Global Alliance for Incinerator Alternatives (GAIA)

By Yvette Ahenkorah, 2026 Africa Zero Waste Academy Participant

I came to the GAIA Africa Zero Waste Academy ready to learn. I expected new knowledge, new ideas and a deeper understanding of what zero waste could look like in our communities. What I did not fully expect was to leave the six-day in-person experience carrying a greater sense of responsibility, not only towards the waste we generate, but towards the people whose lives and livelihoods are deeply connected to it.

Yvette during a presentation at the Africa Zero Waste Academy 2026, in Ghana.

There is something about knowledge that changes you when you can no longer separate what you have learnt from what you see around you.

Suddenly, waste is not just the overflowing bin, the plastic on the street or what disappears after collection. You begin to ask where it goes. Who collects it? Who sorts through what we throw away? Who recovers the materials that still have value? Who bears the health and environmental consequences of the systems we have created?

And somewhere within those questions, the people behind our waste systems become impossible to overlook: Waste workers. Who are part of what keeps our communities and cities functioning, yet their contribution can easily disappear from the larger conversation about waste. 

For me, the Academy reinforced that we cannot speak meaningfully about a zero waste future without speaking about the people already doing much of the work of recovery, collection, sorting and recycling.

That realisation made zero waste feel less like an environmental concept I was studying and more like a movement I wanted to contribute to.

Because what would a zero waste transition mean if the people already holding parts of our waste systems together are left behind?

Movement building, then, has to be about more than changing where materials go. It must also be about people, dignity, recognition, livelihoods and justice.

Over those six days, learning alongside people committed to changing our relationship with waste reminded me that movements do not always begin with something big. Sometimes they begin with a conversation. With questioning a system we have accepted for too long. With recognising the value in something we once called waste. With listening to those whose livelihoods give them an understanding of these materials that many of us may never have considered.

And perhaps most importantly, movement begins when knowledge moves beyond us.

I have carried that thought with me since the Academy, particularly into my work at AERC-Ghana. As I engage with community-based approaches such as composting and continue exploring circular solutions, I find myself returning to a question that has become increasingly important to me:

How do we turn what we know into action that communities and the people working within our waste systems can experience, own, and sustain?

Yvette & other participants during a session at the Africa Zero Waste Academy 2026, in Ghana.

I am learning that building the zero waste movement is not about arriving in communities with all the answers. It is about listening. It is about recognising existing knowledge and labour. 

It is about creating space for communities and waste workers to help shape the solutions that affect them. And it is about ensuring that our pursuit of cleaner communities does not erase the people whose work has helped keep those communities clean.

This is where the experience became deeply personal for me. I may have walked into the Academy seeking knowledge about zero waste, but I walked away thinking more deeply about people. About whose voices are heard when solutions are designed. About whose labour we notice. About the kind of transition we are building, and whether dignity and justice sit at the centre of it.

Six days cannot solve our waste crisis.

Six days cannot address every challenge waste workers face.

But six days can change the questions someone begins to ask.

For me, the question is no longer simply, “How do we achieve zero waste?”

It is also, “How do we build a zero-waste movement where no resource and no person is treated as disposable?”

Perhaps that is where knowledge becomes movement. And where movement becomes action.

Writer’s Bio

Yvette is a youth development and sustainability professional from Ghana passionate about climate action, waste management, and community empowerment. She currently works with Alliance for Empowering Rural Communities, where she supports initiatives focused on inclusion, youth engagement, and equal access for underserved communities. Her interests include urban resilience, circular economy solutions, and empowering young people through environmental sustainability and advocacy.

The post Africa Zero Waste Academy: Where Knowledge Becomes Movement first appeared on GAIA.

Del 3 al 5 de septiembre, miembros de GAIA y de Break Free From Plastic en América Latina se reunieron en Santiago para compartir experiencias, celebrar logros y construir prioridades estratégicas para seguir fortaleciendo el movimiento. El encuentro recibió a 44 organizaciones de 14 países de la región. 

Septiembre, 2026 – El objetivo central del encuentro fue fortalecer la articulación regional, celebrar los aprendizajes colectivos y construir prioridades estratégicas compartidas para orientar el trabajo conjunto de los próximos años por la justicia ambiental y basura cero. 

En la primera parte de la jornada, se pensó colectivamente en la realidad política, social y ambiental de los distintos países. Se coordinaron espacios de conversación que trataron temas relacionados con basura cero en espacios educativos, pirólisis y residuos orgánicos, para luego dar paso a la celebración de los hitos que han marcado el trabajo desde la última vez que nos encontramos en Lima, en 2023.

Foto grupal encuentro de miembros GAIA y BFFP América Latina, Santiago, 2026.

Para Karla Escoto de Basura Cero Nicaragua, “Haber sido parte del encuentro ha sido gratificante, renovador.  Estos espacios no sólo nos permiten intercambiar las experiencias y acciones que están realizando cada unas de las organizaciones que trabajamos hacia basura cero, también nos permite tener ese contacto directo, humanizar nuestras acciones, compartir, replantearnos, y saber que a pesar de las diferentes circunstancias y contextos de cada país seguimos avanzando desde nuestros territorios, trabajando de la mano de la juventud, las comunidades y recicladores de base.”

Otros espacios importantes fueron las instancias de formación ejecutadas por los mismos miembros y las conversaciones que se dieron en torno a las prioridades estratégicas de la región, con el fin de avanzar en puntos comunes que permitan orientar el trabajo conjunto en los próximos años y reconocer las capacidades que existen dentro de la alianza. 

“El encuentro significó confirmar el valor de compartir lo que hacemos desde las comunidades. Pudimos llevar la experiencia de León Cortés, pero también escuchar y aprender de otras organizaciones de la región. Ese intercambio fortalece nuestro trabajo y nos recuerda que, aunque nuestros territorios son distintos, podemos aprender unos de otros.”, comenta Julia Picado de la Asociación Defensores del Monumento Natural Zona de los Santos, Costa Rica.

Los tres días de encuentro terminaron en un ambiente festivo con la feria de causas, donde las organizaciones presentaron el trabajo que están desarrollando en sus territorios. Las experiencias compartidas permitieron conocer mejor la diversidad del trabajo que sostiene el movimiento y las distintas formas en que las organizaciones están impulsando la justicia ambiental e iniciativas de basura cero.

Para Tania Ricaldi, de CESU-UMSS, Bolivia, “El Encuentro de Santiago fue un espacio de diálogo, escucha e interaprendizaje que permitió compartir experiencias de prácticas de basura cero que muestran que desde el accionar local, el trabajo solidario y creativo se están construyendo y reconstruyendo relaciones y transformaciones esenciales para el cuidado de la vida.”

El encuentro en Santiago será recordado como un momento donde se celebró lo construido y donde se delinearon los pasos para construir las estrategias que permitirán avanzar hacia nuevos objetivos y reforzar logros ya alcanzados. 

The post Tres días de encuentro para compartir y construir el futuro de nuestro movimiento first appeared on GAIA.

The Pan African Vision for the Environment (PAVE) is a Lagos-based grassroots non-profit accredited by the United Nations Environment Programme (UNEP) and the United Nations Convention to Combat Desertification (UNCCD). 

Established to promote sustainable development through research, policy dialogue, advocacy, and consultancy, PAVE works on development issues across their environmental and socio-economic dimensions, with a focus on the Sustainable Development Goals, including water and sanitation, agricultural Value Chain promotion, Gender, Disaster Risk Reduction (DRR), Climate change and Clean Energy promotion, Waste Management including E-Waste, Chemical Management, Blue Economy, Ocean Citizen Awareness and literacy, and Stakeholder Engagement

With over 20 years of experience in the development sector, PAVE has worked at local, national, regional, and international levels, presenting research and organising capacity-building workshops on sustainable development across Africa, Asia, Europe, and the Americas.

Grassroots community members at a PAVE training. Lagos, Nigeria.

PAVE is a member of the Global Alliance for Incinerator Alternatives (GAIA) and one of the implementing partners of the GAIA-led Multi-Solving Action to Methane Reduction in Nigeria (MAMRN) Project.

In this article, the third of a series, we spoke with Anthony Akpan, Founder of PAVE, about their work as a partner in Lagos for the project.

In this project, several GAIA members are participating in several activities. Can you share insights on best practices for collaborating with other organisations in Nigeria?

Collaboration works best when it is built on trust, respect, and clear communication. 

In this project, PAVE has worked closely with GAIA members throughout our workshops and other activities, ensuring that each session runs smoothly, reaches participants effectively, and avoids duplication of efforts. Seeing everyone bring their expertise together to achieve shared goals has been inspiring and demonstrates how partnerships can multiply impact.

