Global Alliance for Incinerator Alternatives (GAIA)

Se insta a Turquía a adoptar políticas de «basura cero» más ambiciosas en materia climática Se publica una declaración mientras los líderes mundiales se reúnen en la sesión entre períodos de la COP en Bonn

PARA SU PUBLICACIÓN INMEDIATA: 17 de junio de 2026

Estambul, Turquía– Mientras los líderes mundiales se reúnen en Bonn, Alemania, para sentar las bases de las negociaciones de la COP31, la Alianza Global por Alternativas a las Incineradoras (GAIA) ha publicado una declaración pública en colaboración con Greenpeace Turquía, el Fondo Mundial para la Naturaleza (WWF) Turquía, el Grupo de Investigación sobre Microplásticos y la Plataforma Turquía Libre de Plástico, y firmada por 124 organizaciones de casi 60 países que representan a profesionales del movimiento «basura cero», expertos en políticas y grupos comunitarios.

La declaración destaca la brecha entre la promoción que hace Turquía del modelo «basura cero» en el escenario internacional y las políticas nacionales que siguen respaldando prácticas incompatibles con una acción climática ambiciosa, la justicia ambiental y la salud pública.Los firmantes instan a Turquía, como anfitriona de la COP31, a establecer un nivel alto de ambición climática mediante el impulso de una agenda integral de «basura cero» que aborde las causas fundamentales de los residuos y las emisiones.

En una conferencia de prensa el pasado martes 9 de junio, antes de la reunión entre sesiones de Bonn, el presidente designado de la COP31, Murat Kurum, anunció el objetivo de reducir a la mitad los residuos globales para 2035. Si bien este objetivo es visionario, a los defensores del «basura cero» les sigue sin quedar claro cuál es la línea de base, el alcance y la implementación de dicho objetivo, y si incluirá la reducción de la producción de plástico y una transición justa para los recolectores de residuos y los trabajadores, así como otras estrategias clave.

Sedat Gündoğdu, del Grupo de Investigación sobre Microplásticos, afirma:

“Es positivo que Turquía haya priorizado el ‘basura cero’ en la agenda de la COP31; sin embargo, parece que la actual gestión de los residuos plásticos podría no ser del todo coherente con este ambicioso objetivo político. Específicamente, las nuevas inversiones en plantas petroquímicas, el comercio de residuos que sigue vigente y la exclusión de los recolectores de residuos del sistema parecen estar en contradicción con este objetivo. Para que la agenda de la COP31 se implemente con éxito, es necesaria una estrategia de eliminación gradual del plástico. El concepto de basura cero debe perseguirse genuinamente, no solo presentarse como una fachada».

Mariel Vilella, directora del Programa Global de Clima de GAIA, afirma:

«El basura cero es una de las soluciones climáticas más rápidas y efectivas disponibles hoy en día, pero debe ir más allá de la gestión de residuos. Una agenda creíble de basura cero implica reducir la producción de plástico en su origen, disminuir las emisiones de metano mediante el desvío de los residuos orgánicos y poner fin a la dependencia de tecnologías contaminantes como la incineración de residuos para generar energía y la pirólisis. Como anfitrión de la COP31, Turquía tiene la oportunidad de demostrar que el liderazgo climático significa abordar conjuntamente las crisis de los combustibles fósiles y los residuos, al tiempo que se garantiza una transición justa que proteja a los recolectores de residuos, a los trabajadores y a las comunidades más afectadas».

Tras la política «Espada Nacional» de China, que restringió la mayoría de las importaciones de residuos plásticos al país, Turquía se convirtió en uno de los principales destinos mundiales para los residuos plásticos importados. La declaración insta a Turquía a abordar su papel en el comercio mundial de residuos, poner fin al colonialismo de los residuos y priorizar la justicia ambiental para las comunidades afectadas de manera desproporcionada por la contaminación por residuos.

Berk Butan, activista de Greenpeace Turquía, afirma:

«El verdadero liderazgo climático en la COP31 comienza por reconocer que el 99 por ciento de los plásticos se fabrican a partir de combustibles fósiles. Una verdadera estrategia de basura cero requiere cerrar el grifo de la producción de plástico y poner fin a la injusticia del colonialismo de los residuos que convierte a Turquía en el vertedero de plástico de Europa».

La Declaración exige:

• Estrategias de basura cero vinculadas a la eliminación gradual de los combustibles fósiles y a la reducción de la producción de plástico
• Compromisos más sólidos de reducción de metano y medidas de rendición de cuentas, particularmente a través del desvío de residuos orgánicos y la prevención de la emisión de metano en los vertederos
• El rechazo a las falsas soluciones, como la incineración para generar energía, la pirólisis y otras tecnologías intensivas en carbono
• El fin del colonialismo de los residuos y un compromiso con la justicia ambiental para las comunidades afectadas
• Una transición justa que reconozca, proteja e incluya a los recolectores y trabajadores de residuos en las políticas, el financiamiento y la implementación

Nota para el editor:

La Declaración Conjunta: Alineando el «basura cero» con una Acción Climática de Alto Nivel de Ambición para la COP31 se puede consultar en: https://www.no-burn.org/joint-declaration-zero-waste-climate-action-cop31/

Contacto de prensa:

Claire Arkin, Global Communications Lead

claire@no-burn.org | +1 510-604-7833

###

The post 124 grupos de la sociedad civil instan a la presidencia de la COP31 a convertir la ambición de «basura cero” en acción climática first appeared on GAIA.

Turkiye Urged to Adopt More Climate-Ambitious Zero Waste Policies Declaration Released As World Leaders Meet at Bonn Intersessional 

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE: June 17, 2026

Bonn, Germany– As world leaders gather in Bonn, Germany to lay the groundwork for negotiations at COP31, Global Alliance for Incinerator Alternatives (GAIA) has released a public declaration in collaboration with Greenpeace Türkiye, World Wildlife Fund Türkiye, the Microplastic Research Group, and the Plastic Free Türkiye Platform, and  signed on by 124 organizations in almost 60 countries representing zero waste practitioners, policy experts, and community groups. 

The declaration highlights the gap between Türkiye’s promotion of zero waste on the international stage and domestic policies that continue to support practices inconsistent with ambitious climate action, environmental justice, and public health.The signatories urge Türkiye, as host of COP31, to set a high bar for climate ambition by advancing a comprehensive zero waste agenda that addresses the root causes of waste and emissions.

At a press conference last Tuesday, June 9 ahead of the Bonn intersessional, COP31 President-Designate Murat Kurum announced a goal of halving global waste by 2035. While this target is visionary, zero waste advocates remain unclear on the baseline, scope, and implementation of such a goal, and whether it will include reducing plastic production and providing a just transition for waste pickers and workers, as well as other key strategies.

Sedat Gündoğdu of the Microplastic Research Group states:  

“It is good that Turkey has prioritized zero waste on the COP31 agenda; however, it appears that the current plastic waste governance may not be entirely consistent with this ambitious political objective. Specifically, new investments in petrochemical plants, the ongoing waste trade, and the exclusion of waste pickers from the system seem to be at odds with this goal. For the COP31 agenda to be successfully implemented, a phasing out strategy from plastic is necessary. The concept of zero waste should be genuinely pursued, not merely presented as a facade.”

Mariel Vilella, Global Climate Program Director at GAIA, states:

“Zero waste is one of the fastest and most effective climate solutions available today, but it must go beyond waste management. A credible zero waste agenda means reducing plastic production at its source, cutting methane emissions through organics diversion, and ending reliance on polluting technologies such as waste-to-energy incineration and pyrolysis. As COP31 host, Türkiye has an opportunity to show that climate leadership means tackling the fossil fuel and waste crises together while ensuring a just transition that protects waste pickers, workers, and frontline communities.”

Following China’s National Sword policy, which restricted most plastic waste imports into the country, Türkiye emerged as one of the world’s leading destinations for imported plastic waste.  The declaration calls on Türkiye to address its role in the global waste trade, end waste colonialism, and prioritize environmental justice for communities disproportionately affected by waste pollution. 

Berk Butan, Campaigner at Greenpeace Türkiye, states:

 “Real climate leadership at COP31 begins with acknowledging that 99 percent of plastics are made from fossil fuels. A true zero waste strategy requires turning off the tap on plastic production and ending the injustice of waste colonialism that turns Türkiye into Europe’s plastic dumping ground.”

The Declaration calls for: 

• Zero waste strategies that are linked to fossil fuel phase-out and reduced plastic production
• Stronger methane reduction commitments and accountability measures, particularly through organics diversion and landfill methane prevention
• Rejection of false solutions such as waste-to-energy incineration, pyrolysis, and other carbon-intensive technologies
• An end to waste colonialism and a commitment to environmental justice for affected communities
• A just transition that recognizes, protects, and includes waste pickers and waste workers in policy, financing, and implementation

Note to the Editor:

The Joint Declaration: Aligning Zero Waste with High-Ambitious Climate Action for COP31 can be found at: https://www.no-burn.org/joint-declaration-zero-waste-climate-action-cop31/

Press contact:

Claire Arkin, Global Communications Lead

claire@no-burn.org | +1 510-604-7833

###

GAIA is a worldwide alliance of more than 1,000 grassroots groups, non-governmental organizations, and individuals in over 100 countries. With our work, we aim to catalyze a global shift towards environmental justice by strengthening grassroots social movements that advance solutions to waste and pollution. We envision a just, zero waste world built on respect for ecological limits and community rights, where people are free from the burden of toxic pollution, and resources are sustainably conserved, not burned or dumped. 

The post 124 Civil Society Groups Call on COP31 Presidency to Turn Zero Waste Ambition into Climate Action first appeared on GAIA.

english español Türkçe français ENGLISH

As Türkiye prepares to host COP31, we, the undersigned civil society organizations, acknowledge the Turkish Presidency’s decision to elevate Zero Waste and waste-derived methane reduction as top priorities within the Action Agenda. We affirm that zero waste is an indispensable strategy for climate mitigation, adaptation, and co-benefits, given that approximately 70% of global greenhouse gas emissions are linked to the materials economy—the extraction, production, and disposal of “stuff.” However, we stress that this focus must reinforce, not replace, a binding global roadmap for fossil fuel phase-out. 

1. Zero Waste as a Fossil Fuel Phase-Out Strategy 

Zero Waste is one of the central actions for climate mitigation. It is a vision and roadmap for designing waste out of the system through strategies that change how we produce and consume goods and process discarded materials. This approach meets environmental justice and eventually ends the disposal of waste in landfills and incinerators, while keeping the materials economy within planetary boundaries. The production and disposal of materials—plastics, cement, steel, paper, and others—generate roughly 29% of all global greenhouse gas emissions, and 99% of plastics are made from fossil fuels. Therefore, zero waste and plastic reduction policies are, by definition, fossil fuel phase-out strategies. A high-ambition COP31 agenda must include binding targets to cap and reduce plastic production, aligned with the UN Global Plastic Treaty, to ensure that the “Zero Waste” narrative does not become a cover for continued petrochemical expansion. 

2. Closing the Methane Accountability Gap and Advancing ROW Commitments 

While we welcome Türkiye’s focus on waste-related methane, we note the contradiction in prioritizing this sector while the country remains one of the few major economies that has not signed the Global Methane Pledge—an important accountability gap. To lead a 

credible COP31 presidency, Türkiye must commit to the pledge and translate this commitment into concrete, high-impact actions. Its signature of the COP29 ROW Declaration on Reducing Methane from Organic Waste demonstrates initial commitment, but ambitious implementation is needed. 

In addition to acknowledging the ROW Declaration, Türkiye should:

● Set quantified methane reduction targets for the waste sector with clear interim milestones. 

● Integrate these targets into its NDC. 

● Legislate mandatory source separation and phase out landfilling of untreated organic waste. 

● Establish dedicated financing and MRV frameworks to support implementation and ensure accountability. 

