Identification of Key Activities Contributing to Macro Plastic Waste on the Shoreline of Koh Chang, Thailand

(1)

IN

DEGREE PROJECT TECHNOLOGY,

FIRST CYCLE, 15 CREDITS ,

STOCKHOLM SWEDEN 2019

Identification of Key Activities

Contributing to Macro Plastic

Waste on the Shoreline of Koh

Chang, Thailand

A Quantification of Macroplastic Waste Items

ELEA JUELL-SKIELSE

(2)

(3)

Abstract

Sustainable development is vital in order for Thailand to continue to develop as in previous years. However, sustainable development cannot be achieved if the amount of macroplastic littering into the oceans does not decrease. In order to facilitate future decision making regarding this issue, this report aims to identify which human activities that contribute the most to the present macroplastic waste items on Thai shorelines. This identification was performed through a simplified material flow analysis based on observations and simple calculations on the island Koh Chang in Ranong. A comparative study was performed on the dissimilar island Koh Larn in Pattaya in order to eliminate any error factors caused by the specific environment on Koh Chang. It was deduced that Grocery Consumption, Fishing and

Dining were the Key Activities on the two islands that contributed to the present macroplastic waste. Tourism was also shown to be a great contributor. The study did not find any signs of a current Rate of

Accumulation on Koh Chang. However, there were always macroplastic waste items present in the sampling areas which implies that they might pose a threat to the ecosystems. Further research is needed in order to find a suitable solution for this problem.

(4)

Sammanfattning

En hållbar utveckling är central för att Thailand ska kunna fortsätta utvecklas på samma sätt som skett de senaste åren. Hållbar utveckling kan dock inte uppnås om mängden makroplaster som hamnar i haven inte minskar. För att underlätta framtida beslutsfattande ämnar denna rapport att identifiera de mänskliga aktiviteter som i störst utsträckning bidrar till de makroplastföremål som går att finna på thailändska kuststräckor. Denna identifiering utfördes genom en simplifierad materialflödesanalys som baserades på observationer och simpla beräkningar på ön Koh Chang i Ranong. En jämförande studie utfördes på den annorlunda ön Koh Larn i Pattaya för att eliminera felfaktorer som kan ha uppstått på grund av Koh Changs specifika förutsättningar. Studien visade att Livsmedelskonsumption, Fiske, och

Restaurangbesök var de Nyckelaktiviteter som bidrog till det befintliga makroplastavfallet. Turism

(5)

Acknowledgements

First and foremost we want to thank our supervisor in Thailand, Dr. Wayne N. Phillips at Mahidol University International College. Mr Phillips has provided us with contacts as well as with invaluable input and assistance from the beginning until the end. Thank you Wayne.

Second, we want to give thanks to our supervisor Researcher Daniel Franzén at the Royal Institute of Technology (KTH) in Stockholm, Sweden, and to our assisting supervisor Joseph Santhi Pechsiri, PhD student at KTH. This project would not have been possible without you and we are truly grateful for your time, interest and input. We also want to give special thanks to Mr Santhi Pechsiri who we know have spent a lot of unpaid free time with us for working on this project.

(6)

1 Introduction

This report is structured as follows: A background, presenting the report’s connection to the concept of Sustainable Development, the base litterature for the report as well as the reports aims and objectives; Methodology, describing the procedure used for the acquisition of data that were later analyzed to fulfill the aims and objectives; Results, shortly presenting the findings of the study; Discussion, containing an interpretation of the results as well as an analysis of the limitations and potential error factors of the study; Conclusions, a summary of the study’s most important findings.

1.1 Background

Of the 17 Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs), there are four goals that are especially relevant to this study; SDG 14: “Life Below Water”, SDG 15: “Life on Land”, SDG 11: “Sustainable Cities and

Communities” and SDG 12: “Responsible Consumption and Production”. These four SDGs are often

closely connected, a connection which becomes especially apparent when one investigates the issue of plastic pollution. (@GlobalGoalsUN, 2019)

It is well known that the dispersion and disintegration of plastic waste in land based and marine ecosystems has grave consequences for the health of flora and fauna as well as for user, existential and aesthetic values (Bureecam et al., 2018; Christopher et al., 2017; Wright and Kelly, 2017). Therefore, it could be assumed that the spread of plastic waste in land based and marine ecosystems indicate that SDG Sustainable Cities and Communities (11) and Responsible Consumption and Production (12) have not been fulfilled which in turn prevents the fulfillment of Life Below Water (14) and Life on Land (15). This also reduces future generations capacity to fulfill their own needs and therefore prevents our generation from achieving sustainable development, as defined in the Brundtland Report (World Commission on Environment and Development, 1987).

