Despite the challenges, it is estimated that its implementation has contributed to a significant decrease in pollution from international shipping and applies to 99% of the world’s merchant tonnage. From a policy standpoint, compliance and enforcement of the convention’s provisions remain a challenge (IMO, 2019; Carpenter and MacGill 2005 in Bergmann et al., 2015). Considering the challenges highlighted in Chap. 2, effort should go to reviewing compliance and enforcement of national regulatory frameworks to strengthen mechanisms for ship-generated pollution prevention at harbour and port facilities. Despite efforts by countries to implement the Convention and its Annexes, there is evidence of dumping garbage at sea by ships, in contravention of the Convention (Ryan et al., 2019; IMO, 2018). Results from multiyear recording and monitoring of accumulation of plastic debris along Inaccessible Island, a remote, uninhabited island in the central South Atlantic Ocean, show increased plastic accumulation growth in the recent past. The research found that 90% of plastic bottles stranded on the island had been manufactured recently, with more than 83% of new bottles of Asian origin. The time-since-manufacture stamps on the bottles are significant in assigning the likely responsible source from ships (Ryan et al., 2019). Similar evidence of illegal dumping of plastics from ships operating in Asia has been observed through scrutiny of plastic bottles found on beaches in Kenya and South Africa (Ryan, 2020; Ryan et al., 2021a). These sea-based and transboundary sources of plastic bottles are found on all beaches, though their signal is diluted close to local land-based sources.

There are benefits derived when countries implement MARPOL Annex V. For instance, Nigeria, Africa’s largest economy and host to a high level of shipping traffic, domesticated the MARPOL Convention as part of its port reforms starting in 2000. The reforms empowered the Nigerian Maritime Administration and Safety Agency (NIMASA) as an oversight body and created an enabling environment for public–private investments in port infrastructures. A private waste management agency secured a long-term contract to manage port reception facilities in Nigeria’s six largest ports (UNEP, 2017b). Such legislative and institutional reforms boosted confidence in the private sector to invest more than 70 million US dollars towards shipping waste management infrastructure (Obi, 2009). The contribution of marine litter in Africa from transboundary and sea-based sources (Ryan, 2020; Ryan et al., 2021a) has further economic repercussions, as plastic accounts for 94–98% of all litter on Cape Town beaches, where the tourism sector directly employed about 44 thousand people (Takunda & Blottnitz, 2019; City of Cape Town, 2019). A recent study by Jain et al. (2021) estimated that plastic litter on the beaches of Cape Town could lead to losses of up to R 8.5 billion in total coastal tourism revenue, representing 91% of total coastal tourism revenue and 67% of overall tourism revenue.

4.3.1.4 Basel Convention

The 1989 Basel Convention on Control of Transboundary Movements of Hazardous Wastes and Their Disposal was established due to increasing public outcry in Africa and other parts of the developing world, in relation to deposits of toxic wastes imported from abroad. The Convention aims to reduce hazardous and other waste generation, promote environmentally sound management, restrict transboundary movements of hazardous and other wastes and provide a regulatory system on where transboundary movements are permissible geographically.

In 2019, the Conference of Parties to the Convention adopted amendments to three annexes to enhance the control of transboundary movements of plastic waste and to clarify the convention’s scope as it applies to such waste. The amendments specified the types of plastic wastes that are presumed to be hazardous or not, and as such, which would be subject to the Prior Informed Consent (PIC) procedure. Non-hazardous waste in the new entry to the annex is understood to include mixtures of plastic wastes consisting of commonly used plastics, such as polyethylene (PE), polypropylene (PP) or polyethylene terephthalate (PET), provided they are destined for separate recycling, in an environmentally sound manner, and are almost free from contamination.

These amendments may have several ramifications, especially as it relates to waste traded between developed and developing countries. Overall, they are intended to strengthen the regulation of plastic waste shipped to countries that cannot manage it in an environmentally sound manner. Africa is already affected by illegal traffic and cross-border movements of wastes from countries and companies seeking cheaper and less regulated disposal options for their waste (Mail & Guardian, 2020; Schluep et al. 2012). The dumping of hazardous wastes into Africa has occurred for decades, such as the dumping of 500 tonnes of toxic waste near Abidjan, Cote d'Ivoire, in 2006, which killed around 15 people and left thousands more experiencing severe illness (Mail & Guardian, 2020). Much of this waste is treated using environmentally unsound practices, further exposing the population to toxic compounds (BRS, 2019a, 2019b, 2019c). For example, a study at a Ghanaian processing site recorded amongst the highest exposure levels of POPs due to unsound management of imported plastic wastes (Bruce-Vanderpuije et al., 2019).

The 2018 Africa Waste Management Outlook highlighted, as a major weakness, the lack of data on transboundary movements of hazardous waste across many African countries and the lack of transmission by Parties of their annual national reports as required by the Convention (UNEP, 2018a, 2018b, 2018c). A number of waste-exporting countries now face waste management challenges due to the recent Basel amendments, resulting in further pressure to find new end markets for their wastes. Recent news publications have reported on major oil companies lobbying the United States government in their ongoing trade negotiations to pressure African Countries to ease their stance against plastic waste imports (Guardian, 2020; New York Times, 2020). Note that the United States is a Signatory to the Convention but has not ratified it. As much as compliance with the amended provisions of the Basel Convention provides for reduced inflows of hazardous wastes to African countries, it needs to be accompanied by strengthened mechanisms to implement and enforce the Convention at the national level.

The Basel amendments came into effect on the 1st of January 2021 for all Parties that had not submitted a notification of non-acceptance of the amendments. As none of the African states that are Parties to the Basel Convention submitted such notification, the amendments entered into force for all the 53 Parties across Africa. The categorisation as per the amendments of specific PE, PP and PET waste as non-hazardous is relevant, as these are some of the most recycled polymers across the continent (UNEP, 2018a, 2018b, 2018c). While it is predicted that exports of well-sorted wastes may continue uninterrupted. Though subject to additional inspection, African countries may face challenges in exporting mixed-plastic bales elsewhere due to the increased administration of their movement due to new measures adopted to implement the amendments (Resource Recycling, 2019). Such challenges may present opportunities for African countries to invest in expanding environmentally sound domestic recycling infrastructure and services, thereby benefitting informal sector actors who recover and supply such post-consumer recyclables to the recycling economy. The need for Africa to optimise the benefits provided by the informal sector in managing plastic waste and leakages through positive engagement, support and integration has been highlighted (UNEP, 2018b).

4.3.1.5 UN Watercourses Convention

The UN Watercourses Convention 1997 (Convention on the Law of the Non-navigational Uses of International Watercourses) requires Parties that use international watercourses to take appropriate measures to prevent harm to other watercourse Parties, including preventing, reducing and controlling pollution, which includes plastics. In an analysis undertaken by UNEP as part of its UNEA process, this convention could cover a broader inland scope of application to sources and activities. As one of the most recent frameworks, it has a low level of government participation. Out of the 40 Parties who have approved, accepted or ratified the Convention, 13 are from Africa, with only four Signatories, namely Côte d'Ivoire, Namibia, South Africa and Tunisia.

4.3.1.6 Stockholm Convention

The Stockholm Convention 2001 (Convention on Persistent Organic Pollutants) provides measures to reduce or eliminate releases of persistent organic pollutants (POPs) as these present risks to human health and the environment, including marine ecosystems. It provides for the protection of human health and the environment by setting out the obligations for Parties to restrict or eliminate intentional production and use of chemicals listed under its annexes A and B; measures to control trade (imports and exports) in such chemicals; measures to reduce or eliminate releases of POPs from stockpiles and wastes; measures to reduce or eliminate release from unintentional production of chemicals listed in its Annex C. These measures encompass, among other things, production, use and disposal of additives that are POPs (e.g. PBDEs, PFOS, PFOA and SCCPs) in plastic products or during the manufacture of plastics. This is relevant for plastics recycling and reusing articles in use containing quantities of such regulated POPs. Open burning and incomplete incineration of plastic waste unintentionally produce and release of POPs. For example, recent assessments estimated the air pollution by noxious chemical gases from open burning of mismanaged plastic in 2018 as 233 kti in Kenya, 80 kt in Mozambique, 514 kt in South Africa and 129 kt in Tanzania (IUCN-EA-QUANTIS, 2020a, 2020b, 2020c, 2020d). The studies called for further investigations on open burning practices, backed up by field studies to accurately estimate the amount of mismanaged plastic waste burned across African countries.

POPs in plastics are relevant as they pose potential toxic risks (refer to Chap. 1), added to that posed by the plastic particles and leaching of plastic additives (Iñiguez et al., 2017). In general, additives to plastics constrain their recovery, recyclability and disposal, thereby reducing their contribution to a circular economy (Wagner & Schlummer, 2020). Therefore, the risks posed by POPs and related harmful plastics additives need to be addressed; otherwise, they inhibit economic development through job creation in the recycling sector. Recycling remains a prime investment area in Africa, where mismanaged waste plastics constitute a high proportion of generated plastic waste, and overall only 4% of plastic waste is recycled (Babayemi, 2019; UNEP, 2018a, 2018b, 2018c).

4.3.1.7 Convention on Biological Diversity (CBD)

The Convention on Biological Diversity is dedicated to promoting sustainable development. The Convention recognises that biological diversity is more than just plants, animals, microorganisms and their ecosystems and that it integrates people and ecosystem-derived needs. This Convention largely focuses on conservation of biological diversity with marine plastic litter and microplastics included in its targets (UNEP, 2017a, 2017b), specifically Aichi Biodiversity Targets 8 on reducing pollution pressures to biodiversity and Target 10 on minimisation of anthropogenic pressures. Parties to the Convention have also adopted key decisions, such as Decision COP XIII/10 which provides voluntary guidance for preventing and mitigating the impacts of marine litter. The decision also calls for the strengthening of existing legal frameworks to eliminate the production of microplastics and address wastes from fisheries and aquaculture (UNEP, 2017a, 2017b).

Towards preparations for the post-2020 global biodiversity framework, the Convention received a number of submissions that proposed for the Aichi Biodiversity Targets to serve as a basis for the targets in the post-2020 global biodiversity framework, but with modifications. Some of the feedback was to consider formulating new targets such as plastics and sustainable production, issues not already covered by the existing Targets (CBD, 2019). The revision of the targets could be relevant, given that its success in addressing marine litter remains debatable.