Rooting collaboration in local relationships has also been key. Engaging community leaders, local government representatives, and waste pickers early helped ensure that interventions were practical, culturally appropriate, and sustainable. 

By staying open to learning from each other and adapting to on-the-ground realities, the partnership has consistently achieved stronger outcomes.

Flexibility and accountability remain central to success. Operating environments in Nigeria can change quickly, and having a spirit of co-creation, regular check-ins, and openness to feedback has allowed PAVE and GAIA to stay aligned while delivering meaningful results.

Could you share some perspective on the current waste crisis in Nigeria and how this project aims to address this?

Nigeria faces a significant waste management challenge, with millions of tons of organic waste generated each year and only a fraction properly collected or treated. 

Open dumping, irregular collection systems, and limited infrastructure have led to environmental pollution, greenhouse gas emissions, and public health risks, while informal waste workers often operate in unsafe conditions without recognition or support.

Grassroots community members at a PAVE training. Lagos, Nigeria

The MAMRN Project addresses this crisis through a holistic approach that combines community engagement, practical solutions, and policy-level support. Through the project, PAVE is working to divert organic waste from landfills, promote community-level composting, and strengthen local government systems for more effective waste management, while building the capacity of households, waste pickers, and local authorities with the knowledge and tools to manage waste sustainably.

A practical example from Lagos illustrates the impact: PAVE has trained over 50 waste pickers and approximately 300 households on organic waste segregation, composting, and Black Soldier Fly (BSF) rearing. 

Participants learned how to separate food and garden waste from general trash, which was then collected and converted into compost for local urban farms. Putting these practices into action not only reduces methane emissions but also provides valuable resources for the community.

Do you have a personal milestone or favourite moment in this project so far?

A personal milestone for us at PAVE has been supporting participants as they begin to apply what they are learning during our household and waste picker training in Lagos.

Seeing families and waste workers engage with organic waste segregation and composting in real time strongly affirms the project’s vision and highlights the potential for meaningful change on the ground. 

Our favourite moments have been during live demonstrations of Black Soldier Fly (BSF) rearing and composting at the workshops. Observing participants’ curiosity, excitement, and hands-on engagement is incredibly inspiring. 

Their enthusiasm underscores how knowledge becomes most impactful when experienced directly, and it reinforces the importance of practical, interactive learning in shaping both environmental practices and community action.

Grassroots community members pose for a picture at a PAVE training. Lagos, Nigeria

We have seen these key themes emerge in this project (Organic Waste Management, Infrastructure Development, Waste Picker Integration, Capacity Building and Awareness Raising, Local Government Engagement, National Policy Advocacy and Emissions Monitoring). Could you share experiences (as applicable) on any of these topics within this project so far?

Throughout the MAMRN project in Lagos, several key themes have guided PAVE’s work and shaped our impact. In organic waste management, households and communities have learned to transform food and garden waste into compost or feed for Black Soldier Fly (BSF) larvae.

On waste picker integration, informal waste workers received training and support to improve segregation practices and gain recognition within local waste systems. Seeing participants confidently separate organic waste for composting demonstrated both empowerment and practical impact.

Capacity building and awareness raising have been central to the project, with hands-on workshops bringing households and waste pickers together. Participants eagerly engaged in sorting exercises and BSF demonstrations, translating knowledge into real-world action.

Finally, through local government engagement, PAVE has worked closely with Lagos authorities to ensure that interventions align with municipal waste management plans, strengthen local infrastructure, and integrate informal workers into formal systems. 

Together, these experiences show how training, collaboration, and practical, community-driven solutions can tackle Nigeria’s waste challenges, reduce methane emissions, and create meaningful environmental and social impact.

What is the path forward for your organisation and possible next steps from this project?

With the MAMRN project still underway, PAVE is focused on building on the progress made so far and ensuring the remaining activities have maximum impact. We continue to engage households, waste pickers, and local authorities in Lagos, reinforce hands-on solutions like composting and Black Soldier Fly (BSF) rearing, and encourage practical application of the skills learned.

Next steps include expanding ongoing training sessions, deepening community participation, and supporting local government efforts to better integrate informal waste workers into structured waste systems. We are also capturing lessons in real-time, allowing us to adapt and refine our approach as the project unfolds.

Looking ahead, PAVE is committed to turning knowledge into action, empowering communities to adopt sustainable waste practices, and contributing to Nigeria’s methane reduction goals — one household, one waste picker, and one composting initiative at a time. The journey is ongoing, and the best outcomes are still ahead.

The post PAVE: Rooting collaboration in local relationships through the MAMRN Project first appeared on GAIA.

By Cyrus Malama, 2026 Africa Zero Waste Academy Participant

When I boarded my flight on July 26, 2026, I was more than just a Junior Councillor; I was a young Zambian with a vital question: How can we transform the waste problem in our communities into a solution? This question drove me to Accra, Ghana, for the Africa Zero Waste Academy 2026, hosted by the Green Africa Youth Organization (GAYO) and the Global Alliance for Incinerator Alternatives (GAIA). 

My purpose was not only to learn about waste management but also to explore culture, leadership, and Africa’s future.

Learning the Principles in Kpong 

The first phase of the Academy took place at Ensign Global University in Kpong, Eastern Region, from July 27 to 30. Our days were filled with energy and learning as we discussed:

• Climate action and its significance for African youth
• Zero waste principles—understanding that waste is not an endpoint but a starting point for jobs, composting, and clean energy
• Communication and advocacy—recognising that as young leaders, we must express our ideas clearly to effect change
• The Conference of the Parties (COP)—exploring the role of youth in global climate conversations

However, the best lessons awaited us outside the classroom.

Learning from the Ground in Accra

On July 30, we moved to Accra and settled in at the AH Hotel in East Legon. For the next three days, Ghana taught me through its hands, its people, and its stories. 

At Kpone Landfill, I witnessed the harsh reality of waste—the mountains, the smoke, and the individuals working under difficult conditions. It reminded me of home and reinforced the urgency of our mission.

At the launch of the Federation of Informal Sector Waste Pickers Association, I met heroes—men and women who collect and recycle daily, often without recognition. Seeing them honoured made me proud and reminded me how important it is to include everyone in creating solutions.

At the Multi-Facility Recovery Centre, I witnessed circularity in action: one person’s waste became another person’s resource. At Kwame Nkrumah Memorial Park, I paused to reflect. Surrounded by Ghana’s history, I thought about leadership. Nkrumah fought for Africa’s independence, and now, our generation is fighting for Africa’s climate future.

Between site visits, I laughed, shared meals, and exchanged stories with youth from across the region.  We learned new greetings, tasted different foods, and realised that while waste challenges may vary across Africa, the solutions all begin with people. This cultural exchange was as powerful as the training.

Cyrus and other participants during a session Coming Home with Commitment  

On August 2, I said goodbye to Accra and landed in Lusaka on August 3 at 3:00 AM, where my family welcomed me. Although I was exhausted, my heart was full. 

The Africa Zero Waste Academy was transformative. It changed my view of waste—from a problem to something with economic and environmental value. Most importantly, I returned committed to advocating for inclusive, community-driven zero-waste initiatives in Zambia. I aim to apply what I learned in Ghana to make a difference in Lusaka.

I returned with:

• Practical knowledge of zero waste systems
• Enhanced advocacy and communication skills
• A network of African youth committed to developing climate solutions

Most importantly, I returned with a commitment: to advocate for inclusive, community-driven zero- waste initiatives in Zambia. I aim to apply what I learned in Ghana to make a difference in Lusaka. I am deeply grateful to GAYO, GAIA, and everyone who supported me in representing Zambia in Ghana. Thank you for investing in young leaders. This experience was not just a trip; it was a turning point.

Writer’s Bio

Cyrus Malama is a Junior Councillor based in Lusaka, Zambia. His work centres on child rights, climate action, community development, and issues affecting young people. He believes that because the future belongs to youth, leaders must actively listen to young voices and take action to protect every child.

The post A Zambian Youth’s Journey to the Africa Zero Waste Academy 2026 first appeared on GAIA.

Open Letter to the Chair of the Intergovernmental Negotiating Committee on Plastic Pollution

Your excellency, Amb. Julio Cordano,

The release of the Aid to Negotiations marks a key step in the process to develop a legally binding international instrument to end plastic pollution. Unfortunately, rather than bringing the Parties closer to delivering the ambition mandated by the United Nations Environment Assembly (UNEA) Resolution 5/14, the document raises profound concerns about both its substance and the process by which it was developed.

