Why does this matter? A factory polluting local lakes and rivers to make goods for export to another state definitely couldn't use this as an excuse. They control the process, so they are responsible for consequences of using that process. So why rules are suddenly different when we talk about countries?
The rules are indeed different.
I'm fully prepared to bear the cost of these things if someone would actually give me a way to pay it.
I try and avoid single use plastic, it seems obscene to me it even exists, but my waste ends up in landfill. To solve ocean plastic we need bin men and landfill in the countries causing it.
The fight against single use plastic in the developed world is just, but a separate issue.
A problem in the UK has been that plastics have been passed on for recycling only to be sent to China, for example, and dumped.
The issue as I see it is that we expect waste processing to be profitable and only do it if it is - waste processing should be handled from the profits of waste production.
So many companies conning their customers with half-empty packaging, products designed to break, etc., seems to be a large part of the problem.
I think it's become apparent that in pretty much every western country we were shipping them to China, as you described for the UK. That's now come to an end. Who DOES subsidise local industry enough to recycle in-country?
Change is slow and hard. Throwing up our hands and carrying on with the status quo is a choice not an inevitability. If we each live our lives according to the world we want to live in, and make our personal choices accordingly, then at the very least we'll be able to tell our kids we tried.
Obviously, this is far from where the world seems to be heading currently but it's still the only way.
I agree guilt-tripping is fairly useless.
Market forces just don't work for these things because the negative consequences are decades away and don't necessarily affect the producers/consumers at all.
Your position that people who didn't want rainforest destroying for one-time use bags are responsible for one-time use plastics is way off the mark. Such people use reusable bags from sustainable sources invariably, for example.
When these issues hit the mainstream, and the public don't fully understand the position, then it's easy for the Capitalists to shift to the 'next-worst most profitable' thing rather than shifting to a sustainable production.
That being said, I disagree with the spirit of your comment. When ABC corp relocated to underdeveloped country so they can avoid regulatory burden (be it pollution, or labor laws), the end goal is to achieve competitive product pricing back home. A portion of the $$ they save in Asia is passed down to the Western consumer.
Whether you want to feel guilty about it ("they only make 50 cents an hour making my Nikes, outrageous!"), or proud ("they make a whole 50 cents thanks to me!") is up to you I guess, but the link is there.
What you are proposing ends up as "don't do business with Asian countries because they can't be trusted to deal with the trash properly."
It's really easy to find photos of waterways all over the world, and it's abundantly clear which countries and cultures value clean water ways over cost/time to deal with the garbage. Where it comes from seems to be irrelevant.
Western societies went through the same process. They polluted heavily through much of the XX century, while building up their own industrial economies, and didn't start cleaning up until the 1970s and 80s.
I am hopeful developing countries follow the same trajectory. China, for example, has been successful at tackling its air pollution. And googling shows that they began rolling out programs to combat river pollution as well. Eventually, we'll get there. Not soon, but eventually.