● Ensure the social dimension of waste management is honored, including formal recognition, protections, and inclusion of waste pickers in policy design and delivery, with access to training, safety, and financial support. 

● Explicitly avoid high-carbon “false solutions” such as open burning or waste-to-energy incineration. 

3. Avoiding Counterproductive or Carbon-Intensive Pathways 

These measures can reduce waste-sector methane by up to 95%, far more effective than technological fixes, and ensure that Türkiye’s leadership at COP31 is credible, ambitious, and socially inclusive. 

We caution against policy approaches that favor high-carbon waste treatment technologies under the guise of climate solutions. Rebranding incineration (“waste-to-energy”), pyrolysis, or chemical recycling as mitigation strategies risks locking in emissions-intensive infrastructure, creating long-term dependence on fossil-fuel-derived energy, and diverting investment away from upstream solutions. Incineration is extremely expensive and represents an unsustainable use of both public and climate finance. It also generates toxic air pollutants, including dioxins, furans, and particulate matter, that disproportionately harm frontline and vulnerable communities, undermines local recycling and informal waste recovery economies, and produces hazardous residual ash. COP31 should instead prioritize upstream measures such as waste prevention, organic waste diversion, and inclusive management practices, which reduce emissions at the source while delivering social, economic, and environmental co-benefits. 

4. Ending Waste Colonialism 

Türkiye is uniquely positioned to lead globally in zero-waste solutions by ending its role as a top destination for plastic waste exports from the EU and UK. Imported plastic waste is not only largely unrecyclable – often up to 50% – but also represents an endless source of plastic pollution. When illegally burned, it produces black carbon, a super pollutant that accelerates global warming, along with other toxic emissions that disproportionately harm vulnerable communities. By implementing a comprehensive

ban on plastic waste imports, Türkiye can prioritize domestic reduction, strengthen national recycling systems, protect public health, and demonstrate leadership in environmental justice and climate action. 

5. Centering a Just Transition for Waste Pickers and Other Waste Workers 

COP30 delivered a breakthrough with the creation of a rights-based Just Transition Mechanism, a long-sought win for informal economy workers, communities, and movements across the Global South. Yet governments left unanswered the core question: who will pay for the transition. Without new, grant-based public finance and structural reform of the global financial system, the mechanism risks becoming another promise without the resources to deliver justice. Türkiye’s championing of zero waste should take the baton on this agenda and go further, advancing a transformation of the waste sector in line with UNFCCC and environmental justice principles. A genuine zero-waste approach means that waste pickers and other waste workers must be prioritized, formally recognized, and protected, as they are central actors in the country’s waste management system. This includes ensuring social security, occupational safety, fair employment and living income opportunities, and meaningful participation in decision-making for the new materials economy. 

Conclusion 

We call on the COP31 Presidency and Champion to present a unified climate roadmap that combines a robust fossil fuel phase-out with justice-centered zero-waste implementation. All Parties must ensure that the “Zero Waste” label does not mask low-ambition climate targets. Success at COP31 will depend on moving beyond showcase policies toward systemic shifts that protect both the planet and its people. 

Signatories

Türkçe

Ortak Bildiri: Sıfır Atık Hedefi COP31’in İklim Eyleminde Yüksek Hedeflerle Uyumlu Olmalıdır

Türkiye, COP31’e ev sahipliği yapmaya hazırlanırken, aşağıda imzası bulunan sivil toplum kuruluşları olarak, Türkiye Başkanlığı’nın sıfır atık hedefini ve atıklardan kaynaklanan metan emisyonlarının azaltılmasını Eylem Gündemi’nin en önemli öncelikleri arasında konumlandırma kararını memnuniyetle karşılıyoruz. Küresel sera gazı emisyonlarının yaklaşık %70’inin kaynak çıkarımı, üretim ve bertaraf süreçlerini kapsayan malzeme ekonomisiyle bağlantılı olduğu göz önüne alındığında, sıfır atık yaklaşımının iklim değişikliğinin etkilerinin azaltılması, iklim değişikliğine uyum ve ortak faydalar için vazgeçilmez bir strateji olduğunu düşünüyoruz. Ancak, bu yaklaşımın fosil yakıtlardan aşamalı çıkışa  yönelik bağlayıcı bir küresel yol haritasının yerine geçmemesi, aksine bu yol haritasını  güçlendirmesi gerektiğini vurguluyoruz.

1. Sıfır Atık, Fosil Yakıtlardan Çıkışın Temel Stratejilerinden Biri Olmalıdır 

Sıfır atık, iklim değişikliğinin etkilerini azaltmaya yönelik en temel yaklaşımlardan biridir. Üretim ve tüketim biçimlerimizi dönüştüren, atık haline gelen materyallerin nasıl yönetildiğini yeniden tanımlayan stratejiler aracılığıyla, atığın sistemin dışına çıkarılmasını hedefleyen bir vizyon ve yol haritası sunar. Bu yaklaşım, çevresel adaleti gözetirken aynı zamanda atıkların depolama sahalarında ve yakma tesislerinde bertaraf edilmesine son verilmesini ve kaynak kullanımının gezegenin sınırları içinde tutulmasını amaçlar. Plastik, çimento, çelik, kağıt ve diğer malzemelerin üretimi ve bertarafı, küresel sera gazı emisyonlarının yaklaşık %29’unu oluşturmaktadır. Ayrıca plastiklerin %99’u fosil kaynaklardan üretilmektedir. Bu nedenle, sıfır atık ve plastik azaltım  politikaları, doğrudan fosil yakıtlardan aşamalı çıkış stratejilerinin bir parçasıdır.  “Sıfır atık” söyleminin petrokimya sektöründeki büyümeyi meşrulaştıran bir araca dönüşmemesi için, yüksek hedefli bir COP31 gündemi, BM Küresel Plastik Anlaşması ile uyumlu şekilde  plastik üretimini sınarlandıran ve azaltan  bağlayıcı hedefler içermelidir.

2. Metan Emisyonlarında Hesap Verebilirlik Güçlendirilmeli ve Organik Atıklardan Kaynaklanan Metanın Azaltımına Yönelik Taahhütler Hayata Geçirilmelidir 

Türkiye’nin atık kaynaklı metanları azaltmaya odaklanması memnuniyetle karşılıyoruz. Ankcak ülkenin hâlâ Küresel Metan Taahhüdünü imzalamamış birkaç büyük ekonomiden biri olması önemli bir çelişki ve hesap verebilirlik eksikliği yaratmaktadır. Türkiye’nin COP31 Başkanlığı’nı güvenilir ve güçlü bir şekilde yürütebilmesi için, Küresel Metan Taahhüdü’ne taraf olması ve bu taahhüdü somut, yüksek etkili politikalara dönüştürmesi gerekmektedir. Türkiye’nin COP29 kapsamında kabul edilen Organik Atıklardan Kaynaklanan Metanın Azaltılmasına İlişkin ROW Deklarasyonu’na imza atmış olması önemli bir başlangıç niteliği taşımaktadır. Ancak bu taahhüdün etkili olabilmesi için iddialı ve kapsamlı bir uygulama süreci gereklidir. 

Türkiye, ROW Deklarasyonu’nu kabul etmiş olmanın yanı sıra:

• Atık sektörü için net ara hedefler içeren nicel metan azaltım hedefleri belirlemelidir.
• Bu hedefleri Ulusal Katkı Beyanı’na (NDC) entegre etmelidir.
• Kaynağında ayrıştırmayı zorunlu hale getirmeli ve işlenmemiş organik atıkların depolama alanlarına gönderilmesini aşamalı olarak sona erdirmelidir 
• Uygulamayı desteklemek ve hesap verebilirliği sağlamak amacıyla özel finansman mekanizmaları ile Ölçme, Raporlama ve Doğrulama (MRV) sistemleri oluşturmalı, 
• Atık yönetiminin sosyal boyutunu gözeterek; atık toplayıcıların resmi olarak tanınmasını, korunmasını ve politika geliştirme ile uygulama süreçlerine dahil edilmesini sağlamalı; eğitim, güvenlik ve finansal destek imkanlarına erişimlerini güvence altına almalı, 
• Atık yakma veya atıktan enerji elde etme gibi yüksek karbon salımına yol açan “yanlış çözümlerden” açıkça kaçınmalı, buralara verilen teşvikleri sonlandırmalıdır.

Bu önlemler, atık sektöründen kaynaklanan metan emisyonlarını %95’e kadar azaltma potansiyeline sahip ve teknoloji yoğun çözümlerden çok daha etkilidir. Ayrıca teknoloji odaklı sınırlı çözümlere kıyasla çok daha etkili sonuçlar sağlayarak Türkiye’nin COP31 kapsamındaki liderliğinin güvenilir, iddialı ve sosyal açıdan kapsayıcı olmasına katkı sunacaktır. 

3. Karbon Yoğun Yanlış Çözüm Yaratan Atık Yönetimi Yöntemlerinden Kaçınılmalıdır

İklim çözümü adı altında yüksek karbon salımına yol açan atık işleme teknolojilerini teşvik eden politika yaklaşımlarına karşı dikkatli olunmalıdır.  Yakma tesislerinin (“atıktan enerji üretimi”), piroliz ve kimyasal geri dönüşüm uygulamalarının iklim değişikliğiyle mücadele aracı olarak sunulması; emisyon yoğun altyapıların uzun yıllar boyunca kalıcı hale gelmesine, fosil yakıt temelli enerji sistemlerine bağımlılığın sürmesine ve yatırımların kaynağında önleme çözümlerinden uzaklaşmasına neden olmaktadır. Atık yakma tesisleri son derece maliyetli olup hem kamu kaynaklarının hem de iklim finansmanının sürdürülemez biçimde kullanılmasına yol açmaktadır. Ayrıca dioksinler, furanlar ve partikül maddeler gibi toksik hava kirleticileri üreterek özellikle kırılgan topluluklar ile tesislerin etki alanında yaşayan kesimler üzerinde orantısız sağlık ve çevre yükleri yaratmaktadır. Bunun yanında yerel atık geri kazanım ekonomilerini baltalar ve bertarafı mümkün olmayan tehlikeli atık kül üretir. Dolayısıyla COP31 kapsamında öncelik verilmesi gereken yaklaşım; atık oluşumunun önlenmesi, organik atıkların düzenli depolama yerine kompost ve benzeri yöntemlerle değerlendirilmesi ve kapsayıcı atık yönetimi uygulamalarının yaygınlaştırılmasıdır. Bu tür politikalar emisyonları kaynağında azaltırken aynı zamanda sosyal, ekonomik ve çevresel faydalar da sağlamaktadır. 

4. AB’nin Atık Sığınağı Olmaya Neden Olan Politikalara ve Atık Sömürgeciliğine Son Verilmelidir

Türkiye, Avrupa Birliği ve Birleşik Krallık’tan gelen plastik atık ihracatının başlıca varış noktalarından biri olma rolünü sona erdirerek sıfır atık politikalarında küresel ölçekte öncü bir konuma gelebilir  Sıfır atık ancak sıfır atık ithalatıyla mümkün olur. Türkiye’ye ithal edilen plastik atıkların önemli bir bölümü düşük kaliteli ve geri dönüştürülemez niteliktedir; bazı durumlarda bu oran %50’ye kadar ulaşabilmektedir. Bu atıklar yalnızca sürekli büyüyen bir plastik ve mikroplastik kirliliği kaynağı yaratmakla kalmamakta, aynı zamanda açıkta ya da yasa dışı biçimde yakıldıklarında ciddi çevresel ve sağlık risklerine yol açmaktadır. Bu süreçlerde, küresel ısınmayı hızlandıran güçlü bir kirletici olan siyah karbonun yanı sıra, özellikle kırılgan toplulukları orantısız biçimde etkileyen toksik emisyonlar ortaya çıkmaktadır.  Türkiye plastik atık ithalatına kapsamlı bir yasak getirerek, yurt içindeki atık azaltım politikalarını güçlendirebilir, ulusal geri dönüşüm sistemlerini güçlendirebilir, halk sağlığını koruyabilir ve çevresel adalet ve iklim eylemi konusunda güçlü bir liderlik gösterebilir.

