Is it worth sacrificing Çukurova and the Mediterranean for Europe's trash?

Reports coming from the coasts of Antalya and Alanya over the last few days are alarming. Field research conducted by the Alanya Municipality, along with investigations by Prof. Dr. Sedat Gündoğdu, a faculty member at Çukurova University's Faculty of Fisheries, and other experts, indicate that a significant portion of the extraordinary microplastic pollution on the coasts is linked to plastic recycling activities in Adana and Mersin.

It is stated that in samples taken in Alanya, 60 to 93 percent of the microplastics are particles related to recycling facilities, and in some areas, the pollution reaches 60-65 times the Mediterranean average. Particles reaching the sea from Adana and Mersin are carried by currents as far as Alanya, Kemer, and even Fethiye.

At some points, the amount of microplastics passing through the channels exceeded 5.3 billion particles per hour. These channels pass through the agricultural lands of Çukurova, reaching the Seyhan River and eventually the Mediterranean.

I am someone who cares about the environment and nature. No matter how efficient an economic activity may be, if it harms the environment, it is unacceptable. The painful and strange part of the matter is that these plastic waste recycling facilities do not even make a proper contribution to the economy...

Why is Europe's trash in Adana?

In 2025, over 500 thousand tons of plastic waste were sent to Turkey from European Union countries alone. Approximately 140 thousand tons also came from the UK. A total of approximately 640 thousand tons.

According to recent research, approximately 60 percent of the imported plastic waste coming to Turkey is concentrated in Adana. About 380 thousand tons of the waste coming from the EU and the UK alone are directed to Adana.

Was this supposed to be the vision for Adana, which has some of Turkey's most fertile lands and was once Turkey's third-largest industrial city?

Well, they say the Port of Mersin is nearby. The land is relatively cheap. There is cheap labor from refugees... Where did the goals for high value-added and high-tech industrialization go?

On one hand, we are talking about drought. We are talking about water scarcity in agriculture. We are talking about food security. On the other hand, we are bringing in plastic waste from Europe and washing it in the fertile lands of Çukurova, using Çukurova's water.

That water gets contaminated with microplastics and reaches agricultural fields and the sea... It is destroying our natural capital.

So, what is the economic return?

According to 2021 data from the Recycling and Recovery Association (GEKADER), approximately 1.1 million tons of plastic are processed annually in the Turkish plastic recycling sector; about half of this is imported from Europe, and half is met domestically. It prevents approximately 1.2 billion dollars in petrochemical raw material imports. The sector's turnover is approximately 1 billion dollars. The Ministry of Environment also uses the same figures in a later sector presentation.

This is a one-billion-dollar turnover, not one billion dollars of national income. Nor is it the value-added it creates. We know the turnover and import substitution declared by the sector itself. We do not know the real value-added it creates for the Turkish economy and the economic cost of the environmental externalities it creates in return.

Now let's compare it with just Antalya

Turkey's 2025 tourism revenue is over 65 billion dollars. The tourism economy of Antalya alone is approximately 17 billion dollars.

Now look at the strangeness. The turnover of the entire plastic recycling sector in Turkey is approximately 1 billion dollars. The tourism economy of Antalya alone is approximately 17 billion dollars. And the pollution created by this sector, which is concentrated on the Adana-Mersin line, threatens the most valuable asset of Antalya's tourism, which is 17 times larger than itself: its sea.

Moreover, the threat is not limited to Antalya; it also covers the agricultural lands and water resources of Çukurova.

Furthermore, tourism creates a very wide chain of employment, from accommodation to food and beverage, from transportation to trade. In the plastic recycling sector, the figure used by the Ministry is 35 thousand direct jobs.

Are we consuming national wealth while creating national income?

You can contribute to national income with an economic activity. But if this activity reduces national wealth, you will also lose the national income you would have obtained in the coming years thanks to that wealth.

A country's soil, natural resources, sea, agricultural lands, water resources, and the clean coasts of Antalya and the Mediterranean are national wealth.

If a factory's machine wears out, you can buy a new one.

But the damage caused when you contaminate soil, water, and the sea with microplastics is not for one year. Plastic can remain in nature for decades, even centuries; it does not disappear as it breaks down, but turns into smaller micro- and nanoplastics.

If we are consuming the natural capital that would create billions of dollars of income for future generations while creating limited value-added today, can we call this development?

The Ministry of Environment, the Ministry of Industry, the Ministry of Agriculture, the Ministry of Tourism...

Has any of these four ministries conducted an impact analysis that measures the benefit the plastic recycling sector provides to the Turkish economy together with the environmental and economic cost it creates?

Have they calculated the damage it will cause to Çukurova's water resources, agricultural lands, and food security, and the cost of the Mediterranean's pollution to tourism? Have they included the approximately 17 billion dollars of Antalya tourism in this risk calculation?

If they have calculated these and reached the conclusion that “It is economically correct to bring Europe's plastic waste to Turkey and process it in Çukurova,” let them explain the details so that we can also make a more comprehensive assessment.

One more question.

The UK and the EU sent approximately 640 thousand tons of plastic waste to Turkey in 2025.

If plastic recycling is such a profitable, environmentally friendly, and perfect economic activity, why doesn't the UK wash its own plastic in the UK and turn it into granules?

Why doesn't Germany process all of it in Germany? Why doesn't the Netherlands evaluate its own waste in its own country? Why do they transport it thousands of kilometers and send it to Turkey?

Could the answer to this question be only labor costs?

No matter how efficient an economic activity may be, if it causes irreparable damage to the environment, it is unacceptable. The painful and strange part of the matter is that the economic balance sheet of this plastic recycling activity does not look that bright either.

Wouldn't Turkey be more profitable if it considered its comparative advantages and withdrew from the business of processing Europe's plastic trash; recycled its own plastic waste under conditions that do not harm the environment; or perhaps withdrew from this sector entirely, and directed its resources to tourism, efficient agriculture, safe food, and high value-added industry?

Economics is the art of directing resources to the areas where they are most efficient.

Consuming our national wealth just to create national income has nothing to do with economics.