INF/TE/IDP/RD/125  
 
3 May  2023 
(23-3109) Page: 1/23 
  Original: English  
 
DIALOGUE ON PLASTICS POLLUTION AND ENVIRONMENTALLY  
SUSTAINABLE  PLASTICS TRADE  
FACTUAL SUMMARY OF DISCUSSIONS ON REDUCTION AND CIRCULARITY TO TACKLE   
PLASTIC POLLUTION  
_______________  
1. In furthering the objectives of the 2021 Ministerial Statement1, the Dialogue's Plan2 envisaged, 
under the workstream " Reduction  and Circularity  to Tackle Plastic Pollution ", discussions covering , 
inter alia : how trade -related cooperation could support efforts to reduce unnecessary or harmful 
plastics and plastic products, including single -use plastics and plastic packaging associated with 
international trade; and sharing experiences of effective approaches to move towards more circular 
resource efficient and environmentally sustainable plastics  trade. During the last  plenary meeting of 
2022, a proposal was made to organize a dedicated workshop on the topic to help advance technical 
work.3 Coordinators agreed to do so as informed at their first pre -plenary meeting of 2023 .4 The 
objective of the  workshop is to provide a strong basis for discussions in 2023 and help implement 
the call from the co -sponsors ' Ministers to "look for concrete, pragmatic, and effective outcomes  at 
the latest by the 13th Ministerial Conference ". 
2. The exploratory workshop on reduction and circularity to tackle plastic pollution (the 
Workshop) , organized in cooperation with the United Nations Environment Programme (UNEP), will 
take place on 27 April 2023 and  will cover four specific issues: (i) types of trade measures most 
often used and best practices ; (ii) unnecessary or harmful plastics and plastic products most targeted 
by trade policies, including single -use plastics and plastic packaging associated with international 
trade; (iii) trade policies and practices requiring realignment with the objective of ending plastic 
pollution ; and (iv) criteria used when prioritizing trade action on unnecessary or harmful plastics, 
plastic products and other goods . The objective of this factual summary is  in turn  to compile and 
showcase the wealth of information produced by the Dialogue on the se topics both before and in the 
wake of the Workshop.  
3. In total, since the Dialogue's 2021 Ministerial Statement5 and up to the date of the Workshop, 
124 interventions (pres entations and statements) were made on topics directly relevant to 
trade-related efforts to support reduction and circularity to tackle plastic pollution. Interventions 
were made by 19 different delegations, 22 stakeholders and by the WTO Secretariat (see table 1 
below). Most interventions (66) took place during the meetings between May and September 2022. 
The 4th pre-plenary meeting of 20226, held on 17 and 18 November and which focused on the topics 
of single-use plastics (SUP) and products, plastic pack aging and plastic waste management and 
trade, saw a particularly high number of interventions relevant to reduction and circularity (34).  
 
1 See Ministerial Statement on Plastic Pollution and Environmentally Sustainable Plastics Trad e 
(WT/MIN(21)/8/Rev.2 ), 10 December 2021.  
2 See Dialogue Plan 202 2 (INF/TE/IDP/W/5 ), 21 February 2022.  
3 Informal Summary ( INF/TE/IDP/R/10 ), 07 December  2022, Plenary  Meeting, para. 22.  
4 Aide Memoire ( INF/TE/IDP/R/11 ), 16 February 2023, Pre -Plenary Meet ing, para. 12. 
5 Nine interventions captured by this Factual Summary were made at the last meeting  of the Committee 
on Trade and Environment in 2021, in October 2021. The interventions were included due to the wealth of 
relevant information shared in that meeting and its close date to the Dialogue Ministerial Statement.  
6 See Aide Memoire  (INF/TE/IDP/R/9 ), 17 November  2022, Pre-Plenary  Meeting.  INF/TE/IDP/RD/125  
 
- 2 - 
 
  Table 1: Delegations and Stakeholders who intervened on topics related to reduction and 
circularity to tackle plastic pollution  
Australia  European Union  Morocco  The Philippines  
Cabo Verde  Guat emala  Russian Federation  United Kingdom  
Canada  Hong Kong, China  Saudi Arabia  United States  
Colombia  Japan  Switzerland  Uruguay  
Costa Rica  Maldives  Thailand   
BRS  IUCN  TESS  WHO 
Consumer Goods Forum  OECD  UNCTAD  World Bank  
CIEL  Pew Charitable Trusts  UNODC  WWF  
ICC Plastics Recyclers Europe  WBCSD  
Global Plastics Policy Centre 
(University of Portsmouth)  IISD QUNO  WCO  
Ellen MacArthur Foundation  Minderoo Foundation  MarViva Foundation  
 
4. Delegations provided 70 interventions, stakeholders 45, and the WTO Secretariat 8 (see 
Graph 1 below). Interventions covered a wide range of topics and mostly consisted of concrete 
suggestions (75) and domestic practices (41) on efforts to support reduction and circul arity to tackle 
plastic pollution, including related to the topics covered by the Workshop. These were followed by 
observations (37) and challenges (14).7 Specifically on the topics covered by the Workshop, 
84 interventions provided elements related to "t ypes of trade measures most often used and best 
practices", 57 related to "unnecessary or harmful plastics and plastic products most targeted by 
trade policies", 40 related to "trade policies and practices requiring realignment with the objective 
of ending  plastic pollution", and 29 to "criteria used when prioritizing trade action on unnecessary 
or harmful plastics, plastic products and other goods."  
Graph 1:  Breakdown of interventions by delegations, stakeholders and the WTO 
Secret ariat  
 
 
5. In the following sections, a summary of the interventions related to each of the topics covered 
by the Workshop is provided . 
1  TYPES OF TRADE MEASURES MOST OFTEN USED AND BEST PRACTICES  
6. The 2021 Ministerial Statement stresses the  importance of ident ifying actions that 
participating Members could take collectively to support global efforts to reduce plastics pollution, 
including sharing  experiences of effective approaches to move towards more circular, resource 
efficient and environmentally sustainabl e plastics trade .  
 
7 Each intervention could include simultaneously suggestions, observations, challenges and/or domestic 
practices. In this sense, the total number of these add up to more than the total number of interventions.  
INF/TE/IDP/RD/125  
 
- 3 - 
 
  7. During the 10 Dialogue meetings covered by this factual summary, delegations and 
stakeholders shared extensively their experiences, challenges, studies and approaches regarding 
the use of trade -related plastic measures (TrPMs) to reduce plastic pollution. Interventions referred 
to a wide variety of TrPMs (see Graph 2 below), mostly technical requirements (42) and bans (20) 
related to certain plastic or plastic -containing products, establishing criteria for recyclability, 
compostability, t oxicity and design (see section 4 for an overview of the different criteria mentioned) 
or the conditions for certifications, labels and traceability efforts. Many interventions also referred 
to Extended Producer Responsibility (EPR) schemes (13), internal charges and deposit schemes (8), 
discussing their key elements, objectives and related challenges.  
Graph 2:  Types of TrPMs  referred to in the interventions8 
 