5. Atık İşçileri için Adil Geçişi Merkeze Almalıdır

COP30 kapsamında hak temelli bir Adil Geçiş Mekanizması’nın oluşturulması önemli bir dönüm noktası olmuştur.  Bu, Küresel Güney ülkelerindeki işçiler, topluluklar ve hareketler için uzun zamandır talep edilen önemli bir kazanımı temsil etmektedir. Ancak hükümetler, geçiş sürecinin finansmanının nasıl sağlanacağına ilişkin temel soruyu cevapsız bıraktı. Yeni ve hibe temelli kamu finansmanı sağlanmadan ve küresel finans sisteminde yapısal reformlar gerçekleştirilmeden, bu mekanizmanın gerekli kaynaklardan yoksun bir taahhüt olarak kalma riski bulunmaktadır. Türkiye, sıfır atık alanındaki öncü rolünü yalnızca atık azaltım politikalarıyla sınırlamamalı; aynı zamanda BM İklim Değişikliği Çerçeve Sözleşmesi (BMİDÇS) ve çevresel adalet ilkeleri doğrultusunda atık sektöründe adil bir dönüşümün ilerletilmesine de öncülük etmelidir.  Gerçek bir sıfır atık yaklaşımı, atık toplayıcılarının ülkenin atık yönetim sisteminde merkezi aktör haline getirilmesi ile mümkündür. Dolayısıyla sıfır atıkta öncü olmak ancak ve ancak atık toplayıcıların önceliklendirilmesi, resmi olarak tanınması ve korunması ile mümkündür. Bu aynı zamanda sosyal güvenlik, iş güvenliği, adil istihdam fırsatları, asgari yaşam ücreti ve yeni malzeme ekonomisi için karar alma süreçlerine anlamlı katılımın sağlanmasını da içerir.

Sonuç

COP31 Başkanlığı’nı ve İklim Şampiyonluğu mekanizmasını, fosil yakıtlardan aşamalı çıkışı adalet temelli sıfır atık politikalarıyla birleştiren bütüncül bir iklim yol haritası ortaya koymaya çağırıyoruz. Tüm taraflar, “Sıfır Atık” etiketinin yüksek hedefli iklim hedeflerini maskelemesinin önüne geçmelidir. COP31’in başarısı, vitrin niteliğindeki politikaların ötesine geçilerek; hem insanları hem de gezegeni koruyan yapısal dönüşümlerin hayata geçirilmesine bağlı olacaktır. 

İlk imzacılar ESPAÑOL Declaración conjunta: Alinear la meta de «Basura Cero» con una acción climática ambiciosa rumbo a la COP 31

Mientras Turquía se prepara para acoger la COP 31, nosotros, las organizaciones de la sociedad civil abajo firmantes, reconocemos la decisión de la Presidencia turca de elevar el objetivo «Basura Cero» y la reducción del metano derivado de los residuos a la categoría de prioridades principales dentro de la Agenda de Acción. Afirmamos que «Basura Cero» es una estrategia indispensable para la mitigación y la adaptación climáticas, así como para obtener beneficios colaterales, dado que aproximadamente el 70 % de las emisiones globales de gases de efecto invernadero están vinculadas a la economía de los materiales: la extracción, la producción y la eliminación de «cosas». Sin embargo, hacemos hincapié en que este enfoque debe reforzar, y no sustituir, una hoja de ruta global vinculante para la eliminación gradual de los combustibles fósiles.

1. Basura Cero como estrategia para la eliminación gradual de los combustibles fósiles

Basura Cero es una de las acciones centrales para la mitigación climática. Es una visión y una hoja de ruta para eliminar los residuos del sistema mediante estrategias que cambian la forma en que producimos y consumimos bienes y procesamos los materiales desechados. Este enfoque cumple con la justicia ambiental y, a la larga, pone fin a la eliminación de residuos en vertederos e incineradoras, al tiempo que mantiene la economía de los materiales dentro de los límites planetarios. La producción y eliminación de materiales —plásticos, cemento, acero, papel y otros— generan aproximadamente el 29 % de todas las emisiones globales de gases de efecto invernadero, y el 99 % de los plásticos se fabrican a partir de combustibles fósiles. Por lo tanto, las políticas de basura cero y reducción de plásticos son, por definición, estrategias de eliminación gradual de los combustibles fósiles. Una agenda ambiciosa para la COP 31 debe incluir objetivos vinculantes para limitar y reducir la producción de plástico, en consonancia con el Tratado Global de las Naciones Unidas sobre el Plástico, a fin de garantizar que la narrativa de «basura cero» no se convierta en una excusa para la expansión petroquímica continua.

2. Cerrar la brecha de rendición de cuentas sobre el metano y avanzar en los compromisos del ROW

Si bien celebramos el enfoque de Turquía en el metano relacionado con los residuos, observamos la contradicción de priorizar este sector mientras el país sigue siendo una de las pocas economías importantes que no ha firmado el Compromiso Global sobre el Metano —una importante brecha de rendición de cuentas—. Para liderar una presidencia creíble de la COP 31, Turquía debe comprometerse con el Pacto y traducir este compromiso en acciones concretas y de gran impacto. Su firma de la Declaración ROW de la COP 29 sobre la reducción del metano procedente de residuos orgánicos demuestra un compromiso inicial, pero se necesita una implementación ambiciosa.

Además de reconocer la Declaración ROW, Turquía debería:

• Establecer objetivos cuantificados de reducción de metano para el sector de los residuos con hitos intermedios claros.
• Integrar estos objetivos en su NDC.
• Legislar la separación obligatoria en origen y eliminar gradualmente el vertido de residuos orgánicos sin tratar.
• Establecer marcos específicos de financiamiento y MRV para apoyar la implementación y garantizar la rendición de cuentas.
• Asegurar que se respete la dimensión social de la gestión de residuos, incluyendo el reconocimiento formal, la protección y la inclusión de los recolectores de residuos en la economía informal en el diseño y la ejecución de las políticas, con acceso a capacitación, seguridad y apoyo financiero.
• Evitar explícitamente las «falsas soluciones» con altas emisiones de carbono, como la quema al aire libre o la incineración para la generación de energía.

Estas medidas pueden reducir el metano del sector de los residuos hasta en un 95 %, lo que es mucho más eficaz que las soluciones tecnológicas, y garantizar que el liderazgo de Turquía en la COP 31 sea creíble, ambicioso y socialmente inclusivo.

3. Evitar vías contraproducentes o con altas emisiones de carbono

Advertimos contra los enfoques de políticas que favorecen tecnologías de tratamiento de residuos con altas emisiones de carbono bajo el pretexto de ser soluciones climáticas. Renombrar la incineración («energía a partir de residuos»), la pirólisis o el reciclaje químico como estrategias de mitigación corre el riesgo de consolidar una infraestructura intensiva en emisiones, creando una dependencia a largo plazo de la energía derivada de combustibles fósiles y desviando la inversión de las soluciones en las etapas iniciales. La incineración es extremadamente costosa y representa un uso insostenible tanto de los fondos públicos como de los fondos climáticos. Además, genera contaminantes atmosféricos tóxicos, como dioxinas, furanos y partículas, que perjudican de manera desproporcionada a las comunidades vulnerables y en primera línea, socava las economías locales de reciclaje y recuperación informal de residuos, y produce cenizas residuales peligrosas. La COP31 debería, en cambio, priorizar medidas en las etapas iniciales, como la prevención de residuos, el desvío de residuos orgánicos y las prácticas de gestión inclusivas, que reducen las emisiones en la fuente al tiempo que aportan beneficios sociales, económicos y ambientales.

4. Acabar con el colonialismo de los residuos

Turquía se encuentra en una posición única para liderar a nivel mundial las soluciones de basura cero al poner fin a su papel como principal destino de las exportaciones de residuos plásticos de la UE y el Reino Unido. Los residuos plásticos importados no solo son en gran medida no reciclables —a menudo hasta un 50 %—, sino que también representan una fuente inagotable de contaminación plástica. Cuando se queman ilegalmente, producen carbono negro, un supercontaminante que acelera el calentamiento global, junto con otras emisiones tóxicas que perjudican de manera desproporcionada a las comunidades vulnerables. Al implementar una prohibición integral de las importaciones de residuos plásticos, Turquía puede priorizar la reducción interna, fortalecer los sistemas nacionales de reciclaje, proteger la salud pública y demostrar liderazgo en justicia ambiental y acción climática.

5. Centrarse en una transición justa para los recolectores y trabajadores del sector de residuos

La COP30 logró un avance decisivo con la creación de un Mecanismo de Transición Justa basado en los derechos, una victoria largamente esperada para los trabajadores, las comunidades y los movimientos de todo el Sur Global. Sin embargo, los gobiernos dejaron sin respuesta la pregunta fundamental: ¿quién pagará por la transición? Sin una nueva financiación pública basada en donaciones y una reforma estructural del sistema financiero global, el mecanismo corre el riesgo de convertirse en otra promesa sin los recursos necesarios para hacer justicia. La defensa de la política de basura cero por parte de Turquía debería tomar el relevo en esta agenda e ir más allá, impulsando una transformación del sector de los residuos en consonancia con la CMNUCC y los principios de justicia ambiental. Un enfoque genuinamente de basura cero significa que los recolectores y recicladores de residuos en la economía informal deben ser priorizados, reconocidos formalmente y protegidos, ya que son actores centrales en el sistema de gestión de residuos del país. Esto incluye garantizar la seguridad social, la seguridad laboral, oportunidades de empleo justas, un ingreso digno, y una participación significativa en la toma de decisiones para la nueva economía de materiales.

Conclusión

Hacemos un llamado a la Presidencia y al Defensor de la COP 31 para que presenten una hoja de ruta climática unificada que combine una eliminación gradual sólida de los combustibles fósiles con una implementación de «basura cero» centrada en la justicia. Todas las Partes deben garantizar que la etiqueta «basura cero» no enmascare objetivos climáticos de baja ambición. El éxito de la COP 31 dependerá de ir más allá de las políticas de escaparate hacia cambios sistémicos que protejan tanto al planeta como a su gente.

Firmantes

FRANÇAIS Déclaration commune : Aligner le « zéro déchet » sur une action climatique ambitieuse en vue de la COP 31

Alors que la Turquie s’apprête à accueillir la COP 31, nous, organisations de la société civile soussignées, saluons la décision de la présidence turque de faire du « zéro déchet » et de la réduction des émissions de méthane issues des déchets des priorités absolues du programme d’action. Nous affirmons que le zéro déchet est une stratégie indispensable pour l’atténuation et l’adaptation au changement climatique, ainsi que pour les avantages connexes, étant donné qu’environ 70 % des émissions mondiales de gaz à effet de serre sont liées à l’économie des matériaux — l’extraction, la production et l’élimination des « objets ». Cependant, nous soulignons que cette priorité doit renforcer, et non remplacer, une feuille de route mondiale contraignante pour l’élimination progressive des combustibles fossiles.

1. Le « zéro déchet » comme stratégie d’élimination progressive des combustibles fossiles

Le « zéro déchet » est l’une des actions centrales pour l’atténuation du changement climatique. Il s’agit d’une vision et d’une feuille de route visant à éliminer les déchets du système grâce à des stratégies qui modifient la manière dont nous produisons et consommons les biens et traitons les matériaux mis au rebut. Cette approche répond aux principes de justice environnementale et mettra fin à terme à l’élimination des déchets dans les décharges et les incinérateurs, tout en maintenant l’économie des matériaux dans les limites planétaires. La production et l’élimination des matériaux — plastiques, ciment, acier, papier et autres — génèrent environ 29 % de l’ensemble des émissions mondiales de gaz à effet de serre, et 99 % des plastiques sont fabriqués à partir de combustibles fossiles. Par conséquent, les politiques de zéro déchet et de réduction des plastiques sont, par définition, des stratégies d’élimination progressive des combustibles fossiles. Un programme ambitieux pour la COP 31 doit inclure des objectifs contraignants visant à plafonner et à réduire la production de plastique, en accord avec le Traité mondial des Nations unies sur les plastiques, afin de garantir que le discours du « zéro déchet » ne serve pas de prétexte à la poursuite de l’expansion pétrochimique.

