analysis
INT

2019

No Plastic in Nature:assessing plastic
ingestion fromnature to people
AN ANALYSIS for WWF byACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
The analysis was written by Dalberg Advisors, Wijnand de Wit and Nathan Bigaud.

DALBERG ADVISORS
Dalberg Advisors is a strategy consulting firm that works to build a more inclusive
and sustainable world where all people, everywhere, can reach their fullest potential.
We partner with and serve communities, governments, and companies providing an
innovative mix of services – advisory, investment, research, analytics, and design – tocreate impact at scale.

WWF
WWF is one of the world’s largest and most experienced independent conservation
organizations, with over 5 million supporters and a global network active in more than
100 countries.
WWF’s mission is to stop the degradation of the planet’s natural environment and tobuild a future in which humans live in harmony with nature, by conserving the world’s
biological diversity, ensuring that the use of renewable natural resources is sustainable,and promoting the reduction of pollution and wasteful consumption.
Published in June 2019 by WWF – World Wide Fund For Nature(Formerly World Wildlife Fund), Gland, Switzerland.
Any reproduction in full or in part must mention the title and credit theabove-mentioned publisher as the copyright owner.
© Text 2019 WWF
All rights reserved

Cover photo © Mohammed Abdulraheem / Shutterstock / WWF

Design: Ender Ergün
ISBN 978-2-940529-95-7

AN ANALYSIS for WWF by

WWF International

Dalberg

The University of Newcastle

Avenue du Mont-Blanc
1196 Gland, Switzerland

Rue de Chantepoulet 71201 Geneva, Switzerland

University Drive, Callaghan NSW
2308 Australia

www.panda.org

www.Dalberg.com

www.newcastle.edu.au/

Contents
Plastic is polluting
the air we breathe, the water we drink and the food we eat .... 6
Study methodology and limitations...................................... 7
WWF’S CALL FOR COLLECTIVE GLOBAL ACTION.............................. 12
ENDNOTES......................................................................... 14

© Alex Mustard / naturepl / WWF

Plastic ispollutingthe air we breathe,
the water we drink
and the food we eat.

A new study by the University of Newcastle,
Australia suggests that an average person could beingesting approximately 5 grams of plastic every week.
The equivalent of a credit card’s worth of microplastics.
This summary report highlights the key ways plastic gets
into our body, and what we can do about it.
Increasing plastic use and limited recycling
results in towering plastic production. Since
2000, the world has produced as much plastic as all thepreceding years combined1, a third of which is leaked into
nature2. The production of virgin plastic has increased
200-fold since 1950 and has grown at a rate of 4 per centa year since 2000. If all predicted plastic production
capacity is reached, current production could increase by
40 per cent by 20303.

As of today, a third of plastic waste ends up
in nature, accounting for 100 million metrictons of plastic waste in 20164. Plastic is used asa disposable material, to such an extent that over 75% of all plastic ever produced iswaste5. A significant portion of this waste is mismanaged. Mismanaged waste is a direct
result of underdeveloped waste management infrastructure and refers to plastic left
uncollected, openly dumped, littered, or managed through uncontrolled landfills6. Of
this mismanaged waste, about 87% is leaked into nature and becomes plastic pollution7.
For instance, if nothing changes, the ocean will contain 1 metric ton of plastic for every
3 metric tons of fish by 2025 8.
Plastic pollution affects the natural environment of most species on theplanet. Plastic has been found at the bottom of the Mariana trench9 and in Arctic sea
ice10, in addition to covering coastal ecosystems and accumulating in ocean gyres in allparts of the world. Animals get entangled in large plastic debris, leading to acute andchronic injury or death. Wildlife entanglement has been recorded in over 270 different
species, including mammals, reptiles, birds and fish11. Animals also ingest large quantitiesof plastic and are unable to pass the plastic through their digestive systems, resulting
in internal abrasions, digestive blockages, and death12. Further, toxins from ingested
plastic have also been shown to harm breeding and impair immune systems. Finally,

Figure 1: Total productionof virgin plastic by year,
1950-2030 (forecasted)

6,000

Half of the virgin plastic
produced between
1950 and 2016 hasoccurred since 2000.