8. Others referred to more general requirements, regulations and efforts to improve plastic waste 
collection and management as well as awareness raising and information campaigns (20). Finally, 
several interventions referred to support programmes to reduce plastic pollution, such as tax 
concessions (5, e.g. tax rebate f or recycling operators), for), grants and direct payments (2, e.g. to 
a plastic waste to oil project), public procurement (2, e.g. to bolster markets for recycled plastics), 
non-monetary support (6, e.g. investment in waste management infrastructure) and o ther support 
measures (6, e.g. general support to access to technologies).  
9. A number of interventions (36) also referred to ongoing or proposed trade -related efforts 
aimed at reduction under international processes, including the discussions under the 
Intergovernmental Negotiating Committee on Plastic Pollution (INC) launched at the 5th session of 
the United Nations Environment Assembly  (UNEA), the 2022 -2027 Amendment cycle of the World 
Customs Organization (WCO) Harmonized System (HS), the implementati on of the Basel Convention 
Plastic Wastes Amendments, its Plastic Waste Partnership (PWP) and other plastic -related 
developments under the Basel, Rotterdam and Stockholm (BRS) Conventions conferences of the 
parties (CoPs), as well as related work under the  World Health Organi zation (WHO), the United 
Nations Conference on Trade and Development (UNCTAD), the International  Union for Conservation 
of Nature  (IUCN), the Organisation for Economic Co -operation and Development (OECD), and the 
Osaka Blue Ocean vision . Several Members and stakeholders proposed specific opportunities for 
enhanced cooperation between the Dialogue and these processes on TrPMs, as well as cooperative 
efforts on specific policies under the Dialogue itself (e.g. labelling or eco -design).  
10. In total, 10 delegations9 shared their domestic efforts, policies, and approaches to reduce 
plastic pollution (through 24 interventions). For example, Costa Rica noted it been developing a legal 
framework that would progressively eliminate the use and consum ption of SUP, prohibit their 
commercialisation and regulate recycling processes, in order to encourage the use of other 
environmentally friendly goods. Th e effort sought not only to raise public awareness towards greater 
environmental protection and conser vation, but also to advance an increasingly circular economy.10 
Cabo Verde  noted it had  joined the Dialogue  as a country that suffered because of plastic pollution. 
 
8 Each intervention could include multiple measures. In this sense, the total number of these add up to 
more than the total number of interventions.  
9 These were: Australia; Cabo Verde; Canada; Colombia; Costa Rica; the European Union; Guatemala; 
Japan; Maldives; Russian Federation; Saudi Arabia; Switzerland; The Philippines; and the United Kingdom.  
10 CTE minutes ( WT/CTE/M/73 ), meeting held on 12 October  2021.  
INF/TE/IDP/RD/125  
 
- 4 - 
 
  Since 2017, Cabo Verde had implemented a law prohibiting  the use of plastics and was raisin g 
awareness among traders and the population in general to entirely ban the use of plastics .11 
Similarly, Maldives noted t hat, as a Small Island Developing State ( SIDS), the Maldives economy 
largely depended on coastal and marine ecosystems and the biodive rsity they harbour ed, with its  
two largest economic activities, tourism and fisheries , largely dependent on healthy oceans. Maldives  
had thus taken several significant steps to phase out SUP. Starting 1 June 2021, the import of any 
goods declared as SUP was prohibited. The Amendment mandated the government to compile and 
publicize the list of goods to be classified as banned SUP, as well as to add or remove items from 
the list in the future. This initiative would enable the Maldives to steadily phase out SUP by 2023, 
one of the government's key environmental pledges.12 
11. Guatemala also shared its approach and domestic policies which focused more on proper and 
integrated plastic waste management. Guatemala's Governmental Agreement 164 -2021 on the 
integrated management of waste and solid waste, defined the competent authorities, provided a 
maximum of 2 years for implementation, defined the actors involved, and took a circular economy 
approach into account.13 Similarly, Saudi Arabia emphasized the im portance of  effective waste 
plastic management as a useful and efficient  tool. Saudi Arabia further shared their approach to  the 
Circular Carbon Economy . While the "Circular Economy" focused on material flow, the "Circular 
Carbon Economy" emphasized emissi ons management – both of which were complementary and 
important in accelerating global sustainable trade goals.14 The Russian Federation shared its 
legislative initiative to address secondary resources that directly dealt with plastic pollution. The 
Russia n government aimed to adopt a new concept of producer responsibility for goods and 
packaging many of which were made of plastic. The Russian Federation was also developing a 
regulation prohibiting the use of single -use dishes and goods of colourful plastic s, which would come 
into force in 2023.15 
12. In a series of interventions, the European Union shared the "EU Plastic Strategy" and related 
policies, including bans on specific single -use plastic goods, binding targets for recycled content in 
PET beverage bott les, markings and design requirements, awareness -raising measures, separate 
collection targets, and EPR schemes.16 Similarly, Switzerland shared its approach, including 
restricting the exports of wastes covered by the Basel Convention only to OECD and/or E U countries , 
while requiring that the disposal routes were conclusively known and the disposal method 
environmentally sound and correspond ing to the state of the art in Switzerland .17 It also shared its 
plastic bag charge , which followed  the principle of “ polluter pays” and create d an incentive to limit 
waste , and its approach to  PET bottles , which required  a recycling rate of at least 75%  by the 
industry . If not achieved, the federal government could  introduce a deposit.18 Japan similarly shared 
its plans to address the full life cycle of plastics from design to disposal , which included m andatory 
charging on plastic shopping bags , its Act on Promotion of Resource Circulation for Plastics providing  
further measures to reduce plastics containing  goods , such a s cutleries and amenities provided for 
free as attachments to the products and services in convenience stores  and hotels , as well as  its 
Plastic Resources Circular Strategy  which provided guidelines  to make packaging of plastic 
containers to be designed reusable or recyclable (incl uding  disassembly)  by 2025 and make 60% of 
packaging of plastic containers reused or recycled by 2030.19 
13. Canada shared its approach in developing a proposed ban on SUP, which had involved many 
industry stakeholders but also other levels of government within Canada to ensure the law aligned 
with all policy responses .20 Australia introduced its domestic  waste policy that would require all 
packaging to be recyclable or composta ble by 2025. Australia was also banning the export of waste 
plastics and  aimed to  transform plastic recycling and reprocessing into new products through the 
 
11 Ibid.  
12 CTE minutes ( WT/CTE/M/74 ), meeting held on 02 February  2022.  
13 CTE minutes ( WT/CTE/M/73 ), meeting held on 12 October  2021. 
14 CTE minutes ( WT/CTE/M/74 ), meeting held on 02 February  2022 
15 Informal Summary  (INF/TE/IDP/R/5 ), 30 March  2022, Plenary Meet ing. 
16 CTE minutes ( WT/CTE/M/73 ), meeting held on 12 October  2021. Informal Summary  
(INF/TE/IDP/R/11 ), 30 March  2022, Plenary Meet ing. Aide Memoire  (INF/TE/IDP/R/9 ), 17 November  2022, 
Pre-Plenary Meet ing. 
17 Informal Summary  (INF/TE/IDP/R/8 ), 30 March  2022, Plenary Meet ing. 
18 Aide Memoire  (INF/TE/IDP/R/9 ), 17 November  2022, Pre-Plenary Meet ing. 
19 Informal Summary  (INF/TE/IDP/R/5 ), 30 March  2022, Plenary Meet ing. Aide Memoire  
(INF/TE/IDP/R/9 ), 17 November  2022, Pre-Plenary Meet ing. 
20 Informal Summary  (INF/TE/IDP/R/5 ), 30 March  2022, Plenary Meet ing. INF/TE/IDP/RD/125  
 
