INF/TE/IDP/RD/131*  
 
20 June 2023 
(23-4231) Page: 1/4 
 Original: English/anglais/inglés  
 
  
UNOFFICIAL ROOM DOCUMENT1 
 
DIALOGUE ON PLASTICS POLLUTION AND  ENVIRONMENTALLY SUSTAINABLE 
PLASTICS TRADE  
SOLUTIONS TO PLASTIC POLLUTION  - PEW’S RESPONSES  
Workshop on reduction and circularity to tackle plastic pollution – 27 April 2023 
 
DOCUMENT DE S ÉANCE NON OFFICIEL1 
 
DIALOGUE ON PLASTICS POLLUTION AND  ENVIRONMENTALLY SUSTAINABLE 
PLASTICS TRADE  
SOLUTIONS TO PLASTIC POLLUTION  - PEW’S RESPONSES  
Workshop on reduction and circularity to tackle plastic pollution – 27 April 2023  
 
DOCUMENTO DE SALA NO OF ICIAL1 
 
DIALOGUE ON PLASTICS POLLUTION AND  ENVIRONMENTALLY SUSTAINABLE 
PLASTICS TRADE  
SOLUTIONS TO PLASTIC POLLUTION  - PEW’S RESPONSES  
Workshop on reduction and circularity to tackle plastic pollution – 27 April 2023  
_______________  
  
 
* In Original language only/En langue originale seulement/En el idioma original solamente.  
1 Documents issued in the RD series are not official WTO documents. They usually appear in their 
language of submission and will not be translated systematically into the working languages of the WTO. They 
are intended for use in WTO meeting rooms and are a ttributed an unofficial symbol for archiving purposes only.  
Les documents de la série RD ne sont pas des documents officiels de l 'OMC. Ils ne paraissent 
généralement que dans la langue dans laquelle ils ont été communiqués et ne seront pas systématiquemen t 
traduits dans les langues de travail de l'OMC. Ils sont destinés aux salles de réunion de l'OMC et une cote non 
officielle leur est attribuée à des fins d'archivage.  
Los documentos de la serie RD no son documentos oficiales de la OMC. Por lo general se d istribuyen en 
el idioma en que han sido presentados y no se traducen sistemáticamente a los idiomas de trabajo de la 
Organización. Se distribuyen para su uso en las salas de reunión de la OMC y se les asigna una signatura no 
oficial a efectos de archivo ún icamente.  INF/TE/IDP/RD/131  
 
- 2 - 
 
   
 
 
 
DIALOGUE ON PLASTICS POLLUTION AND ENVIRONMENTALLY SUSTAINABLE PLASTICS 
TRADE  
 
THE PEW CHARITABLE TRUSTS SUBMISSION  
 
1) Types of trade measures most often used and best practices  
 
Q. What principles and criteria should be taken into account when identifying "best practices" in 
relation to Trade -related Plastic Measures (TrPMs) aimed at reduction to tackle plastic pollution, 
while bearing special attention to issues and challenges arising for developing members, including 
SIDS.  
 
The Pew Chari table Trusts, along with the International Institute for Sustainable Development (IISD) 
and Duke University, presented research on the types of trade measures most often used at an 
event for WTO members and stakeholders on April 19, 2023. At this event IIS D and Duke University 
presented their analyses of the WTO Environmental Database and the Duke Plastic Policy Inventory, 
showing that bans – particularly on plastic bags - is the primary trade measure used by WTO 
Members. Bans also covered other items such a s food containers, tableware, certain plastic 
packaging, straws, cotton buds, polystyrene, microplastics and plastic bottles. Other types of policy 
measures that are relatively frequent include technical regulations (on a variety of products) and 
import li censing schemes (with a strong focus on plastic waste).  
 
Pew presented its research as published in Breaking the Plastic Wave   
(https://www.pewtrusts.org/en/research -and-analysis/articles/2020/07/23/breaking -the-plastic -
wave-top-findings ) showing that five product types contribute to 85% of all plastic leaking into the 
ocean. These are: monomaterial films (i.e., cling film, pallet w raps), carrier bags, bottles, sachets 
and multilayer films (i.e., condiment and single -portion shampoo packets), and household goods. 
According to our modelling, reduce policies such as elimination, reuse by the consumer, and reuse 
through new delivery mod els should play a key role in preventing these plastics from leaking into 
the environment or clogging up waste management streams.  
 
Focusing on products with high leakage rates and potential to become pollutants is key to creating 
a cleaner, healthier env ironment – which should be a key criteria going forward. WTO Members can 
also look to what policies have already been enacted to inform their own policymaking – plastic bags 
are a highly polluting product (recorded in the top 10 items  found on coastal clean -ups globally), 
that many countries have already banned. As IISD noted in their presentation, such policies could 
be taken up by other countries for  a “geographic expansion”, with experience -sharing helping to 
foster coherence around best approaches. However, a “thematic expansion” to other products will 
also be needed. WTO Members should consider the whole spectrum of trade measures to address 
highly  polluting products such as monomaterial films, bottles, and sachets and multilayer films in 
addition to carrier bags, including bans/prohibitions yet also other trade measures that would be 
more suitable for certain products. It is important that introduc ed trade measures are equally 
matched by domestic measures (if those are not part of the same legislation) to ensure that the 
environmental objectives are actually achieved. We also note that there may be geographic 
differences in which items contribute mo st to plastic leakage, and that regional differentiation and 
alignment in which products are targeted by countries may help maximise the impact of measures.       
 
