Street cleaners collect plastic waste separately for local recycling and trash on the occasion of World Environment Day in Johannesburg. (Photo by Ihsaan Haffejee/Anadolu Agency via Getty Images)
The forestry, fisheries and the environment department has been accused of giving preferential access and influence to the plastics and chemical industries in its global plastic pollution treaty delegation and national policy work.
These allegations come as South Africa prepares to attend the fifth and final round of talks for a global plastic pollution treaty, known as INC-5, in Busan, South Korea, from Monday.
A coalition of civil society organisations, who interact with the department as a collective on issues related to the global plastic pollution treaty negotiation process, said this week that Plastics SA “continues to have increased access and visibility” with the government.
Plastics SA serves as the umbrella body representing the entire plastics value chain in the country, including raw material suppliers, manufacturers and recyclers.
The coalition comprises the Global Alliance for Incinerator Alternatives, WWF South Africa, the South African Waste Pickers Association, groundWork South Africa, Green Anglicans and Greenpeace Africa.
It cited how, in a recent multistakeholder meeting organised in July, the designated venue was the Plastics SA offices.
“As Plastics SA is an industry association, largely representing the voice of primary plastic polymer producers in South Africa, the organisation does not hold a neutral stance in the context of the plastics value chain of South Africa or in the global plastic pollution treaty negotiation process,” the coalition said.
It took the view that “this was not a suitable venue to promote inclusive and meaningful dialogue” among stakeholders and “collectively decided against attending the meeting”.
‘Vested interests’
In previous meetings, the South African delegation to the INC process has consisted of representatives from the environment department’s chemicals and waste and oceans and coasts branches, as well as those from the plastic sector desk of the department of trade, industry and competition (DTIC) and the Council for Scientific and Industrial Research.
Representatives of the plastics sector participate as observer organisations to attend INC meetings, not as part of the country’s delegation, the coalition said.
“Representatives of Plastics SA have consistently attended INC meetings, including Sasol and Safripol representatives. Not unique to South Africa, fossil fuel representatives have been attending INC meetings in numbers,” it said.
“At INC-3, the number of fossil fuel industry representatives outnumbered 70 of the smallest member state delegations, highlighting that they are investing heavily to protect fossil fuel and petrochemical interests that are fuelling the plastic pollution crisis, a direct form of conflict of interest.”
It is important for the plastics industry to participate in the South African consultation for the treaty, “however, their influence over the South African position should be limited”, the coalition said, citing the “conflict of interest given the vested interests and their profits” directly linked to the plastic pollution crisis.
It said this limited influence has not been kept in check, with recent changes and new appointments in South Africa’s delegation to INC-5. “There is growing concern that previously progressive technical experts have been replaced with experts more aligned with the petrochemical industry position.”
The coalition pointed out, too, that the country’s “plastics industry” includes businesses across the plastics value chain, who hold divergent perspectives and positions.
“Often when referring to the ‘plastics industry’ this primarily refers to Plastics SA … However, some plastic recyclers do not align with Plastics SA’s position on interventions to address plastic pollution and are represented in the Business Coalition for a Plastics Treaty advocacy group in the treaty negotiations.”
Plastics SA does not include brandowners and retailers in their membership, who are the major consumers of plastics and plastic products, and are represented by the Business Coalition for a Plastics Treaty.
The business coalition “are actively advocating for legally binding global rules under the future treaty. This further highlights divergent views of the plastics industry across the plastics value chain”.
‘Equal access’
The M&G has seen evidence of regular, monthly meetings with the plastics industry but not other stakeholders, such as civil society and the business coalition. Peter Mbelengwa, the spokesperson for the environment department, however, disputed this.
“This is not true. The meetings were arranged as and when there were issues to consider. The timeline for the development of this international instrument is ambitious and thus constant engagement was necessary. There was no stakeholder that asked for engagement with the South African INC delegation that was not provided such an opportunity,” he said.
The department has a structured schedule for meeting stakeholders about the negotiations process and the country’s position. The stakeholders are NGOs, labour movements and industry, including the Business Coalition for a Plastics Treaty advocacy group, Plastics SA and the Chemical & Allied Industries’ Association (CAIA).
He said civil society groups are well represented and have full access to the delegation team.
“There are meetings that are arranged with civil society only to get their inputs. Civil society also writes to the department when outstanding matters are identified, and the department always provides a platform for meetings to discuss and clarify matters,” Mbelengwa said.
At the July meeting at Plastic SA’s offices, Mbelengwa said the department planned a separate meeting with civil society organisations. It was held on 12 August, “so that all the stakeholders could be accommodated”.
‘No conflict of interest’
Mbelengwa confirmed that Thokozani Masilela, a senior director of the plastics desk at the trade and industry department, would be part of South Africa’s negotiating team for INC-5, as he was for INC-3 and INC-4. Masilela is the deputy chairperson of Plastics SA.
The international legally binding instrument that is under development by the INC aims to have measures across the full lifecycle, and “it is critical that the DTIC that regulates upstream, including regulating plastics products, is part of the South Africa INC delegation”, Mbelengwa said.
“Mr Masilela, in his capacity as a government official, was requested to be part of the delegation to negotiate on behalf of the South African government. His in-depth knowledge of South African industrial policy adds value and diversity to the South African INC delegation and brings a perspective of socio-economic considerations that are necessary for policymaking.”
There is no discussion about a transition to a circular economy without making any reference to an industrial policy, Mbelengwa said.
“[The environment department’s] emphasis on a full lifecycle approach to addressing plastic pollution means that we need to revisit the approach to drafting industrial policy to ensure support and growth with circular approaches.”
Anton Hanekom, the executive director of Plastics SA, “strongly denied” any allegations of improper behaviour or conflict of interest.