Your Aid to Negotiations is not a neutral facilitation document. It is a political document that makes choices. These choices consistently favor the lowest common denominator – about what is prioritized, what is sidelined, and what is left unresolved. And time and again, sacrificing the ambition mandated by governments in Resolution 5/14.

The result is deeply troubling: rather than facilitating progress towards an ambitious, fit-for-purpose treaty supported by a majority of countries, as demonstrated in previous rounds of negotiations, the Aid to Negotiations text is an insidious attempt to compromise on the wishlist of a small group of petrostates. 

Rather than helping Parties conclude a treaty capable of truly ending plastic pollution, the document renders ineffective the core elements needed to achieve its objective. It systematically removes obligations to address upstream measures, weakens the financial mechanisms necessary to ensure effective implementation of the instrument, and excessively relies on voluntary, non-binding, nationally determined measures whilst sidelining binding ones. It gives disproportionate weight to positions advanced by a small group of countries that have consistently sought to delay, dilute, and derail negotiations, while disregarding proposals supported by broad majorities of Parties.

Since your assumption of the Chairmanship, observers—particularly those representing the communities most impacted by plastic pollution—have repeatedly been denied access to the process. This has effectively turned what should be an inclusive, transparent, and fair multilateral process into almost a year-long series of closed-door meetings, under the pretext of an informal Member State-led process. The ambiguity in the Rules of Procedure regarding observer participation in informal meetings has been repeatedly invoked to justify our exclusion.  Such restrictions undermine the transparency, inclusivity, and legitimacy of the process. Those living on the frontlines of the plastics crisis cannot be expected to accept decisions being made about their lives, livelihoods and communities from behind closed doors. Yet, we remain attentive, engaged and determined to achieve an ambitious, fit-for-purpose treaty that protects human health and ensures environmental justice to all. The Aid-to-Negotiations text carries a conscious choice. Specifically:

• Conference Room Papers supported by large numbers of ambitious governments on key upstream measures have been ignored, while weaker downstream options championed by a handful of spoiler countries are prioritized
• The text regress us  instead of building on progress achieved over the past five negotiation sessions
• The interpretation of “balance” consistently result in lower ambition
• Texts that have been officially rejected by the International Negotiations Committee at INC-5.2 are considered as references
• Low-ambition text that has not been previously negotiated in the formal INC process, has been introduced

These are not rhetorical questions. They go to the heart of whether this process is still serving the mandate governments agreed to in Nairobi in 2022.

UNEA 5/14 Is Not Open for Renegotiation

There is no legitimate disagreement about the treaty’s purpose. Governments agreed that this instrument must end plastic pollution through a comprehensive approach addressing the full lifecycle of plastics. Yet, the document repeatedly treats upstream obligations as optional, secondary, or politically unrealistic while upending the waste hierarchy and prevention principles.

Plastic pollution does not begin at the waste stage; it begins with fossil fuel extraction, petrochemical production and ever-increasing plastic production. No amount of geopolitical influence can override the prevailing scientific evidence when it comes to reordering the stages of the plastics lifecycle. The science is clear: the plastics crisis must be addressed across its full lifecycle, and no political maneuvering can change that reality. 

Three-quarters of greenhouse gas emissions from primary plastic production occur before polymers are even manufactured. Waste management systems cannot solve a crisis driven by unchecked production. Only around 9% of all plastics ever produced have been recycled. A treaty that does not address production cannot end plastic pollution if  it ignores its primary driver.

Consensus cannot become a Veto

The document also perpetuates another false narrative: that consensus at any cost is necessary for success. It is not.

More than 115 countries support maintaining the ability to adopt decisions by voting after all efforts to reach consensus have been exhausted. This reflects a standard and widely accepted practice under international law. Without this safeguard, an impasse shaped by a handful of minority countries seeking to delay or weaken the treaty could render any progress or achievement supported by the overwhelming majority of governments meaningless.

The climate regime offers a clear warning: overreliance on consensus has delayed, weakened, and postponed critical decisions for decades. The plastics crisis cannot afford to wait 30 years for urgent action. 

Consensus should be the preferred outcome, not a permanent veto for those most invested in preserving the status quo. Consensus is not interchangeable with unanimity.

The document points toward a Framework Convention

The most worrying feature of the Aid to Negotiations is its overall direction. Throughout your communications, you have emphasized that the treaty should be “concise”, “adaptable,” and capable of evolving over time. Taken together with the removal of substantive obligations throughout the document, this suggests a deliberate shift toward a framework convention. A treaty that establishes broad aspirations today while postponing binding and urgent measures until future protocols is spineless. That is not what governments mandated in the UNEA 5/14 Resolution.

Framework conventions delay action, postpone difficult decisions, and require years, sometimes decades, of additional negotiations before meaningful obligations exist, if they are ever achieved. The world does not have that time.

The plastics treaty must include binding global control measures from the outset, supported by annexes that can be strengthened over time by independent, science-based evidence. This is how a treaty can both evolve and remain relevant and effective.

Transparency has been replaced by Opaqueness

The concerns extend far beyond the text itself. The process through which this document has been developed has lacked transparency from the outset – and this deficit has become increasingly pronounced since you assumed the Chairmanship of the Committee.

Governments, rights-holders and observers have no clear understanding of how negotiating advances were discarded, why widely supported proposals disappeared, or on what basis competing options were selected.

A Chair’s document should faithfully reflect Parties’ positions; it should not quietly rewrite them. When choices consistently favor those seeking weaker obligations, confidence and trust in the neutrality of the process inevitably erode.

With a document so consistently aligned with the agenda of countries seeking the weakest possible treaty, it is reasonable to ask: Whose positions is this document actually reflecting and representing?

At every stage of this process, meaningful civil society and rightsholders participation has been systematically sidelined, increasingly reduced to the margins and, in practice, denied altogether. Governments face language barriers that prevent meaningful participation from any non-English-speaking delegation. Indigenous Peoples, waste pickers, frontline communities, women, youth, scientists, and public health experts have repeatedly been prevented from fully and effectively engaging in this process.

In your 4th letter to the Committee, you proposed a new multi-stakeholder action agenda. Observers are not asking for another forum; we are asking to participate in the negotiations and to have the right to engage with our country’s representatives present at the negotiations.

We also reject the false equivalence implied by the term “Observers.” Communities living with plastic pollution are rights-holders. Corporations whose business models depend on expanding plastic production are not. The Tobacco Convention recognized this distinction and succeeded in solving the problem it was intended to address. The Plastics Treaty must do the same.

Leadership requires Upholding the Mandate, not Lowering It

The Committee won’t succeed by producing a document that everyone dislikes equally. Your responsibility is not to protect the comfort and interests of the least ambitious Parties. It is not to make a treaty that is politically convenient for spoiler countries. It is to facilitate negotiations that allow governments to deliver the treaty they were mandated to negotiate.

The Aid to Negotiations does the opposite: it narrows ambition. It privileges obstruction. It weakens obligations. And it risks steering this process toward a treaty incapable of ending plastic pollution.

A Note to Ambitious Countries

We, Observers, recognize that this process has been intense, demanding, and frustrating. Yet, we have not come this far to agree to a text that does not fulfill the mandate of Resolution 5/14. We request that Governments reject any negotiating text that retreats from the agreed mandate.

The world did not launch these negotiations to produce another framework for future discussions. It was launched to end plastic pollution. That remains the benchmark by which this process should be judged.

Civil society will stand with ambitious countries that reject a weak treaty. Your leadership is needed to avoid a catastrophic outcome. No treaty remains a better option than a bad treaty.

We also encourage you to consider negotiating a treaty outside the UN. The UNEP umbrella has consistently failed to deliver a fair process, and unfair processes do not result in strong outcomes. A treaty driven by the ambitious majority, guided by a genuine desire to end plastic pollution and by the power and experience of countries that have demonstrated commitment to the process has a winning chance to deliver the needed outcomes. If you decide to move in the direction of a Coalition of the Willing, civil society will stand firmly alongside you applauding  your braveness, supporting your decisiveness and ready to work with you. 

The post GAIA Response to the Aid to Negotiations first appeared on GAIA.

El Seminario internacional basura cero reunió en Chile a representantes de 26 municipalidades y 45 organizaciones de más de 15 países para abordar el potencial de los residuos orgánicos en la reducción de emisiones de metano y la transición hacia modelos de basura cero.

Conversatorio: Cómo dialoga el contexto legal actual con la estrategia basura cero.

Septiembre de 2026—  La gestión de residuos debe dejar de ser entendida únicamente como un problema sanitario y convertirse en una prioridad de la acción climática. Ese fue uno de los principales mensajes del “Seminario internacional basura cero: el rol estratégico de los residuos orgánicos para la acción climática y la democratización de soluciones”, organizado por GAIA, Break Free From Plastic (BFFP) y la Alianza Basura Cero Chile.

