The main aspect we problematize is the single-use nature of plastics. Plastic as a material is everywhere; they are in our clothes, gadgets, water bottles and food containers. But what is truly harmful is the single-use nature of plastic bags. The importance of reusing is something we always try to get across to our audience.

Furthermore, sachets as previously discussed are also considered single-use plastics. Now the problem is that some garbage banks actually do not take in sachets anymore due to their non-recyclable nature, opting to dump them in landfills instead. This is exactly why we problematize single-use plastic products that end up polluting the environment.

We often emphasize that the act of reusing is key.

If for example, a person opted to switch from plastic to biodegradable paper bags, it would still be redundant if these paper bags are only used once because then it is no different than single-use plastic bags in their quick conversion to waste. Some people would justify their use of paper bags because it is able to decompose naturally, and yes, although it is good for the environment, the solution to our waste problem is if we make reusing a habit. This issue is actually similar to the stainless straw dilemma. Recent research articles have highlighted how the production of stainless straws actually has bigger emissions than plastic straws. But indeed once again what is pressed is the single-use nature of these products. People often have the misconception that plastic bag alternatives are always expensive and that we have to buy them continuously.

When we talk about coming up with a solution to our waste problem, it doesn’t mean we have to buy new sustainable products. So even though these alternative options might have a higher emission during their production, if it means that we will be using the item constantly and not need to use disposables anymore, then we are indirectly suppressing the production numbers of single-use products, and in turn, the number of gas emissions during the process.

So our executive director Tiza Mafira initiated the petition in 2013. At that time, “Pay for Plastic” was just a mere movement. Various individuals and organizations were involved in this campaign, but Mrs Tiza was the lead initiator. Finally, a petition was made through the Change.Org platform.

Eventually, the Ministry of Environment and Forestry agreed to back up this initiative, which gathered over 60,000 signatures.

As far as I remember, with the petition getting the seal of approval from the Ministry of Environment and Forestry, the trial run for the “pay for plastic” law was implemented in 23 provinces designated by the Ministry of Environment and Forestry for 6 months. The trial run succeeded in reducing plastic use by 55% based on research released by the Ministry of Environment and Forestry. We saw very positive outcomes from this trial run which also lead to a snowball effect like in the city of Banjarmasin which was inspired by the success of the trial run and finally became the first city in Indonesia to ban plastic bagss.

So this is something quite exciting for us because we were able to observe the apparent willingness of regional governments to reduce plastic, with little push and guidance. It might be difficult for the Ministry of Environment and Forestry to assist each and every city, so for this reason, the GIDKP organization is always racking its brains to support the Ministry of Environment and Forestry.

Together in collaboration, we hope to jointly assist local governments to develop this regulation strategically and implementing it to ensure that single-use plastic reduction programs in their respective cities can run effectively and on target.

Yes, it was overwhelmingly positive.

What's really noticeable is that in 2019, the enactment of the PERGUB 142 law caused a lot of stir in the capital city DKI Jakarta, due to the people protesting that it affects business opportunities in the city. For a bit of background, the PERGUB 142 law is a ban on plastic in the province of DKI Jakarta, however, it was not the first as many local governments had also banned plastic, one of which is the province of Bali.

At that time, it was quite clear that there were those who were opposed which resulted in Tiza and her team being taken to court because someone had filed a lawsuit against the prohibition of the use of plastic in Bali.

Luckily in the end, the organization won the trial. So as presented, the situation can be quite intense as there are parties who are not happy and would make a fuss about the plastic ban for fear it will harm their business.

Apart from the province of Bali, this incident also occurred in the province of DKI Jakarta during yesterday's PERGUB 142. It is worth noting that the ban in Jakarta is more specific. While the bans in other cities only cover plastic bags, the ban in the capital also lists specific materials that are prohibited such as bioplastics or biodegradables as well.That is also one of the reasons why GIDKP has received a lot of attention because GIDKP has assisted in the process of making PERGUB 142.

You can check the Kopernik website to find out more about why bioplastics/biodegradables are banned because indeed again, the narrative pushes for single-use properties and the selling point of bioplastics is that they are sourced from organic materials such as cassava, but actually they still use plastic particles. For this reason, GIDKP and several other organizations under AZWI still disagree with bioplastic or biodegradable solutions.

The traditional market is indeed quite challenging, therefore, GIDKP has started to clamp down on the plastic-free market program since 2019. Market management can encourage its traders to use less plastic, but cannot completely ban them, with the exception of some local governments such as Jakarta where traditional markets are also one of the legal subjects regulated for single-use plastic. That's why GIDKP is also part of the plastic-free market program, we strive to educate people that shopping at traditional markets can be done without using a plastic bag. For example, the plastic bag can be replaced with a tote bag or plastic containers you already have at home. The same applies to, say, when buying wet food ingredients such as meat, tofu and so on.