The Convention on Biological Diversity (CBD) is considered a universally accepted Convention, given its ratification by 196 Parties, with the United States being a Signatory only, but not yet a Party. All 54 African countries have ratified and are Parties to the Convention.⁵

4.3.2 International Arrangements, Processes and Initiatives

In addition to the above global legally binding treaties or conventions and their related protocols, there are complimentary global intergovernmental cooperative mechanisms, processes and strategies relevant in this regard. A number of African countries (Fig. 4.2a, b) engage with these global arrangements at the regional and national levels through various cooperative mechanisms. A few mechanisms of relevance in this context are highlighted in subsections below.

Fig. 4.2

a Global legally binding agreements, voluntary initiatives, and political initiatives regarding marine litter. b African legally binding agreements, voluntary initiatives and political initiatives regarding marine litter

In domesticating their obligations as enshrined in the international instruments, African countries benefit from strengthened regional and national institutional, legal and policy frameworks, including creating avenues for sharing knowledge, technologies and funding to fulfil their related obligations in relation to preventing and addressing pollution.

Cumulatively, the global instruments encapsulate articles and provisions to address land- and sea-based sources of marine litter, call for and at times facilitate for development of regional and national strategies for pollution and waste prevention, address the potential effects of marine litter and plastic pollution to human health and the marine environment and contribute to fostering a healthy development of the world economy while considering the interests and needs of developing countries.

In addition, these global instruments support the advancement of scientific knowledge and facilitate information-sharing to better support regional and national decision-making. This includes supporting the development of national and regional marine science, technology centres, strengthening national scientific and technical research capabilities, collaboration in scientific and technical research and promoting access and exchange of data and analyses. The instruments also promote the sustainable financing of upstream and downstream interventions such as training and transferring environmentally sound technologies and know-how towards achieving their objectives. They also broadly point to the need for technical assistance to enable developing countries and countries with economies in transition to incorporate the goals and objectives of the various instruments into their national responsibilities to achieve their full implementation. While acknowledging the complexity in addressing marine litter, the instruments underline the need for strengthening efforts further upstream to change production and consumption patterns reduce the generation of waste and manage it.

4.3.2.1 Global Programme of Action for the Protection of the Marine Environment from Land-Based Activities/Global Partnership on Marine Litter (GPA/GPML)

The Global Partnership on Marine Litter was initiated under the Global Programme of Action for Protection of the Marine Environment from Land-based Activities (GPA). The GPA is hosted by the United Nations Environment Programme (UNEP) and brings together international agencies, governments, nongovernmental organisations, academia, the private sector, civil society and individuals to reduce the impacts of marine litter on economies, ecosystems and human health. Under it, the Global Partnership on Marine Litter (GPML) has been established to address the global challenge posed by marine litter, including plastics, by engaging all public and private sector stakeholders in the lifecycle of plastics and encouraging solutions by all sectors. The Global Partnership on Waste Management also has a complimentary process, which includes marine litter as one of nine focal areas.

4.3.2.2 Basel Convention Partnership on Plastic Waste (PWP)

The Conference of the Parties to the Basel Convention established Plastic Waste Partnership (PWP) in 2019. The PWP aims to mobilise business, government, academic and civil society resources, interests and expertise, to improve and promote the environmentally sound management (ESM) of plastic waste at the global, regional and national levels and to prevent and minimise its generation. The activities of the PWP will contribute to efforts to reduce and eliminate the discharge of plastic waste and microplastics into the environment in general and, in particular, the marine environment. The PWP has established four project groups:

• 1. Plastic waste prevention and minimisation;

• 2. Plastic waste collection, recycling and other recovery including financing and related markets;

• 3. Transboundary movements of plastic waste and

• 4. Outreach, education and awareness-raising.

Eight pilot projects from the African region are among the initial 23 supported by the PWP during its inaugural phase. The pilot projects aim to improve and promote the environmentally sound management of plastic waste and prevent and minimise its generation. In general, the partnership operationalises the newly expanded mandate of the Basel Convention to address plastic pollution.

The efforts within the PWP are undertaken within the context of international cooperation activities by the Secretariat of the Basel, Rotterdam and Stockholm Conventions that amplify and ensure consistency between initiatives at the global level to ensure the ESM of plastic waste. This includes cooperation with entities such as the World Customs Organisation, the International Maritime Organisation and the World Trade Organisation.

4.3.2.3 United Nations Environment Assembly/Ad-Hoc Open-Ended Expert Group on Marine Litter and Microplastics (UNEA/AHEG): Africa Group

The United Nations Environment Assembly’s Bureau of the Ad Hoc Open Ended Expert Group on Marine Litter and Microplastics (AHEG) has facilitated regional consultative structures to maximise transparency, inclusivity and participation. The Africa Group engages countries within the continent, facilitates consultations and feedback between the Chair and Bureau with the region and shares information on the progress and ongoing AHEG work. During the fourth Meeting of the AHEG, held online in November 2020, the Africa Group signalled an interest to explore the option of a new legally binding agreement with a shared vision to eliminate all discharge of plastic into the environment. Importantly, they reiterated the need for strengthening the means of implementation for related action, including through adequate and sustainable financial support, transfer of technology and capacity building.⁶

4.3.2.4 Small Island Developing States Accelerated Modalities of Action (Samoa Pathway)

The Samoa Pathway supports action to address marine pollution by developing effective partnerships, including developing and implementing of relevant arrangements and instruments. Acknowledging the waste management limitations in Small Island Developing States (SIDS), the Pathway calls for enhancing technical cooperation through the various Conventions and Protocols; the strengthening of national, regional and international mechanisms for managing waste, including marine plastic litter. Africa has six island states: Cape Verde, Comoros, Madagascar, Mauritius, São Tomé and Príncipe and Seychelles.

The Samoa Pathway covers the conservation of the marine environment through several Articles, with Article 58(b) addressing the marine plastic waste problem, and articles 70 and 71 covering the management of chemicals and waste, including hazardous waste, and remedial approaches such as reduction, reuse, recycling, recovery and return policies. Pathway implementation is reviewed through a high-level process at the UN General Assembly (UNGA) and national and regional levels.

As part of addressing marine litter, the 2019 Mid-Term Review of the SAMOA Pathway High Level Political Declaration called for addressing different types of waste through innovative approaches, including inter alia mismanaged plastic waste, chemical waste and marine litter, including plastic litter and microplastics.⁷

4.3.2.5 Group of Twenty (G20) and the Group of Seven (G7)

The Group of Twenty (G20) is a forum for international economic cooperation. It brings together the world's major economies to discuss global economics and finance issues. The G20 Environment Ministers adopted the “G20 Implementation Framework for Actions on Marine Plastic Litter”, to tackle marine plastic litter and microplastics and their adverse impacts. South Africa is the only African country that is a member of the G20.

The Group of Seven (G7) is an intergovernmental organisation of the world's largest developed economies that meet periodically to address international economic and monetary issues. Through the Ocean Plastics Charter, the G7 members have articulated their commitment to take action towards a resource-efficient lifecycle management approach to plastics in the economy. Through the Charter, the G7 reiterates its commitment to mobilise and support the collaborative government, industry, academia, citizen and youth-led initiatives, including accelerating catalysing investments to address marine litter in global hotspots and vulnerable areas through public–private funding and capacity development, innovative solutions and coastal clean-up. It has advanced the G7 Plastics Innovation Challenge to address marine plastic litter by stimulating innovations, awareness-raising and improvements to the management of plastic, especially plastic waste, in developing countries.

At the G7 leader’s summit held in Cornwall, UK, in June 2021, the leaders adopted the G7 2030 Nature Compact that commits to taking action to tackle increasing levels of plastic pollution in the ocean, including working through the UN Environment Assembly (UNEA) on options including strengthening existing instruments and a potential new agreement to address marine plastic litter.⁸ The G20 and G7 are highlighted here, partly due to their power to influence global policy processes. Their membership comprises some of the wealthiest countries in the world that could partner with African countries to address marine litter. It is worth noting that the major plastics and chemicals producers are located across this group of countries, hence their relevance in contributing to addressing the plastics problem.

4.3.2.6 Honolulu Strategy: A Global Framework for Prevention and Management of Marine Debris

The Honolulu Strategy is a framework for a global effort to reduce the ecological, human health and economic impacts of marine debris globally. It is designed to be used as a planning tool, reference framework and monitoring progress across programmes. The strategy elaborates a framework for collaboration and coordination among the multitude of stakeholders across the globe concerned with marine debris. It encourages participation and support on global, regional, national and local levels. The strategy encourages the establishment of appropriate mechanisms to facilitate the removal of marine debris. As a global strategy not directly addressing the unique issues, cultures and contexts across the 54 African countries, it has guided the development of regional and sub-regional strategies to address marine litter in Africa. Two recent examples include the “Strategy for Marine Waste: Guide to Action for Africa’⁹ and the ‘Western Indian Ocean Regional Action Plan on Marine Litter”.¹⁰

The strategy comprises three goals and associated strategies to reduce the amount and impact of marine debris from land- and sea-based sources and marine debris accumulations and aims for:

• reduced amounts and impacts of land-based sources of marine debris introduced into the sea (Goal A),

• reduced amounts and impacts of sea-based sources of marine debris, including solid waste; lost cargo; ALDFG; and abandoned vessels (Goal B) and

• reduced amounts and impacts of accumulated marine debris on shorelines, benthic habitats and pelagic waters introduced into the sea (Goal C).

The strategy provides countries with an opportunity to translate some of the strategies under each goal into concrete national policies and programmes aimed at preventing or reducing marine litter and plastic pollution into the marine environment.

4.3.2.7 UN Clean Seas Campaign

The Clean Seas campaign is an initiative established to contribute to the objectives of UNEP’s GPML. It serves as a platform to connect and rally governments, industry, civil society groups and individuals to be catalysts of change. It advocates for a transformation in habits, practices, standards and policies around the globe to dramatically reduce marine litter and its negative impacts. Since its launch in 2017, more than 62 countries have joined, making the Clean Seas Campaign the biggest, most powerful global coalition devoted to end marine plastic pollution. So far, the only African governments which have joined the campaign are Kenya and Rwanda.

