The Difference Between “Trash” and “Litter”

Written By Angus Jackson

By Angus Jackson

We tend to thoughtlessly equate the words "trash" and "litter", but understanding their difference is valuable in NYC, as are the processes through which litter spills out of trash infrastructure, because the leaks inflict quantifiable environmental, health, and social harms.

"Trash" is refuse that properly enters the waste stream, contained in cans, bags, and placed out for collection. "Litter" is that segment of the refuse stream which escapes containment: wrappers dropped on the pavement, plastic blown from loose bags, or food scraps on the sidewalk after bags shift or rupture.

First, there's a direct correlation between increased litter and lower-income neighborhoods: according to "Overflowing Disparities: Looking at the Availability of Litter Bins in New York City," research shows that lower-income census tracts have fewer trash cans than wealthier tracts, so there are structural inequalities in the infrastructure that lead to trash becoming litter in some neighborhoods.

One peer-reviewed journal in PeerJ, "Rat sightings in New York City are associated with neighborhood sociodemographics, housing characteristics, and proximity to open public space,"  determined that neighborhoods with more vacant housing, older apartment buildings, and a lower median level of education have a greater frequency of rat sightings. The study mapped 43,542 rat sightings onto NYC census tracts and found that physical factors such as proximity to subway lines and open public space are strongly correlated with the sightings. Since litter is more common in these neighborhoods, there's evidence that litter, not simply trash, has downstream public health impacts by attracting rodents.

Another peer-reviewed article, "Detection of Zoonotic Pathogens and Characterization of Novel Viruses Carried by Commensal Rattus norvegicus in New York City", discloses that the city's Norway rats carry a varied range of bacterial pathogens, such as Leptospira interrogans and Salmonella enterica, and even previously uncharacterized viruses. The research showed that ~12% of the tested rats were excreting L. interrogans; even though most infections are asymptomatic, the presence of these pathogens serves to underscore the risk to the public when rats feed on poorly contained waste and food waste litter.

There are deleterious health risks of litter via pollution as well. A paper in ACS ES&T Water, “Urban Stormwater Runoff: A Major Pathway for Anthropogenic Particles,” sampled particles in urban stormwater runoff at 12 locations. It found that rubber fragments and fibers (plastics) were especially widespread, particularly in the finest size category, 125–355 µm. Litter doesn't stick around on sidewalks; rainstorms carry loose trash into waterways, where it pollutes ecosystems and may persist for decades. Since most macro- and microplastic particles in runoff come from human debris, some likely originate from litter that wasn't properly contained.

Furthermore, the study "Primary and secondary microplastics sources from the study of litter in the urban environment" compared cities in Iran and calculated densities of litter to be 0.0001-0.6502 items per square meter, and source densities for microplastics as ~52,782 µg per square meter for "primary" microplastics and ~2,570 µg per square meter for secondary sources. That suggests that in general areas where there is infrastructure, litter is a major source of plastic pollution, affirming that improperly disposed waste disproportionately injures the environment.


To conclude, trash is what's appropriately containedwhile litter is when trash escapes its proper containment. Research in NYC indicates that litter triggers issues such as rat infestation, the transmission of pathogens, plastic contamination of stormwater, and unevenly distributed burden on low-income communities. Litter may account for a smaller percentage of total refuse tonnage than trash, but it’s disproportionately problematic compared to what's inadequately controlled.

Thus, when local government policy or public endeavor aims at less litter, like more containers, enforcement of containerization, or more rapid or more effective refuse collection, there are not trivial changes. They tackle the origins of litter, where serious environmental, health, and social costs begin. Recognizing the distinction makes such interventions more focused and supportable.

Sources Used:

Angus Jackson
Previous

Pride vs. Practice: The Paradox of NYC Residents Who Litter
Next

The Social and Economic Price of Littering