2. Combler le déficit de responsabilité en matière de méthane et faire progresser les engagements ROW

Si nous saluons l’attention portée par la Turquie au méthane issu des déchets, nous relevons la contradiction qu’il y a à donner la priorité à ce secteur alors que le pays reste l’une des rares grandes économies à ne pas avoir signé le Global Methane Pledge — un déficit de responsabilité important. Pour assurer une présidence crédible de la COP 31, la Turquie doit s’engager à respecter cet engagement et le traduire en actions concrètes et à fort impact. Sa signature de la Déclaration ROW de la COP 29 sur la réduction du méthane issu des déchets organiques témoigne d’un engagement initial, mais une mise en œuvre ambitieuse est nécessaire.

En plus de reconnaître la Déclaration ROW, la Turquie devrait :

• Fixer des objectifs chiffrés de réduction du méthane pour le secteur des déchets, assortis d’étapes intermédiaires claires.
• Intégrer ces objectifs dans ses NDCs.
• Légiférer pour rendre obligatoire le tri à la source et éliminer progressivement la mise en décharge des déchets organiques non traités.
• Mettre en place des cadres de financement et de MRV (mesure, rapport et vérification) dédiés pour soutenir la mise en œuvre et garantir la responsabilité.
• Veiller à ce que la dimension sociale de la gestion des déchets soit respectée, notamment par la reconnaissance officielle, la protection et l’inclusion des ramasseurs de déchets dans la conception et la mise en œuvre des politiques, avec un accès à la formation, à la sécurité et au soutien financier.
• Éviter explicitement les « fausses solutions » à forte intensité carbone telles que le brûlage à l’air libre ou l’incinération des déchets à des fins énergétiques.

Ces mesures peuvent réduire les émissions de méthane du secteur des déchets jusqu’à 95 %, ce qui est bien plus efficace que les solutions technologiques, et garantir que le leadership de la Turquie lors de la COP 31 soit crédible, ambitieux et socialement inclusif.

3. Éviter les voies contre-productives ou à forte intensité carbone

Nous mettons en garde contre les approches politiques qui favorisent les technologies de traitement des déchets à forte intensité carbone sous le couvert de solutions climatiques. Présenter l’incinération (« valorisation énergétique des déchets »), la pyrolyse ou le recyclage chimique comme des stratégies d’atténuation risque de verrouiller des infrastructures à fortes émissions, de créer une dépendance à long terme à l’égard de l’énergie dérivée des combustibles fossiles et de détourner les investissements des solutions en amont. L’incinération est extrêmement coûteuse et représente une utilisation non durable des financements publics et climatiques. Elle génère également des polluants atmosphériques toxiques, notamment des dioxines, des furanes et des particules fines, qui nuisent de manière disproportionnée aux communautés de première ligne et vulnérables, sapent les économies locales de recyclage et de valorisation informelle des déchets, et produisent des cendres résiduelles dangereuses. La COP 31 devrait plutôt donner la priorité à des mesures en amont telles que la prévention des déchets, le détournement des déchets organiques et des pratiques de gestion inclusives, qui réduisent les émissions à la source tout en apportant des avantages sociaux, économiques et environnementaux.

4. Mettre fin au colonialisme des déchets

La Turquie est particulièrement bien placée pour jouer un rôle de premier plan au niveau mondial en matière de solutions « zéro déchet » en mettant fin à son statut de principale destination des exportations de déchets plastiques en provenance de l’UE et du Royaume-Uni. Les déchets plastiques importés sont non seulement en grande partie non recyclables – souvent jusqu’à 50 % –, mais constituent également une source inépuisable de pollution plastique. Lorsqu’ils sont brûlés illégalement, ils produisent du carbone noir, un super-polluant qui accélère le réchauffement climatique, ainsi que d’autres émissions toxiques qui nuisent de manière disproportionnée aux communautés vulnérables. En mettant en œuvre une interdiction totale des importations de déchets plastiques, la Turquie peut donner la priorité à la réduction des déchets au niveau national, renforcer les systèmes de recyclage nationaux, protéger la santé publique et faire preuve de leadership en matière de justice environnementale et d’action climatique.

5. Placer la transition juste au cœur des préoccupations pour les récupérateurs de déchets et autres travailleurs du secteur

La COP 30 a marqué un tournant décisif avec la création d’un mécanisme de transition juste fondé sur les droits, une victoire attendue de longue date pour les travailleurs de l’économie informelle, les communautés et les mouvements sociaux à travers le Sud global. Pourtant, les gouvernements ont laissé sans réponse la question centrale : qui financera la transition ? Sans nouveaux financements publics sous forme de subventions et sans réforme structurelle du système financier mondial, ce mécanisme risque de devenir une nouvelle promesse sans les ressources nécessaires pour rendre justice. L’engagement de la Turquie en faveur du zéro déchet devrait prendre le relais de cet agenda et aller plus loin, en faisant progresser une transformation du secteur des déchets conforme à la CCNUCC et aux principes de justice environnementale.Une véritable approche « zéro déchet » implique que les récupérateurs de déchets et autres travailleurs du secteur soient prioritaires, officiellement reconnus et protégés, car ils sont des acteurs centraux du système de gestion des déchets du pays. Cela passe par la garantie de la sécurité sociale, de la sécurité au travail, d’opportunités d’emploi équitables et d’un revenu décent, et d’une participation significative à la prise de décision pour la nouvelle économie des matériaux.

Conclusion

Nous appelons la présidence et le champion de la COP 31 à présenter une feuille de route climatique unifiée qui combine une élimination progressive et rigoureuse des combustibles fossiles avec une mise en œuvre du « zéro déchet » centrée sur la justice. Toutes les Parties doivent veiller à ce que le label « zéro déchet » ne masque pas des objectifs climatiques peu ambitieux. Le succès de la COP 31 dépendra de la capacité à aller au-delà des politiques de façade pour opérer des changements systémiques qui protègent à la fois la planète et ses habitants.

Signataires Signatories

1000 Grandmothers for Future Generations

Aama Nepal Foundation

AbibiNsroma Foundation 

Agency for Conservation and Development (ACD)

AGIR POUR LA SECURITE ET LA SOUVERAINETÉ ALIMENTAIRE (ASSA)

Allen+

APLOI (The Indonesian Organic Waste Management Association)

ASSOCIATION OF SCRAPS AND WASTEPICKERS OF LAGOS STATE ASWOL 

Association pour la protection de l’environnement banda bitsi 

Bio Vision Africa (BiVA)

Bioenzyme Entrepreneur Academy Of India 

Blue Dalian

Breathe Free Detroit 

CAB

Carbone Guinée 

Carrot Foundation

CEE Bankwatch Network

Centre for Citizens Conserving Environment & Management (CECIC)

Centre For Earth Works (CFEW)

Centre for Environment Justice and Development

Centre for financial accountability 

Centro de Estudios Superiores Universitarios – Universidad Mayor de San Simón (CESU-UMSS)

CESTA AT

Citizen consumer and civic Action Group

Climate Action Network Arab World

Climate Action Network Zimbabwe

Coaction Indonesia

COLECTIVO ACONTRAVIA

Colectivo Acontravia

Dalai Lama Foundation 

Društvo Ekologi brez meja

Ecosoum

Ecoteca NGO

Egyptian Foundation for Environmental Rights – EFER

End Plastic Pollution Uganda 

Environment and Social Development Organization – ESDO

Fair Resource Foundation

Faith and Hope Association

Family Tree Movement Namibia 

Flamingo Chap Chap CBO

Foundation for Environment and Development (FEDEV)

Foundation Milieukontakt Albania

Friends of the Earth – SPZ

Friends of the Earth Cyprus

Front commun pour la protection de l’environnement et des Espaces Protégés (FCPEEP-RDC)

Fundacion Basura

Fundación El Árbol

Fundación Entrejardines 

Future for Future 

GLOBAL 2000

Global Alliance for Incinerator Alternatives (GAIA) 

Grambangla Unnayan Committee

GRC

Green Knowledge Foundation 

Greenaction for Health and Environmental Justice

Greenpeace Türkiye

Health Environment and Climate Action Foundation (HECAF360)

Health service consumer Rights watch

Hnutí DUHA – Friends of the Earth Czech Republic

Humusz Szövetség

Instituto Pólis (Pólis Institute for Social Policy Studies, Training and Advisory Services)

International Alliance of Waste Pickers

Irrigation Training and Economic Empowerment Organization – IRTECO

Just Transition Alliance

Kalyani Rani Biswas 

KongoGreen 

Korea Zero Waste Movement Network

La Cuica Cósmica

Microplastic Research Group 

Mikroplastik Araştırma Grubu

Miya Ywech 

Mother Earth Foundation (MEF)

MT Plastic Free

NA

Nect Green Code (NGC)

Nipe Fagio

Pacific Environment Vietnam

Pan African Vision for the Environment(PAVE)

Plastic Free Future

Plastic Free Türkiye Platform

Pocasset Pokanoket Land Trust

Polish Zero Waste Association

Prakriti Sanrachna

Prowaste concepts pvt ltd 

Reach-Out Health Awareness Foundation 

Red de Acción por los Derechos Ambientales RADA

Retorna

Rezero

Sanggar Hijau Indonesia

Scuola Agraria del Parco di Monza

Slingshot

Solidarité pour la Protection des Droits de l’Enfant( SOPRODE)

Sustainable Environment Development Initiative 

Sustainable Research and Action for Environmental Development (SRADev Nigeria)

THANAL Trust

The Danish Society for Nsature Conservation

The UMI FUND

United Kingdom Without Incineration Network (UKWIN)

VOICE (Voice Of Irish Concern for the Environment)

VšĮ “Žiedinė ekonomika”

Vukani Environmental Movement 

WALHI

West Berkeley Alliance for Clean Air and Safe Jobs

WIEGO 

WWF-Türkiye

Xpozz India 

Youth Exploring Solutions

ZERO – Association for the Sustainability of the Earth System

Zero Waste Aotearoa

Zero Waste Association of South Africa

Zero Waste BC

Zero Waste Belgium

Zero Waste Canada

Zero Waste Detroit

Zero Waste Estonia SA

Zero Waste Europe

Zero Waste Italy

Zero Waste Ithaca

Zero Waste Lab

Zero Waste Latvija

Zero Waste Nederland

Zero Waste Senegal Association

Zero Waste Society

Zero Waste USA

The post Joint Declaration: Aligning Zero Waste with High-Ambition Climate Action for COP31  first appeared on GAIA.

© Camila Aguilera

A reciclagem de plásticos no Brasil segue sustentada por um mito perigoso: o de que todo material identificado como “reciclável” de fato retorna ao ciclo produtivo. A segunda edição da pesquisa “Catadores por Menos Plástico”, conduzida pelo Instituto de Direito Coletivo (IDC) em parceria com a Universidade Federal Fluminense (UFF), mostra que essa lógica não apenas persiste como aprofunda prejuízos sociais, ambientais e econômicos para os trabalhadores da reciclagem.

Realizado entre julho e dezembro de 2025, o novo levantamento acompanhou o trabalho de 20 associações e cooperativas de catadores, na capital e no interior do estado do Rio de Janeiro, mantendo o mesmo recorte territorial da primeira edição para permitir a comparação dos dados. Os resultados confirmam o cenário já identificado em 2024: os plásticos seguem como a principal categoria entre os rejeitos das cooperativas. Na segunda edição do estudo, eles representam cerca de 45% do material que não é reciclado e acaba destinado a aterros, lixões ou ao meio ambiente, mantendo-se como o maior componente do rejeito, apesar da redução em relação à edição anterior.