- 5 - 
 
  Recycling Modernization Fund. The National Plastics Plan included a range of commitments from 
gover nments, industries, and the community to increase recycling rates and reduce plastic 
pollution.21 The United Kingdom shared several of its proposed measures, including the Plastic 
Packaging Tax (PPT)  which it  estimated would create greater demand to recycl e plastic (around 40% 
more recycled plastic)  and its Plastic Packaging Tax Deposit Return Scheme  – a £200 per tonne tax 
on plastic packaging manufactured in, or imported into the country, that did not contain at least  30% 
recycled plastic .22  
14. Finally, Colo mbia and the Philippines also shared their approaches. Colombia had sought to 
harmonize multiple requirements seeking the gradual reduction of the production and consumption 
of single -use plastic products  thus attending to one of the most important challen ges identified by 
businessmen, which was precisely regulatory fragmentation . It promoted eco-design seeking to 
address the entire life cycle of the product .23 The Philippines domestic  efforts to address plastic 
pollution included banning  environmentally un acceptable products only when  there were alternatives 
available to consumers at no more than ten percent greater cost than the disposable product. It was 
also in the final stage s of adopting a producer funded EPR  scheme, setting an implementation 
schedule and targets, as well as incentives and penalty provisions. The Philippines was promoting 
mechanical recycling of plastic waste, using flexible plastic waste as filler material for plastic products 
and construction materials, as well as mixed plastic waste for road asphalt and plastic lumber. There 
were other opportunities for plastic waste processing such as waste to fuel or energy recovery and 
chemical recycling under examination.24 
15. In June 2022, aiming to help "build a deeper understanding of the range of  policy tools WTO 
Members employ or could adopt to address plastic pollution, and the areas where international 
cooperation through a trade dimension was most vital ", the Dialogue coordinators launched a 
voluntary survey on trade -related measures relevant to plastic pollution reduction 
(INF/TE/IDP/W/7/Rev.1 ).25 In a series of interventions26, the WTO Secretariat provided some 
preliminary res ults based on the data already available through the survey. Noting that the analysis 
was based on preliminary data and absolute numbers provided could change (including reducing 
after cleaning up the data), the Secretariat noted that it was still useful t o share some insights into 
the wealth of information being generated. Below, a summary of the information shared is provided 
based on the data available at the last presentation (16 February 2023).  
16. The survey contained around 280 TrPMs of 64 WTO Members, from all regions. Most measures 
identified were from developing and least  developed Members, representing 75% of the total. The 
vast majority of TrPMs included sustainability requirements (251), followed by support and financial 
requirements (24) and pricing and market mechanisms (11) (see Graph 3 below). This could be 
partially explained by WTO transparency provisions and practices27, which led to the identification 
of internal taxes to a lesser degree th an regulations, for instance.  
 
 
 
21 Ibid. 
22 Informal Summary  (INF/TE/IDP/R/5 ), 30 March  2022, Plenary Meet ing. Aide Memoire  
(INF/TE/IDP/R/9 ), 17 November  2022, Pre-Plenary Meet ing. 
23 Informal Summary  (INF/TE/IDP/R/8 ), 11 October  2022, Plenary Meet ing. 
24 Informal Summary  (INF/TE/IDP/R/5 ), 30 March  2022, Plenary Meet ing. 
25 See Ministerial Statement by Coordinators on Plastic Pollution and Environmentally Sustainable 
Plastics Trade (WT/MIN(22)/12) , 13 June 2022.  In their Plenary Meeting of 13 March 2023, coordinators 
informed they would be closing the Survey by the end of May. See  Informal Summary  (INF/TE/I DP/R/12 ), 
13 March  2023, Plenary Meet ing. 
26 See Aide Memoire ( INF/TE/IDP/R/7 ), 19 September  2022, Pre-Plenary Meet ing; Informal Summary  
(INF/TE/IDP/R/8 ), 11 October  2022, Plenary Meet ing; Aide Memoire  (INF/TE/IDP/R/9 ), 17 November  2022, 
Pre-Plenary Meet ing; and Aide Memoire  (INF/TE/IDP/R/11 ), 16 February  2023, Pre-Plenary Meet ing. 
27 The Survey builds upon plastic -related data available at the WTO Environmental Database . INF/TE/IDP/RD/125  
 
- 6 - 
 
  Graph 3:  Types of TrPMs Identified in the Survey  
 
 
17. The TrPMs identified pursued a number of plastic -related objectives, top among them recycling 
(109), eco -designing (105), waste management (97) an d addressing SUP (89) (see Graph 4 below). 
In terms of stage in the value chain life cycle of plastics, most TrPMs focused on the mid and 
downstream stages, with a particular concentration of measures applied to finished goods and 
manufacturing (151), plas tic use (122) and packaging materials (109) (see Graph 5 below).  
Graph 4: Plastic -related Objectives Pursued by the TrPMs Identified in the Survey28 
 
 
Graph 5: Stage in Value Chain Life Cycle to which TrPMs Identified in the Survey Apply29 
 
 
 
18. The survey also sought to identify challenges faced by WTO Members when implementing 
specific TrPMs and related needs. A preliminary analysis showed that 48 TrPMs  already indicated 
challenges and needs, with access to technology (29), domestic private sector (28) and civil society 
(21) engagement, followed by technical assistance on policy implementation (21), the four needs 
more often mentioned (see Graph 6 below) . Additionally, 38 TrPMs already indicated the existence 
of mechanisms to  assess the measure's efficacy and/or efficiency and targeted results . 
 
28 Each TrPM often includes multiple objectives. In this sense, the total number of these add up to more 
than the total number of TrPMs . 
29 Each TrPM could be applied to different stages. In this sense, the total number of these add up to 
more than the total number of TrPMs.  
1122474651748997105109
Other: waste to energyOther: food safetyOtherreuse and remanufacturingpromotion of waste management and other technologieschemical, toxic, and hazardous substances managementpromotion of alternatives and substitutessingle-use plasticwaste management (including its trans-boundary movement) and leakage avoidanceeco-designingrecycling
INF/TE/IDP/RD/125  
 
- 7 - 
 
  Graph 6: Needs to Implement Specific TrPMs Identified in the Survey30  
 
 
19. In general ter ms, the WTO Secretariat noted that most TrPMs that far focused on five broad  
topics , namely: single -use plastic products; packaging; recycling; eco -design ; and waste 
management.  On SUP, the Secretariat shared an initial analysis of the 39 TrPMs restricting  the use, 
production, consumption and/or trade of single -use plastic bags. While all measures had roughly the 
same objectives and mechanisms (i.e. bans coupled with certain exceptions and specifications), they 
varied significantly on how they identified si ngle-use plastic bags (see table 2 below).  Such 
measures  used one or more of four criteria to identify single -use plastic bags: i) thickness of 
material  (e.g. < 50 microns)  – used by 9 TrPMs ; ii) usage (e.g. purpose or capacity)  – 13 TrPMs ; 
iii) Polymer in put (e.g. bio or polymer based)  – 14 TrPMs ; and iv) end -of-life properties 
(e.g. degradability)  – 6 TrPMs . The Secretariat noted there were important variations in each 
criterium used. For instance, TrPMs that relied on the "thickness" criteria varied from  as low as 
15 microns to as much as 100 microns to differentiate "single -use plastic bags".   
Table 2: Criteria Used by TrPMs to Identify Single -Use Plastic Bags  
Thickness 
(ranges )  Usage (e.g : purpose or 
capacity) includes  Polymer references  End-of-life properties  
include  
< 0.025 
microns  
 Designed to carry  
• purchased goods from a 
business  
• goods, materials or products  
• products and goods that are 
delivered to a consumer  Bio-Based  
• a blend of materials 
with plant derived 
products  Biodegradable or 
compostable  
• whose composition 
and/or characteristics 
do not allow or hinder 
its biodegradability  
< 0.01 
microns  
< 15 microns  
< 50 microns  
< 70 microns  
 Capacity / volume / surface 
density of  
• less than 10 kilograms,  
> 53 metres  
• less than 25 litres  
• equal to or greater than  
60 g/m²  Polymers of  
• ethylene  
• one or more organic 
polymeric 
substances of large 
molecular weight  
• contains as an 
essential ingredient a 
high polymer such as 
polyethylene 
terephthalate, high 
density 
polyethylene, … Made of degradable 
plastic often included 
in the ban  
• incl. oxo -degradable, 
biodegradable  and 
compostable 
materials  
• consists of 
polyethylene and 
oxo-degradable 
impurities  
< 100 microns  Designed for single -
use/short useful life or to be 
“reusable” or used > than:  
• 100 times  Oil-based  
• petroleum -based 
material or its 
derivatives   
 