1.1.2 The Dangers of Plastic Waste

An important part of Responsible Consumption and Production (12) is to reduce waste generation and to promote sustainable management of, as well as, sustainable use of, natural resources (@GlobalGoalsUN, 2019). It could be argued that since plastic is a non-renewable material, its consumption should be limited. Furthermore, plastic is also widely known to be a non-degradable material, which implicates that the dispersion of plastic into non-anthropogenic ecosystems might cause long lasting damage to these environments.

(8)

and mortality (Bläsing & Amelung, 2018). Furthermore, floating plastic waste has been proven to enable the spread of alien species. Several marine species can colonize floating plastic objects, move with currents and spread into sensitive ecosystems, threatening biodiversity. Simultaneously, the accumulation of plastic waste on the sea floor can also cause damage. Examples are dead zones on the seafloor or changes in flora and fauna. Even though the dangers to land and marine life from plastic waste is apparent, it is important to remember that plastic waste can also be a hazard to human economic activities such as shipping and fishing practices. (Browne et al., 2013; Gregory, 2009; Moore, 2008) Since macroplastic waste, of a size greater than 5 millimeters, degrades into smaller microplastic particles with time, the spread of macroplastic waste ultimately cause the same damage that can be connected to microplastics (Weinstein et al., 2016). Furthermore, it has been proven that plastic waste in land ecosystems can end up in marine environments at the same time as marine plastic litter often can be encountered after having been washed up on land (Jambeck et al., 2015). This implicates that the plastic littering problem is not solely a problem contained in the ecosystem where the littering occurs, but that plastic waste also is dispersed between different environments. To fulfill the SDGs Life

below Water (14) and Life on Land (15), marine pollution has to be reduced and both marine and land

based ecosystems need to be protected (@GlobalGoalsUN, 2019). Therefore it is of importance that the dispersion of plastic waste from the anthroposphere to non-anthropogenic ecosystems is prevented at length and that leaks from plastic waste management systems are identified.

There is an abundant amount of research available concerning the harms of plastics in marine ecosystems and the dangers of several types of plastics on human health, but it is clear that research into the harms of plastics on land based ecosystems is lacking. However, before any studies are made in this field, it would be proper to first discern if the amount of plastics in these types of ecosystems are of any notable amount.

1.1.3 Plastic Waste in Thailand

Thailand’s population has steadily increased for several decades (The World Bank, 2019). At the same time, plastic consumption in Thailand has rapidly increased in line with this population growth. In the view of SDG Sustainable Cities and Communities (11) and Responsible Consumption and Production (12) this trend is unsustainable, since these two goals aim to reduce the environmental impact of cities as well as to reduce waste generation. Besides the population growth, Thailand is also a country with a massive tourism industry that is often perceived to generate a great amount of macroplastic waste. According to the government produced report “Thailand's State of Pollution Report 2015”, 67 percent of the plastic waste was recycled that year contributing to SDG target 12.4, aiming to responsibly manage waste. Still, the non-recycled amount of plastic waste still accounted for more than 770,000 tonnes in 2015. It is also important to note that in this report, recycling has been defined as materials either being processed, reused or used as an alternative energy source. Furthermore, it is not apparent how much of the plastic labeled as “recycled” ends up in either category. It could be argued that the plastic used as an alternative energy source is not in fact recycled since carbon-dioxide emissions as well as other toxic emissions still end up in the atmosphere without proper gas treatment. (Pollution Control Department, 2015; @GlobalGoalsUN, 2019)

(9)

percent of the total amount of Thailand’s marine waste. Plastic straws made up 10 percent, plastic caps 8 percent and plastic food containers 8 percent, showing a great lack of progress towards SDG Life

