Assessment of the Effectiveness of International Agreements in Addressing Marine Plastic Pollution: A Review of the NESREA Act (2007)

INTRODUCTION

Marine plastic pollution poses existential threats to marine ecosystems, human health, and coastal economies. Plastic pollution, ranging from tiny micro plastics to larger visible items such as plastic bottles, shopping bags, and packaging materials, presents a growing and multifaceted threat to the health of marine ecosystems. These pollutants accumulate in oceans, rivers, and lakes, where they are often ingested by marine organisms – from plankton and small fish to larger species like turtles, seabirds, and whales. Over time, plastic particles can work their way up the food chain, ultimately reaching human consumers through seafood and other water-based sources.¹ Nigeria generates approximately 2.5 million tons of plastic waste yearly, with 88% mismanaged and entering waterways.² The NESREA Act 2007,³ which is Nigeria’s principal environmental legislation, grants the Agency the authority to implement and uphold all environmental legislation, policies, standards, and regulations within Nigeria. It also mandates the Agency to ensure compliance with the terms of international environmental treaties, conventions, agreements, and protocols that Nigeria has ratified. However, the effectiveness of the NESREA in addressing marine plastics remains questionable, particularly in light of Nigeria’s commitments under international agreements like the Basel Convention Plastic Waste Amendments 2021 and SDG 14.1.⁴ This paper critically examines:

•  The alignment of the NESREA Act with international marine plastic frameworks.

•  Nigeria’s compliance with transboundary obligations.

•  Enforcement challenges and institutional capacity gaps.

•  The role of public participation and awareness.

LITERATURE REVIEW

The Basel Convention’s Plastic Waste Amendments⁵ mandate strict controls on transboundary movements of plastic waste. At its fourteenth session, held from 29 April to 10 May 2019, the Conference of the Parties (COP-14) to the Basel Convention adopted modifications to Annexes II, VIII, and IX. These amendments were designed to improve the regulation of cross-border movements of plastic waste and to provide greater clarity regarding the Convention’s applicability to such materials. The revised provisions automatically took effect for all Parties that did not formally object within six months following the depositary’s official circulation of the amendments, in accordance with paragraph 3 and subparagraph 2(c) of Article 18 of the Convention.⁶ While the NESREA Act (Sections 20)⁷ prohibits improper waste disposal, it lacks specific provisions for tracking imported plastics, a loophole exploited by foreign waste traffickers.⁸ Section 20 of the NESREA Act provides that:

(1) The Agency may make regulations setting specifications and standards to protect and enhance the quality of Nigeria’s air resources, so as to promote the public health or welfare and the natural development and productive capacity of the nations’ human, animal, marine or plant life including, in particular;

(a) minimum essential air quality standards for human, animal, marine or plant health;

(b) the control of concentration of substances in the air which separately or in combination are likely to result in damage or deterioration of property or of human, animal, marine or plant health;

(c) the most appropriate means to prevent and combat various atmospheric pollution;

(d) control of atmospheric pollution originating from energy sources, including that produced by aircraft and other self-propelled vehicles, industries, factories and power generating situations or facilities;

(e) standards applicable to emissions from any new mobile or stationary source which in the judgement of the Agency causes or contributes to air pollution which may reasonably be anticipated to endanger public health or welfare; and

(f) the use of appropriate means to reduce emission to permissible levels

In the first quarter of 2022, Nigerian authorities successfully intercepted a shipment consisting of 50 containers filled with illegal plastic waste originating from the European Union, at Lagos Port. This seizure revealed ongoing challenges in the enforcement of international and domestic environmental regulations concerning transboundary movement of waste.⁹ The incident also exposed a persistent lack of regulatory coordination and alignment between exporting and importing nations, even despite global legal frameworks such as the Basel Convention, which seeks to prevent the dumping of hazardous and non-recyclable waste in developing countries.