4.3.2.8 IMO's Action Plan

In 2018, the IMO’s Marine Environment Protection Committee adopted an action plan to address marine plastic litter from ships through several measures to reduce plastic litter in the marine environment. The action plan, which runs until 2025, is established to enhance existing policy and regulatory frameworks and provides the IMO with a mechanism to identify specific outcomes and actions and introduce supportive measures to address the issue of marine plastic litter from ships. Some of the identified measures include studies on marine plastic litter from ships, adequacy of port reception facilities, fishing gear-related litter sources and awareness building on the impact of marine plastic litter. The IMO GloLitter Partnerships project will aid developing countries to prevent and reduce marine litter, with a focus on plastic, by identifying ways for the reduction of plastic applications in the maritime transport and fisheries industry.

4.4 Regional and Sub-Regional Frameworks and Initiatives

The regional and sub-regional frameworks covered in this section are reviewed through five lenses that are essential for success in an African context: (i) prevention or removal of marine litter, (ii) providing a healthy and productive environment, (iii) providing sustainable development through sustained livelihoods, decent work and economic growth, (iv) cooperate in science–policy interface towards improved knowledge management relevant to Africa and (v) sustainable financing of waste management.

4.4.1 Regional Frameworks and Initiatives

4.4.1.1 African Union

The African Union (AU) is a key driver for successful economic development in Africa. It is a continent-wide forum for Heads of State of Member States, or their representatives, to adopt coordinated positions.

4.4.1.1.1 African Union Blue Economy Strategy

The recent African Union Blue Economy Strategy (AU-IBAR, 2019) is the first of the AU’s strategies or plans emphasising the economic development potential of marine (and freshwater) resources. It recognises pollution by chemicals and plastics as a key threat to the blue economy, including fisheries, aquaculture and tourism. See Chap. 1 for details on the blue economy and potential growth in Africa.

4.4.1.1.2 Agenda 2063 of the African Union

Agenda 2063, adopted in 2015 by the African Union, is a vision of how Africa aims to deliver inclusive and sustainable development. None of the flagship programmes to be undertaken during its first 10-year implementation plan (2014–2023) are directly related to marine and coastal protection and management, nor the Ocean/Blue Economy. Still, the sixth goal states that a Blue Economy will accelerate economic growth. The priority areas for that goal are identified as marine resources and energy, and port operations and marine transport (AU, 2015). The seventh goal also addresses the blue economy by including priority areas such as sustainable resource management and biodiversity conservation and sustainable consumption and production patterns. These areas indirectly support the prevention and removal of marine litter. The implementation plan also calls for improved sanitation in cities, aiming for a minimum recycling rate of 50% of the waste generation and further supported by the roll-out of policies to enable the growth of urban waste recycling industries.

4.4.1.1.3 2050 Africa’s Integrated Maritime Strategy

The 2050 Africa’s Integrated Maritime (AIM) Strategy, developed by the AU in 2012, provides a framework for the region’s protection and sustainable exploitation of Africa’s Maritime Domain (AMD) for economic growth. One of the twelve strategic objectives include “protection of populations, including AMD heritage, assets, and critical infrastructure from maritime pollution and dumping of toxic and nuclear waste” (AU, 2012, pp. 12). This objective addresses explicitly the prevention and reduction of marine pollution via dumping from ships and maritime activities through maritime governance actions.

4.4.1.1.4 African Ministerial Conference on the Environment

The African Ministerial Conference on the Environment (AMCEN) was established in 1985 to provide advocacy for environmental protection in Africa, social and economic development and sustainment of basic human needs, including food security (UNEP, n.d.). This forum is represented by the Member States’ Ministers of Environment and their representatives to adopt coordinated positions on various topics related to environmental issues, including but not limited to climate change, Blue Economy, the circular economy, biodiversity loss and plastic pollution.

At the 17th session of AMCEN in 2019, plastic pollution and marine litter prevention was addressed through the Ministerial Durban declaration themes of the circular economy, the Blue Economy and plastic pollution. Its decision 17/1, III (paragraph 11)¹¹ highlights and promotes the circular economy as a comprehensive approach to address plastic pollution. The key policy messages in the appendix to the Durban Declaration on environmental sustainability and prosperity in Africa (Section VIII) specifically highlight plastic pollution as a focus area. Here, continent-wide support for global action to address plastic pollution “to engage more effectively on global governance matters relating to plastic pollution” is expressed (p. 8). It further mentions that both the option of a new global agreement and reinforcement of existing agreements should be considered.

4.4.1.1.5 Bamako Convention

The Bamako Convention on the Ban of the Import into Africa and the Control of Transboundary Movement and Management of Hazardous Wastes within Africa (Bamako Convention) came into force in 1998. It is a treaty of African Member States prohibiting importing to Africa and ocean and inland water dumping or incineration of any hazardous (including radioactive) waste. The Bamako Convention responds to Article 11¹² of the Basel Convention, which encourages regional agreements on hazardous waste to help achieve its objectives. The Bamako Convention was also driven by incidents of hazardous waste being dumped in African countries by developed countries, causing major health and environmental impacts.

Only 29 African countries are Parties to the Bamako Convention.¹³ South Africa and Nigeria have not ratified the Convention given the risk that it may inhibit their recycling economies, which involve transboundary trade of goods such as e-waste and plastic waste (Parliamentary Monitoring Group, 2008, 2014). Other possible concerns for states who are not party to the Convention may include the high financial investments required for effective implementation and the need for dedicated, skilled personnel (Ouguergouz, 1993).

Interestingly, the Bamako Convention responds to the increasing number of policy developments to address plastic pollution in its third Conference of the Parties (COP) in 2020. The COP-3 decision CB.3/8¹⁴ contains multiple interventions to prevent plastic pollution in Africa, including to:

• invite Parties and other African countries to prohibit the manufacture, importation, sale and use of plastic bags and single-use plastic items;

• urge Parties to add “all forms of plastic wastes” to its Annex I—categories of waste which are considered hazardous, a more extensive list than that of the amendments to the Basel Convention in 2019;

• encourage Parties to participate in activities under the Basel Convention and, in particular, in the Partnership on Plastic Waste;

• increase awareness and education on the environmental and human health implications of plastic pollution and

• call for a new global legally binding agreement to address plastic pollution using a life cycle approach.

While this decision focuses on plastic pollution more broadly, it may indirectly help reduce and prevent some instances of plastic pollution and its contribution to marine litter.

4.4.1.2 Regional and Coordinating Centres Under the Basel and Stockholm Conventions

The Basel and Stockholm conventions benefit from a network of 23 Regional and Coordinating Centres for Capacity Building and Technology Transfer (BCRCs-SCRCs), six of which are located in Africa. These centres have been established to assist Parties to these conventions in implementing their obligations under these conventions, which includes promoting environmentally sound management of hazardous waste (including those containing or contaminated with POPs) and other waste. These centres took the initiative of establishing a working group on marine litter. They prepared a report on the challenges and measures to tackle marine litter plastics and microplastics and their POPs and EDC components¹⁵ in 2016. Further, in 2017 and again in 2019, the conferences of parties to the Basel and Stockholm conventions mandated the regional centres to work on the impact of plastic waste, marine plastic litter, microplastics and measures for prevention and environmentally sound management.^{16 17} A range of projects on plastic waste is being undertaken under the Basel and Stockholm Conventions’ Regional Centre Small Grants Programme (SGP), known as “SGP on plastic waste”. These projects are implemented by Basel Convention regional and coordinating centres and Stockholm Convention regional and sub-regional centres, funded by the Norwegian Agency for Development Cooperation (Norad). The projects aim to improve the management of plastic waste in partner countries and thus contribute towards preventing and significantly reducing marine pollution. In total, 15 projects have been selected for funding. They are being implemented in 2021–2022 in 32 beneficiary countries, 11 are countries from the African region.¹⁸

4.4.1.3 Regional Fisheries Bodies

Regional fisheries bodies provide a mechanism for promoting country adoption of the conservation measures outlined in the voluntary FAO Code of Conduct for Responsible Fisheries (Code of Conduct) as well as the Agreement for the Implementation of the Provisions of the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea of 10 December 1982 relating to the Conservation and Management of Straddling Fish Stocks and Highly Migratory Fish Stocks (UN Fish Stocks Agreement). The Code of Conduct is a global instrument that aims to address the issue of ALDFG by promoting the development of environmentally safe fishing gear and practices and minimising waste. The Code of Conduct is supported by the binding UN Fish Stocks Agreement, which calls for the States to require the marking of fishing gear in accordance with international standards, a practice promoted in the prevention of ALDFG. This agreement, however, only applies to a limited number of fish species. Relevant to Africa, the General Fisheries Commission for the Mediterranean (GFCM) and South East Atlantic Fisheries Organisation (SEAFO) have adopted measures specific to the prevention of ALDFG (Gilman, 2015), but generally, Regional Fisheries Management Organisations have been slow to address the issue.

4.4.2 Sub-Regional Frameworks and Initiatives

4.4.2.1 Regional Seas Conventions Governing Africa’s Marine and Coastal Areas

The UN Regional Seas Programme aims to protect and address the degradation of marine and coastal environments through engagements between groups of neighbouring coastal countries in joint, coordinated actions. There are 18 Regional Seas Programmes (RSPs), which function through action plans, and/or legally binding conventions and related protocols. Four conventions govern Africa’s marine and coastal areas (Fig. 4.3):

Fig. 4.3

Regional Sea Conventions and their geographical coverage

• Abidjan Convention (Convention for Cooperation in the Protection, Management, and Development of the Marine and Coastal Environment of the Atlantic Coast of the West, Central, and Southern Africa Region);

• Nairobi Convention (Convention for the Protection of the Marine Environment and the Coastal Region of the Western Indian Ocean);

• Jeddah Convention (Regional Convention for the Conservation of the Red Sea and Gulf of Aden Environment);

• Barcelona Convention (Convention for the Protection of the Marine Environment and the Coastal Region of the Mediterranean).

