By Effie Herdi & Mouhamad Bigwanto
n Indonesia, the tobacco crisis is no longer confined to a public health emergency; it has become a visible and pervasive environmental disaster. Cigarette butts are not harmless organic waste; they are made of cellulose acetate, a type of plastic that takes up to a decade to decompose. As they degrade, these discarded filters leach thousands of toxic chemicals, such as arsenic, lead, and nicotine directly into Indonesia’s soil and water ecosystems. The Greater Jakarta (Jabodetabek) area is a metropolitan region projected to become the world’s most populous, with 42 million people in 2025-2026. A recent cigarette waste brand audit across five cities in this region reveals a stark reality: an average of four cigarette butts litter every square meter of public space.
The findings from the Cigarette Waste Brand Audit, which collected 18,062 waste samples (16,847 butts and 1,215 packs) during April and May 2025, demand that we shift the narrative from individual “littering” to systemic industrial accountability.
The methodology and detailed findings can be accessed in our full report here.
Pollution Follows the Market
The data show that cigarette pollution closely mirrors the market share of tobacco companies in Indonesia. The audit demonstrates a consistent correlation between a company’s market dominance and its contribution to environmental degradation.
Table 1. Market Share vs. Cigarette Waste Contribution in Greater Jakarta
| Company | Market Share (%) | Butt Waste (%) | Packaging Waste (%) |
| HM Sampoerna (Philip Morris) | 32.4 | 39.5 | 35.9 |
| Gudang Garam | 32.3 | 18.7 | 13.5 |
| Djarum | 17.6 | 5.7 | 10.6 |
| BAT / Bentoel | 7.7 | 4.7 | 3.8 |
| Nojorono | n/a | 5.6 | 6.0 |
| Wismilak | n/a | 5.2 | 4.3 |
For decades, the tobacco industry has offloaded the costs of waste management onto taxpayers and the environment. This audit provides the empirical basis to justify applying the Polluter Pays Principle, ensuring that those who profit from the tobacco epidemic also bear the cost of its cleanup.
Industry Response: A Consistent Pattern of Distraction
Once these findings were published and gained public attention, the industry responded using a well-established playbook to evade accountability:
Diversion Tactics (HM Sampoerna/Philip Morris): Major contributors shifted the public narrative toward their economic and social contributions, effectively sidestepping the issue of their environmental pollution.
Co-optation through CSR (Djarum): Affiliates of the industry approached civil society organizations involved in the audit with funding offers, an apparent attempt to influence or silence critics.
Greenwashing through Recycling (BAT/Bentoel and Nojorono): These companies promoted small-scale cigarette butt recycling programs. However, these initiatives are negligible compared to the hundreds of thousands of tons of waste produced annually; they are public relations efforts than meaningful solutions.
The Regulatory Gap: Challenging the “Data Vacuum”
Indonesia already has a framework for producer responsibility through the Ministry of Environment and Forestry (MoEF) Regulation No. 75/2019. However, the tobacco industry continues to receive “special treatment,” remaining largely exempt from these obligations.
In response to our audit, the MoEF acknowledged cigarette butts as a systemic issue but cited a “data vacuum” on Life Cycle Assessment (LCA) as a reason to delay specific regulations. This reflects a common bureaucratic bottleneck. Our brand audit helps address this gap by demonstrating the “end-of-life” data crucial for any LCA. These findings prove that the environmental impact is an immediate reality, not a future projection.
Moving from Evidence to Action
Several countries have begun introducing policies requiring tobacco companies to cover the costs of waste management and tobacco control, with Ireland, Spain, and Canada implementing cost recovery and Polluter Pays Principle schemes. Globally, the momentum is also shifting from merely managing waste to addressing it at the source: California has pursued legislative bans on single-use cigarette filters, while advocates are pushing to explicitly classify them as single-use plastics within the ongoing negotiations for the UN Global Plastics Treaty. These developments reflect growing recognition that cigarette filters are not merely consumer litter, but a form of plastic pollution directly linked to the tobacco industry.
This international shift increasingly aligns with Indonesia’s own environmental commitments. In August 2025, the Minister of Environment reaffirmed Indonesia’s commitment to the UN Global Plastics Treaty, including efforts to eliminate problematic plastics and strengthen Extended Producer Responsibility (EPR) systems. However, a significant policy gap remains: cigarette butts are toxic single-use plastics made of cellulose acetate, yet tobacco products remain largely absent from Indonesia’s producer responsibility framework. The findings from Greater Jakarta provide a strong basis for integrating tobacco waste into Indonesia’s EPR mechanism and aligning national plastic reduction commitments with tobacco control and environmental protection policies.
Authors:
Effie Herdi is with Lentera Anak, Indonesia & is a SEATCA fellow, 2024 – 2026
Mouhamad Bigwanto is with Ruang Kebijakan Kesehatan Indonesia (RUKKI-IHPF), Jakarta, Indonesia