Assessing threats, regulations, and strategies to abate plastic pollution in LAC beaches during COVID-19 pandemic

Abstract

Plastic use and production have dramatically increased globally over the past 65 years with the improvement of life quality by the daily use of plastic products. Still, around 50% of the plastic produced is disposable products that generate substantial waste. Several reports pointed out the adverse effects of plastic litter in coastal environments in recent years, emphasizing single-use plastics (SUP). In this manner, Latin America and the Caribbean (LAC) coastal environments are highly vulnerable due to wastewater treatment facilities scarcity and poor plastic waste management strategies. Since COVID-19 pandemic, the single-use plastic waste/person rate is expected to rise due to the use of personal protective equipment and SUP as health care measures. Based on literature research and the review of plastic waste regulations, this paper will assess the main COVID-19 plastic pollution threats and LAC beaches' regulations to suggest possible measures to abate this problem. The main findings suggest that unifying the ongoing fragmented and overlapped policies is key to abate plastic pollution, including plastic industry regulations and circular economies. In addition, increasing public risk perception about plastic pollution is critical to reducing plastic waste generation. Research advances in the adverse effects of plastic debris could improve the public's perception of plastic pollution risk, pushing forward global marine plastic governance.

1. Introduction

Continuous discharge of plastic materials to the oceans is recognized as one of the most significant pollution problems worldwide, directly impacting aquatic life and water quality (Rochman, 2018; Ronda et al., 2019; Villarrubia-Gómez et al., 2018). Coastal environments are particularly critical plastic pollution hotspots due to the influence of continental pollution sources (Alfonso et al., 2020), threatening their vast biodiversity and ecosystem services (Soto et al., 2021). Those beaches located in Latin America and the Caribbean (LAC) are highly vulnerable to plastic pollution as waste treatment plants are limited and plastic waste management inefficient (Hernández-Padilla et al., 2017; Soto et al., 2021). Single-use plastics (SUP) as plastic bags, food containers, bottles, and fishing nets were the most common litter items found on LAC beaches and the world (Ivar do Sul and Costa, 2013; Galgani et al., 2015; Garcés-Ordóñez et al., 2020). With the growing knowledge on the impacts of plastics, global concern amongst the general public and policy-makers has rapidly escalated (Avio et al., 2017; Borrelle et al., 2017; Mæland and Staupe-Delgado, 2020). Initiatives and actions at many levels (global-regional-national) help to mobilize the international community to abate marine plastic pollution (UNEP, 2018a).

Public awareness is growing along with communities' intense activism, recycling, and clean-ups (Schneider et al., 2018); meanwhile, the resulting public pressure also drives the development of regulatory processes (Koelmans et al., 2017; GESAMP, 2019). In LAC coastal environments, the plastic pollution regulation is framed by a range of policies and actions such as global (e.g., UNCLOS and MARPOL Conventions) and regional (e.g., Cartagena and Lima Conventions) programs to reduce marine pollution (UNEP, 2021b; UNEP, 2019) and activities to improve the plastics litter monitoring and research (GESAMP, 2019). Also, there are national and subnational legislative efforts to reduce land plastic litter directly (Karasik et al., 2020). Furthermore, regulations for plastic waste disposal (UNEP, 2018b) and economic instruments such as specific plastic product ban and extended producer responsibility were applied in many LAC countries (OECD, 2016; Raubenheimer and Uhro, 2020).

Despite all these efforts, the amount of plastic flowing into the oceans is expected to double from 2010 to 2025 (Dauvergne, 2018), being tourism and poor waste management the primary sources of plastic pollution in coastal environments (Garcés-Ordóñez et al., 2020). Particularly, since the emergence of COVID-19, the use of plastic personal protective equipment (PPE) products, life support equipment, respirators, and available plastic supplies, including syringes, increased as the number of people infected globally (Klemeš et al., 2020). In addition, lockdown measures have led to an increase in SUP, in the packaging used to deliver food and groceries to residences (Klemeš et al., 2020). This situation could increase the already existing plastic pollution problem. Considering that COVID-19 is widely recognized as a challenge (Higgins-Desbiolles, 2020; Nicola et al., 2020), it could be expected that poor waste management of such products will be the leading cause of plastic pollution in the near future (Soto et al., 2021).

