G20 GROUP SUMMIT HAMBURG GERMANY 2017

G20 JULY 2017 HAMBURG SUMMIT

The 2017 G20 Hamburg summit was the twelfth meeting of the Group of Twenty (G20), which was held on 7–8 July 2017, at Hamburg Messe, in the city of Hamburg, Germany.

The G20 recognizes the urgent need for action to prevent and reduce marine litter in order to preserve human health and marine and coastal ecosystems, and mitigate marine litter's economic costs and impacts. We stress the direct relationship between the challenge of marine litter, environment, human health, economic development, social well-being, biodiversity and food security.

Realizing the global nature of the challenge of marine litter, the G20 will work together to promote and initiate measures and actions at local, national, and regional levels to prevent and reduce marine litter. We recognize that the lack of effective solid waste management, wastewater treatment and storm water systems, and unsustainable production and consumption patterns, are primary land-based sources and pathways of marine litter. Taking into account the need for comprehensive multi-stakeholder involvement, we as the G20 acknowledge the role of non-state actors and further encourage private sector engagement and the development of environmental protection solutions to reduce marine litter.

We recognize the challenge posed by knowledge gaps. We consider UNEP's report on "Marine plastic debris and microplastics - global lessons and research to inspire action and guide policy change" and the GESAMP reports in 2015 and 2016 on "Sources, fate and effects of microplastics in the marine environment: A global assessment", and The First Global Integrated Marine Assessment (World Ocean Assessment I, which is the outcome of the First Cycle of the Regular Process) as positive foundations on which to base further work on marine litter. In accordance with and acknowledging relevant UN resolutions and commitments and where applicable within different regional seas conventions, programs and initiatives, as well as action plans and measures in place (as referred to in the annex to this document), we will continue to share knowledge and experiences and support further research into marine litter and its prevention to fill evidence-based knowledge gaps. A lack of certainty in scientific evidence can no longer be accepted as an excuse for non-action. Recognizing that a large majority of G20 are members to a Regional Cooperation, Action Programs, Action Plans etc., we are determined to complement existing initiatives, experiences and expertise, and work to incorporate them into the G20 approach.

We, the G20, will take action to prevent and reduce marine litter of all kinds, including from single-use plastics and micro-plastics. We thus reiterate our commitment to preventing and substantially reducing marine litter and its impacts by 2025 in support of the 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development and its Sustainable Development Goals and targets related to marine pollution, waste management, waste water treatment and sustainable consumption and production by putting into practice the following 'G20 Operational Framework' and the voluntary Global Network of the Committed (GNC).

G20 Operational Framework - Issues to be addressed

The G20 maintains that the tools to reduce marine litter have to be as diverse as the challenge of marine litter itself. There is no 'one size fits all' solution. We reiterate the need to:

* address pollution from land based sources,

* address pollution from sea based sources, including key waste items from the fishing and aquaculture industry as well as from the shipping sector,

* address financial resources for cost-effectiveness analyses as well as measures for marine litter prevention or reduction,

* put in place effective actions e.g. to facilitate the implementation of the polluter pays approach, e.g. 'extended producer responsibility' or deposit schemes - already in place in some G20 countries as appropriate and develop new sources of funding for effective waste management systems, as well as stimulate innovation;

* address additional research requirements.

Given that in many regions the largest amount of marine litter entering the oceans worldwide stems from land-based sources, waste reduction and waste management, as well as waste water management, including storm water, deserve priority actions.

The G20 emphasizes its need to work on land- and sea-based sources of marine litter and commits to focusing on the following priority areas in accordance with national circumstances.

PROTESTORS - Climate change and other environmental and social justice activists stages a series of protests at the inaction of the G20 in real terms.

1. Promote the socio-economic benefits of establishing policies to prevent marine litter

Acknowledge and promote the socio-economic benefits of preventing marine litter and reduction measures in terms of employment generation including the informal sector, tourism development, sustainable fisheries, waste and wastewater management, biodiversity and other areas

Identify policy measures on the basis of risk and impact assessments (including economic, social and environmental costs and benefits)

Facilitate communication and cooperation between impacting and impacted municipalities, countries and regions as well as with other stakeholders

Promote partnerships with stakeholders from economic sectors such as tourism, fisheries, the shipping and cruise sectors, waste, waste water and harbour management, as well as the plastics and consumer goods industries.

Develop highly qualified scientific and technical staff for monitoring and assessing marine litter and alleviating its impacts (e.g. treatment centres for injured animals such as turtles etc.)