Below Water (14) and Life on Land (15) which aim to reduce marine pollution, protect marine

ecosystems, biodiversity and natural habitats. These four common categories of waste nearly contribute to half of Thailand’s marine waste pollution and it is important to note that all of these types of waste products are made from plastic materials. The Thai government is well aware of the damage that plastic waste can cause and has launched a “Plastic Debris Management Plan 2017–2021”. The country is also a great promoter of the 3Rs (reduce-reuse-recycle). (Wichai-utcha & Chavalparit, 2019; @GlobalGoalsUN, 2019)

However, it is still unknown where Thailand’s non-recycled plastic waste ends up and why so much plastic waste winds up in Thailand’s non-anthropogenic ecosystems. It might be possible that the existing plastic waste in some way can be linked to consumer behaviour and activities.

Since a great part of Thailand’s economy hails from tourism revenues, tourism as an industry is very important for Thailand’s continued economic growth. The tourism industry however often impact the natural environments that are the reason for the visits in the first place. Because of tourism’s important role in Thai economy, it is important that natural resources are managed to ensure that tourism becomes an environmentally sustainable activity in Thailand.

Improved education, improved waste management systems and as a consequence, improved praxis, are all vital to decrease littering. To be able to effectively reduce littering, decision makers need to be aware of which activities and which industries that are lacking in these three factors. In order to give an overview of which key human activities that might be enabling the spread of macroplastic waste items into non anthropogenic ecosystems, so that praxis-lacking activities might be discovered, this study provides a sampling of macroplastic waste items on two beaches in Thailand.

1.2 Aims and Objectives

In order to facilitate future decision making to reduce the amount of macroplastic litter on shorelines, the aim of this study is to identify which human activities that generate the highest amount of macroplastic waste items that can be found on the shoreline of the island Koh Chang in Ranong, as well as to determine if there is a continuous accumulation of macroplastic waste items on the island. In order to achieve this aim, the following objectives are to be fulfilled:

● Identify which anthropogenic activities have generated the macroplastic items that can be observed on the shoreline of Koh Chang.

● Perform a comparative study on the dissimilar island Koh Larn in order to evaluate if the same anthropogenic activities generate macroplastic items.

● Estimate the rate of accumulation of marine macroplastic items on the shoreline of Koh Chang.

(10)

2.1 Glossary

Accumulation - Accumulation of macroplastic waste items

Addition Value (a) - The number of macroplastic waste items that has appeared in a sampling area since

the last sampling was made.

Dispersion (d) - The number of macroplastic waste items that has disappeared from a sampling area since

the last sampling occasion.

Initial Value (i) - The initial number of macroplastic waste items in an area at the beginning of a sampling

occasion.

Items - Macroplastic waste items.

Key Activities - Human activities that contribute to the largest amount of macroplastic waste.

Rate of Accumulation (RoA) - The difference between the additional value and the dispersion per time

unit, a simple material balance for difference between input and output.

Residual Value (r) - The number of macroplastic waste items in a sampling area that has not disappeared

from the sampling area since the last sampling occasion.

2.2 Study Site - Koh Chang

Koh Chang is situated outside of Ranong in the Andaman Sea with the approximate coordinates 9°49'42.6"N 98°26'47.4"E. It is about 8 kilometers long and 4 kilometers at its widest, with a population of about 300 people and 126 households (Bennett et al., 2014). Note that the population and household count is from 2014 and might be outdated.

The main sources of income on the island comes from rubber and cashew plantations, tourism and fishing (Bennett et al., 2014). The two latter income sources are directly affecting and are affected by the plastic pollution in the ocean. For a sustainable economic growth, the SDGs Sustainable Cities and

Communities (11) and Responsible Consumption and Production (12) are especially important for Koh

Chang. Koh Chang usually has long stay tourists since the island is underdeveloped in comparison to the rest of Thailand, therefore catering to a certain type of visitors that prefer a calmer and more sedated vibe.