Therefore, the global pandemic context could be an opportunity to reinforce the application of all the existing agreements, goals, and measures to reduce plastic pollution in coastal environments, also proposing new effective measures to abate new plastic sources. Based on the review of previous baseline studies and regulations in force (global, regional, and national), this paper will tackle the present threats of COVID-19 plastic pollution, revisit the principal regulations/agreements, and propose measures to abate plastic pollution in LAC beaches.

2. Materials and methods

To achieve the proposed objectives, we conducted a systematic search of the available information employing governmental and non-governmental websites (e.g., United Nations, OECD, World Wildlife Fund databases) and Google Scholar as a search web engine to find peer-reviewed papers, books, and technical reports. The keywords “plastic pollution,” “plastic debris,” “plastic litter,” “beach,” “coastal environments,” “COVID-19,” “regulation,” “policies,” “government,” “waste management,” “Latin America,” and “Caribbean” were used for the literature search. The eligibility criteria were based on the review's scope, focusing only on those documents (1) from 2010-up to date that approached (2) the plastic pollution state, (3) on beaches, (4) the related global, regional and national regulations in force, and (5) the current situation of plastic pollution under the COVID-19 scenario. Plastic regulations at the sub-national level were excluded from this search as the information is extensive and not easily accessed.

From the obtained information, we organized their analysis and discussion in five main sections: section 3.1, where main results from data collection were summarized, and section 3.2, where we discussed the main threats of plastic pollution for LAC beaches. In section 3.3, we analyzed the main in-force global (3.3.1), regional (3.3.2), and national (3.3.3) agreements and regulations, including social actions (3.3.4) to abate plastic pollution. In section 3.4, we discussed all the information about the plastic pollution generated due to the pandemic situation. Finally, in section 3.5, we proposed and discussed possible measures to abate the plastic pollution problem, emphasizing the COVID-19 situation for LAC countries' beaches.

3. Results and discussion

3.1. Data collection

From the obtained search information, a total of 110 items were assessed among technical reports (21), reviews (10), book chapters (5), and peer-reviewed research articles (74) that focused on the scope of the present study. From those, 98 documents correspond to plastic pollution research and 32 to the associated in force regulations and agreements. Information about the condition of plastic pollution in beaches was found for most LAC countries and islands. Meanwhile, for plastic pollution state under the COVID-19 pandemic, most published research was available for a global context, not exclusively for LAC countries, when this review was developed. Finally, we found and discussed several international and national agreements and regulations about main in force plastic pollution policies. The main results and discussion from these documents are presented in the following sections:

3.2. Plastic pollution threats for LAC beaches

Plastic pollution has become a growing problem in aquatic environments worldwide. It was estimated that 6.3 billion tons of plastic waste were generated since 1950, from which only 12% was incinerated, and less than 10% was recycled, ending 78% in landfills, dumpsites, or natural environments (Dauvergne, 2018; Geyer, 2020). Jambeck et al. (2015) estimated that between 4.8 and 12.7 million tons of plastic waste reached the ocean only in 2010, and predicted that up to 28 million tons would enter by 2025 if the actual touristic use trends and discharge continue. In addition, Lebreton et al. (2017) estimated that another 1.15 and 2.41 million tons enter into the ocean every year from rivers. The LAC region produces around 28 million tons of plastic waste every year, being 36% SUP (Brooks et al., 2020). It was estimated that 3.7 million tons of plastic waste reached the ocean in 2020 due to an inadequate solid waste management in coastal cities, where a significant portion of the population lives (Brooks et al., 2020). In LAC countries, plastic pollution has land and sea-based sources (Lima et al., 2020; Soto et al., 2021). Among the most commonly cited, urban waste disposal, fish farming, marine traffic, continental runoff, tourism, and fishing and harbor activities are mentioned (Kutralam-Muniasamy et al., 2020; Lima et al., 2020). From urban waste, the most common plastic items found in beach clean-ups were beverage bottles, bottle caps, expanded polystyrene food and drink containers, cutlery, grocery bags, straws or stirrers, and food wrappers (Ocean Conservancy, 2017).

