National
Plastic Action
Partnerships[NPAP]A Multistakeholder Approach to Addressing
Plastic Pollution in Developing Countries

National Plastic Action Partnerships (NPAP):
A Multistakeholder Approach to Addressing Plastic Pollution in Developing Countries
This study was conducted for the World Economic Forum (WEF) by the Center for Global Commonsat the University of Tokyo (CGC) and the Institute for Global Environmental Strategies (IGES)
Project Administration
IGES: Vivek Anand Asokan, Yasuhiko Hotta, and Miki Inoue
CGC: Takashi Ohtani, Izuru Takei, and Hikari Ogawa
Global Plastic Action Partnership (GPAP): Abdellah Hmamouche and Enrica De Pasquale
Economic Research Institute for ASEAN and East Asia (ERIA): Ayako Mizuno
Authors
Section 1: Vivek Anand Asokan and Takashi Ohtani
Section 2: Vivek Anand Asokan
Section 3: Abubakari Ahmed
Section 4: Muchamad Muchtar, Budhi Setiawan, Vivek Anand Asokan, andPremakumara Jagath Dickella Gamaralalage
Section 5: Do Thi Thu Trang, Hoang Minh Giang, Vivek Anand Asokan, and Ngoc-Bao Pham
Section 6: Vivek Anand Asokan
Reviewers
ERIA: Michikazu Kojima
IGES: Mark Elder and Shiko Hayashi
English proofreading and editing
Thomas Hamilton
DesignLayout by Match-up Co. Ltd.
Cover design by Match-up Co. Ltd.
All rights reserved. No part of this publication may be reproduced, stored in a retrieval system,or transmitted in any form by any means electronic or mechanical without prior written notice toand permission from CGC and IGES.
Please cite as Asokan V.A., Muchtar, M., Ahmed, A., Trang, D.T.T., Ohtani T., Giang, H., Setiawan,
B., Pham, N., and Gamaralalage, P. (2023). National Plastic Action Partnerships (NPAP): A
Multistakeholder Approach to Addressing Plastic Pollution in Developing Countries. Center
for Global Commons at the University of Tokyo (CGC) and Institute for Global Environmental
Strategies (IGES). DOI: https://doi.org/10.57405/iges-13061

Acknowledgments
The authors wish to thank ERIA, WEF, NPAP secretariats, and respondents to our interviews.
They are grateful to the reviewers for reviewing the draft and for their comments. Gratitude isalso extended to Thomas Hamilton for proofreading the report.

IIForeword
Plastics permeate every part of our daily lives, and have brought to us significant convenience.
However, in recent years, the dumping and leakage of plastics into the ocean and the resulting
impacts on the environment and human health have created major global crises. The plastic
value chain is complex, capacities of source countries are sometimes lacking, and local
conditions are diverse, all of which present vast challenges to addressing plastic. Within thiscontext, several international initiatives have emerged, one of which is Global Plastics Action
Partnership (GPAP).
GPAP, launched at the World Economic Forum in 2018, has a unique, two-tier structure
comprising a Global Platform and National Action Platforms for individual countries, and is
expected to provide unique benefits to participating countries. Countries can learn lessons
from each other and benefit from the global knowledge on the global platform, while retaining
their individual internal structures, which are tailored to local conditions in terms of capacity
levels, governance structures and value chains.
Another unique feature of GPAP-NPAP is its ability to bring multiple stakeholders under one
platform. Governments, both national and sub-national, the private sector, internationaland national NGOs, local communities and citizens are expected to work together under thenational strategy to address the plastic issue. Within the business sector, various players exist
in the plastics value chain, some of which are found in developed countries, as well as recycling
and waste management industries.
The overarching aim of launching GPAP-NPAP was to assist individual countries in addressing
the plastic challenge. This 'snapshot’ assessment was conducted to evaluate if initialexpectations have been met, what aspects are effective, and where improvements are needed.
While only four years have passed since its launch and it would be premature to carry out amore comprehensive project assessment at this point, it was considered useful to provide thissnapshot assessment at an early stage with the hopes that more countries can be encouraged
to adopt the GPAP-NPAP framework as a result. In summary, this assessment reports on its
generally positive findings and provides suggestions for a way forward, such as the need foreach NPAP to include diverse local actors.

Naoko Ishii
Executive Vice President, the University of Tokyo
Professor at Institute for Future Initiatives
Director, Center for Global Commons at the University of Tokyo (CGC)i

Foreword
The problem of unmanaged plastic waste and its leakage into the ocean has entered themainstream discourse on environmental protection and needs our immediate attention.
Managing plastic pollution requires downstream efforts, such as waste management systems,
and upstream efforts such implementation of 3R (Reduce, Reuse and Recycle) and circular
economy policies.
While downstream measures such as waste management infrastructure exist in developed
countries, the situation is very different in developing countries. Developing countries face
additional challenges to address the issue: they lack capacity, such as financial, technical,
managerial capacity, which is especially true in Asia and Africa. Developing countries haverequested support for capacity building efforts – financial and technical resources – to manage
plastic waste from the Intergovernmental Negotiating Committee (INC) on Plastic Pollution.
Global stakeholders, including developed country governments and multinational companies,
can help fill the capacity gap, and they have started engaging with national governments indeveloping countries. Yet their efforts need to be co-ordinated, and in particular, they mustmeet both local and national needs, which requires engagement, consultation and working
with different stakeholders.
In this regard, the Global Plastic Action Partnership, hosted by the World Economic Forum,has formed individual National Plastic Action Partnerships in several countries with the aimof encouraging systemic change and reducing plastic pollution and marine plastic litter. This
report covers their approach and operations in Ghana, Indonesia, and Vietnam.
It is my hope that this report will help highlight the importance of MSPs such as NPAP and
disseminate information to support the INC process. This report describes NPAP’s MSP
approach and can serve as an important resource for other MSPs and as a basis for discussion
on the role of MSP in guiding business-government-community collaborative models forplastic waste management at the INCs.

Kazuhiko Takeuchi
President, Institute for Global Environmental Strategies (IGES)

ii

Contents
iv
v
v
vi

List of Abbreviations
List of Figures
List of Tables
Summary and Introduction to the Report

Section 1: The Context of Plastics Pollution
1.1 Introduction–Global Plastic Pollution
1.2 Emerging Global Plastic Pollution Governance
1.3 Plastic Value Chain and Capacity Challenges in Developing Countries
1.4 MSPs to Solve Grand Challenges
1.5 Global Plastic Action Partnership

Section 2: Background and Data Analysis
2.1 Theoretical Background
2.2 Motivation and Research Questions
2.3 Review of literature
Multi-stakeholder Partnerships and their Strengths
2.4 Limitations of this Study

1
1
2
2
4
4
7
7
8
8
8
10
11
11
11
11
12
13
14
15

Section 3: Ghana
3.1 Introduction
3.2 Waste Management Context
National Background
Local Government Context
3.3 NPAP Activities
3.4 Current Achievements and Status
3.5 Way Forward and Conclusion

17
17
17
19
20
21

Section 4: Indonesia
4.1 Introduction
4.2 Waste Management Context
4.3 NPAP Activities
4.4 Current Achievements and Status
4.5 Way Forward and Conclusion

23
23
23
23
24
24
26
26

Section 5: Vietnam
5.1 Introduction
5.2 Waste management context
National background
Local background
5.3 NPAP Activities
5.4 Current Achievements and Status
5.5 Way Ahead and conclusion

Section 6: GPAP Approach: Task Forces to Roadmaps to Action
6.1 Introduction
6.2 Summary of the NPAP approach
6.3 Major Findings
Institutional Mechanism
Procedural Mechanisms
6.4 Recommendations to strengthen NPAP operations
Creating inter-ministerial coordination at the national level
Involvement of local governments
Involvement of the informal sector
Financial bankability
6.5 Conclusion: Central Actor as a Linchpin and Future Recommendations

iii

29
29
29
30
30
31
31
32
32
32
32
32

List of Abbreviations
BRIN

Indonesian Institute of Sciences

CE

Circular Economy

CMMAI

Coordinating Ministry of Maritime Affairs and Investment

CSIRO

Commonwealth Scientific and Industrial Research Organisation

EPR

Extended Producer Responsibility

GPAP

The Global Plastic Action Partnership

ISPONRE

Institute of Strategy and Policy on Natural Resources and Environment

IWCs

Informal Waste Collectors

LB

Leadership Board

LEP 2020

Law on Environmental Protection 2020

MESTI

Ministry of Environment, Science, Technology & Innovation

MOEF

Ministry of Environment and Forestry

MOHA

Ministry of Home Affairs

MONRE

Ministry of Natural Resources and Environment

MOPWH

Ministry of Public Work and Housing

MSP

Multi-Stakeholder Partnerships

MSW

Municipal Solid Waste

NPAP

National Plastic Action Partnership

NSMD

Non-State Market-Driven

OECD

Organization for Economic Co-Operation and Development

OJK

Financial Services Authority

PACE

Platform for Accelerating Circular Economy

PET

Polyethylene Terephthalate

PPP

Public Private Partnerships

PRO

Producer Responsibility Organisations

RDF

Refuse-Derived Fuel

SCS

Systems Change Scenario

SDGs

Sustainable Development Goals

SME

Small-Scale Enterprises

SMV

Special Mission Vehicles

TF

Task Force

TPS

Temporary Collection Points

TPS 3Rs

Temporary Collection Points Mini-MRFs (Materials Recovery Facilities)

UNEA

United Nations Environment Assembly

VCCI

Vietnam Chamber of Commerce and Industry

WEF

World Economic Forum

WtE

Waste to Energy Plants

WWF

World Wildlife Fundiv

List of Figures
Figure 1: Plastic value chain

3

Figure 2: GPAP impact ladder

6

Figure 3: Role of central actor in aligning perspectives,

10

targets, and action

List of Tables
Table 1: City type and related waste generation rate

12

Table 2: Membership of Task Forces by stakeholder group

13

Table 3: Activities of NPAP-Ghana

13

Table 4: List of regulations related to solid and plastic

18

wastes management
Table 5: Task forces and activities

25

Table 6: Summary of the NPAP approach30v

Summary and Introduction to the Report(2) How can the NPAP approach help deliver the

In this report, we describe the challenges of plastic
pollution

and

the

need

for

collaborative

Multi-Stakeholder

outcomesinmitigating

plastic

pollution?

Partnerships (MSP) and describe an emerging MSP
process called GPAP and its sister NPAP counterpartsin developing countries. We focus on three developing

To provide a description and understanding of thecountries, Ghana, Indonesia, and Vietnam as NPAP

NPAP process, we present and develop a conceptual

have started operations in these three countries.

framework based on an academic literature review
on MSP as a way to understand the complex reality

Plastic waste management is a critical issue inand various factors that influence the MSP process.

developing countries, the countries lack technicalWe then review primary resources – NPAP andand financial capacity. The grand challenges ofgovernment documents – to understand and describe

environmental pollution are complex, uncertain, andthe NPAP process with the help of the conceptual

evaluative, and measures to address the issue areframework.

likewise very complex. Therefore, to prevent plastic
pollution, diverse perspectives must be aligned, shared

NPAP aligns divergent interests of various stakeholders

goals must be established, a timeline must be agreed

such as perspectives, targets, priorities, and timeline

on, and new financial flows to solve the problem mustof all stakeholders, thereby trying to engineer change.

be generated.

The unique approach of the GPAP and NPAP to addressthese complex and difficult challenges is that it brings
stakeholders with divergent interests together by:Multi-stakeholder processes that involve governments,
businesses and communities have been proposed to(1) Providing a forum for stakeholders to collaborate

accelerate change and bring about effective systems

through a multi-layered mechanism that brings

to manage plastic waste. The GPAP, hosted by World

together international and national stakeholders

Economic Forum (WEF), is a multistakeholder platform

without diminishing the role of the national

to replace the current ‘take-make-waste’ model with agovernments;

closed-loop circular economy approach to reduce theimpacts of plastic pollution in developing countries.

(2) Bridging the knowledge gap in developing countries

NPAPs are national level secretariats of GPAP thatthrough the use of ‘system change scenarios’

work with national governments, businesses andderived from internationally recognised models

communities at the national level and take care of(built by SYSTEMIQ), the sharing of knowledge

the day-to-day operations. WEF has partnered withamong various stakeholders, and supporting the

SYSTEMIQ, and makes use of their models. SYSTEMIQ

development of data-based policy making in pilot

is a company that handles modelling and is focussed

countries; andon driving sustainability and systems change.

(3) Facilitating

proactive

experimentation

In this report we cover the NPAP processes unfoldingbyactionparticipants

andsocialthroughtheparticipatory architecture through creation of thein Indonesia, Ghana and Vietnam to understand andfive Task Forces (TF) and action agenda for systems

describe the role of NPAP in planning strategies andchange.

facilitating the MSP process to improve plastic waste
management in developing countries, based on the

The report is structured as follows. In section 2,

following considerations:

we cover the research questions of this study and(1) In the three pilot countries, what are NPAP’s

introduce the conceptual framework used in theplanned approaches and strategies in supporting

study. From sections 3 to 5, we discuss the specificand promoting practical and systematic action, andcase study, and finally, in section 6, we present theencouraging narratives to transition to a circularanalysis and emphasise the importance of GPAP andeconomy for plastics?

NPAP projects, and elaborate the way forward for themultistakeholder platform.

vi

1

SECTION

The Context of
Plastics Pollution
Authors: Vivek Anand Asokan and Takashi Ohtani

1.1 Introduction–Global Plastic
Pollution

Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD)

Plastics are ubiquitous: they are used everywhere in

to cut plastic usage (OECD, 2022). Hence, measures are

our economy. Due to their properties, such as lighturgently needed to stop the ever-increasing amounts

weight, strength, water resistance, shock resistance,of plastic from entering the environment and themalleability,

resistanceocean. It is widely recognised that much of the plastic

to photodegradation, the use of plastics has been

leaked into the ocean is caused by mismanagement on

associated with lower material and energy use, as wellland, and the shift to a circular economy is expected

as health and safety benefits (Andrady & Neal, 2009).

to offer promise as a solution to plastic pollution.