Koh Chang is surrounded by coral reefs and they are sensitive to plastic pollution. In addition to this, Koh Chang is rich in mangrove which is home to many different species due to its unique roots that provide shelter for these animals. Furthermore, the coastlines of the island are very biodiverse, sporting a multitude of species. To achieve SDGs Life Below Water (14) and Life on Land (15), it is crucial to protect these biomes from plastic pollution. (Bennett et al., 2014)

The sampling site used was one of the beaches on the west side of the island. The site was sandy beach, surrounded by rockier areas.

2.3 Study Site - Koh Larn

(11)

There are two permanent settlements on the island and the islands main income is tourism. Again in contrast to Koh Chang, Koh Larn is over exploited, welcoming more visitors every day than what both waste management systems and drinking water suppliers can handle. Since tourism in Thailand is generally increasing, it is of importance to strive towards SDG Sustainable Cities and Communities (11) and Responsible Consumption and Production (12), especially for Koh Larn and its tourist-based economy. (Pupattanapong, 2018)

The island is also surrounded by coral reefs, which is the base for the tourist industry at the island. These reefs are sensitive and hence vulnerable to tourist activities and its related impacts such as plastic pollution (Terry et al., 2015). In order to achieve SDGs Life Below Water (14) and Life on Land (15), proper plastic waste management is vital in such a location.

The sampling sites were all situated on the west coast of the northern end of the island with the approximate coordinates of 12°55'54.2"N 100°47'06.3"E. All sampling sites for the current accumulation were on rocky ground.

2.4 Definition of Key Activities

Everyday, a sampling of items found on the study sites was made. All items were recorded in Appendix 1 and 2. After the last sampling, all items were sorted into different categories based on which human activity that was presumed to have generated the item. The activities used were; Everyday Activities,

Dining, Hotel Stay, Grocery Consumption, Fishing, Tourism and Unknown. By observing which items

that could be found on the beach and where these items could be purchased, the previously mentioned activities were found. The origin of the items, however, was not always apparent and hence some discussion was needed in order to deduce the present activities. The two activities that generated the highest number of items were defined as Key Activities.

The comparative study on Koh Larn was made through sampling of visible accumulation sites. All items were sorted in the same manner as on Koh Chang.

2.5 Rate of Accumulation

(12)

Figure 1. The size and placement of the six sampling sites on Koh Chang.

The items in each Level were counted, identified and then recorded as Initial Value, denoted i. All items were marked with a sharpie or tape and left in place. The sampling sites were then left alone until the next sampling.

During the next sampling, the items in the Levels were once again counted. The marked items still in each Level were recorded as Residual Value. The number of items that had disappeared; the Dispersion, could then be calculated with simple material balances as shown in (1). In the equation, d denotes

Dispersion, i denotes Initial value, r denotes Residual Value and n denotes the n:th sampling occasion.

𝒅𝑛= 𝒊𝑛−1− 𝒓𝑛 (1)

The unmarked items were assumed to be newly added items and were recorded as Additional Value, denoted a. Thereafter a new Initial Value, denoted i, could be calculated with simple material balances as follows:

𝒊𝑛= 𝒓𝑛+ 𝒂𝑛 (2)

After the last sampling, the Rate of Accumulation, denoted RoA, was calculated with simple material balances as shown in (3). The mean refers to the mean value of all recorded values for a(n) and d(n).

𝑹𝒐𝑨 = 𝑚𝑒𝑎𝑛(𝒂) − 𝑚𝑒𝑎𝑛(𝒅) (3)

Note that the Rate of Accumulation here is assumed to be input minus output based on material balances.

3 Results

(13)

3.1 Analysis of Key Activities

In this section, the Key Activities found to contribute to macroplastic litter on the shorelines of Koh Chang and Koh Larn are presented, as well as the composition of items in these Key Activities. For composition of items in other activities that were not defined as Key Activities, see Appendix 1.

3.1.1 Koh Chang

After sampling on Koh Chang, six activities were identified. These activities are Everyday Activities,

Dining, Hotel Stay, Grocery Consumption, Fishing and Unknown. The two Key Activities that

contributed to the greatest amount of items were Grocery Consumption and Fishing (See Figure 2). Although, Dining and Everyday Activities did not fall far behind implying that these two were also great contributors to items on the shorelines of the island.