A study developed in Brazilian coastal environments found that plastic comprises more than 80% of debris (Fernandino et al., 2016), with values ranging from approximately 0.11 items m⁻² (Ivar do Sul and Costa, 2013) to 133 items m⁻² (Cordeiro and Costa, 2010). In Argentina, 71,848 items were collected from 888,444 m⁻² of a beach (0.08 item m⁻²), from which 83.2% was plastic (WWF Argentina, 2020). Abundances up to 13 items m⁻² with a mean of 1.7 items m⁻² were found in Chilean beaches (Hidalgo-Ruz et al., 2018). Both Argentina and Chile presented a dominance of plastic fragments and cigarette butts. For the Caribbean countries, a recent study developed in 24 Colombian beaches registered up to 14.72 items m⁻² (mean value = 4.54 items m⁻²) and classified these beaches as “Extremely Dirty” with a “Very High Abundance” of plastics (Rangel-Buitrago et al., 2021). Most of the litter found corresponded to polyethylene (PE) pieces and SUP, such as caps, bottles, and food containers (Rangel-Buitrago et al., 2021). A study in 4 Panama beaches found high microplastics concentrations in the Caribbean coast (353 items m⁻²) and lower ones, but with more diverse plastic categories, for the Pacific Coast (187 items m⁻²) (Delvalle de Borrero et al., 2020). Recent studies affirm that coast clean-up efforts (nearer to land sources) are more effective than those conducted in oceanic gyres, where plastic pollution accumulates (De Frond et al., 2019; Sherman and Van Sebille, 2016). A study about anthropogenic debris in 42 beaches of 24 Caribbean Islands registered concentrations between 0.1 and 48.25 items m⁻², from which 90% corresponded to plastics (5178 items) (Schmuck et al., 2017). According to the authors, higher values were registered for inaccessible beaches due to less frequent beach clean-ups whereas more visited beaches presented higher micro (1–5 mm) than macro debris due to their removal during clean-ups.

All the plastic waste, which ends in landfills or the environment (Geyer et al., 2017), is easily spread by wind, runoff, and watercourses to coastal habitats and the ocean (Lebreton et al., 2017). The continuous urbanization of coast environments increases plastic pollution, as most of it comes from local urban areas (Willis et al., 2017). Beached plastic litter significantly contributes to removing it from the ocean (Browne et al., 2011; Onink and Laufkötter, 2020). Beaching processes also contribute to plastic fragmentation in secondary microplastics (MPs) because of UV radiation, oxygen, and wave effect (Resmeriță et al., 2018; Song et al., 2017). A study modeled beaching processes found that this process is low in LAC countries than in more populated areas such as Asia (Onink and Laufkötter, 2020). Moreover, this study also showed that plastic litter in LAC countries originates more from local sources than remote (Onink and Laufkötter, 2020).

3.3. Governmental and non-governmental actions to reduce plastic pollution

In the last few years, the marine litter problem has intensified discussions and debates worldwide. In the following sections, some of the current governmental regulations (global, regional, and national) (Fig. 1 ) and non-governmental actions developed by NGOs and citizens are detailed for LAC coastal environments:

Fig. 1.

Current leading global, regional, and national regulations for the LAC beaches.

3.3.1. Global regulations

Nowadays, global plastics governance is characterized by a fragmented authority with overlapping and uncoordinated policies. The United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea (UNCLOS) performs global ocean governance (UNCLOS, 1982). It promotes signatory nations to reduce marine litter (including plastic litter), minimizing pollution from 16 marine and land-based sources that may enter the marine environment (UNEP, 2019). Nevertheless, the obtained results depend on each nation's effort (UNEP, 2019). Meanwhile, the Convention on the Prevention of Marine Pollution by Dumping of Wastes and Other Matter (MARPOL), created in the London Dumping Convention in 1972, exerts an internationally legally binding agreement that bans ships dumping waste (including plastic) into the oceans. Its enforcement prevents vessels from dumping waste into the sea and is blurred beyond national jurisdictions (Gago et al., 2020).

