Trash in a river. Source: Unsplash

Picture this. You order a new sweatshirt online and a few days later, it arrives in a plastic (poly) mailer on your doorstep. The mailer has an insignia stamped on it which says that it’s made from 100% recycled ocean plastics. Wow! This is surprising, since the plastic doesn’t even look recycled - it’s strong, clear of marks or speckles, and nearly perfect-looking. How did that plastic pollution fished from the ocean turn into this? Can we now turn the Pacific Garbage Patch into ecommerce packaging?

Not exactly.

Ocean-bound plastic refers to “plastic waste that is collected from areas at high risk of entering the ocean, typically within 50 kilometers (about 31 miles) of coastlines. This term is used to describe plastics that are not yet in the ocean but have potential to reach marine environments if not properly managed.”

The term can also refer to plastic pollution collected from ocean, waterway, and beach cleanups, but this is far less common - since this litter is often so degraded from its time in the aquatic environment that it cannot be remanufactured successfully into recycled plastic resin or products. Instead, most of these materials are landfilled or incinerated. This subset of plastic is often called “no value plastics”, “negative value plastics” or “low value plastics” - due to their inability to be commercially recycled.

Therefore, the vast majority of recycled ocean-plastic products are made from plastic resin that has been sourced from high-risk countries, not from waterways or the ocean.

Currently, there is no formal, regulatory-definition of ocean-bound plastic- so the term and claim of OBP is dependent on the specific use case and definitions from its certification (if it has one). When the term is used responsibly and verified by third parties, it refers to plastic waste recovered within 50 km (30 miles) of a coastline or major waterway.

Given the lack of regulatory consensus on definition, we instead rely on the industry-leaders and certifiers of these materials as our source of truth. At this time, the two existing certification standards for OBP are:

1. Ocean-Bound-Plastic Collection Certification, owned and operated by Zero Plastic Oceans.

2. OceanCycle Certification, owned and operated by OceanCycle

Between these two certification schemes, collected OBP typically meets the following criteria:

• Geographical Criteria: Plastic must be collected within 50 km (31 miles) of the coastline, in areas lacking formal waste management.

• Social & Environmental Responsibility: Ensures ethical collection practices, fair wages, no child labor, and safety standards for waste pickers.

• Traceability: Requires documentation of the plastic’s origin and destination.

• Third-Party Auditing: Certification must be verified by an independent body.

Brands wanting to know the precise type of OBP resin in question may consult the supplier’s certification documents - which will usually specify the general location, and the distance range (0 - 50 km) from waterways of collection.

“Most of the plastic in our oceans comes from land-based sources: by weight, 70% to 80% is plastic that is transported from land to the sea via rivers or coastlines. The other 20% to 30% comes from marine sources such as fishing nets, lines, ropes, and abandoned vessels.” ¹

Ratio between yearly plastic production and plastic leaking into the ocean. Source: The Ocean Cleanup

There are two main “buckets” of ocean pollution that are most common. The first bucket is pollution that stays close to the coastline: in rivers, on beaches, and sunk to the bottom of the ocean close to shore. The second bucket is that of mass amalgamations of waste in the deep ocean, brought together by gyres and ocean currents, like the Great Pacific Garbage Patch.

It’s important to distinguish the difference between these two focus areas, because solving each requires different strategies. In bucket one, single-use, consumer-facing plastics that reach the ocean typically stay close to shore, and are not pulled out to the deep ocean. In bucket two, mass garbage patches like Great Pacific Garbage Patch are, by weight and volume, mostly made up of abandoned fishing nets and other aquaculture waste from offshore fishing.

Certainly, we understand that coastline-plastic pollution can and does end up traveling far enough to reach these masses, but by the data, we know the probability of a plastic wrapper in a river is much more likely to remain along the coastline than travel thousands of miles away to an ocean garbage patch.

The journey of floating ocean plastic from rivers to garbage patches. Source: The Ocean Cleanup

Where do ocean plastics end up? Source: Our World In Data

“This is a conclusion we see from numbers from the OECD. It estimates that 1.5 million tonnes out of the 1.7 million that enters the oceans remains close to the shoreline. 0.2 million tonnes sinks to the seabed. And less than 0.1 million tonnes is transported offshore on the surface.” ²

Therefore, if we want to address coastline plastic pollution, our efforts are best focused on land-based pollution prevention through better waste management.

If we want to focus on solving and preventing massive garbage patches, we ought to mitigate fishing nets and litter.

In this piece, we will focus on the former: since its composition is most relevant for consumer-facing brands and producers.