Além de confirmar a baixa reciclabilidade real das embalagens plásticas, a segunda edição da pesquisa aprofunda a mensuração dos danos econômicos e trabalhistas impostos aos catadores. O estudo aponta que cada catador perde, em média, 15,59 horas de trabalho por mês na triagem de plásticos que não têm valor de mercado — o equivalente a 9,38% do tempo mensal de trabalho, ou aproximadamente 2,08 dias de trabalho por mês dedicados a resíduos que não geram qualquer retorno financeiro

Em termos econômicos, a pesquisa estima que as 17 associações e cooperativas incluídas no cálculo deixam de arrecadar, mensalmente, entre R$ 1.179,03 e R$ 3.771,72, apenas considerando os tipos de plásticos que já possuem valor de mercado em pelo menos um dos territórios analisados. A variação decorre dos diferentes preços praticados na comercialização do PET Bandeja, que pode oscilar entre R$ 0,30 e R$ 3,70 por quilo, dependendo da forma de triagem e do comprador final

Segundo Tatiana Bastos, presidente do Instituto de Direito Coletivo (IDC), os dados escancaram uma distorção estrutural do sistema: “Estamos falando de quase 15 horas de trabalho desperdiçadas por catador todos os meses e de uma perda financeira recorrente para cooperativas que já operam no limite. Isso demonstra a falha do modelo de produção de embalagens e a ausência de responsabilidade real da indústria.”

Outro dado preocupante é o aumento da taxa geral de rejeitos nas amostras analisadas, especialmente nas cooperativas da capital, indicando uma piora na qualidade dos materiais encaminhados à coleta seletiva. “O que chamamos de reciclagem hoje transfere custo, tempo e desgaste físico para os catadores. Eles trabalham mais para ganhar menos, enquanto a indústria continua produzindo embalagens inviáveis do ponto de vista técnico ou econômico”, afirma Tatiana.

A pesquisa também realizou uma auditoria de marcas, identificando grupos empresariais responsáveis por grande parte das embalagens plásticas encontradas entre os rejeitos. Embora quase 200 empresas tenham sido identificadas, um número reduzido de grupos empresariais aparece de forma recorrente entre as embalagens encontradas nas cooperativas, reforçando a necessidade de responsabilização efetiva da indústria por meio da logística reversa e do redesenho de embalagens.

Os resultados da primeira edição do estudo já embasaram o Projeto de Lei nº 5.392/2025, em tramitação na Assembleia Legislativa do Estado do Rio de Janeiro (Alerj), que propõe a eliminação progressiva de embalagens não recicláveis, regras mais rígidas de rotulagem e o pagamento direto aos catadores pelos serviços ambientais prestados. A nova edição fortalece ainda mais essa agenda, ao demonstrar que o problema não é pontual, mas estrutural.

Para o IDC, combater o greenwashing e avançar rumo a uma economia circular justa exige mudanças urgentes na origem do problema. “Não existe reciclagem possível quando o produto já nasce como rejeito. Enquanto isso não mudar, o sistema continuará injusto com quem sustenta a reciclagem no Brasil”, conclui Tatiana Bastos.

The post Segunda edição de pesquisa revela agravamento do impacto do plástico não reciclável sobre catadores no Rio de Janeiro first appeared on GAIA.

By: Green Knowledge Foundation

In Durban, South Africa the partnership between the Early Morning Market and the Warwick zero waste composting project stands as a practical model that should be replicated across Africa. This collaboration has not only transformed the market into a cleaner, tidier, healthier, and more attractive environment, but has also significantly reduced the burden on the municipal waste authority while creating value from organic waste through compost production.

To many residents, organic waste is simply part of daily life, but in recent times, environmental organisations, and climate experts across the globe are beginning to see something different, an opportunity for climate action, income generation and community empowerment.

Nigeria generates millions of tonnes of waste every year, and more than half of it is organic; food waste, agricultural residues, and biodegradable materials. When improperly managed, this waste decomposes in oxygen-deprived dumpsites and releases methane, a greenhouse gas significantly more potent than carbon dioxide over the short term. Yet effective organic waste management can transform this environmental challenge into social, economic, and climate solutions.

Waste Pickers benefit significantly.

For waste pickers and informal waste workers, improved organic waste management systems create opportunities for safer livelihoods, economic empowerment, and social inclusion. Across Nigeria, informal waste workers already play a critical role in material recovery, recycling, and waste diversion despite operating with limited recognition, inadequate protection, and unsafe working conditions. Their efforts help reduce the volume of waste reaching dumpsites and landfills, thereby contributing to methane reduction and broader environmental sustainability goals.

Proper management of organic waste through composting, source segregation, decentralised collection systems, and Material Recovery Facilities (MRFs) creates pathways for new green jobs and more stable income opportunities. Through the implementation of the Multi-Solving Action for Methane Reduction in Nigeria ( MAMRN) project, new opportunities are being created for waste workers to transition from hazardous collection practices into safer, more organized, and dignified work. These opportunities include the construction of Material Recovery Facilities (MRFs) within the project.

This waste management system also creates opportunities for skills development, entrepreneurship, compost production, agriculture support, and climate smart business that benefit local economies. Beyond improving environmental conditions, inclusive organic waste management can help to reduce social stigma and protect informal workers while also improving their health and reducing pressure on landfills.

Across Africa, similar models are already demonstrating the socio-economic potential of inclusive waste systems. E.g. In Accra, the work of the Green Africa Youth Organization (GAYO) has shown how integrating waste pickers into organized recovery and recycling programs can improve livelihoods, strengthen community participation, and support sustainable environmental management. Such examples reinforce the idea that proper organic waste management is not only a climate solution but also a pathway toward economic resilience, social inclusion, and community development.

Farmers also stand to benefit significantly.

Composting initiatives have already demonstrated how organic waste can be converted into nutrient-rich compost that improves soil fertility while reducing dependence on chemical fertilisers. The MRF being constructed in the MAMRN project is designed to process a minimum of 10 tons of waste weekly, producing compost and Black Soldier Fly (BSF) larvae for Nigerian farms.

For small farmers facing rising fish feed and fertiliser costs and declining soil quality, compost and BSF larvae offers a climate-smart alternative that supports healthier produce, crops and long-term soil restoration.

Young people and entrepreneurs are finding opportunities as well. Across Africa, climate-focused enterprises are emerging around composting, Black Soldier Fly farming, waste collection, recycling, and methane monitoring systems. New jobs are being created in environmental education, circular economy innovation, climate data, and sustainable agriculture.

As one Climate and Clean Air Coalition report noted, organic waste should be seen as “a viable resource.” 

Communities themselves benefit through cleaner environments and improved public health. Poorly managed organic waste contributes to environmental stench, air pollution, blocked drainage systems, and disease outbreaks. Effective waste separation and composting, reduce the volume of waste entering dumpsites while lowering methane emissions and open burning.

For NGOs and development organisations, this creates an important opportunity for high impact interventions. This also combines climate mitigation with livelihood creation, food security, gender inclusion, and youth empowerment. Organic waste management sits at the centre of all these priorities.

The MAMRN project has revealed the urgent need for more initiatives focused on composting, circular economy systems, and methane reduction, as these approaches can simultaneously deliver environmental benefits, create green jobs, support sustainable agriculture, and strengthen community resilience. Such initiatives also align strongly with the United Nations Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs), particularly SDG 1 (No Poverty), SDG 2 (Zero Hunger), SDG 11 (Sustainable Cities and Communities), SDG 12 (Responsible Consumption and Production), and SDG 13 (Climate Action).

Globally, the transition toward zero waste systems is accelerating because governments and development partners increasingly recognise that climate action must also create social and economic value.

The environment and the economy are deeply interconnected, and effective organic waste management is increasingly demonstrating this reality. What was once viewed merely as waste is gradually emerging as a source of livelihoods, climate solutions, cleaner environment, healthier soils, and economic opportunity.

The future of sustainable development may therefore depend not only on reducing waste, but on recognizing the social, environmental, and economic value embedded within it.

This article is fourth in a series on the Methane Reduction in Nigeria (MAMRN) Project, implemented in collaboration with CfEW Jos, SraDev Lagos, Pave Lagos, CODAF Epe Lagos, and SEDI Benin City.

The post Opportunities in Organic Waste Management first appeared on GAIA.

By Frank Sekyere, Programs Manager for Upcycle It Ghana

Every morning, millions of garments are pulled from racks across Europe and the United States – purchased with excitement, worn a handful of times (if at all), and then discarded in favour of the next trend. But where do those discarded clothes go after being cast aside? Many second-hand clothes travel halfway across the world to Africa. Here, they meet a cruel fate, overwhelming the local markets, poisoning the environment, and exacerbating the global textile waste crisis. This global trade is marketed as charity, but the reality is much darker: it perpetuates a vicious cycle of waste colonialism with severe environmental and social consequences.

The Hidden Cost of Charitable Donations

Kantamanto Market in Accra, Ghana, stands as a ground zero for the textile waste crisis. Each week, approximately 15 million garments discarded by the Global North arrive in shipping containers, labelled as donations or charitable goods to help the less fortunate and promote reuse. Yet, EU data from 2019, which includes the UK, shows that Ghana was the second-largest destination for Europe’s used-clothing exports by volume, behind only Tunisia.

The truth is that 40% of the clothing sent to Ghana is waste, unsellable and of such poor quality and often damaged, that they can’t be resold. This waste clogs drainage systems, inundates landfills and pollutes the environment. These garments were intended to be a source of aid, but in reality, they are nothing more than a burden.

Textile waste – a plastic-dominant, toxic-saturated waste stream containing complex chemical mixtures – often exhibits characteristics consistent with hazardous or other wastes under the Basel Convention. In Ghana, these textiles are either burnt or left to decompose in landfills, releasing toxic chemicals into the soil and air and damaging the local environment. The smoke from burning textiles contains harmful substances like carbon monoxide, dioxins, and volatile organic compounds (VOCs), which have been linked to respiratory problems and other health issues in local communities. 

A Story of Waste and Hope

Consider the story of Beatrice, a fish seller from Jamestown Beach in Accra. She walks down the shore every morning, carefully picking through the waste that washes ashore, often finding her catch mixed with discarded textiles. “The waste disturbs us,” she says. “When fishermen go fishing, they come back with fish mixed with plastic and textile waste. We have to remove all the garbage before selling it.”Beatrice’s story is not unique; it is one shared by countless others in Accra. Textile waste has infiltrated every part of their lives, from their markets to their beaches and likely even them, through contamination of the food chain. 

Yet, despite these daily struggles, there is hope. Organisations like Upcycle It Ghana are working tirelessly to turn this waste into a resource by training artisans and young people to repurpose discarded textiles into bags, accessories, and even upcycled fashion. However, it is important to recognise that, despite these efforts, the growing volume of textile waste means end-of-life solutions remain severely limited.

Less than 1% of textile waste is recycled into new clothing, while most materials, especially synthetic and blended fabrics, still have no effective recovery options. And even handling these materials could be harmful to workers because post-consumer polyester contains chemicals from dyes, finishes, detergents, coatings, flame retardants, microplastics and other additives. 

How Overproduction of Virgin Plastic and Fast Fashion Contributes to the Crisis

At the centre of the textile waste crisis is market distortion, the relentless flood of artificially cheap plastic feedstocks like polyester, acrylic and nylon into the fashion industry. These synthetics, derived from fossil fuels and highly subsidised, are now so inexpensive that they outprice natural fibres like cotton, wool and linen.

The result is a race to the bottom, brands cut costs to maximise profits and compete against cheap suppliers who often turn to these plastic fabrics. Yet the inherently low quality means they are designed for disposability rather than longevity. Garments are produced cheaply, worn only a few times and then given away. Studies show that the average time clothing is worn before disposal has declined, with as many as one in five fast-fashion products discarded after no more than 10 wears. A stark contrast to the clothing of previous generations, which was designed to last. 

