A mess of plastic: It is not clear what strategies will be most effective in mitigating harm from the global problem of plastic pollution. Borrelle et al. and Lau et al. discuss possible solutions and their impacts. Both groups found that substantial reductions in plastic-waste generation can be made in the coming decades with immediate, concerted, and vigorous action, but even in the best case scenario, huge quantities of plastic will still accumulate in the environment. Science , this issue p. 1515 , p. 1455

Recycling has been taking place in South Africa for more than three decades, driven by social and economic needs. While the waste hierarchy is embedded in national policy, an extensive legislative framework has made it more and more challenging for the public and private sector to remain compliant and competitive in a local and global market, and still drive waste away from landfill towards reuse, recycling and recovery. A local recycling economy, on par with many developed countries, is in part due to a large and active informal waste sector. In the absence of separation at source across South African cities and towns, informal waste pickers have been key to accessing resources which the private sector has struggled to access, due to gatekeeping by municipalities. The South African waste and recycling sector can be defined in terms of four main stages of development—“The Age of Landfilling”, “The Emergence of Recycling”, “The Flood of Regulation” and “The Drive for EPR”, and is currently standing on the brink of a fifth stage—“The future is a Circular Economy”. The low hanging fruit, the easy to collect and recycle products, has been reaped. Moving to higher diversion from landfill targets will require more investment by the private sector and by government in the future. The social, economic and environmental benefits of doing this are clear, but must be balanced against the cost that will ultimately be borne by society, as consumers.

Waste management is a social, economic, and environmental problem facing all African countries. If the 2030 Agenda for sustainable development is to be achieved, sustainable waste management approaches must be an environmental and public health imperative deserving political priority. Current reasons for the poor management of waste in Africa, include, amongst others, weak organizational structures; lack of appropriate skills; inadequate budgets; weak legislation; lack of enforcement; low public awareness; corruption, conflict; political instability; and lack of political will. At the heart of the problem, is a failure in governance. However, through these gaps, many social and technological innovations have emerged. Innovations that recognize the opportunity that waste provides as a secondary resource. Diverting waste away from dumpsites and landfills towards reuse, recycling and recovery can improve the livelihoods of thousands of informal waste reclaimers, while also creating new jobs and business opportunities for the continent. Reintroducing secondary resources such as polymer, fiber, metals and nutrients back into local value chains has the potential to strengthen manufacturing economies and reduce the economic burden on product imports. Bringing waste under control in Africa and unlocking the opportunities that “waste” provides as “resource” will require immediate intervention by government, business and civil society.

With changing consumption patterns, growing populations and increased urbanisation, developing countries face significant challenges with regards to waste management. Waste plastic is a particularly problematic one, with single-use plastic leaking into the environment, including the marine environment, at an unprecedented rate. Around the world, countries are taking action to minimise these impacts, including banning single-use plastics; changing petroleum-based plastics to alternative bio-benign products such as paper, glass or biodegradable plastics; and improving waste collection systems to ensure that all waste is appropriately collected and reprocessed or safely disposed. However, these “solutions” are often met with resistance, from business, government or civil society, due to the intended and unintended consequences, leaving many questioning the most appropriate solution to reducing the leakage. This paper argues that there is no one single solution to addressing the leakage of plastic into the environment, but that the solution is likely to be a combination of the three approaches, based on local considerations.

Background: The circular economy framework for human production and consumption is an alternative to the traditional, linear concept of ‘take, make, and dispose’. Circular economy (CE) principles comprise of ‘design out waste and pollution’, ‘retain products and materials in use’, and ‘regenerate natural systems’. This commentary considers the risks and opportunities of the CE for low- and middle-income countries (LMICs) in the context of the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs), acknowledging that LMICs must identify their own opportunities, while recognising the potential positive and negative environmental health impacts. Main body: The implementation of the CE in LMICs is mostly undertaken informally, driven by poverty and unemployment. Activities being employed towards extracting value from waste in LMICs are imposing environmental health risks including exposure to hazardous and toxic working environments, emissions and materials, and infectious diseases. The CE has the potential to aid towards the achievement of the SDGs, in particular SDG 12 (Responsible Consumption and Production) and SDG 11 (Sustainable Cities and Communities). However, since SDG 3 (Good Health and Well-Being) is critical in the pursuit of all SDGs, the negative implications of the CE should be well understood and addressed. We call on policy makers, industry, the health sector, and health-determining sectors to address these issues by defining mechanisms to protect vulnerable populations from the negative health impacts that may arise in LMICs as these countries domesticate the CE. Conclusion: Striving towards a better understanding of risks should not undermine support for the CE, which requires the full agency of the public and policy communities to realise the potential to accelerate LMICs towards sustainable production and consumption, with positive synergies for several SDGs.