 
30 Each TrPM could include multiple needs. In this sense, the total number of these add up to more than 
the tota l number of TrPMs that indicated challenges and needs.  
34891011161821212829
otherregional cooperationcooperation from exporting countriestechnical assistance on policy developmentcustoms challengescertification, testing and metrologycooperation from value chain actors (incl. exporters)financial and investment assistancetechnical assistance on policy implementation (e.g. market surveillance)domestic civil society engagementdomestic private sector engagementaccess to technologyINF/TE/IDP/RD/125  
 
- 8 - 
 
  20. On packaging, the Secretariat noted that most of the "pricing and market mechanisms" 
identified that far applied to plastic packagi ng, generally seeking to improve collection rates and 
increase the economic incentives for recycling. Apart from the United Kingdom's  PPT programme 
and the Philippines EPR Act of 2022 described above, the Secretariat provided further examples of 
such TrPMs , including Chile’s Framework for Waste Management, Extended Producer Responsibility 
and Promotion of Recycling  – which included an EPR scheme for packaging and a "Fund for 
recycling "), and the UK’s Waste and Resources Action Programme (WRAP) – which included "industry 
fees" and cover ed the  "majority of plastic packaging sold through UK supermarkets, and 
approximately two thirds of the total plastic packaging placed on the UK market ." 
21. On recycling, the Secretariat noted that among the 109 TrPMs addressing the issue a few 
general categories or approaches could be identified (see table 3 below). The Secretariat further 
noted that out of the 24 TrPMs that included "support and financial pr ograms", 18 focused on 
recycling, indicating a preponderance in the survey for these types of measures to address the issue. 
The Secretariat noted that such support programs included: support for plastic waste recycling 
(including machinery acquisition); w aste levy exemptions and discounts [incl. for specific recycling 
processes]; expenditure on resource utilization of agricultural wastes, incl. recycling of waste plastic 
films; preferential tax treatment for products produced with integrated utilization of  resources, or 
for goods with recycled content; government procurement requirements/preferential rates for goods 
with recycled content; direct grants to R&D of recycling processes [e.g. plastic packaging, waste 
tyres]; and  direct support for waste collecti on for recycling . 
Table 3: General Approaches Found in TrPMs Addressing Recycling  
Bans/restrictions  on importation [and 
exportation] of [ recyclable ] waste  [incl.] to 
promote [domestic] recycling  Standards , guidelines, requirements on 
“recyclability ” of [waste] imports [incl. 
hazardousness, quality requirements]  
Segregation, collection and recovery targets  
requirements, deposit schemes  [incl. EPR 
schemes ] Standards , guidelines, requirements on using 
recycled content /resins in goods [incl. testing 
methods ] 
Grading and labelling /marking  system  of 
recyclability [incl. b2b and to inform consumers]  Registry  of recycling operators  (incl. importers 
and exporters)  
Food -grade /Sanitary requirements  for recycled content in packaging  
 
22. On eco -design, the Secretariat noted that among the 104 TrPMs  a few general categories or 
approaches could be identified (see table 4 below). The Secretariat further noted that 18 TrPMs on 
eco-design indicated challenges and needs for their implementation. A lthough still based on a small 
sample, the relatively higher importance of "technical assistance on policy development" and 
"cooperation from exporting members " among the needs and challenges associated with eco -design 
TrPMs could be an early indication th at the topic could benefit from enhanced cooperation in the 
policy development phase.  
Table 4: General Approaches Found in TrPMs Addressing Eco -design  
Requirements  applicable to minimum 
thickness, (re)usability  Minimum recycled cont ent [5-30%, different 
horizons e.g. 2030 ] [incl. in tax form]  
Exclusion  of certain components : 
• specific polymers  
• microbeads [ e.g. 5 mm in size ] 
• features affecting recyclability [colo uring, 
multilayer, multi -polymer]  
• toxic components/additives [medical waste]  (voluntary) Guidelines for design  of plastic-
containing products:  
• requirements Restricting Excessive 
Packaging in Foods and Cosmetics  
• requirement to introduce an "environmental 
variable" in product packaging design  
• requirements on eProducts design to 
enhance extraction of key components, 
marking of plastic parts  
 
23. Finally, on waste management, the Secretariat noted that 19 TrPMs indicated challenges faced 
in implementation. These included the volume of waste i mported, the amount of plastic products 
and demand for them, issues with customs misdeclaration of goods, as well as lack of financing, 
costs for residents and changing their habits. In terms of needs, technical assistance on policy INF/TE/IDP/RD/125  
 
- 9 - 
 
  implementation, access to technology and cooperation from value chain actors (incl. exporters) were 
the three elements most often indicated.  
24. Stakeholders also participated actively, sharing their studies and proposals related to TrPMs. 
The OECD shared specific trade -related appr oaches to address plastic pollution contained in their 
Global Plastic Outlook and Ghost Gear Study , including mapping the d omestic plastics policy 
landscape of 50 economies and noting how tra de could enable the efficient allocation of end -of-life 
fishing g ear by : facilitating the movement of material to markets with a comparative advantage in 
waste processing ; allowing for efficient production and trade of gear with the best design ; facilitat ing 
trade of less harmful plastics and substitutes ; restricting or  banning  trade in the most harmful 
plastics ; harmoniz ing or joint  development of trade policy, regulation, and product standards .31 The 
Ellen MacArthur Foundation  (EMF) noted the role of trade policies in the transition to a circular 
economy for plastics , including banning unnecessary or problematic plastic packaging , requiring 
design of plastic packaging  to be 100% reusable, recyclable or compostable and free of hazardous 
chemicals , promoting  reuse models .32 The Quaker United Nations Office (QUNO) similarly stressed 
the importance of TrPMs to promote package -less and reuse systems first, including through 
international standards and definitions harmonization, standardization of reus able packaging in B2B 
(i.e., pal lets, crates, dunnage, drums, intermediate bulk containers, and big bags) , and design 
requirements for internationally traded products to be reused and to use fewer raw materials in their 
life cycle .33  
25. The Pew Charitable Trusts  (Pew)  presented their compr ehensive assessment of pathways 
towards stopping ocean plastic pollution. To achieve reduction in plastic usage by 30%, they explored 
three categories: (i) elimination of plastic use (8%); (ii) reuse plastic (4%); and (iii) new delivery 
models (18%). A few  possible trade policies were identified which could support business and 
incentivize reduction such as : coordinated regional or domestic  bans on certain products or polymers 
that were problematic; liberalize tariffs and reduce non -tariffs barriers to trad e in goods and 
services; simplification and elimination of border measures; reduce subsidies to fossil fuels/virgin 
plastics production; facilitate technology transfer for refill and recycling technologies; and 
transparent reporting on plastic trade flows across the life cycle of plastic.34 The Minderoo Foundation 
presented their Plastic Waste Makers Index (PWMI) mapping the S UP value chain . They argued that 
only regulation could solve recycling's failure to scale and that without policy support for recycling 
there were no strong commitments. The presentation identified three big interventions required to 
tackle the issues related to SUP: limiting fossil fuel production and consumption; increasing the 
circularity of plastic products and materials; and investing in environmentally sound waste 
management.35 
26. The WCO and BRS Secretariat shared the relevant TrPM approaches in their respective 
processes multiple time s. In particular, the WCO noted the importance of having clear definitions of 
the level of contamination that would be allowable in plastic waste to ensure a clear distinction 
between single polymer waste and mixed wastes , as well as the criteria and testi ng methods in 
relation to dangerous substances . It shared the ongoing efforts under  the Asia -Pacific Plastic Waste 
Project (APPW) and Statement which aimed at strengthening the capacity of selected Customs 
Administrations to mitigate and appropriately resp ond to environmental threats in the Asia -Pacific 
region , including through a regional customs approach.36 The BRS Secretariat shared efforts under 
its CoPs to improve the implementation of the Prior Informed Consent (PIC) procedure s, to agree 
on technical guidelines on the Environmentally Sound Management (ESM) of plastic and rubber 
wastes, and to promote compliance through the Environmental Network for Optimizing Regulatory 
Compliance on Illegal Traffic (ENFORCE) , as well as some experiences under the PWP programme 
 