However, in recent years, the dumping of plastics

Gruber et al. (2022) recommend upstream measures,on land and leakage of plastics into the ocean andincluding product eco-design, increased producer andthe resulting impact on biodiversity have become

retailer responsibility, stricter government policies,

significant problems.

and consumer behaviour changes to stem plastics

chemicalresistanceandestimates that plastic consumption will continue toincrease until 2060, even under an ambitious scenario

leakage to the environment and ocean. And naturally,
The articles by Jambeck et al. (2015) focused on plastic

downstream measures such as waste management

pollution, which at the time was still an ‘emerging

and waste sorting are equally important.

challenge’ and emphasised the importance of waste
management to stop plastic leakage into the ocean,

Although a variety of good practices have alreadyespecially in developing countries that lack waste

emerged around the world, the role of capacity

management infrastructure. The latest research showsbuilding and support are critical to implementing thethe presence of plastic particles in marine sediments

above measures in developing countries. The plastic(De-la-Torre, 2020), air (Schymanski et al., 2021), biota

value chain has several stakeholders – national and(or gut contents) (Ugwu et al., 2021), and even humaninternational – and there exists a significant state

blood (Leslie et al., 2022). Today, environmental

capacity deficit in developing countries that makes

pollution due to poor plastic waste management is

it difficult to implement solutions that can work, andwidely recognised as one of the major transboundary

accentuates the problem.

environmental challenges.
Indeed, it is due to the rate of growth of plastics thatdeveloping countries require capacity support, as in

In its Global Plastic Outlook, the Organization for1Section 1：The Context of Plastics Pollution

some areas they are one of the major contributors toelements in solving the plastics problem.

plastic pollution from land-based sources to the ocean.
On the other hand, as the OECD's Global Plastics
On the other hand, in recent years, in various

Outlook points out, the role of technical and financial

environmental fields, MSPs, mainly consisting of

support to developing countries is crucial to solving

non-state actors such as international NGOs andplastic pollution. In doing so, it is necessary to identify

multinational corporations, are increasingly taking on

key issues and priorities for national and regionalsuch capacity support. Therefore, this report focuses

efforts, considering the different institutional aspects,

on describing the roles played by NPAPs in the threecapacities, and interests of developing countries. The

countries to address plastic pollution.

NPAPs discussed in this report are MSPs that address
this challenge.

1.2 Emerging Global Plastic Pollution
Governance

1.3 Plastic Value Chain andCapacity Challenges in
Developing Countries

The roles of non-state actors such as NGOs andcorporations are rapidly becoming more importantin relation to complex social issues, such as plastic

Recent research has highlighted that plastic pollution

pollution and other environmental problems, whereis a major problem in developing countries and that

it is sometimes difficult to reach consensus amongit contributes to global marine plastics pollution

nations and within nations. Such actors complement(Jambeck et al., 2015; Meijer et al., 2021). Here, we

and support the functions of national bodies in theelaborate on the plastic value chain and capacity

form of MSPs by designing standards and new norms,

challenges for developing countries.

raising consumer awareness, and facilitating thebuilding of international and domestic consensus.

There are various players in the plastics value chain:

Cashore (2008) calls this evolving process a NSMD

the plastics industry itself; companies producing

governance system’. For example, the PACE, a global

goods used in diverse sectors such as construction,

collaboration platform now hosted by the World

textiles, agriculture, automotive, and electronics; andResource Institute, has set the goal of doubling

the chemical industry that manufacturers plastics.

circularity in 10 years, and in the plastics sector, they

The plastic value chain is global, several stakeholders

have launched ‘The Circular Economy Action Agenda

operate outside of national jurisdictions, plastics arefor Plastics’. The action agenda identifies 10 priority

exported or imported at various stages of the plastic

actions required to achieve plastics circularity, working

value chain.

with public and private partners on project promotion
Once plastics are disposed of, waste material isand advocacy activities.

collected and recycled to varying degrees by local
At the international level, consensus is rising on

governments.

mitigating plastic pollution. For example, in 2018, theregulations are in effect, plastics are also recycled byAdditionally,

in

areas

where

EPR

Ocean Plastics Charter was adopted by all G7 members

PRO. Such organisations are obligated by government

except for Japan and the US. In 2019, the Osaka Blue

regulation to oversee collection and recycling. In some

Ocean Vision was adopted by the G20 members with ainstances, they can be private companies, government-

call ‘to reduce the additional pollution by marine plastic

mandated institutions such as local community

litter to zero by 2050’ (Hotta et al., 2021). Furthermore,organisations or based on PPP models, and thoseand most importantly, at United Nations Environment

who organise the recycling and waste management

Assembly (UNEA) 5.2 in 2022, governments agreed

services are regarded as a PROs.

to begin negotiations to create a legally binding
instrument on plastic pollution (End Plastic Pollution:

Therefore, the challenge lies in the collection and

Towards an International Legally Binding Instrument,

assimilation of data in each subcategory from the wide2022). In this resolution, the roles of multi-stakeholder

range of stakeholders, as these data are crucial forpartnerships and international cooperation, especiallydownstream users (i.e., those collecting the waste andregarding knowledge, are emphasised as important

processing it).

2Section 1：The Context of Plastics Pollution

The plastic value chain is complex with many

capacities lacking in many developing countries, as

stakeholders in the process, as described, and requires

follows:

complex capacities. Sobir (2019) elaborated on the
Figure 1: Plastic Value Chain

Basic framework of plastic flow
1
1

Imports – exports =Virgin/recycled +Embodied plastic

62

Production =Resin production +Recycled resin
production +Resin exported

12 Illegal

dumping(invisible and
lost)

3

3

Industrial
plastic use

7

2

4 3R

5

Total
Consumption =Household waste +Imports

13 Untreated

4

Waste
Generation =Industrial waste +Household waste +Waste imports –Waste exports(visible + invisible)

sewage tyre debris

8 Sewagetreatment rate

14
15 MSW

leakage towater bodies

9 MSW collection

and processing =(Open dump +Landfill +Incineration)

6 3R

15 MSW leakage

to wind nearwater bodies

16 Improper

recycling Leakage

517
10 Informal recycling

Beach Litter

18 Slowweathering ofplastic fromland anddisasters

11

Formal recycling
and waste recovery

Source: Authors• Policy and legislative capacity, i.e., the capacity• Financing capacity, which refers to financing

gaps in preparing national plans, sector-based

capacities

policies/strategies, local planning, etc.

• Institutional

capacity,

i.e.,

the

capacityforresource

mobilizationandstrengthened public finance processes• Information and technological capacity, whichtocoordinate and implement through sectoral andrelatehierarchal collaborations

totechnology,

information,andknowledge

innovation

tosharing,

accelerate

implementation• Monitoring and reporting capacity, which refers
to identifying local targets and indicators, and theSuch challenges exist in many developing countries,

potential to collect data and maintain informationand overcoming them is difficult due to the diversity

systemsof the plastics value chain stakeholders and related• Human resource and leadership capacity, which

complexities due to economic and political challenges.

refers to the availability of both technical andFurthermore, the waste management and recycling

managerial human resources

sector is not economically profitable, and is considered3Section 1：The Context of Plastics Pollution‘dirty’, which hinders private sector and communityforparticipation in the waste management sector. In

increasing the achievement of the rest of the SDGs.

sustainable

development’andfocusesondeveloping countries, the waste management andThis goal directs our attention to MSP as an effective

recycling activities are entirely based on market

governance mechanism (Maltais, Aaron et al., 2018).

activities. Since the cost of recycling and waste
management is high, only the most profitable andMulti-stakeholder partnerships are instruments for

expensive items are recycled via informal waste

leveraging capacities beyond the state level, using themanagement system. In comparison, in developed

power of the private sector and nongovernmental

countries the market is regulated via EPR mechanisms

organizations.

that prioritise recycling over waste management, andtouches on the importance of the financial sector as an

The‘AddisAbaba

ActionAgenda’sometimes recycling is more economically feasible

enabler for achieving Agenda 2030, including the SDGs,

than waste management.

and points to the importance of multi-stakeholder
partnerships to facilitate the mobilization of funds

At the same time, as noted above, as governmentsfrom the private sector (Addis Ababa Action Agenda :lack capacity and waste management services are not

Financing for Sustainable Development Office, n.d.).

widely available, the situation remains in a stalemate.
To overcome this situation, developing countries must

An advantage of multi-stakeholder partnerships is1) build action plans, 2) coordinate with horizontal andthat they pool resources, thus theoretically allowing

vertical stakeholders, 3) set targets, 4) develop humaneach partner to fully demonstrate its strengths. A

resources for execution, 5) raise financial resources,

comprehensive literature review on MSPs can be foundand 6) develop information and knowledge. As manyin section 2. The Global Plastic Action Partnerships

developing countries do not possess such complex

highlighted in this report also intends to serve ascapabilities, this is why MSPs could support capacity

catalysts for financing to mitigate plastic pollution.

building in such countries.

1.5 Global Plastic Action Partnership

1.4 MSPs to Solve Grand Challenges

There are many MSPs addressing a range of

Sustainability-related challenges are ‘grand challenges’

environmental and social problems, and in this sectionthat are complex, uncertain, and evaluative (Ferraro

we highlight the salient features of GPAP and NPAP,et al., 2015; Gehman et al., 2022); they are complex

which is the national body and is based on the GPAP

problems

approach.

‘involving

multipledomains,

multiplelocations, and multiple time frames’. The challenges
are uncertain, as the outcomes are risky and we

The GPAP, hosted by World Economic Forum, is a(humans) lack the knowledge to quantify all the risks.

multistakeholder platform to replace the current

The challenges are evaluative, as they are understoodtake-make-waste model with a closed-loop circulardifferently by different stakeholders. Global plastic

economy approach to reduce the impacts of plastic

pollution is such a challenge and involves manypollution. NPAPs are the national level secretariat ofactors in diverse geographic regions, and such actors

GPAP that work with national governments, businesses

evaluate the risks differently, producing a range ofand communities at the national level and handle theoutcomes. As described in Section 1.2, as the plastic

day-to-day operations of the MSP.

value chain involves many stakeholders, collaborationof such stakeholders has the potential to cut through

GPAP itself was launched in 2018 at the World

the complexity of the plastic pollution issue.

Economic Forum’s Sustainable Development Impact
Summit. GPAP works closely with SYSTEMIQ and WEF,

The importance of MSP is also reflected in thein the sense that WEF steers GPAP, and the models

Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) as Goal

used therefor are based on those developed by

17 (capacity building (17.9) and MSPs (17.16 and

SYSTEMIQ. SYSTEMIQ as an entity was started up by

17.17)), which is titled ‘Strengthen the means of

ex-McKinsey consultants, and receives support from

implementation and revitalise the global partnershipseveral companies, such as Unilever, Nestlé, Danone,

4Section 1：The Context of Plastics Pollution

BNP Paribas, The Coca-Cola Company, Salesforce,

manufacturers, recyclers, and civil society. The NPAP

BlackRock, EDF, Microsoft and The Climate Group.

is divided into a steering board, an advisory board,

SYSTEMIQ is a company that focuses on system change

different task forces, and the NPAP secretariat.

to create better economies and drive sustainability.

GPAP, through NPAPs, wishes to create impacts inthe following domains: behaviour change, financing,

The GPAP approach is based on the SYSTEMIQ

policy, innovation, and metrics to build capacities inmodelling and approach (which was also developed

developing countries. We discuss the stepwise global

with Pew charitable trust), and WEF has developed an

GPAP process in this section, and the NPAP approaches

approach for theory of change using the GPAP-NPAPin three countries are individually covered in the casemodel. The systems change scenario (SCS) developed

study sections.

by SYSTEMIQ is aimed at reducing “annual land-based
plastic leakage into the ocean by about 80% (82 ±13%)

The first step taken by an NPAP involves engaging

below projected business- as-usual (BAU) levels by

with national governments and creating various

2040, while delivering on other societal, economic, andnational committees in five domains. The second step

environmental objectives”. GPAP champions the cause

taken by an NPAP involves setting ambitious goalsof building an integrated public-private partnershipand targets using the models developed by the Pew

to find solutions to plastic pollution, and the platform

Charitable Trusts and SYSTEMIQ. Then, throughout

brings together policymakers, businesses, and civil

the five domains, the national committees develop

society. The initiative’s objectives are to convene

roadmaps to attain the ambitious targets througha range of stakeholders in targeted countries toan inclusive approach; one example being including

createsupportgender issues as part of the roadmaps. The final andfinancing in order to move away from the existing

context-specificroadmapsandmost important step involves accelerating the use of

system surrounding plastic pollution through using

financial investment to achieve the ambitious goals

SYSTEMIQ’s modelling and approach.

and targets of mitigating plastic pollution.

The NPAP is the national counterpart of the GPAP

The final intended outcome of the GPAP is to improvethat is responsible for the implementation of thethe state of the environment and quality of life of

project and is hosted by a local stakeholder. Theypeople. The intermediate outcome of the projects isserve as the secretariat of the national stakeholder

for public and private actors to tackle plastic pollution

platform working with national governments andthrough evidence-based dialogue and increasingother partners. GPAP selects a local consultant as

investment.

NPAP secretariat and closely works with them. GPAP

process is establishing the taskforces driven byprovides them guidelines and support – logistical,

publication of outputs, such as road maps. These

financial, managerial – to develop an MSP and also

processes, from outputs to outcomes to impacts, areshares the information regarding SCS modelling data

part of the GPAP impact ladder, and are presented inon plastic flows nationally, developed with support of

the Figure 2.

The immediate outcome of the GPAP

SYSTEMIQ. The WEF (via GPAP), SYSTEMIQ, and the
local consultant (NPAP secretariat) use their network

In this report, three countries are covered as casefor liaison and expansion of the network by engaging

studies:the national governments and other stakeholders. The

three countries are facing the challenge of plastic

GPAP platforms provides space to NPAP secretariats

pollution and have an operational NPAP secretariat.

to chart their own pathway based on their unique

Vietnam and Indonesia have been identified as top-

national context in consultation with the national

10 contributing countries facing plastic pollution

governments. This information is discussed in more

(Jambeck et al., 2015; Meijer et al., 2021), and in Ghana,detail in the individual studies in sections 3, 4 and 5.

plastic waste management is increasingly becoming

Ghana,

Indonesia,

andVietnam.

