Single-Use plastic items and its adverse impacts on human health and the environment: A mini-review

167 HNUE JOURNAL OF SCIENCE DOI: 10.18173/2354-1059.2018-0042 Natural Sciences 2018, Volume 63, Issue 6, pp. 167-176 This paper is available online at SINGLE-USE PLASTIC ITEMS AND ITS ADVERSE IMPACTS ON HUMAN HEALTH AND THE ENVIRONMENT: A MINI-REVIEW Do Thi Kim Chi 1 and Le Van Khoa 2 1 Faculty of Biotechnology, Ho Chi Minh City Open University 2 Faculty of Environment and Natural Resource, Ho Chi Minh City University of Technology Abstract. Urban modern lifestyle creates time pressure on its residents. To adapt to the time pressure, the urban residents pick up fast food as the main option due to lack of time to prepare traditional meals. The on-going up growing fast food services leads to the increases in solid waste, especially food packaging waste and disposal tableware made of plastic, that is generally called single use plastic items in this paper. The use of single use plastic items (SUPIs) not only causes consumers‟ health issues via absorbing bisphenol A from plastic food containers but also adversely impacts on the environment after throwing them away. This paper aims to review of the current findings on the negative impact of SUPIs on both human health and the environment, particularly adverse impacts on (1) human health; (2) persistence of plastic in the environment; and (3) moving them in the ecosystem. Furthermore, future research issues and research gaps are also identified. Keywords: Fast food industry, disposal tableware, plastic waste, environmental impact. 1. Introduction Humans generate considerable amounts of waste, and the quantities are increasing as standards of living and the increasing population. Especially, in modern societies, there is an increasing trend in use of fast food due to its popularity and convenience [1]. Use of fast food causes potential risks to human health and its consequence ([2] Pereira et al., 2005; [3] Bowman & Vinyard, 2004; [4] Harnack & French, 2003; [5] Heidal et al., 2012) [6]. Also, the fast food industry makes a large number of solid waste, among which food packaging waste are the majority and highly recoverable [7]. It is a fact that solid waste in the industry is diversity and depends on many factors such as solid waste management policy options in different countries (developed countries vs. developing countries) and consumer„s lifestyle and behavior as well as environmental perspective of producers [8]. The solid waste in this service includes mainly food waste, food packaging, and disposal tableware. However, the plastic waste from this industry is partly responsible for total plastic waste at both global and local levels. At the global level, about one trillion plastic bags are annually used. According to China Trade News (2010), 3 billion plastic bags are consumed daily only in China. In 2010, it was approximately calculated that 98.6 billion plastic carrier bags was bought in European countries and about 100 billion plastic bags have been placed additionally every year (European Commission, 2013c). Therefore, on average, each EU citizen consumed almost 200 disposable bags Received June 20, 2018. Revised July 4, 2018. Accepted July 11, 2018. Contact: Do Thi Kim Chi, e-mail address: chi.dtk@ou.edu.vn Do Thi Kim Chi and Le Van Khoa 168 on an annual basis, and 8 billion of them went to seas and other water recipients (European Commission, 2013b). At the local level, according to the Vietnam Environment Administration (VEA, 2012), the average amount of municipal solid waste was approximate 7000 tons and amount of plastic bags were used up to 34-60 tons every day. The analyzing of municipal solid waste components indicates that plastic waste is always the second high proportion after food waste in discarding sources, transferring stations and treatment manufacturers (roughly 9 - 23%, 9 - 23%, and 20 - 22%, respectively). Plastic waste also takes highly up 13 - 57% of total domestic waste, in which the plastics discarded in restaurants/hotels accounts for nearly 23 percent of total plastic waste in the domestic waste (Ho Chi Minh City Department of Natural Resource and Environment, 2015). It is noticeable that the majority of plastic bags and other plastic waste was placed in landfills such as Da Phuoc and Phuoc Hiep landfills due to the limitation of source waste separation and waste collection system in Ho Chi Minh City. According