The Ocean Conservancy’s 2024 International Coastal Cleanup Report¹⁰ found that coastal pollution from land-based leakage, across the globe, was made up of:

1. Cigarette Butts
2. Beverage bottles (plastic)
3. Bottle caps (plastic)
4. Food wrappers, typically multilayer plastic bags and wrappers (candy, chip bags, etc.)
5. Grocery Bags (plastic)
6. Other bags and pouches
7. Food containers (plastic)
8. Cups, plates (plastic)
9. Straws/stirrers (plastic)
10. Cups, plates (paper)
    

(By volume, not weight)

Specifically, in central and south Asia, the top 5 identifiable plastic materials collected were (in order of high-low volume): beverage bottles, food wrappers, lines/nets/traps, bottle caps, and grocery bags.

Types of plastic that make up ocean pollution. Source: International Coastal Cleanup 2024 Report

High-income countries create the most plastic waste, per capita. But the highest amount of plastic waste enters waterways within middle-low income countries.

This is due to a lack of effective waste management systems. As previously stated, this is not due to a lack of concern, but due to the reality and nature of the economic stages of these countries.

It’s worth noting that high-income nations, like the United States, have had deeply flawed and ineffective waste management infrastructure for a long-time. The creation and growth of infrastructure systems like these does not happen overnight; we can't expect these nations to do better than we did.

Mapped out, nearly 80% of ocean plastic pollution comes from ocean-bound rivers in Asia.¹ By volume, the top 5 land-based polluting countries are (in order): Philippines, India, Malaysia, China, and Indonesia.

“The Philippines accounts for more than one-third (36%) of plastic inputs – unsurprising given the fact that it’s home to seven of the top ten rivers. This is because the Philippines consists of many small islands where the majority of the population lives near the coast. But it’s an important update on our previous understanding of where China and India were thought to dominate. India accounts for 13%, and China for 7%.” ¹

Share of global plastic waste emitted to the ocean, 2019. Source: Our World In Data

There are several factors that contribute to the impact of river pollution: that most Asian nations are islands and ocean-adjacent; the rainy climate which can carry mismanaged waste to drains and waterways; the proximity of major cities to rivers and bays; and perhaps most importantly - the significant lack of waste management infrastructure and systems.

Combined, these factors make plastic waste in low-middle income, ocean-adjacent countries “high risk.”

Previous research from 2017 suggested that the top 10 emitting rivers contributed to between 56 - 91% of ocean plastic pollution. However, the latest research from 2021 challenges this - showing that the top 10 rivers studied only contribute ~18% of all plastic pollution.

This latest assessment suggests that smaller rivers play a much larger role than previously assumed, and to effectively address the issue, we need to widen our focus to address pollution in over 1,656 rivers worldwide.¹ The Ocean Cleanup has mapped these top 1,000 emitting rivers.⁴

For many years, clickbait headlines have purported that rich countries export the majority of their plastic waste overseas. Other claims state that the exporting of plastic waste from rich countries (particularly, North America and Europe) in the global waste trade was the major culprit for ocean plastic pollution.

But the data shows that both of these assertions are unlikely to be true.

• Of the plastic waste generated worldwide, only 2% of it is exported and traded- the rest (98%) is managed domestically: recycled, landfilled, incinerated.³

• Since 2010 (when volumes peaked) the amount of plastic traded has fallen by two-thirds, a dramatic reduction.³

• Most plastic that is traded stays within a local region and economy, not traveling across oceans or between continents.³

In the research piece “Ocean plastics: How much do rich countries contribute by shipping their waste overseas?”, published by Our World in Data, Hannah Ritchie asserts that a reasonable estimate for the amount of ocean plastic pollution that could be attributed to the global plastic trade would be 5%.

She aptly points out:

"A reasonable estimate might be around 5% of ocean plastics [come from waste shipped overseas from rich countries]. In reality, it might be a bit lower because a tonne of waste that is bought and traded is more likely to be managed well than the average tonne of waste in a country.” ³

Key Economic Actors Operating in the Plastic Value Chain and Circularity Pathways. Source: World Bank Group

Experts, scientists, and on-the-ground activists working in plastic pollution cleanup all agree that the number one way to drastically reduce and prevent ocean plastic pollution is through building and supporting waste management systems in high-risk areas - even more than reducing overall plastic use.

Source: The Ocean Cleanup

In the above chart from The Ocean Cleanup, three scenarios are projected and mapped for the future of mismanaged plastic waste.

• Scenario A shows business as usual - if we do nothing - in which mismanaged waste is likely to double (to 200 Million tons) between 2020 and 2060.

• Scenario B shows the impact of improving waste management - which would reduce that theoretical waste figure in 2060 drastically - to 50 million tons.

• Scenario C combines improved waste management with efforts to reduce plastic use (mainly through regulatory standards like EPR and plastic bans) - which brings the 2060 theoretical figure to 25 million tons.