2. Promote waste prevention and resource efficiency

Utilize the waste hierarchy and the '3 Rs' (reduce, reuse, recycle) approach, according to which waste prevention should be the first option, followed by reuse and recycling

Promote mechanisms to involve producers, importers and retailers in the establishment of resource-efficient product value chains from design to end-of-life treatment and in financing waste collection and treatment

Significantly reduce the use of micro-beads and single-use plastic bags and where appropriate phase them out

Implement source reducing measures, e.g. Sustainable Material Management (SMM), by paying attention to product innovation, product design and consumer behaviour (product use)
Significantly reduce the loss of plastic pellets during production and transport

BLUE GROWTH - 71% of the Earth surface is water. It is a very high percentage and that is why the European Commission wants to further harness its potential (oceans, seas and coasts) in order to create jobs and value, always from a sustainable point of view. This is the « Blue Growth » concept we have been hearing about. To promote this development, the European Commission has created several funding lines available to all kind of European organizations so they can develop innovative projects through the Horizon 2020 funding scheme. What are the most important sectors to develop the European. Find out more on the European Commission infographic on « Blue Growth »:

3. Promote sustainable waste management

Support integrated sustainable waste management including infrastructure (for collection and treatment)

Promote access to regular waste collection services and facilitate investments in waste management infrastructure in order to prevent waste leakage into the sea

Where needed, integrate informal waste workers into modernized waste management systems in order to improve their working conditions and livelihoods

Support international cooperation among the G20 and with other partners, for capacity development and infrastructure investments for improved waste management systems in coastal, urban and rural areas

Establish adequate port reception facilities at ports and terminals in line with MARPOL requirements, in particular Annex V. Encourage port reception facilities to apply a reasonable cost or when applicable no-special-fee system for waste of sea-based sources

Promote regulatory frameworks on environmentally sound management of waste in order to facilitate its implementation at local levels

Secure cross-financing of waste management operational activities (e.g. through economic incentives, fees, charges, deposit funds or taxes)

Surmount barriers to financing waste management, e.g. by de-risking private waste management infrastructure investment in G20 Countries (cf. APEC model)

4. Promote effective waste water treatment and storm water management

Consider providing and extending wastewater treatment coverage
Facilitate investment in wastewater treatment infrastructure in order to prevent waste leakage into the sea

Promote available technologies to avoid large solid waste from entering into rivers and oceans

5. Raise awareness, promote education & research

Promote public information campaigns for citizens and businesses to reduce waste generation, to re-use and to facilitate their participation in waste collection systems and to avoid littering

Support research and coordination among countries and international organizations to identify and remediate through environmentally sound methods sources of marine waste, concentrated areas of marine litter (national, regional, local), taking into account, inter alia, litter loads and sensitivity of biodiversity and ecosystems and document defining characteristics (lack of infrastructure, geography, product use and impacts on marine biodiversity and human health)

Support research to assess marine litter impacts on ecosystems and human health
Promote knowledge sharing, e.g. by expert exchange, thus strengthening institutional and human capacities

Include scientific and technical aspects in measure-related considerations, inter alia by promoting and, where under way, continuing and supporting efforts with regard to harmonization of global marine litter monitoring, as well as by standardization of methods, data and evaluation

6. Support removal and remediation action

Support research and coordination to identify environmentally sound removal and remediation actions
Develop guidance and toolkits and support their implementation

7. Strengthen the engagement of stakeholders

Seek to continue communicating about marine litter (amongst G20 partners as well as with third parties)
Contribute to implementing existing regional plans tackling marine litter and developing new such plans, where useful

Accept appropriate responsibilities and act as a focal point in existing networks and co-operations involving G20 members

Continue to involve stakeholders (in particular local authorities, civil society organization, Industry, Financial Institutions and Scientific Experts)

Promote the engagement of the private sector in reducing marine litter and in developing integrated waste management and waste water treatment solutions

Promote the issue of marine litter in high level economic forums (e.g. World Economic Forum and Green Financing Forum)

Inform about G20-related activities in international forums, inter alia SDG 14 Conference (New York), Our Oceans Conference, (Malta), APEC, ASEAN, and possible G20-side events, 6th International Marine Debris Conference (San Diego)

Promote knowledge sharing, e.g. by expert exchange, thus strengthening institutional and human capacities

Harness existing business (B20) engagement to promote a dialogue on the contributions of industry to tackling marine litter

Communicate results, effects, achievements of measures, activities and projects that address marine litter

Promote cooperation between authorities responsible for freshwater and marine water

Global Network

Helping to support implementation of the activities within relevant work areas, the G20 launches a voluntary Global Network of the Committed – GNC, a platform addressing marine litter linked to the UNEP´s Global Partnership on Marine Litter (GPML) to offer and secure exchange, dissemination and transfer of information, standards, experiences and knowledge.