to Vietnam Plastic Association (2011), plastic consumption of the South of Vietnam in packaging area accounts for nearly 85.7% of total national plastic packaging. In term of plastic discard, plastic waste not only leads to increase in municipal solid waste in Ho Chi Minh city, but also then occupies considerably area in the landfills that have been narrowed gradually due to its urbanization. More importantly, plastic disposal tableware maybe threats human health due to absorbing bisphenol A and other chemicals that are maybe transferred into fast food in particular conditions. On the other hand, plastic waste creates pressure on the environment and the ecosystems due to its persistence. The article aims to review negative effects of general plastic waste, particularly single use plastic items use of fast food industry on human health and the environment. The article begins by presenting adverse impact of single use plastic items that are used in fast food industry on human health, followed by introducing its persistence in the environment and subsequently its moving in the ecosystem. The article ends with revealing further research, prior to the concluding remarks. 2. Content 2.1. Impact of single use plastic items on human health Most plastics contain organic polymers. The plastics based on a synthetic polymer are made from phenol and formaldehyde. Plastic products contain different additives that make plastic waste toxic. For example, plasticizers like adipates and phthalates are commonly added to brittle plastics like polyvinyl chloride (PVC) that help them become more pliable to use in food packaging, toys, and many other items [9] (Popphd et al. 2014). In fast food industry, many disposable foodservice products can be made of plastic: Cups , plates, bowls, trays, food containers and cutlery. Polystyrene (PS) is one of the most common types of plastics used for foodservice packaging, for examples, food container, disposal cups. Polypropylene (PP) (drinking straws) and Polyethylene terephthalate (PET) (such as disposal tableware) are also regularly used in this industry. In general, the kinds of the above plastics are allowed to use in food industry according to its safe limitation and plastic standards in each country. However, in developing countries, plastics recycled or counterfeited to turn into disposal items are used in food industry contaminate into food and then cause potential risk to human health [10] (Poovarodom et al. 2010). Although the most researches reveal BPA, a known endocrine disruptor [11], exposure to human health at a low level that is under standards laid down (excepted a few sample of [12] Potter et al., 2010), its adverse effect on human health depends on different conditions such as temperature, periodal development of human and others. More detail, researches carried out in this century (after 2000) show the potential risk of BPA (bisphenol A) to human health such as Single-use plastic items and its adverse impacts on human health and the environment: A mini-review 169 sexual maturation, decreased male fertility, aggressive behavior, and others (reviewed in [13] Schrenk & Kaiserslautern, 2014). On the contrary, a few research published before that revealed that “the potential exposure to bisphenol A (BPA) from the use of consumer products or packages made from bisphenol A derived polycarbonate resins was calculated. The calculation was made by migration data from moulded discs prepared from a composite of polycarbonate resins. Using these data, along with FDA's conventional procedure for estimating potential dietary exposure using food simulating migration data, the potential dietary exposure to bisphenol A from the use of polycarbonate resins was determined to be less than 0.25 ppb” [14] (Howe et al. 1998). Recent research on BPA potential exposure to human is quite diversity in research subjects and its concentration. Particularly, according to Calafat et al., 2008, carrying out a research on BPA impact on research subjects different in ages, demographic and their income indicates that “females had statistically higher BPA LSGM (Least Square Geometric Mean) concentrations than males and children had higher concentrations than adolescents, who also had higher concentrations than adults”. The result demonstrates that LSGM concentrations were detected lower in participants in the high household income category (> $45,000/year). According to Calafat