The Basel Convention is one of the most relevant plastic waste agreements dealing with controlling transboundary movements of hazardous waste and its disposal between countries (Raubenheimer and McIlgorm, 2018). Initially, this Convention controlled the movements of dangerous plastic waste and household plastic waste. A recent amendment in 2019 added non-hazardous plastic waste, which was not shipped for direct recycling (Annex 2). Another convention that addresses plastic waste is the Stockholm Convention on Persistent Organic Pollutants (POPs) (UNEP, Stockholm Convention), comprising nations to prohibits or restricts all chemical products with POPs, many of them used in the plastic industry as additives. Therefore, these restrictions allow progress towards the use of green chemistry. There are regional centers for the Basel and Stockholm Conventions distributed in Brazil, Uruguay, Argentina, Trinidad and Tobago, Panama, and Mexico for LAC. In 2011, the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) in the United States and the UN Environment developed the Honolulu strategy, based on the nation's voluntary commitments to reduce the incidence and impacts in coastal and marine ecosystems by 2025. It promotes national strategies for plastic regulatory frameworks. The Sustainable Development Goal 14.1 is committed to “prevent and significantly reduce marine pollution of all kinds in particular from land-based activities, including marine debris” by 2025 (UNEA, 2018). The Global Partnership on Marine Litter (GPML), launched in 2012, is a multi-stakeholder partnership to prevent marine litter and microplastics, making a significant contribution to the achievement of the 2030 Agenda, in particular SDG 14.1 (UNCTAD, 2019). Other conventions, such as the Convention on Biological Diversity (2016) and the Conference of the Parties to the Convention on Migratory Species of Wild Animals (2014), adopted resolutions to reduce marine litter (including plastic). The Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations (FAO) Code of Conduct for Responsible Fisheries sets that garbage and fishing gear from fishing vessels should not be disposed in the ocean but is not legally binding (UN Environment, 2017a; UNEP, 2021b). Finally, the G20 in 2017 launched the G20 Marine Litter Action Plan and the G20 Resource Efficiency Dialogue. The action looks for promoting activities to reduce marine litter as sustainable waste management, wastewater treatment, increasing awareness, and stakeholder engagement (Fadeeva and Van Berkel, 2021).

3.3.2. Regional regulations for LAC environments

The UN's Regional Seas Program approach was established to protect coastal and marine environments, contributing to global targets such as the Sustainable Development Goals. Of the 18 regional seas programs in the world, there are two (Fig. 1) that involve LAC coastal environments:

The Wider Caribbean Region (WCR) is one of the world's “biodiversity hotspots” that comprises the insular and coastal States and Territories with coasts on the Caribbean Sea and the Gulf of Mexico, as well as waters of the Atlantic Ocean adjacent to these States and Territories including 28 islands and continental countries. The WCR economies depend on the shipping and petroleum industry, which generates emissions, garbage, oil spills, and sewage. Therefore, the region established the Convention for the Protection and Development of the Marine Environment of the Wider Caribbean Region (“Cartagena Convention”) as its legal framework being the only legal instrument specific for the Wider Caribbean marine environment. Three protocols supplement it: one concerning oil spills, other protected areas and wildlife, and finally, the Protocol Concerning Pollution from Land-Based Sources and Activities to the Convention for the Protection and Development of the Wider Caribbean's Marine Environment Region, the “LBS Protocol” since 2010. The second Convention is the South-East Pacific Action Plan, adopted by signing the ‘Convention for the Protection of the Marine Environment and Coastal Areas in the South-East Pacific’ (“Lima Convention”) that involves Chile, Colombia, Ecuador, Panama, and Peru, to protect from pollution sources. The region also signed a historic agreement with the Secretariat of the Pacific Environment Programme (SPREP) to cooperate to protect a more extensive Pacific area (UNEP, 2021c). There is no specific convention in the South Atlantic, but it is included in other global agreements previously mentioned as MARPOL, Basel Convention, and UNCLO. Finally, in February 2021, the XXII Meeting of the Forum of Ministers of Environment for Latin America and the Caribbean was held. The pollution and waste agenda was discussed for regional management cooperation of chemicals and waste (UNEP Document Repository, 2021).