31 Aide Memoire  (INF/TE/IDP/RD/29 ), 18 March  2022, Pre-Plenary Meet ing. 
32 Ibid. 
33 Aide Memoir e (INF/TE/IDP/R/11 ), 16 February  2023, Pre-Plenary Meet ing. 
34 Aide Memoire ( INF/TE/IDP/R/7 ), 19 September  2022, Pre-Plenary Meet ing. 
35 Aide Memoire  (INF/TE/IDP/R/11 ), 16 February  2023, Pre-Plenary Meet ing. 
36 Aide Memoire  (INF/TE/IDP/RD/29 ), 18 March  2022, Pre-Plenary Meet ing. Informal Summary  
(INF/TE/IDP/R/6 ), 24 May  2022, Plenary Meet ing. Aide Memoire  (INF/TE/IDP/R/11 ), 16 February  2023, 
Pre-Plenary Meet ing. INF/TE/IDP/RD/125  
 
- 10 - 
 
  which aimed at inter alia : prevention and minimization; collection, recycling and other recovery, incl. 
financing; transboundary movements; and outreach, education, and awareness raising .37  
27. On efforts to combat illegal trade, the United Nations Office on Drugs and Crime (UNODC) 
presented its initiatives including the "Unwaste" project, which sought to fight trafficking in waste 
between the EU and Southeast Asia by promoting enhanced UN -EU-ASEAN partnerships in support 
of ongoing efforts towards a  circular economy transition. The project aimed to improve 
understanding of the illegal flows, promote domestic dialogues as well as inter -regional partnerships 
and cooperation. The project also was conducting a study to map legal and illegal waste flows 
between the EU and Southeast Asia and modus operandi of illegal networks.38 The World Bank also 
highlighted a few of the policy recommendations to address plastic waste in the ASEAN and East 
Asia and Pacific (EAP)  regions, including the definition of ESM criteria for plastic waste treatment  
and implementation of importing procedures and other trade measures .39 
28. On design, the Consumer Goods Forum shared the ' golden design rules ' to eliminate 
unnecessary plastic pack aging  developed by the Coalition of Action on plastic waste . The Coalition 
also worked on i dentifying "optimal EPR" and eco -modulation schemes and global alignment to stop 
leakage into the environment .40 Plastics Recyclers Europe stressed the importance of  enabling 
traceability by certification  of recycling facilities, which should  provide transparent and reliable data 
that could be used at the product level , and the need for a common understanding of labelling on 
recyclability linked to an international st andard that addressed recycled content. It also referred to 
their industry guidelines  for recyclability which included the following technical requirements: (i) the 
product must be made with plastic that is collected for recycling, has market value and/or is 
supported by a legislatively mandated program; (ii) the product must be sorted and aggregated into 
defined streams for recycling processes; (iii) the product can be processed and reclaimed/recycled 
with commercial recycling processes; and (iv) the recyc led plastic becomes a raw material that is 
used in the production of new products.41 
29. The MarViva Foundation  suggested, inter alia : strengthening EPRs ; disincentivizing the export 
and import of plastic waste in Latin America and the Caribbean; promoting tra nsparency and control 
over trade in waste; and tackling illicit trade in plastic waste .42 CIEL urged delegations to strengthen 
their efforts on the reduction workstream, to identify concrete outcomes to phase down the amount 
of plastics being produced . In particular, CIEL suggested specific provisions in the Ministerial 
Statement  targeting : a ban or a commitment to reduce single -use plastic products, which would 
consequently incentivi ze reusable, 'multi -use' circular replacement s; efforts  to end all trade i n plastic 
waste; ban export and import of plastics precursors, materials, products and wastes that were 
restricted or banned in the exporting or importing economies, or by relevant multilateral 
environmental agreements; and improve Members notifications on  subsidies to plastics to better 
understand plastics subsidies and effectively address that issue at the WTO and in the INC process.43 
30. Finally, delegations put forward 25 suggestions related to enhanced work on TrPMs that could 
be pursued, including notabl y in the context of the Dialogue. The last two plenary meetings of the 
Dialogue, in December 2022 and March 2023, saw a particularly high number of such suggestions 
(13) as delegations further outlined their preferences towards the 13th Ministerial Confere nce (MC13) 
scheduled for MC13. Suggestions included: explor ing voluntary principles related to design ; 
consider ing actions that would help consumers have more transparent information on labelling , 
including harmonizing l abels and product identifiers ; identifying [effective] measures [in particular 
adopted by developing Members] that would help reduce the most harmful or damaging plastics , 
and encourage or support their adoption [incl. through self -reviews]; increasing Aid for Trade and 
investments in waste management and other relevant technologies in LDCs and other developing 
members ; reducing trade barriers for waste  management technologies ; developing guidelines for 
eliminating SUPs and harmonizing policies on recycling and plastics packaging standards ; 
considering commitments focused on bans and levy approaches to harmful and unnecessary plastics 
 
37 Aide Memoire  (INF/TE/IDP/RD/29 ), 18 March  2022, Pre-Plenary Meet ing. Informal Summary  
(INF/TE/IDP/R/6 ), 24 May  2022, Plenary Meet ing. Aide Memoire  (INF/TE/IDP/R/9 ), 17 November  2022, 
Pre-Plenary Meet ing.  
38 Aide Memoire  (INF/TE/IDP/R/11 ), 16 February  2023, Pre-Plenary Meet ing. 
39 Ibid. 
40 Aide Memoire ( INF/TE/IDP/R/7 ), 19 September  2022, Pre-Plenary Meet ing. 
41 Aide Memoire  (INF/TE/IDP/R/9 ), 17 November  2022, Pre-Plenary Meet ing. 
42 Aide Memoire ( INF/TE/IDP/R/7 ), 19 September  2022, Pre-Plenary Meet ing. 
43 Ibid. Aide Memoire  (INF/TE/IDP/R/11 ), 16 February  2023, Pre-Plenary Meet ing. INF/TE/IDP/RD/125  
 
- 11 - 
 
  such as SUP and pro blematic plastics ; further examining well -coordinated measures to address the 
issue of inefficient public support for fossil -fuel-based polymers, while taking into account the 
situation in each economy and industry ; identify [through a survey] best practic es and policies  in 
terms of TrPMs.44 
2  UNNECESSARY OR HARMFUL PLASTICS AND PLASTIC PRODUCTS MOST TARGETED BY 
TRADE POLICIES, INCLUDING S UP AND PLASTIC PACKAGING ASSOCIATED WITH 
INTERNATIONAL TRADE  
31. The 2021 Ministerial Statement emphasizes the Dialogue's comm itment to identify best 
practices and share experiences regarding how trade -related cooperation could support efforts to 
reduce unnecessary or harmful plastics and plastic products, including SUP and plastic packaging 
associated with international trade. In the Dialogue discussions so far, 57 interventions included 
identifiable plastics, plastic products, or plastic -containing goods (35 interventions by delegations, 
17 by stakeholders and five by the WTO Secretariat). The interventions included examples of specific 
trade-related policies and measures applicable to such specific products (as explored in the previous 
section), but also studies, observations and general suggestions and approaches to address 
environmental, social and economic concerns related to  the goods.  
32. Overall, a wide  variety of goods were targeted based on different characteristics such as type 
of polymer, composition (e.g. containing additives or certain chemicals), design (e.g. multi -layered), 
size (e.g. microplastics), related industry or  sector (e.g. care products, fishing gear), function (e.g. 
packaging, single -use), end -of-life properties (e.g. recyclability, degradability or compostability) or 
life cycle stage (e.g. virgin, recycled or waste plastic). Based on the interventions and dat a available, 
and to help structure the analysis, a series of tentative criteria were used to classify the specific 
products identified in the interventions so far (see table 5 below).  
Table 5: Types of plastic products and criteria used to identify them  
polymer  SUP construction  textiles  food  
additive  bag auto industry  care product  electronics  
chemical  packaging  fishing gear  agriculture  waste  
microplastic  end-of-life properties  
 