“[Masilela] brings valuable expertise to our board as deputy chair of Plastics SA. He has been a member of the Plastics SA Board since 2019. His role enhances collaboration between government and industry while maintaining strict ethical standards,” Hanekom said.
The department of trade, industry and competition did not respond to the Mail & Guardian’s inquiries.
‘Unique realities’
Hanekom described as “unfounded” the assertion that Plastics SA or the broader industry has had “preferential access” to the SA INC delegation or government officials.
“Plastics SA and CAIA have requested regular, open meetings with the department of forestry, fisheries and the environment [DFFE]and other relevant government entities. These sessions are transparent platforms where we present our position, address concerns and foster constructive dialogue,” he said, adding that anti-plastics coalitions and civil society groups have had similar opportunities to present their perspectives.
“Their request for separate open-ended meetings with DFFE was agreed to in joint stakeholder meetings … It is essential for governments to hear all sides, and we respect and encourage this inclusive approach.”
The plastics sector is a critical contributor to the economy, accounting for 1.8% of GDP and 15.8% of manufacturing and supporting vital industries such as healthcare, energy, construction and agriculture, Hanekom said.
It sustains about 95 900 income-generating opportunities, particularly within the informal recycling economy and contributed more than R4.7 billion to the supply chain.
“Given this extensive impact, it is imperative for policymakers to consider how restrictions or bans on certain plastics or chemicals might affect employment, local manufacturing, and the broader economy,” he added.
Plastics SA and CAIA have voiced concerns over proposed global lists of chemicals of concern, which could impose blanket restrictions “unsuitable” for South Africa’s unique conditions.
“Instead, we advocate for flexible, sound and risk-based chemical management systemss, which better accommodate national contexts. We are committed to advancing a circular economy and supporting sustainable practices, including the improvement of recyclability and reducing the dependence on fossil fuels. These efforts are central to our engagement in the lNC negotiations,” Hanekom said.
Cabinet determines the government position, which considers the lNC documentation and the various options before they approve the South African position for the lNC negotiations, he said.
“Plastics SA remains dedicated to fostering open, transparent relationships with all stakeholders. We firmly believe that the global fight against plastic pollution requires inclusive solutions that balance environmental imperatives with economic realities in the context of national circumstances.”
National interest
According to the coalition, South Africa has generally maintained the same positions across the INCs. On production reduction, it is unwilling to support clear, binding targets and control measures to reduce plastic production, and proposes that this should be guided by the principle of common but differentiated responsibilities, and take into consideration national circumstances and capabilities.
South Africa is supportive of global phase-outs of chemicals of concern and global phase-outs of problematic and avoidable plastic products, “however, taking a weaker approach than for chemicals of concern, through the inclusion of the qualifier of the support only ‘as appropriate’”.
The country supports voluntary measures and guidelines on product design for reuse, refill, repair, repurposing and refurbishment and measures for minimum recycled content for specific plastic categories.
It also backs mandatory extended producer responsibility on plastic packaging as this is already legislated at a national level, with specific inclusion of a service fee for waste reclaimers.
South Africa has been a “consistent champion” for waste reclaimer integration and recognition in the global plastic pollution treaty negotiations, and has co-led the Just Transition Initiative with Kenya.
The country also supports measures to ensure environmentally sound waste management and of a newly established dedicated financial mechanism.
South Africa is a member of the Africa Group of Negotiators (AGN), mandated under the African Ministerial Conference on Environment and further guided by its Decision 19/2F.
It calls for “a global instrument that eliminates the most harmful and high-risk plastic categories, including problematic polymers, chemicals of concern, products and applications and brings overall plastic production to sustainable levels”.
“However, we are starting to see South Africa express their national interests increasingly in the lead-up to INC-5, which could dilute the progressive positions of the AGN,” the coalition said.
Bridge to Busan
Ten African states have signed the Bridge to Busan declaration on primary plastic polymers, calling on governments to achieve sustainable levels of production. South Africa is not yet among them.
“South Africa’s interests come first and addressing plastic pollution and related control measures need not undermine South Africa’s industrial policy direction,” Mbelengwa said.
The coalition said the country is not a signatory “given their clear articulation against the support for mandatory global or national targets to reduce production”.
“Rather … there have been recurring instances and support for expanding recycling and waste management facilities in the country propagated by industry, including mentions of the Plastics SA industry expanding their footprint in the coming years.”
South Africa is a primary plastic producing country with significant imports of primary plastic for local manufacturing. “This position and the job creation priority of the government, supported by the industry lobby, has resulted in the unwillingness of South Africa to support production caps or similar.”
But the government’s position on the global phase-outs of problematic and avoidable plastic products and polymers is not aligned with the industry lobby. “The focus by the industry lobby remains on waste management with responsibility for this stage of the value chain placed squarely at the door of the public sector and citizens,” the coalition said.
South Africa’s unwillingness to prioritise clear, binding targets and control measures to reduce plastic production can be directly linked to the projected plastics and petrochemical industry expansion and “attributed to safeguarding economic interests at the mercy of protecting people and the health of the environment.
“Current plastic production levels are exposing us daily to more than 16 000 chemicals, with 4 200 of them identified as a hazard for the environment and human health.”
More production means more exposure to these chemicals and more exposure for communities living around and working in production facilities.
The coalition said the treaty must deliver results by the end of negotiations to stop unsustainable production and consumption, establishing clear and mandatory measures from the beginning.
“Measures to start with should include, but not be limited to: 1) stop production growth and 2) define the necessary reductions for each country to ensure the achievement of a global reduction goal.”
South Africa, it said, should lead the way in negotiating for the rights of vulnerable populations. “Plastic pollution increases flooding, plastic production leads to more carbon emissions and poor waste management increases toxic fumes from burning.”