et al. (2005), 95% of USA adult population was the prevalence of BPA concentration in their urine and difference in urine concentrations of total BPA depended on by race/ethnicity, age, sex, and household income [15]. Generally, most research on BPA exposure to human illustrates that BPA concentrations detected in human is different in sensitive groups like young, female and pregnant groups, according to Schrenk & Kaiserslautern, 2014; [14] Howe et al., 1998; [16] Calafat et al., 2008; Talsness et al. 2009; Potter et al., 2010 and also discussed in North & Halden, 2013. In term of adverse impact of BPA and other compounds coming from plastic, experimental investigations in animals show that there are potential risks to human health with a wide variety of effects associated with prevalence of these compounds, according to Belcher et al., 2015; Cantonwine et al., 2016; Ferguson et al., 2016; Talsness et al., 2009; Veiga-Lopez et al., 2016; Yalcin et al., 2016. In particular, Talsness concluded that “concentrations of BPA in the fetal mouse within the range of unconjugated BPA levels observed in human fetal blood have produced effects in animal experiments.” [20]. According to Belcher et al., (2015) also confirmed that “RNA sequence analysis identified significant sex-specific changes in gene expression in response to BPA that were consistent with the observed exposure-related phenotypic changes in the collagenous and non-collagenous extracellular matrix, cardiac remodeling, altered autonomic responses, changes in ion channel and transporter functions, and altered glycolytic and lipid metabolism” [17]. On the other hand, it is possible to show an association of potential obesogens with plastic components (discussion in [23] North & Halden, 2013). According to [18] Cantonwine et al., (2016), there is a relationship, depending on infant sex, between the urinary concentration of BPA and preeclampsia. The research groups confirmed that “significantly elevated hazard ratios were found across gestation for all di-2-ethylhexyl phthalate (DEHP) metabolites”, in which the DEHP is commonly used in a variety of polyvinyl chloride (PVC) containing products as plasticizers. Furthermore, the maternal prevalence of DEHP during pregnancy was linked to decrease in fetal growth, and growth parameters like head circumference, femur length [19]. For other vulnerable groups, for instances, the capacity of BPA elimination is reduced significantly in obese, diabetic individuals and the cirrhotic livers via sulfonation in comparison with the healthy livers [22] (Yalcin et al., 2016). To deal with this situation, there is a few researches that focuses on elimination of BPA concentration in human. For instance, Chavarro et al., (2016), indicated that it is possible to be against adverse reproductive effects of BPA via soy food intake, even which is the first stepinitial research on interaction between BPA and soy. For that reason, USA, and Europe recently banned BPA use in infant bottles and spill- Do Thi Kim Chi and Le Van Khoa 170 proof cups for toddlers in an effort to protect a particularly vulnerable population like pregnant, infant groups [25]. In summary, despite the known adverse impact of plastic products on both human and animals, there remains the lack of data on childhood exposure, especially in developing countries like Vietnam, other vulnerable groups, and it is strongly recommended to study wide-spreading pathways of human exposure to BPA and other compounds coming from plastic. 2.2. Adverse impacts of plastic on the environment 2.2.1. Persistence of plastic in the environment The environment can be seriously degradable by pollutants coming from disposal plastics. For instance, the plastics appear not only in rivers via discarding sources like wastewater with micro-plastic, but also in lands via landfill‟s leachates, then they end up in oceans. Particularly, “many additives and constitutional monomers leach out of plastics, and the discharged leachate can introduce plastic-derived contaminants into the environment” [26]. According to plastic persistence, it does not mix or bind with water in the marine environment. Hence it can only be ingested by organisms (wildlife) or otherwise buried in the seabed, especially in shoreline [27]. Plastic wastes amounted to approximately 10 percent of the municipal waste stream by weight and up to about 80 % of the waste accumulating on land, shorelines, the