El encuentro reunió a 50 representantes de más de 26 municipalidades de Chile, 45 organizaciones provenientes de más de 15 países de América Latina y el Caribe, representantes del sector gubernamental, recicladores de base y académicos, quienes compartieron experiencias sobre políticas públicas, compostaje, reciclaje, reparación y gestión local de residuos.

El metano estuvo en el centro de la discusión. Marcelo Mena, director ejecutivo de Global Methane Hub, destacó que “si bajamos la emisión de metano, la disminución de la temperatura sería prácticamente inmediata”, y planteó que reducir los residuos orgánicos es una de las medidas más eficaces y rentables para avanzar en esta dirección.

Juan Pablo Escudero, investigador del Instituto Emmett de la UCLA, destacó el aporte de las nuevas tecnologías para identificar las fuentes de metano. “La gran acción climática no consiste únicamente en dejar de quemar petróleo. Hay que mirar a la basura”, afirmó.

Conferencia inaugural de Marcelo Mena, Director Ejecutivo Global Methane Hub. Residuos orgánicos: de problema a recurso

Durante el seminario se abordó especialmente el potencial de los residuos orgánicos para producir compost, regenerar suelos y reducir emisiones.

Mariela Pino, campañista en mitigación de metano para GAIA LAC, señaló que “la gestión de residuos ya no es solo una cuestión sanitaria” y que su relación con el cambio climático exige una aproximación distinta. Pino planteó que avanzar hacia basura cero requiere maximizar el reciclaje de materiales orgánicos e inorgánicos, implementar sistemas de recolección diferenciada y separación en origen, y asegurar un financiamiento adecuado.

También destacó la importancia de vincular la gestión de residuos con la protección de los suelos y la producción de alimentos: “Tenemos que ver los residuos no solo como algo sanitario, sino como parte de una economía socioambiental que genera buenos beneficios”, sostuvo.

Las experiencias presentadas mostraron que estas soluciones ya están siendo implementadas. En el municipio Quinta Normal de Chile, por ejemplo, se desarrolla un programa piloto de reciclaje orgánico en ferias libres, mientras que en Melipeuco el municipio trabaja desde 2021 en una estrategia local de basura cero junto a las comunidades.

En tanto, Fértil Compostaje, una empresa familiar campesina de La Araucanía chilena, procesa entre 20 y 30 toneladas de residuos de la industria agrícola para producir compost. Su responsable, Germán Jara, advirtió sobre el deterioro de los suelos agrícolas y afirmó: “No estamos enterrando basura, estamos enterrando la solución para regenerar nuestros suelos”.

Asistentes al seminario en el Aula Magna de la Universidad Católica de Chile. Una transición que debe incluir a los recicladores

El rol de los recicladores de base fue otro de los ejes del encuentro. Soledad Mella, de la Asociación Nacional de Recicladores de Chile, llamó a que la transición hacia sistemas de basura cero incorpore a quienes históricamente han sostenido la recuperación de materiales. “La transición justa no es mover residuos de lugar: es mover poder, inversión y oportunidades hacia quienes sostienen el reciclaje”, afirmó.

Desde Brasil, Roselaine Mendes, secretaria internacional de la Red Latinoamericana y del caribe de Recicladores (RedLacre), destacó la importancia de reconocer económicamente el trabajo de los recicladores. “Solo vivir de la venta de los materiales no es sostenible. Es necesario que recibamos el pago por nuestro trabajo”, señaló.

El seminario también abordó los avances y desafíos de las políticas públicas chilenas, incluyendo la Ley de Responsabilidad Extendida del Productor (REP), la infraestructura para la gestión de residuos orgánicos, la educación ciudadana y la coordinación entre gobiernos nacionales, regionales y municipales.

Magdalena Donoso, coordinadora regional de GAIA y BFFP en América Latina.

Para Magdalena Donoso, coordinadora regional de GAIA y BFFP en Latinoamérica y el Caribe, los avances alcanzados son resultado de la organización y perseverancia de diversos actores. “Las agendas se mueven cuando las voluntades irreductibles deciden organizarse y actuar antes de que el éxito parezca posible, y perseveran porque se niegan a aceptar que aquello que no tiene sentido se siga perpetuando”, afirmó.

El encuentro concluyó con un llamado a fortalecer la colaboración entre gobiernos, municipios, organizaciones sociales, recicladores, comunidades, academia y sector privado para acelerar soluciones locales que permitan reducir emisiones, prevenir residuos y avanzar hacia sistemas de basura cero.

Contactos de prensa: 

Camila Aguilera, GAIA, camila@no-burn.org  | +56 9 8913 6198

María Fernanda Pérez R., BFFP, mafe@breakfreefromplastic.org | +58 424 210 8017

The post Organizaciones, sector gubernamental y recicladores de base llaman a acelerar la gestión de residuos como estrategia frente al cambio climático first appeared on GAIA.

#image_title

Reuniones cerradas entre gobiernos dejan fuera a organizaciones observadoras de las discusiones sustantivas sobre el futuro tratado, advierten 26 organizaciones de la región.

Agosto de 2026— Organizaciones de la sociedad civil de América Latina y el Caribe denuncian la falta de espacios de participación efectiva en las negociaciones del Tratado global de plásticos y alertaron sobre el impacto que esta situación tiene en la transparencia y legitimidad del proceso.

Las organizaciones, que siguen las negociaciones desde 2022, señalan que durante 2026 los jefes de las delegaciones gubernamentales han participado en reuniones denominadas “informales” para discutir aspectos sustantivos del tratado, mientras que las organizaciones observadoras no han tenido acceso a estos espacios.

En su lugar, han sido convocadas a reuniones virtuales con la Presidencia del Comité Intergubernamental de Negociación (INC, por sus siglas en inglés), encabezada por el embajador Julio Cordano, en las que el principal mecanismo de interacción disponible es un chat.

“El Tratado Global de Plásticos no puede, bajo ningún concepto, crear nuevas zonas de sacrificio, ni consolidar las ya existentes, zonas que están marcadas por la opacidad y por decisiones que han sido tomadas al margen de la ciudadanía y los observadores velan para que esto no ocurra. Mantenerlos al margen de las reuniones de delegados y delegadas no es una simple decisión procedimental: es un acto político que profundiza la brecha entre quienes deciden y quienes padecen las consecuencias. Si el tratado aspira a ser justo, debe ser participativo desde su raíz”, explica Cecilia Bianco de la organización Taller Ecologista de Argentina. 

Según las organizaciones, esta modalidad les impide aportar oportunamente evidencia científica independiente, conocimientos técnicos y experiencias de comunidades y territorios afectados por la contaminación por plásticos, así como conocer y contribuir al debate sobre las posiciones que los gobiernos llevan a la mesa de negociación.

También expresaron preocupación ante la solicitud de la Presidencia del INC de que las organizaciones observadoras designen representantes únicos. Consideran que esta medida podría limitar la diversidad de voces y reducir la variedad de aportes científicos, técnicos y territoriales disponibles para las delegaciones.

Las organizaciones sostienen que la falta de participación sustantiva representa una regresión respecto de los estándares alcanzados anteriormente en el propio proceso de negociación y resulta contraria a los principios de democracia ambiental, particularmente aquellos relacionados con transparencia, acceso a la información y participación pública establecidos en el Acuerdo de Escazú.

“Hemos insistido en que el Acuerdo de Escazú representa un referente de progresividad para nuestra región. Por ello, resulta preocupante que, mientras América Latina y el Caribe han avanzado en reconocer estándares más altos de transparencia, acceso a la información y participación pública, las negociaciones del tratado global sobre plásticos estén adoptando modalidades que restringen los espacios de participación que la sociedad civil había tenido en etapas anteriores del proceso. Este cambio representa una regresión en términos de participación y transparencia, particularmente cuando se trata de una negociación que definirá respuestas frente a una crisis ambiental y de salud pública de alcance global.

Esta situación resulta aún más paradójica en una región profundamente afectada por el Colonialismo de la Basura, que históricamente ha recibido y soportado una parte desproporcionada de los impactos de la contaminación por plásticos y de los desechos generados por otros países”, afirma Larisa de Orbe de la organización Acción Ecológica de México.

Ante esta situación, las organizaciones hacen un llamado al presidente del INC, embajador Julio Cordano, y a la Mesa directiva para que restablezcan mecanismos que garanticen una participación directa, efectiva y significativa de las organizaciones observadoras en todas las etapas de la negociación.