Thesea significant challenge with increasing amounts of
The NPAP approach is built at the national level, andplastic being generated (Musah et al., 2021). Thesethe governance structure is determined on a national

three countries were also early partners in the GPAP

level. The NPAP platform comprises stakeholders

since its inception.

across the plastic value chain, such as policymakers,

5Section 1：The Context of Plastics Pollution

Figure 2: GPAP impact ladder

ImpactIntermediate
Outcomes

Immediate
Outcomes

Outputs

Improved state of the environment and quality of life for communities
impacted by plastic pollution

Public and private actors take inclusive action to tackle plastic pollution
Public and private actors’ decision- making to tackle plastic pollution is
informed by evidence
Public and private actors increase investment in tackling plastic pollution❶ Promoting inclusivity❹ Informing policy❸ Harmonizing metrics❻ Unlocking ﬁnance❷ Transforming behaviour❺ Boosting innovation

Initiatives catalyzed and collaborations supported
Knowledge products published and roadmaps launched
Communities convened and conversations hosted

6

2

SECTION

Background andData Analysis
Author: Vivek Anand Asokan

2.1 Theoretical Backgroundvarious agendas, and a focal firm as a central actor

The plastic value chain involves many stakeholders andIn the present context, NPAP secretariats act as central

has a fragmented institutional structure that hinders

actors to support the MSPs. Towards this goal, tocoordinated action. To deal with these challenges,

understand the challenges faced by central actors, we

NPAP has engaged stakeholders from the upstream

develop and employ a conceptual framework.

aligns the various actors towards a common direction.

to downstream; producers to consumers; and private
sector to public sector, and in this report we describe

Ravitch et al. (2023) note that as the actual reality

how NPAP actions are intended to support theis more complex than any theory can attempt tostakeholder collaboration process.

reflect, a conceptual framework that can account forthis complexity yet avoid gross oversimplification is

In this section, we discuss how the NPAP frameworkneeded. They also note that a conceptual framework is

can overcome plastic pollution issues. Therefore, in thean ‘argument’ and not simply an assortment of ideas,

three case study countries, it is essential to understandand needs to be pieced together from theoretical andthe role of the MSP and how NPAP can steer plastic

empirical studies. Therefore the framework employedpollution abatement practices. In this regard, wein this study attempts to shed light on the complexity

aimed to discover what successes have resulted,

of operating an MSP process by a central actor.

what shortfalls are present, and what learnings andtakeaways from NPAPs can be carried forward to other

This conceptual framework was developed from

NPAPs and other multistakeholder processes.

extant academic literature on MSPs and orchestrators(central actors) that describe the enabling process of

To describe NPAP support for creating and developing

the central actor. We posit that the National Plastic

the multi-stakeholder approach, we specifically intend

Action Partnership secretariat acts as an orchestrator

to provide an understanding and description of the(central actor), and use the literature on MSPs androle of the NPAPs in supporting the stakeholder

orchestration process for this study. The term

collaboration

planning‘enabling process’ is used instead of ‘orchestration

strategies and facilitating MSP processes. We present

process’ in the report to avoid miscommunication of

the rationale behind and describe the NPAP process, as

this academic term and make it simpler for a non-follows. As noted by Adner (2017) and Jacobides et al.

academic audience.

process,

which

involves(2018), organisations involved in MSP processes have7Section 2：Background and Data Analysis

We elaborate on the motivation and research

The literature emphasises the importance of central

questions for this study in section 2.2. In section 2.3,

actors as one of the crucial actors in the success or

we explain the conceptual framework used in the

failure of the MSP, and provides insight into the role

study. This study describes the role of the central actor,of NPAP in planning strategies and facilitating the MSP

NPAP, and narrates the importance of the central actor

process. It also notes the important of a central actor

in aligning several pathways such as perspectives,in aligning several pathways such as perspectives,

targets, priorities, and timeline of all stakeholders.

targets, priorities, and timeline of all stakeholders in

We focus on the role of the central actor in the

an MSP. We posit this characteristic as an important

multi-stakeholder partnership and are interested toattribute to understand and describe the role of thedescribe the mechanism – how the NPAP mechanism

central actor in NPAP.

is intended to work and has worked in three countries.
Finally, the framework is applied to the cases andMulti-stakeholder Partnerships andtheir Strengths

discussed in section 6, and in next three sections (3, 4
and 5), we cover the activities of the NPAP platforms in

Biermann et al. (2007) stated that the success of MSPs

Ghana, Indonesia, and Vietnam.

lies in creating regulations or addressing regulatory
deficits and enabling effective implementation when

2.2 Motivation andResearch Questions

governmental initiative is absent; and to widen
the participation of stakeholders beyond powerfulstates. Schäferhoff et al. (2009) define MSPs as an

The central actor faces the challenges of co-operating“institutionalised partnership between public, private,with the actors and implementing practical actions

and civil society actors to advance the provision ofwith them. These actions necessitate resources andsocial goods embodied in the SDGs”. Hemmati et al.

knowledge, and the support of the stakeholders. For(2002) note the difference between multi-stakeholder

this study, we used the following questions to describe

partnerships and PPPs, and explain that PPPs are

the NPAP process:enforceable contracts that a public agency takes(1) In the three pilot countries, what are the NPAP

out with usually a private company, and MSPs areplanned approaches and strategies in supporting

voluntary agreements between different stakeholders.

and promoting practical and systematic action, andHemmati et al. (2002) define MSPs as “a process of

encouraging narratives to transition to a circulardecision-making, consensus building, or equivalenteconomy for plastics?

communication among three or more stakeholders
with equal representation”.

(2) From the perspective of SDG 17, how can the NPAP
approach help deliver the collaborative outcomes

Bäckstrand et al. (2012), in a review, mentions

in mitigating plastic pollution?
The

data

collection

frameworkthat earlier research focussed on the typology of
implemented

MSP partnerships, and case studies on empiricalinjustification that focussed on the presence andthe study involved a literature review of policy inlegitimacy of MSPs. After the need for and legitimacy

three countries, a review of NPAP documents and,of MSPs were established, expectations placed on

importantly, interviews with NPAP participants.

MSPs to provide value is growing (Widerberg &Stripple, 2016), and stakeholders are seeking more

2.3 Review of literatureevidence and studies on the performance of MSPs.

In this section, we first define the multi-stakeholder

about MSPs, and researchers such as Pattberg andprocess based on academic literature. We then refer

Widerberg (2016) and Chan et al. (2018) note instances

to the role of the central actors (orchestrator) in theof MSPs supporting actions aimed at overcoming

MSP process. The identified literature allows us tosustainable development challenges, though such

understand 1) the role of MSP process and 2) role ofscholarship is currently limited. This report is intended

central actor, and allows us to answer the core issue

to fill this knowledge gap.

Both public and private sectors have been enthusiasticof the report – understand and describe the NPAP
process.

8Section 2：Background and Data Analysis

Central Actors as Linchpin

accommodating diverse institutional working styles
that need to be overcome. Central actors should‘Central actors as linchpin’ could be seen as atherefore be as participatory as possible to overcome

tautological statement; however, here, we wish tosuch challenges and create realistic expectations

emphasise that the literature suggests that central

about the process.

actors are indeed the most crucial actor in ensuring
the success of an MSP. Orchestration (i.e., the enabling

What can central actors do?

process) is defined as the process of assembling anddeveloping an inter-organizational network (Paquin &HenryHoward-Grenville, 2013). Chan and Amling (2019) used

responsibilities of MSPs are unbalanced, as thethe orchestration process developed by Abbott et al.

central actors work to tight deadlines, while other(2016), and suggest that orchestration is a process

stakeholders might not share the same sense of

in which the central actor influences the target actor

urgency. Therefore, central actors need to influence

through partnerships and sectoral networks. By

the network actors through various means and raise

definition, it is clear that central actors such as NPAP

the level of commitment with the stakeholders (Henry

play a crucial role in the assembly, organisation and& Möllering, 2022). With this aim in mind, central

guidance of networks. In MSPs, actors from various

actors could, for example, develop strategic visions

sectors collaborate to create solutions and products.

for stakeholders and create avenues for resource

Reypens et al. (2021) describe that while each actor

exchange, and mobilise value by facilitating knowledge

has different interests, in an MSP, the stakeholders

and resource exchanges (Aarikka-Stenroos et al., 2017;need to agree to collaborate on a specific problem

Dhanasai & Parkhe, 2006; Ritala et al., 2009).

andMöllering(2022)

mentionthat

theand find solutions. The network is therefore createdby the central actor by combining the ‘resources,

The concept of ‘central actors’ has been muchperspectives, and expertise’ of all the stakeholders of

discussed in the context of global environmental

the network (Ferraro et al., 2015; Levén et al., 2014).

processes, such as climate change (Abbott et al., 2016;

Central actors play a crucial role in mobilising andChan & Amling, 2019). Paquin and Howard-Grenvillecoordinating with various members (Dhanasai &(2013) highlight some critical questions related toParkhe, 2006) and by providing the resources needed

the activities of central actors, such as regarding how

to support participation of stakeholders and facilitate

central actors can build and assemble networks; how

discussion among them (Aarikka-Stenroos et al., 2017;

they can accumulate resources and expertise as the

Ritala et al., 2009).

network develops; and what the dilemmas are andhow the values can be demonstrated. We refer to

The success or failure of an MSP process depends onthese questions in section 6 and provide answers toestablishing the legitimacy of the MSP process, which isthem to elaborate on the role of NPAP as central actor.

of utmost importance as various stakeholders should
feel confident about the process (Paquin & Howard-

Literature on how central actors raise stakeholder

Grenville,

innovative

commitment toward MSP is scarce; Henry andoutcomes at the early stages is necessary to secure

Möllering (2022) propose the use of ‘fictional road-the interest of stakeholders. If contracts are enforced,

mapping’, i.e., triggering exchange and timelines asthese networks are easy to manage; however, whenmeans to solicit member commitment to the MSP

participation is voluntary and stakeholder interests

process. In comparison to direct control, target-

are unique and sometimes divergent, securing thesetting is an indirect means to plan and administer acommitment of stakeholders can be challenging. In

multistakeholder process (Bird et al., 2005; Carter etsuch environments, the role of the central actor isal., 1995; Stafford Beer, n.d.). Furthermore, we propose

even more critical. Harris Gleckman (2018) notes thatthatsome of the challenges in the MSP process could

involves aligning targets, timelines, perspectives, andlie in the arbitrary selection of stakeholders andtechnical expertise, which is presented in Figure 3.

2013).

Therefore,

creating

creating

commitment

amongstakeholders

arbitrary processes carried out by central actors. He
explains further the operational challenges such as

Hemmati (2002) notes MSPs should only complement

creating trust among participants, developing shared

the existing governance system and not be a substitute.

goals, managing internal power imbalances andIn the next three sections we cover the country cases

9Section 2：Background and Data Analysis

Figure 3: Role of central actor in aligning perspectives, targets, and action

Enabler–NPAP
secretariat

NPAP processes, task forces
and their outputs

Aligning perspectives

Actors withdiverse Interests in
waste management
and plastic CE

Aligning target

Plastic pollution
abatement

Aligning action

using the framework we developed in this section andwas conducted by four separate teams and their

explore in detail the current activities of the NPAPs

interpretations therefore differ, thus the interpretationand the role of the central actor in mitigating plasticof researchers for different country cases may act aspollution.

a limitation toward generalisation and comparison,due to the contextual nature of the case countries.

2.4 Limitations of this Study

Further, responses were not received from all

In this study we describe the approach of the NPAP:

limited the availability of contextual insight. In light ofIn the three country cases, the NPAPs are in differing

these limitations, while the study findings may not bestages of implementation, as the implementation

directly relevant for other regions, they can be sharedstrategies of NPAP secretariats differ and are notas examples of good practices with local stakeholders

comparable. Furthermore, due to Covid-19, the study

to aid discussion, consultation and experimentation.

stakeholders due to personal circumstances, which

10

3

SECTION

Ghana
Author: Abubakari Ahmed

3.1 Introduction

3.2 Waste Management Context

In Ghana, improper waste disposal, together with the

National Backgroundlack of adequate collection, separation and treatment

In Ghana, the national average Municipal Solid Wasteof plastic waste, represent significant challenges to the(MSW) generation rate was estimated to be 0.47 kg/

waste management sector (Debrah et al., 2021; Miezah

cap/day in 2015, with plastic accounting for 14% of

et al., 2015)). In addition, the state’s waste management

total MSW generated (Miezah et al., 2015). Aside from

infrastructure and services cannot keep pace with the

population growth, major challenges in the sector

amounts of waste generated (Amoah & Kosoe, 2014;

include issues of peoples’ attitudes, poor planning,

Douti et al., 2017). Therefore, as part of an international

weak regulatory framework and governance, low

response to the menace of plastic pollution andtechnology adoption, the absence of policy incentives

management, the NPAP was established as a multi-

and limited appropriate marketing strategies forstakeholder platform to mitigate plastic pollution.

recycled plastics (Amoah & Kosoe, 2014; Debrah etal., 2021; Lissah et al., 2021; Ministry of Environment,

In 2019, Ghana became the first African country to join

Science, Technology and Innovation, 2019; Quartey

GPAP. Subsequently, the Ghana NPAP was established,

et al., 2015). The confluence of these factors was anwhich offers a national platform for multi-stakeholder

increase in the national average MSW generationcooperation, facilitating initiatives and funding torate to 0.50 kg/cap/day in 2020 (Global Plastic Action

scale-up and accelerate in-country partnerships that

Partnership, 2021). It is estimated that in 2030 andaddress plastic waste and pollution while contributing

2040, the national average MSW generation rates

to the nation’s progress towards achieving many of thewill reach 0.54 and 0.59 kg/cap/day, respectively

Sustainable Development Goals.

(Global Plastic Action Partnership, 2021). Plastics
travel through several channels (i.e., both formal andThis section discusses the NPAP’s activities of engaging

informal) before arriving at their final destination. As awith the stakeholders, to generate narratives forresult, 49% of plastic waste is collected, of which 9.5%

effective public-private partnerships that can facilitateis recycled.

practical actions to reduce plastic pollution in Ghana.
To achieve this, data were collected with the assistance

The introduction of the 2019 National Plasticsof the NPAP Secretariat in Ghana.