The network will offer a platform to share knowledge and experiences on the implementation of the G20 Action Plan on Marine Litter and the GPML Steering Committee will support the development of terms of reference for the GNC.

ANNEX

Quotation and citation (non-exhaustive) of conventions, programs and initiatives, action plans and measures, and relevant UN resolutions:

Barcelona Convention (Legally Binding Regional Plan on Marine Litter Management, 2013)

Basel Convention on the Control of Transboundary Movements of Hazardous Wastes and their Disposal
Bucharest Convention

CBD (2012): Report – "Impacts of Marine Debris on Biodiversity: Current Status and Potential Solutions" (CBD Technical Series No. 67)

CBD DECISION XIII/10 (2016): Addressing impacts of marine debris and anthropogenic underwater noise on marine and coastal biodiversity

EU Marine Strategic Framework Directive (Directive 2008/56/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 17 June 2008 establishing a framework for community action in the field of marine environmental policy)

Germany (2015): G7 Action Plan to Combat Marine Litter

Japan (2016): G7 Ise-Shima Leaders' Declaration Communique; G7 Toyama Environment Ministers' Meeting; Tsukuba Communique G7 Science and Technology Minister's Meeting in Tsukuba, Ibaraki; Tokyo Message on the Standardization and Harmonization of Marine Litter Monitoring from the 2016 Expert Workshop

Italy (2017): G7 Workshop on Marine Litter "Mainstreaming the work of the Regional Sea Programmes towards the better implementation of the G7 Action Plan and the achievement of the global commitments on marine litter"

G20 resource efficiency dialogue [inclusion subject to endorsement by G20 members]
Habitat III (2016): New Urban Agenda

Honolulu Strategy (2011): Globally framing an Action Plan to prevent, reduce and manage marine litter
International coalition "Stop Plastic Waste" launched at COP22

International Convention for the Prevention of Marine Pollution from Ships, 1973 (MARPOL 73/78) and its revised Annex V

Manila Declaration (2012): Global Programme of Action - Marine Litter becoming an >additional major component

Rio + 20 Declaration (2013): "Significant reduction of marine litter until 2025."
UN SDG 14.1 (2015): "By 2025, prevent and significantly reduce marine pollution of all kinds, in particular from land-based activities, including marine debris and nutrient pollution"
UNEA I (2014): Resolution on Marine plastic debris and microplastics
UNEA II (2016): Resolution on Oceans and Seas and on Marine Litter and microplastics
United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea (UNCLOS)

Source: Official website of the German G20 presidency

ACTION PLAN - The Munk School of Global Affairs, part of the University of Toronto, recorded the G20.s action plan to combat marine litter.

Globally, around 12.7 million tonnes of mismanaged plastic waste enter the ocean every year (Jambeck et al., 2015). This is equivalent to each citizen of the world dumping almost 2 kg of plastic in the ocean annually. Plastics and marine litter are one of the biggest environmental challenges of today. They are not only an eyesore, but represent major risks to human health and biodiversity, as well as to many sectors of the economy. So far global leadership and action on this issue has been lacking, but this is changing.

One of the central G20 recommendations is to improve waste management to reduce plastics pollution, especially for plastic waste leakage. Ineffective solid waste management, wastewater treatment and storm water systems are key sources of land-based marine litter. The recommendations aim to promote clean-up activities in a planned and consistent manner supporting removal and remediation actions, particularly in tourist areas and ports where plastic pollution can be pervasive. However, clean-up actions are not sufficient as they only address plastics on the ocean surface, but in the absence of sufficient upstream preventative measures, they are often essential downstream actions to clean up the environment and promote waste prevention by raising citizen awareness (Watkins et al 2015).

The G20 Marine Litter Action Plan states the G20 will place effective measures to make producers responsible for their products. They will do this by facilitating a polluter pays approach, via extended producer responsibility (EPR). EPR systems promote takeback, reuse and recycling and can contribute to reducing marine litter. IEEP is conducting a study on “EPR in the EU Plastics Strategy and Circular Economy” which aims to encourage ambitious EPR for plastic waste and support the transition towards a circular economy in Europe.

G20 recommendations build on initiatives launched by vanguard countries across the world. Examples include a microbeads ban in the United States through the Microbead-Free Waters Act of 2015, policies on single-use plastics in France where single-use plastic bags are banned since 2016 and Ireland which introduced a plastic bag levy in 2002. Other European examples include a plastic bag and bottle deposit refund schemes in Germany which introduced a mandatory one-way deposit system in 2003 and Sweden where a deposit system has existed since 1984, but only for beers and soft drink containers. A number of countries are enacting partial or complete disposable plastic bags bans with the most recent being Kenya (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Phase-out_of_lightweight_plastic_bags).