Las organizaciones sostienen que un tratado global sobre los plásticos sólo podrá ser legítimo, sólido y ambicioso si se construye mediante un proceso transparente, inclusivo y respetuoso de los principios de la democracia ambiental.

Organizaciones firmantes

Acción Ecológica México; Alianza Resíduo Zero Brasil; Alianza Basura Cero Chile; Alianza Basura Cero Ecuador; AMAR Asociación de Defensa del Medio Ambiente; Libérate del Plástico; Centro de Tecnologías Aplicadas de Argentina; CESTA, Amigos de la Tierra (El Salvador); Coalición Ciudadana Antiincineración (Argentina); Colectivo Ecologista Jalisco (México); Colectivo Tz’unun Ya’ (Guatemala); El Poder del Consumidor (México); FAS (Panamá); FUNAM (Argentina); Fundación Agua Clara (Venezuela); Fundación PlastiCo. Proyecto (Ecuador); Alianza Global para Alternativas a la Incineración (GAIA); Manos Abiertas La Bandada (Argentina); Mingas por el Mar (Ecuador); Organización Ecologista Piuke (Argentina); RADA (Chile); RAPAL (Uruguay); Red Dominicana de Estudios y Empoderamiento Afrodescendiente (República Dominicana); Taller de Comunicación Ambiental (Argentina); Taller Ecologista (Argentina); Toxisphera Asociación de Salud Ambiental (Brasil).

Contactos de prensa: 

Camila Aguilera, GAIA, camila@no-burn.org  | +56 9 8913 6198

María Fernanda Pérez R., BFFP, mafe@breakfreefromplastic.org | +58 424 210 8017

The post Organizaciones de América Latina y el Caribe denuncian exclusión de lasociedad civil en las negociaciones del Tratado global de plásticos first appeared on GAIA.

The Community Development Advocacy Foundation (CODAF) is a Nigerian NGO bridging the gap between policymakers and grassroots communities on environmental issues.

CODAF tackles climate change through innovative zero-waste initiatives, converting organic waste to compost using Black Soldier Fly technology while training Zero Waste Ambassadors and the Zero Waste Farmers Network in zero-waste and agroecological practices.

    

CODAF holds extractive industries accountable by exposing environmental violations by mining and oil companies in the Niger Delta and the Northern and South Eastern parts of Nigeria.

Through our projects, capacity building, and policy advocacy rooted in the African Charter on Human and Peoples’ Rights, CODAF empowers communities to defend environmental rights and manage resources sustainably without marginalization.

In this article, part of a series, we spoke with Richard Bini, the Executive Director of CODAF, about their work as a partner in Epe, Lagos State, for the MAMRN project.

Thank you for joining us, Richard. Several organizations carry out the project through different activities, but with the same goal. Can you share some insights on best practices for collaborating with other organizations on a project in Nigeria?

CODAF’s collaboration approach centers on strategic partnerships that amplify impact while respecting local leadership.

As a member of GAIA, CODAF leverages local organisations, including GAIA members and non-members, to strengthen local methane reduction initiatives and bring diverse, aligned expertise to community-level implementation in Epe.

Our collaborative model emphasizes:

• Integrating GAIA’s technical knowledge with CODAF’s grassroots engagement expertise to reach local institutions and non-GAIA members.
• Ensuring local organizations support rather than direct local initiatives
• Complementary strengths where other organisations/institutions are blended into our idea and belief, including universities providing aligned research, government agencies getting involved in creating policy pathways via our zero-waste parliament structure, while GAIA members contribute zero-waste technical capacity.
• Regular stakeholder meetings align diverse actors, including other organizations around our common goals.

This approach transforms partnerships into genuine collaboration where communities remain primary decision-makers while benefiting from expanded resources and knowledge.

Could you share some perspective on the current waste crisis in Nigeria and how this project aims to address this?

Nigeria is currently facing a severe waste management crisis that is as much about the climate as it is about public health, with most communities lacking proper disposal infrastructure, leading to massive dumpsites that generate methane.

In Lagos State alone, Lagosians generate thousands of tonnes of waste weekly, with organic waste decomposing in open dumps that act as “methane bombs”, polluting air and water while contributing significantly to climate change.

CODAF staff speaks to grassroots and community representatives Do you have a personal milestone or favourite moment in this project so far?

A standout milestone for us was our final groundbreaking on the construction of the Epe Material Recovery Facility.

Watching a site once abandoned and dilapidated transform into a structured hub for resource recovery was incredibly powerful. It made our vision for methane reduction tangible; we weren’t just talking about abatement; we were building the solution.

But the real magic happened when we launched the Zero Waste Parliament. Seeing the room filled with the entire waste value chain, government officials, zero waste ambassadors, and our Zero Waste Farmers Network was a “pinch me” moment. These groups are now a unified movement. Our favorite part is seeing our farmers and ZeWA championing the message, showing how organic waste from the MRF is literally reviving their soil.

What is the path forward for your organisation and possible next steps from this project?

Our goal is to scale the “Epe model” into a national blueprint. We want to see a decentralized Material Recovery Facility in every local government, moving Nigeria away from the era of toxic mega-dumpsites.

We also hope to see the Zero Waste Parliament become a permanent advisory body that can influence national policy directly. We also want to expand the Zero Waste Farmers Network so organic compost becomes the default choice for Nigerian agriculture. We’re moving from a single project to a nationwide movement for justice.

We have seen these key themes emerge in this project (Organic Waste Management, Infrastructure Development, Waste Picker Integration, Capacity Building and Awareness Raising, Local Government Engagement, National Policy Advocacy and Emissions Monitoring. Could you share experiences (as applicable) on any of these topics within this project so far?

Our journey in Epe has shown us that you can’t fix the waste crisis without first addressing the human crisis. That is why Waste Picker Integration is at the heart of everything we do. We are currently developing a Waste Picker Integration Manual. It’s designed to guide both communities and the government on how to transform informal work into dignified, green jobs. 

On the Infrastructure and Organic Waste front, building the MRF was our “proof of concept.” It turned the abstract idea of methane reduction into something people could touch. We’ve watched organic waste, which used to rot and smell in the sun, become high-quality compost. 

This vision comes alive during our capacity-building sessions. We’ve brought together Zero Waste Ambassadors, Zero Waste Farmers Network, and waste pickers in Epe for training.

It’s been incredible to watch these groups lead awareness campaigns together, teaching their own neighbors about segregating waste at the source and why diverting organics from the dumpsite is a win for the climate and the soil. Also, seeing a farmer hold our compost and realize they don’t need to buy expensive, soil-stripping chemicals is when “zero waste” actually clicks for people.

Of course, none of this works in a vacuum, so we’ve been deeply engaged with policymakers. We are working closely with the Epe LGA to ensure local ownership, while also collaborating with the Lagos State Ministry of Environment and LASEPA.

Our goal is to show them that the Epe MRF isn’t just a one-off project; it’s a scalable model for the entire state. We are advocating for a shift where the government sees waste as a resource to be managed locally, rather than a problem to be buried.

The post CODAF: Bridging the gap between policymakers and grassroots communities through MAMRN Project first appeared on GAIA.

By Princess Kemdi Chika-Okafor 

.stk-ttxh81s {margin-bottom:25px !important;}

I have always believed true circularity isn’t just about fixing what breaks at the end of the disposal process; it means rethinking and redesigning our systems from the start.

This was exactly what the Africa Zero Waste Academy was about: rethinking and redesigning our waste systems. As a participant in both the virtual and in-person components of the second edition of the Africa Zero Waste Academy 2026, hosted by GAIA and GAYO in Ghana, I carry away much more than technical blueprints. I am leaving with a renewed understanding of what it takes to build a waste-free continent: a strong combination of technical innovation, strategic storytelling, and grassroots climate justice.

In Kpong, in Ghana’s Eastern Region, our days flowed seamlessly from theory to hands-on practice. In one session, we upcycled discarded textiles into tote bags that served as a tangible reminder of everyday circularity, while strategic advocacy sessions encouraged us to refine our messaging for maximum policy impact.

Pitching the Century 21 Foundation’s capstone proposal to decentralise solar-hybrid cold chains across Africa demonstrated that our local solutions are ready for immediate scaling. By connecting off-grid cold storage with organic waste diversion, we can preserve fresh produce, protect farmers’ livelihoods, and build long-term climate resilience.

Back in Accra, seeing these concepts in real-world operations brought them to life. At the Kpone landfill site, we witnessed an old waste dump being transformed into a sustainable green zone using ClosureTurf technology. A later tour of the Accra Compost and Recycling Plant (ACARP) showcased how large-scale recycling drives the economy, creates green jobs, and supports circularity.