MARPOL Annex V (Plastic Discharge Restrictions)

The International Convention for the Prevention of Pollution from Ships (MARPOL Annex V)¹⁰ bans ships from discharging plastics into the sea. The MARPOL Convention which was initially adopted in 1973 and later significantly amended by the 1978 Protocol, represents one of the most comprehensive international legal frameworks aimed at combating marine pollution caused by ships. Among its various annexes, Annex V specifically focuses on the prevention of pollution resulting from the discharge of garbage generated during ship operations. This annex provides detailed provisions regulating the management and disposal of a wide range of ship-generated waste, including plastics, food waste, paper products, glass, metal, and other refuse. Of particular concern is plastic waste, which poses a long-term threat to marine ecosystems due to its non-biodegradable nature and potential to cause harm to marine life through ingestion or entanglement. Annex V also sets out obligations for both ship operators and flag states to ensure proper waste handling, documentation, and disposal procedures, thereby reinforcing international efforts to reduce the environmental footprint of maritime activities and protect ocean health.

Contrast this with South Africa’s Maritime Pollution Prevention Act 2020, which imposes stringent penalties on all vessels, regardless of size. This legislative amendment was signed into law by President Ramaphosa and it represents a significant step in South Africa’s commitment to addressing various forms of marine pollution. In contrast, this updated law focuses on the incorporation of Annex IV and Annex VI of the MARPOL Convention into domestic legislation. Annex IV governs the control and safe disposal of sewage from ships, while Annex VI establishes international standards for reducing air pollution and enhancing energy efficiency in maritime operations, including curbing greenhouse gas emissions.

Unlike Annex V which targets solid waste like plastics and food remnants, these annexes deal with more fluid and gaseous pollutants, thus broadening the environmental scope of marine regulatory oversight. The amendment also expands the regulatory authority of South Africa’s Minister of Transport, empowering the ministry to create new rules addressing ship-related air and sewage pollution. The updated legislation also introduced harsher penalties, raising the maximum fine from R500,000 to R10 million for serious breaches under the Marine Pollution Act or any incorporated MARPOL provision.

UNEP Global Partnership on Marine Litter

Nigeria joined the UNEP Global Partnership on Marine Litter (GPML)¹¹ in 2019 and pledged to halve marine plastic leakage by 2025. Interestingly, that was over 6 years ago, and the partnership’s guidelines remain undomesticated. This is unlike Sustainable Waste Management Act 2022 of Kenya, which explicitly bans single-use plastics. Kenya’s Sustainable Waste Management Act (No. 31 of 2022)¹² introduces a transformative approach to national waste management by transitioning from a traditional linear model to a circular economy framework, grounded in the principles of the waste hierarchy.

This legislative development aims to foster environmentally responsible waste practices, enhance public health standards across the country, and curb pollution affecting the air, land, freshwater, and marine ecosystems. In alignment with the Act, the National Environment Management Authority (NEMA) has unveiled the Sustainable Waste Management (Extended Producer Responsibility) Regulations, 2022.¹³ These regulations hold producers accountable for their products and associated packaging throughout the entire product life cycle, thereby reinforcing sustainable production and consumption practices.

The NESREA Act’s Regulations on Sanitary Services 2009¹⁴ vaguely prohibit “littering” without defining plastic-specific offenses, rendering enforcement arbitrary. This regulation promotes eco-conscious methods for sanitation and waste disposal aimed at reducing environmental pollution. It also outlines specific responsibilities for managing the release of different types of waste, including effluents and medical waste.¹⁵