ocean surface or seabed (reviewed in Barnes et al. 2009). Obviously, the research indicated that plastics can exist in the environment for thousands of years. The existence altered from emission sources to the ocean due to their migration. According to Li et al. (2016), there is a list of research on widespread occurrence of plastic with a different concentration in sediment at a variety of beaches over the global (see Table 1). In Belgian coast, plastic debris concentrates highly on harbors (Claessens et al., 2011). Accumulation rates of plastic are much lower in the Southern Hemisphere but are still increasing significantly [28]. The occurrence of plastic debris can adversely impact on the environment that presents, in particular, only after approximately two months, the presence of plastic carrier bag as litter in intertidal shore-generated anoxic conditions that can fast alter assemblages and the ecosystem services it provides (Green et al., 2015). The evidence from the Table 1 shows that plastics and plastic debris appear at a wide scale in the environment over the world, including Asia, Europe, America, Australia and Antarctica. It does not mention include the shoreline areas of developing countries, where have not been fully investigated on both scales of distribution and occurrence of plastics, especially such majority of beaches in Vietnam. Although plastic waste is not an urgently harming factor to human and creatures, when associated with other impacts, such as uncontrolled fishing or oil spills, it may add cumulatively to severe effects (European Commission, 2011). In term of sustainable development, the accumulation and transform of contaminants from plastic in the environment may cause other environmental issues, such as bioaccumulation in the food chain, change in the circular cycle in the ecosystem and the environment due to the plastic persistence. The majority of research on the abundance of plastic waste focuses on beaches, shores, and seabed as well as estuaries. However, it is necessary to study the deep accumulation of plastic concentrations in sediments of rivers or of estuaries to demonstrate that a variety of plastic concentration from river basins to oceans. 2.2.2. Transformation of plastic in the ecosystem There is evidence showing chemical compounds from plastic may cause environmental pollution and are transformed to organisms [26] and there is increasing in number of plastic debris floating to coastal habitats. As reported by the European Commission (2011), “plastic could potentially transport these chemicals to otherwise Single-use plastic items and its adverse impacts on human health and the environment: A mini-review 171 clean environments and when ingested by wildlife, plastic could cause the transfer of chemicals into the organism‟s system. Research has indicated that some species or developmental stages are more vulnerable to ingestion of plastic waste and the toxic effects of the chemicals associated with it”. Particularly, as a stated in Teuten et al., (2009), more organic contaminants accrues from polyethylene (PE) than other plastics such as polypropylene (PP), and polyvinyl chloride (PVC). There are hidden threats coming from plasticizers and other plastics additives as well as constitutional monomers to terrestrial environments due to leach of micro-plastic from landfills into groundwater and/or surface waters. [26]. On the other hand, plastic debris can bring alien, for instance, the bryozoan Membranipora tuberculate is induced to “have crossed the Tasman Sea, from Australia to New Zealand, encrusted on plastic pellets” (Gregory, 1978) (reviewed in Derraik, 2002). In line with Fig. 1, plastics are released into the marine environment by industrial activities and other human activities like fishing; they are then broken into micro-plastic by fragmentation and degradation, particularly by chemical and physical processes as well as the biochemical process. The mico-plastics are then ingested by marine organisms like mammals and continue to be transformed into the food chain or otherwise they are fouled into sedimentation and then come into the food chain with the same process (discussion in Li et al., 2016). Table 1. Occurrence of plastic debris found in beach sediment Location Occurrence Plastic type Plastic sizes Reference Edinburgh coast, UK Average density of 0.8 items m -2 Velander & Mocogni, (1999) Mumbai, India Average abundance of 7.49g