5,500
5,000
4,500
4,000
3,500
3,000

PROJECTED

2,500
2,000
1,500
1,000
500
0
1950

2016

2000
1960

1970

1980

6 No Plastic in Nature: Assessing Plastic Ingestion From Nature To People

1990

2000

2010

2020

2030

microplastics pollution has been shown to alter soil conditions, which can impact thehealth of fauna and increase the likelihood of harmful chemicals leaching into the soil13.
Microplastics are contaminating the air we breathe, the food we eat, andthe water we drink. Microplastics are defined as plastic particles under 5mm insize14. Primary microplastics are plastics directly released into the environment in theform of small particulates (shower gel microbeads, tyre abrasion, etc.) while secondary
microplastics are microplastics originating from the degradation of larger plastic (e.g.
degraded plastic bags).

An average person could be ingesting approximately 5 grams ofplastic per week. The equivalent of one credit card.

5 gr

an average
person could be
IngestIng
approxImately
5 grams ofplastIc
every week

A new study by the University of Newcastle, Australia, takes a closer lookat the data gap on what plastic pollution means for human nutrition15.
The study estimates the average amount of plastic ingested by humans by analyzing
and synthesizing the existing but limited literature on the topic. The results confirm
concerns over the large quantity of plastic we ingest every day.

Study methodology and limitations
The study by the University of Newcastle, discussed below builds on acomprehensive review of existing studies to estimate plastic ingestion throughinhalation, food, and beverages. The approach was to focus on available data
and to use conservative extrapolations and assumptions when data was notavailable.
While this study represents a synthesis of the best available data, it builds ona limited set of evidence, and comes with limitations. The consensus among
specialists is thus that while these numbers are in a realistic range, further
studies are needed to get a precise estimate.
A key limitation is the lack of data available on crucial metrics, such as weightand size distribution of microplastics in natural environments, and the varying
quality of data collected. A widespread issue in data collection for instance isvariations in sample collection methodologies leading to risks of contamination.
This issue was for example raised by the scientific community regarding
the Invisible plastics (2017). The Newcastle study team used assumptions
and extrapolations to bridge data gaps and adjust for data quality. It is
acknowledged that with every assumption and extrapolation, the level of
uncertainty increases, and further research and data collection is needed toascertain these results.

The study reveals that consumption of common food and beverages may
result in a weekly ingestion of approximately 5 grams of plastic, depending
on consumption habits. Out of a total of 52 studies that the University of Newcastle
included within its calculations, 33 studies looked at plastic consumption through foodand beverage. These studies highlighted a list of common food and beverages containing
microplastics, such as drinking water*, beer, shellfish, and salt. The results are shown in
the figure 2.

No Plastic in Nature: Assessing Plastic Ingestion From Nature To People 7

Figure 2: Estimated microplastics ingested through consumption of common foods and beverages (particles (0-1mm) per week)

An average person potentiallyconsumes as much as

1769
particles of plastic every week

just from water

1769

Drinking water*

182

10

Shellfish

11

Beer

Salt

* Drinking water includes both tap and bottled water

Figure 3: Map of average percentage of tap water sample containing plastic fibers and average number of fibers(>100um) per 500ml16
Percentage of tap water samples containing plastic fibers

98 %72.2 %

94.4 %

1.9 gr

4.8 grUS
Ecuador2.2 gr
79.2 %

Avarege number of fibers per 500 ml

EuropeLebanon

4.5 gr
76.2 %

India
Uganda4 gr

2.2 gr80.8 %

8 No Plastic in Nature: Assessing Plastic Ingestion From Nature To People

Indonesia

1.9 gr
82.4 %

© Shane Gross / Shutterstock / WWFNo Plastic in Nature: Assessing Plastic Ingestion From Nature To People 9

The largest source of plastic ingestion is drinking water* with plastic foundin water (groundwater, surface water, tap water and bottled water) all over
the world 17. All samples were found to contain plastic in a study on bottled water,which used a limited sample of locations around the world18. As shown figure 3, a recent
study, suggests large regional variations, with twice as much fibres per 500ml observedin American or Indian water as in European or Indonesian tap water 19. Another key
source is shellfish, accounting for as much as 0.5 grams a week. This comes from thefact that shellfish are eaten whole, including their digestive system, after a life in plasticpolluted seas.
Inhalation estimates represent a negligible proportion of microplastics
entering the human body but may vary heavily depending on theenvironment. The study surveys 16 papers focusing on outdoor and indoor air quality.
The results show that indoor air is more heavily plastic polluted than the outdoors.
This comes from the limited air circulation indoors, and the fact that synthetic textiles
and household dust are among the most important sources of airborne microplastics.
This estimate is very conservative, but hints at the fact that exposure to airborne
microplastics may vary largely depending on local conditions and lifestyle. However,what is clear is the ubiquitous nature of the presence of microplastics in the air: a recent
study found microplastics on the top of the Pyrénées mountains in the south of France
due to airborne microplastics travel20.