The Abidjan Convention and Regional Enforcement Failures

The Abidjan Convention, formally known as the Convention for Cooperation in the Protection, Management and Development of the Marine and Coastal Environment of the Atlantic Coast of the West and Central Africa Region, was adopted in 1981 under the auspices of the United Nations Environment Programme (UNEP) and came into force in 1984. This landmark treaty was designed to establish a regionally coordinated legal framework aimed at preventing, reducing, and controlling marine pollution across the West, Central, and Southern African regions. It specifically addresses various sources of marine pollution, including pollution from shipping, and advocates for intergovernmental cooperation as a mechanism for achieving its objectives. With the eventual accession and ratification of the treaty by countries such as South Africa (2002), Angola and Namibia (2017), and Cape Verde (2019), the Convention has grown to include 19 Contracting Parties, symbolizing a broad regional commitment to environmental governance.¹⁶ Despite its comprehensive mandate and integrative vision, the implementation and enforcement of the Abidjan Convention have been marred by persistent regional enforcement failures. While the Convention outlines robust mechanisms for scientific and technological cooperation, knowledge sharing, and coordinated action to address environmental hazards, in practice, enforcement remains weak. Member states often lack the institutional capacity, political will, or necessary infrastructure to monitor compliance or respond adequately to environmental emergencies. The failure to operationalize the Convention’s protocols, especially in relation to pollution response and emergency cooperation, underscores the region’s broader challenge in harmonizing domestic laws with regional commitments. Furthermore, the lack of consistent funding, technical expertise, and transparency has further undermined the Convention’s ability to fulfill its objectives. The Convention’s potential as a unifying legal instrument remains largely unrealized, not due to conceptual flaws, but because of systemic shortcomings in implementation and oversight. Without addressing these structural enforcement deficits, the Abidjan Convention risks becoming more symbolic than functional, offering rhetorical commitment without the necessary legal and institutional backbone to protect the region’s critical marine and coastal ecosystems effectively.

As a signatory to the Abidjan Convention 1984,¹⁷ Nigeria is obligated to protect the Gulf of Guinea’s marine environment through collaborative monitoring. The Abidjan Convention serves as a foundational regional agreement developed to address the necessity for coordinated efforts in preventing, reducing, and managing pollution affecting the marine environment, coastal zones, and associated river systems across West, Central, and Southern Africa. However, plastic waste inflows from neighboring Cameroon and Benin persist due to porous borders and inadequate regional coordination.¹⁸ The 2020 Ghana v. Ivory Coast ITLOS case,¹⁹ which adjudicated disputes over marine pollution from oil exploration, established precedent for liability in transboundary harm. Yet Nigeria has not invoked similar mechanisms to address plastic inflows, despite satellite evidence showing cross-border plastic drift from the Wouri River in Cameroon.²⁰

METHODOLOGY

Under Section 7 of the NESREA Act,²¹ port authorities are empowered to inspect vessels for environmental compliance. This however is not the case, as corruption and understaffing have crippled this mandate. Looking closely at Onne Port in Rivers State, a major hub for international shipping, only 15% of vessels undergo environmental audits,²² compared to 92% in South Africa’s Durban Port.²³ The IMO Port State Control Guidelines,²⁴ which recommend digital waste manifests, are ignored due to Nigeria’s reliance on paper-based systems, enabling falsification of records.

The IMO document offers fundamental guidelines for carrying out port State control inspections. Its purpose is to assist in enforcing the requirements of applicable conventions and sections of the IMO Instruments Implementation Code (III Code), as outlined in Resolution A.1070(28). It also aims to promote uniformity in inspection procedures, the identification of ship, equipment, or crew deficiencies, and the implementation of corrective measures.

Regulatory Fragmentation and Bureaucratic Overlap

Nigeria’s marine plastic governance is hamstrung by overlapping mandates between NESREA, the Federal Ministry of Environment, and State Environmental Protection Agencies. NESREA for instance is tasked with enforcement, while the Ministry drafts policies; this shows a disconnect, evident in the stalled National Plastic Waste Management Policy 2021.²⁵ This regulatory fragmentation has serious implications for Nigeria’s ability to combat marine plastic pollution effectively. The lack of a central coordinating body or unified legal instrument means that efforts to tackle plastic waste are reactive, and largely unmonitored. Policies are launched without clear implementation strategies, responsibilities are duplicated, and enforcement is patchy at best. The absence of standardized reporting and accountability mechanisms continues to exacerbates the problem by allowing illegal dumping and non-compliance with environmental regulations to persist without meaningful consequences.