and 68.83 items m -2 Micro-plastics and macro-plastics < 5 mm to 10 mm (Jayasiri et al. (2013) Tasmania, Australia Average abundance of 113 items or 1.69kg of debris per beach (Slavin et al. (2012) Nakdong River Estuary, South Korea Average abundance of 8205 particles m -2 in May and 27.606 particles m -2 in September items or 1.69kg of debris per beach Micro-plastics and macro-plastics 1 mm to > 25 mm Lee et al. (2013) San Diego, California 2453 individuals plastic debris Micro-plastics and macro-plastics < 5 mm to 50 mm Van et al. (2012) UK Maximum 8 particles kg -1 Thompson et al. (2004) Do Thi Kim Chi and Le Van Khoa 172 Hongkong Average abundance of 5595 items m -2 and maximum 258,408 items m -2 Micro-plastics 0.315 to 5mm Fok and Cheung (2015) Western coast of Portugal Average density of 185.1 items m -2 Micro-plastics (72%) macro-plastics (18%) 50 μm to 20 cm Martins & Sobral (2011) Hawai Average weight of debris per sample was 23.38g plastic Micro-plastics and macro-plastics 1 - 2.8 mm (43%), 2.8 - 4.75 mm (48%) > 4.75 mm (9%) McDermid & McMullen (2004) Belgian coast Average 92.8 particles kg - 1 dry sediment Micro-plastics 38 μm to 1 mm Claessens et al. (2011) Norderney Mean 1.76kg -1 dry sediment Micro-plastics and macro-plastics < 1 mm to > 2mm Dekiff et al. (2014) East Frisian Islands, Germany Maximum 621 particles per 10g Liebezeit and Dubaish (2012) Singapore Maximum 3 particles kg -1 Ng and Obbard (2006) North Atlantic Coast Average density of 0.15- 12.5 items m -2 Barnes and Milner (2005) Northeast Brazillian Coast Average density of 82.1 items m -2 Santos et al. (2009) Malta Island >1000 particles m -2 Micro-plastics 1.9 to 5.6 mm Tunner and Holmes (2011) Source: (reviewed in Li et al., 2016) Although adverse impacts of plastic debris floating on marine environment on its organisms, such as mammals and birds, have been broadly reported, the full extent of effects in various the marine habitats have been not fully proved or very little, notably ecosystem function [30]. Single-use plastic items and its adverse impacts on human health and the environment: A mini-review 173 Figure 1. Potential pathways of plastic debris transportation and its biological interactions (Ivar Do Sul & Costa, 2014, and discussion in Li et al., 2016) 2.3. Research gap and further research It is necessary to do research on effects on assemblages and consequences on ecosystem functioning and capacity that they provide [30]. Additionally, research on childhood and other vulnerable groups' exposure to the both BPA and other chemicals from plastics, especially in developing countries, is very limited. Hence it is strongly recommended to study wide-spreading pathways of human exposure to BPA and other compounds coming from plastic. In developing countries, especially Vietnam and Thailand, the status of counterfeiting use of plastic is common [44] and the information of BPA contamination in the food industry is very little. Hence, it is urgent to monitor sources, fates and effects of BPA general and particular in the food industry. Besides that, in Vietnam with over 1000 km of length shoreline, it is necessary to academically investigate a current status of occurrence of plastic debris in the shoreline (including tourist beaches, river-dominated beaches, and stable beaches as well as unstable beaches). Consequently, studies of exposure pathways and risk assessment of potential health effects, and risk assessment are in critical need. The outcomes should be disseminated exactly and widely to limit the use of plastic food contact products. In addition, it is strongly recommended to implement further research on the elimination of BPA concentration and other compounds coming from plastic in human. On the other hand, use of plastic products like cups, disposal tableware in the fast food industry can cause both adverse impacts on the environment and human health via food contact containers. Many business of fast food replaced their food-contact products by environmentally Do Thi Kim Chi and Le Van Khoa 174 friendly products such as the Jococup, the Keepcup, and the Starbuck reusable cup, as well as the Eco cup (the Guardian, 2014). Therefore, it is possible to widen and develop the use of both reusable cups and other items in fast food industry. 