3.3.3. National regulations

Marine litter regulations are sporadic and fragmented at the national level (Fig. 1). Banning plastic bags is one of the most common measures applied in several LAC countries (Karasik et al., 2020), being Antigua and Barbuda the first countries to apply it in 2016, followed by Panama and Chile. Meanwhile, Colombia enforced a fee over big plastic bags for reducing their use. Jamaica also applied a cost to local and imported plastic products, and Peru required public sector entities to acquire and use biodegradable plastic bags. Costa Rica adopted a strategy to reduce the use of SUP by 2021, like Belize and Bahamas. Ecuador decided to transform Galapagos Island into a plastic-free place, banning its use and sale. Mexico promotes a reduction in straws and expects to ban plastic bags and polyethylene. Colombia promotes the rational use of plastic bags. Haiti prohibited the import, manufacture of black polythene bags and foam polystyrene containers. Argentina banned microbeads nationally and SUP in national parks. Regarding the final disposal of plastic waste, there are national regulations in most of the LAC countries (e.g., Argentina, Brazil, Bahamas, Barbados, Belize, Costa Rica, Cuba, Republican Dominican, Ecuador, El Salvador, Venezuela, Granada, Guyana, Trinidad and Tobago, Honduras, Jamaica, Mexico, among others) (Karasik et al., 2020). Other countries like Bolivia, Brazil, Paraguay, and Uruguay made progress in recognizing laws to extended producer responsibility for plastic bags and some SUP (UNEP, 2018b).

3.3.4. Social actions

Multiple clean-ups in LAC beaches were organized by UNEP to celebrate World Environment Day, called “Clean Seas,” quantifying the type of plastic pollution registered in rivers, lakes, and beaches by volunteers. For their campaign, 15 LAC countries joined (Argentina, Barbados, Brazil, Chile, Colombia, Costa Rica, Ecuador, Granada, Guyana, Honduras, Panama, Peru, Republican Dominican, Santa Lucia, and Uruguay). Also, other non-governmental associations held voluntary clean-up actions on beaches as Parley (2021) or Snorkeling for trash (Snorkeling for trash, 2021) (Fig. 2 ). Nevertheless, this kind of clean-up action is insufficient to reduce and control a massive used and ubiquitous pollutant as plastic. Implementing child education in schools, involving in cleaning actions, or developing citizen science programs could be a long-term strategy to reduce plastic pollution (Hidalgo-Ruz et al., 2018; Prata et al., 2019). For example, in Chile, a citizen science program (“litter scientists”) studied the problem of anthropogenic debris on the SE Pacific coast for ten years (Eastman et al., 2014). This program involved more than 3600 students and teachers from 99 schools participating in plastic debris surveys. From the obtained data, the researchers not only made significant conclusions about the plastic debris composition and spatio-temporal variations (Hidalgo-Ruz et al., 2018), but also could “enhance the spatial and temporal scale of data collection, support school curricula, public understanding of the scientific process, and environmental management decisions” (Eastman et al., 2014). In recent years, the information available about plastic pollution increases with the citizens' interest (Prata et al., 2019). The Internet and social media are excellent tools to improve people's awareness and commitment to plastic pollution because of their massive use and scope. According to Eastman et al. (2014), the publication of the citizen science project in local newspapers recognized students' hard work and improved their long-term commitment. Also, aloud to the rest of the community to be aware of plastic pollution and stakeholders to propose management and policies to abate this problem (Eastman et al., 2014). Like this study, there were several citizen science programs with promising results worldwide (Liboiron et al., 2016; Nelms et al., 2017).

Fig. 2.

Plastic pollution presence and effects in LAC coastal environments during COVID-19. A: Face mask in Cancún coastal waters (Mexico) (Credit: Snorkeling for Trash) and B: Face masks found during clean-up actions in Bucalemu beach (Chile) (Credit content: @parley.tv/@elotrooscar).

3.4. Plastic pollution under COVID-19 scenario

Development of the above-mentioned governmental regulations, bans, and fees will decrease coastal plastic pollution. However, since the COVID-19 global pandemic in March 2020 (WHO, 2021), the use of PPE in professional health care and citizens and SUP items for health and food safety recommendations have increased (De-la-Torre et al., 2021). As a new challenge and without precise specifications about the correct disposal of these plastics items, this situation increased the presence of masks, gloves, and SUP items in coastal environments worldwide (Ormaza-González and Castro-Rodas, 2020; Prata et al., 2020; De-La Torre et al., 2021; Patrício Silva et al., 2021). Moreover, plastic reduction regulations and management measures were postponed prioritizing human over environmental health (Prata et al., 2020; Patrício Silva et al., 2021).