© Shutterstock / See Cee / WWF

Going forward, scientists are working to obtain more precise information
on pollution from plastic, how it is distributed and how much is consumed.
Some important areas of enquiry the research community is currently exploring include
mapping the size and weight distribution of plastic waste particles, and how plastic
particles − when consumed by an animal – travel into muscle tissue. An example of an
ongoing project is the tracking of plastic in the oceans. The project, which lasts until
2022, aims to create a 3D map of ocean plastic litter. A better mapping of microplastics
in the environment will allow for more fine-tuned estimation of plastics ingested basedon microplastic size, shape, polymer type and particle size distribution, depending on
the surrounding environment and geographical location. Another key area of research
focuses on identifying the health effects of plastic ingestion on humans.

10 No Plastic in Nature: Assessing Plastic Ingestion From Nature To People

The long-term effects on our health of ingesting large quantitiesof plastic are not clear but studies are underway.
The specific effects of microplastics ingestion on human health are not yet fully
understood, but scientists suspect that the health hazard may be more important than iscurrently understood21.
The long-term effects of plastic ingestion on the human body are not yet
well documented. But studies have shown that beyond a certain exposure level,
inhalation of plastic fibres seem to produce mild inflammation of the respiratory
tract22. In marine animals, higher concentrations of microplastics in their digestiveand respiratory system can lead to early death23. Research studies have demonstrated
toxicity in vitro to lung cells, the liver, and brain cells24.
Some types of plastic carry chemicals and additives with potential effects
on human health. Identified health risks are due to production process residues,
additives, dyes and pigments found in plastic25, some of which have been shown tohave an influence on sexual function, fertility and increased occurrence of mutations
and cancers26,27. Airborne microplastics may also carry pollutants from the surrounding
environment. In urban environments, they may carry PAHs – molecules found in coaland tar − and metals28.
Studies are underway to better understand the effects of plastic on ourhealth. A key challenge to research is the overwhelming presence of plastic in our daily
life, making it very hard to isolate the effect of a specific exposure pathway from otherpossible causes of exposure. The World Health Organization is currently undertaking areview of the health impact of microplastics29. The University of Newcastle in Australia
is currently working on a synthesis of existing literature on this topic.
Ingestion of plastic is just one aspect of a much larger problem withsignificant environmental and economic consequences. Plastic pollution isa significant threat to wildlife, not only through microplastic ingestion, but throughentanglement of marine animals in larger plastic items or through habitat destruction.

No Plastic in Nature: Assessing Plastic Ingestion From Nature To People 11WWF’S CALL
FOR COLLECTIVE
GLOBAL ACTION
Plastic is affecting entire ecosystems, potentially leading
to a collapse in systems supporting people’s livelihoods.
Plastic pollution has important economic consequences:
the UN Environment Programme (UNEP) estimates the
economic impact of plastic pollution on oceans at US$8
billion per year30.

© Shutterstock / Rich Carey / WWF

The current global approach to addressing theplastic crisis is failing. Governments play a keyrole to ensure all actors in the plastic system
are held accountable for the true cost of plastic
pollution to nature and people. Systemic solutions
using strategic and tactical interventions are required tostop plastic pollution at its source, and bold action froma broad range of stakeholders is needed across the full
plastic lifecycle to implement these interventions.

12 No Plastic in Nature: Assessing Plastic Ingestion From Nature To People

CALL FOR ACTION

WWF calls on all governments to:●● Support further research to fill the knowledge gaps on
plastic and microplastics in nature: better understand how
plastic and microplastics enter living organisms and what are theexact consequences on their health.

●● Establish a global scientific body to assess and synthesize
best available research on plastic and microplastics innature. Such a body would enable the scientific community to pool
resources and develop common standards for measuring plastic
pollution leakage.

●● Agree to a legally binding international treaty to stop
plastic pollution from leaking into the oceans, thereby
significantly contributing to Sustainable Development Goal 14.1
and paving the way for an accountability framework to address
plastic pollution on a global level.
●● Establish national targets for plastic reduction, recycling
and management in line with global treaty commitments,
including transparent reporting mechanisms that recognize thetrans-boundary nature of the problem.
●● Deploy appropriate policy instruments to incentivize thecreation and use of recycled plastic over new plastic, and thedevelopment of viable alternatives to plastic that have smaller
environmental footprints.