33. Following these criteria, SUP were the types of products most often referred to in the 
interventions at the Dialogue so far (33 interventions), followed by plastic goods defined by their 
end-of-life properties (25), such as non -degradability or recyclabili ty (see Graph 7 below). Wastes 
(21) and packaging (20) were also referred to often. In terms of sectors, plastics products related 
to the food sector (including disposable tableware or food containers) were the ones most often 
raised (13 interventions), fo llowed by care products (8) and fishing gear (7). Microplastics (8) and 
the presence of additives (8) or certain chemicals (7) were also mentioned in several interventions.  
 
44 Informal Summary ( INF/TE/IDP/R/10 ), 07 December  2022, Plenary  Meeting, para. 22. Informal 
Summary  (INF/TE/IDP/R/12 ), 13 March  2023, Plenary Meet ing. INF/TE/IDP/RD/125  
 
- 12 - 
 
  Graph 7: Types of plastic products and criteria most often found in interventions  
 
 
34. Specifically on SUP, 12 delegations made 21 interventions referring to these goods as either 
targets of their TrPMs or as products of focus.  For instance, several delegations  shared their domestic 
plans  seeking the gradual reducti on [or elimination]  of trade, production  and/or  consumption of [all 
or certain] single -use plastic products to protect life, health , the environment  and/or important 
economic sectors. Such delegations included Costa Rica, Cabo Verde, Maldives, the European  Union, 
the Russian Federation, Canada, Japan, Switzerland, Colombia and the Philippines. In these 
interventions, a wide variety of specific SUPs were mentioned, including (see table 6 below)  
35. Stakeholders also focused several of their interventions on SUPs  (seven  interventions by seven  
different stakeholders).45 For example, Minderoo presented its P WMI, which  focused on the source 
of the "single -use plastic crisis " and tracked five benchmarks looking at: who produced the virgin 
polymers bound for SUP and ho w much ended up as SUP waste; who was active in recycling 
single --use plastic waste; the near -term outlook for production of polymers bound for single -use 
plastic; the greenhouse emissions associated with SUP and the leaders and laggers in the move to 
circularity. At the centre of the index was a global material flow mod el which took a lifecycle approach 
to estimating the single -use plastic waste content in municipal solid waste streams. The report  had 
found that most SUP were still being discarded, dumped in the landfills and ending in the oceans, 
and that only regulatio n could solve recycling's failure to scale and that without policy support for 
recycling there were no strong commitments. The presentation identified three big interventions 
required to tackle the issues related to SUP: limiting fossil fuel production and  consumption; 
increasing the circularity of plastic products and materials; and investing in environmentally sound 
waste management .46 
36. The OECD presented their Global Plastic Outlook , a comprehensive mapping of the lifecycle of 
plastics globally and which provided  detailed insights on leakage to land, water and air. Among the 
priority goods identified by the study were "consumer products" and packaging .47 The EMF presented 
their n ew plastics economy initiative, supported by 1000+ organizations. According to  their 
principles, all packaging put on the market must be  reusable  (as well as  recyclable or compostable ), 
thus excluding SUP from the future plastics economy.48 Similarly, according to QUNO, all 
"internationally traded goods" should be re usable  and trade  policies should stimulate the move 
towards B2B re usable  packaging.49  
 
45 The OECD, EMF, the Global Plastics Policy Centre of the University of Portsmouth , Pew Charitable 
Trusts , the Minderoo Foundation , QUNO and CIEL.  
46 Minderoo presentation, 16 February 2023, Pre -plenary meeting . 
47 Aide Memoire  (INF/TE/IDP/RD/29 ), 18 March  2022, Pre-Plenary Meet ing. 
48 Aide Memoire  (INF/TE/IDP/R/11 ), 16 February  2023, Pre-Plenary Meet ing. 
49 Aide Memoire  (INF/TE/IDP/R/11 ), 16 February  2023, Pre-Plena ry Meet ing. 
INF/TE/IDP/RD/125  
 
- 13 - 
 
  37. Pew presented the findings of their Breaking the Plastic Wave study applicable to SUP and 
products . In particular, they noted that huge reductions in plastic waste generation could be a chieved 
by focusing on six plastic applications that were projected to account for 86 percent of the total 
reduction achievable in 2040. These applications included  certain SUP such as  business -to-business 
packaging, films, bottles, carrier bags, and food service disposables.  According to the study, sachets 
and multilayer/multi -material  flexibles (such as for shampoo and condiment portions, chips and 
sweets packets) offer ed the highest reduction potential  reduction  at 26 million metric tons per year .50 
Finally, CIEL noted that it was not only SUP that were the challenge regarding plastic pollution but 
also unnecessary and problematic plastics. This included inter alia  recyclable plastics that in practice 
were uneconomic or too difficult to recycle due t o their size or how they were combined or 
multi-layered with other plastics.  Therefore, CIEL suggested approach to regulate single -use plastic 
products was through a "positive list" which set out the plastics allowed to be produced and traded, 
along with s ome conditions and a few exceptions for necessary uses .51 
Table 6: Illustrative list of SUP referred to in the interventions by delegations and 
stakeholders52 
tableware  multilayer/multi -material  flexibles  business -to-business packag ing 
kitchenware  films pallets  
cutlery  [PET] bottles  crates  
dishes  plastic bags  dunnage  
plates  carrier bags  drums  
straws  home delivery bags   intermediate bulk containers  
cups takeaway food packaging  big bags  
stirrers  food and beverage containers  tobacco  
mixers  food service disposables  confetti  
streamers  plastic labels with adhesive  cotton bud [sticks]  
 
38. Other issues raised in sparingly the discussions were "colourful" plastics (which interfered in 
recycling processes), multi-layered plastics (which could be hard to recycle) and minimum plastic 
content for a targeted good to be classified as plastic.  
39. As noted above, in a series of interventions53, the WTO Secretariat provided some preliminary 
results based on the data alr eady available through the survey on TrPMs. Noting that the analysis 
was based on preliminary data and absolute numbers provided could change (including reducing 
after cleaning up the data), the Secretariat noted that it was still useful to share some insi ghts into 
the wealth of information being generated. With respect to specific plastic goods targeted by the 
TrPMs included in the survey that far, the Secretariat noted that most measures targeted packaging 
(109 TrPMs), foll owed by SUPs (89) and waste (88) .  
40. With regards to specific SUPs that could be identified in the TrPMs included in the survey, the 
Secretariat noted that the six most often targeted were: plastic bags (43 TrPMs), tableware 
(26 TrPMs), food containers (22 TrPMs), cups (17 TrPMs ), plastic straws (17 TrPMs) and cotton buds 
(10 TrPMs) .54 Apart from packaging and SUPs, the Secretariat noted that 26 other TrPMs included 
identifiable "finished goods" targeted by these measures, including products from the construction, 
agricultural an d auto sectors (see table 7 below).  
 