2) Trade policies and practices requiring realignment with the objective of ending plastic 
pollution.  
 
Q. What are the trade policies, if any, that are misaligned with the objectives of ending plastic 
pollution to protect human health and the environment, through reduction?  
 
As noted above, trade policies are currently focused on bans – primarily  for plastic bags and plastic 
waste. This is an excellent first step in tackling plastic pollution, however we cannot stop here.  
 
INF/TE/IDP/RD/131  
 
- 3 - 
 
  Our modeling shows that we need a system change approach to reduce plastic  pollution  by 80% by 
2040;  there is no one “silver bullet” solution to solving the plastic problem. In Breaking the Plastic 
Wave we show that focusing on any one solution in isolation would be more expensive for 
governments, result in more plastic pollution and higher GHG emissions than taking a system cha nge 
approach that combines upstream action on reduction, reuse and redesign as well as downstream 
action to improve collection and recycling.  
 
For example, our modelling shows that a strategy focused solely on collection and disposal would  
likely still leave 13 million metric tons of plastic leakage to the ocean per year by 2040, which is 18 
per cent above 2016 levels, and would cost governments US$800 billion – US$130 billion more than 
BAU in present value between 2021 and 2040. for waste management (i.e., collection, sorting, and 
safe disposal). Moreover, the vast proportion of these costs would fall on middle -/low-income 
countries.  
 
Reduction strategies are a key part of the system change scenario which results in better economic 
outcomes  for governments, less plastic pollution and lower GHG emissions.  
 
We note that to date, ‘reduction’ policies have focused on bans of specific products but that wider 
reaching policies are likely to be necessary to tackle the scale of plastic pollution. Wi thin the INC 
there have also been discussions of reducing the production of virgin plastic and microplastics added 
to products.  
 
3) Unnecessary or harmful plastics and plastic products most targeted by trade policies, 
including single -use plastics and pla stic packaging associated with international trade  
 
Q. What unnecessary or harmful plastics and plastic products, including single -use plastics and 
plastic packaging associated with international trade, are already being targeted by [your] trade 
policies a nd what are their identification codes under the Harmonized Commodity Description and 
Coding System (HS) (even if those codes currently cover other products)?  
 
As presented by IISD and Duke, their research shows plastic bags and plastic waste are already 
being targeted by WTO Members. Other items targeted by bans include food containers, tableware, 
certain plastic packaging, straws, cotton buds, polystyrene, microplastics and plastic bottles.  
 
In order to end plastic pollution and protect human health and the environment, trade policy must 
consider these five product categories that make up 85% of all plastic pollution into the ocean: 
monomaterial films, bottles, sachets and multilayer films, and household goods. According to our 
modelling, the “Reduce” int ervention is essential to tackling these categories, such that reduce 
policies are needed to tackle:  
- 25% of monomaterial films  
- 45% of carrier bags  
- 43% of bottles  
- 44% of sachets and multilayer films  
These products deserve greater focus when developing trad e policies and tracking mechanisms.  
 
 
4) Criteria used when prioritizing trade action on unnecessary or harmful plastics, plastic 
products and other goods.  
 
Q. Please select from below (and assign a grade of 1 to 5 in order of importance, with 5 being of 
highest importance) the criteria used when prioritizing trade action on particularly unnecessary or 
harmful plastics and plastic products, including single -use plastics and plastic packaging associated 
with international trade . 
 
In Breaking the Plastic Wave , The Pew Charitable Trusts and its partners looked primarily at leakage 
into the marine environment. Our analysis quantified leakage rates and solutions for municipal 
plastic waste – including plastic packaging, single -use plastics, durable consumer produ cts, 
household products, business -to-business packaging, and others. In order to compare solutions with 
very different environmental (pollution and GHG), economic, performance (health, safety, product 
protection, and consumer acceptance dimensions, each po tential solution in Breaking the Plastic 
Wave  was evaluated against four criteria:  
 INF/TE/IDP/RD/131  
 
- 4 - 
 
  • Technology Readiness Level: Is a solution available today?  
• Performance: Does the intervention satisfy performance and health requirements?  
• Convenience: Is the intervention acceptable for lifestyle and convenience?  
• Affordability: Are the cost implications of the alternative acceptable?  
 
Our analysis and re search showed that action should not be prioritized by any single or subset of 
the criteria, but rather by a combination of these criteria, because countries have varying capabilities 
and priorities and products are designed to consider a range of paramete rs. Our analysis emphasizes 
that there is no one -size-fits-all solution. We do however place high importance on a clean and 
healthy environment with consideration given to plastic leakage rates, GHG emissions, waste 
management costs, and implications to hu man health.  
 
 
__________