The overlapping and often contradictory roles of NESREA, the Federal Ministry of Environment, and State Environmental Protection Agencies reveal deep institutional inefficiencies that need to be addressed through regulatory reform. Establishing clear lines of authority, harmonizing mandates, and fostering coordinated inter-agency collaboration are essential steps toward building an integrated and effective marine plastic governance framework in Nigeria. Without such structural adjustments, the country’s marine environments will continue to suffer from the consequences of fragmented governance and unchecked plastic pollution.

Inadequate Penalties and Deterrence

In the Nigerian context, multiple environmental laws exist to prevent ecological damage, with financial penalties playing a crucial role in discouraging violations. These monetary sanctions are carefully calibrated to match both the seriousness of the offense and its environmental consequences, serving as an enforcement mechanism for both private citizens and corporate entities.²⁶ Specialized agencies like the National Environmental Standards and Regulations Enforcement Agency (NESREA) oversee the evaluation and administration of these fines. The penalty determination process follows an established structure that accounts for several variables, including: the magnitude of ecological impact, the size of the violating operation, and the offender’s track record of adherence to regulations. The system employs a graduated approach – relatively minor offenses with minimal environmental impact might result in fines around ₦100,000, while egregious cases like major petroleum spills could face sanctions amounting to several million Naira.²⁷

Technological Deficits in Monitoring and Enforcement

In another starkly contrast between the NESREA’s reliance on manual inspections and the Environmental Protection Agency of Ghana, the NESREA is nothing compared to EPA Ghana that uses AI-powered drones and satellite imagery to detect illegal dumpsites. To address the challenge of illegal mining operations, Ghana’s government employs an integrated monitoring approach that blends conventional demographic information with advanced aerial surveillance methods. Regulatory bodies systematically examine concession boundaries and vegetative cover in vulnerable regions through satellite imagery analysis to detect unauthorized mining activities (galamsey).²⁸

Tokenism Under the NESREA Act

Though Section 30 of the NESREA Act mandates public awareness campaigns, less than 1.4% of the agency’s ₦5.3 billion (~$12.2 million) 2023 budget was allocated to education.²⁹ Non-governmental organizations in Nigeria like Environmental Rights Action have filled this void through grassroots initiatives like the Lagos Beach Clean-Up Project, which removed almost 8,000 tons of plastic waste in 2022. In a bid to support improved plastic waste management efforts in Nigeria, the Coca-Cola System which includes Coca-Cola Nigeria and the Nigerian Bottling Company partnered with the African Cleanup Initiative (ACI), a local environmental organization. Together, they conducted a cleanup campaign at Alpha Beach, a well-known coastal area in Lagos, Nigeria, as part of their sustainability initiatives.³⁰

Corporate Evasion of Extended Producer Responsibility

Nigeria’s Extended Producer Responsibility (EPR) Framework, introduced in 2020 under the auspices of the National Environmental Standards and Regulations Enforcement Agency (NESREA), mandates that producers, importers, and brand owners take full responsibility for the entire life cycle of their plastic products, including collection, recycling, and final disposal. The framework is grounded in the “polluter pays” principle and is intended to shift the burden of waste management from the government and consumers to the corporations that generate plastic waste. Specifically, it requires companies to design and implement plastic recovery schemes and to increase the use of recycled content in their packaging materials setting a target of achieving at least 48% recycled content by 2025.³¹ Despite this progressive legal instrument, compliance among major plastic producers operating in Nigeria remains woefully inadequate. Notably, multinational corporations such as Coca-Cola Nigeria and Nestlé Nigeria (both of which are among the top contributors to plastic waste in the country) have significantly underperformed in meeting their EPR obligations.³² This stark disparity makes us see not only the inadequacy of enforcement mechanisms in Nigeria but also a glaring regional inequality in corporate environmental accountability.