Note that, even though Unknown was the second largest contributor to the number of items, it was not considered a Key Activity. This is because the items sorted under Unknown were either unidentifiable or the only item of its kind, not belonging in any of the other activities (See Appendix 3, Figure 17 for example picture). Unknown can therefore not be targeted by decision makers for littering reduction and is therefore not considered in this study.

Figure 2. Amount of items on the shorelines of Koh Chang generated by different activities, in percent.

The composition of items in the Key Activity Grocery Consumption is illustrated in Figure 3. Drinking related items contribute most to this activity, standing for 73.1 percent of the items. Especially as

(14)

Figure 3. Pie chart showing the composition of items generated by the Key Activity Grocery Consumption.

The composition of items in the Key Activity Fishing is illustrated in Figure 4. The most common item in this activity is String which makes up for more than half of the items connected to Fishing. The

Unknown Styrofoam is also a big contributor to Fishing. Although labelled Unknown Styrofoam, the

only other identifiable item found on Koh Chang consisting of styrofoam was Bobber and hence this item has been assumed to be connected to Fishing as well.

(15)

3.1.2 Comparative Study - Koh Larn

The two activities that contributed to the greatest amount of items on Koh Larn were Grocery

Consumption and Dining (See Figure 5). Therefore, these two activities are the two Key Activities that

generate the items on the shorelines of Koh Larn.

Figure 5. Amount of items on the shorelines of Koh Larn generated by different activities, in percent.

(16)

Figure 6. Pie chart showing the composition of items caused by the Key Activity Grocery Consumption.

Figure 7 shows the composition of items in Dining on Koh Larn. Almost the entire Key Activity consists of Foam food container or Piece of foam food container (see Figure 7).

Figure 7. Pie chart showing the composition of items caused by the Key Activity Dining.

3.2 Rate of Accumulation

(17)

Figure 8. Additional number of items per sampling in each Level as well as a total for the whole beach.

The observed Dispersion for each sampling is shown in Figure 9 below. The figure illustrates both the dispersion of items for each separate Level, but also a total Dispersion for the whole beach, again shown in dark blue. Day 7 had the largest total Dispersion.

(18)

The mean Additional Value and Dispersion for the whole 8 day period is shown in Table 1 below. The unit for these results have been converted for easier interpretation.

The mean additional amount of items that appeared per 10,000 square meters at the shoreline every hour were approximately 2.5 items. The mean number of items that were dispersed from all Levels were approximately 2.8 items per 10,000 square meters every hour. The mean Rate of Accumulation were calculated as approximately -0.3 items per 10,000 square meters every hour (see Table 1). For full calculations and tally see Appendix 1.

Table 1. Mean of a, d and RoA on Koh Chang over an 8 day period. Additional value [Items/(h*10000m^2)] Dispersion [Items/(h*10000m^2)] Rate of Accumulation [Items/(h*10000m^2)] 2.5 2.8 -0.3

Even though the mean Rate of Accumulation in Table 1 is approximately zero, a number of items, the

Initial Value, was still observed to be on the beach at all times (see Figure 10). The figure illustrates

both the Initial Value for each sampling in each separate Level, but also a total Initial Value for the whole beach, shown in dark blue. Even though the total number of items fluctuated greatly, the total number of items never receded 150 with an average of 251.5 items present on the beach during the 8 day period.

Figure 10. The Initial Value of items in the beginning of every sampling for each Level as well as a total.

(19)

Figure 11. Initial value and approximate reach of the high tide presented with a light blue colour.

The number of marked items remaining from the previous sampling is shown below in Figure 12. The figure illustrates both the Residual Value for each sampling in each separate Level, but also a total

(20)

4 Discussion

This section has been divided into three parts. First is an interpretation of the results, followed by delimitations and error sources and lastly suggestions for further research.

4.1 Interpretation of results

In the following three sections, 4.1.1, 4.1.2 and 4.1.3, further interpretations of the results presented in section 3 is made.

4.1.1 Tourism as a Key Activity

In the results, Tourism was only considered an activity when an item’s connection to tourism was non disputable. However, the activities Dining and Hotel Stay could be argued to have a strong connection to Tourism. Especially since most restaurants and hotels in locations like Koh Chang, Koh Larn and nearby areas foremost cater to tourists rather than to locals.