3. Conclusion It is clear that human and animals have been prevalent with contaminants coming from plastics in a few of particular conditions, for instance, the BPA can cause adverse effects on human health and animals like endocrine disruption. Widespread occurrence of plastic debris in the environment at the global, especially the marine environment, has been definitively proved and is increasing substantially due to the growth of plastic use, including SUPIs of fast food service. The occurrence can cause a health risk to the environment and ecosystem. It is necessary to carry out research on distributions and occurrence of plastic debris in developing countries, and pathways of human exposure to these compounds as well as their potential risk to human health. It is nonetheless urgent to reduce plastic products in the food industry and instead of environmentally friendly products (as well as towards sustainable consumption) to protect the environment and forward to sustainable development. REFERENCE [1] J. Jabs and C. M. D. Ã, 2006. Time scarcity and food choices: An overview, Vol. 47, pp. 196-204. [2] M. A. Pereira et al., 2005. Fast-food habits, weight gain, and insulin resistance (the CARDIA study): 15-year prospective analysis. Vol. 365, pp. 36-42. [3] S. a Bowman and B. T. Vinyard, 2004. Fast food consumption of U.S. adults: impact on energy and nutrient intakes and overweight status. J. Am. Coll. Nutr., Vol. 23, No. 2, pp. 163-168. [4] L. Harnack and S. French, 2003. Fattening up on fast food. J. Am. Diet. Assoc., Vol. 103, No. 10, pp. 1296-1297. [5] K. B. Heidal, S. E. Colby, G. T. Mirabella, K. S. Al-numair, B. Bertrand, and K. H. Gross, 2012. Cost and Calorie Analysis of Fast Food Consumption in College Students. No. July, pp. 942-946. [6] R. W. Jeffery, J. Baxter, M. McGuire and J. Linde, 2006. Are fast food restaurants an environmental risk factor for obesity?, Int. J. Behav. Nutr. Phys. Act., Vol. 3, p. 2, [7] T. Aarnio and A. Hämäläinen, 2008. Challenges in packaging waste management in the fast food industry. Resour. Conserv. Recycl., Vol. 52, No. 4, pp. 612-621. [8] M. Kasidoni, K. Moustakas and D. Malamis, 2015. The existing situation and challenges regarding the use of plastic carrier bags in Europe. Waste Manag. Res., Vol. 33, No. 5, pp. 419-428. [9] T. Popphd, P. Christian and A. M. Constantinovici, 2014. Indian Streams Research Journal, Vol. 4, No. 6, pp. 4-8. [10] N. Poovarodom, P. Tangmongkollert, T. Jinkarn, and V. Chonhenchob, 2010. Survey of counterfeit melamine tableware available on the market in Thailand, and its migration. Food Addit. Contam. Part A, Vol. 28, No. 2, pp. 251-258. [11] European Food Safety Authority, 2015. Bisphenol A, 21-01-2015, No. April. [12] E. L. J. Potter, E. L. Bradley, C. R. Davies, K. A. Barnes, and L. Castle, 2010. Migration of Single-use plastic items and its adverse impacts on human health and the environment: A mini-review 175 formaldehyde from melamine-ware: UK 2008 survey results. Food Addit. Contam., Vol. 27, No. 6, pp. 879-883,. [13] D. Schrenk and T. U. Kaiserslautern, 2014. Literature report on food packaging materials and their potential impact on human health. No. April. [14] S. R. Howe, L. Borodinsky and R.Lyon, 1998. Potential exposure to bisphenol A from food-contact use of polycarbonate resins. Food Addit. Contam., Vol. 15, No. 3, pp. 370-375. [15] A. M. Calafat, X. Ye, L. Y. Wong, J. A. Reidy and L. L. Needham, 2008. Exposure of the U.S. population to Bisphenol A and 4-tertiary-octylphenol: 2003-2004. Environ. Health Perspect., Vol. 116, No. 1, pp. 39-44. [16] A. M. Calafat, Z. Kuklenyik, J. A. Reidy, S. P. Caudill, J. Ekong, and L. L. Needham, 2005. Urinary concentrations of bisphenol A and 4-Nonylphenol in a human reference population. Environ. Health Perspect., Vol. 113, No. 4, pp. 391-395. [17] S. M. Belcher, R. B. Gear and E. L. Kendig, 2015. Bisphenol a alters autonomic tone and extracellular matrix structure and induces sex-specific effects on cardiovascular function in male and female CD-1 mice. Endocrinology, Vol. 156, No. 3, pp. 882-895. [18] D. E. Cantonwine, J. D. Meeker, K. K. Ferguson, B. Mukherjee, R. Hauser, and T. F. McElrath, 2016. Urinary Concentrations of Bisphenol A and Phthalate Metabolites Measured during Pregnancy and Risk of Preeclampsia. Environ. Health Perspect., No. April. [19] K. K. Ferguson, J. D. Meeker, D. E. Cantonwine, Y. Chen, B. Mukherjee and T. F. Mcelrath, 2016. Urinary phthalate metabolite and bisphenol A associations with ultrasound and delivery indices of fetal growth. Environ. Int.,. [20] C. E. Talsness, A. J. M. Andrade, S. N. Kuriyama, J. a