Although the lockdown measures significantly reduce the touristic activities and the associated disposal of plastic litter (Mooney and Zegarra, 2020; Ormaza-González and Castro-Rodas, 2020), plastic pollution future increase could be expected (Prata et al., 2020). With the progress of COVID-19, many countries started softening their lockdown restrictions, allowing people to circulate and use recreational areas with health safety requirements such as the use of masks and other PPE (Canning-Clode et al., 2020). According to UNCTAD's international trade director, the exponential increase in SUP's daily use for health safety aggravates the actual plastic pollution problem. For instance, the business consulting firm Grand View Research affirmed that disposable face masks global sales alone are increasing from $800 million in 2019 to $966 billion in 2020 (Grand View Research, 2021). Social distancing has also led to a flood of products delivered daily to homes as people turn to online shopping and takeout services. The ensuing plastic waste is enormous, and about 75% of it will likely become waste clogging our landfills and floating in our seas (UNCTAD, 2019). Therefore, governments must recognize and address the consequences of a pandemic that promotes increased plastic pollution sources, aggravating the existing problem (Black et al., 2020).

Added to this, the lack of comprehensive surveys and research field studies will result in a gap in plastic litter data, forcing us to take forehanded preventive measures based on assumptions. Monitoring is an essential step addressing specific questions about microplastics and general marine litter, contributing to assessing their spatial and temporal state and providing information for mitigation measures determination and effectiveness assessment (Gago et al., 2020). Notably, during the first months of 2021, surveys registering face masks in LAC beaches were published (De-la-Torre et al., 2021). Also, masks and gloves were recorded on streets and natural habitats in clean-up actions (Fig. 2).

3.5. Proposals to abate plastic pollution in LAC beaches

As discussed in section 3.4, poor waste management and tourism are cited as the primary sources of plastic pollution in coastal environments (Garcés-Ordóñez et al., 2020). According to the UNWTO, the COVID-19 restrictions reduced international arrivals by 70%, with a loss of US$ 730 billion in export revenues from international tourism in 2020 (UNTWO, 2021). Looking towards austral 2020–2021 summer vacations, several LAC countries already opened their beaches to reactivate their economies (e.g., Chile, Brazil, Uruguay, and Argentina), with most of them incentivizing or forcing PPE use. These LAC coastal environments are highly visited places, with tourists' affluence mainly in austral summer (marked seasonal variation) or during all year. In some beaches from LAC, facial masks have already appeared, and it is expected that with tourism's increase will keep happening (Fig. 2). The UNWTO foresees a rebound in international tourism in 2021, mostly in the third quarter of 2021. Therefore, all the postponed regulations during the lockdown and urgent coastal management decisions are needed to avoid the increase in plastic pollution.

Sustainable tourism has been in discussion since the early 1990s, also promoted by UNEP (UNEP-WTO, 2005) being more urgent in the current context. According to UNWTO (2021), it requires the informed participation of all relevant stakeholders and strong political leadership to ensure broad participation and consensus-building. Constant impact monitoring, applying necessary preventive and corrective measures, maintaining meaningful experience and tourist satisfaction, raising awareness about sustainability issues, and promoting sustainable tourism practices are recommended to achieve this goal (UNTWO, 2021). Based on the plastic litter regulations/literature review (see Sections 1, 2, 3) and facing an increase in COVID-19 associated plastic pollution (Section 3.4), proposed action lines to abate plastic pollution are listed in Supplementary Table 1.

As plastic consumers, public risk perception about plastic pollution is critical to its reduction and mitigation. A recent study found that inhibiting messages were less effective than persuasive ones at the implicit level (Sukaatmaja, 2020), outlying that conservation messages should be prepared with an indirect approach (see examples in Sukaatmaja, 2020). Therefore, the application of signs and flyers with a persuasive warning message about the effect of inadequate disposal of plastic litter could be an effective way to improve public awareness in coastal cities. Because of their implementation and maintenance low costs, long-range and higher availability visual messages are one of the better options for locations with a high touristic demand, where face-to-face communication is challenging. This tool is widely utilized for positive attitude influence in visitors' behavior (Perrault et al., 2015; Sukaatmaja, 2020). Furthermore, considering that the population still has restricted access to coasts and enhanced internet access and cell phone applications, combined with the social distancing scenario and enhanced awareness of governmental rules, could build an excellent opportunity to reset coastal social behavior.