While regulatory changes and reducing plastic use has an impact on the projections, relatively speaking - it is a 13% reduction, which is not insignificant. But compared to the improvement of waste management systems, which would reduce that 2060 projection by 75%, curbing plastic use pales in comparison.

In many of the middle-low income countries where the vast majority of coastline plastic pollution originates, there are no waste management systems, providers, or infrastructure - this subset of material is typically called mismanaged plastic waste.

For citizens in high-income countries, we associate waste management infrastructure with the bins at our homes, apartments, and businesses that collect waste and are regularly emptied, collected, and sent to the proper disposal locations. We may imagine an upgraded waste management infrastructure to include more intelligent recycling centers, compost collection, or hard-to-recycle dropoff locations.

However, we need to drastically adjust these expectations when considering an upgraded waste management in low-middle income countries. There, an improved waste system is often a covered and sealed landfill, and reliable collection systems.

The lack of centralized or consistent services for waste management means it is usually up to the individual to deal with their waste. The main strategies in many of these countries are open dumping (also called open-air landfills), open burning, or dumped into seas or open waters outright.⁷ Individuals and communities burn their trash, or dump it in unmanaged locations to get it out of their way. For ocean-adjacent and island communities, it’s not hard to understand why so much litter, particularly light and easy-to-move plastic, ends up in streams, rivers, and eventually - the ocean.

Improved waste management systems in these countries typically include:

• Creation of closed (capped) landfills

• Bolstering the (often pre-existing) informal waste collection economy, to act like material recovery facilities (MRFs).

• Creating collection / aggregation centers for pickers to bring gathered materials, in exchange for payment.

• Centralizing and aggregating waste (both valuable recyclables and landfill-bound waste) in central, reliable locations builds economies of scale - increasing the legitimacy of the collection’s ability to consistently sell materials into buyers in the recovered materials supply chain.

• Building direct relationships with end-buyers of collected materials: recyclers, remanufacturers, etc.

Waste workers in Udupi, India. Source: rePurpose Global

An informal waste picking and collecting economy already exists in many of these high-risk geographies: finding, collecting, and selling valuable commodity materials - like precious metals and high value plastics - offers many people income.

In Indonesia, for example, two million people work in an informal, exploitative, and low paid, waste sector.

Companies and nonprofits, like rePurpose Global and Plastic Bank that work to organize support for bolstering these systems are careful to approach their support in a sustainable way: meaning, their funding and work only strengthens preexisting systems- it doesn’t replace them or “take over.” Keeping the ownership squarely in the hands of native and local organizations for longevity, engaging multiple stakeholders within the community for collaboration; and providing well-paying, reliable jobs to the local community.

In this way, the dollars provided to these recovery programs through private investment, corporate plastic offsetting, and other financial support incentivizes the collection of waste as a valuable and worthwhile endeavor.

An Overview of Key Features of Informal Waste Collection Systems

• Poor working conditions and lack of safety measures for waste pickers.
• Stigma and lack of recognition for the work.
• Vulnerability to exploitation by intermediaries.
• Lack of integration with formal waste
• management systems.

Common Methods for Formalizing Informal Waste Collection Systems

Source: Plastic Bank

Plastic Bank and Waste Picker Integration, Philippines

Plastic Bank operates in the Philippines by formalizing waste collection efforts and incentivizing plastic recycling. It works directly with informal waste collectors to gather plastic waste that would otherwise end up in the ocean.

How It Works:

• Waste collectors bring plastic waste to designated collection hubs.

• They are compensated in cash, digital tokens, or goods like food and healthcare.

• Plastic is sorted, processed, and sold as "Social Plastic" to global companies like Henkel and SC Johnson.

Impact:

• Diverted millions of kilograms of plastic from entering waterways.

• Improved waste pickers' income and quality of life.

• Enhanced community participation in recycling through education and incentives.

Source: SWaCH

SWaCH Cooperative in Pune, India

SWaCH (Solid Waste Collection and Handling) is a cooperative of informal waste pickers in Pune that works in partnership with the local government to manage urban waste.

How It Works:

• SWaCH collects segregated waste from households, focusing on recyclables, including plastics.

• Members are provided ID cards, uniforms, and safety equipment.

• Waste pickers are trained to separate high-value plastics for recycling.

• Revenue is generated through collection fees paid by households and selling recyclables.

Impact:

• Reduced landfill dependency by diverting significant volumes of recyclables.

• Provided stable income and social security benefits to 3,500+ waste pickers.

• Reduced plastic pollution by ensuring proper recycling of PET and HDPE materials.

Source: Waste Concern

Waste Concern's Community-Based Model, Bangladesh

Waste Concern, a social enterprise in Dhaka, focuses on integrating informal waste pickers into community-based waste collection and recycling systems.