Several factors contribute to this poor compliance and implementation gap. First, there is limited regulatory oversight and weak institutional capacity to monitor and enforce the EPR framework. The NESREA though empowered by law to enforce environmental regulations, struggles with resource constraints, lack of technical infrastructure, and bureaucratic inefficiencies, making it difficult to hold large corporations accountable. Many producers continue circumvent their obligations by forming underfunded Producer Responsibility Organisations (PROs) or by adopting token recycling programs that exist more for public relations than actual environmental impact. Secondly, the informal sector, which plays a critical role in plastic waste collection and recycling in Nigeria, remains largely unintegrated into the formal EPR structure. Informal waste pickers are responsible for collecting a significant portion of recyclable materials in urban areas, yet they operate without state support, recognition, or integration into the national waste management strategy. This exclusion limits the scalability and sustainability of recycling efforts, as the informal sector lacks the capacity to meet the high-volume demands required to achieve national recycling targets.

Moreover, consumer awareness and infrastructure for waste separation and recycling remain underdeveloped. There are few incentives or systems in place to encourage proper disposal and segregation of plastic waste at the household or community level, which further hampers collection and recycling rates. Without a comprehensive public education campaign and investment in infrastructure such as collection centers, reverse vending machines, and recycling facilities, the effectiveness of the EPR framework will continue to be compromised.

RECOMMENDATIONS

Legislative Overhaul

The Basel Plastic Waste Amendments should be fully integrated into national frameworks by clearly defining what constitutes hazardous plastic waste, establishing compulsory Prior Informed Consent (PIC) procedures for the transboundary movement of such waste, and introducing stringent legal consequences for the misclassification or falsification of plastic waste declarations. These measures will surely enhance transparency, ensure environmental accountability, and reduce the illegal trafficking and dumping of plastic waste, particularly in developing countries especially Nigeria, where there is often a lack in the infrastructure to manage it safely.

Capacity Building for Institutions

To improve the efficiency and effectiveness of environmental justice specialized environmental tribunals should be established; drawing inspiration from Kenya’s Environment and Land Court.³³ These tribunals would be dedicated to handling cases involving environmental degradation and pollution, with the goal of expediting legal proceedings and ensuring timely redress. Modeled after Kenya’s approach, such courts would combine judicial expertise with adequate knowledge of the environment which enables them to deliver informed and swift decisions on complex pollution-related matters, thereby strengthening enforcement mechanisms and promoting environmental accountability.

Regional and Global Collaboration

Effectively tackling the growing problem of transnational plastic waste trafficking in the Gulf of Guinea region require a proposal for the establishment of a specialized multinational enforcement body under the auspices of the Abidjan Convention. This joint task force would serve as a coordinated regional response mechanism, bringing together law enforcement agencies, environmental regulators, and customs authorities from member states to:

•  Monitor and intercept illegal shipments of plastic waste moving across maritime borders

•  Investigate and dismantle criminal networks engaged in waste trafficking

•  Harmonize enforcement approaches among neighboring countries

•  Share intelligence and best practices for waste tracking and identification

Corporate and Public Mobilization

To strengthen Extended Producer Responsibility (EPR) compliance, regulatory authorities should implement a graduated penalty system modeled after South Africa’s National Environmental Management Act (NEMA). This would impose financial sanctions equivalent to 4.5% of annual turnover on corporations failing to meet their EPR obligations, creating a meaningful deterrent that scales with company size. This corporate accountability mechanism would be complemented by robust public participation programs. Following the successful example of Indonesia’s Plastic Detectives Initiative, governments should establish partnerships between academic institutions and coastal communities to develop citizen science capacity. These programs would focus on:

•  Training local residents

•  Equipping communities with digital tools for pollution reporting

•  Creating community-based certification systems

•  Establishing university-community knowledge exchange platforms

The dual approach of stringent corporate penalties and empowered community monitoring creates a synergistic enforcement ecosystem. While the financial disincentives ensure producer accountability, the citizen science programs foster grassroots environmental stewardship and generate localized data to inform policy decisions. This model aligns with best practices in environmental governance that emphasize both regulatory rigor and participatory monitoring, as demonstrated by successful implementations in various jurisdictions facing similar waste management challenges.