Waste Management Policy clarified both national

11

Section 3：Ghana

Table 1: City type and related waste
generation rate

efforts and institutional arrangements for plastic
waste management. As a result, the Policy is seen
as representing a renewed commitment of theArchetypegovernment of Ghana and establishes a framework forthe sustainable management of plastics.

Averaged MSW generation rate(kg/cap/day)

Mega

0.73

Medium0.40

arrangements for plastic waste management, the

Rural

0.28

roles and interests of 18 public sector organisations,Remote

0.28

Prior

to

NPAP,

in

terms

of

the

institutional

academia, civil society organisations, conventional

Source: (Miezah et al., 2015)

authorities, development partners and the private
sector had been outlined by the government (Ministry

Plastic waste, therefore, has social, economic andof Environment, Science, Technology and Innovation,

environmental impacts at the local level, thereby2019). However, although the 2019 Policy mentioned

shaping

above also defined such roles, it failed to delineate

thesustainability

trajectories

of

mega,

medium and small cities in different ways. For

the interrelationships regarding flows of information,

example, studies in Ghana have reported that theresources, decision making and implementation,choking of drains and gutters causes water stagnation,

which made it difficult to understand how overlapping

thereby leading to breeding habitats for mosquitoes

roles, interests and power interplays are managed and(Kombiok & Naa Jaaga, 2022; Odonkor & Sallar, 2021).

addressed across different scales (i.e., from local toThis was the main cause of a cholera outbreak in 2014

national) in the current policy.

in Ghana, in which over 243 people died (Dzotsi et al.,2016; Kanhai et al., 2021). In terms of environmental

Local Government Context

impacts, studies in Ghana have reported issues ofAt the local level, cities and towns in Ghana can bemarine pollution, impacts on fisheries, freshwater, andgrouped into four archetypes, namely mega (n=24),

environmental quality (Kanhai et al., 2021; Musah et al.,medium (n=87), rural (n=84) and remote (n=65).

2021). In terms of economic impacts, plastic pollution

Table 1 shows the average MSW generation rates ofat the local level increases government expenditure onthese city types (kg/cap/day) prior to Ghana NPAP.

managing waste (Otoo & Danquah, 2021).

As can be seen, megacities in Ghana generate more
plastic waste, which is attributed to the increasing
populations and higher plastic consumption.

12Section 3：Ghana

3.3 NPAP Activities

NPAP’s TF are multi-stakeholder groups of technical

Ghana NPAP is the leading national convener ofsector and civil society. The task forces operate in theactions, initiatives and stakeholders. It is chaired byfields of behaviour, finance, policy, innovation and

the Ministry of Environment, Science, Technology andinclusion, as shown in Table 2 and 3. Steps are far

Innovation (MESTI), which also hosts the secretariat.

advanced to operationalise the other two TFs, namely

As a convener, the NPAP secretariat started by inviting

Innovation and Metric.

specialists from government, academia, the private

all stakeholders to join NPAP. Through this, NPAP
brought together stakeholders from public, private,

Since 2019, according to the NPAP Secretariat,

non-governmental

significant outcomes have been achieved, which areorganisation,

academia

andinternational development agencies

described below:

Table 2: Membership of Task Forces by stakeholder group (NPAP Ghana secretariat interviews)
Public sector

Private sector

Non-governmentalorganisation

Internationalorganisations

Academia

Policy

12

15

3

6

-

Inclusion

2

5

10

1

1

Behaviour

2

5

10

2

-

Finance

5

12

1

8

-

Metric*

-

-

-

-

-

Innovation*

-

-

-

-

-

Task force*Membership is yet to be formed.

Table 3: Activities of NPAP (NPAP Ghana secretariat interviews)
Impact1 1

Informing policy (TF)

Achievements
Prepared action roadmaps
Prepared scoping and baseline study of plastic waste pollution in Ghana
Published report on gender analysis
Developed an Intersectional Gender Equality Strategy

Promoting inclusivity (TF)

Built capacity of NPAP members on gender mainstreaming
Started organising informal workers into cooperatives
Initiated a national database of informal waste pickers, collectors and recyclers

Changing Behaviour (TF)

Started discussions to conduct a baseline analysis of Behaviour
Identified local case examples and leadership approaches to behaviour change

Unlocking finance (TF)

Developed a finance roadmap and mapped investable projects, and financialorganisations as well as their interests and barriersHarmonising metrics (no TF yet)

Rollout of Plastic Action Initiative Tracker by NPAP

Boosting innovation(no TF yet)

NPAP initiated the mapping of different innovations and identified gaps andbarriers to their adoption

1

Immediate Outcomes’ based on the GPAP impact ladder13

Section 3：Ghana“ NPAP has already established structures andAccording to the interviews, it was learnt that members

working groups with members from various
sectors. Any time the Ministry wants to engage
stakeholders in the plastic sectors, we rely on the
NPAP membership and platform rather thanstarting from ground zero.”of the task forces influence the plastic value chain in
different ways, as follows:As catalyst for coordinated action
to scale solutions[Interview, a government representative, April 2022]

Examples of forming multi-stakeholder groups oftechnical specialists from the government, academia,“ I think the first thing is that NPAP has created a

the private sector and civil society span the following

platform that has helped us stop doing things inisolation. ”

thematic areas:• A TF on inclusion was developed to support[Interview, a private sector representative, April 2022]

the country’s efforts to develop a national“ The most important support we get from thedatabase of informal waste pickers, collectors

platform is connecting with other actors within
the space, including other development partners
and the big brands that work in the space. It is thespace that is provided for us to be able to interact,
to share ideas and to co-design solutions together.”and recyclers, develop stakeholder guidelines for
informal sector integration​, and conduct capacity
building for informal actors and capacity building
training for the NPAP platform members.

• A TF on financing was developed to support[Interview, an intergovernmental organization
representative, May 2022]

the development of the financing roadmap,
support the country’s efforts to implement an
EPR Scheme and build the capacity of the local

Generating Insights and Action Roadmaps

financial sector to support the financing projects
to address plastic pollution.

In terms of contributing to NPAP, all the interviewees
indicated that they did so through reviewing baseline• A TF on Behaviour Change was developed toreports, roadmaps and action plans. Other ways

support Ghana’s efforts to develop a Citizen
Engagement

Strategy

​and

the

rollout

members contributed include attending meetingsofto share ideas and make decisions. As noted by one

Stakeholder Citizen Engagement Campaigns.

•

respondent:

A Policy TF was developed to support the country’s“ I was one of the reviewers, and I provided

efforts to implement an EPR scheme, graduallysignificant inputs in the development of theroadmap. I provided feedback for multiple drafts,
and I was also referenced in a few of the pages ofthe document.”

phase out problematic and unnecessary ​plastics
and develop standards for recycled plastics.

Convening communities andcurating conversations[Interview, a sector representative, April 2022]

All interviewees indicated that the main form of support

3.4 Current Achievements and Statusprovided by Ghana NPAP is in the platform it createdfor sharing ideas, data, knowledge and innovation

Achievements of the NPAP activities are as follows:

through a series of meetings and engagements. From

• Enabled a national platform for multi-stakeholder

the interviews, it was found that members of the task

collaboration and engagement among organisations

forces have made use of data and structures fromacross the plastic value chain.

NPAP for other related initiatives. For example, aninterview with a government representative revealed• Set up a Steering Board made up of senior leadersthat it relies on the structure of the task force platformfrom the public sector, private sector and civil

for other stakeholder consultations rather thansociety chaired by the Minister of Environment,

starting afresh to create a new platform for plastic

Science,waste management.

Technology,

andInnovation

guides the strategic direction of the NPAP.

14

which

Section 3：Ghana• Organised several cross-sectoral engagement

national plastics management policy, plastic separation
in households and public dump sites is limited.

sessions for stakeholders to exchange knowledge
and insights towards addressing plastic pollution,
one of which was a series of country-level

Aside from the lack of waste separation, no financial

dialogues on the Global Plastics Treaty.

resources are made available for plastic waste
management. However, the lack of a dedicated• Developed a baseline report on plastic waste

funding mechanism remains a major challenge, asflows in Ghana.

• Conductedanoted by the following comment:
scenario

analysis,based“ I think the main challenge with the platform ison

SYSTEMIQ modelling, that provides projections

funding from the government’s side. Currently,
there is no specific budget allocation for plastics by
the Ministry.”of population growth and plastic consumption
from 2021 to 2040 and forecasts the future stateof plastics.

[Interview, a government representative, April 2022]• Developed and published the National Action

Another challenge is how to engage the informal

Roadmap on plastic waste pollution, which

sector, and the absence of regulatory frameworks andprovides a clear set of actions to eradicate plastic

business models for informal waste pickers makes thispollution in the marine environment and othera major challenge for NPAP. One respondent noted

water bodies by 2040 to deliver on Ghana’sthat:

ambitious goals.

“ It is important to have certain standards for how• Developed a Gender Baseline Analysis of thecompanies engage informal workers. Every SME
in Ghana works with the informal sector in someway, be it as a supplier, or for security or as a peeror whatever, so we believe that there should besome kind of standard for how people engage theinformal sector.”

Plastics and Plastics Waste Sectors to understandthe gender roles, barriers, and impacts acrossthe plastics value chain on gender inclusion andwomen’s empowerment.

• Developed and published the Intersectional[Interview, a non-governmental organisation
sector representative, April 2022]

Gender Equality Strategy, envisioned to provide aframework that guides gender mainstreaming inall of NPAP’s work.

•

NPAP has made significant steps in operationalising

Developed and published the NPAP Ghana

some task forces, developing other task forces andFinancing Roadmap for plastic pollution, which

launching an action plan, baseline study, financial

provides a set of recommendations aimed atroad map and gender analysis report. In addition,

attracting capital investment to fill the existingthese products have started to shape innovations offinancing gap in the plastics value chain andsome corporations and the government is increasingly

enable Ghana to achieve a radical reduction inusing NPAP teams and committees for similar related

plastic pollution by 2040.

initiatives. However, many more actors are unaware of
NPAP and its activities in Ghana beyond its members.

• Developed the prototype of the Plastic Action

Random discussions with several SMEs revealed

Initiative Tracker.

that many are unaware of NPAP and how they canbe involved or contribute, especially as most are not

3.5 Way Forward and Conclusion

operating in the digital space of technology. Therefore,

The challenges can be grouped into two areas: plastic

NPAP activities in Ghana, including government

waste management and Ghana NPAP operations.

leadership, inclusion of informal businesses, more

Regarding the challenges in plastic waste management,

extensive involvement of SMEs. Ghana’s NPAP should

most interviewees stated that significant barriers are

expand its membership beyond international partners

the lack of waste separation and dedicated funding

and big corporations to unlock funds, as businesses

for plastic waste management in Ghana. Despite theprefer investing in potentially profitable businesses.

new narratives are needed to catalyse and upscale

15Section 3：Ghana

Better information sharing mechanisms and a new

a challenge. Steps should therefore be taken tobusiness model for the informal sector for pricing andorganise informal actors. Aside from the lack ofselling plastics should also be developed. The following

organisation of these actors, the language barrier

are therefore strongly recommended:and other factors could make them less likely tobe critical actors of NPAP. For full engagement in• Sustainable funding: Despite the rolling out

this sector, NPAP inclusive task force membersof the financing roadmap, the actual funding

must

secured for NPAP activities and plastic waste

languages in addition to the official language

management in Ghana is limited. Dedicated(English) of the state to reach a wider non-English

funding for NPAP and plastic waste management

and regional language speaking audience.

is imperative for reducing plastic pollution.

communicate

throughlocal/regional• Finally, it is imperative to raise awareness of• Informal sector: The plastic waste management

NPAP and GPAP activities in Ghana. Currently,

sector is mainly informal, and although many

beyond Accra and Kumasi, people and small

informal associations are found within NPAP,

businesses within the plastic value chain aretheunaware of NPAP and how they can support its

lack

of

organisedassociations

makes

bringing more informal sector actors onboard

activities.

16

4

SECTION

Indonesia*

Authors: Muchamad Muchtar, Budhi Setiawan, Vivek Anand Asokan,
and Premakumara Jagath Dickella Gamaralalage

4.1 Introduction

decentralised to local governments. The Regional

Indonesia was the first country to join the Global

as a mandatory sector under concurrent government

Plastic Action Partnership, which officially launchedaffairs of central and local government. The central

the Indonesia National Plastic Action Partnershipgovernment provides policy direction, strategies,(NPAP) on March 11, 2019. The launch was co-targets, as well as technical and financial assistances

organised by the Coordinating Ministry of Maritime

Table 4. The Ministry of Public Work and Housing

Affairs and Investment (CMMAI) together with Ministry(MOPWH) is responsible for planning and creatingof Environment and Forestry and Ministry of Industry.

infrastructure, and the Ministry of Environment andThis section presents the progress achieved since its

Forestry (MOEF) is responsible for all operational

establishment.

issues including pollution control.

Government Act 23/2014 classifies waste management

Local Government Context

4.2 Waste Management Context

Local governments play the leading role as bothmain service provider and local regulator in waste

National Backgroundmanagement

processes;

Law

No.

18/2008

andThe NPAP SCS model, developed by SYSTEMIQ,

Government Regulation No. 81/2012 mandate local

estimates that Indonesia generated 6.8 million tonnes

governments to promote the 3R approach and circularper year of plastics based on the contents of its MSW

economy by engaging the public and private sector,

in 2017. Of the total, only around 20% was managed,

including the plastic waste producers through EPR.

10% was recycled, and 9% was potentially leaked into
the sea, lakes, and rivers, ending up as marine debris

Under such arrangements, the local government is(Global Plastic Action Partnership, 2020).

obligated to develop facilities for temporary collection
points (TPS). The 3R-based waste processing facilities

Since 2001, Indonesia has undergone a period(TPS 3Rs are mini-MRFs (Materials Recovery Facilities))of major political reorganization, in which manyand landfills are supported by MOPWH and MOEF.

central government authorities’ responsibilities were

Within Indonesia’s 12 megacities, the GOI promotes* In this section, the abbreviations correspond and are based on official language of the country - Bahasa Indonesia

17Section 4：Indonesia

Table 4: List of regulations related to solid and plastic wastes management
No.