This throwaway culture is not confined to wealthy countries. As discarded clothing is shipped to developing countries like Ghana, the cycle continues. In Kenya, it is estimated that 55,500 to 74,000 tonnes of textile waste are generated each year due to the flood of second-hand clothing imports. The poor quality of many of these garments, a direct result of the fast-fashion model, means they are often not reusable, contributing to the growing problem of textile waste.

This situation is compounded by the fact that local industries in these countries are unable to compete with the cheap, low-quality textiles flooding their markets. In Ghana, local textile industries have been forced to close or scale back, unable to compete with the influx of second-hand clothing. This leaves the country with a double burden: it imports waste and also loses out on the potential benefits of a thriving domestic textile industry.

What Needs to Change?

The solution to this crisis is not simple, but it starts with accountability and addressing the root cause: overproduction. 

Fast fashion brands must be held accountable for their role in this crisis. Brands that profit from the overproduction of cheap garments must take responsibility for the waste they create. There is an urgent need for binding national, regional, and global agreements to support Extended Producer Responsibility and hold producers legally accountable for the resources used, emissions generated, and waste produced across the entire lifecycle of clothing.

Another important step in addressing the textile waste crisis is ending the export of cheap, low-quality second-hand clothing to Africa and other destination countries. Countries in the Global North must stop using developing nations as dumping grounds and instead invest in local, meaningful solutions to manage their waste responsibly at source. Only clean, sorted material destined for legitimate reuse markets should be traded.

As the Basel Convention’s fifteenth meeting of the Open-ended Working Group (OEWG-15) in June considers options to address used textiles and textile waste within its work programme, there is a clear opportunity to take action to close this gap. Textile waste should be subject to the same baseline controls as other polluting and hazardous waste streams, including classification as “other waste” under Annex II of the Convention, making it subject to mandatory Prior Informed Consent procedures and additional control measures. This will preserve legitimate reuse and recycling markets while ensuring that mixed, contaminated or low-quality textile waste is properly controlled.

Consumers also need to be educated on the environmental impact of their clothing choices. By promoting sustainable fashion practices, such as buying quality second-hand or investing in durable garments, we can reduce demand for fast fashion and its waste.

Governments should be proactive in implementing transparency measures to track the routes, destinations, and fate of used clothes, and in enforcing quality checks at their ports for second-hand clothes, ensuring that only suitable garments are imported for legitimate reuse and recovery. A strict eco-design and detox strategy must be enforced by banning hazardous chemicals and phasing out fossil-fuel-based synthetic fibres in textile production and final products to shift to a truly circular, sustainable model. 

How Are You Contributing to Solving the Waste Crisis?

The global textile waste crisis is a daunting challenge, but it’s one we can solve, together. Real progress begins with the choices we make every day: buying less, choosing better, reusing more, and refusing to be trapped by the cycle of fast fashion. The time to act is now, because every conscious decision, no matter how small, helps build a more sustainable and just future!

References

Ahiable, E. (2021). Textile waste in Ghana: Impact on the environment and health. Journal of Environmental Studies, 15(3), 5-12.

Acquaye, A., & Manieson, J. (2023). Textile waste management practices in Ghana: Challenges and opportunities. Waste Management and Research, 31(1), 45-58.

Changing Markets Foundation. (2023). The impact of textile waste and microplastics on the environment. Retrieved from https://www.changingmarkets.org

Greenpeace. (2024). The impact of textile waste on the environment: Case studies from Africa. Greenpeace Africa.

Kantamanto Market and Environmental Pollution: The Role of Secondhand Clothing Trade in Ghana. (2022). Journal of African Environmental Research, 9(4), 35-47.

Mensah, L., & Agyemang, D. (2023). Textile waste from fashion shops and imported second-hand clothing in the Greater Kumasi Sub-Region of Ghana: A call for policy change. Environmental Challenges, 22(2), 57-70.

Ricketts, L. (2023). The Or Foundation’s advocacy for sustainable textile economies in Ghana. The Or Foundation. 

The post From the EU’s Closet to Africa’s Dumpsters: How Fast Fashion Fuels the Textile Waste Crisis in Africa first appeared on GAIA.

By: Green Knowledge Foundation

Nigeria’s growing waste crisis is no longer just an environmental concern; it is also a major socio-economic and public health challenge. From the bustling Alaba International Market in Lagos and Igbudu Market in Warri to places such as Ojota, Ajah, Epe, Akpakpava, and Gwagwalada, heaps of unmanaged waste continue to accumulate in open spaces, drainage channels, markets, and dumpsites. 

The majority of this waste is biodegradable and decomposes, releasing methane, a greenhouse gas far more potent than carbon dioxide. Beyond its environmental consequences, poor management of organic waste contributes to many challenges like disease outbreaks from poor sanitation, flooding, reduced productivity, e.g. Waste workers falling sick, leachate that affects ground water and also farm products etc and lost economic opportunities that arise from zero waste approaches to waste management. Yet, hidden within these waste streams is a valuable resource capable of creating jobs, improving soil health, supporting local agriculture, and driving a more circular and sustainable economy.

Organic waste, which includes food waste, agricultural residues, slaughterhouse waste, and other biodegradable materials, makes up a significant percentage of Nigeria’s municipal solid waste stream. When improperly managed, this waste decomposes anaerobically, emitting methane into the atmosphere and contributing significantly to climate change. 

Yet, beyond the climate implications of organic waste, there is a deeper human story, stories of poverty, health challenges, negative stigma, inequality, weak infrastructure, and other socio-vulnerabilities.

Many Nigerian communities are heavily dependent on informal waste workers. Waste pickers play a crucial role in recovering recyclable materials and diverting waste from dumpsites, often under dangerous and unregulated conditions. Their contribution to reducing landfill pressure and methane emissions is significant, yet they remain largely invisible in policy discussions. 

A visit to the Olusosun Landfill in Lagos or the Gosa Dumpsite will reveal the critical work these informal waste pickers do. At the Gosa dumpsite, once the disposal trucks finish dumping waste, waste pickers begin sorting and collecting, and, in no time, the waste is reduced to items with little or no value. For many, this might be seen as undignified work, without the social protections needed, but for the waste pickers working here, it means feeding their families.

According to the World Bank, poorly managed waste disproportionately affects vulnerable and low-income communities, contributing to flooding, disease transmission, respiratory problems from waste burning, and adverse economic impacts.

Sadly, many Nigerian communities have a bad habit of burning waste, and where organic waste is openly burned or dumped, methane emissions are often accompanied by toxic smoke and foul odours that threaten both environmental and human health.

The social stigma, and the economic burden carried by informal waste workers, is particularly alarming. Many have suffered injuries from landfill fires, exposure to hazardous waste, and long-term health complications due to unsafe working conditions. Informal waste workers face forced evictions from informal settlements near dumpsites (e.g. Karu axis in Abuja), without access to social protection or alternative livelihoods. Despite contributing to recycling and climate mitigation efforts, they are often excluded from government planning and investment opportunities.

Environmental activist Wangari Maathai once stated, “The environment and the economy are really two sides of the same coin.” This reality is evident in Nigeria, where environmental degradation from poor waste management directly impacts livelihoods, healthcare costs, food systems, and community wellbeing.

Methane reduction presents not only an environmental opportunity but also an economic one. Investments in composting, source segregation, Black Soldier Fly (BSF) Farming and other specialised organic waste management systems can create jobs, strengthen local economies, and improve public health outcomes. Speaking on climate action, Inger Andersen, Executive Director of UNEP, emphasised that “Cutting methane is the strongest lever we have to slow climate change over the next 25 years.” For Nigeria, this means that addressing organic waste management must become a national priority within both climate and development policies.

Civil society organisations like GAIA, GKF and a host of other GAIA members across Nigeria are increasingly advocating for zero-waste systems, an all-inclusive system for waste management. 

Solving Nigeria’s methane challenge requires more than technical solutions. It demands a socio-economic approach that recognises the dignity of waste workers, invests in green infrastructure such as MRFs, and empowers communities of farmers, waste pickers, and other critical stakeholders.

This is why the MAMRN project is unique, it recognises that organic waste should no longer be treated with kid’s gloves.

This article is the third in a series on the Methane Reduction in Nigeria (MAMRN) Project, implemented in collaboration with CfEW Jos, SraDev Lagos, Pave Lagos, CODAF Epe Lagos, and SEDI Benin City.

The post Social-Economic Perspectives on Organic Waste and Methane Emissions in Nigeria first appeared on GAIA.

Con el objetivo de fortalecer y dar visibilidad a experiencias locales que promueven la prevención y gestión responsable de residuos, la iniciativa Rutas basura cero seleccionó una serie de recorridos presenciales ejecutados por organizaciones locales en distintos países de América Latina. 

La propuesta surge en un contexto de creciente preocupación por la crisis de los residuos y los impactos ambientales, sociales y económicos asociados al actual modelo de producción y consumo. Frente a este escenario, las estrategias de basura cero han demostrado ser una alternativa efectiva para reducir la generación de residuos mediante prácticas de reducción, reúso, reciclaje y compostaje, al tiempo que promueven la justicia ambiental y el fortalecimiento de las economías locales.

En particular, los sistemas de reúso y rellenado están cobrando cada vez más relevancia como soluciones replicables y escalables para avanzar hacia comunidades más saludables y sostenibles. Sin embargo, muchas de estas experiencias continúan siendo poco conocidas fuera de sus zonas, lo que limita su potencial de incidencia y réplica.

Para revertir esta situación, el proyecto Rutas basura cero impulsa recorridos presenciales coordinados por organizaciones locales, que permiten a tomadores de decisiones, representantes de gobiernos, académicos, líderes sociales y otros actores clave conocer de primera mano iniciativas exitosas en funcionamiento.

Las rutas incluyen visitas a proyectos con al menos un año de trayectoria y resultados comprobables, vinculados a prácticas como el rellenado de envases, el lavado y reutilización de utensilios, el compostaje descentralizado y el cooperativismo. Además, cada experiencia es documentada mediante registros audiovisuales que pasan a integrar una base regional de casos de éxito.

La iniciativa busca generar espacios de intercambio entre experiencias consolidadas y actores estratégicos, así como producir materiales que contribuyan a la difusión y sistematización de aprendizajes sobre modelos basura cero en la región.

A continuación, compartimos las organizaciones e iniciativas seleccionadas que forman parte de esta primera edición de Rutas basura cero:

Entrejardines nos lleva a la compostera y huerta comunitaria del barrio La Floresta en Quito, luego pasamos por Pure!, una empresa de turismo que comparte cómo ha adoptado prácticas de reúso y segregación en origen dentro de su oficina, y terminamos en el restaurante Pim’s donde conocemos cómo gestionan sus residuos sólidos y orgánicos. 

La Asociación Defensores Monumento Zona de los Santos, nos muestra cómo están trabajando para preservar una zona de alta biodiversidad a través del manejo de residuos de subproductos de procesos de cultivo de café como el que hacen en CoopeTarrazu y Coopedota. Luego terminamos con una parada en el Centro de acopio Preserve Planet (CAPP) para saber más sobre segregación de residuos y recuperación de tapas de refrescos.

Fundación Lenga nos traslada a la zona más austral del Chile donde iniciamos el recorrido en Compost Coiron y su proyecto de gestión de residuos orgánicos, donde además nos cuentan cómo el turismo influye en el colapso del vertedero municipal de Puerto Natales. En Punta Arenas, conocemos el laboratorio textil Puro Viento, una iniciativa de reuso que utiliza residuos textiles y gigantografías publicitarias para hacer artículos como mochilas, estuches, entre otros. Finalmente, llegamos a Puerto Williams para saber más sobre la iniciativa municipal de gestión de residuos.

The post Rutas basura cero: una iniciativa regional para visibilizar experiencias de reúso y gestión sostenible de residuos first appeared on GAIA.