If all items in the activities Dining and Hotel Stay are added to the activity Tourism, the two Key Activities for both Koh Chang and Koh Larn change. Tourism then becomes the second largest contributor to items on both islands (see Figure 13, Figure 14).

When recategorizing the activities, the new Key Activities for Koh Chang are Grocery Consumption and Tourism (See Figure 13).

Figure 13. Activity distribution on Koh Chang with Tourism as a Key Activity.

(21)

Figure 14. Activity distribution on Koh Larn with Tourism as a Key Activity.

4.1.2 Key Activities

If the initial results are considered, it is clear that on both Koh Chang and on Koh Larn, Grocery

Consumption was the anthropogenic activity that contributed to the highest amount of macroplastic

waste items on the shorelines. This indicates that this activity is not in line with the SDGs Sustainable

Cities and Communities, Responsible Consumption and Production, Life Below Water and Life on Land

(11, 12, 14, 15), actively preventing Thailand from achieving sustainable development as defined in the Brundtland Report. Since these two islands do not share many attributes, it could be argued that Grocery

Consumption is likely to be the greatest contributor to macroplastic waste items on shorelines in all of

Thailand. Therefore, if decision makers seek to reduce the amount of macroplastic litter on shorelines in Thailand, Grocery Consumption should be targeted for littering reduction.

However, it is also apparent that drinking bottle related items, such as the bottles themselves, bottle caps, bottle insulation and bottle cap rings, contributed to the main portion of the waste in Grocery

Consumption. This indicates that if decision makers want to reduce the amount of macroplastic litter on

shorelines, an alternative to targeting the activity itself, might be to target plastic drinking bottles as a product instead.

(22)

4.1.3 Rate of Accumulation

From the results it is clear that even though the average Rate of Accumulation is close to zero, the number of items on the beach at all times is still quite high. It is unclear if this is because the beach merely acts as a temporary stop for items for a short while or if the Rate of Accumulation in this study is zero because of the short time span of the study. For more certain results, a study stretching over a longer period of time is needed.

Another discernible pattern is that items seems to be moving upwards through the Levels. This can be clearly seen as the Initial Value (see Figure 10) in Level 3 peaks during Day 4, Level 4 peaks during Day 5 and so on. There is therefore a possibility that the decrease in the total amount of items on the beach after Day 7 is a consequence of items moving from Level 6 even further up on the beach, outside of any sampling areas. However, this is not a behaviour that was observed and further studies would be needed to prove this type of phenomenon.

If the same data is considered together with the height of the tide (see Figure 15), the same pattern can be observed, and further explained. The figure clearly illustrates how the number of items in Level 6 and 5 stays fairly constant during Day 2 to 5 when the tide does not reach these Levels. This is illustrated by arrow A and B. The same pattern can be observed in Level 4 during Day 3 and 4, as illustrated by arrow C. The previously discussed pattern in Figure 10 is shown by arrow D, highlighting how items travel upwards in sync with the height of the tide. As the tide immerses Level 6 on Day 8, the number of items decreases once again, perhaps pushing items further up on the shore.

Figure 15. Initial value of items in every level, everyday with blue background showing the approximate reach of the tide

(23)

4.2 Delimitations and

error sources

An important part of this study was to give an idea of how and why macroplastic waste is accumulated on the shorelines in Thailand. To get an overview, a lot of sampling had to be made and due to time restrictions some simplifications were necessary. Hence, this study is limited in some aspects.

Firstly, it is apparent that the Rate of Accumulation probably differs with the tide. On Koh Chang the tide sometimes reached higher than Level 6, and therefore some items that were recorded as Dispersion might have been accumulated further up on the shoreline. For a more accurate result, a longer time perspective might be considered, including at least one whole tide cycle, to better understand the tides effect on accumulation of macroplastic waste items, as well as a greater number of sampling sites that encompass a larger surface.

Secondly, the sampling was made during the tourist off-season. Therefore the Rate of Accumulation in this report might not be representative for all months of the year.

Thirdly, only foam pieces larger than 5 centimetres were counted, even though the limit for the size of macroplastics is generally 5 millimeters. This limitation was due to these foam pieces being so numerous as to be impossible to count (see Appendix 3, Figure 16 for example picture).