Regulation

Main substance1.

Presidential Decree No. 97/2017 on National Policy& Strategy on Household Waste and Householdlike Waste Management (JAKSTRANAS) (Presidential
Decree No. 97 of 2017 Concerning National Policies andStrategies for Management of Household Waste andHousehold-like Waste, 2017)

JAKSTRANAS sets a national target of 30% waste
reduction, and 70% proper handling of waste by2025 to achieve the goal of ‘2025 Clean-from-Waste
Indonesia’ (Indonesia Bersih Sampah 2025)

2.

Presidential Regulation No. 83/2018 on Action Plan
on Marine Plastic Debris 2018–2025 (Presidential
Decree No. 83 of 2018 on Action Plan on Marine Plastic
Debris 2018–2025, 2018)

Sets a national target of 70% reduction of marine
plastic litter by 2025 and provides institutionalarrangements. GOI appoints a National Coordination
Team consisting of 18 ministries and state agencies tocoordinate Action Plan implementation.

3.

Ministry of Environment and Forestry Regulation No.
75/2019 on Roadmap of Plastic Waste Reduction by
Producers, including EPR (Ministerial Regulation ofEnvironment and Forestry No. 75 of 2019 on Roadmapof Plastic Waste Reduction by Producers, Including EPR,
2019)

Requirement for producers to manage plastic wastefrom their packaging and goods production.

improvement of the landfill system, and progressively

Local budgets are the main source of financing, whichmoves from open dumping to controlled or sanitary

are primarily earmarked for operational expenses,

landfills and then to WtE, RDF, and biodigesters.

while the contribution of waste retribution1 2 feerevenue is still limited. Further, local and state budget

For the business sector, the regulation mandates

allocations for establishing required infrastructure andproducers in the manufacturing, food and beverage

to support local recycling are relatively low, averaging

service sector, and retail sector to plan and implement

only 2.5% of the total municipal budget compared tothe 3R principle for plastic waste generated from their

the ideal of 5% (Hoornweg & Bhada-Tata, 2012).

products and/or packaging. Recently, a few businesses
have been building recycling plants with a combined

The process of primary collection of waste anddesign capacity of 25,000 tonnes per year of food-transportation

grade certified recycled PET.

(TPS in Bahasa Indonesia) is one of the challenges

tointermediatecollection

pointsin waste management, and is usually organised
Nevertheless, an NPAP analysis shows that medium-

quasi-independently by community organizations/

sized and rural cities have greater challenges where

neighbourhood

about 72% of wastes were mismanaged. The NPAP

Indonesia) or by area management associations

analysis divided the Indonesian region into fourfor commercial areas using a fee-based system toarchetypes – megacity, medium-sized city, rural city, andfinance operational costs. These arrangements result

remote area – which cover 514 cities/regencies acrossin disparate approaches for worker arrangements,

Indonesia. Major challenges in the medium-sized andcollection frequency, disposal patterns and payment

rural cities were the lack of proper infrastructure andstructures (World Bank, 2019). Moreover, in areas

lower collection rates compared to megacities, which

outside the aforementioned areas, which by law comeis assumed to be a cause of plastic leakage to water

under the responsibility of local government, wastebodies and the ocean.

largely remains unmanaged.

2

associations(RT/RWin

BahasaThe retribution fee is a funding source for local government and is imposed on individuals, households, businesses, or institutions to manage anddisposal of waste

18Section 4：Indonesia

4.3 NPAP Activities

which were convened by the SYSTEMIQ. In most

The NPAP has succeeded to align and expand from a

local governments is currently zero, as it is quasi-

government-led initiative to embrace other related

independently collected through community or

stakeholders. The existing government-led initiative

neighbourhood management. In the discussions,on reducing marine debris litter has a National

SYSTEMIQ provided best practices from its projects

Coordination Team, consisting of 18 ministries led byin three cities of East Java and Bali Provinces that

the CMMAI, and a national target of 70% reduction

become policy inputs for MOHA, which are beingby 2025 from 2018. The Steering Board members offormulated into a technical guidance for city

NPAP are representatives from Indonesian ministries,

governments.55

cities, the retribution fee of residential areas forembassies of foreign countries and internationalorganizations,multinational

andnational

privateB

sectors, and civil society. Further, Task Force co-chairs

Promoting Inclusivity: Indonesia NPAP seeks
to promote inclusivity by addressing concernsof the informal sector waste pickers and also

were strategically selected from government and nongovernment institutions. The roles of the Task Forces

addressing

genderissues(NPAP

Secretariat,

are explained individually below.

Indonesia, 2021). While waste pickers make a large
contribution in terms of plastic waste collection

A

Informing Policy: The Policy Task Force aims

(representing about 15% of the total waste) fromat, among others, identifying and sharing

residential

best-in-class policy approaches from local,

experience the lowest level of welfare in the value

andintermediate

stations,

they

potential

chain. NPAP engaged with one of the waste picker

replication in cities, as well as identifying key

organisations and facilitated matchmaking with abarriers to policy implementation.

private sector organisation on developing an app

national,

For

and

example,globalpractices

MOEF’sforRoadmapforfor informal sector waste pickers.

Waste

Reduction by Producers’ (EPR scheme in Indonesia)

On the gender issue, the NPAP Secretariat istarget and timeline (to be achieved by 2030)

currently drafting a general guideline. The draft

represented a challenging policy implementation

covers eight key gender issues, including health,issue, particularly for the private sector (Ministerial

wage gaps, lack of gender aggregated data, and low

Regulation of Environment and Forestry No. 75 ofwomen representation in the waste management

2019 on Roadmap of Plastic Waste Reduction by

sector. The NPAP Secretariat is also developing

Producers, Including EPR, 2019). In detail, the private

a gender data framework which includes the key

sector and industrial association voiced concerns

performance indicators and sex aggregated dataover the transition period in respect of changes toof NPAP members.

their value chain and markets, since these would
incur time, cost, resources, and capacity building.

C

In response, the Policy Task Force facilitated bypromoting formal and non-formal educationinterests of the government and private sector,

initiatives and increasing public awareness. The

which led to an agreeable target and timeline being

Behaviour Change Task Force collaborates with (1)reached for EPR, which could then be reflected in

the Innovation Task Force to leverage matchmaking

the Policy Roadmap. 2

opportunities between members to find alternative

further3

exampleisthediscussions

solutions and (2) the Policy Task Force to outline

heldpolicy options on new business models.

between the Ministry of Home Affairs (MOHA)
and some local governments on policy options

As one of the most populous Muslim countries, theand calculation of the solid waste retribution fee 4,

engagement of religious organisations is one of the

45

Change Roadmap identifies priority actions by

mediating between the differing perspectives andA

3
4

Changing Behaviour: The NPAP’s Behaviour

Interview with representative of the World Bank (2022)
The retribution fee is a funding source for local government and is imposed on individuals, households, businesses, or institutions to manage and disposalof waste
Interview with representative of SYSTEMIQ (2022)

19

Section 4：Indonesia

key strategic approaches. The Behaviour Change

impactful solutions, such as start-ups, social

Task Force has engaged the two largest Islamic-

entrepreneurs, and civil society.

based organisations (with an estimated combined
membership of more than 100 million) to beFmembers, and one of the organisations serves as

Unlocking Finance: The NPAP Action Plan
estimates that Indonesia requires capital
investments of about 18 billion USD to shift

the co-chair of this task force.

from a business-as-usual scenario to a SCS

DHarmonising metrics: In the first year of

scenario, which is explained in section 1.5, involving

NPAP’s establishment, the team comprisingmeasures

aimed

at

effective

solid

waste

SYSTEMIQ and Pew Charitable Trusts teammanagement and recycling between 2017 andshared insights and knowledge resulting from their

2040 (the calculation includes non-plastic waste).

study at the global level, and developed a study on

This entails an estimated 1 billion USD increase inIndonesia. SCS modelling tools were employed tooperational financing for solid waste management

develop the baseline and projection scenarios

systems every year by 2040. In addition to

based on priorities of Indonesian governments,

government funding, the Financing Roadmap

the National Action Plan on Marine Plastic Debris,projected that revenues from private investment

JAKSTRANAS,

Waste

into the circular economy sector could grow rapidly

Reduction by Producers (EPR scheme in Indonesia).

to 10 billion USD (rough estimate) per year by

The modelling team received inputs and insights

2040. The Financing Task Force, in cooperationfrom the Indonesia NPAP Steering Board, NPAPwith the Innovation and Policy task forces isExpert Panel, Indonesian government and otherworking towards (a) incubating and scaling up

stakeholders in formulating an action plan, titledinnovations, (b) enabling capital investments in the“Radically Reducing Plastic Pollution in Indonesia: A

after-use (waste and recycling system), and (c)Multistakeholder Action Plan”. The process helped

closing operational financing gaps for city-levelto foster an agreeable target and timeline.

waste collection and recycling systems.

and

the

Roadmapfor

Following its establishment, the Metric Task Force

4.4 Current Achievements and Statussought to formulate and clarify an agreed baseline
and indicators for monitoring the achievements of
the NPAP. The metric focus areas are plastic usage,

NPAP’s Multistakeholder Action Plan sets a shared

recycling, and collection, and data is to be tracked

target to reduce marine plastic leakage by 70% by

from 2017, which is set as the baseline, to 2025.

2025, while enhancing ambition toward near-zero

The TF involves several academics and is working

plastic pollution by 2040 through transitioning toward

to align reports from the Indonesian Institute ofa circular economy. It is expected that these actions

Sciences (BRIN in Bahasa Indonesia), the World

will avoid the leakage of 16 million tonnes of plastic

Bank and Indonesia government database (MOEF

waste into waterbodies and the ocean (2017−2040).

and MOPWH databases), and are coordinated byAccording to the latest monitoring data by the CMMAI,

LIPI and Commonwealth Scientific and Industrial

the Indonesian government claims that plastic waste

Research Organisation (CSIRO) with the support ofhas been reduced by 28.5% between 2018−2021.66

SYSTEMIQ (Nurhati & Cordova, 2020).
IncreasedE

6commitments

andfinancing:Over

Boosting Innovation: The Innovation Task

the last 1−3 years, the Financing Roadmap has

Force, in cooperation with the Financial andidentified growing commitments from international

Behaviour Change task forces seeks todevelopment partners. For domestic financing, theidentify and facilitate member matchmaking and

NPAP supports the local government to optimise thecollaboration to align technical and/or financial

huge waste retribution fee potentials, which is in line

capacities (such as those of research and/orwith the policy formulation being promoted by Ministryfinancialof Home Affairs (MOHA). PT SMI, as one of the Special

institutions)

with

those

with

most

Interview with the NPAP’

20

Section 4：Indonesia

Coordination and communication

Mission Vehicles (SMV) of the Ministry of Finance,
will finance public infrastructure projects and has

Theexpanded their portfolio to finance local government
projects, including waste management infrastructure.

Currently, the CMMIA plays a leading role in the NPAP
as well as acting as the coordinator of the government-

seen an increasing trend of plastic waste management

led National Coordination Team. According to theinitiatives – “downstream” and “upstream” – that haveinterviews, however, the related ministries still findbeen implemented by the government, private sector,

divisional roles in the NPAP a matter of confusion.

social enterprises, and community. This growing trend

NPAP and CMMIA therefore need to strengthen

mainly results from the positive effects of MOEF’s

engagement of the relevant ministries.

regulation on EPR, promulgated in 2019.
for

NPAP

two aspects: division of roles and public financing.

MOEF in 2019. Recent developments, however, havefacilitiesofand communication amongst the ministries involves

Indonesia were considered low, according to data fromlarge

communicationand (b) internal NPAP organisation. The coordination

solid waste sorting (11%) and recycling (11−13%) in

of

and

institutions at the national and local government level,

Increased Investment and Infrastructure: Rates ofEstablishment

coordination

members concerns two areas: (a) inter-government

Role and M&E mechanism

recycling

infrastructure for PET beverage bottles recycling and

The role of the NPAP in increasing their knowledge,

innovative social entrepreneurs following a profit

building the network and connecting with global policy

model is one of the conspicuous recent trends.

issue and actors is acknowledged by the members.
However, the actions undertaken by NPAP since

Socio-economic Benefits: The NPAP Multistakeholder

establishment of the Action Plan and Roadmaps have

Action Plan is also projected to accelerate positive

been rather slow, hampered especially by the Covid-19

outcomes that are related to the SDGs, including

pandemic.

creating more than 150,000 jobs by 2025, curbing

Financing

20 million tonnes of CO2e emissions per year,
and improving health through cleaner air andAs outlined in the Financing Roadmap, the availability

reduced flooding. The monitoring and evaluation ofof a pipeline of investible opportunities that areachievements, however, is still underway as the NPAP

sufficient to meet investor demand is one of the key

Secretariat is establishing an NPAP Dashboard tochallenges. Required therefore is the acceleration ofmonitor and evaluate progress towards achieving the

public financing implementation, via a retribution fee

plastic waste reduction target, which is designed toor subsidy by the local government, and promotion

compile and collate the activities and commitments ofof capital investment and capital expenditure by the

all NPAP members.

private sector, in order to promote the solid waste
management and recycling sector.

4.5 Way Forward and Conclusion

In this regard, the NPAP facilitated discussions with
the Financial Services Authority (OJK in Bahasa

In addition to the promising progress as describedIndonesia) to enable solid waste management andabove, major challenges are yet to be overcome thatrecycling investment to be a bankable business. The

have been identified during the interviews and fromOJK has recently launched Sustainable Finance andprimary sources such as GPAP, NPAP and government

Green Taxonomy, which provides guidance for the

documents. The following are key and immediate

financial services institutions to promote and prioritisechallenges that the NPAP needs to engage with.

the financing of more green businesses towardsustainable financing in Indonesia.

21Prof. Agamutu Pariatamby in Bali at an
integrated waste management facility (Tempat
Pengolahan Sampah Terpadu, TPST) during the
ERIA expert working group meeting. We thankhim for allowing us to use his photo.