Taylor, and F. S. vom Saal, 2009. Components of plastic: experimental studies in animals and relevance for human health. Philos. Trans. R. Soc. Lond. B. Biol. Sci., Vol. 364, No. 1526, pp. 2079-2096. [21] A. Veiga-Lopez et al., 2016. Developmental programming: interaction between prenatal BPA exposure and postnatal adiposity on metabolic variables in female sheep. Am. J. Physiol. Endocrinol. Metab, Vol. 310, No. 3, pp. E238-47. [22] E. B. Yalcin, S. R. Kulkarni, A. L. Slitt, and R. King, 2016. Bisphenol A sulfonation is impaired in metabolic and liver disease. Toxicol. Appl. Pharmacol., Vol. 292, pp. 75-84,. [23] E. J. North and R. U. Halden, 2013. Plastics and environmental health: The road ahead. Rev. Environ. Health, Vol. 28, No. 1, pp. 1-8. [24] J. E. Chavarro et al., 2016. Soy intake modifies the relation between urinary bisphenol a concentrations and pregnancy outcomes among women undergoing assisted reproduction. J. Clin. Endocrinol. Metab., Vol. 101, No. 4, pp. 1082-1090. [25] K. Smith, 2012. Agency: Action : Vol. 77, No. 137, pp. 15-18. [26] E. L. Teuten et al., 2009. Transport and release of chemicals from plastics to the environment and to wildlife. Philos. Trans. R. Soc. Lond. B. Biol. Sci., Vol. 364, No. 1526, pp. 2027-45. [27] European commission, 2011. Plastic Waste in the Environment. Sci. Environ. Policy, No. November, pp. 1-37. [28] D. K. a Barnes, F. Galgani, R. C. Thompson and M. Barlaz, 2009. Accumulation and fragmentation of plastic debris in global environments. Philos. Trans. R. Soc. Lond. B. Biol. Sci., Vol. 364, No. 1526, pp. 1985-1998. [29] M. Claessens, S. De Meester, L. Van Landuyt, K. De Clerck and C. R. Janssen, 2011. Occurrence and distribution of microplastics in marine sediments along the Belgian coast. Mar. Pollut. Bull., Vol. 62, No. 10, pp. 2199-2204. Do Thi Kim Chi and Le Van Khoa 176 [30] D. S. Green, B. Boots, D. J. Blockley, C. Rocha and R. Thompson, 2015. Impacts of discarded plastic bags on marine assemblages and ecosystem functioning. Environ. Sci. Technol., Vol. 49, No. 9, pp. 5380-5389,. [31] J. G. . Derraik, 2002. The pollution of the marine environment by plastic debris: a review. Mar. Pollut. Bull., Vol. 44, No. 9, pp. 842-852. [32] K. Velander and M. Mocogni, 1999. Beach Litter Sampling Strategies: is there a ’Best’Method? Mar. Pollut. Bull., Vol. 38, No. 12, pp. 1134-1140. [33] H. B. Jayasiri, C. S. Purushothaman, and A. Vennila, 2013. Quantitative analysis of plastic debris on recreational beaches in Mumbai, India. Mar. Pollut. Bull., Vol. 77, No. 1-2, pp. 107-112. [34] C. Slavin, A. Grage and M. L. Campbell, 2012. Linking social drivers of marine debris with actual marine debris on beaches. Mar. Pollut. Bull., Vol. 64, No. 8, pp. 1580-1588. [35] J. Lee et al., 2013. Relationships among the abundances of plastic debris in different size classes on beaches in South Korea. Mar. Pollut. Bull., Vol. 77, No. 1-2, pp. 349-354. [36] A. Van et al., 2012. Persistent organic pollutants in plastic marine debris found on beaches in San Diego, California. Chemosphere, Vol. 86, No. 3, pp. 258-263. [37] R. C. Thompson et al., 2004. Lost at Sea: Where Is Allthe Plastic?, Science (80), Vol. 304, No. May, p. 838. [38] J. Martins and P. Sobral, 2011. Plastic marine debris on the Portuguese coastline: A matter of size?. Mar. Pollut. Bull., Vol. 62, No. 12, pp. 2649-2653. [39] K. J. McDermid and T. L. McMullen, 2004. Quantitative analysis of small-plastic debris on beaches in the Hawaiian archipelago. Mar. Pollut. Bull., Vol. 48, No. 7-8, pp. 790-794. [40] J. H. Dekiff, D. Remy, J. Klasmeier, and E. Fries, 2014. Occurrence and spatial distribution of microplastics in sediments from Norderney . Environ. Pollut., Vol. 186, pp. 248-256. [41] I. R. Santos, A. C. Friedrich, and J. A. Ivar do Sul, 2009. Marine debris contamination along undeveloped tropical beaches from northeast Brazil. Environ. Monit. Assess., Vol. 148, No. 1-4, pp. 455-462. [42] W. C. LI, H. F. TSE, and L. FOK, 2016. Plastic waste in the marine environment: A review of sources, occurrence and effects. Sci. Total Environ., Vol. 566-567, pp. 333-349. [43] J. A. Ivar Do Sul and M. F. Costa, 2014. The present and future of microplastic pollution in the marine environment. Environ. Pollut., Vol. 185, pp. 352-364. [44] N. Poovarodom et al., 2014. Investigation of policies, environmental impacts, consumption and fate of plastic bags. Food Addit. Contam., Vol. 23, No. 6, pp. 100-139,