 
50 Aide Memoire ( INF/TE/IDP/R/7 ), 19 September  2022, Pre-Plenary Meet ing. 
51 CIEL, aide memoire, 17 Nov 22, Pre -plenary . 
52 Some repetition is include d in the list to illustrate the different manners in which these goods are 
referred to in interventions . 
53 See Aide Memoire ( INF/TE/IDP/R/7 ), 19 September  2022, Pre-Plenary Meet ing; Informal Summary  
(INF/TE/IDP/R/8 ), 11 October  2022, Plenary Meet ing; Aide Memoire  (INF/TE/IDP/R/9 ), 17 November  2022, 
Pre-Plenary Meet ing; and Aide Memoire  (INF/TE/IDP/R/11 ), 16 February  2023, Pre-Plenary Meet ing. 
54  INF/TE/IDP/RD/125  
 
- 14 - 
 
  Table 7: Summary of specific plastic goods targeted by TrPMs included in the Dialogue 
Survey (preliminary results)55 
Packaging  109 TrPMs  
SUPs  Plastic bag s 43 
89 Tableware  26 
Food containers  22 
Cups  17 
Plastic straws  17 
(expanded) Polystyrene  11 
Cotton buds  10 
Beverage stirrers  10 
Plastic lids  9 
Plastic film  5 
Bottles  3 
Plastic balloon sticks  3 
Sachets  3 
Oxo-degradable plastic  2 
Fishing gear  1 
PVC 1 
Wastes and scraps  88 
Other "finished goods" included…  Construction materials  
26 Agricultural materials (e.g. rubber hoses, mulch films)  
eProducts and electronics  
Care products (cosmetics, diapers, toiletries…)  
Tyres  
Fishing nets  
Tobacco  
 
 
41. Finally, it is worth noting that almost no intervention included a direct reference to specific 
HS codes of targeted products, except for a few of interventions by stakeholders. In particular, in a 
series of interventions56, the Forum on Trade, Environment & the SDGs (TESS)  presented examples 
of HS codes that could be further developed or disaggregated to help identify plastic polymer, 
products and plastic -containing goods of interest, including single -use goods (see table 8 below57). 
Although such interventions were delivered in the context of efforts to contribute to the 2027 HS 
reform at the WCO, they offer a few indications of where such plastic products could already found. 
The Workshop will aim identify HS codes that are alre ady being used to target specific plastics, 
plastic products and plastic -containing goods.  
 
 
55 Each TrPM could include multiple specific targeted goods. In this sense, the total numbe r of these add 
up to more than the total number of TrPMs.  
56 See TESS submissions to the Dialogue meetings held on 11 May 2022 ( INF/TE/IDP/RD/62 ), 
24 May 2022 ( INF/TE/IDP/RD/63/Rev.1 ) 11 October 2022 ( INF/TE/IDP/RD/65 ) and on 17 November 2022 
(INF/TE/IDP/RD/77 ). 
57 The table reproduces a specific table contained in TESS submission  to the Dialogue Pre -Plenary 
meeting held on 17 November 2022 ( INF/TE/IDP/RD/77 ) INF/TE/IDP/RD/125  
 
- 15 - 
 
  Table 8: TESS submission of HS codes used to identify single -use products  
392310 Plastics; Boxes, cases, crates and similar articles for the  conveyance or packaging of 
goods  
392321  Ethylene  polymers; s acks and bags, incl. cones, for the conveyance or packaging of 
goods  
392329  Plastics; s acks and bags, incl. cones, for the conveyance or packaging of goods , of 
plastics other than those of polymers of ethylene  
392330  Plastics; carboys, bottles, flasks and similar articles, for the conveyance or packaging 
of goods  
392340  Plastics; spools, cops, bobbins and similar supports, for the conveyance or packaging 
of goods  
392350  Plastics; stoppers, lids, caps and other closures, for the conveyance or packaging of 
goods  
392390  Plastics; for the conveyance or packaging of goods  n.e.c. in heading no. 3923  
392410  Tableware and kitchenware, of plastics  
630531  Sacks and bags; of a kind used for the packaging of goods, of polyethylene or 
polypropylene strip or the like  
630532  Sacks and bags; of a kind used for the packaging of goods, of man -made textile 
materials, flexible intermediate bulk containers  
630533  Sacks and bags; of a ki nd used for the packaging of goods, of made textile materials, 
of polyethylene or polypropylene strip or the like, not flexible intermediate bulk 
containers  
560811  Twine, cordage or rope; fishing nets, of man -made textile materials  
560819  Other knotted netting of twine, cordage or rope; made -up fishing nets and other made -
up bets, of textile materials  
 
 
3  TRADE POLICIES AND PRACTICES REQUIRING REALIGNMENT WITH THE OBJECTIVE OF 
ENDING PLASTIC POLLUTION  
42. The 2021 Ministerial Statement emphasizes the  importance of identifying effective trade 
policies or measures to support the implementation of actions under other international processes 
and efforts and strengthening cooperation and policy coherence within rules and mechanisms of the 
WTO.  
43. Across the Dialogue's discussions, participants highlighted several key considerations 
underpinning effective trade policies that would help advance global efforts to reduce plastics 
pollution and support the transition to a more circular and environmentally sustaina ble global plastics 
economy. In general, participants underscored the overarching need for trade policies and trade 
cooperation to contribute to reducing production, consumption, and use of unnecessary or harmful 
plastics, as well as the need for ESM of plastics waste. At the same time, many stressed the 
importance of  avoid substituting one environmental problem with another  and press ed the need to 
assess the full life cycle consequences of substitutes and alternatives  when imposing restrictions on 
plastics and plastic products. Discussions also brought to fore varied approaches to plastics pollution 
reduction, including through:  
• Trade -related measures that address production, consumption, and use of plastics, and 
trade in plastics waste.  
• Effective waste management to reduce pollution from plastics waste.  
• Stimulation of upstream considerations, taking into account shifting market  incentives to 
make the economics work at scale and facilitate the necessary investments, and to catalyse 
collective industry action.58 
• Trade facilitative approach that minimi zes the need for virgin materials and keeps products 
and their related materials in productive use in the economy for as long as possible.59 
• Building capacity of developing and least developed Members to support implementation of 
environmental policies that reduce plastics pollution.  
 
 
58 Ellen MacArthur Foundation presentation/study, aide memoire 18 March 20 22. 
59 CTE Minutes, 12 Oct ober 2021. INF/TE/IDP/RD/125  
 