These conventions form the primary initiatives relevant to marine litter prevention or removal in Africa, providing the opportunity to tailor actions to each regional context. However, they are not comprehensive in geographic coverage nor in scope of implementation. In addition, not all States are Contracting Parties (i.e. that expressed consent to be bound through, e.g. ratification) to their relevant regional convention, while others, such as Egypt, Somalia and South Africa, are Parties to more than one see Fig. 4.3 Land-locked African states¹⁹ are not covered under these conventions due to the limited geographic scope, despite contributing to marine pollution through the transboundary transport of marine via river and other water systems (see Chap. 1, Fig. 1.1 and Chap. 2).

The scope of work of each convention varies as not all have adopted a protocol for land-based sources of pollution or a marine litter action plan. The marine litter action plans are not legally binding except for the Barcelona Convention, 2013 Regional Plan on Marine Litter Management in the Mediterranean. The fragmentation at the regional level discussed here suggests that actions and implementation will not be tackled uniformly across Africa.

4.4.2.1.1 Abidjan Convention

The Abidjan Convention and its associated protocol were developed in 1981 and came into force in 1984. It is a framework agreement to prevent, reduce and control marine coastal and related inland waters pollution in West, Central and Southern Africa. It has additional protocols with relevance to marine litter:

• Pointe Noire Protocol on integrated coastal zone management adopted in 2019;

• Calabar Protocol on sustainable mangrove management adopted in 2019 (the only protocol of its kind);

• Malabo Protocol on environmental norms and standards for offshore oil and gas and exploitation activities adopted in 2019;

• Grand Bassam Protocol concerning the Cooperation in the Protection and Development of the Marine and Coastal; Environment from Land-Based Sources and the Activities in the Western, Central and Southern Africa Region was signed and adopted in 2012 and

• Protocol Concerning Co-operation in Combating Pollution in Cases of Emergency in the Western and Central African Region adopted in 1985.

The Abidjan Convention hosts projects and partnerships to address marine litter, a few are mentioned here. The Abidjan Convention covered a stocktaking exercise of marine pollution in the region through three workshops organised in Namibia, Ghana and Morocco in 2019. A report of the results is currently being finalised. Another project in partnership with the African Marine Waste Network (a programme of the Sustainable Seas Trust) was an interactive webinar series hosted March–May 2021 on topics related to marine litter pollution, its impacts and actions to address it. These lectures contributed to developing best practice action plans for managing plastic waste in Africa (UNEP, 2021c). Further efforts to develop a regional action plan and national plans against plastic pollution in the region are considered under the framework of the third phase of the Multilateral Environmental Agreements in Africa, Caribbean and the Pacific Countries (ACP-MEAs) Programme funded by the EU and UNEP. This project aims to scientifically characterise plastic pollution, together with partners such as the African Marine Waste Network, WWF, GIZ and the Basel, Rotterdam and Stockholm Conventions. The Abidjan Convention further supports the call for a legally binding international treaty against plastic pollution.

The 19 Contracting Parties that have ratified the Abidjan Convention are shown in Fig. 4.3. While Cape Verde, Equatorial Guinea and São Tomé and Príncipe are located in the Abidjan Convention area, as of June 2020, they had not ratified the Convention. The contracting parties are required to establish and harmonise national laws and regulations for effective delivery of the Convention obligations.

The 12th Conference of the Parties (COP) in 2017 Decision CP.12/16: Marine waste²⁰ emphasises the need for the Convention Secretariat and its partners to collect and analyse data on marine waste in order to monitor future progress, carry out an impact assessment, inform policy at various levels and raise awareness. Data collection and analysis are encouraged to be carried out through the African Marine Waste Network using the methodology outlined in Barnardo and Ribbink (2020). While there is no specific mention of economic development and job creation, the Convention text includes recognising the economic, social and health value of the marine and coastal environments. Article 14 of the convention text highlights explicitly the need to assist in scientific and technological exchange and cooperation.

One of the challenges facing the Abidjan Convention is the lack of awareness and political will to support the Convention’s activities in certain countries and limited funding (Shigwedha, 2019).

4.4.2.1.2 Nairobi Convention

The Nairobi Convention was adopted in 1984 and came into force in 1996, with further amendments adopted in 2010.²¹ It offers a legal framework, an intergovernmental forum, and a platform for coordinated actions with partners in the West Indian Ocean region (East coast of Africa). It has additional protocols relevant to marine litter prevention and removal, including:

• the Protocol for the Protection of the Marine and Coastal Environment of the Western Indian Ocean from Land-Based Sources and Activities (Adopted March 2010); and

• the Protocol Concerning Co-operation in Combating Marine Pollution in Cases of Emergency in the Eastern African Region.

The Convention is made up of ten Contracting Parties (Fig. 4.3): Comoros, Kenya, Madagascar, Mauritius, Mozambique, Seychelles, Somalia, Tanzania, South Africa and France (La Réunion and Mayotte).

4.4.2.1.2.1 Western Indian Ocean Regional Action Plan on Marine Litter (WIO-RAPMaLi)

The Western Indian Ocean Regional Action Plan on Marine Litter (WIO-RAPMaLi)²² was developed in 2018 in response to the UNEA resolution 1/6, 2/11 and 3/20 to address marine litter regionally, in a coordinated manner. The action plan aims to set implementation standards for contracting parties to the Nairobi Convention towards agreed commitments. There are six focus areas for actions: (i) stakeholder engagement, (ii) policy and legal frameworks, (iii) prevention and removal of marine litter, (iv) education and outreach, (v) monitoring, research and reporting and (vi) capacity development. Interestingly, job creation and socioeconomic development are not included as focus areas of the action plan, even though they could be seen as positive reinforcement of all other focus areas.

4.4.2.1.2.2 Regional Group of Experts on Marine Litter and Microplastics

A linked success is the establishment of the regional Group of Experts on Marine Litter and Microplastics,²³ in response to “Decision CP.9/3 Management of marine litter and municipal wastewater in the Western Indian Ocean” from the ninth COP in August 2018. The Secretariat established this group in collaboration with the Western Indian Ocean Marine Science Association (WIOMSA). The main objective is to provide a knowledge exchange platform, provide policy guidance to the Nairobi Convention and synthesise research topics of relevance.

4.4.2.1.3 Jeddah Convention

In 1974, the Programme for the Environment of the Red Sea and Gulf of Aden (PERSGA) was initiated in collaboration with the Arab League Educational, Cultural and Scientific Organization (ALECSO) and UNEP to address transboundary threats such as marine pollution, overfishing and depletion of marine resources. In 1982, the programme was underpinned by signing the Jeddah Convention, which provides the platform for governments and partners to commit to joint and coordinated efforts to address threats to marine and coastal environments in the region.

Along with the Jeddah Convention, the “Action Plan for the Conservation of the Marine Environment and Coastal Areas in the Red Sea and Gulf of Aden”, which is also legally binding, was signed in 1982. In 2005, two additional protocols were signed:

• the Protocol Concerning the Conservation of Biological Diversity and the Establishment of Network of Protected Areas in the Red Sea and Gulf of Aden; and

• the Protocol Concerning the Protection of the Marine Environment from Land-Based Activities in the Red Sea and Gulf of Aden.

Marine litter is further addressed in the Regional Marine Litter Program, which includes monitoring, capacity building and training, awareness-raising and developing guidelines and action plans for marine litter assessments. These activities are conducted both nationally and regionally.

The Regional Action Plan for the Sustainable Management of Marine Litter in the Red Sea and Gulf of Aden highlights seven strategies for comprehensive action to address marine litter: (i) an integrated management framework; (ii) awareness and education; (iii) legal and institutional framework; (iv) encouraging public–private partnerships; (v) removal of marine litter; (vi) research and monitoring and (vii) capacity building and training (PERSGA, 2018). Member States are expected to develop National Action Plans based on the Regional Action Plan, detailing how and when actions will be implemented. While the economic impacts of marine litter are acknowledged in the rationale and included in the awareness-raising component of the action plan; there are no specific actions to promote economic opportunities including job creation and sustainable livelihoods, which could be viewed as one of the major gaps of this action plan. Furthermore, there is no mention of financing for waste management activities and infrastructure. However, this may be indirectly promoted through the proposed public–private partnerships. Another potential gap is the lack of emphasis on science–policy interface when considering the links between the legal and institutional framework and the research and monitoring components.

Four of the seven Contracting Parties are African States (Fig. 4.3): Djibouti, Egypt, Somalia and Sudan. Other Contracting Parties are Jordan, Saudi Arabia and Yemen.

4.4.2.1.4 Barcelona Convention

The Barcelona Convention was adopted in 1976, entered into force in 1978, and amended in 1995 (which entered into force in 2004). The Mediterranean Action Plan (MAP) is the legally binding framework that holds the Barcelona Convention and its seven protocols. Many of these protocols are relevant to marine litter management and prevention:

• the Protocol for the Prevention of Pollution of the Mediterranean Sea by Dumping from Ships and Aircraft;

• the Protocol for the Protection of the Mediterranean Sea Against Pollution from Land-Based Sources;

• the Protocol Concerning Mediterranean Specially Protected Areas;

• the Protocol on the Prevention of Pollution of the Mediterranean Sea by Transboundary Movements of Hazardous Wastes and their Disposal and

• the Protocol on Integrated Coastal Zone Management in the Mediterranean.

The work of the MAP is guided by its 6-year mid-term strategy–the previous strategy for 2016–2021 was adopted by the 19th COP in Decision IG.22/1.²⁴ The strategy for the following 6 years has recently been agreed upon at the latest COP meeting in 2021. Under one of the core themes of the strategy–land and sea-based pollution–the prevention, reduction and control of marine and coastal litter and its impacts are highlighted as strategic objectives. Furthermore, under the cross-cutting themes of sustainable consumption and production (SCP), key economic sectors and lifestyles are identified as one of the upstream drivers of marine litter to be addressed. Strengthening of technical capacities of businesses, finance agents and civil society to implement SCP solutions is highlighted as another lever to prevent and reduce marine litter. Notable outputs related to marine litter include national monitoring, pilot projects to reduce upstream sources and knowledge exchange for best practices. While the financing of waste management activities and job creation are not identified explicitly as key focus areas, they are addressed indirectly though the private sector and SCP activities. The science–policy interface is specifically mentioned as a priority, together with facilitating stakeholder engagement.

