MONITORING AND CONTROLLING MICROPLASTICS

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