By Cecilia Allen, Global Zero Waste Cities Program Director, GAIA

(c) Nipe Fagio

Lo que antes se consideraba un sueño de idealistas,  «basura cero» es ahora una corriente dominante. Incluso ha entrado en el lenguaje de la ONU: el organismo elaboró una resolución en la que instaba a los gobiernos a «promover iniciativas basura cero», estableció un Día Internacional Basura Cero y creó un Consejo Asesor Basura Cero; además, el PNUMA, ONU-Hábitat y otros organismos de la ONU utilizan el concepto en campañas e informes. Este año, basura cero fue nombrado una de las principales prioridades de la Agenda Global de Acción Climática. La Fundación Basura Cero de Turquía, uno de los principales promotores de estos esfuerzos, está organizando su segundo Foro Global Basura Cero bajo el lema «Camino a Antalya: basura cero como acción climática». Turquía será la anfitriona de la COP31 sobre el clima.

Si bien este avance es emocionante, las palabras importan. Cuando los mismos organismos de la ONU que se supone deben promover basura cero reconocen las plantas de incineración de residuos para generar energía y la reutilización de las cenizas volantes altamente tóxicas de los incineradores como una solución basura cero, significa que algo anda mal. Del mismo modo, cuando Pakistán afirma que busca una economía “basura  cero” al aumentar la capacidad de conversión de residuos en energía, las alarmas suenan entre los defensores de basura cero en todo el mundo: la incineración es un oxímoron para basura cero. Lo que nos muestran estos ejemplos es que es necesario adoptar y defender enérgicamente una verdadera definición de basura cero.

¿Qué es basura cero?

El concepto «basura cero» surgió hace 30 años al adaptar objetivos de fabricación como el de «cero defectos» a los residuos sólidos. Basura Cero es tanto una visión como un plan de acción. Como plan de acción, incluye estrategias para eliminar la idea de «basura»: prevención de residuos, rediseño, reutilización, cambios en los patrones de consumo, reciclaje, compostaje y otros métodos para re procesar la materia orgánica. Basura Cero se guía por el objetivo de reducir progresivamente el vertido en vertederos e incineradoras, un criterio para juzgar la eficacia de los programas y políticas de residuos.

Como visión, su objetivo final es cambiar la forma en que producimos, consumimos y procesamos los desechos para que nuestra economía de materiales se ajuste a los límites planetarios. Esto no solo se refiere a los materiales, sino a nuestra relación con ellos, con el medio ambiente y entre nosotros. Es por eso que «basura cero» tiene sus raíces en la justicia ambiental: apoya el florecimiento de todos, independientemente de la raza, la clase o cualquier otra identidad, y los derechos de la naturaleza. Los sistemas basura cero se basan en la comunidad, reconocen a los recolectores de residuos como trabajadores, eliminan las «zonas de sacrificio» que suponen una carga desproporcionada para las comunidades pobres y marginadas, y sitúan a las personas en el centro de las soluciones.

Esa es la belleza del sistema basura cero: ofrece una alternativa alentadora a un sistema lineal que perpetúa la eliminación, el agotamiento de los recursos, el cambio climático y la contaminación que amenazan la salud pública y el bienestar. No sucederá de la noche a la mañana, pero establece una dirección clara.

Defender basura cero

Existen múltiples debates dentro del movimiento ambientalista sobre la cooptación del concepto basura cero. ¿Debemos dejarlo pasar? ¿Defenderlo? Hay argumentos sólidos en todos los lados de la mesa. Pero nuestro objetivo es expandir el verdadero basura cero a nivel mundial. La generalización significa que las ideas se aceptan como normales porque la mayoría de la gente las comparte; eso es por lo que miles de comunidades, funcionarios gubernamentales y empresas han trabajado durante décadas. Luchar contra esta apropiación es, por lo tanto, una parte inevitable de la generalización.

Cada vez que se presenta un proyecto de conversión de residuos en energía o de plásticos en combustible como «basura cero», las autoridades en la materia deben aclarar las cosas. La incineración de residuos para generar energía perpetúa la generación de residuos porque requiere materia prima para quemar, compite con la reutilización y el reciclaje por materiales de alto poder calorífico, depende de materias primas de origen fósil como los plásticos, produce emisiones de gases de efecto invernadero y genera residuos peligrosos. Nada de eso podría estar más lejos del concepto basura cero.

Lo más importante es que el concepto basura cero no es solo un concepto abstracto.

Durante más de tres décadas, cientos de ciudades, miles de comunidades y muchos profesionales del sector de los residuos han liderado la transición hacia él. Han demostrado que es posible lograr más del 90% de separación en origen, tasas de desvío del 80% o más, mejores condiciones de trabajo para los recolectores de residuos y economías locales basadas en la reparación y la reutilización. También demuestran que seguir la jerarquía de residuos crea más empleos, reduce más las emisiones de metano y mejora la salud pública.

Facilitar la implementación de la iniciativa «basura cero» 

En los últimos años, más gobiernos, instituciones financieras, universidades y profesionales del sector de los residuos han adoptado la visión «basura cero» y han priorizado las medidas en las etapas iniciales por encima de la eliminación. Eso es alentador, pero se necesita mucho más. Por ejemplo, solo el 1 % de la financiación internacional destinada a la reducción de metano en el sector de los residuos se destina a estrategias «basura cero», como el compostaje.

Si los bancos multilaterales de desarrollo y otras instituciones financieras internacionales destinaran el 99 % restante, en lugar de a sistemas nocivos de tratamiento final como incineradoras y megavertederos, a la prevención y recuperación de residuos orgánicos a nivel comunitario, se nivelaría el campo de juego: habría más incentivos para un cambio en los patrones de producción y consumo, y los gobiernos locales y las comunidades acelerarían la transición hacia basura cero. Si los gobiernos que afirman perseguir basura cero actuaran en consecuencia, liderarían la transición e inspirarían a otros.

Los organismos de la ONU, como el PNUMA, ONU-Hábitat y el Consejo Asesor Basura Cero, tienen la responsabilidad especial de establecer una visión clara para los gobiernos y las instituciones, y promover una agenda auténtica basura cero para impulsar la sostenibilidad ambiental, la equidad social y los sistemas económicos que respeten los límites naturales.Mientras continuamos trabajando hacia un futuro basura cero, honremos su verdadero espíritu, que impulsa el cambio de los sistemas. Y apoyemos y ampliemos los programas y políticas de eficacia probada que los gobiernos, las comunidades, los recolectores de residuos, las ONG y las empresas están sosteniendo. Protejamos el término y honremos la práctica: pongamos en práctica el verdadero basura cero.

Rommel Cabrera/GAIA, 2019. Waste pickers collecting separated waste from households. Tacloban City, the Philippines.

The post En defensa del verdadero espíritu  «basura cero» first appeared on GAIA.

How the Bamako Convention Can Drive Real Implementation of the Basel Convention in Africa

By Gilbert KUEPOUO, Executive Director of Centre de Recherche et d’Education pour le Developpement (CREPD)

The African continent has historically been a dumping ground for hazardous chemicals, technologies, and waste from the global north and from countries such as China, India, and Turkey.

This dumping is the result of brute economic forces, often characterized as “toxic colonialism,” as evidenced by the recent case of Italian waste dumped in Tunisia. The real costs of waste disposal are shifted onto the recipient population and environment, transferring negative externalities born in the global north and other countries onto the African continent. 

As African civil society strives to drive action on waste trade as an urgent environmental and social justice issue in Africa during Africa Day, it is important to examine the global and regional instruments that govern waste trade, their weaknesses, and areas of complementarity and effectiveness. 

At the global level, the Basel Convention on the transboundary movement of hazardous waste and its disposal, adopted in 1989 and entered into force in 1992, regulates the global trade in hazardous and other waste.

While the Basel Ban Amendment (Article 4a of the Basel Convention), adopted in 1995 and entered into force relatively recently on 5 December 2019, prohibits the export of hazardous waste from developed countries (Annex VII) to developing countries (non-Annex VII), it is not applicable to countries that have not ratified it, including many African countries.

Further, the Basel Ban Amendment does not apply to Basel’s Annex II waste, which includes household waste, mixed plastic waste, and non-hazardous e-waste, nor does it apply to as defined by the African Bamako Convention. It is therefore vital for all African countries to ratify both the Basel Ban Amendment and the Bamako Convention.

The Bamako Convention, which I like to refer to as the “African dam regulation”, is a treaty of African nations, created by Africans for Africans, that entered into force in 1998 and is intended to protect the continent against the dumping of hazardous and other waste.

It is a regional agreement accepted by the Basel Convention under its Article 11, which allows legal waste trade agreements that are no less environmentally sound than the Basel Convention, and can, for example, in particular interests of developing countries, be stronger than the Basel Convention. For example, the Bamako Convention offers stronger protections than the Basel Convention in the following ways: 

1. The Bamako Convention considers any waste containing either listed hazardous substances or listed hazardous characteristics as hazardous wastes. The Basel Convention, on the other hand, requires both a hazardous substance and a hazardous characteristic at the same time to qualify as hazardous waste. 

2. The Bamako Convention considers all chemicals, whether they are factually waste or not, as hazardous waste if they are banned or severely restricted for environmental or human health reasons anywhere in the world. The Basel Convention does not consider these banned or severely restricted chemicals as wastes subject to control in Africa. 

3. The Bamako Convention uniquely considers nuclear wastes of all kinds (Y0), as well as wastes collected from households, and incinerator ashes from the burning of wastes collected from households (Y46 and Y47) to be hazardous wastes. The Basel Convention does not consider these wastes to be hazardous waste.

4. The Bamako Convention bans the import of all hazardous wastes into the continent of Africa, as well as the ocean dumping in the waters under the jurisdiction of African States. There are no such provisions under the Basel Convention.

In light of these stronger protections, the Bamako Convention is truly a regional dam treaty to prevent hazardous and other waste, including chemicals banned or severely restricted by governments around the world, from crossing the sovereign borders of the African continent and causing further harm. It provides African countries with strong protections against environmental injustice and exploitation, and gives them future opportunities to self-regulate and set stronger trade bans or controls than the Basel Convention, keeping regional needs top of mind.

For example, the Bamako Convention plays a major role in preventing plastic and electronic waste from being exported to the African continent. It is also well-positioned to prevent toxic technologies, such as the chemical recycling of plastics and waste incineration, from being moved to the African continent from the Global North.

However, while in legal force for 29 African countries, Bamako is not yet fully functional as intended.  

First, the Convention needs to be fully ratified by all 54 member states of the African Continent. To date, only 25 countries, including those regularly targeted for hazardous waste dumping, such as Nigeria, Ghana, and Kenya, have not ratified the Bamako Convention. 

Second, and of critical importance, is the mobilization of resources to allow for a steady source of funding, for adequate operationalisation, and to hold regular meetings, as any Convention must have in order for it to function. An initial step toward this was taken during the last BRS COP through a decision calling for communication and synergies with Basel, aiming for a stronger partnership.

The AMCEN-20 (African Ministerial Conference on the Environment) decision on Bamako also calls for ratification and the convening of the next COP—COP4 of the Bamako Convention — with the support of the African Union and UNEP (United Nations Environment Program).   

We must collectively call on UNEP, AMCEN, the GEF (Global Environment Fund), and all national governments of Africa to ratify the Bamako Convention if they have not, and, moreover, to explore ways to overcome these critical institutional challenges and gaps to finally achieve a functional regional convention on chemicals and waste. The most important job is finished—we have a convention. It is now our time to breathe life into it so it can fulfil its promise of protecting Africa, now and for its future generations.

The post Why Africa’s Own Treaty May Be the Key to Fixing Global Waste Trade Rules first appeared on GAIA.