CONCLUSION

Nigeria’s marine plastic crisis demands urgent, multifaceted legal intervention. In an attempt to align the NESREA Act with international standards, fortifying enforcement through technology, and fostering regional cooperation, Nigeria can transition from a pollution hotspot to a leader in sustainable waste governance. The cost of inaction which could result in ecological collapse, health crises, and economic losses, far outweighs the investment required for reform.

*****

Footnotes

1. C. Thiagarajan, and Y. Deverajan, ‘The urgent challenge of ocean pollution: Impacts on marine biodiversity and human health’ Regional Studies in Marine Science 81(3) (2025) https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rsma.2024.103995 accessed on 13th May 2025

2. P. U. Ekpei, ‘Plastic pollution in Nigeria is poorly studied but enough is known to urge action’ (June 27, 2022) The Conversation https://theconversation.com/plastic-pollution-in-nigeria-is-poorly-studied-but-enough-is-known-to-urge-action-184591. Accessed on 13th May 2025.

3. National Environmental Standards and Regulations Enforcement Agency (Establishment) Act 2007, Cap N164, Laws of the Federation of Nigeria (LFN) 2004 (as amended)

4. Basel Convention on the Control of Transboundary Movements of Hazardous Wastes and Their Disposal (adopted 22 March 1989, entered into force 5 May 1992) 1673 UNTS 57, as amended by the Plastic Waste Amendments (entered into force 1 January 2021)

5. Basel Convention (Plastic Waste Amendments) (n 4).

6. Wingfield, S., Lim, M. Microplastic in the Environment: Pattern and Process (1st edn. Springer, Cham 2021)

7. National Environmental Standards and Regulations Enforcement Agency (Establishment) Act 2007, Cap N164 LFN 2004, ss 20

8. M. T. Ladan, ‘Review of NESREA Act 2007 and Regulations 2009-2011: A New Dawn in Environmental Compliance and Enforcement in Nigeria’ SSRN Electronic Journal 8(1) (2023): 118-140

9. Busola A., ‘Oil theft: Nigeria lost $1bn in Q1 2022, says NUPRC’ (June 30, 2022) https://www.thecable.ng/oil-theft-nigeria-lost-1bn-in-q1-2022-says-nuprc/ accessed on 13th May 2025.

10. International Convention for the Prevention of Pollution from Ships (adopted 2 November 1973, entered into force 2 October 1983) as modified by the Protocol of 1978 relating thereto (MARPOL), Annex V

11. United Nations Environment Programme (UNEP), Global Partnership on Marine Litter (GPML) (UNEP, 2012) https://www.unep.org/gpml accessed on May 13, 2025

12. Sustainable Waste Management Act No 31 of 2022 (Kenya)

13. Sustainable Waste Management (Extended Producer Responsibility) Regulations 2022 (Kenya) Legal Notice No 176 of 2024

14. National Environmental (Sanitation and Wastes Control) Regulations 2009, S.I. No. 28 of 2009 (Nigeria)

15. X. Dafeng, ‘Effect of Environmental Regulation on Sustainable Household Waste Management in Nigeria’ Utilities Policy Journal 91(2) (2024):23-43.

16. I. J. Adewumi, UNEP Abidjan Convention Secretariat, Abidjan, Côte d’Ivoire Encyclopedia of Sustainable Management (Published by UNEP Abijan Convention Secretariat, Cote d’Ivoire, 2023): 3821-3823.

17. Convention for Co-operation in the Protection and Development of the Marine and Coastal Environment of the West and Central African Region (adopted 23 March 1981, entered into force 5 August 1984) 1306 UNTS 101 (Abidjan Convention).