Five of the 22 Contracting Parties to the Barcelona Convention are African countries (Fig. 4.3): Algeria, Egypt, Libya, Morocco and Tunisia. Other contracting parties are Albania, Bosnia and Herzegovina, Croatia, Cyprus, France, Greece, Israel, Italy, Lebanon, Malta, Monaco, Montenegro, Slovenia, Spain, Syrian Arab Republic, Turkey and the European Union.

4.4.2.2 Relevant Sub-Regional Economic Bodies, Commissions, and Frameworks

Some regional economic bodies have adopted measures to address pollution, single-use plastic production and consumption and the management and trade of plastic waste or hazardous waste. These bodies are established to engage and regulate common interests in commercial and industrial relations amongst countries. The geographic scope of some of these intergovernmental communities also extends to the non-coastal African States, which provides an opportunity to engage land-locked countries on relevant transboundary issues of marine pollution. One of them is transport through transboundary waterways–an opportunity that is not afforded in the Regional Seas Conventions.

4.4.2.2.1 East African Community (EAC)

The Treaty for the establishment of the East African Community²⁵ promotes the interconnected use of national communication systems to identify polluted marine areas (Article 93 (o)); encourages joint actions to address inland water pollution monitoring and control (Article 94 (p)); encourages coordinated effort to protect the environment against all forms of pollution (Article 111 (b)). In Article 112, further supports measures to control transboundary water pollution from developmental activities (1c); encourages the adoption of common standards for control of land and water pollution resulting from urban and industrial activities (2 h) and encourages the manufacture and use of biodegradable packaging (2c). The EAC also adopted the Polythene Materials Control Bill 2016,²⁶ which provides a framework to prohibit the manufacture, sale, use and importation of polythene materials on a national level in the region. The Bill is currently awaiting assent by EAC Heads of State (UNEP, 2018b).

4.4.2.2.2 Economic Community of West African States (ECOWAS)

The Economic Community of West African States (ECOWAS) Integrated Maritime Strategy (EIMS)²⁷ includes provisions to reduce, combat and control marine and coastal pollution from the maritime industry. Waste management, in particular, is addressed in the draft regional strategies on plastic waste management, e-waste and hazardous waste (UNEP, 2018b). In particular, plastic waste management issues are to be included in the revised ECOWAS Environmental Action Plan (EAP).

4.4.2.2.3 Southern African Development Community (SADC)

The Southern African Development Community (SADC) Regional Indicative Strategic Development Plan (RISDP) for 2020–2030 (SADC, 2020) highlights the sustainable development of the blue, green and circular economies in its third strategic objective. The key interventions to achieve this include a regional Waste Management Programme, as well as the development of a blue economy and circular economy strategies.

4.4.3 Relevant Regional and Sub-Regional Marine Litter Initiatives

In addition to these policy agreements, regional and sub-regional programmes provide environmental policy guidance and promote better practices for the marine environment, resulting in region-wide multi-partner projects that respond to specific marine pollution issues in Africa, some of which are outlined below.

4.4.3.1 IUCN World Conservation Congress and Close the Plastic Tap Programme

The IUCN hosts the World Conservation Congress, a global agenda-setting forum on nature conservation. During its 2021 session, IUCN membership, including 45 State and government agencies from Africa, will consider and approve appropriate motions. These include three, targeted at slowing the global plastic pollution crisis in the marine environment, eliminating plastic pollution in protected areas, with priority action on single-use plastic products and avoiding unintended impacts of plastics substitution. The motions have been co-sponsored by 11 organisations from Benin, Burkina Faso, Cameroon, Côte d'Ivoire, Kenya, Malawi, Morocco and Uganda and 36 organisations from outside the continent.

The IUCN also implements the “Close the Plastic Tap” global programme, which undertakes analytical studies and supports policy and programmatic action in Africa. Current and past actions focused on Algeria, Egypt, Kenya, Libya, Morocco, and Western Sahara, Mozambique, Senegal, South Africa and Tanzania.

4.4.3.2 UNEP/IUCN National Guidance for Plastic Pollution Hotspotting and Shaping Action

Through Resolution No. 6/2019 on marine plastic litter and microplastics, the member states to the UN Environment Assembly highlighted the importance of a harmonised methodology to measure plastic flows and leakage along the value chain. This resolution laid the basis for UNEP and IUCN to develop a methodology to support countries to address existing knowledge gaps in understanding the magnitude of the challenge at a national level and thus to address the root causes of the problem. Through its Life Cycle Initiative, UNEP and the IUCN have co-developed the ‘UNEP/IUCN National Guidance for Plastic Pollution Hotspotting and Shaping Action’ that helps States quantify and qualify plastic pollution and offers an effective interface between science-based assessments, policy-making and action. The results from piloting the guidance in Kenya, Mozambique, Tanzania and South Africa demonstrate a clear case for African countries to address street littering, illegal dumping and open burning of waste. Addressing the lack of waste segregation combined with the separate collection, sorting and processing are quick wins and cost-effective solutions that will reduce mismanaged plastic in general waste. The financing required to implement such policy measures, including implementation, could be much lower than that needed for scaling waste management infrastructure across Africa’s cities and municipalities (UNEP, 2020).

4.4.3.3 WWF’s “No Plastic in Nature” Global Initiative and Regional Strategy for Africa

WWF is an independent conservation organisation working with governments, businesses, communities and civil society in more than 100 countries to sustain the natural world for the benefit of people and nature. Amongst WWF’s broad programmes of work, the “No Plastic in Nature” Initiative works across the life cycle of plastics to reduce the amount of virgin plastic production, increase the circulation of material already in the system and eliminate plastic leakage. The initiative focuses on three core pillars: global governance, business engagement and Plastic Smart Cities. A regional 2020–2025 strategy for WWF offices in Africa has been developed to implement the initiative across the region. Capacity development is one of the key focuses alongside evidence-based campaigns to encourage governments to improve enforcement of existing legislation and implement more robust policies, including but not limited to extended producer responsibility (EPR). Through its policy advocacy, WWF encourages governments to support the mandate to start negotiations on a new global legally binding treaty to address plastic pollution.

4.4.3.4 Sustainable Seas Trust and the African Marine Waste Network

The Sustainable Seas Trust is a nonprofit organisation that focuses on research, education, awareness-raising and enterprise development across Africa. One of its core programmes is the African Marine Waste Network (AMWN),²⁸ a collaborative platform for knowledge exchange within Africa and beyond. It aims to mobilise resources to enable stakeholders to reduce marine pollution through research, education, capacity building, enterprise development and communications. The AMWN also partners with WIOMSA to monitor marine litter throughout the WIOMSA region (see Sect. 4.4.3.5).

4.4.3.5 Western Indian Ocean Marine Science Association (WIOMSA)

The WIOMSA²⁹ is a nonprofit membership organisation established in 1993 that covers the same geographic scope as the Nairobi Convention. Its activities include promoting education, science and technological development in marine sciences and particularly the interface between research, management and governance of marine and coastal ecosystems. As part of its Marine and Coastal Science for Management programme, WIOMSA, in collaboration with the Sustainable Seas Trust through the AMWN and country partners, is monitoring marine litter in Kenya, Madagascar, Mauritius, Mozambique, Seychelles, Tanzania and South Africa. Baselines will be determined at each site for the relevant targets set in SDG 14.1. A marine litter monitoring manual has been developed describing guidelines to measure litter in rivers, estuaries, beaches and on land (Barnardo & Ribbink, 2020).

High-level panel for a sustainable ocean economy in Africa

As part of the global High-Level Panel (HLP) on a Sustainable Ocean Economy, the three Sherpas³⁰ representing the African continent–Ghana, Namibia, and Kenya–coordinate and host meetings for their respective regional blocs, which are eventually intended to culminate in an Africa-wide position to be discussed and adopted at an AU Heads of State Summit meeting. A Western Indian Ocean regional Meeting was held in Mombasa in December 2019, which provided an interactive knowledge-sharing platform forged a shared understanding of ocean-related issues critical to Africa and developed A Call to Action to Save African Fisheries.

The HLP has noted the issue of pollution, especially from the tonnes of plastics that find their way into the ocean each year and the threats it poses to ecosystems, health and livelihoods. It has included pollution and plastic waste as one of three promising pathways to address Africa’s ocean-related challenges.

Ellen MacArthur Foundation Plastics Pact Network in Africa

The Ellen MacArthur Foundation’s Plastics Pact Network³¹ is a coordinated response to plastic pollution, specifically plastic packaging, via national or regional initiatives that bring together stakeholders to implement context-specific actions towards a circular economy for plastics. Each Plastic Pact is led by a local organisation bringing together actors from across the entire plastics packaging value chain, including government bodies, businesses and civil society, behind a shared vision with an ambitious set of targets. The targets are specific to each context but all align towards eliminating unnecessary and problematic plastic packaging, ensuring plastic packaging is reusable, recyclable or compostable and increasing effective recycling rates and use of recycled content in plastic packaging.

The South African Plastics Pact was the first of its kind in Africa, launched by WWF in partnership with the South African Plastics Recycling Organisation and WRAP in January 2020 and now implemented by GreenCape. Two other Plastics Pacts in Africa are currently developing in Kenya and Senegal.

Abandoned, lost, or otherwise discarded fishing gear (ALDFG) initiatives in Africa

The Secretariat of the Basel, Rotterdam and Stockholm Conventions in cooperation with S-cycles, the Öko-Institut, Grid-Arendal and the Ministry of Environment, Science, Technology and Innovation of Ghana, with funding from the Norwegian Ministry of Foreign Affairs, implemented a pilot project to collect and recycle waste fishing nets together with local fishers in Accra, Ghana. A Global Ghost Gear Initiative (GGGI) project, under the SOFER initiative, has a programme called the Fishing Net Gains Nigeria, which aims to create economic opportunities for coastal communities, including women and youth, through developing best practices for addressing ghost gear in the region. The programme includes training women to design, make and sell crafts from waste fishing gear as a source of income. The craft workshops will be supplied with materials collected at fishing gear collection sites. Volunteer divers will be trained to collect data and retrieve ghost gear where safe and feasible.

