When people hear “environmental work,” many imagine scientists deep in forests or conservationists working in the field. Rarely do they picture spreadsheets, policy documents, or meetings in conference rooms. Yet, behind every restored habitat and every protected species, there are decisions, data, and policies shaping what is possible and what is not.

During my internship, I was placed under the Policy and Climate Change (PCC) team. The first few weeks of my internship involved reading multiple environmental policy and national development documents as part of the climate change policy and advocacy strategy. As I read through them, I found myself questioning what impact these policies were actually having in Malaysia. To me, policies are just things written on paper but rarely seen in daily life. That assumption began to shift gradually, not through a single defining moment, but through repeated exposure to discussions and decision-making processes that revealed how policy quietly shapes real outcomes.

Within WWF-Malaysia’s PCC team, I came to see that while climate change remained central, it was not the only focus. I supported the team in working on issues such as rare earth element (REE) mining in or near forested areas, where such activities carry significant ecological and social implications, including deforestation, groundwater pollution, and various health issues, as well as the widespread use of problematic and unnecessary single-use plastics (PUSUPs), which has contributed to growing waste management problems and pollution of the environment and our food sources. I examined these issues through political, economic, social, technological, environmental, and legal (PESTEL) perspectives. Seeing these layers side by side made it clear that environmental problems are rarely isolated but deeply interconnected with broader political, economic, and social systems.

Figure 1: As part of her internship journey, Pei Xian participated in the Plastic Policy Law Lab. © Rachanah Sugumaran / WWF-Malaysia

Some of the most insightful conversations came from simple conversations. During discussions on PUSUPs, for example, I began noticing details I had previously overlooked: plastic-wrapped cartons of bottled water, unnecessary outer packaging, and inconsistent choices between cardboard and plastic. These were not abstract debates about waste, but questions about daily consumption habits shaped by regulation, industry practice, and consumer awareness. The policies being discussed were directly connected to what people buy, throw away, and accept as normal.

In another National Policy team event, I also began to realise that decisions are often made far from the communities most affected by them. At the Beyond GDP workshop, discussions highlighted how economic and environmental indicators are typically designed without sufficient involvement from Indigenous Peoples and local communities. This gap between decision-making and lived experience echoed across multiple policy conversations. It reinforced a recurring realisation: policies can appear comprehensive on paper yet still fail if they are disconnected from those expected to live with their consequences.

Figure 2: Beyond GDP Workshop participants during the Day 1 session. © Malaysian CSO-SDG Alliance

Figure 3: Pei Xian (centre) with colleagues supporting the registration team at the Beyond GDP Workshop. © Malaysian CSO-SDG Alliance

At the same time, I also learned that policy is not only about large national strategies. Even internal organisational practices reflected their everyday relevance. WWF-Malaysia’s work-from-home policy, for instance, helped reduce commuting-related emissions, lowered operational costs, and eased daily pressures on staff. It was a small but concrete example of how policy choices can shape environmental, social, and wellbeing outcomes in practical ways, even within an organisation’s day-to-day operations.

Reading and analysing numerous policies over several months raised a persistent question that followed me through meetings and workshops: if so many policies are well-written and ambitious, why do environmental problems continue? The answers were rarely simple. Implementation gaps, fragmented responsibilities between federal and state levels, limited data continuity, and weak follow-through after policy launches surfaced repeatedly in discussions. These conversations revealed the critical role of advocacy, not as opposition to government, but as sustained pressure to ensure policies move beyond announcements into long-term action.

Alongside my internship work, I often spent weekends visiting urban parks and lakes to photograph birds. What began as a personal interest gradually became another lens through which I could observe how decisions, habits, and public awareness shape the environments and wildlife around us.

At places like Permaisuri Lake Garden, a range of species can be seen around the lake and surrounding trees. Sparrows and pigeons move comfortably between human spaces, while birds such as painted storks, egrets and herons gather near the water’s edge on the island, far away from humans. 

Figure 4: Storks, egrets and herons near the water’s edge on the island in the middle of the lake. © Lee Pei Xian

One recurring sight at Permaisuri Lake Garden was visitors feeding bread, rice, and other processed food to catfish and birds. In some cases, whole slices of bread were thrown directly into the water. While often undertaken with good intentions or as a leisure activity, these actions can impact water quality and encourage wildlife to rely on unnatural food sources. Leftover food that sinks or remains floating may also contribute to the gradual deterioration of the lake environment. There is also an issue of littering of the plastic packaging of said bread or rice.

These observations began to feel closely connected to what I was learning during my internship about environmental governance and public awareness. Environmental issues are not always the result of dramatic events. Often, they emerge from small everyday practices that gradually accumulate over time. When such behaviours become normalised, environmental decline can occur quietly, without attracting much attention.

After learning more about environmental policy and management, I understand that addressing these issues also involves civic participation, even at the individual level. I later submitted a suggestion through Dewan Bandaraya Kuala Lumpur’s ADU@KL Public Complaint System, recommending signage and visitor education to discourage the feeding of wildlife in the park. While it was a small action, it reflected how public awareness and institutional responsibility can work together in managing shared environments.

Figure 5: A snapshot of the complaint Pei Xian submitted through ADU@KL last December. © Lee Pei Xian

Through these experiences, environmental policy is no longer conceptual. Its effects were not sudden or dramatic, but gradual and uneven. Policies influence what is allowed, what is ignored, and whose voices are heard. When policies are not properly carried out, the impacts appear not as headlines, but as slow changes in ordinary places.

By the end of my internship, I no longer saw environmental policy as something far from daily life. Instead, I began to see it as something quietly shaping the spaces around us—often unnoticed, often imperfect, but deeply important. Understanding policy is not only about reading documents, but it is about recognising how decisions affect the environments we live in every day.

Figure 6: Pei Xian with the Policy and Climate Change team. © Lee Pei Xian