The momentum from the G20 recommendations is welcomed, but will not be enough to solve the problem in the upcoming years. This is why the G20 countries must set an example by taking bolder steps to transition to a circular economy that avoids waste and reduces marine litter at a much larger scale. Costs of failing to act are much higher than the costs of action, and the option to postpone action is gone.

IEEP
Rue Joseph II 36-38,
1000 Bruxelles
Belgium
Tel: +32 (0) 2738 7482
Fax: +32 (0) 2732 4004
Email: smootoosamy@ieep.eu

11 Belgrave Road,
IEEP Offices, Floor 3
London
SW1V 1RB
Tel: +44 (0) 20 7799 2244
Fax: +44 (0) 20 7799 2600
Email: jlindblad@ieep.eu

While the G20 'Action Plan' tasks member nations to raise awareness of marine pollution, and to address waste management to alleviate marine litter, there is no definitive remedy to deal with plastic in the oceans, and those plastics, that despite the efforts of the parties to prevent from entering the sea, will inevitably find its way into the marine environment.

Whereas, in our opinion that the World needs an 'Ocean Action Plan' to tackle waste as it comes into the marine environment and as it dissipates to eventually end up as ocean gyres.

Such an Ocean Action Plan would coordinate the efforts of member nations that in turn will benefit each other as the oceans transport waste from one shoreline to the shores of a neighbor country.

It is the assertion of the WOAA that they need specific help to develop an international strategy for responsible heads of state, and that they need to allocate sufficient funds for an organization such as the WOAA to allow them to effectively make headway. As a first stage, the sums needed to kickstart a specific strategy is estimated to be in the region of $10 million dollars to develop a SeaVax prototype as an example of what is possible and by way of freeware to and for potential operators in any contributing country.

Follow on expenses, or pledges of ongoing support should be included to cover the cost of helping contributing nations to set up fleets of ocean cleaning machines - and run them in a network or pattern such as SeaNet, to stand a better chance of regenerating the oceans.

If (for example) world leaders could agree to contribute within 12 months from July 2018, it would take around three years from that Agreement to get things moving and produce a SeaVax prototype - assuming cooperation from all members of such an Alliance.

From a point in time where a SeaVax (type) prototype was deemed sufficiently proven to go into production, it would take five AmphiMax portable boatyards to produce 8 SeaVax units a year each (@ six week assembly time) that could launch 40 SeaVax ships collectively. If this formula were used as a guide, it would take 3 years to complete a proposed fleet of 120 SeaVax (type) vessels for the Indian Ocean, without clogging up that nation’s shipyards.

A similar plan would proceed in tandem for the Atlantic and Pacific oceans, meaning that within 3 years a global fleet of 360 ocean dustcarts could be operational.

It would then take an estimated five years to make an impact on fish stocks - as in stabilization - and within 10 years we might reasonably anticipate a percentage recovery of roughly 0.5% a year, meaning that it would take 96 years for our ocean fish stocks to recover to 1970 levels, by 2114. This assumes parallel action to tackle climate change and international bans on single use plastic, or better recycling rates on land.

The only way to improve on the 2114 figure would be to operate more SeaVax vessels:

This is on the assumption that filtration time does not reach total waste absorption, which is likely at some point even at 360 SeaVax vessels.

The blue economy is said to be valued at $24 trillion in total* (USD). According to the UN Food and Agriculture Organization (FAO), the world production of fish in 2005 consisted of 93.2 million tonnes captured by commercial fishing in wild fisheries. The number of individual fish caught in the wild has been estimated at up to 2.7 trillion per year.

Divide this up by the area of our oceans (344.8m km2): $ 1,802,371,230 per million square kilometers. Hence:

OCEAN	AREA Km2	x 1.8024 = $B	% GAINS/YEAR in $
-	-	-	-
Pacific Ocean	165.3	297,931,964,319.0	297,931,964.3
Atlantic Ocean	106.5	191,952,535,995.0	191,952,535.9
Indian Ocean	70.5	127,067,171,715.0	127,067,171.7
Mediterranean Sea	2.5	4,505,928,075.0	4,505,928.0
-	-	-	-
TOTALS	344.8	621,457,600,000.0	621,457,600.0

It is as yet not possible to suggest a rate of ocean recovery with any accuracy, as insufficient data exists. But, if we were to aim for just 1/10^th of one percent for ocean recovery per annum, this would give us a return of $621,457,600 million ($.6.2m) in dollar value in terms of fish recovery per year.