How It Works:

• Waste pickers are organized into small groups and trained to collect and segregate waste.

• Plastic waste is sold to recycling facilities, while organic waste is turned into compost.

• The model is partially funded by carbon credits through composting programs.

Impact:

• Created sustainable income opportunities for waste pickers.

• Diverted plastic waste from landfills and waterways.

• Built a successful model for waste management in low-income urban neighborhoods.

1. Can Reduce the Amount of Plastic Reaching the Ocean: OBP refers to plastic waste found within 50 km (30 miles) of coastlines in countries that have been considered “high risk” of entering the ocean. By sourcing and recycling OBP, these materials are intercepted before they can pollute marine ecosystems.

2. Supports Waste Collection Infrastructure in High-Risk Areas: Many OBP sourcing programs are implemented in low- and middle-income countries where waste management systems are weak or nonexistent. By creating a market for OBP, these programs provide economic incentives to improve waste collection and recycling infrastructure.

3. Raises Awareness: OBP programs often emphasize the need for better waste management systems and highlight the role consumers and companies can play in addressing plastic pollution- driving support for larger systemic solutions.

4. Creates Livelihoods for Waste Pickers: In many cases, OBP programs integrate informal waste pickers, providing them with steady income, training, and better working conditions.

5. Promotes Circular Economy Practices: By using OBP resin in consumer products, companies close the loop on plastic waste. This reduces dependency on virgin plastics and fossil fuels.

Waste worker with recycling materials. Source: rePurpose Global

1. Fails to Address Root Causes: OBP sourcing treats the symptom (plastic already in the environment) rather than the cause (mismanagement of plastics and more broadly - its excessive production consumption). Without systemic changes to both improve global waste systems and reduce plastic production at the source, plastic leakage into the environment will continue.

2. Picking for Already-Valuable Materials, and Ignoring the Vast Majority of Plastic Pollution: plastics that have already entered the environment often have degraded quality due to exposure to sunlight, water, and contaminants. This makes it less valuable to pickers and systems that are focused on finding high-value plastics to sell as certified OBP. For example, clear HDPE is one of the most valuable plastics by price per pound, and is often downcycled into LDPE - thin film plastics used for poly mailers, bags, and plastic bags.

3. Risk of Greenwashing: Consumers are often misled by ocean-bound plastic claims: believing them to be plastics recovered from the ocean and remanufactured into a new product. In reality, they are plastics collected within 50kms (30 miles) of a coastline.

4. Economic and Ethical Concerns: Paying for OBP can incentivize collectors to focus on coastal areas while neglecting inland waste management, creating geographic disparities in collection efforts.

5. Does Not Ensure Long-Term Systems Change: when the material itself is valuable, but the systems that enable its collection are neglected, it could create a situation where - if, in future years, this material has lower demand and value - the management of plastics could fall back to historical norms of mismanagement and pollution.

For brands that have committed to sourcing and using OBP resin in their packaging and finished products, there are three distinct ways to source resin intentionally for high-impact.

1. Targeted sourcing within 0-5 kms of a coastline or river (instead of up to 50 kms)

2. Sourced from high-risk locations, such as the top 5 polluting countries: Philippines, India, Malaysia, China, Indonesia.¹

3. 3rd-party certified (providers include Zero Plastic Oceans’ OBP-Certification) or verified by auditors against a publicly-available Protocol and Code of Conduct - such as rePurpose Global’s Verified Plastic Recovery Protocol

Plastic removal, recovery/interception projects should be, at the very least: Additional, Measurable, Verifiable, and Transparent / Traceable.

As this piece argues, if brands want to have an immediate, proven long-term impact on ocean plastic pollution, our suggestion is to begin contributing to funding waste management in relevant countries.

And, we as a world want to see plastic (and frankly, all packaging) consumption go down. Because of this, here we also provide an action plan for brands to be responsible with, and reduce, their plastic usage from the start - recognizing that the impact of these actions are also longer-term solutions.

We recognize that there is a massive push to remove, eliminate, and replace plastic altogether. This reaction is understandable and frankly deserved, given the tragic implications of this material’s pollution and the lack of responsibility historically shown by the petroleum industry.

While we agree that complete elimination would be the ultimate solution to plastic pollution, we recognize that this is also extremely unlikely to happen in our modern age- given how dependent our systems are on these materials to remain as profitable and efficient as possible.

Therefore, we present the following recommendations as a methodology for progress over perfection in the face of both pollution, and the consistent growth of plastics use.

The time, energy, and financial requirements to complete these strategies are highly dependent on the complexity of the brand’s product suite and supply chain footprint. Generally, the brand-level involvement is medium-high.

The time, energy, and financial requirements by the brand to complete these strategies tends to be low.

The time, energy, and financial requirements by the brand to complete these strategies tends to be low.