In the last years, there was an increase in public perception about plastic litter's adverse effects on marine fauna (ingestion, strangulation, asphyxiation) and microplastics adverse effects (inhalation, toxics exposure, hormonal disruption). Nevertheless, according to Gago et al. (2020), this evidence is insufficient to change public perception about plastics as a high-risk pollutant. Evidence from nanoplastic toxicology research suggests that these particles could be transferred across biological barriers and accumulate inside organisms, resulting in a wide range of adverse effects (Shen et al., 2019). Scientific community advances in nanoplastics bioaccumulation and dissemination could be a game-changer in the public's perception of plastic pollution risk. As in the Montreal protocol (1987), where public perception about the increase in skin cancer because of the Ozone Layer hole helped to regulate the global CFCs production (Solomon, 2004; Gago et al., 2020). Therefore, research about the adverse effects of nanoplastics in trophic chains, including humans, could push forward global marine plastic governance (Gago et al., 2020).

A possible action and a way to combine and implement the in-force regulations with social awareness and coastal management could be redesigning and implementing “Eco-Labels” for coastal environments (Font et al., 2003) but from a COVID-19 pandemic point of view. In past years, eco-labels have been developed to reduce tourism's negative environmental and social impacts, ensuring tourism industry is held accountable to stakeholders. If these certifications achieve citizens' interest, they could inform and influence consumer choice, acting as a marketing tool to reactivate economies associated with coastal tourism (Zielinski and Botero, 2015). Nevertheless, some initiatives as the “Blue-Flag” classification have been criticized for being perceived more as a tourism promotional tool than an environmental management or protection one (Klein and Dodds, 2018). In this sense, these types of “beach certifications” could be revised and redesigned to achieve desired plastic pollution management goals (e.g., preventing and reducing plastic pollution) and taking health care measures for COVID-19 prevention, but avoiding the predominance of tourism promotion.

Another way to respond to the SUP increase (plastic bags and food containers) during the pandemic and an urgent measure to avoid them ending up on our beaches, is citizens' awareness and training in recycling habits. However, people manipulating items to be recycled are potentially exposed to the virus. Therefore, acceptable waste management practices will help in two ways: reducing the environmental impact of plastic litter and preventing further infections. According to van Doremalen et al. (2020), SARS-CoV-2 was more stable on plastic (72 h) and stainless steel (48 h) than on copper (4 h) and cardboard (24 h). The replacement of plastic packages with cardboard could be beneficial for health safety and the environment. Measures like installing more trash cans on beaches will help reduce litter propagation, particularly for cities located within 50 Kilometers of the coast. A proposal could be implementing bio-sanitary, recyclable, and ordinary trash cans, suggesting 72 h prudential time before waste collector's manipulation.

The industry is one of the main targets to reduce plastic pollution in coastal environments. Only four LAC countries are currently incentivizing extended producer responsibility (EPR) (Fig. 1). Therefore, critically needed action is the national promotion of such regulations for the rest of LAC countries, regional collaboration, and effective global initiatives implementation. These actions could significantly reduce plastic waste production by replacing them with more eco-friendly materials and re-entering plastic waste in a circular circuit. These kinds of rules should be developed to promote the plastic recycling industry and the circular economy to decrease the present rise in world plastic production. Regarding the use of POPs and additives in plastic products, their toxicity can harm marine biota and make plastic recycling more difficult (Hahladakis et al., 2018). In this sense, despite the usefulness in polymer product functionality, many common plastic additives pose a high potential to contaminate soil, air, water, and food (Hahladakis et al., 2018). Stepping in Stockholm and Basel Conventions, the national promotion of chemical plastic additives regulation and tiered replacement with “greener” compounds will progress to mitigate the harm at coastal and marine ecosystems (Section 3.2.1).