●● Collaborate with industries and civil society groups toensure a systems-based approach that addresses plastic production,
consumption, waste management and recycling as a singular system,
and refrain from individual, fragmented or symbolic policy actions.
●● Invest in ecologically-sound waste management systems
domestically and in countries where a nation’s plastic waste isexported for disposal, thereby locking in long-term economic andenvironmental benefits.

●● Legislate effective extended producer responsibility as apolicy mechanism for all plastic-producing sectors to ensure thegreater accountability of companies in the collection, reduction,
recycling and management of the plastic waste originating in theirtrade chains.

●● Implement sufficient monitoring and compliance measures
for all policies related to the production, collection and managementof waste by all stakeholders in the plastic system, supported by ashared global reporting and monitoring framework.

●● Work at appropriate subnational levels to establish robust
management plans and transparent accounting mechanisms thatprevent plastic leakage into water systems or other mismanaged
waste disposal mechanisms.

For more information on how to solve plastic pollution, you can readthe WWF March 2019 report, Solving Plastic Pollution ThroughAccountability, available https://www.worldwildlife.org/publications/solving-plastic-pollution-through-accountability. You can find out
more about the University of Newcastle study https://www.newcastle.
edu.au/newsroom/featured-news/plastic-ingestion-by-people-couldbe-equating-to-a-credit-card-a-week
No Plastic in Nature: Assessing Plastic Ingestion From Nature To People 13

ENDNOTES
1

Roland Geyer, Jenna R. Jambeck, and Kara Lavender Law,
Production, Use, and Fate of All Plastics EverMade. 2017(https://advances.sciencemag.org/content/3/7/e1700782)

2

De Souza Machado et al. Microplastics as an Emerging
Threat to Terrestrial Ecosystems. 2018 (https://www.ncbi.
nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/29245177)

3

WWF, Solving plastic pollution through accountability,
2019 (https://www.worldwildlife.org/publications/solvingplastic-pollution-through-accountability)

4

De Souza Machado et al. Microplastics as an Emerging
Threat to Terrestrial Ecosystems. 2018 (https://www.ncbi.
nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/29245177)

5

Roland Geyer, Jenna R. Jambeck, and Kara Lavender Law,
Production, Use, and Fate of All Plastics EverMade. 2017(https://advances.sciencemag.org/content/3/7/e1700782)

6

Jenna R. Jambeck et al., Plastic Waste Inputs from Land
into the Ocean, Science 347, no. 6223. 2015 (https://science.
sciencemag.org/content/347/6223/768)

7

See Ref. 4.

8

Ellen MacArthur Foundation and New Plastic Economy,
The new plastics economy: rethinking the futureof plastics & catalysing action. 2017 (https://www.
ellenmacarthurfoundation.org/assets/downloads/
publications/NPEC-Hybrid_English_22-11-17_Digital.pdf)

9Jamieson, A. J., et al. “Microplastics and synthetic particles
ingested by deep-sea amphipods in six of the deepest marine
ecosystems on Earth.” Royal Society open science 6.2(2019): 180667. (https://royalsocietypublishing.org/doi/
pdf/10.1098/rsos.180667)

