News Articles

When it comes to identifying major challenges like plastic pollution and single-use foodware, most of us agree: this is a problem. But when it comes to choosing solutions, that’s where differences emerge. Values, priorities, and lived experiences shape how we each approach the path forward—even when we share the same long-term goals.

The push to reduce single-use plastics is no exception. Across Hawaiʻi and beyond, people are working hard to cut waste, protect oceans, improve health, and support climate goals. But we don’t always agree on how to get there.

So how do we keep working together—even when we don’t see eye to eye?

Part of it is understanding why we land on different solutions. Often, it comes down to what specific problem we’re solving for. Is it marine debris? Climate impacts? Environmental justice? Health? All of the above? These different lenses shape what looks like a “good” solution.

Take compostable foodware. Maui and Oʻahu have passed single-use bans that promote compostables. On the surface, it seems like progress. But Hawaiʻi lacks the infrastructure to process most of these materials—they mostly end up in the landfill, where they can emit methane. From a waste or climate perspective, compostables may not be the right solution. 

But, from another view—reducing ocean plastic or fossil fuel dependence—they can seem like a step forward. That doesn’t make either side wrong. It just reflects different priorities.

Recycling is another example. Many in the reuse movement view it as a limited or false solution, especially as more research shows health risks tied to recycled plastics. Others see recycling as a useful, if imperfect, tool, particularly for reducing greenhouse gas emissions.

At the heart of these different views is risk. People assess it differently. Some won’t back anything with even potential harm to human health. Others are okay with incremental steps if it means making progress. Some argue that using recycled plastic is better than doing nothing about it when it ends up being land-filled as a single-use product. Others ask why invest more into recycling when reuse offers greater long-term benefits.

Even within the reuse space, there’s disagreement—like which materials to use for containers. Some see starting with plastic as pragmatic, given current market limitations of the types of containers that are available. Others argue we can’t justify using materials with known health and justice concerns, even as a temporary step.

So where does that leave us?

It leaves us with the truth that this work is hard. It’s nuanced. It requires humility, dialogue, and compromise. We won’t always agree—but we need to stay in conversation, stay focused on our shared vision, and keep moving forward. At the same time, we each need clarity on where we draw the line—when a solution no longer aligns with our values. That doesn’t mean treating others as adversaries. It means staying grounded in our principles while building better systems together.

For me, years of work on Hawaiʻi Island have made it clear: reuse is our most holistic and powerful solution. It reduces waste, can protect health, supports local jobs, and aligns with the zero waste hierarchy, which prioritizes reduction and reuse over recycling or composting.

Others may land elsewhere—and that’s okay. What matters is that we keep learning, stay rooted, and don’t let perfection be the enemy of progress.

Jennifer Navarra
Program Director
Zero Waste Hawaiʻi Island

read more