18. G. F. Ngwome et al, ‘Plastic waste pollution, environmental impacts and regulatory challenges: The Cameroonian example’ Environmental Law Review 24(2) (2022)

19. Dispute Concerning Delimitation of the Maritime Boundary between Ghana and Côte d’Ivoire in the Atlantic Ocean (Ghana/Côte d’Ivoire), Judgment of 23 September 2017, ITLOS Reports 2017, p. 4

20. B. Yalwaji and Oyenje and T. Sogbanmu, ‘Plastic Pollution in the Environment in Nigeria: A Rapid Systematic Review of the Sources, Distribution, Research Gaps and Policy Needs’ Scientific African Journal 16(2) (2022):1-12

21. National Environmental Standards and Regulations Enforcement Agency (NESREA) Act 2007, s 7.

22. One page Africa, ‘Onne Multipurpose Terminal welcomes largest vessel in history, marking milestone in Nigerian maritime sector’ (April 21, 2025) https://onepageafrica.com/2025/04/21/onne-multipurpose-terminal-welcomes-largest-vessel-in-history-marking-milestone-in-nigerian-maritime-sector/ accessed on May 14, 2025

23. N. M. Mangele et al, ‘The health and economic impacts of exposure to marine mobile emissions from ships in Durban port, South Africa’ Atmospheric Environment: X 23(2)

24. International Maritime Organization, Procedures for Port State Control (Resolution A.1155(32), 2021).

25. Generis Global Legal Services, ‘Penalties for Environmental Violations in Nigeria: An Overview’ (November 24, 2024) https://generisonline.com/penalties-for-environmental-violations-in-nigeria-an-overview/ Accessed on: May 14, 2025

26. Anton F., et al, ‘Economic Sanctions: Theory, Policy, Mechanisms’ Baltic Journal of Economic Studies 6(2) (2020): 69-80. See also G. Felbernayr et al, ‘Understanding economic sanctions: Interdisciplinary perspectives on theory and evidence’ European Economic Review 135(3) (2021) https://doi.org/10.1016/j.euroecorev.2021.103720 accessed on May 14, 2025.

27. S. Monsurat and M. Raimi and H. O. Sawyerr, “A Deep Dive into the Review of National Environmental Standards and Regulations Enforcement Agency (NESREA) Act” Research Journal of Applied Sciences 1(4) (2019): 109-134.

28. F. Duodu, ‘Addressing the Illegal Mining Menace in Ghana with Comprehensive Policy Interventions’ (November 19, 2024) https://www.modernghana.com/news/1358240/addressing-the-illegal-mining-menace-in-ghana-with.html accessed on 14th May, 2025.

29. Vanguard, ‘NESREA moves to strengthen environmental regulations, bans single-use plastics in MDAs’ (Febuary 19, 2025) Vanguard https://www.vanguardngr.com/2025/02/nesrea-moves-to-strengthen-environmental-regulations-bans-single-use-plastics-in-mdas/#google_vignette accessed on May 14, 2025.

30. The Punch Newspaper, ‘Foundation hires residents to clean Lagos beaches, others’ (April 24, 2021) https://punchng.com/foundation-hires-residents-to-clean-lagos-beaches-others/ accessed on May 14, 2025.

31. I A. Ajani and I. Kunlere, ‘Implementation of the Extended Producer Responsibility (EPR) Policy in Nigeria: Towards Sustainable Business Practice’ Nigerian Journal of Environmental and Health 2(1) (2019): 44-56.

32. The Editorial Board, ‘Nigeria’s scarcity’ saga: A grim tale of resilience and government failure’ (May 7, 2024) https://businessday.ng/editorial/article/nigerias-scarcity-saga-a-grim-tale-of-resilience-and-government-failure/ accessed on May 20, 2025.

33. Environment and Land Court Act (No. 19 of 2011), Kenya.