22

5

SECTION

Vietnam

Authors: Do Thi Thu Trang, Hoang Minh Giang, Vivek Anand Asokan, and Ngoc-Bao Pham

5.1 Introduction

launched NPAP Viet Nam. This section provides
information on NPAP Viet Nam activities.

Viet Nam ranks among the top five countries globallythat send plastic waste into the ocean (Jambeck et

This section of the report is divided into five mainal., 2015). It is also one of the top 20 plastic exporters

sections: section 5.1 introduces the establishment ofand currently exports to more than 55 countries and

NPAP Viet Nam as well as the objectives of the report;

territories globally, with a plastic industry growth rate

section 5.2 reviews the waste management context

of 16–18% annually (Central Intelligence Agency, n.d.;with a focus on plastic waste issues in Viet Nam; section

International Trade Centre, n.d.). About 83% of plastic

5.3 discusses the key activities of NPAP Viet Nam andproducts in Viet Nam were produced from resin andstakeholders; and section 5.4 highlights the challenges

17% from recycled plastic scraps. Most inputs forfacing Vietnam’s plastic waste management in the

manufacturing plastic, including resin and recycled

years to come. A conclusion and future directions are

scraps, are imported in Viet Nam (VCCI, 2019).

given in section 5.5.

Reducing plastic pollution is becoming an urgent issue
in Viet Nam, particularly in the context of promoting

5.2 Waste management context

green growth and sustainable development. Further,plastic pollution is currently considered a key priority

National backgroundtowards achieving a circular economy in Viet Nam,following the global trend. Therefore, there is a

Rapid economic development has led to significant

demand for SCS articulated by SYSTEMIQ to reform theincreases in municipal solid waste generation andcountry’s plastic economy and plastic waste recycling

increased the complexity of waste composition.

and management system.

According to National State of Environment Report2019 on Solid Waste, waste generation in Vietnam is

In 2019, the Government of Viet Nam initiated aapproximately 65,000 tonnes per day, of which 55%

collaboration with the GPAP to launch a Nationalof waste is generated in urban areas and 45% in

Plastic Action Partnership (referred as NPAP Vietcountryside areas. The collection rate is still quite low

Nam) in Viet Nam to take urgent and unprecedented

in rural areas (about 66%), whereas in urban areas it isaction on plastic leakage. On 23 December 2020,

about 92%. Most of the waste collected was landfilled

the Government of Viet Nam and WEF successfully(71%) and the rest was incinerated (13%) or composted

23Section 5：Vietnam• The lack of transparency in recycled plastic(16%) (Ministry of Natural Resources and Environment,
Vietnam, 2020).

product market means potential players in thesecondary raw materials are discouraged from

Regarding plastic waste management in Viet Nam, 72%participating.

of plastic waste is mismanaged, and a huge proportion• The lack of human resources, specifically expertsof mismanaged plastic waste leaks into the oceanand staff with extensive knowledge of SWM not(EA and Quantis, n.d.). High plastic waste leakage

only at the local level but also at the national

also results from unsustainable collection, recycling,level. In addition, waste separation at the source

and treatment systems. Local governments areis ineffective due to a lack of awareness among

struggling with collecting, transporting, treating, andresidents.

disposing of growing solid waste streams. Therefore,
improving SWM would help Viet Nam realise a circular

5.3 NPAP Activities

economy. However, recycling is rarely a part of theformal waste management system provided by local
government, which instead relies heavily on market

NPAP Viet Nam provides a platform that convenes

forces to incentivise Informal Waste Collectors (IWCs)

national leaders to drive the transition to a circular

for collection and aggregation.

plastics economy. Following the Viet Nam NPAP launch
in 2020, the MONRE Minister, Tran Hong Ha issued
Decision No. 2268/QD-BTNMT on 19 November, 2021

Local backgroundto establish the NPAP Leadership Board (LB). The LB

While Viet Nam has strong political commitment fromwas established with the aim of advising the MONRE

the central government to mitigate plastic waste,

on policies, solutions and strategic orientations in ordervarious challenges remain at the local level:•to 1) support the development and implementation of

Low collection coverage and efficiency, especiallya circular economy, 2) reduce plastic waste pollution

in rural areas is still a significant source ofin Viet Nam, 3) promote cooperation and mobilise

plastic waste leakage into the ocean. In general,

resources from domestic and foreign organizations

current collection systems in the provinces

and individuals, and 4) implement plans, programmes

are labour intensive and inefficient due toand projects to reduce plastic waste pollution.

lack of technology, lack of financial resources,
and poor collection infrastructure. In addition,

The Leadership Board consists of 35 members

waste collected is disposed of at open or non-

who are senior leaders of ministries, international

engineered dumpsites instead of sanitary ordevelopment organizations, leading businesses andengineered landfills, thus improvements to theassociations, who will now jointly coordinate thecurrent waste management system to implement

strategic direction of NPAP to tackle plastic pollution

waste separation at source, and increase reusein Viet Nam. Establishment of the Leadership Board is

and recycling represent a huge challenge.

strong evidence of the government's commitment topromoting public-private partnerships in transforming• Waste recycling is still limited and mainly carried

the economy and the improving quality of theout by the informal sector. However, due toenvironment.

the lack of regulations and policy incentives,
the informal sector is currently considered an

NPAP’s concerted actions across many tasks andenvironmental polluter rather than a contributor

projects

to material recycling. Further, they have received

contributelittle attention and support from authorities andrelevant

towardstakeholders

national

policycollectively
developmentin the plastics sector. Key representatives of thesociety.

•withprojects mainly come from the Vietnam Environment

The private sector has not found it attractive toAdministration,

participate in SWM due to reasons including

to ensure coordinated action. According to theuncertainties over the legal framework of PPP

interviewees, The major activities are covered inand lack of reliable data on the recycling market.

Table 5.

24

lineministries

andbusinesses

Section 5：Vietnam

NPAP supported our institutes’ research activities which are in their programme.
During the previous two years of new Law and Decree preparation, they provided muchsupport for us in terms of experts, financial support, research results, reports, and roadmap… We look forward to ongoing comprehensive cooperation in the future.
Interview, representative of a research institute

Table 5: Task forces and activities (complied by authors from NPAP documents)
Task forces

Tasks and Projects

Promote Inclusivity

Research on “Gender equality and social inclusion in plastic waste management in Viet Nam”;
data collection and consultations were carried out from November 2021 to April 2022 in Hanoi,
Ha Tinh, and Thua Thien Hue to obtain information about knowledge, attitudes, and practicesof consumers of plastic products.

Inform Policy

Organise policy dialogues, conferences and workshops to plan strategies and mobilise theresources to support effective implementation of plastic waste management and treatment
options, and accelerate achievement of a circular economy in Viet Nam.
Launch the NPAP National Roadmap Report on Plastic Pollution Mitigation.
Contribute to development of legal regulations and technical standards on waste management
and environmental protection at domestic solid waste treatment facilities.
Coordinate and support the implementation of research, surveys, assessments and propose
solutions to promote circular economic models, public-private partnerships, and businessmodels with the participation of associations, organizations, and enterprises.
Research and suggest environmental regulations for recycled products, plastic bags and nonbiodegradable plastic packaging.
Coordinate and support the implementation of research, proposing environmental regulations
on recycled products, goods containing microplastics and plastic bags, and non-biodegradable
plastic packaging. The specific tasks include: (1) survey and assessment of microplastics
in products and goods; and (2) proposing regulations on proportion of recycled plastic in
products and goods.

Unlock financing

The main tasks are: (1) assess, report and propose directions to strengthen the management
and coordination of budgets and (2) mobilise resources to strengthen plastic waste
management and implement circular economy for the plastic industry.

Transform
Behaviour

Emphasise the need for participation and implementation of waste segregation at households
in accordance to the Law on Environmental Protection in 2020 and other policies.
Implement and accelerate communication programmes and campaigns to raise awareness andsupport behavior change on sustainable consumption and production.

Boost Innovation

Increase visibility of innovations, create opportunities for high-potential innovators to connect
with those who can scale their innovations.

Harmonise Metrics

Coordinate and support the investigation, evaluation and building of a database system forformulating periodical reports on plastic waste.
Develop a national environmental report on the theme of plastics.

25Section 5：Vietnam

5.4 Current Achievements and Status

Vietnam, 2022). The significantly more aggressive

After more than a year since its implementation,

plastic leakage into waterways from 2018 levels, which

achievements have included (1) the promotion ofis in line with the National Action Plan for Management

Viet Nam’s initiatives on combating plastic pollutionof Marine Plastic Litter by 2030. The interventions willto the international community at the World Summit

require a broad policy framework that identifies theon Sustainable Development; (2) efforts to finalise theresponsibilities and specific actions for each of the

National Action Roadmap on Plastic-Loss Reduction ininterventions.

targets of the ambitious SCS enable a 75% reduction inViet Nam; (3) research on gender equality and social
inclusion in plastic waste management; (4) support for

Accelerating policy development and Government
commitments

consultations with the government to finalise current
policies on accelerating plastic waste governance;and (5) assisting the Viet Nam government to build aTechnical assistance for boosting regulations onplastic analysis platform and a national data system

CE framework and EPR scheme:on marine plastic waste. Some of the more notable

Through the project “Mitigating marine plastic litter inachievements are summarised below.

Viet Nam”, NPAP has cooperated with and supported
the national government agencies in the development

Drive the delivery of baseline assessments,
plastic waste flow analyses, and action roadmapsof regulatory approaches and guiding documents toimplement priority policies. They include strengthening

The Viet Nam NPAP Action Roadmap for Radical

plastic waste and marine plastic debris management,

Reduction of Plastic Pollution - 3rd edition shows

including an effective EPR scheme, CE framework, andthat if aggressive yet realistic SCS is implemented,

regulations to reduce the production, importation andmismanaged waste will decrease from 42% in 2018consumption of single-use plastic products and non-

to 9% by 2030 and consequently, plastic leakage

biodegradable plastic bags.

into waterways will drop by 43% (NPAP Secretariat,

26

Section 5：Vietnam

under the LEP, that integrates content and policy tools

Policy dialogue and consultation on Decree on CE:

to support the application of CE and EPR.

With reference to the criteria, roadmap and incentive
mechanism for the plastic and packaging sector,

Supporting MONRE to implement the action plan to

on September 24, 2021, NPAP collaborated withstrengthen plastic waste management:

Institute of Strategy and Policy on Natural Resources
and Environment (ISPONRE) and World Wildlife Fund

NPAP has been proactively contributing to the process(WWF-Vietnam) and organised a policy dialogueof policy development, which resulted in NPAP being

and online consultation on the topic of “Circular

exclusively named as the official initiative in support

economy regulation under the draft Decree andof MONRE implementing the action plan to strengthen

recommendation for the plastic and packaging sector”.

plastic waste management under Decision 2436/QD-

This provided a timely supplement to the draft Decree

BTNMT, newly issued on 13 December, 2021. Thisand related documents on the circular economy asdecision indicates the government's determination toregulated in the Law on Environmental Protection

follow through on the national strategy.

in 2020, with detailed proposals for the plastic andPrivate Sector Involvement

packaging sector (WWF, 2021).

There has been a notable rise in actions taken to tackle
Support for the drafting of Decree detailing someplastic pollution by various stakeholders, which is a

articles of the Law on Environmental Protection

highly positive sign. Various initiatives are resulting in2020 (LEP 2020), that focussed on the CE regulations

many different platforms targeting the same objective.

-

waste

Due to its scale and composition of LB members,

management, EPR and circular economy development

NPAP can therefore play an important role in policy

and such like. As a result, the Vietnam National

orientation.

plastics

andpackaging

sectors,

plastic

Assembly promulgated Decree No. 08/2022/ND-CP

The most effective contribution of NPAP is possibly policy improvement,
as most of their LB members are V.I.Ps. In addition, the participation of foreign representatives(most are from developed countries) provides benefits in sharing information and experiences ofplastic waste management with policy makers who are also members of NPAP LB.
For example, the ambassador can share new policies and experiences
in tackling plastic pollution. NPAP also has the ability to approach various financial resources
to support other activities and MSPs.
Interview, an Embassy official

5.5 Way Ahead and conclusionof single-use plastic in supermarkets and commercial

NPAP has contributed significantly to the development

governments. Obtaining buy-in across consumers,of plastic waste management activities in Viet Nam,businesses and leaders at national and local levels

especiallyis necessary to enable the success of these policies.

ininforming

policyandcentres represents a big challenge for central and local

transforming

behaviour task forces. The policy measures include

Sustainable

the new law of environmental protection with EPR

marine plastic waste pollution and waste management

and CE regulations, as well as setting national targets

will

defined in the national strategy on integrated wastecomplementary behaviour change by consumers andmanagement to reduce landfill rates. Implementing

strong political support by legislators and enforcers.

these and other measures, including the elimination27

besolutions

more

and

effective

interventions
when

tackling

combinedwithSection 1：The Context of Plastics Pollution

28

6

SECTION

GPAP Approach:Task Forces toRoadmaps toActionAuthor: Vivek Anand Asokan

6.1 Introduction

initiating task forces to bring stakeholders together,

We investigated in this report the role of the NPAP inand facilitating increased commitment to action

addressing plastic pollution in developing countries.

through SCS as espoused by SYSTEMIQ modelling.

building roadmaps with stakeholders (as participants),

The NPAP process is composed of several thematic‘tracks’, such as changing behaviour, promoting

The major findings of this analysis relate to NPAP

inclusivity, harmonising metrics (knowledge), policy

support for existing national policy processes, suchdevelopment, boosting innovation, and unlocking

as EPR, as well as support for stakeholders in aligning

finance.

perspectives, target setting, and actions, as highlighted

Based

on

the

conceptual

framework

developed in section 2, we wish to describe the rolein the conceptual framework.

played by the central actor to align several pathways

some challenges in the NPAP process and highlight

We further identify

such as perspectives, targets, priorities, and timeline

the importance of the two-pronged approach ofof all stakeholders.

NPAPs that includes both international and domestic
stakeholders to overcome the challenges.