However, the most emotionally impactful moment came on July 31 with the historic launch of the Federation of Informal Sector Waste Workers Associations of Ghana (FISWWAG). Watching informal waste pickers—the unsung heroes who keep tons of waste out of landfills—unite across 16 regions for formal policy recognition was a powerful reminder that true zero waste cannot exist without social justice.

Beyond lectures and field visits, the Academy’s heart lay in the connections we built. Sharing traditional attire, local dishes, and personal stories during our cultural night revealed that, despite our regional challenges, we all share a vision for a resilient Africa. From long bus rides filled with music to intense group debates, we forged an extraordinary network of lifelong allies across the continent. Now, the focus shifts to execution.

For the Century 21 Foundation, our next phase centres on documentary-style storytelling to highlight frontline market women known as (Iya Ojas) in our local parlance, expand source-separation models, and scale our One Plate, One Nation community feeding initiative. With strategic insights, blended finance blueprints, and cross-sector partnerships, we are ready to turn our proposals into tangible impact. 

The future of Africa is green, circular, and already underway.

Writer’s Bio

Princess Kemdi Chika-Okafor is a social entrepreneur and development economist dedicated to solving Africa’s leading agricultural challenge, the dramatic rise in post-harvest food waste and nutritional poverty. As the Founder and Executive Director of the Century 21 Foundation, she is globally recognised as a pioneering thought leader in Afro-Nutrition Sovereignty, championing tech-enabled, self-sustaining circular food economies that move beyond traditional short-term charity.

The post My Chronicles of the Africa Zero Waste Academy 2026: Princess Kemdi first appeared on GAIA.

August, 2026.

The undersigned organizations, which have been monitoring the Global Plastics Treaty negotiations since 2022, wish to express our deep concern and alert the public to the following facts:

Since the beginning of 2026, only so-called “informal” meetings have been taking place between heads of government delegations, and according to available official information, these modality of meetings will continue to be held to address the fundamental issues for negotiating the Global Plastics Treaty. These meetings are conducted behind closed doors and in confidence, without access for observer organizations, which severely limits the transparency of the process and prevents informed participation by civil society. This situation creates a worrying lack of transparency surrounding key discussions for the future of the treaty and marginalizes the voices of civil society organizations that defend the public interest.

The situation is such that during this year it has been impossible for us to fully exercise this role due to the working modality adopted by the chair of the Intergovernmental Negotiating Committee (INC), Ambassador Julio Cordano.

While heads of delegations hold meetings to address the substantive aspects of the negotiations, observer organizations have been relegated to virtual meetings with the INC presidency. During these sessions, the only available interaction mechanism is a chat, which is clearly insufficient to foster genuine dialogue. These virtual spaces neither substitute for nor can replace direct interaction between observer organizations and government delegations, which is an essential component for ensuring effective and meaningful participation in the negotiation process.

This format of online meetings with the INC presidency only allows us to learn general guidelines and organizational aspects of the process, information that is largely already public and does not offer real opportunities to exchange perspectives with national delegations, present evidence and recommendations during substantive discussions, or contribute to strengthening the positions that governments bring to the negotiating table.

We firmly believe that the participation of observer organizations cannot be limited to receiving information about decisions already taken or about the planning of the process. Meaningful participation requires access to spaces where the contents of the treaty are discussed and the possibility of dialogue directly with government delegations before and during the definition of their positions. Excluding civil society organizations from these bodies reduces the transparency of the process and weakens the principles of participation and accountability that should guide the construction of a global treaty of this relevance.

We denounce this practice as contrary to the principles and standards of environmental democracy, which in our region are enshrined in the Escazú Agreement, particularly regarding access to information, public participation, and transparency in environmental matters. These principles require that decision-making processes be conducted with openness, timeliness, and effective participation of stakeholders.

Therefore, it is legally paradoxical that the president of the INC, who was a promoter of the Escazú Agreement in the region, adopts working methods that do not conform to the principle of progressivity, recognized in international environmental law as an obligation to advance in a sustained manner in the expansion and strengthening of access rights.

In this regard, the implementation of closed spaces and the restriction of substantive interaction between observer organizations and government delegations constitute a clear regression in the standards of participation previously achieved in the negotiation process itself, weakening the minimum democratic guarantees that should govern the drafting of an international instrument of this nature. Ultimately, these are implementing procedures that restrict the effective influence of observer organizations.

Even more concerning is the INC president’s request that observer organizations appoint representatives from among our organizations. Implementing this measure will widen the gap between our organizations and government delegations, limit the diversity of voices, and diminish the wealth of scientific, technical, territorial, and public policy contributions that our organizations directly share with our governments during negotiations.

In this context, civil society organizations working to protect human health, planetary health, ecosystems, and independent science denounce our exclusion from discussion forums that define essential aspects of the treaty. This situation has limited our timely access to the debates, hindered our ability to understand the evolution of government positions, and restricted our capacity to contribute independent scientific evidence, technical expertise, and experiences from territories directly affected by plastic pollution.

Our role as civil society is to accompany the negotiations, understand and analyze the positions of our governments, and contribute to strengthening decision-making through evidence and independent recommendations free from industry conflicts of interest, incorporating the realities of the affected communities and territories and oriented towards the protection of the public interest, human rights, human and planetary health, and ecosystems.

For all the above reasons, we call upon the Chair of the Intergovernmental Negotiation Committee, Ambassador Julio Cordano, and the Board of Directors of the INC to reestablish mechanisms that guarantee effective, direct and meaningful participation of observer organizations in all stages of the negotiation process.

A global treaty on plastics can only aspire to be legitimate, solid and ambitious if it is built through a transparent, inclusive process that respects the principles of environmental democracy.

Signatories:

Acción Ecológica México, México   

Aliança Resíduo Zero Brasil

Alianza Basura Cero Chile

Alianza Basura Cero Ecuador

AMAR Associação de Defesa do Meio Ambiente

Break Free From Plastic

Centro de tecnologías aplicadas de Argentina

CESTA, Amigos de la Tierra, El Salvador

Coalición Ciudadana Antiincineración, Argentina

Colectivo Ecologista Jalisco, México

Colectivo Tz’unun Ya’ -Guatemala

Colectivo Viento Sur, Chile

El Poder del Consumidor, México

FAS, PANAMA

FUNAM, Argentina

Fundación Agua Clara, Venezuela

Fundación PlastiCo. Project, Ecuador

Alianza Global para Alternativas a la Incineración, GAIA 

Manos Abiertas La Bandada, Argentina

Mingas por el Mar, Ecuador

Organización Ecologista Piuke, Argentina

RADA, Chile

RAPAL, Uruguay

Red Dominicana de Estudios y Empoderamiento Afrodescendiente. República Dominicana

Taller de Comunicación Ambiental, Argentina

Taller Ecologista, Argentina

Toxisphera Associação de Saúde Ambiental, Brasil

The post PUBLIC STATEMENT BYLATIN AMERICAN AND CARIBBEAN ORGANIZATIONS ON THE LACK OF PARTICIPATION IN THE 2026 PLASTICS TREATY NEGOTIATIONS first appeared on GAIA.

Agosto, 2026

Las organizaciones firmantes de esta declaración que hemos dado seguimiento a las negociaciones del Tratado Global de Plásticos desde 2022 queremos expresar nuestra profunda preocupación y alertar a la opinión pública sobre los siguientes hechos:

Desde los primeros meses de 2026 se vienen realizando y, de acuerdo con información oficial disponible, continuarán realizándose únicamente reuniones denominadas “informales” entre jefes de delegaciones gubernamentales, en las que se abordan los temas fundamentales para la negociación del Tratado Global de Plásticos. Dichas reuniones se desarrollan de manera cerrada y confidencial y sin acceso para las organizaciones observadoras, lo que limita gravemente la transparencia del proceso e impide una participación informada de la sociedad civil. Esta situación genera una preocupante opacidad en torno a discusiones clave para el futuro del tratado y margina las voces de las organizaciones de la sociedad civil que defendemos el interés público.

La situación es tal, que durante este año nos ha sido imposible ejercer plenamente este rol debido a la modalidad de trabajo adoptada por el presidente del Comité Intergubernamental de Negociación (INC por sus siglas en inglés), embajador Julio Cordano. 

Mientras los jefes de delegación sostienen reuniones para abordar los aspectos sustantivos de la negociación; las organizaciones observadoras hemos sido relegadas a reuniones virtuales con la presidencia del INC. Durante las sesiones, el único mecanismo de interacción disponible es un chat, el cual resulta claramente insuficiente para propiciar un intercambio real. Estos espacios virtuales no sustituyen ni pueden reemplazar la interacción directa entre las organizaciones observadoras y las delegaciones gubernamentales, la cual constituye un componente indispensable para garantizar una participación efectiva y significativa en el proceso de negociación.