In this manner, regulating clear labeling for plastic packaging is also necessary, enhancing the importance of consumers' sustainability choices. This choice approach promoted bio-based and biodegradable polymers during the last years, sometimes misleadingly referred to as “bioplastics” (Lambert and Wagner, 2017). These labels' inappropriate use in plastic products leads to the disinformation of their consumers. A study analyzed the biodegradability of bioplastics items under the same conditions as petroleum-based plastics and found that bioplastics did not biodegrade but gained weight (Harding et al., 2017). These results could lead us to deduce that labeled bioplastic samples may not be made from biological sources (Harding et al., 2017). Therefore, there is a need to regulate the assessment of polymers' biodegradability, especially under realistic waste management and environmental conditions, to avoid their release into the environment (Lambert and Wagner, 2017).

Although primary microplastics (those already manufactured with ≤5.0 mm size) account for less than 5% of marine ones (Boucher et al., 2020), the banning of plastic microbeads in personal care products has gained global influence since 2012 (Dauvergne, 2018). In this manner, LAC should join this trend to reduce their presence in the coastal and marine environments (Mazariegos-Ortíz et al., 2020), increasing anti-microbead activism, public concern, voluntary corporate phasedowns, and governmental bans (Dauvergne, 2018). Moreover, synthetic microfibers from textile goods account for 35% of MPs in the ocean (Boucher et al., 2020), providing a global flow to aquatic environments of 0.28 million tons/year (Belzagui et al., 2020). The detachment rate of microfibers from different textile garments, laundry effluents, and the percentage of treated municipal water explains these values. Coastal cities, specifically in the LAC region, are vulnerable zones regarding the percentage of treated water (<20%), since municipal treatment facilities are frequently overflowing during touristic affluence. Belzagui et al. (2020) concluded that Asia is the most polluting region in microfibers reaching aquatic environments, followed by Latin America and the Caribbean. Regarding this context, the COVID-19 pandemic scenario sets a proper situation to disseminate “better practices” in house clothes washing, e.g., washing less but enough, filling up the washing machine, using liquid detergents, selecting colder and quicker laundry settings, among others (Plastic Pollution Coalition, 2021). In particular, for coastal locations, it is urgently to regulate the incorporation of technologies to capture microfibers at the washing machine or later in the effluent before they reached the marine environment (Cesa et al., 2017, 2020).

4. Conclusions

Since its production in 1950, plastic has become a growing pollution problem in aquatic environments worldwide. In the last few years, the presence of marine litter has intensified discussions and debates around the world. Several governments' policies, industries, and scientists seek to regulate plastic pollution by banning SUP and economic instruments such as phasing out specific products and extended producer responsibility. In addition, citizens' awareness is growing along with intense activism, curbside collections, recycling, community clean-ups, and voluntary community initiatives. Today, plastic global governance is characterized by a fragmented authority with overlapping and uncoordinated policies. The spread of COVID-19 has aggravated plastic pollution by increasing disposable PPE and SUP use. This paper discusses the problem of plastic pollution in coastal environments of LAC revisiting present threats and opportunities to abate this issue during the COVID-19 pandemic.

From 2021, most LAC countries are seeking to reopen their beaches to reactivate the economy, incentivizing or forcing PPE use. Facing this problem, constant impact monitoring, applying necessary preventive and corrective measures, maintaining meaningful experience and tourist satisfaction, raising awareness about sustainability issues, and promoting sustainable tourism practices are needed. As consumers of plastic, public risk perception about plastic pollution is critical to its reduction and mitigation. Actions like implementing implicit persuasive messages, citizen science programs, resetting people's coastal behavior through the Internet and apps, and redesigned “Eco-Labels” could inform and influence consumer choice. Other social actions like clean-ups for coastal areas are helpful. Also, incentivizing EPR, regulating plastic chemical additives, and the circular economy to reduce plastic production could significantly reduce their massive production. Finally, research advances on the adverse effects of plastic debris on humans could be a game-changer in the public's perception of plastic pollution risk, pushing forward global marine plastic governance.

Declaration of competing interest

The authors declare that they have no known competing financial interests or personal relationships that could have appeared to influence the work reported in this paper.

Appendix A. Supplementary data

The following is the Supplementary data to this article: