Asia Pacific Experts Urge Caution on Bioplastics at Regional Panel Discussion

Environmental leaders, community advocates, and policy experts from across the Asia Pacific convened on January 22 for Fire or Ice: Growth of Bioplastics in the Asia Pacific, an online
discussion examining regulatory, policy, and investment trends driving the expansion of bioplastics and their implications for communities, climate, and human health.

Panelists warned that the unchecked growth of bioplastics risks repeating the environmental and social harms of conventional plastics, particularly when promoted as a quick fix rather than
part of a broader system change.

Arpita Bhagat, Plastic Policy Officer at GAIA Asia Pacific and moderator of the panel, stressed the need to move beyond material substitution. “Bioplastics are often framed as sustainable by
default, whereas the material combinations keep evolving without minimum design standards or safe safeguards. Without chemical transparency, strong regulations, and a clear focus on the
reduction of single-use material, they are another false narrative that wastes precious resources and delays real action. Therefore, our governments must reevaluate their policy incentives for
bioplastics promotion,” she said.

Participants examined the scale of bioplastics production in the region, noting that Asia has already become the largest producer and exporter. Panelists cautioned that this rapid growth is
being driven more by market incentives than by environmental safeguards. Pichmol Rugrod, Plastic-Free Future Project Lead of Greenpeace Thailand, highlighted how national policies can unintentionally reinforce harmful narratives.

“Thailand is promoting itself as a biodegradable hub through investment incentives and policy frameworks like the bio-circular- green economy. But this does not address plastic pollution at its root. Plastic packaging, even when labeled biodegradable, does not truly biodegrade in real-world conditions and therefore is not the real solution. Reuse and refill systems are,” she said.

The discussion also centered on Indigenous and frontline community perspectives. Rufino Varea, Director of the Pacific Indigenous Climate Action Network (PICAN) in Fiji, said,“Bioplastics are a regrettable solution that only creates a false sense of security about addressing the plastic crisis. They do not fit our Global South realities. We already face disproportionate waste burdens threatening our ecosystems, affecting marine food webs, and causing toxicity to our waters. Our Indigenous knowledge systems have the heritage of organic materials that are inherently circular, regenerative, and in harmony with the economy.”

Chemical safety and environmental health risks were raised as major concerns. Jam Lorenzo, Deputy Executive Director of BAN Toxics, emphasized that bioplastics are not inherently safer.

“Studies show that more than half of tested bioplastics contain toxic chemicals similar to those found in conventional plastics, including substances like lead and cadmium when production is
poorly regulated,” he said. “Our position is simple. No data, no market.”

Experts also flagged agricultural and food safety impacts. Mageswari Sangaralingam, Chief Executive of the Consumers Association of Penang (CAP) in Malaysia, pointed to growing
evidence of harm to soils and crops. “Bioplastics are marketed as eco-friendly, but they fragment, break down into microplastics, and release chemical additives that contaminate soil and enter food systems. A 2025 study by Jing Liu found that starch-based plastic is potentially as toxic as petroleum-based plastic. We must put a blanket ban on using bioplastics for
mulching films,” she said.

Doun Moon, Policy and Research Officer of the Global Alliance for Incinerator Alternatives (GAIA), cautioned against assuming bioplastics are a climate solution. “Switching from
petroleum-based plastics to bioplastics does not automatically cut emissions, as there is a large amount of GHG emissions associated with land use, material production, and end-of-life
treatments,” she said. She cited South Korea’s experience, where the bioplastics industry is growing slowly despite the government’s encouragement and attempts to pass a promotional
bill.

Legal and regulatory gaps were also highlighted. Madhuvanthi Rajkumar, an independent consultant working at the intersection of law, public policy, and rights-based advocacy from
India, mentioned, “While we are seeing unprecedented policy momentum (in India and Asia) in favour of bioplastics, the primary risk is substituting one set of problems for another while
believing we’ve solved the crisis. Bioplastics come with the same array of negative environmental, social, and health impacts as conventional fossil-fuel-based plastics, in someways even worse, while giving a false sense of sustainability that increases consumption and waste generation. It’s not even old wine in a new bottle; It’s old wine in an old bottle but with a
“green” label!”

The panel concluded with a shared call for action. Speakers emphasized that the Global Plastics Treaty must prioritize binding measures on plastic production reduction, toxic chemicals, and real reuse-based systems, rather than legitimizing alternative single-use materials. The focus must remain on reuse and refill systems rather than new single-use materials.