Esta modalidad de reuniones en línea con la presidencia del INC solo nos permite conocer orientaciones generales y aspectos organizativos del proceso, información que en gran medida ya es de carácter público y no ofrece oportunidades reales para intercambiar perspectivas con las delegaciones nacionales; presentar evidencia y recomendaciones durante las discusiones sustantivas; ni contribuir al fortalecimiento de las posiciones que los gobiernos llevan a la mesa de negociación.

Creemos firmemente que la participación de las organizaciones observadoras no puede limitarse a recibir información sobre decisiones ya adoptadas o sobre la planificación del proceso. Una participación significativa requiere acceso a espacios donde se discuten los contenidos del tratado y la posibilidad de dialogar directamente con las delegaciones gubernamentales antes y durante la definición de sus posiciones. Excluir a las organizaciones de la sociedad civil de estas instancias, reduce la transparencia del proceso y debilita los principios de participación y rendición de cuentas que deben orientar la construcción de un tratado global de esta relevancia.

Denunciamos que este proceder resulta contrario a los principios y estándares de democracia ambiental, que en nuestra región están consagrados en el Acuerdo de Escazú, particularmente en lo relativo al acceso a la información, la participación pública y la transparencia en asuntos ambientales. Dichos principios exigen que los procesos de toma de decisiones se desarrollen bajo criterios de apertura, oportunidad y participación efectiva de los actores interesados.

Por lo que resulta jurídicamente paradójico que el presidente del INC, quién fue promotor del Acuerdo de Escazú en la región adopte modalidades de trabajo que no se ajustan al principio de progresividad, reconocido en el derecho ambiental internacional como una obligación de avanzar de manera sostenida en la ampliación y fortalecimiento de los derechos de acceso.

En este sentido, la implementación de espacios cerrados y la restricción de la interacción sustantiva entre organizaciones observadoras y delegaciones gubernamentales constituyen una clara regresión en los estándares de participación previamente alcanzados en el propio proceso de negociación, debilitando las garantías mínimas democráticas que deben regir la elaboración de un instrumento internacional de esta naturaleza.  En definitiva, se están implementando modalidades que restringen la incidencia efectiva de las organizaciones observadoras.

Más preocupante aún es que el presidente del INC haya solicitado a las organizaciones observadoras designar representantes únicos entre nuestros integrantes. De implementarse esta medida, se profundizará la distancia entre las organizaciones y las delegaciones gubernamentales, limitaría la diversidad de voces y reduciría la riqueza de los aportes científicos, técnicos, territoriales y de política pública que las organizaciones trasladamos directamente a nuestros gobiernos durante las negociaciones. 

En este contexto, las organizaciones de la sociedad civil que trabajamos por la protección de la salud humana, la salud planetaria, los ecosistemas y la ciencia independiente, denunciamos que hemos sido excluidas de espacios de discusión en los que se definen aspectos esenciales del tratado. Esta situación ha limitado nuestro acceso oportuno a los debates; dificultado conocer la evolución de las posiciones gubernamentales y restringido nuestra posibilidad de aportar evidencia científica independiente, conocimientos técnicos y experiencias de los territorios directamente afectados por la contaminación por plásticos. 

Nuestro papel como sociedad civil es acompañar las negociaciones, conocer y analizar las posiciones de nuestros gobiernos y contribuir a fortalecer la toma de decisiones mediante evidencia y recomendaciones independientes libres de conflictos de interés de la industria, que incorporen las realidades de las comunidades y territorios afectados y estén orientadas a la protección del interés público, los derechos humanos, la salud humana y planetaria y los ecosistemas. 

Por todo lo anterior, hacemos un llamado al presidente del Comité Intergubernamental de Negociación, embajador Julio Cordano, y a la Mesa Directiva del INC para que restablezcan mecanismos que garanticen una participación efectiva, directa y significativa de las organizaciones observadoras en todas las etapas del proceso de negociación. 

Un tratado global sobre los plásticos sólo podrá aspirar a ser legítimo, sólido y ambicioso si se construye mediante un proceso transparente, inclusivo y respetuoso de los principios de la democracia ambiental. 

Firmantes:

Acción Ecológica México, México   

Aliança Resíduo Zero Brasil

Alianza Basura Cero Chile

Alianza Basura Cero Ecuador

AMAR Associação de Defesa do Meio Ambiente

Break Free From Plastic

Centro de tecnologías aplicadas de Argentina

CESTA, Amigos de la Tierra, El Salvador

Coalición Ciudadana Antiincineración, Argentina

Colectivo Ecologista Jalisco, México

Colectivo Tz’unun Ya’ -Guatemala

Colectivo Viento Sur, Chile

El Poder del Consumidor, México

FAS, PANAMA

FUNAM, Argentina

Fundación Agua Clara, Venezuela

Fundación PlastiCo. Project, Ecuador

Alianza Global para Alternativas a la Incineración, GAIA 

Manos Abiertas La Bandada, Argentina

Mingas por el Mar, Ecuador

Organización Ecologista Piuke, Argentina

RADA, Chile

RAPAL, Uruguay

Red Dominicana de Estudios y Empoderamiento Afrodescendiente. República Dominicana

Taller de Comunicación Ambiental, Argentina

Taller Ecologista, Argentina

Toxisphera Associação de Saúde Ambiental, Brasil

The post Organizaciones latinoamericanas y del Caribe ante la inexistencia de espacios de participación en las negociaciones del Tratado de plásticos 2026 first appeared on GAIA.

By Collins Azuike

SEDI Staff retrieving discarded organic waste on a Landfill in Otofure, Edo State

Sustainable Environment Development Initiative (SEDI) is committed to promoting sustainable environmental practices, focusing on organic waste management, waste reduction, and soil health. 

The organization works to establish composting facilities, divert organic waste from landfills, and produce nutrient-rich compost as a soil amendment, alongside public awareness campaigns, environmental policy advocacy, and capacity building in local communities. SEDI aims to create a circular economy where waste is turned into a resource.

SEDI is one of the implementing partners of the GAIA-led Multi-Solving Action to Methane Reduction in Nigeria (MAMRN) Project. 

In this article, part of the series on the MAMRN project, we spoke with a Tom Aneni, The Executive Director of SEDI about their work as a partner in Otofure, Edo State, for the project.

In this project, several GAIA members are participating in various activities. Can you share some insights into the best practices for collaboration with other organizations in Nigeria?

Successful collaboration with other organizations, particularly in environmental projects like this one, requires clear communication, shared goals, and mutual respect for each organization’s strengths. Regular meetings and collaborative planning sessions ensure alignment and that everyone is working toward common objectives.

Leveraging local knowledge and expertise is vital, especially when addressing unique community challenges, and a flexible approach to local contexts is crucial for long-term success. Partnerships, like the one with GAIA, benefit from resource-sharing, whether financial, technical, or knowledge-based and create a more impactful project.

Could you share some perspective on the current waste crisis in Nigeria and how this project aims to address this?

Nigeria faces a major waste management crisis, with a significant proportion of organic waste improperly disposed of in open spaces or landfills, contributing to environmental pollution and health issues. Our project directly addresses this by setting up a composting facility that turns organic waste into valuable compost. 

This not only reduces waste sent to landfills but also improves soil health and promotes sustainable agriculture. By focusing on organic waste, we aim to reduce waste’s environmental impact, improve waste management infrastructure, and educate the public on sustainable practices.

Do you have a personal milestone or favourite moment in this project so far?

A personal milestone for us has been establishing the composting facility at Otofure, Edo State, Nigeria, which marks a significant step toward sustainable waste management in the community. Our efforts to raise awareness about the benefits of composting through our social media handles have also been incredibly rewarding. Seeing the public engage with our campaigns and embrace composting has been fulfilling, as it shows growing recognition 

of composting as a valuable practice for both waste reduction and soil health improvement.

We have seen these key themes emerge in this project (Organic Waste Management, Infrastructure Development, Waste Picker Integration, Capacity Building and Awareness Raising, Local Government Engagement, National Policy Advocacy and Emissions Monitoring). Could you share experiences (as applicable) on any of these topics within this project so far?

On organic waste management, the composting facility we established can successfully divert organic waste from landfills.

On infrastructure development, we have developed composting infrastructure at a key location in Otofure community, Edo State, designed to handle both small-scale and large-scale organic waste processing.

Waste picker integration has been a priority. We are providing waste pickers with training and resources to engage in the composting process, improving their livelihoods and empowering them as vital stakeholders.

