We live in what many scientists call the Anthropocene – the geological era that is shaped by human activity. Few forces capture that influence more starkly than the explosion in plastic production. This ubiquitous polymer, laced with harmful chemicals, never fully degrades. Instead, it fragments, working its way into food chains, into the earth beneath us, and even into our own bodies. Yet while plastic has become a defining issue of our age, only a sliver of environmental philanthropy – just 0.7% – is earmarked for initiatives that tackle the plastic and chemical crisis. That figure is starker still when you consider that environmental causes attract only 3% of philanthropic funding in Europe. [Philea, Environmental Funding by European Foundations Report, 2026.]
This mismatch is hard to justify. Plastic production is set to skyrocket 70% by 2040 compared to 2020, fuelling the climate emergency: it already accounts for at least 5% of total global GHG emissions while releasing toxic chemicals in our environment. [OECD, Policy Scenarios for Eliminating Plastic Pollution by 2040, 2024].
And plastic is not only warming the planet – it is poisoning our bodies. Through inhalation and ingestion, plastic has been found in human blood, lung tissue, placenta and breast milk (Ragusa et al., 2021). During the first 1,000 days from conception to age two – the critical window that shapes lifelong health – babies are especially defenceless against what surrounds them. Recent research links exposure to phthalates – plasticisers known to disrupt the endocrine (hormone) system, to rising cancer rates in children (Strotmeyer, 2022).
This harm is global in scale, just like the production and waste chains that drive it. Communities living near production and recycling plants or dump sites bear the brunt through inhalation and chemical leaching. But exposure also happens quietly, in daily life – through food-contact materials, personal care products, and medical devices. [HEAL and HCWH]. Women are disproportionately affected, through higher cumulative contact with plastics at home and in feminine care products. [UNEP REPORT: Neglected environmental justice impacts of marine litter and plastic pollution, 2021].
History has met moments like this before – acting boldly on tobacco, on lead, on air pollution once the evidence became impossible to ignore. Plastic now demands the same resolve. Its pervasiveness calls for a funding approach that bridges sectoral divides and spans geographies, before another generation is born into the harm.
Unpacking the plastic funding landscape – reflections from a fundraiser
For all the ways the plastic crisis connects – climate, nature and human health – my experience is that the money that could fix it tends to stay in its lane. After six years of fundraising across Europe’s climate and environment landscape, I believe plastic falls between the cracks not because it matters too little, but because it belongs to everyone and no single strategy at once.
Climate portfolios understandably prioritise renewable energy and mitigation technologies. Yet single-use plastic emissions run through the supply chain of every industrial sector, including our essential services we least associate with pollution. Healthcare is a striking example: the sector has the potential to reduce plastic use by 53%, and with it, GHG emissions by 55% – saving 7 million tonnes of CO2e a year. Despite this, the majority of climate funders disregard the mitigation potential of climate reduction strategies.
The same holds for funding tackling biodiversity loss and habitat degradation that overlooks one of the key root causes: plastic pollution. Many local interventions, for example, beach clean-ups, do valuable work raising awareness, but cannot match the scale of the global plastics crisis, caused by the overproduction and overconsumption of plastics. Pairing that visible, community work with efforts further upstream where the chemical pollution that endangers habitats begins is where funding can make lasting change.
Philanthropic health funding flows largely toward research and treatment, but a growing number of funders are investing in prevention: from healthy cities to active populations. A preventative approach to health would require prioritising solutions to the plastic crisis: chemical additives in plastic have been found to impair the immune and hormonal systems, driving ill health. But right now, we are failing to protect our most vulnerable – babies under two – from being born into toxic plastic exposure that is resulting in costly lifelong health problems affecting entire generations.
The stakes are rising, too. The plastics and fossil fuel industries are lobbying to ringfence single-use plastics in healthcare as essential to saving lives – a claim that sits in stark contrast to the 48 million healthcare professionals calling for no exemptions for healthcare in the Global Plastics Treaty. When the people closest to patients are asking for less plastic, not more, funders have a rare opening to back the medical voices already leading the change.
The plastic crisis is a health emergency as much as it is an engine of the triple planetary crises. For environmental, climate and health philanthropists alike, plastic pollution runs through the priorities they already hold and connecting the dots can create deep impact on several goals at once.
Funder perspective #1 – Tamar Matalon from Flotilla Foundation
As an Ocean conservation funder, funding across issues of ecosystem and human health, environmental justice, and systems change – at the Flotilla Foundation, we’ve seen how plastic pollution consistently falls between traditional funding priorities. It is treated as a waste management issue, when in reality it is also a climate challenge, a biodiversity crisis, a public health emergency, and a social justice issue. This fragmentation leaves critical advocacy, research and policy work chronically under-resourced, despite the scale of the crisis.
The plastic crisis is not a niche environmental issue – it is a defining challenge of the Anthropocene that cuts across every aspect of human and planetary wellbeing. Philanthropy has a unique opportunity to help shift the conversation from managing plastic waste to preventing plastic pollution altogether. By recognising plastics as a cross-cutting strategic priority, funders can catalyse solutions that protect our climate, biodiversity, and human health.
Addressing plastic pollution requires philanthropy to think differently. Rather than funding in silos, we need more collaboration across climate, health, biodiversity and environmental justice portfolios. Investments should support organisations working to reduce plastic production at source, eliminate hazardous chemicals, strengthen regulation, amplify the voices of affected communities and accelerate the transition to safer, circular systems.
Funder perspective #2 – Siobhan McCarthy Morton from The Savitri Trust
At the Savitri Trust, we see plastics and harmful chemicals as inseparable issues. They are found in our soil, water, air, food and, increasingly, our bodies. The impacts are real, particularly for children, who face the greatest lifetime exposure. Our work is driven by a simple belief: the things we eat, breathe and use every day should be free from toxic chemicals. What began as a £30,000 exploratory grant has evolved into one of our largest programmes. Today, we support efforts to strengthen UK and international law and policy while raising awareness of the risks associated with plastics and hazardous chemicals.
Our experience has reinforced the idea that philanthropy’s role extends beyond grantmaking. The plastics and chemicals field remains significantly underfunded, creating opportunities for smaller funders like us to help build the capacity of organisations working on these issues. We can provide flexible support, convene partners and help strengthen the wider ecosystem. Progress requires honest recognition of our respective capacities, shared accountability and a collective commitment to bringing more funders into the field. We also see an important role in helping partners connect with funders that can provide greater scale and longer-term support.
The complexity of the plastics and chemicals crisis can make it difficult to communicate its urgency. Yet we believe the direction of travel is positive.