Box 4.1: Bans on Plastics Carrier Bags and Other Single-Use Plastic Items

The banning or regulation of single-use plastic items, especially plastic carrier bags, has been a popular legislative instrument to reduce the generation of plastic waste and pollution. Reasons include malaria outbreaks due to stagnant water collected in littered plastic bags in Kenya, sewage systems clogged by plastic bags causing floods in Cameroon and death of livestock due to ingestion of plastic bags in Mauritania (Larsen & Venkova, 2017).

Over 30 African States have some legislation to regulate or completely ban the use, manufacture, sale, free distribution and import of plastic carrier bags (UNEP, 2018a). Examples include:

• The EAC Polythene Materials Control Bill 2016 provides a legal framework for prohibiting of the manufacture, sale, import and use of polythene materials, including plastic carrier bags, intended for national-level implementation for countries based in the EAC region.³²

• Rwanda was one of the first and most strict amongst the African states, with its ban enforced in 2008, including confiscation of plastic bags upon arrivals at airports.

• Kenya’s ban on single-use plastic bags in 2017 was followed by a ban in June 2020 on other single-use plastic items in protected natural areas such as National Parks, beaches, forests, and conservation areas.

• Countries such as South Africa and Cameroon have adopted taxes on certain types of bags as a disincentive instead of an outright ban, transferring some of the environmental cost onto the consumer.

• In 2021, South Africa amended its plastic carrier bag regulations³³ by setting a minimum recycled content requirement to be enforced in a phased approach. This aims to promote end-use markets to recycled content, which has been a major barrier for the country’s recycling economy (Van Os & De Kock, 2021).

• In 2019, in collaboration with the AU First Ladies, the AU Commission hosted a high-level working session on the “Banning of plastics in Africa towards a pollution-free Africa”.

• In Côte d’Ivoire, the plastics industry actors opposed the proposed ban due to the threat of job losses and other economic repercussions. This caused several delays in enforcement, as well as the addition of exemptions for biodegradable plastic bags and specific applications (Kobo, 2014; Excell, et al. 2018).

• In Senegal, the plastic ban in 2015 had failed to be implemented; however, the state proposed another plastic ban in 2020. The proposed ban included water sachets and was protested by various actors selling drinking water in plastic sachets. It was estimated that the ban would potentially put 30,000 jobs at risk (Oladipo & Niang, 2021).

• In 2012 (with an effective date of 1 January 2013 and a 6-month moratorium) the Mauritanian government decided to ban the manufacture, marketing and use of plastic bags in order to protect the environment. But due to the lack of accompanying measures (alternatives, lack of awareness and public acceptance, monitoring, sanctions…) and with the pressure of certain lobbies (traders, importers, bag producers…) the measure has remained ineffective.

The successful implementation of plastic bag bans varies across the continent and has been the main criticism of its effectiveness. Several reports of enforcement issues of the plastic bag bans are due to illegal trade across “porous” national borders as well as established informal markets (UNEP, 2018c). Some of the potential unintended consequences of bans, such as the loss of jobs and revenue in the plastic bag production industry, are also a concern (Godfrey, 2019), especially for African countries with a plastic production value chain such as Nigeria and South Africa.

Besides socioeconomic impacts, life-cycle sustainability impacts should be considered, primarily to assess the risk of introducing alternative products and materials into the economy to offset the ban. A life-cycle assessment study on single-use plastic carrier bags and their alternatives in South Africa revealed some of the cautions necessary when replacing them with alternative materials such as paper, biodegradables or reusable polyester bags (Russo et al., 2020). This study further affirmed the need use recycled content to replace virgin plastic as more favourable in life cycle sustainability impacts.

The banning of plastic goods may be seen as a knee-jerk reaction to the broader issue of plastic pollution and marine litter, as it is limited to a singular focus on certain types of plastic waste. A systems approach to policy and legislative instruments to address plastic pollution and marine litter is necessary to avoid fragmented interventions and unintended consequences.

4.5 Implementation Challenges

The international and regional legal and policy frameworks assessment shows that the duty to prevent marine litter from land- and sea-based sources has been clearly established. Less clear, however, is the duty to provide sustainable funding for such purposes while ensuring a safe and healthy environment and access to sustainable livelihoods. The SDGs provide the most robust guidance in this regard, providing a holistic approach to preventing marine litter through environmentally sustainable waste management that supports the principles of justice for all. The drivers of marine litter in Africa are complex, supporting the need to incorporate a broader range of measures than those included in global and regional instruments for preventing pollution, managing chemicals and waste and protecting species and biodiversity.

By recognising the common challenges and limitations of implementation at the national level, research and sharing best practices can facilitate the cost-effective transformation of the plastics value chain in Africa, with a primary focus on adding value to waste and providing sustainable financing of waste management systems. Examples of success exist on the continent that can stimulate action in neighbouring countries. Still, experiences have also shown that a coordinated and harmonised regional approach is required to support compliance and enforcement. By incorporating all 17 SDGs into the systemic transformation of waste generation and management, the co-benefits of poverty reduction and environmental justice can be realised within the African context.

National policy and regulatory frameworks could prioritise stringent provisions that aim to address street littering, open and illegal dumping, open burning of waste and waste segregation combined with the separate collection, sorting and processing as a quick win, cost-effective solutions that contribute to minimising the mismanaged plastic component in general waste. The financing required to implement such policy measures targeted at source reduction, including implementation, could be much lower than that required for scaling waste management infrastructure across Africa’s cities and municipalities. Lebreton and Andrady (2019) suggest that the gradual increase in waste management infrastructure may not be enough for some parts of the world, particularly in Africa, by 2060. The investment in recycling infrastructure appears uneconomic because of the substantially higher recycling cost than landfilling (Goddard, 1995).

There is increased appreciation of the circular economy concept across Africa, which is being recognised in policy and legislative formulations. Even though the concept presents economic and social opportunities, it remains weak in addressing the social equity gap. The number of citizen-driven initiatives in Africa engaged in beach clean-ups or collection and trade in waste is on the rise. These present opportunities for addressing the social equity gap. States though need to explore appropriate integration models that ensure that these informal sector actors can be integrated into the formal waste economy to safeguard their interests and ensure that the benefits from the waste economy impact the broadest possible segment of society. From a waste prevention perspective, African countries need to develop and support the implementation of policies that emphasise the creation and marketing of recyclable or recoverable materials, either at the same or higher quality, coupled with the sourcing of renewable and secondary material in the manufacture of plastic objects. There is also a need to explore other innovative approaches to addressing plastic pollution by incentivising the reuse of plastics and promoting other measures that address plastic waste beyond recycling, which tends to be the key strategy at the heart of the circular economy. Such policy reforms need to support the establishment of multi-level, multi-sector platforms at the national level to ensure unified strategies across the entire life-cycle stages of plastics as no single actor can independently drive complete life-cycle improvements.

4.6 Recommended Best Practices for Prevention and Reduction of Marine Litter in Africa

A number of response options are available to governments operating at the national and sub-national levels. These must be suited to the local context and supported by socioeconomic studies to ensure the intended outcomes are met and various industries and communities are not negatively affected. Important to the design of policies to prevent marine litter is the inclusion of the producer in the physical and financial responsibility for the waste resulting from their products placed on the market. The cost of waste management can be borne by a mix of local government, producers and consumers. Examples of consumer contribution to the reduction of marine litter through improved waste management include pay-as-you-throw schemes to fund household waste collection, as well as shopping bag taxes to reduce their use and fund various waste management services.

Box 4.2: EPR in the African Context—The Example of South Africa (Climate Legal, 2020)

EPR schemes can assist in preventing marine litter in the short term by improving formal collection systems and in the long term by incentivising design for the environment. A central aim of EPR schemes is to reduce the burden on local councils of end-of-life treatment of products and transfer the costs of these services to producers and/or consumers. In addition, economic opportunities and environmental benefits can be gained (OECD, 2016). EPR schemes can be voluntary, co-regulatory or mandatory and include product take-back schemes (e.g. producer is responsible for collection and recycling), market-based instruments (e.g. deposit-refund, advanced disposal fees and taxes), performance standards (e.g. minimum recycled content) and information (e.g. labelling requirements) (OECD, 2016). Schemes should determine if producers regulated by the scheme will cover the full cost or partial costs.

In South Africa, an industry-led self-regulated initiative for PET recycling, PETCO, has been in operation since 2004. No mandatory EPR schemes had been adopted in Africa by 2013 (OECD, 2016). However, this situation has changed in recent years with the adoption of legislation that provides for the development of such schemes. Examples include South Africa, where EPR regulations have recently been adopted, and Kenya (see Opondo, 2020), where a draft bill is still under discussion.

The OECD has outlined the following recommended elements for effective EPR legislation (OECD, 2016):

Design and Governance—Provision should be made for updating targets, fees and other aspects affected by changes in the market. Enforcement measures can include mandatory scheme registers, accreditation schemes, penalties for non-compliance, robust monitoring systems and reporting that is independently audited.

Definitions, Roles and Responsibilities—Stakeholders of EPR schemes include producers, national governments, local councils, retailers and consumers. Relevant stakeholders should be defined in legislation, particularly those classified as producers. The roles and responsibilities of each will vary with the product range in scope of the scheme and the objectives to be achieved by each sector and by the scheme overall. Consideration must also be given to “free-riders” (producers that are not required to contribute to the scheme but benefit from it), “orphaned” products (the producer of the product is no longer in business) and online sales from international providers that may be difficult to capture in national legislation.

Transparency and Preventing Anti-Competitive Behaviour—Schemes must be held accountable for their performance, particularly where administration is given to a Producer Responsibility Organisation (PRO). Information that can strengthen transparency includes disclosing costs and reporting on the number of products placed on the domestic market, fees charged to producers and performance regarding rates for collection, reuse, recycling, recovery and landfill. Open and non-discriminatory tenders should promote competition in the services market and allow new technologies and processes entry.

Incentivise Design for The Environment—Eco-modular fees for EPR-regulated products can promote improved design, particularly if these fees reflect the complexity and cost of end-of-life management of products. Where this relationship is not incorporated into EPR schemes, eco-design improvements have proved difficult to achieve if collective producer responsibility is applied.

