Ecological backlash acknowledged: Formation of the End Plastic Pollution International Collaborative (EPPIC)
On Sept. 20, 2023, during a United Nations (UN) general assembly meeting, representatives voted and launched a 15-million dollar initiative led by the International Union for the Conservation of Nature (IUCN) to minimize the long-term effects of plastic on organic life, even that which we cannot see on a microscopic level, and the unsteady route we are traveling down as a result.
This voluntary initiative focuses on solving the plastic pollution crisis by building a global set of networks, all of which unilaterally work on different solutions, the idea being that this independent citizen science will be more effective than active scientists. The End Plastic Pollution International Collaborative, according to the IUCN, will “convene governments, business, civil society, philanthropies, and others to accelerate global action on plastic pollution, focusing on science-based solutions to reduce, reuse, and recycle plastic waste… EPPIC will have reach and opportunities that no single philanthropy, Non-government organization, company, or national government could match working on its own.”
The initiative targets the environmental harm of plastic, finally giving plastics the prevalence they warrant, yet many feel this is too little too late. This discontentment is mainly due to the voluntary, relaxed nature of the initiative established during the assembly—it seems too hands-off for many people’s likings.
The main reason for this comes down to the facts at our disposal, specifically the toxicity of the plastics we utilize daily. A 2022 report by the American Chemical Society determined that most, if not all, humans have trace amounts of microplastics within their bloodstream—in addition to being found in all types of animals, fresh salt water, and the air we breathe every second. Since each of these contains trace amounts of microplastics, either through sediment picked up along the way or intertwined with the cardiovascular system of an organism, there is virtually no way to avoid intake, no matter how intentional one is to prevent it.
That is because of years of unregulated plastic usage—in which these companies favored profit garnering rather than the long-term longevity of their fellow organisms—we now find ourselves on a bleak route, trying to find a way to diminish the effectiveness of this “forever” chemical. Rather than employ regulations or try to find ways to break down plastics - without waiting up to the 500 years plastic takes to decompose naturally, these corporations did nothing.
Many environmental activists have commented on this, stating that these conglomerates seem to put the total weight of their misdeeds onto the backs of billions of unsuspecting individuals through this voluntary campaign. One of these voices was a representative of Greenpeace USA, a group focused on using peaceful protest and creative communication to expose environmental problems and create solutions, who slandered the voluntarism of the EPPIC, John Hocevar.
Hocevar said, “...[The] plastic pollution crisis impacts our biodiversity, health, food security, and economies. But they still refuse to take action on the scale this crisis demands. Initiatives like EPPIC…fail to address one critical root of the problem—plastic is toxic. $15 million is a raindrop…compared to the cost of plastic to our health…”
Though it is still very early into the lifespan of this initiative, the stakes are high for it and the results it produces. Whether or not it is realized now, these results could be the crux of our society going forward. The EPPIC is a step in the direction of allowing plastic to be treated with an urgency that has been noticeably absent until recent; only time will tell the true effectiveness of this initiative.