Therefore it is very possible to shop without plastic bags in traditional markets, but again, it's up to the will of the individual. Although many people say that it is difficult to shop without plastic bags, through educational videos and tips that we share online, we have proven that it is indeed very feasible. What is needed is consistency, not only from consumers but also from the traders, which we hope to carry out through this plastic-free market program. Through this program, we encourage traders by making a kind of protocol in which we invite traders to participate in educating their consumers because we are aware that the success of this program depends on the main actors in traditional markets, namely traders who interact with their consumers every day. We consider these traders to be "local champions" in traditional markets because they play a very important role in their interactions with consumers.

To answer the question of whether it is possible for traditional markets to operate independently of plastic bags, the answer is yes, however, it would take some time as it requires change in the society where people have made a habit out of using plastic. Habits, especially ones that occur everyday and involves many people, does not change overnight.

Apart from the plastic-free market program, we are also initiating a new movement called the Reuse Movement Jakarta. What we see to be a major problem is perception. When talking about environmentally-friendly solutions, people already have a prior perception that it is expensive and complicated. The existence of this misperception greatly affects individual behaviours, which in turn reduces the motivation to act. This is quite challenging because again, perceptions and habits are things that are difficult to change. If we are consistent in disseminating information on eco-friendly solutions, it might just motivate people to do it. But again, yes, in my opinion, the main obstacle is the factor of misperception itself. To me, I do not agree with the claim that sustainable solutions don't exist because the solution already exists right in front of our eyes and in our own homes — in the form of canvas bags and tumblers.

The second problem is the spread of misinformation that led to these misperceptions. As I have discussed before, for example, during the ban on plastics in Jakarta, there was an apparent rejection from several industries, especially the plastics industry, which greatly affects how they decorate the media, in the sense that it would later lead to the emergence of hoaxes, etc., especially during the PERGUB yesterday which coincided with Covid 19. So in my opinion, that is also one of the inhibiting factors because individuals are quick to absorb the news; especially the highlights. For this reason, organizations are always keen to justify wrong narratives. And lastly, further elaborating on my previous point, is the number of people promoting fake solutions. Especially when talking about Waste to Energy, which caused a lot of confusion amongst the public and that is proof that the narrative manipulation by the industry has succeeded in brainwashing people with misinformation.

To summarize, misperceptions and the dissemination of false information are major bottlenecks that are difficult to change once it sinks in and we are always struggling to find ways to help people differentiate between true and false facts. The documentaries Plastic Island and Story of Plastic are one of our methods to refute this. Katiza was involved in both documentaries which in fact became tools for us to refute wrong narratives circulating in the media.

Getting the right information to people is important. That’s why education and campaigns are important factors because even though laws and restrictions play a crucial part when talking to the community, a different approach is more ideal. We could take the recent implementation of the obligation to wear masks during the pandemic. We were able to observe and learn from that experience how people would react. The sad realization is that even with things being a health hazard, it is still rather difficult to get people to comply, more so the problem of plastic pollution whose impact on health is not very visible.

Firstly is that I hope each person at least makes an effort to reduce plastic use. What I often highlight is that we don't need to completely stop using plastic which can be considered quite overwhelming. Instead, I always put more emphasis on an individual devising a personal plan catered to their habits to slowly cut down on using plastic in their routine. Hopefully once successful, these individuals can then turn to educate the people around them, which brings me to my next point.

Secondly, I hope that more people would spread environmental awareness to the people around them. It is difficult if we are alone in this battle, yet with the power of a few, a huge impact can be made, even if individually, the cutbacks on plastic are minute.

For the aspirations of the GIDKP organization itself, the third is to devise a method for the regional or central government to be able to work closely with all actors in their respective regions because again, what we want to highlight is systemic changes.

For the aspirations of the GIDKP organization itself, the third is to devise a method for the regional or central government to be able to work closely with all actors in their respective regions because again, what we want to highlight is systemic changes. If for example talking about systemic change, there is a need for all parties in the ecosystem to get involved together in a sustainable ecosystem. Recently, GIDKP created the Reuse Infrastructure Grid, where we created an ecosystem to enable all parties in the city of Jakarta to contribute to this re-use ecosystem so that, aligning with a saying by the UN, no one gets left behind. Synergy and commitment are the keywords in order to succeed together in creating an environmentally friendly ecosystem.

Fourth would be for no more public misperceptions of the false narratives and solutions around plastic pollution as mentioned earlier because, in my opinion, the media has great power over individuals because their knowledge of certain things would ultimately dictate their behaviour.

And the fifth and final hope, in light of the upcoming 2024 election, is for our new leader to take responsibility to support the right solution for all Indonesians and our environment.