Informal Sector Integration—Formal waste management systems must integrate informal waste collectors. Excluding this sector from access to waste streams should be avoided where these streams would be managed under new EPR schemes.

Stakeholder Consultation—As with introducing any new systems, whether voluntary or legislated, stakeholder engagement is essential at all phases of development and review.

A key component of the transformation of waste management in South Africa is integrating of the informal waste sector. An estimated 60,000 people work in this sector, reportedly saving local councils an estimated ZAR 700 million annually (Department of Environmental Affairs of the Republic of South Africa, 2019). The Waste Management Act of South Africa (Act No. 59 of 2008) provides for the development of mandatory EPR schemes for relevant products. However, only voluntary schemes have been implemented. The PET Recycling Company (PETCO) of South Africa was established in 2004 and provided a voluntary, industry-driven and financed EPR scheme for PET bottles. The fee paid by members is voluntary and achieved a 62% collection rate in 2019 (PETCO, 2019a). PETCO’s How-To Guide to Section 18 for Producers (PETCO, 2021) assists their members in understanding their obligations under the new EPR Regulations, while the guidelines on Designing for the Environment (PETCO, 2019b) promote improved design to support end-of-life processes for PET bottles. In lieu of mandatory EPR regulations in Kenya, PETCO was also established in Kenya in 2018 (PETCO Kenya, 2021) and operated in a similarly to PETCO in South Africa before the new EPR Regulations were introduced. As of 2019, five drop-off sites had been set up in Nairobi in partnership with retailers.

The recently adopted Regulations Regarding EPR in GN 1184, Government Gazette No. 43879 of 5 November 2020 National Environmental Management: Waste Act (59/2008) (EPR Regulations) in South Africa give effect to Section 18 of the Waste Management Act and are likely to move South Africa towards mandatory schemes. These regulations provide definitions and requirements of producers such as fee collection, record keeping and auditing. Producers are also required to conduct life-cycle assessments (including minimising waste and toxicity) within 5 years of establishing an EPR scheme, use environmental labels, integrate the informal sector, develop secondary markets for recyclates and work towards equal representation within the entire value chain. The EPR Regulations mandate implementation of the waste hierarchy as well as cleaner production principles. A producer registration process is provided to prevent “free-riders.”

Waste pickers are well represented in the 2020 National Waste Management Strategy (DEFF, 2020a) and the 2020 Waste Picker Integration Guideline, developed through six participatory workshops that included industry (DEFF, 2020b). The Waste Picker Integration Guideline includes a section on integration within EPR schemes. It will guide future development of such schemes, together with stakeholder engagement, particularly the South African Waste Pickers Association. The EPR legal and policy framework developed in South Africa provides a good foundation for other African countries to build on but is relatively new in South Africa. They will require investment in the infrastructure development to support the mandatory measures adopted and enforcement if they are to establish a compelling example for other countries to follow.

4.7 Integrated Waste Management Policy and Strategy

An integrated waste management strategy should include various approaches that collectively work towards the goals and objectives of the strategy. These can be binding or voluntary, and a comprehensive strategy would likely include a combination of both. The waste hierarchy should provide the overall framework for any waste management strategy as a priority. The waste hierarchy promotes the most environmentally friendly options, with the least-preferred disposal options being landfilling or dumping (US EPA, 2020). According to the waste hierarchy, reduction strategies should be prioritised to minimise waste generation at source. This includes education and behaviour change on an individual and industrial level to emphasise reducing the use of plastic products. Thereafter, reuse can extend the life of products, while recycling can reduce the need to extract raw materials. Where products are not designed for reuse or recycling, or where adequate environmentally sound waste management options are not available, trade of waste in compliance with the international regulations can provide an alternative to incineration and landfill.

4.8 Preventing Marine Litter Through a Holistic Lens

Many African States prioritise the Blue Economy principles to stimulate sustainable and integrated maritime and freshwater industries (see Chap. 1). Marine litter presents a risk to maritime industries, resulting in direct costs as well as indirect impacts, for which the costs are more difficult to calculate (McIlgorm et al., 2020). Although the Blue Economy approach shares some principles with the circular economy, the latter provides greater scope for improving livelihoods across a broader range of sectors. However, in practice, both tend to focus on economic activity, giving less emphasis to social and environmental outcomes. Many of the jobs that need to be stimulated through the promotion of circular systems may fall outside of the industries that make up the Blue Economy. It is therefore imperative that Africa seeks to broaden the focus of marine litter prevention from a purely waste management perspective towards the circular economy approach, with emphasis on resource efficiency as well as social equity aspects, such as the distribution of wealth generated through the new opportunities provided by the circular economy. By addressing the issue of marine litter through the lens of job creation, the co-benefits of improved livelihoods and the right to a safe and productive environment can be collectively targeted. Therefore, the design of legal and policy frameworks should consider the most cost-effective ways to deliver on multiple benefits, including reducing the cost of waste management to the public sector. In the short term, the consumer can play a vital role in sorting and disposing of wastes appropriately, participating in clean-ups, spreading awareness and promoting ownership of the environment.

Appendices

Annex 4.1: SDG Targets and Indicators Relevant to the Prevention of Marine Litter, Livelihoods and a Safe Environment

Target	Indicator
SDG 6. Ensure availability and sustainable management of water and sanitation for all
Target 6.3—By 2030, improve water quality by reducing pollution, eliminating dumping and minimizing release of hazardous chemicals and materials, halving the proportion of untreated wastewater and substantially increasing recycling and safe reuse globally	6.3.1 Proportion of domestic and industrial wastewater flows safely treated 6.3.2 Proportion of bodies of water with good ambient water quality
SDG 8. Promote sustained, inclusive and sustainable economic growth, full and productive employment and decent work for all
Target 8.3—Promote development-oriented policies that support productive activities, decent job creation, entrepreneurship, creativity and innovation and encourage the formalization and growth of micro-, small- and medium-sized enterprises, including through access to financial services	8.3.1 Proportion of informal employment in total employment, by sector and sex
Target 8.4—Improve progressively, through 2030, global resource efficiency in consumption and production and endeavour to decouple economic growth from environmental degradation, in accordance with the 10Year Framework of Programmes on Sustainable Consumption and Production, with developed countries taking the lead	8.4.1 Material footprint, material footprint per capita, and material footprint per GDP 8.4.2 Domestic material consumption, domestic material consumption per capita and domestic material consumption per GDP
Target 8.9—By 2030, devise and implement policies to promote sustainable tourism that creates jobs and promotes local culture and products	8.9.1 Tourism direct GDP as a proportion of total GDP and in growth rate
SDG 9. Build resilient infrastructure, promote inclusive and sustainable industrialization and foster innovation
Target 9.5—Enhance scientific research, upgrade the technological capabilities of industrial sectors in all countries, in particular developing countries, including, by 2030, encouraging innovation and substantially increasing the number of research and development workers per 1 million people and public and private research and development spending	9.5.1 Research and development expenditure as a proportion of GDP 9.5.2 Researchers (in full-time equivalent) per million inhabitants
SDG 11. Make cities and human settlements inclusive, safe, resilient and sustainable
Target 11.1—By 2030, ensure access for all to adequate, safe and affordable housing and basic services and upgrade slums	11.1.1 Proportion of urban population living in slums, informal settlements or inadequate housing
Target 11.6—By 2030, reduce the adverse per capita environmental impact of cities, including by paying special attention to air quality and municipal and other waste management	11.6.1 Proportion of municipal solid waste collected and managed in controlled facilities out of total municipal waste generated, by cities
SDG 12. Ensure sustainable consumption and production patterns
Target 12.1—Implement the 10‑Year Framework of Programmes on Sustainable Consumption and Production Patterns, all countries taking action, with developed countries taking the lead, taking into account the development and capabilities of developing countries	12.1.1 Number of countries developing, adopting or implementing policy instruments aimed at supporting the shift to sustainable consumption and production
Target 12.4—By 2020, achieve the environmentally sound management of chemicals and all wastes throughout their life cycle, in accordance with agreed international frameworks, and significantly reduce their release to air, water and soil in order to minimize their adverse impacts on human health and the environment	12.4.1 Number of parties to international multilateral environmental agreements on hazardous waste, and other chemicals that meet their commitments and obligations in transmitting information as required by each relevant agreement 12.4.2 (a) Hazardous waste generated per capita; and (b) proportion of hazardous waste treated, by type of treatment
Target 12.5—By 2030, substantially reduce waste generation through prevention, reduction, recycling and reuse	12.5.1 National recycling rate, tonnes of material recycled
Target 12.7—Promote public procurement practices that are sustainable, in accordance with national policies and priorities	12.7.1 Degree of sustainable public procurement policies and action plan implementation
Target 12.8—By 2030, ensure that people everywhere have the relevant information and awareness for sustainable development and lifestyles in harmony with nature	12.8.1 Extent to which (i) global citizenship education and (ii) education for sustainable development are mainstreamed in (a) national education policies; (b) curricula; (c) teacher education and (d) student assessment
SDG 14. Conserve and sustainably use the oceans, seas and marine resources
Target 14.1—By 2025, prevent and significantly reduce marine pollution of all kinds, in particular from land-based activities, including marine debris and nutrient pollution	14.1.1 (a) Index of coastal eutrophication; and (b) plastic debris density
Target 14.2—By 2020, sustainably manage and protect marine and coastal ecosystems to avoid significant adverse impacts, including by strengthening their resilience, and take action for their restoration in order to achieve healthy and productive oceans	14.2.1 Number of countries using ecosystem-based approaches to managing marine areas
Target 14.C—Enhance the conservation and sustainable use of oceans and their resources by implementing international law as reflected in the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea, which provides the legal framework for the conservation and sustainable use of oceans and their resources, as recalled in paragraph 158 of “The future we want”	14.c.1 Number of countries making progress in ratifying, accepting and implementing through legal, policy and institutional frameworks, ocean-related instruments that implement international law, as reflected in the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea, for the conservation and sustainable use of the oceans and their resources

Annex 4.2 List of International and Regional Policy Instruments, Agreements and Declarations Relevant to Marine Plastic Litter

1972 Convention on the Prevention of Marine Pollution by Dumping of Wastes and Other Matter, opened for signature.

13 November 1972, 1046 UNTS 120 (Entered into Force 30 August 1975) (‘London Convention’) <https://treaties.un.org/%20doc/Publication/UNTS/Volume%201046/volume-1046-I-15749-%20English.pdf Doc/Publication/UNTS/Volume1046/volume-1046-I-15749-English.Pdf>.