10 Peeken, Ilka, et al. “Arctic sea ice is an important temporalsink and means of transport for microplastic.” Naturecommunications 9.1 (2018): 1505. (https://www.nature.
com/articles/s41467-018-03825-5)
11 S Harding, Marine Debris: Understanding, Preventing
and Mitigating the Significant Adverse Impacts on Marine
and Coastal Biodiversity, Secretariat of the Convention on
Biological Diversity, no. No.83. 2016 (https://www.cbd.int/
doc/publications/cbd-ts-83-en.pdf)
12 Susanne Kühn, Elisa L. Bravo Rebolledo, and Jan A. vanFraneker, Deleterious Effects of Litter on Marine Life,International Publishing, 75–116. 2015 (https://link.
springer.com/chapter/10.1007/978-3-319-16510-3_4)
13 De Souza Machado et al. Microplastics as an Emerging
Threat to Terrestrial Ecosystems. 2018 (https://www.ncbi.
nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/29245177)
14 Encyclopaedia Britannica, Microplastics (https://www.
britannica.com/technology/microplastic)
15 K. Senathirajah, T. Palanisami, University of Newcastle,
How much microplastics are we ingesting? Estimationof the mass of microplastics ingested.Report for WWF
Singapore, May 201917 K. Senathirajah, T. Palanisami, University of Newcastle,
How much microplastics are we ingesting? Estimationof the mass of microplastics ingested.Report for WWF
Singapore, May 201918 Sherri A. Mason, Victoria G. Welch, and Joseph Neratko,
Synthetic Polymer Contamination in Bottled Water,2018 (link). Results based on a 259 sample size detecting
microplastics > 100um.
19 Mary Kosuth, Sherri A. Mason, Elizabeth V. Wattenberg,
Anthropogenic contamination of tap water, beer, andsea salt, 2018 (https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0194970#sec001). Results
based on a 159 sample size detecting microplastics > 100um.
20 S. Allen et al., Atmospheric transport and deposition of
microplastics in a remote mountain catchment, Nature
Geoscience, 2019 (https://www.nature.com/articles/s41561019-0335-5)
21 Gasperi, Johnny, et al., Microplastics in air: Are webreathing it in?, Current Opinion in Environmental Science& Health, 2018 (https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/
article/pii/S2468584417300119?via%3Dihub)
22 Ibid.
23 Lusher, Amy, Peter Hollman, and Jeremy Mendoza-Hill,
Microplastics in fisheries and aquaculture: status ofknowledge on their occurrence and implications for aquaticorganisms and food safety, FAO Fisheries and Aquaculture
Technical Paper 615 (2017) (http://www.fao.org/3/a-i7677e.
pdf)
24 GESAMP. Sources, fate and effects of microplastics in themarine environment: part two of a global assessment.
Joint Group of Experts on the Scientific Aspects of Marine
Environmental Protection, 2015 http://agris.fao.org/agrissearch/search.do?recordID=XF2017002714)
25 See ref. 21
26 Melzer, David, et al., Association of urinary bisphenol a
concentration with heart disease: evidence from NHANES
2003/06, PloS one 5.1, 2010 (https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.
gov/pubmed/20084273/)
27 Linares V, Bellés M, Domingo JL: Human exposure to PBDE
and critical evaluation of health hazards. Arch Toxicol(2015)
28 See ref. 21
29 BBC, Plastic: WHO launches health review, 2018 (https://www.bbc.com/news/science-environment-43389031)
30 UNEP, Marine Plastic Debris and Microplastics: Global
Lessons and Research to Inspire Action and Guide Policy
Change, UN, 2016 (www.google.com/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&es
rc=s&source=web&cd=1&cad=rja&uact=8&ved=2ahUKEwil
1pDjp-bhAhWLERQKHVNPCfoQFjAAegQIAhAC&url=https%3A%2F%2Fwedocs.unep. org%2Frest%2Fbitstreams%2F11
700%2Fretrieve&usg= AOvVaw1TbiUycdwyexp9N6Ym1fag)

16 Mary Kosuth, Sherri A. Mason, Elizabeth V. Wattenberg,
Anthropogenic contamination of tap water, beer, andsea salt, 2018 (link). Results based on a 159 sample size
detecting microplastics > 100um.

14 No Plastic in Nature: Assessing Plastic Ingestion From Nature To People

100%

recYcLeD

5gr
Average person could beingesting approximately
5 grams of plastic every
week.

75%
Of all plastic
ever produced is
waste

87%
About 87% ofmismanaged waste
is leaked into natureand becomes plastic
pollution.

panda.org© 1986 Panda symbol WWF – World Wide Fund For Nature (Formerly World Wildlife Fund)®©“WWF”
is a WWF
Registered
Trademark.
WWF,ForAvenuedu(Formerly
Mont-Blanc,
1196
Gland,
Switzerland
1986 Panda
symbolWWF – World
Wide Fund
NatureWorld
WildlifeFund)
Tel.
+41 22 is364
9111 Fax+41 22 364
0332. For
contact
and further
information, please visit our® “WWF”
a WWF
Registered
Trademark.
WWF,
Ruedetails
Mauverney
28,
International website at www.panda.org © Text 2016 WWF. All rights reserved
1196 Gland, Switzerland – Tel. +41 22 364 9111; Fax. +41 22 364 0332. For contact details
and further information, visit our international website at panda.org

1 ton
The ocean willcontain 1 metricton of plastic forevery 3 metric tonsof fish by 2025.

GO.panda.org/PLASTICS

Why we are here
To stop the degradation of the planet’s natural environment andto build a future in which people live in harmony with nature.

• No Plastic in Nature: Assessing Plastic Ingestion From Nature To People

Assessing plastic ingestion
from nature to people