Lastly, several times during this study, marked items would disappear for several days to later reappear. One theory for this phenomenon is that these items might have been buried under the sand of the shoreline. It is crucial to remember that a beach is a very dynamic place, always changing in shape and size, and it is therefore difficult to accurately track items in this type of terrain without proper tracking equipment.

4.3 General discussion and further research

Although this study is limited, the findings implicate the need of further research. As mentioned in “4.1 Interpretation of Results”, it seems that the most effective targets for macroplastic litter reduction are either the activities Grocery Consumption and Tourism or to directly target drinking bottles as a product. To gain a greater understanding of which approach might be most effective for macroplastic litter reduction, a cost benefit analysis might be performed to compare the different alternatives. Regardless, if nothing is done, the plastic consumption will increase in line with the increase of people and since

Tourism is generally increasing in Thailand, it is of importance to act quickly before the situation gets

out of hand.

(24)

Furthermore, the Dispersion was quite high towards the end of this study, but it was simply an observation of items disappearing. The results do not indicate where these items end up. Another potential extension of this study is therefore to look into where the items actually go and what potential threats they may pose there.

Another curious observation was that the local people seemed to be aware of the issue of plastic pollution. There seemed to be a lot of advertisement regarding the 3Rs (reduce-reuse-recycle) and to refuse disposable plastic items. It would be interesting to see why these measures have so far been ineffective in preventing the spread of macroplastic waste items into non anthropogenic ecosystems. To reduce macroplastic waste, an idea is to reduce the source, for instance by not offering plastic items in stores. This could be done by charging a small fee for a plastic bag. This has been done in several countries, for example Ireland introduced the system in 2002 and it resulted in the usage of plastic bags decreasing with more than 90 percent (Convery et al., 2007). Another approach is to change the material of the disposables, for example switching foam food containers to carton containers, plastic bottles to glass bottles etcetera. Although this would probably not reduce the actual waste, just the amount of plastic waste. It could be argued that switching materials would just be a sub optimization.

Another observation on both islands was that the amount of waste bins was very limited. By increasing the amount of bins, it could result in a positive effect on the plastic pollution problem. Although, an issue with this approach is that it also requires an increase in garbage trucks, which might be economically challenging and further research on the subject is needed. Several countries also have a deposit-refund system for plastic bottles. When buying a bottle, one is charged extra and the extra money is then returned when the bottle is returned. Many studies show that this is an effective approach and alternatives to this system are inferior (Walls, 2013). This could be an idea for Thailand’s journey on reducing plastic pollution, however recycling plastic bottles into new drinking or food related items is currently illegal in Thailand (Hicks, 2019). Another option might be to add taxes on disposable items. However, these are just suggestions and further research is needed in order to decide which options are most suitable.

5 Conclusions

The findings of this study was that the Key Activities that contributes to the greatest number of macroplastic waste items on the shorelines of the island Koh Chang in Ranong were Grocery

Consumption and Fishing. The anthropogenic activities that contributed to the greatest number of

macroplastic waste items on Koh Larn in Pattaya were Grocery Consumption and Dining. This indicates that Grocery Consumption might be the Key Activity contributing to the greatest amount of macroplastic litter on all shorelines in Thailand. The single most common type of item in Grocery

Consumption on both islands were items connected to plastic drinking bottles, making this item the

greatest contributor to macroplastic waste on the shorelines of both islands.

If only items directly connected to tourism are considered to be generated by the activity Tourism, then

Tourism cannot be considered to be a Key Activity on either Koh Chang or Koh Larn. However, if

(25)

(26)

References

@GlobalGoalsUN. 2019. About the Sustainable Development Goals. [Online] Available:

<https://www.un.org/sustainabledevelopment/sustainable-development-goals/?fbclid=IwAR3bdJ6fBN8QWzrV7P7S2pn5QN4Z92wRlUVtiVbGp9nhi994BM_tnULlnfg> Accessed 2019-02-15.