The NPAP secretariat acts as a central actor in the MSP
and we intended to answer the following questions

We summarise the NPAP approach by answering

based on our study in the three pilot countries:

the specific questions posed by Paquin and HowardGrenville (2013) in section 6.2. The main findings are(1) In the three pilot countries, what are the NPAP

covered in section 6.3, the current challenges areplanned approaches and strategies in supporting

discussed in section 6.4, and the conclusions of theand promoting practical and systematic action, andcurrent studies are presented in the final section, 6.5.

encouraging narratives to transition to a circular
economy for plastics?

6.2 Summary of the NPAP approach(2) From the perspective of SDG 17, how can the NPAP
approach help deliver the collaborative outcomes

Regarding answers to the specific questions posed byin mitigating plastic pollution?

Paquin and Howard-Grenville (2013) related to the role
In this section, by answering these questions, weof MSPs, these are provided below, as well as further

explain how and why NPAP activities are importantdetails of the role of the two-pronged process and its

in enabling the multiple stakeholder process, i.e., by

implications for the future. The major characteristics of29Section 6：GPAP Approach: Task Forces to Roadmaps to Action

NPAPs are summarised in Table 6.

to increase the number of domestic stakeholders,
while this increase must be balanced and fit with theTable 6: Summary of the NPAP approach

inclusive nature of NPAP.

Issue

Focus on plastic pollution

ParticipantsMultinational Companies, National
Government, Local Companies,
and non-governmental
stakeholders(3) What are the dilemmas and how are the values

Approach tosolution

Global and National Approach;Bring diverse stakeholders
together

Implementation

System Change through private
financingdemonstrated by the organisation?
In terms of the dilemmas, the waste management
and recycling industry is currently not considered
economically profitable. Regarding the values, theWorld Economic Forum, an international organisation,
has a wealth of experience in managing and working
with public and private partners. Additionally, theplatform supports experimentation, and successful
solutions can be scaled nationally and to other regionsof the NPAP platform. Therefore, the platform canbalance the various interests of stakeholders as long(1) How does the NPAP build and assemble theas the NPAP remains committed to a participatory

network?

architecture and implementation.

The strength of NPAP lies in its two-pronged
framework that combines the strengths of global
stakeholders, i.e., knowledge and finance, with those

6.3 Major Findingsof the national stakeholders, i.e., implementation andinclusion. Initially, national stakeholders are the ‘large

The main findings are divided into two categories,

players’ – ministries of national governments, large

institutional mechanism and procedural mechanisms

companies, and NGOs. However, direct engagement

below.

with the ‘smaller players’, such as local governments
and the informal sector, will require further investment

Institutional Mechanismand sharing of resources in the two-pronged process.
Furthermore, the smaller players need to find a voice

Supporting National Governments andwhile working with the larger players. It is therefore

National Processnecessary to take concrete action and further

NPAP

strengthen the inclusiveness mandate of the NPAP

supports

theconventional

government-

led process, in which the ministries of national

process.

governments head numerous NPAP TF committees.
As such, NPAP actions become part of the mainstream(2) How does NPAP accumulate resources andpolicy process, and knowledge generated from NPAP

expertise as the network develops?

activities, such as data from SCS modelling, is used to

The NPAP secretariat is thinly staffed and needs toinform national action plans and other government-

source regular financial funding from global andled policy processes. For example, in the contexts

national stakeholders in the long term, and mightof Vietnam, Indonesia, and Ghana, the NPAP task

require the support of GPAP and national governments.

forces are seen to increase discussions on EPR. Such

Currently, the resources of the international actors

engagement is positive as the implementation of EPR

influence the general functioning and orientation ofrequires stakeholders buy-in across the plastic value

the GPAP, and NPAP is trying to reorient the financing

chain to collaborate; the producers, consumers, and(from national and local stakeholders) while building

recyclers should be part of the process. Here, NPAPa self-sufficient, yet open framework that domestic

as a multi-stakeholder collaboration can facilitate

stakeholders can support. The two-pronged processcollaboration and accelerate engagement between

supports

stakeholders.

thistransformation

and

may

requirerebalancing of the composition due to the need30Section 6：GPAP Approach: Task Forces to Roadmaps to Action

Procedural Mechanisms

engagement process. Each of these processes
aims to change the perspective on plastic pollution

Explained below are the procedural mechanisms

depending on the specific stakeholder concerned.

used by central actors to facilitate encounters, build

Our study shows that The TFs facilitate discussioninteractions, design action plans and execute projects.

among stakeholders that leads to the sharing

These mechanisms help align the perspectives, targets,of knowledge, which is crucial to developing aand timelines. According to the theory of robust

common understanding among stakeholders.

actions, a participatory architecture (Gehman et al.,2022) is recommended, and the participatory structure

Target settingof NPAP, as we explained enables to balance diverse
interests and experiment before scaling.

The setting of targets and working towards themNPAPs have developed TFs around five themes toour study shows that NPAP facilitates linking

have been a hallmark of management, andtheenable collaboration and coordinate action – TFs help

knowledge

obtainedfromglobalplastic

consumption and waste models to policy road

NPAP align the perspectives, set targets and timelines.

maps and national action plans by working with the

The process is self-reinforcing as the central actors

various national ministries. Science-based statisticalneed to adjust their own perspectives, targets, andmodelling, such as the SYSTEMIQ SCS model

timelines, thus to support multi-stakeholder initiatives

estimates future plastic waste generation, and thethe aims of the NPAP will keep changing: each NPAP

resulting estimates from the scenario model are

secretariat is also decentralised, allowing the central

provided to policymakers, who previously lacked

actor to adapt to such flexibility.

such information for planning. As the stakeholders
participate in TF (harmonising data), the modelling

Perspectives

process is further linked with official national

The plastic value chain has diverse stakeholders

data collection processes. The exchange between

who view and understand the issue of plastic

international and domestic stakeholders results inpollution differently in terms of its causes andan improved national data collection process andsolutions. For example, manufacturers, consumers,

knowledge sharing.

recyclers and workers have different worldviews
and prefer different means to bring about change.

ActionManufacturers consider the material properties

The role of NPAP is to broker an agreement thatof plastics that are used in their manufacturing

aligns policy action with financial commitment

process, such as product durability; consumers will

andfocus on comfort and convenience; and recyclers

investment.

Aligning

perspectives

andtargeting setting is a critical element in formulating

are concerned about wastes with high recyclability.

agreements on implementation between different

The workers of the informal waste sector are

partners. NPAP supports the EPR processes,

primarily concerned with economic opportunities

where the NPAP stakeholders can offer theirand costs, such as social and health security.

expertise/best

Governments are in a unique position, too, as they

practicesfrom

elsewheretosupport implementation of EPR processes. Further,oversee governance. In theory, given this diversity

NPAP can develop financial instruments andof interests, it is pertinent that MSP stakeholders

solutions such as blended finance to support theare derived from all sections of society, and that

implementation processes.

the MSPs are balanced and inclusive.
Individual TFs are targeted at specific issues and6.4 Recommendations tostrengthen NPAP operations

stakeholders. For example, the task force (TF) on
behavioural change targets consumers; the TF on
boosting innovation works with innovators andbusiness stakeholders; and the TF on inclusion

In this section we provide suggestions to strengthenemphasises social issues and includes stakeholders

NPAP operations to support and facilitate practical andthat are left out of the current governance andsystematic action.

31Section 6：GPAP Approach: Task Forces to Roadmaps to Action

Creating inter-ministerial coordination at
the national level

Under this scheme, part of the financing can be used
to support the implementation of the EPR system, andthe financial task force can share the knowledge andWhile

NPAP’sstructurehasenabledsuccessful

also support the governance process in developingofnationalcountries and operationalise EPR, in the form of grants

governments, the NPAP is also trying to create meansor loans, until the EPR systems become financiallyfor inter-ministerial coordination at the national level.

viable.

collaborations

withministries

theInvolvement of local governments

6.5 Conclusion: Central Actor
as a Linchpin and Future
Recommendations

As the focus of NPAP’s framework is moving towards
action, this would also require the participation of
local governments. The NPAPs can connect local
governments with international stakeholders such as

In this section, we describe the critical elements ofbanks, city governments, and multinational companies

the NPAP process in supporting and promoting SCS,

who can share knowledge, best practices and financeand encouraging narratives to transition to a circular

directly.

economy. The NPAP platform implements a twopronged process: a global and a national process.

Involvement of the informal sector

This setup has inherent strengths to deal with thechallenges we discussed in the previous section.

The presence of informal sectors is ubiquitous indeveloping countries, and NPAP can serve as or createa bridging organisation. Studies have suggested that

GPAP, a global MSP, has a wealth of international

the involvement of bridging organisations, i.e., thoseprojectthat interface between formal institutions, such as

experience on plastic consumption and waste, and as

local governments and companies, and informal

knowledge and financial networks are not available

institutions, such as self-managed waste pickers or

to developing countries, such networks are highly

independent waste and recycling establishments

desired by partners in developing countries. The(Williams et al., 2013). NPAP can play a direct role innational NPAP secretariat is funded by GPAP, andcreating waste management cooperatives, i.e., jointly

NPAPs are central actors and do not replace other

owned enterprises among informal stakeholders, andstakeholders. Rather, they facilitate interaction of

can add impetus to such organisations by infusing

domestic and international stakeholders and support

finance, skills, and technology.

the national policy process. As mentioned previously,

management

experienceandmodelling

since not all stakeholders in the plastic value chain are
based within relevant national jurisdictions, the aspect

Financial bankabilityof coordination between NPAP-GPAP is considered

The main aim of the NPAP process is to increase theworthwhile and valuable in supporting national

private sector role in the waste management andgovernment coordination, as well as coordination withrecycling process, which involves augmenting thestakeholders in other countries.

governance process without diminishing the roleof the governments. The role of finance is crucial;while waste management and recycling projects are
considered not financially viable, blended financeusing subsidies, loans, and grants from public andprivate companies could be combined. As NPAP
activities have led to creation of a roadmap for financethrough engagement of international and national
stakeholders, it is desirable to use such roadmaps(outputs) to scale up the public and private finance(intermediate outcomes) to reduce plastic pollution, as
embraced in GPAP impact ladder strategy.

32

References
Aarikka-Stenroos, L., Jaakkola, E., Harrison, D., & Mäkitalo-Chan, S., & Amling, W. (2019). Does orchestration in the

Keinonen, T. (2017). How to manage innovation processes

Global Climate Action Agenda effectively prioritize

in extensive networks: A longitudinal study. Industrial

and mobilize transnational climate adaptation action?

Marketing Management, 67, 88–105. https://doi.

International Environmental Agreements: Politics, Law andorg/10.1016/j.indmarman.2017.09.014

Economics, 19(4–5), 429–446. https://doi.org/10.1007/

Abbott, K. W., Genschel, P., Snidal, D., & Zangl, B. (2016).

s10784-019-09444-9

Two Logics of Indirect Governance: Delegation andChan, S., Ellinger, P., & Widerberg, O. (2018). Exploring

Orchestration. British Journal of Political Science, 46(4),national and regional orchestration of non-state
action for a < 1.5 °C world. International Environmental

719–729. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0007123414000593

Addis Ababa Action Agenda : Financing for Sustainable

Agreements: Politics, Law and Economics, 18(1), 135–152.

Development Office. (n.d.). Retrieved 17 August 2022,

https://doi.org/10.1007/s10784-018-9384-2
Debrah, J. K., Vidal, D. G., & Dinis, M. A. P. (2021). Innovativefrom https://www.un.org/development/desa/financing/Use of Plastic for a Clean and Sustainable Environmental

document/addis-ababa-action-agenda

Management: Learning Cases from Ghana, Africa.

Adner, R. (2017). Ecosystem as Structure: An Actionable
Construct for Strategy. Journal of Management, 43(1), 39–

Urban Science, 5(1), Article 1. https://doi.org/10.3390/

58. https://doi.org/10.1177/0149206316678451

urbansci5010012

Amoah, S. T., & Kosoe, E. A. (2014). Solid Waste Management

De-la-Torre, G. E. (2020). Microplastics: An emerging threat
to food security and human health. Journal of Foodin Urban Areas of Ghana: Issues and Experiences from
Wa. Journal of Environment Pollution and Human Health,

Science and Technology, 57(5), 1601–1608. https://doi.

2(5), Article 5. DOI: 10.12691/jephh-2-5-3

org/10.1007/s13197-019-04138-1
Dhanasai, C., & Parkhe, A. (2006). Orchestrating Innovation

Andrady, A. L., & Neal, M. A. (2009). Applications and societal
benefits of plastics. Philosophical Transactions of the

Networks. The Academy of Management Review, 31(3), 659–

Royal Society B: Biological Sciences, 364(1526), 1977–1984.

669.
Douti, N. B., Abanyie, S. K., Ampofo, S., & Nyarko, S. K. (2017).

https://doi.org/10.1098/RSTB.2008.0304
Bäckstrand, K., Campe, S., Chan, M., Mert, A., & Schäferhoff,

Solid Waste Management Challenges in Urban Areas ofM. (2012). Transnational Public-Private Partnerships.

Ghana: A Case Study of Bawku Municipality. International

Journal of Geosciences, 8(4), Article 4. https://doi.

Biermann, F., Chan, M., Mert, A., & Pattberg, P. H. (2007).
Multi-stakeholder partnerships for sustainableorg/10.4236/ijg.2017.84026

development: Does the promise hold? In P. Glasbergen,

Dzotsi, E., Odoom, J. K., Opare, J. K. L., & Davies-Teye, B. B.

F. Bierman, & A. P. J. Mol (Eds.), Partnerships, Governance

K. (2016). Outbreak of Cholera, Greater Accra Region,and Sustainable Development. Reflections on Theory and

Ghana, 2014. Journal of Scientific Research and Reports,

Practice (pp. 239–260). Edward Elgar.

1–12. https://doi.org/10.9734/JSRR/2016/21461

Bird, S. M., Sir David, C., Farewell, V. T., Harvey, G., Tim, H., &EA and Quantis. (n.d.). National Guidance for Plastic PollutionPeter C., S. (2005). Performance indicators: Good, bad,Hotspotting and Shaping Action – Vietnam Country report.

and ugly. Journal of the Royal Statistical Society: Series A

Retrieved 5 December 2022, from https://www.iucn.org/(Statistics in Society), 168(1), 1–27. https://doi.org/10.1111/

sites/default/files/content/documents/2021/vietnam_-_j.1467-985X.2004.00333.x

national_guidance_for_plastic_pollution_hotspotting_

Carter, N., Day, P., & Klein, R. (1995). How Organisations

and_shaping_action.pdf

Measure Success: The Use of Performance

Ferraro, F., Etzion, D., & Gehman, J. (2015). Tackling Grand

Indicators in Government. Routledge. https://doi.

