Kampanya o Kalikasan? Managing Pollution from the Philippine Elections

Two months after the 2025 national elections, the remnants of the campaign season are still visible throughout the Philippines. Banners bearing candidates’ faces flying high and posters plastered on electric posts, walls, and gates, as if election day has yet to happen. It is clear that these practices are nothing short of excessive—in one day, the Metro Manila Development Authority (MMDA) collected up to 20 tonnes of campaign materials in the week following May 9th, the 2025 election day. 

These scenes raise the question of what truly happens to election campaign materials once the votes are cast and government officials are elected. Some of the campaign materials are taken down, disposed of by candidates themselves or appointed agencies such as the Department of Environment and Natural Resources (DENR) and MMDA. However, most are neglected, staying up even until the next election season. 

Globally, the Philippines is notorious for being a top plastic polluter, producing over 2.7 million tonnes of plastic annually. Unregulated campaign materials exacerbate this, putting pressure on drainage systems, landfills, and natural resources. Campaign materials in the Philippines are dominated by tarpaulin posters made of plastics such as polyester, polyethylene, and PVC. In local communities, these materials present a major solid waste management problem. Pressures on the environment caused by unsustainable plastic production, including the use of plastics for election campaign materials, prompt the need to implement proactive, sustainable campaigning practices.

A man walking through a waiting shed full of election campaign posters (Rouelle Umali/Xinhua)

Campaign waste management policies in the Philippines 

Presently, political candidates in the Philippines are mandated to clean up their campaign waste within a required period of time after elections. After this period, if campaign materials still remain,  local communities and volunteering NGOs take on the responsibility by organizing clean-up drives and other initiatives.

At the heart of this election waste problem lies the persistent issue of solid waste management (SWM) in the Philippines. Under the Local Government Code (RA 7160), the LGUs are primarily responsible for the implementation and enforcement of the provisions of the Ecological Solid Waste Management Act of 2000 (RA 9003) within their respective jurisdictions.

For campaign-related waste, in particular, there is a Joint  DENR-DILG-COMELEC Memorandum Circular (JMC) 2013-01, which aims to achieve a “basura-free” election through the commitment and compliance of all candidates to reduce election-related waste and enforce the waste management provisions under Republic Act No. 9003 (“Ecological Solid Waste Management Act of 2000”). 

The JMC entails a) a litter-free campaign to reduce non-reusable and disposable materials, b) an observance of waste segregations, c) proper waste disposal during campaign meetings, d) immediate clean up after each election activity, and d) coordination with local waste collectors to other related election activities, and lastly, e) adhering to RA 3571 which prohibits the cutting, destroying or injuring of planted or growing trees, flowering plants and shrubs or plants of scenic value along public roads. At the local level, some Cities have enacted similar ordinances, such as   City ordinance No. SP 2202 s. 2013 in Quezon City,  which also targets a “basura-free” election through its plastic prohibitions. However, there is very limited information available on the implementation or efficacy of these policies in managing campaign-related waste. Paranaque City has also issued a ban on single-use polyethylene (a polymer found in common campaign posters) altogether. Other forms of plastic, such as polypropylene, polyethylene terephthalate, polyvinyl chloride, and polystyrene, are also not included and can therefore be continuously used to generate single-use campaigning materials. Despite these measures, waste generated throughout the electoral process continues to bypass existing policies. 

In recent years, there have been greater efforts by private groups (civil societies, communities, and NGOs) to upcycle tarpaulin posters to offset the waste produced. A recent example of this is Kinwa Etica, a Kalinga crafts business whose founder, a member of the Kalinga Basura Express, took the initiative to upcycle the discarded campaign items into ecobags. This is seemingly the only existing approach for mitigating the negative effects of already present tarpaulins; the sole reliance on these groups or an occasional candidate. While upcycling has various benefits, such as reducing excess waste or minimizing production, it is not sustainable. Firstly, pursuing upcycling processing is quite costly because it is primarily implemented by the private sector. Secondly, the process itself can only be done for very select types of plastics, and it still poses severe risks of leaching harmful substances such as phthalates and cadmium, and other hazardous chemicals such as toxic ink and Polyvinyl chloride (PVC) / PE) into our food and water systems. To summarize, the continuous production of plastic is not an ideal situation, and in order to truly encourage viable “basura-free elections,” we need not only the prohibition of plastic, but its measure to be employed in order to achieve this goal. Otherwise, we are left with the cases we have presented where prohibitions are in place, but not truly carrying out their goal.

