[Editorial Note]:
Microfiber pollution from synthetic textiles is rapidly increasing globally as fast-fashion becomes more popular. Filters in washing machines designed to capture microfibers before they enter the waste stream are a promising solution, and some governments (e.g., France, California) are considering requiring their usage. This timely interview summarizes Soma’s groundbreaking research on public opinions regarding microfiber filtration policy, and may be useful for policymakers considering such strategies.
Soma Barsen recently completed a ground-breaking study investigating microfiber emission issues related to textiles and the practicability, feasibility, and cost-effectiveness of interventions and policies to address them from households in British Columbia and Canada. Currently, Soma is a graduate student at Yale University where she is continuing her research on microfibers. [Image courtesy of Soma Barsen]
(Scott): Soma, in 2021 you completed a Master of Public Policy thesis about microplastics emissions into the environment. Why were you interested in this topic and how did you approach the complex but important environmental policy issues?
I call Vancouver, British Columbia, my home, and I spent several years as a volunteer at the Vancouver Aquarium Marine Science Centre. My duties at the Centre included educating school children on marine invertebrates and conservation near the BC coastal region, a program humorously called “Spineless Wonders”. During 2018, the Vancouver Aquarium had an exhibit on marine pollution and plastics, and it was a time when several studies were coming out on microplastics and synthetic microfibers in BC coastal waters. This influenced me, and while I was thinking about a thesis project for my Masters research in Public Policy at Simon Fraser University, I naturally decided to focus on microplastics. It was clear that interventions were needed but I was also sure that costly interventions should not disproportionately impact vulnerable populations, low-income households or neighbourhoods, and marginalized groups.

So, I decided to consult the public, whose daily realities, decisions, and activities directly impact the amount of microplastics entering local wastewater treatment facilities and eventually large waterbodies. I focused on Metro Vancouver, which is home to more than half of the BC population. In my study, I targeted synthetic microfibers, particularly because it accounted for the largest proportion of microplastics emissions in the region, and because it was extremely relevant for the public, given the direct shedding of microfibers from clothing, and releases from washing machines. One of my hypotheses was that environmental iteracy or knowledge about synthetic microfiber sources, sinks, and environmental impacts was a predictor of their willingness to change behaviours, and/or adopt emissions reductions technologies, and/or support for policy.
“It was clear that [microplastics] interventions were needed but I was also sure that costly interventions should not disproportionately impact vulnerable populations, low-income households or neighbourhoods, and marginalized groups.”
Through a representative sample survey in the region, I investigated six core research questions, the answers to which were expected to guide appropriate policies. Developing the survey itself was a painstaking, 9-month process, which saw extensive testing and retesting to fine-tune the questions, and a pilot study was done to ensure proper functionality. My focus was on extracting reliable data to find the patterns in and predict the public’s behaviours, environmental attitudes, willingness to change laundry and clothing, purchase behaviours to reduce emissions, willingness to adopt new technologies, and their support or opposition to a variety of policy interventions. I also tested their knowledge about microplastics. As potential explanatory factors, the survey considered the age, gender, income, and education of the participating individuals. It also included other interesting factors, for example, homeownership, which could impact the likelihood of using microfiber filter technology or buying new washing machines, and also the presence of children, which could drive laundry frequency and demand for new clothing.
(Scott): Could you tell us the main takeaways from your microfiber intervention research study in Vancouver?
The knowledge test showed that I could divide the Metro Vancouver public into four nearly equal-sized groups, ranging from people with no knowledge about microfibers to those who were highly knowledgeable on the topic. I used it as a metric for literacy about microplastics and as a predictor of the public’s pro-environmental attitudes and their support or opposition to various policy interventions, technological or regulatory. Interestingly, I found that the usual suspects such as gender, age, and income, or how they voted in the last federal election, did not have any bearing on the public’s perspectives on the matter. This clearly demonstrated that in the Metro Vancouver region, class considerations such as socioeconomic status, and even voting preferences do not have any influence on people’s concern about microplastic pollution or their willingness to reduce their personal microfiber footprint and their support for policy interventions. I was surprised to see how strongly people perceive the threat synthetic microfibers pose to the ocean. I found, about 9 in 10 of British Columbians who have been informed about synthetic microfiber pollution identify it as a serious environmental problem and they are willing to invest in efficacious technological interventions and support policy.

More interestingly, having children, especially teenagers, in the household emerged as a driver of the demand for new low-cost clothing and laundry frequency. Laundry frequency is very resistant to change because it is driven by a convenient access to ensuite appliances (an important growing trend), and the lack of time on hand for professional parents. The importance of socioeconomic factors could vary from region to region, and I would expect that the location of residence may impact a person’s opinion. Based on my findings, and giving priority to equity and fairness, I was able to outline a set of recommendations for decision-makers in the region, providing them with the necessary information to address synthetic microfiber emissions from Metro Vancouver households, while minimizing any cost burdens on vulnerable families. I believe my work has contributed to developing a foundation for future environmental sustainability programs.
After the provision of information about the sources and sinks of synthetic microfibers, the vast majority (84%) of British Columbians would support government regulatory action to set filtration standards for washing machines. Only about 1 in 10 of the informed public would suggest that the government should have no role in managing synthetic microfiber emissions from household sources.
What I’m especially proud of is that based on my findings, I was able to outline a set of recommendations that had at their core equity and fairness and providing decision-makers in the region with the necessary information to address synthetic microfiber emissions from Metro Vancouver households while minimizing any cost burdens on the more vulnerable families, and helping to develop a foundation for future environmental sustainability programs.
(Scott): We were pleased to hear that your research received some important recognition. Could you tell us about that?
I was honoured by Simon Fraser’s School of Public Policy faculty and was awarded the top prize for my graduating class, which then qualified my work to compete at the national level. My work won the first place(gold prize) at the national level as well. The national competition was a great opportunity to meet many like-minded researchers, professionals, and policy makers who are very deeply involved in addressing some of the most important challenges facing our societies today, ranging from the impacts of the pandemic, mental-health crises, and rising inequality to plastic pollution and climate change policy. It was a very humbling experience.
(Scott): What have you been working on since you completed that thesis?
In the past two years, since the completion of my thesis, I worked on adapting the study at the national scale. I got strong support from national funding partners, including Environment & Climate Change Canada, who felt the importance to run the study and investigate the same research questions for the entire country. In this work, my sample size was much larger and representative of the regional complexities across Canada. The findings were very similar to that of the Metro Vancouver study, barring some regional differences. Again, environmental literacy about plastic pollution was the key predictor for pro-environmental attitudes, willingness to change behaviour and adopt technological interventions, and support for policy action. Though socioeconomic status also showed some relevance, the findings mostly demonstrated that the people of Canada are worried about plastics and synthetic microfiber pollution and would like to see both industry and governments take meaningful action on these issues. The report of the Canada-wide study will become publicly available soon.