Challenges Pragmatically: Robust Action Revisited.

org/10.4324/9780203208663

Organization Studies, 36(3), 363–390. https://doi.

Cashore, B. (2008). Legitimacy and the Privatization oforg/10.1177/0170840614563742

Environmental Governance: How Non-State Market-

Gehman, J., Etzion, D., & Ferraro, F. (2022). Robust Action:

Driven (NSMD) Governance Systems Gain Rule-Making

Advancing a Distinctive Approach to Grand Challenges.

Authority. In International Environmental Governance.

In A. Aslan Gümüsay, E. Marti, H. Trittin-Ulbrich, & C.

Routledge.

Wickert (Eds.), Organizing for Societal Grand Challenges

Central Intelligence Agency. (n.d.). Imports—Commodities—(Vol. 79, pp. 259–278). Emerald Publishing Limited.

The World Factbook. The World Factbook. Retrieved 5https://doi.org/10.1108/S0733-558X20220000079024

December 2022, from https://www.cia.gov/the-world-

Global Plastic Action Partnership. (2020). Radically Reducing

Plastic Pollution in Indonesia: A Multistakeholder

factbook/field/imports-commodities/

33

Action Plan National Plastic Action Partnership. World

Journal of Environmental Studies, 0(0), 1–10. https://doi.org

Economic Forum. https://quest4action.org/wp-content//10.1080/00207233.2022.2050568

uploads/2020/09/NPAP-Indonesia-Multistakeholder-

Leslie, H. A., van Velzen, M. J. M., Brandsma, S. H., Vethaak, A.

Action-Plan_April-2020.pdf

D., Garcia-Vallejo, J. J., & Lamoree, M. H. (2022). Discovery

Global Plastic Action Partnership. (2021). A Roadmap forand quantification of plastic particle pollution in humanRadical Reduction of Plastic Pollution in Ghana. https://

blood. Environment International, 163, 107199. https://doi.

www.wacaprogram.org/sites/waca/files/knowdoc/NPAP_

org/10.1016/j.envint.2022.107199

Ghana_Action_Roadmap.pdf

Levén, P., Holmström, J., & Mathiassen, L. (2014). Managing

Gruber, E. S., Stadlbauer, V., Pichler, V., Resch-Fauster, K.,

research and innovation networks: Evidence fromTodorovic, A., Meisel, T. C., Trawoeger, S., Hollóczki, O.,a government sponsored cross-industry program.

Turner, S. D., Wadsak, W., Vethaak, A. D., & Kenner, L.

Research Policy, 43(1), 156–168. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.

(2022). To Waste or Not to Waste: Questioning Potential

respol.2013.08.004

Health Risks of Micro- and Nanoplastics with a Focus on

Lissah, S. Y., Ayanore, M. A., Krugu, J. K., Aberese-Ako, M.,

Their Ingestion and Potential Carcinogenicity. Exposure& Ruiter, R. A. C. (2021). Managing urban solid wasteand Health. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12403-022-00470-8

in Ghana: Perspectives and experiences of municipal

Harris Gleckman. (n.d.). Multistakeholder Governance andwaste company managers and supervisors in an urban

Democracy: A Global Challenge. Routledge & CRC Press.

municipality. PLOS ONE, 16(3), e0248392. https://doi.

Retrieved 24 August 2022, from https://www.routledge.

org/10.1371/journal.pone.0248392
Maltais, Aaron, Weitz, Nina, & Persson, Åsa. (2018). SDG 17:

com/Multistakeholder-Governance-and-Democracy-AGlobal-Challenge/Gleckman/p/book/9781138502130

Partnerships for the Goals [Annex to the Formas report

Hemmati, M. (2002). Multi-stakeholder Processes for GovernanceForskning för Agenda 2030: Översikt av forskningsbehov

and Sustainability: Beyond Deadlock and Conflict.

och vägar framåt]. https://www.sei.org/wp-content/

Routledge. https://doi.org/10.4324/9781849772037

uploads/2020/01/sdg-17-review-of-researchneeds-171219.pdf

Henry, L. A., & Möllering, G. (2022). Sluggish, but innovative?

Meijer, L. J. J., Emmerik, T. van, Ent, R. van der, Schmidt, C., &Orchestrating collaboration in multi-stakeholder
networks despite low commitment. Innovation, 0(0), 1–23.

Lebreton, L. (2021). More than 1000 rivers account for

https://doi.org/10.1080/14479338.2022.2029707

80% of global riverine plastic emissions into the ocean.

Hoornweg, D., & Bhada-Tata, P. (2012). What a Waste: A

Science Advances, 7(18). https://doi.org/10.1126/SCIADV.

Global Review of Solid Waste Management. https://

AAZ5803
Miezah, K., Obiri-Danso, K., Kádár, Z., Fei-Baffoe, B., & Mensah,

openknowledge.worldbank.org/handle/10986/17388

M. Y. (2015). Municipal solid waste characterization andHotta, Y., Tasaki, T., & Koide, R. (2021). Expansion of Policy
Domain of Sustainable Consumption and Production

quantification as a measure towards effective waste(SCP): Challenges and Opportunities for Policy Design.

management in Ghana. Waste Management, 46, 15–27.

Sustainability 2021, Vol. 13, Page 6763, 13(12), 6763.

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.wasman.2015.09.009

Ministerial Regulation of Environment and Forestry No. 75 ofhttps://doi.org/10.3390/SU13126763
International Trade Centre. (n.d.). Trade Map—Trade2019 on Roadmap of Plastic Waste Reduction by Producers,

statistics for international business development. Trade

including EPR, Ministry of Environment and Forestry,

Map. Retrieved 5 December 2022, from https://www.

Republic of Indonesia (2019) (Ministry of Environment

trademap.org/Index.aspx

and Forestry, Republic of Indonesia).

Jacobides, M. G., Cennamo, C., & Gawer, A. (2018). Towards

Ministry of Environment, Science, Technology and Innovation.

a theory of ecosystems. Strategic Management Journal,(2019). National Plastics Management Policy. https://mesti.

39(8), 2255–2276. https://doi.org/10.1002/smj.2904

gov.gh/wp-content/uploads/2021/02/Revised-NationalPlastics-Management-Policy_-FINAL.pdf

Jambeck, J. R., Geyer, R., Wilcox, C., Siegler, T. R., Perryman, M.,
Andrady, A., Narayan, R., & Law, K. L. (2015). Plastic waste

Ministry of Natural Resources and Environment, Vietnam.

inputs from land into the ocean. Science, 347(6223), 768–(2020). Report on the state of the national environment

771. https://doi.org/10.1126/science.1260352

2019—Special topic on solid waste management (Báo cáohiện trạng môi trường quốc gia 2019—Chuyên đề QuảnKanhai, G., Agyei-Mensah, S., & Mudu, P. (2021). Population
awareness and attitudes toward waste-relatedlý chất thải rắn sinh hoạt). http://dwrm.gov.vn/uploads/

health risks in Accra, Ghana. International Journal ofnews/2020_11/bao-cao-hien-trang-moi-truong-2019.pdf

Environmental Health Research, 31(6), 670–686. https://doi.

Musah, B. I., Peng, L., & Xu, Y. (2021). Plastic waste menacein Ghana, a serious threat to marine ecologicalorg/10.1080/09603123.2019.1680818
Kombiok, E., & Naa Jaaga, J. (2022). Disposal of plastic waste

diversity. IOP Conference Series: Earth and Environmental

in Ghana: The knowledge, attitude and practices of

Science, 725(1), 012006. https://doi.org/10.1088/1755-

households in the Tamale metropolis. International

1315/725/1/012006

34

NPAP Secretariat, Indonesia. (2021). NPAP overview:of Innovation Management, 13(04), 569–591. https://doi.

Reducing Indonesia’s marine plastic leakage 70% by 2025

org/10.1142/S136391960900242X
Schäferhoff, M., Campe, S., & Kaan, C. (2009). Transnational[Presentation to the Board Committee].
NPAP Secretariat, Vietnam. (2022). NPAP Action Roadmap for

Public-Private Partnerships in International Relations:

Radical Reduction of Plastic Pollution (Draft).

Making Sense of Concepts, Research Frameworks, andNurhati, I. S., & Cordova, M. R. (2020). Marine plastic debris

Results. International Studies Review, 11(3), 451–474.

in Indonesia: Baseline estimates (2010-2019) andSchymanski, D., Oßmann, B. E., Benismail, N., Boukerma, K.,monitoring strategies (2021-2025). Marine Research in

Dallmann, G., von der Esch, E., Fischer, D., Fischer, F.,

Indonesia, 45(2), Article 2. https://doi.org/10.14203/mri.

Gilliland, D., Glas, K., Hofmann, T., Käppler, A., Lacorte, S.,

v45i2.581

Marco, J., Rakwe, M. E., Weisser, J., Witzig, C., Zumbülte,Odonkor, S. T., & Sallar, A. M. (2021). Correlates of householdN., & Ivleva, N. P. (2021). Analysis of microplastics inwaste management in Ghana: Implications for publicdrinking water and other clean water samples withhealth. Heliyon, 7(11). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.

micro-Raman and micro-infrared spectroscopy: Minimum
requirements and best practice guidelines. Analytical andheliyon.2021.e08227
OECD. (2022). Global Plastics Outlook ECONOMIC DRIVERS,

Bioanalytical Chemistry, 413(24), 5969–5994. https://doi.

ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS AND POLICY OPTIONS. https://org/10.1007/s00216-021-03498-y
Sobir, R. (2019). UNDESA – Review of capacity development gaps,

doi.org/10.1787/de747aef-en

needs, and priorities. 34.

Otoo, I., & Danquah, M. (2021). Fiscal decentralization andStafford Beer. (n.d.). Decision and Control: The Meaning of

efficiency of public services delivery by local governments
in Ghana. African Development Review, 33(3), 411–425.

Operational Research and Management Cybernetics | Wiley.

https://doi.org/10.1111/1467-8268.12590

Wiley.Com. Retrieved 17 August 2022, from https://www.

Paquin, R. L., & Howard-Grenville, J. (2013). Blind Dates andwiley.com/en-us/Decision+and+Control%3A+The+Meaning

Arranged Marriages: Longitudinal Processes of Network+of+Operational+Research+and+Management+Cyberneti

Orchestration. Organization Studies, 34(11), 1623–1653.

cs-p-9780471948384

https://doi.org/10.1177/0170840612470230

Ugwu, K., Herrera, A., & Gómez, M. (2021). Microplastics inmarine biota: A review. Marine Pollution Bulletin, 169,

Pattberg, P., & Widerberg, O. (2016). Transnational
multistakeholder partnerships for sustainable112540. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.marpolbul.2021.112540

development: Conditions for success. Ambio, 45(1), 42–

End plastic pollution: Towards an international legally binding
instrument, (2022) (United Nations Environment Assembly

51. https://doi.org/10.1007/s13280-015-0684-2
Quartey, E. T., Tosefa, H., Danquah, K. A. B., & Obrsalova,of the United Nations Environment Programme Fifth

I. (2015). Theoretical Framework for Plastic Waste

session).
VCCI. (2019). Vietnam materials marketplace. In Ministry ofManagement in Ghana through Extended Producer
Responsibility: Case of Sachet Water Waste. International

Industry and Trade in Vietnam (MOIT).

Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health, 12(8),Widerberg, O., & Stripple, J. (2016). The expanding field ofArticle 8. https://doi.org/10.3390/ijerph120809907

cooperative initiatives for decarbonization: A review

Ravitch, Sharon & Riggan, Matthew. (2023). Reason & Rigor.

of five databases. WIREs Climate Change, 7(4), 486–500.

https://uk.sagepub.com/en-gb/asi/reason-rigor/

https://doi.org/10.1002/wcc.396

book241777

Williams, E., Kahhat, R., Bengtsson, M., Hayashi, S., Hotta, Y., &Presidential Decree no. 97 of 2017 concerning National

Totoki, Y. (2013). Linking Informal and Formal Electronics

Policies and Strategies for Management of Household

Recycling via an Interface Organization. Challenges, 4(2),Waste and Household-like Waste, no. Presidential Decree

Article 2. https://doi.org/10.3390/challe4020136
World Bank. (2019). Improvement of Solid Waste

no. 97, State Gazette of the Republic of Indonesia (2017).

Presidential Decree No. 83 of 2018 on Action Plan on Marine

Management to Support Regional and Metropolitan

Plastic Debris 2018–2025, State Gazette of the Republic ofCities. https://documents1.worldbank.org/curated/Indonesia (2018) (Republic of Indonesia).

en/608321575860426737/pdf/Indonesia-Improvement-

Reypens, C., Lievens, A., & Blazevic, V. (2021). Hybrid

of-Solid-Waste-Management-to-Support-Regional-and-Orchestration in Multi-stakeholder Innovation Networks:

Metropolitan-Cities-Project.pdf

Practices of mobilizing multiple, diverse stakeholders

WWF. (2021). Đối thoại chính sách và tham vấn Dự thảo Nghịacross organizational boundaries. Organization Studies,định về kinh tế tuần hoàn: Tiêu chí, lộ trình và. https://42(1), 61–83. https://doi.org/10.1177/0170840619868268

vietnam.panda.org/?370315/i-thoi-chinh-sach-va-thamvn-D-tho-Ngh-nh-v-kinh-t-tun-hoan-tieu-chi-l-trinh-va-c-

Ritala, P., Armila, L., & Blomqvist, K. (2009). Innovation

ch-khuyn-khich-cho-lnh-vc-nha-va-bao-bi

orchestration capability—Defining the organizational
and individual level determinants. International Journal

35

Prepared by:
Institute for Global Environmental Strategies
2108-11 Kamiyamaguchi, Hayama,
Kanagawa 240-0115, Japan*Correspondence
Tel: +81-46-855-3700
Fax: +81-46-855-3709