By Cecilia Allen, Global Projects Advisor, GAIA

(c) Nipe Fagio

Once seen as the domain of dreamers, zero waste is now mainstream. It has even entered the language of the UN: the body created a resolution urging governments to “promote zero‑waste initiatives,” an International Day of Zero Waste, and a Zero Waste Advisory Board, and UNEP, UN‑Habitat and other UN bodies use the concept in campaigns and reports. This year, zero waste was named one of the top priorities on the Global Climate Action Agenda. Türkiye’s Zero Waste Foundation, a leading promoter of these efforts, is organizing its second Global Zero Waste Forum under the motto Road to Antalya: Zero Waste as Climate Action. Türkiye will be the host of climate COP31. 

While this progress is exciting, words matter. When the same UN bodies that are meant to promote zero waste recognize waste-to-energy incineration plants and reuse of the highly toxic incinerator fly-ash as a zero waste solution, it means something is off. Likewise, when Pakistan claims to pursue a “zero waste” economy by increasing waste-to-energy capacity, alarm bells go off among zero wasters worldwide: Incineration is an oxymoron to zero waste. What these examples show us is that a true definition of zero waste needs to be adopted and vigorously defended.

What is zero waste?

The concept of “zero waste” emerged 30 years ago by adapting manufacturing targets such as “zero defects” to solid waste.  Zero waste is both a vision and an action plan. As an action plan it includes strategies to design out the idea of “waste”: waste prevention, redesign, reuse, changes in consumption patterns, recycling, composting, and other methods to reprocess organic material. Zero waste is guided by the goal of progressively reducing disposal in landfills and incinerators, a yardstick for judging the effectiveness of waste programs and policies.

As a vision, its ultimate objective is to change how we produce, consume and process discards so our materials economy fits within planetary boundaries. This concerns not only materials but our relationship with them, the environment, and one another. That is why zero waste is rooted in environmental justice– supporting the flourishing of everyone regardless of race, class, or any other identity, and the rights of nature. Zero waste systems are community‑based, recognize waste pickers as workers, eliminate “sacrifice zones” that disproportionately burden poor and marginalized communities, and put people at the center of solutions.

That is the beauty of zero waste: it offers an encouraging alternative to a linear waste system that perpetuates disposal, resource depletion, climate change and pollution that threaten public health and well-being. It will not happen overnight, but it sets a clear direction.

Defending zero waste

There are multiple conversations within the environmental movement about the co-option of the zero waste concept. Should we let it go? Defend it? There are solid arguments on all sides of the table. But our objective is to expand true zero waste worldwide. Mainstreaming means ideas become accepted as normal because most people share them — that is what thousands of communities, government officials and businesses have worked toward for decades. Fighting this co‑option is therefore an inevitable part of mainstreaming.

Every time a waste‑to‑energy or plastics‑to‑fuel project is presented as “zero waste,” authorities in the field must set the record straight. Waste‑to‑energy incineration perpetuates waste generation because it requires feedstock to burn, competes with reuse and recycling for high‑calorific materials, relies on fossil‑based feedstocks such as plastics, produces greenhouse gas emissions, and creates hazardous residues. None of that could be farther from zero waste. 

Most importantly, zero waste is not just an abstract concept. For over three decades, hundreds of cities, thousands of communities and many waste practitioners have led the transition toward it. They have shown that it is possible to achieve over 90% source separation, diversion rates of 80% and higher, improved working conditions for waste pickers, and local economies based on repair and reuse. They also demonstrate that following the waste hierarchy creates more jobs, reduces more methane emissions, and improves public health.

Enabling zero waste implementation 

In recent years more governments, financial institutions, universities, and waste practitioners have embraced the zero waste vision and prioritized upstream measures over disposal. That is encouraging, but much more is needed. For example, only 1% of international finance aimed at methane abatement in the waste sector goes to zero waste strategies such as composting.

If multilateral development banks and other international financial institutions directed the remaining 99% shifted from harmful end‑of‑pipe systems like incinerators and megalandfills to community‑based organic waste prevention and recovery, the the playing field would level: there would be more incentives for a shift in production and consumption patterns, and local governments and communities would speed up the zero waste transition. If governments that claim to pursue zero waste acted accordingly, they would lead the transition and inspire others.

UN bodies such as UNEP, UN‑Habitat and the Zero Waste Advisory Board have a special responsibility to set a clear vision for governments and institutions, and promote an authentic zero waste agenda to advance environmental sustainability, social equity and economic systems that respect natural boundaries.

As we continue the work toward a zero waste future, let us honor its true spirit that drives systems change. And let us support and scale up the proven programs and policies that governments, communities, waste pickers, NGOs, and businesses are sustaining.  Let us protect the term, and honor the practice: put real zero waste into action.

Rommel Cabrera/GAIA, 2019. Waste pickers collecting separated waste from households. Tacloban City, the Philippines.

The post Defending the Real Spirit of Zero Waste first appeared on GAIA.

Mayo, 2026

Costa Rica enfrenta una crisis de residuos con sus rellenos sanitarios casi al límite de su capacidad. El Municipio de León Cortés, por ejemplo, envía el 85% de sus residuos al relleno sanitario, y solo un 14% tiene como destino el reciclaje. Esta situación ha llevado a una proliferación de proyectos de incineración en el país, amenazando tesoros de biodiversidad como la zona Monumento Natural de los Santos, una zona rural y cafetera donde ocurre parte del proyecto de soluciones basura cero que presentaremos a través de la experiencia de Yoselin Zuñiga.

Yoselin Zúñiga, monitora ambiental del proyecto Lideresas del cambio.
© Camila Aguilera.

Yoselin vive en el barrio El Estadio, en León Cortés, y fue una de las siete promotoras ambientales del proyecto Líderesas del Cambio, impulsado por la Asociación Defensores del Monumento Natural Zona de los Santos. El proyecto nació con el fin de buscar soluciones desde el origen del problema y de llegar con esas soluciones a la vida cotidiana de las personas. 

El proyecto comenzó con un estudio de composición de residuos que arrojó que el 60% de los residuos de los hogares que iban a participar en el proyecto correspondía a residuos orgánicos que terminaban en el relleno sanitario. Por otro lado, el municipio ofrecía retiro diferenciado, pero faltaba potenciar la educación ambiental para generar los cambios que se necesitaban para que existiera un compromiso a largo plazo por parte de los hogares.

“No era citar a la gente a un salón y decirles qué hacer. Era ir a sus casas, adaptarse a sus horarios, compartir un café, conversar”, comenta Yoselin.

Promotoras ambientales, el corazón del proyecto
Monitoras ambientales.

La mayoría de los hogares que participaron en el proyecto estaban compuestos por mujeres que sostenían las tareas del hogar y que, por lo tanto, tenían dificultades para salir de la casa  y asistir a charlas o talleres. Por eso, las siete Lideresas del cambio eran mujeres del mismo barrio, también jefas de hogar, que compartían un lenguaje común y sabían cómo abordar la cotidianidad del barrio para sacar adelante el proyecto.

“Queríamos demostrar que las mujeres somos la primera base del hogar en lo que tiene que ver con reciclaje y compostaje”, explica Yoselin. “No desde un discurso feminista, sino desde la realidad cotidiana. Somos quienes sostenemos gran parte de la casa y también podemos impulsar estos cambios”.

Para cumplir la misión de hacer las visitas domiciliarias, las  monitoras recibieron una capacitación de 16 horas para fortalecer sus capacidades técnicas y habilidades sociales, prepararon materiales educativos y fichas de monitoreo. 

Llevar la educación ambiental a cada casa

Una de las decisiones del proyecto fue evitar capacitaciones masivas o charlas impersonales. Las conversaciones de las tres visitas que estaban contempladas para los 175 hogares que se sumaron al proyecto ocurrían dentro de las casas, en horarios acordados con cada familia. “No es lo mismo llegar a entregar un afiche que sentarse a conversar con alguien que ya conoce a la persona que le está hablando”, comenta Yoselin.

Recorrido por el barrio El Estadio, Costa Rica.

Las visitas se adaptaban a cada familia y fue un acompañamiento en el que se enseñó a compostar, a segregar y a reducir. Algunas personas aprendían escuchando, otras necesitaban ver ejemplos o tocar materiales. Por eso llevaban portafolios con muestras y apoyos visuales. “La idea no era solo ir a decir cosas. Era que realmente captaran el mensaje”.

Compostaje, menos malos olores y menos basura

El proyecto contempló la gestión de la fracción de orgánicos desde el comienzo. Quienes querían compostar en sus propios patios recibieron orientación y, quienes no podían hacerlo, tuvieron la opción de acceder a retiro diferenciado.  Para ello, se articuló un trabajo con Ovejas Verdes, el programa piloto municipal de gestión de residuos orgánicos, que envía los residuos a Coopetarrazu, la planta  de gestión de orgánicos industrial más grande de Costa Rica, donde el compost generado vuelve a productores de café.

Visita a la planta de compostaje de Coopetarrazu.

“El orgánico fue lo que más le gustó a mucha gente”, recuerda Yoselin . “En la segunda visita me decían: ‘Los gusanos se me quitaron de la basura, los malos olores, las cucarachas también’”.

 “Uno pasa una semana acumulando residuos orgánicos en una bolsa y claro que eso genera malos olores. Cuando empezaron a separarlos, el cambio se notó de inmediato”.

“La gente me acogió muy bonito”

Si bien cada paso que se dio permitió consolidar cambios sostenidos con impactos ambientales positivos, también se buscaba impulsar una transformación social a través del fortalecimiento del liderazgo de las promotoras y que el barrio El Estadio se convirtiera en un referente ambiental en el cantón. 

Yoselin dice que una de las cosas que más la marcó fue la forma en que las familias abrieron las puertas de sus casas.“Entrar al hogar de alguien siempre es delicado. Uno podría pensar que la gente se va a sentir incómoda si le dicen qué hacer con sus residuos”. Pero ocurrió lo contrario. “No tuve malas caras de nadie. En la segunda visita ya me decían que llegara a la hora del café o del almuerzo para compartir”.

Para Yoselin, buena parte de los resultados tuvieron que ver con la cercanía. Ese enfoque permitió que las familias se sintieran parte del proceso y no simplemente receptoras de instrucciones. “Si alguien no podía un día, reprogramábamos. Todo era muy accesible. Entonces las personas también se comprometían”.

El miedo a los basureros clandestinos y la amenaza de la incineración

Aunque el proyecto mostró buenos resultados, Yoselin dice que todavía existe preocupación por el futuro de los residuos en la zona, “Sabemos que tenemos un problema. El problema de los plásticos de un solo uso, de la contaminación tan grande que hay, de que los rellenos sanitarios ya no dan abasto. En la zona ya las municipalidades no tienen contratos con los botaderos de basura. Y lo que más miedo nos provoca a nosotros como asociación y a nosotras como promotoras son los basureros clandestinos”, explica.

También menciona la amenaza de una incineradora proyectada para la zona, “Si llega el momento en que la municipalidad no tiene dónde llevar esa basura, ¿qué va a hacer? La gente va a tirarla donde pueda o van a poner la incineradora. Una incineradora que sabemos que en San Pablo León Cortés tiene los permisos firmados. Entonces, nosotros necesitamos dar a entender que sí se puede, que el cambio se puede hacer.”

Para ella, la solución no pasa solamente por gestionar mejor la basura, sino por reducirla desde el origen. “La idea no es pasar la vida buscando cómo resolver los residuos. La idea es que no se generen”.

“No podemos perder a esas familias”

Cuando habla del futuro, Yoselin insiste en la continuidad. “No queremos que esto desaparezca”. Las familias ya capacitadas, dice, necesitan seguimiento, nuevas actividades y espacios donde seguir participando.

Al cerrar la conversación, vuelve a recalcar que el proyecto funcionó porque se construyó desde el barrio, entre personas que ya se conocían y compartían la vida cotidiana. “Fueron más de quinientas personas alcanzadas entre adultos y niños. No podemos perder eso”.

“La gente estaba feliz con el cambio.”

The post “La gente estaba feliz con el cambio”: las monitoras ambientales que transformaron el barrio El Estadio en Costa Rica first appeared on GAIA.