For capacity building and awareness raising, our social media campaigns and training programs have raised awareness about the importance of composting and waste management, engaging communities, businesses, and local authorities to ensure the message reaches a wide audience.

On local government engagement, we are actively working with local governments to promote composting as part of sustainable waste management practices; this collaboration has been instrumental in scaling the project to more communities.

And on national policy advocacy, our team is advocating for the adoption of national policies that encourage organic waste recycling, focusing on laws that incentivize composting and waste diversion from landfills.

What is the path forward for your organization and possible next steps from this project?

Looking ahead, we plan to expand our composting facility to more communities, focusing on integrating waste pickers into the composting process and providing them with training and resources. We will also engage with local and national government officials to promote policy changes that support sustainable waste management.

Our goal is to develop a scalable model that can be replicated in other regions and contribute to nationwide improvements in waste management. 

We also aim to build stronger partnerships with businesses to promote compost use in agriculture and landscaping, while continuing our public education and awareness campaigns.

The post How SEDI is promoting sustainable environmental practices through the MAMRN Project first appeared on GAIA.

Más de 20 especialistas, autoridades, académicos,organizaciones de la sociedad civil y representantes de movimientos de recicladores de América Latina y el Caribe se reunirán el próximo 2 de septiembre en Santiago de Chile para compartir experiencias,conocimientos  y estrategias para impulsar la transición hacia modelos basura cero en la región.

Santiago de Chile, agosto de 2026. — ¿Cómo puede la gestión de los residuos contribuir a enfrentar la crisis climática y, al mismo tiempo, generar soluciones locales y fortalecer a las comunidades? Esta será una de las principales preguntas que abordará el “Seminario Internacional basura cero: el rol estratégico de los residuos orgánicos para la acción climática y la democratización de soluciones”, que se realizará el miércoles 2 de septiembre, de 8 a.m. a 5 p.m., en el Aula Magna de la Pontificia Universidad Católica de Chile.

Organizado por GAIA, Break Free From Plastic (BFFP) y la Alianza Basura Cero, el encuentro reunirá a especialistas, organizaciones sociales, autoridades, representantes de gobiernos locales, academia y personas vinculadas a la gestión de residuos de distintos países de América Latina.

El seminario pondrá en discusión el potencial de los modelos basura cero como una estrategia concreta frente a la crisis climática, con especial énfasis en la gestión y valorización de los residuos orgánicos. La agenda contempla cuatro espacios: basura cero como estrategia climática y de desarrollo local; basura cero como política pública nacional; experiencias que demuestran que estos modelos funcionan; y un panel estratégico sobre cómo avanzar hacia una mayor responsabilidad de las empresas frente a los impactos generados por sus productos.

Entre las personas expositoras se encuentran Marcelo Mena, exministra de Medio Ambiente de Chile y director ejecutivo de Global Methane Hub; Juan Pablo Escudero, investigador del Instituto Emmett de UCLA y especialista en derecho ambiental; Kevin Basoa, del Ministerio del Medio Ambiente de Chile; María José Ureta, jefa de la Oficina de Economía Circular de Chile; Miguel Rivas, director de proyectos de Ponguinguiola, quien ha impulsado políticas públicas orientadas a la protección de ecosistemas, la reducción de plásticos y el desarrollo de soluciones climáticas, educativas y comunitarias; Christie Keith, coordinadora internacional de GAIA; y representantes de organizaciones de recicladores de base de Brasil, Argentina y Chile, entre otros especialistas y referentes de la región. 

La diversidad de voces busca poner en el centro soluciones que no sólo reduzcan los impactos ambientales, sino que también incorporen justicia social, participación ciudadana, trabajo digno y desarrollo local.

Basura cero plantea una mirada que va más allá de la disposición final de los residuos: busca prevenir su generación, recuperar materiales, reducir la contaminación y fortalecer sistemas locales capaces de responder a la crisis climática desde soluciones concretas y democratizadas.

Las inscripciones son gratuitas y deben realizarse previas al evento a través de este link.  

Fecha: miércoles 2 de septiembre de 2026

Horario: 8:00 a 17:00 horas

Lugar: Aula Magna, Pontificia Universidad Católica de Chile

Más información.

El seminario también contará con transmisión en vivo. Registros en este link.

Contactos de prensa: 

Camila Aguilera, GAIA, camila@no-burn.org  | +56 9 8913 6198

María Fernanda Pérez R., BFFP, mafe@breakfreefromplastic.org | +58 424 210 8017

The post Seminario internacional abordará el rol estratégico de los residuos orgánicos para la acción climática y la transición hacia basura cero first appeared on GAIA.

By Kadiatu A. Sherriff, 2026 Africa Zero Waste Academy Participant

.stk-4lgao7t {margin-bottom:0px !important;}

When I joined the Africa Zero Waste Academy, I came with an open mind.

 I have been working within the waste sector and thinking about the challenges and possible solutions in Liberia for some time. And I knew there was still a lot to learn. And the Academy became much more than a learning programme for me.

It was wonderful meeting young people from across Africa who had come together for different reasons, but with a shared interest in creating better waste systems. We listened, learned and challenged ideas together.

What made the learning particularly meaningful was its practicality. Even when we discussed theory, stories, experiences, and examples from different African countries brought the ideas to life. Some experiences resonated strongly with what we see in Liberia, while others opened my mind to approaches we could explore or adapt in our own context.

Then came the participant presentations. 

Different people brought different ideas and solutions, and right there, we could see opportunities for collaboration. Sometimes, you realise that someone else is working on a piece of the same puzzle you have been trying to solve.

And, of course, the facilitators brought so much to the experience. Their knowledge, questions, and experiences pushed many of us beyond simply knowing what the problem is to thinking more deeply about why it exists, who is responsible, and what kinds of solutions can create lasting change.

The Personal Shift

One of my biggest personal shifts was learning to question solutions—even some I had previously considered good.

The Academy made me ask myself: Does this solution actually pass the climate test?

Or are we sometimes managing the consequences of a broken system while calling it a solution?

Those questions have stayed with me.

It made me look differently at some of our own methods and the solutions we see around us. A solution should not simply move a problem somewhere else or create another problem in the process. If the end goal is positive change, then we have to be willing to rethink how we get there.

I came home wanting to look at some of our work at Golden Waste Solutions with fresh eyes—not because everything we have done is wrong, but because there is always room to ask better questions and improve.

I also appreciated the lighter side of the in-person experience. The learning was intense, but moments of laughter, connection, and celebration gave us room to breathe. The launch of FISSWWAG was one of those moments. The cultural expressions, the stories, and the atmosphere reminded me that learning doesn’t always have to happen in a serious room with a notebook in hand. Sometimes, you learn just as much by witnessing people come together, celebrate their identity and share their experiences.

And, of course, there was Culture Night. It was beautiful seeing our different cultures come alive. 

But beyond thesessions, culturatural exchanges, and food I found myself appreciating something else: meeting people not only as representatives of their countries, but as individuals. I came to know people beyond the country they represented. That made the experience even more meaningful.

I left Ghana with more than notes, certificates and photographs.

I left with WhatsApp contacts—but not just people to watch on my status. 

I left with young people from different parts of Africa with whom I now share something deeper: a common goal and the understanding that, whenever an opportunity or challenge arises, someone in this network may be the right person to call.

Maybe we will collaborate on a project.

Maybe we will share an idea.

Maybe one of us will simply reach out and say, “I think you should look at this.”

I left with questions, new perspectives, new connections and new possibilities.

And I think the timing could not have been better.

From learning to contribution

Interestingly, shortly after completing the Academy, I had the opportunity to participate in a civil society roundtable convened by the United Nations Office for Sustainable Development (UNOSD), at the request of Liberia’s Environmental Protection Agency, as part of discussions around the country’s waste-management system.

I went into that conversation with fresh perspectives.

The Academy did not make me an expert on Liberia’s waste sector overnight. It gave me a stronger lens through which to contribute: looking beyond collection and disposal, and thinking about prevention, recovery, financing, climate impact, policy, people, and the connections between them.

I found myself better prepared to ask questions, share observations from our experience as a local waste enterprise, and listen to what others were seeing from their own positions.

That experience reinforced something I had begun to understand during the Academy:

Everything we do is connected to a larger system.

Writer’s Bio

Kadiatu A. Sherriff is the Founder and President of Golden Waste Solutions Enterprise Inc based in Liberia, where she works to design and implement ways to reduce waste and create income-generating activities for economically vulnerable communities.

The post I Came to Learn About Zero Waste, I Left Rethinking Our Waste Management System. first appeared on GAIA.