Africa’s protected areas double down on circularity

From the newsletter

South Africa’s Kruger National Park last week began piloting a recycling initiative that includes the installation of clearly marked waste-separation bins across parts of the park. The move is part of a broader trend across Africa, where protected areas are going beyond waste collection to implement recycling and improved waste-management systems.

• As visitor numbers grow, parks are increasingly aware of the material footprint tourism brings, prompting efforts to redesign waste systems to balance conservation goals with the realities of modern travel and consumption.

• Treating pollution prevention and resource recovery as integral to conservation, rather than as a separate task, is helping parks protect biodiversity while managing the pressures of growing tourism.

More details

• Implemented through a partnership between South African National Parks (SANParks) and producer responsibility organisation Petco, the initiative introduces a three bin waste separation system in parts of the park. The animal proof, colour coded bins separate recyclables in green, non recyclables in grey and compostables in brown, signalling a move towards more formalised waste segregation within a high traffic conservation setting.

• The park joins a growing list of other protected areas across Africa that are doing more than just managing waste in their ecosystems. In Ghana’s Mole National Park, reuse, upcycling and plastic selling initiatives aim to reduce pollution while engaging surrounding communities. Tanzania’s Mount Kilimanjaro, though a mountain conservation area rather than a savannah park, operates a long standing trash in trash out system, requiring climbers and operators to remove waste and ensure collection at base facilities. At a broader scale, conservation non-profit African Parks has partnered with the Alliance to End Plastic Waste to address plastic pollution across 17 protected areas in 11 African countries, combining waste management improvements with education, community engagement and plastic reduction strategies. 

• Protected areas generate a distinct mix of waste streams shaped by tourism, conservation operations and surrounding communities. Visitor related solid waste, including plastic bottles and food packaging remains the most visible, but not the only one. Organic waste from camps and lodges is also common and often underutilised despite composting potential. Alongside this, park management activities generate operational waste, while in some areas, hazardous and medical waste from veterinary services and anti poaching units requires strict handling to avoid ecosystem contamination. Beyond internally generated waste, many protected areas also contend with legacy and transboundary pollution, including plastics carried by rivers or blown in from neighbouring settlements, underscoring the limits of park level interventions alone.

• The expansion of recycling and waste-reduction initiatives across Africa’s protected areas is driven by multiple pressures. Rising tourism increases visible waste, which threatens wildlife, habitats and visitor experience, and has led managers to view waste as an ecological risk rather than just a cleanliness issue. Policy changes including producer responsibility schemes and single-use plastic bans are creating new incentives for improved systems, while rising disposal costs, particularly in remote parks, make traditional waste management increasingly expensive. These challenges have encouraged parks to adopt recycling, diversion and on-site treatment, often supported through partnerships with NGOs and private actors, and reinforced by growing pressure from eco-conscious visitors to embed waste management into core conservation planning.

• Yet across much of Africa’s conservation landscape, circularity in protected areas remains concentrated at the waste management stage. Most initiatives focus on separating, collecting and removing materials once they have already entered ecosystems, rather than redesigning upstream systems that determine what enters parks in the first place. Measures such as refill and return systems, packaging restrictions for tour operators, supplier take back obligations and circular procurement remain uneven or limited in scope. Without stronger upstream controls and clearer integration with other stakeholders, circular initiatives risk becoming contained successes that are effective within park boundaries but unable to catalyse wider material system change beyond them.

Our take

• Protected areas are increasingly being left to manage the fallout of upstream system failures, with materials entering ecosystems without recovery pathways and fragile regional waste systems compounding the challenge. 

• However, even effective in-park recycling cannot neutralise material flows fundamentally designed for disposal. Without upstream policy alignment, from procurement rules to producer responsibility enforcement, circular conservation will remain structurally constrained.