3D VISION: The eyes have it on litter action
Looking to be rid of litter bugs?

 Heed the message of Iron Eyes Cody.

      The Nation
      Wed, March 10, 1999

      ONE thing I really don't understand about Thailand is the
      way people throw garbage around. Why is there so much
      littering?''

      It sounds like a typical comment from some newly arrived,
      or long exasperated, farang. In fact, the statement was
      made recently by a Thai academic, an environmental
      scientist no less. If anyone has the answer, you'd think he
      would.

      But no. Somehow, it remains a mystery why Thailand is
      plagued by so many litterbugs. Oh sure, you can chalk it up
      to laziness or selfishness. And we've all heard that
      whereas Thais used to wrap things in banana leaves, they
      now come packaged in plastic, which is much less
      biodegradable when it is flung on to roadsides.

      But neither of these explanations is entirely satisfactory.
      People are clever enough to figure out the difference
      between banana leaves and plastic. And while you might
      be able to understand (without excusing) fouling someone
      else's property, surely even selfish people realise the folly
      of littering in one's own surroundings.

      Nevertheless, you see it happen all the time, especially
      around slums and squatter communities, but also on the
      streets, and even in national parks. Why does it happen?
      And how can it be halted?

      First of all, although littering appears to be more prevalent
      in developing countries, it is not solely a result of
      ignorance bred by poverty. Taiwan, for instance, is a
      relatively wealthy place and yet garbage is strewn about
      everywhere there.

      It must also be admitted that, compared to other
      environmental threats such as deforestation and toxic
      dumping, littering is not the most serious of issues facing
      Thailand. In fact, the question of what to do with rubbish
      that is thrown away properly is probably a more urgent
      issue right now.

      Landfills all over the country are filling up quickly, and most
      of them have been built improperly, so few communities
      are eager to host new ones. Hence the increasing
      outbreaks of the Nimby (''Not In My Backyard'')
      phenomenon in Thailand. Most famously, protests by
      villagers opposed to plans for new landfills around Chiang
      Mai last year led to piles of rubbish building up in the city
      centre. The subsequent stink actually helped topple the
      municipal government in the Rose of the North.

      There are no easy solutions to this dilemma. While
      promoting the separation of garbage, recycling and
      composting can all help minimise solid waste, sanitary
      landfills so long as they are properly built still appear to be
      the best way of disposing of what remains. Incinerators
      tend to be expensive and polluting.

      Further complicating the issue is the seemingly inevitable
      involvement of the dark influence in the garbage business.
      This is a common problem all over the world. Certainly in
      the US, solid waste management operations are notorious
      for being controlled by the local mafia. Again, it's
      interesting to consider why: perhaps it's because
      concessions are typically awarded by the state, making it
      vulnerable to corruption; also, waste disposal can be
      especially lucrative to companies able to skimp on
      environmental safety measures and get away with it.

      Hopefully, the rise of Nimbyism can help counterbalance
      the dark influence, and force environmental and local
      authorities to ensure that in the future garbage disposal
      facilities are better designed, properly maintained and
      carefully monitored.

      Compared to the threat of leaky landfills, roadside trash
      seems like a minor bother. But litter can be dangerous to
      wildlife, and it can spread disease. It also has an
      unmistakable psychological impact on humans. We feel a
      kind of repugnance when we see trash lying around, a lack
      of respect. It is a depressing, grimy, helpless feeling.

      Or perhaps some people do not have that reaction?
      Maybe, somehow, they don't even see the litter anymore,
      and that is how they can tolerate it in their midst. But that
      seems unlikely for most people. We may grow to tolerate
      litter, but it remains a stain in our mind's eye. Slum
      activists certainly realise this. When trying to organise their
      communities, one of the first projects they usually do is
      conduct a garbage clean-up campaign. Along with
      fostering cooperation, it helps restore a measure of
      self-esteem, a feeling of belonging.

      And that may be the key to the whole problem. After all,
      Thais generally keep their homes, their own property,
      spotlessly clean. The worst littering tends to occur in the
      most transient areas not just slums, but also along
      roadsides and beside railroad tracks. What's more,
      places that elsewhere are considered public property
      aren't necessarily seen the same way in Thailand. Here
      they ''belong'' to state agencies national parks, for
      instance, are the domains of the Royal Forestry
      Department.

      To eradicate the litterbug, therefore, we have to convince
      people they have a stake in a civil society.

      Meting out punishment is one way to command respect for
      public property. For instance, the BMA's anti-littering
      campaign, which includes levying fines and setting out
      more garbage bins, seems to have helped clean up the
      city.

      But you also need carrots to go along with the sticks.
      Thais are attracted by the prospect of a cleaner
      environment; but they generally don't trust others to keep
      their end of the bargain and stop littering, too. An effective
      public campaign is needed, one that will tug at everyone's
      civic conscience.

      The US, for example, used to be every bit as litter-strewn
      as Thailand. But that was only until Iron Eyes Cody came
      along.

      A native American who passed away last month at the
      age of 94, Iron Eyes Cody was an actor in a landmark
      advertising campaign sponsored by Keep America
      Beautiful Inc. In a commercial which first appeared on
      Earth Day in 1971, the noble Indian dressed in full regalia
      was shown crossing a landscape befouled by garbage,
      finally shedding a single, eloquent tear.

      This simple but striking image had a profound effect on
      America. Certainly everyone from my generation
      remembers it. Say what you will about the US' treatment of
      native Americans, but there is no doubt they serve as the
      nation's ecological conscience. That's why the campaign
      worked so well.

      Thailand has had many of its own anti-littering campaigns.
      Magic Eyes is the most famous one, and the message
      does still work: if you see someone littering, and say with a
      smile ta wiset hen, na (''the magic eyes see you''), they will
      actually laugh and pick it up. The problem is few dare say
      it.

      Meanwhile, the Tourism Authority of Thailand's
      anti-littering ads which show foreigners staring in
      amazement at huge pieces of Thai trash seem to have
      raised hackles in some quarters. Tourists almost certainly
      do not form Thailand's ecological conscience.

      Who does? Could a Karen villager be effective in an
      anti-littering campaign? How about an aged rice farmer?
      Or a member of the Royal family?

      How appropriate it was that the US environmental
      movement found its (silent) spokesman in the form of a
      native American actor. Hopefully, it will only be a matter of
      time before this country, too, finds its own living symbol
      who can convince everyone to Keep Thailand Beautiful.