Good practices around the world

Other countries have implemented various initiatives and regulations to regulate campaign-related waste and promote more sustainable campaigning practices. Some practices that have proven to be effective include the following: 

In Japan, campaign flyers and posters are highly regulated. Articles 142 and 143 of the Public Offices Elections Act detail the size, content, and number of posters that political candidates are only allowed to distribute. Most notably, displaying posters is strictly limited to designated boards for election campaigning, with every candidate given an equal amount of space. This structured system makes cleanup by local election officers more manageable. Plastic-based campaign paraphernalia is also uncommon, as most candidates use paper for their posters. When posters are taken down the day after elections (by the Election Commission, LGUs, or campaign teams), they become waste handled through the municipal waste systems, which follow mandated sorting and disposal rules.

Election campaign postboards in Japan (Toru Hanai/Bloomberg)

Similarly, according to Singapore’s Parliamentary Elections Act, posters and banners are subject to approval by the Elections Department and can only be placed at certain locations, and must be taken down within a specific time frame after the election. The Elections Department actively oversees whether paraphernalia have been moved, tampered with, or taken down, imposing appropriate fines. The Election Advertising Regulation 11 further specifies the maximum number of posters allowed per candidate. As a country praised for its Zero Waste Master Plan, candidates lead the way to more sustainable campaigning practices. In fact, this year’s elections saw candidates across parties reuse banners from the previous election cycles, use biodegradable and sustainably sourced materials, and ensure that materials go through the proper disposal and recycling institutions.

While present and strong regulations can be put in place to limit excessive campaign paraphernalia, it is ultimately the candidates’ prerogative to promote sustainable campaigning practices, as seen in how political candidates from Japan use paper material while those from Singapore reuse their banners. Election campaigning in Singapore and Japan makes a case for how sustainable and effective campaigning can go hand in hand. A sustainable election does not compromise information reach, as long as campaign materials are developed and posted with intention.

Recommendations

The Philippines can learn a lot from these countries’ practices. Tighter regulations on posting may lead to reduced production of campaign material, minimising waste generated from current practices. Hard limits to campaigning budgets and poster allocations such as P3-10 would also ensure a more equitable campaigning process as candidates are given the same resources and platforms regardless of their financial means. Multi-module campaigning, which involves moving beyond the use of printed materials toward digital campaigning and other more accessible modes of campaigning, would increase information accessibility to voters such as persons with disabilities (PWDs) or Indigenous communities without necessarily generating more campaign waste. While campaigning must prioritize equitable access to all, it should not do so at the expense of environmental consequences.

Upcycling is one avenue to reuse the high amount of waste that has already been generated by campaigns. While it would be ideal to nationalize upcycling as a waste management approach, the present waste management system is not structurally ready to take that on, and it remains an inaccessible approach, especially for candidates without the means to pursue it. Financial support and/or incentives to pursue recycling or upcycling processes may be necessary to encourage candidates to include this in their campaign plans. However, noting the challenges mentioned previously, there is a need to identify other long-term and innovative approaches that have less environmental risk involved.  

Greater emphasis should also be placed on campaign paraphernalia, the materials they are made of (specifically plastics), and the management of associated waste.  To strengthen Philippine laws on waste management, there is a need to regulate a more comprehensive list of plastics, especially those used for campaign materials. Amendments to the Single-Use Plastics Regulation and Management Act of 2022 and the Ecological Solid Waste Management Act of 2000, for example, should revise the restriction of single-use plastics implementation to better its measures, at the same time, promote more eco-friendly materials to also highlight campaign paraphernalia and their materials, such as linen or nylon. 

More than policies, it is important to support initiatives being spearheaded by the DENR, DILG, and COMELEC to improve the effective management of campaign-related waste. This entails addressing the key challenge of ensuring clear accountability among electoral candidates.  A more comprehensive and efficient monitoring system, overseen by a third-party, such as an NGO like EcoWaste Coalition (a known watchdog of election campaign pollution), can help strengthen accountability measures and messaging with candidates. By ensuring that these measures, such as campaign clean-ups, are upheld and that accountability is recorded. Although with this, the consideration and involvement of affected local communities and stakeholders are also essential in these processes to ensure that all parties affected are informed. 

As citizens, it is important to hold political candidates accountable, raising the problem of campaign material pollution and making it a critical issue in their agenda. This is a concrete way to prevent excessive production and use of campaign materials. Through the leveraging of voter power, it would pressure candidates to make sustainable choices not just in their campaigns but also in their priorities. 

It is crucial to find a long-term solution that addresses the root problem of campaign waste. Learning from the challenges of the past and present, actual and effective implementation must be prioritised moving forward. Most of all, increasing awareness, initiative, and collaboration across all stakeholders is critical to this solution, empowering government agencies, political candidates, NGOs, and local communities.


Note: This blog is a collaborative piece by Parabukas’ Intern's Zahara Groenewald and Gabriela Garcia, based on their chosen environmental issue. Zahara is are part of Parabukas’ 7th Summer Internship Program in 2025, through our partnership with the Queen’s Project on International Development (QPID) program of Queen’s University, Ontario, Canada.

Zahara Groenewald and Gaby Garcia