On top of that we add the value of the recovered plastic, and on top of that the fact that toxin levels should drop dramatically in terms of bio-accumulation, making fish safe to eat once more.

A SeaVax could in theory pay for itself in five years based on a target cost for a production SeaVax as being $6.56 million dollars and a return rate of $0.39 cents per kilogram for recovered ocean plastic, where clean recycled plastic can reach as much as $0.80 cents per kilogram on the open market, variable.

Based on these estimates, a fleet of 120 SeaVax would require an investment in the region of $787 million dollars, moving into operational profit after around four years, but the real gains would be from the ocean as marine life has cleaner water in which to stage a recovery.

For all the oceans at the lowest suggested level of operations we would need around 360 SeaVax vessels (or equivalent) taking the bill to $2.361 billion for a $0.621 billion annual return - hence: 3.8 years until it would be possible to achieve a break even point.

Cleaner Ocean Foundation offers that this would be a small price to pay for tending to an issue that a few years ago the Global Ocean Commission could offer no potential solutions for. This is the vision for a better aquatic world. The Cleaner Ocean Foundation invite you to share that vision in joining the proposed World Ocean Anti-plastic Alliance.

PASS THE PARCEL - The children of Burgas are the future generation who will inherit our polluted oceans if we do not do something more positive soon.

The following table is suggestive of an appropriate contribution towards ocean cleaning research and anti-plastic cooperation (or a plastic understanding) between the heads of state and economic advisers in connection with ensuring the future of the blue economy, with an especial slant toward future food security. This will pay for an Ocean Action Plan called SeaNet.

Rank	Country	GDP (billions of US$)	% of World GDP	$M contribution
.	.	.	.	.
1	European Union	$18,399	23.7%	1.840
2	United States	$17,416	22.4%	1.742
3	China	$10,355	13.3%	1.036
4	Japan	$4,770	6.1%	0.477
5	Germany	$3,820	4.9%	-
6	France	$2,902	3.7%	-
7	United Kingdom	$2,848	3.7%	0.285
8	Brazil	$2,244	2.9%	0.224
9	Italy	$2,129	2.7%	0.212
10	Russia	$2,057	2.7%	0.206
11	India	$2,048	2.6%	0.205
12	Canada	$1,839	2.33%	0.184
13	Australia	$1,531	1.94%	0.153
14	Saudi Arabia	$1,358	1.72%	0.136
15	South Korea	$1,305	1.66%	0.130
16	Mexico	$1,259	1.60%	0.126
17	Indonesia	$868	1.10%	0.087
18	Netherlands	$853	1.08%	-
19	Argentina	$637	0.80%	0.063
20	South Africa	$349	0.40%	0.035
.	.	.	.	.
			76.59%	$7,181,000

ARGENTINA

AUSTRALIA

BRAZIL

CANADA

CHINA

EUROPEAN UNION

FRANCE

GERMANY

INDIA

INDONESIA

ITALY

JAPAN

MEXICO

RUSSIA

SAUDI ARABIA

SOUTH AFRICA

SOUTH KOREA

TURKEY

UNITED KINGDOM

UNITED STATES

GUINEA

NETHERLANDS

NORWAY

SENEGAL

SPAIN

SINGAPORE

SWITZERLAND

VIETNAM

GLOBAL OCEAN COMMISSIONERS Vs G7 WORLD MAP - As you can see from the world map above, compared to the world map below (in green), the G7 does not cover world interests geographically but is a group that uses its influence to control Russia's more aggressive tendencies. The non-inclusion of China is a disadvantage, where the divide is largely fiscal. Another glaring omission is that the G7 provides no postal address on their website, other than for media enquiries.

WORLD BANK

FINANCIAL STABILITY BOARD

INT MONETARY FUND

UNITED NATIONS

FOOD & AGRICULTURE ORG

INT LABOUR ORG

WORLD TRADE ORG

ORG ECONOMIC COOPERATION & DEV

WORLD HEALTH ORG

G7 MEMBERS - Canada - Prime Minister Stephen Harper, France - President François Hollande, Germany (2015 Chair) Chancellor Angela Merkel, Italy - Prime Minister Matteo Renzi, Japan - Prime Minister Shinzō Abe, United Kingdom - Prime Minister David Cameron, United States - President Barack Obama, European Union - Council President Donald Tusk & Commission President Jean-Claude Juncker.

G20 MEMBERS - The world map above is more representative of the world geographically, much the same as with the Global Ocean Commission, save for a lack of membership for the huge land mass that is North and Central Africa. Thank heavens that at least South Africa is included.