Bennett, N. J., P. Dearden, G. Murray, and A. Kadfak. 2014. The capacity to adapt?: communities in a changing climate, environment, and economy on the northern Andaman coast of Thailand. Ecology and Society 19(2): 5. http://dx.doi.org/10.5751/ES-06315-190205

Bläsing, M. & Amelung, W. 2018. Plastics in soil: Analytical methods and possible sources. Science of the Total Environment, 612(422-435).

Browne, M., Niven, S., Galloway, T., Rowland, S. & Thompson, R. 2013. Microplastic Moves Pollutants and Additives to Worms, Reducing Functions Linked to Health and Biodiversity. Current Biology,23(23),pp 2388-2392.

Brunner, Paul H. & Rechberger, H. 2004. Practical handbook of material flow analysis. Lewis Publishers.

Bureecam, C., Chaisomphob, T. & Sungsomboon, P.-Y. 2018. Material flows analysis of plastic in Thailand. Thermal Science, 22(6 Part A), pp 2379-2388.

Christopher, K. P., Fran & Julia, R. 2017. Plastic Pollution: Frontiers Media SA.

Convery, F., McDonnell, S. & Ferreira, S. 2007. The most popular tax in Europe? Lessons from the Irish plastic bags levy. The Official Journal of the European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, 38(1), pp 1-11.

Gregory, M. 2009. Environmental Implications of Plastic Debris in Marine Settings—Entanglement, Ingestion, Smothering, Hangers-On, Hitch-Hiking and Alien Invasions. Philosophical Transactions: Biological Sciences, 364(1526), pp 2013-2025.

Hicks, William. 2019. Waste not, want not. Bangkok Post. [Online] Available:

<https://www.bangkokpost.com/news/environment/1681304/waste-not-want-not> Accessed 2019-05-25.

Jambeck, J. R., Geyer, R., Wilcox, C., Siegler, T. R., Perryman, M., Andrady, A., Narayan, R. & Law, K. L. 2015. Marine pollution. Plastic waste inputs from land into the ocean. Science (New York, N.Y.),347(6223),pp 768-771.

Moore, C. J. 2008. Synthetic polymers in the marine environment: a rapidly increasing, long-term threat. Environmental research, 108(2), pp 131.

(27)

Pupattanapong, Chaiyot. 2018. Koh Larn sullied by tourist overload as waste mounts. Bangkok Post. [Online] Available: <https://www.bangkokpost.com/news/general/1479573/koh-larn-sullied-by-tourist-overload-as-waste-mounts> Accessed 2019-03-29.

Terry, James P., Jankaew, K., Dunne, K. 2015. Coastal vulnerability to typhoon inundation in the Bay of Bangkok, Thailand? Evidence from carbonate boulder deposits on Ko Larn island. Estuarine, Coastal and Shelf Science Volume 165, pp 261-269.

Thaitrakulpanich, Asaree. 2019. Precious Plastic: Recycling Bangkok one bottle cap at a time. Khaosodenglish. [Online] Available: <http://www.khaosodenglish.com/featured/2019/05/13/precious-plastic-recycling-bangkok-one-bottle-cap-at-a-time/> Accessed 2019-05-26.

The World Bank. 2019. World Development Indicators. [Online] Available:

<https://databank.worldbank.org/data/reports.aspx?source=2&country=THA> Accessed 2019-03-21.

Walls, M. 2013. Deposit-Refund Systems in Practice and Theory. Encyclopedia of Energy, Natural Resource, and Environmental Economics, Vol.3-3, pp.133-137.

Wichai-utcha, N., Chavalparit, O. 2019. 3Rs Policy and plastic waste management in Thailand. Journal of Material Cycles and Waste Management.

Weinstein, J. E., Crocker, B. K. & Gray, A. D. 2016. From macroplastic to microplastic: Degradation of high‐density polyethylene, polypropylene, and polystyrene in a salt marsh habitat. Environmental Toxicology and Chemistry,35(7),pp 1632-1640.

World Commission on Environment and Development. 1987. Our common future, Oxford: Oxford : Oxford Univ. Press.

(28)

Appendix 1 - Koh Chang

(29)

(30)

(31)

(32)

(33)

(34)

(35)

(36)

(37)

(38)

(39)

(40)

(41)

(42)

Appendix 3

Figure 16. Photograph showing example of amount of degraded foam that was not counted.

(43)