1978 Protocol of 1978 relating to the International Convention for the Prevention of Pollution from Ships of 2 November 1973, as amended, opened for signature 17 February 1978, 1340 UNTS 184 (entered into force 2 October 1983) (‘MARPOL 73/78’) <https://treaties.un.org/doc/Publication/UNTS/Volume%201340/volume-1340-I-22484-English.pdf>.

1979 The Convention on the Conservation of Migratory Species of Wild Animals opened for signature 23 June 1979, [1991] ATS 32 (entered into force 1 November 1983) (‘CMS’) <http://www.austlii.edu.au/au/other/dfat/treaties/1991/32.html>.

1982 United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea opened for signature 10 December 1982, 1833 UNTS 3 (entered into force 16 November 1994) (‘Law of the Sea Convention’) <https://www.un.org/depts/los/convention_agreements/texts/unclos/unclos_e.pdf> .

1989 Basel Convention on the Control of Transboundary Movements of Hazardous Wastes and Their Disposal, opened for signature 22 March 1989, 1673 UNTS 57 (entered into force 5 May 1992) (‘Basel Convention’) <https://www.basel.int/Portals/4/BaselConvention/docs/text/BaselConventionText-e.pdf> .

1991 Convention on Environmental Impact Assessment in a Transboundary Context (ECE/MP.EIA/21), opened for signature 25 February 1991, 1989 UNTS 309 (No. 34028) (entered into force 10 September 1997) (‘Espoo Convention’) <http://www.unece.org/index.php?id=40450&L=0> .

1992 Convention on Biological Diversity, opened for signature 5 June 1992, 1760 UNTS 79 (entered into force 29 December 1993) (‘Convention on Biological Diversity’)  <https://www.cbd.int/convention/text/default.shtml> .

1995 The Agreement for the Implementation of the Provisions of the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea of 10 December 1982 relating to the Conservation and Management of Straddling Fish Stocks and Highly Migratory Fish Stocks, opened for signature 4 December 1995, 2167 UNTS 3 (entered into force 11 November 2001) (‘United Nations Fish Stocks Agreement’) <https://treaties.un.org/doc/Treaties/1995/08/1995080408%9625AM/Ch_XXI_07p.pdf> .

1996 Protocol to the Convention on the Prevention of Marine Pollution by Dumping of Wastes and Other Matter, 1972, opened for signature 7 November 1996, 36 ILM 1 (1997) (entered into force 24 March 2006) (‘London Protocol’) <http://www.austlii.edu.au/au/other/dfat/treaties/2006/11.html> .

1997 Convention on the Law of the Non-Navigational Uses of International Watercourses, opened for signature 21 May 1997, UN Doc A/RES/51/229 (entered into force 17 August 2014) (‘UN Watercourse Convention’)  <http://www.un.org/documents/ga/res/51/ares51-229.htm> .

2001 Stockholm Convention on Persistent Organic Pollutants, opened for signature 22 May 2001, 2256 UNTS 119.

(entered into force 17 May 2004) (‘Stockholm Convention’) <https://treaties.un.org/doc/Treaties/2001/05/2001052212%9655PM/Ch_XXVII_15p.pdf> .

2011 Regulations for the Prevention of Pollution by Garbage from Ships (Resolution MEPC.201(62)), opened for signature 15 July 2011, (entered into force 1 January 2013) (‘MARPOL Annex V’) <http://www.imo.org/en/OurWork/Environment/ PollutionPrevention/Garbage/Documents/2014 revision/ RESOLUTION MEPC.201(62) Revised MARPOL Annex V.pdf > .

2012 CBD, Marine and coastal biodiversity: sustainable fisheries and addressing adverse impacts of human activities, voluntary guidelines for environmental assessment, and marine spatial planning, UNEP/CBD/COP/DEC/XI/18, 11, (CBD Decision XI/18) <https://www.cbd.int/doc/decisions/cop-11/cop-11-dec-18-en.pdf> .

2014 CBD, Marine and coastal biodiversity: Impacts on marine and coastal biodiversity of anthropogenic underwater noise and ocean acidification, priority actions to achieve Aichi Biodiversity Target 10 for coral reefs and closely associated ecosystems, and marine spatial planning and training initiatives, UNEP/CBD/ COP/DEC/XII/23, 12 (Marine and coastal biodiversity: Impacts on marine and coastal biodiversity of anthropogenic underwater noise and ocean acidification, priority actions to achieve Aichi Biodiversity Target 10 for coral reefs and closely associated ecosystems, and marine spatial planning and training initiatives) <https://www.cbd.int/doc/decisions/cop-12/cop-12-dec-23-en.pdf > .

2016 CBD, Addressing impacts of marine debris and anthropogenic underwater noise on marine and coastal biodiversity, CBD/COP/DEC/XIII/10, 13, (CBD Decision XIII/10) <https://www.cbd.int/doc/decisions/cop-13/cop-13-dec-10-en.pdf> .

2017 United Nations General Assembly (UNGA), Sustainable fisheries, including through the 1995 Agreement for the Implementation of the Provisions of the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea of 10 December 1982 relating to the Conservation and Management of Straddling Fish Stocks and Highly Migratory Fish Stocks, and related instruments, A/ RES/71/123, 71, (UNGA Resolution 71/123) <http://undocs.org/A/RES/71/123> .

1980 Protocol for the Protection of the Mediterranean Sea against Pollution from Land-Based Sources and Activities, as amended 7 March 1996, opened for signature 7 March 1996, 1328 UNTS 120 (entered into force 11 May 2008) (‘LBS/A Protocol for the Mediterranean’) <http://wedocs.unep.org/bitstream/handle/20.500.11822/7096/Consolidated_LBS96_ENG.pdf?sequence%20=%205&isAllowed%20=%20y> .

1981 Convention for Co-operation in the Protection and Development of the Marine and Coastal Environment of the West and Central African Region, opened for signature 23 March 1981, 20 ILM (1981) 746 (entered into force 05 August 1984) (‘Abidjan Convention’) <http://abidjanconvention.org/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=100&Itemid=200&lan=en> .

1991 Bamako Convention on the Ban of the Import into Africa and the Control of Transboundary Movement and Management of Hazardous Wastes within Africa, opened for signature 30 January 1991, 2101 UNTS 211 (entered into force 22 April 1998) (‘Bamako Convention’) <https://www.opcw.org/chemical-weapons-convention/related-international-agreements/toxic-chemicals-and-the-environment/bamako-convention/> .

2010 Protocol for the Protection of the Marine and Coastal Environment of the Western Indian Ocean from Land-Based Sources and Activities, opened for signature 31 March 2010, (‘LBS/A Protocol for the Western Indian Ocean’) <http://www.unep.org/nairobiconvention/protocol-protection-marine-and-%20coastal-environment-wio-land-based-sources-and-activities> .

2012 Additional Protocol to the Abidjan Convention Concerning Cooperation in the Protection and Development of Marine and Coastal Environment from Land-Based Sources and Activities in the Western, Central and Southern African Region (UNEP(DEPI)/ WACAF/LBSA/MOP1/2), opened for signature 22 June 2012, (‘LBS/A Protocol of Western, Central and Southern African Region’) <http://abidjanconvention.org/media/documents/protocols/LBSA Protocol-Adopted.pdf> .

2013 Regional Plan on Marine Litter Management in the Mediterranean in the Framework of Article 15 of the Land Based Sources Protocol (Decision IG.21/7), opened for signature 6 December 2013, (entered into force 8 July 2014) (‘Action Plan for Marine Litter in the Mediterranean’) <http://www.unepmap.org/index.php?module%20=%20content2&catid%20=%20001,011,006> .

2005 United Nations General Assembly, Sustainable fisheries, including through the 1995 Agreement for the Implementation of the Provisions of the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea of 10 December 1982 relating to the Conservation and Management of Straddling Fish Stocks and Highly Migratory Fish Stocks, and related instruments, A/RES/60/31, (UNGA Resolution 60/31) (29 November 2005) <http://www.un.org/depts/los/general_assembly/general_assembly_resolutions.htm> .

2012 Manila Declaration, Manila Declaration on Furthering the Implementation of the Global Programme of Action for the Protection of the Marine Environment from Land-based Activities, UNEP/GPA/IGR.3/CRP.1/Rev.1, (Manila Declaration) (27 January 2012) <http://www.unep.org/regionalseas/globalmeetings/15/ManillaDeclarationnew.pdf> .

2011 The Honolulu Strategy, A Global Framework for Prevention and Management of Marine Debris, 25 March 2011, (Honolulu Strategy) <http://www.unep.org/gpa/documents/publications/honolulustrategy.pdf> .

1995 GPA, Global Programme of Action for the Protection of the Marine Environment from Land-based Activities (GPA), UNEP(OCA)/LBA/IG.2/7, (GPA) (3 November 1995)

1985 Montreal Guidelines for the Protection of the Marine Environment against Pollution from Land-Based Sources, Decision 13/18/II, (Montreal Guidelines for LBS) (24 May 1985) <http://www.unep.org/law/PDF/UNEPEnv-%20LawGuide&PrincN07.pdf>. 

1995 FAO Code of Conduct for Responsible Fisheries, (‘Code of Conduct’). <http://www.fao.org/docrep/005/v9878e/v9878e00.HTM>.

2015 UNGA, Transforming our world: the 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development, A/Res/70/1, (The 2030 Agenda) <https://undocs.org/A/RES/70/1>.

2002 United Nations, Johannesburg Declaration on Sustainable Development (A/CONF.199/20) Chap. 1, Resolution 1, (Johannesburg Declaration on Sustainable Development (A/CONF.199/20) Chap. 1, Resolution 1) <https://documents-dds-ny.un.org/doc/UNDOC/GEN/N02/636/93/PDF/N0263693.pdf?OpenElement>.