- 16 - 
 
  44. Pew highlighted that the business -as-usual scenario  was not viable where current policies and 
commitments would only reduce plastic pollution by 7% by 2040, and posited that reduction of 
plastic production was the most attractive solution from environmental, economic, and social 
perspectives.60 OECD noted that, in view of an expected increase in plastic usage, the aim of any 
policy should not necessarily be to eliminate plastics but rather plastics pollution and its 
environmental consequences.61  
45. Several delegations shared their experiences with and explore d the possibility of adopting 
trade-related measures across the plastics value chain, including bans on the import of SUP62, export 
bans on plastics waste,63 and phasing out SUP64 and plastics that cannot be recycled.65 Some 
delegations also underscored th e need to address subsidies in fossil fuels to tackle issues related to 
plastics66 and their impact on the plastics industry, and explore synergies with the Fossil Fuel Subsidy 
Reform initiative at the WTO.67 One delegation noted that it was open to furthe r examining 
well-coordinated measures to address the issue of inefficient public support for fossil -fuel-based 
polymers, by taking into account the situation in each economy and industry.68 
46. A few delegations encouraged efforts to reduce plastic pollution t hrough the improvement of 
effective waste management, recycling, and stimulation measures, rather than through bans and 
restrictions, reiterating that the circular economy was not about excluding the use and trade of 
polymers.69 One delegation further considered that effective waste plastic management, along with 
international cooperation and trade, would be more beneficial to address the environmental aspects 
of plastic waste pollution.70 Another  delegation suggested that a sustainable and economically viable 
solution to the issue of plastic pollution needed to be based on the promotion and integrated 
management of waste and solid waste, and was of the view that the circular economy of plastics, a s 
well as proper waste management, was the right way to fight the problem of plastic pollution.71  
47. On a trade facilitative approach for a circular economy, one delegation highlighted that 
facilitating trade in recyclable materials, including plastic scrap,  was essential in combatting pollution 
from plastic waste and for broader adoption of more circular economy approaches to resource 
efficiency. It added that these products had inherent economic and commercial value and support ed 
greater resource efficiency  and circularity, which required trade policies to facilitate than impede 
their movement.72  
48. Stimulation of upstream considerations was an important approach underscored by the EMF 
which presented on the role of trade policies in the transition to a circul ar economy for plastics. It 
observed that the new plastics economy called for a 6 -pronged vision spanning:  
• Elimination of unnecessary or problematic plastic packaging;  
• Promotion of reuse models;  
• 100% of plastic packaging to be reusable, recyclable or compostable by design ; 
• 100% of plastic packaging to be reusable, recyclable or compostable in practice;  
• Decoupling of plastics use from consumption of finite resources; and  
• Plastic packaging to be free from hazardous chemicals.  
 
49. Overall, it  encouraged policymakers to promote circular outcomes by stimulating upstream 
considerations such as in the design of plastic products  and underscored  the need to take into 
 
60 Pew presentation, aide memoire, 19 Sep tember  2022 pre -plenary . 
61 OECD presentation/study, aide memoire, 19 Sep tember  2022 pre -plenary . 
62 Informal Summary ( INF/TE/IDP/R/5 ), 30 March 2022, Plenary Meeting . 
63 Aide memoire  (INF/TE/IDP/RD/41 ), 11 May 22, Pre -plenary  Meeting . 
64 Ibid. 
65 Ibid. 
66 Informal Summary ( INF/TE/IDP/R/6 ), 24 May 2022, Plenary Meeting . 
67 Informal Summary ( INF/TE/IDP/R/8 ), 11 October 2022, Plenary Meeting . 
68 Informal Summary ( INF/TE/IDP/R/12 ), 13 March 2023, Plenary Meeting . 
69 Informal Summary ( INF/TE/IDP/R/8 ), 11 October 2022, Plenary Meeting . 
70 Saudi Arabia, CTE minutes 2 Feb ruary  2022, directdoc.aspx (wto.org)  
71 Guatemala, CTE minutes 12 Oct ober 2021, directdoc.aspx (wto.org)  
72 CTE Minutes, 12 Oct ober 2021, directdoc.aspx (wto.org)  INF/TE/IDP/RD/125  
 
- 17 - 
 
  consideration shifting market incentives to make the economics work at scale and fa cilitate the 
necessary investments, and to catalyse collective industry action.73 
50. The table below provides examples of the trade policy actions identified in the interventions 
in the Dialogue so far that could be taken under the various approaches to reduc ing plastic pollution.   
Table 9: Trade policy measures to be realigned with the approaches to reducing plastic 
pollution raised in the context of Dialogue discussions  
APPROACH  SUGGESTED ACTIONS IDENTIFIED  
Trade -related measures and 
efforts  Liberalize tariffs and reduce non -tariffs barriers to trade 
in sustainable substitute goods and services74 
Simplify and eliminate border measures on sustainable 
substitute goods and services75 
Phase out plastics that cannot be recycled76  
Phase out substances and/or plastics of concern, 
problematic plastics products and some types of SUP77 
Impose export bans on certain plastics (e.g. wastes )78 
Restrict plastic waste exports to high leakage regions79 
Coordinate regional or domestic  bans on certain products 
or polymers that were problematic80 
Cap plastic production (i.e. reduction) and limit single -
use application of plastics (i.e. re use)81 
Facilitate the adoption of measures on single -use plastic 
products and microplastics intentionally added to 
plastics, and related technical standards82 
Use trade agreements to promote circular economy83 
Better identification of plastics in the H S to help the 
implementation of environmental policies by Customs 
Administrations, such as implementation of the Basel 
Convention and specifically on matters related to plastic 
waste and its illegal shipment84 
Understand the impact of subsidies in fossil fuels on the 
plastic industry and explore possible synergies with the 
Fossil Fuel Subsidy Reform initiative at the WTO85 
Increase knowledge of government support to the 
petrochemical and plastics sectors86 
Reduce subsidies to fossil fuels/virgin plastics 
production87 or commit to a standstill88  
Trade facilitative approach for a 
circular economy  Facilitate trade in recyclable materials, including plastic 
scrap, for circular economy89 
 
73 Ellen MacArthur Foundation presentation/study, Aide Memoire ( INF/TE/IDP/RD/29 ), 18 March 2022, 
Pre-Plenary Meeting . 
74 Pew presentation, Aide Memoi re (INF/TE/IDP/R/7 ), 19 September 2022, Pre -Plenary Meeting .  
75 Ibid.  
76 Aide memoire ( INF/TE/IDP/RD/41 ), 11 May 2022, Pre -plenary Meeting . 
77 Aide Memoire  (INF/TE/IDP/R/11 ), 16 February  2023, Pre-Plenary Meet ing. 
78 Aide Memoire (INF/TE/IDP/R/9 ), 17 November 2022, Pre -Plenary Meeting   
79 Pew, Aide Memoire (INF/TE/IDP/R/9 ), 17 November 2022, Pre-Plenary Meeting   
80 Pew presentation, Aide Memoire ( INF/TE/IDP/R/7 ), 19 September 2022, Pre -Plenary Meeting.  
81 CIEL presentation, Aide Memoire ( INF/TE/IDP/R/7 ), 19 September 2022, Pre -Plenary Meeting   
82 Aide memoire ( INF/TE/IDP/RD/41 ), 11 May 22, Pre -plenary Meeting   
83 Ibid.  
84 WCO presentation, Aide Memoire ( INF/TE/IDP/RD/29 ), 18 March 2022, Pre -Plenary Meeting ; TESS 
statement, Aide Memoire ( INF/TE/IDP/ R/7), 19 September 2022, Pre -Plenary Meeting . 
85 Informal Summary ( INF/TE/IDP/R/8 ), 11 October 2022, Plenary Meeting . 
86 Informal Summary ( INF/TE/IDP/R/8 ), 11 October 2022, Plenary Meeting . 
87 Pew presentation, Aide Memoire ( INF/TE/IDP/R/7 ), 19 September 2022, Pre -Plenary Meeting . 
88 UNCT AD, Aide Memoire ( INF/TE/IDP/R/11 ), 16 February 2023, Pre -Plenary Meeting . 
89 CTE minutes, 12 Oct ober 22. INF/TE/IDP/RD/125  
 
- 18 - 
 
  APPROACH  SUGGESTED ACTIONS IDENTIFIED  
Stimulation of upstream 
considerations  Establish design standards while taking into 
consideration shifting market incentives to facilitate 
investments, and catalyse collective action90 
Effective waste management  Identify common definitions and reviewing policies that 
were incons istent in terms of plastic waste 
management91 
Investment in Waste collection, sorting and recycling 
infrastructure  
Facilitate technology transfer for refill and recycling 
technologies92 
Aid and Capacity building  Realign d evelopment finance to curb plastic pollution 
with where the main sources of leakage were93 
 
51. Discussions also revealed a multitude of challenges  undercutting efforts to reduce plastics 
pollution. One delegation observed that at the root of the problem, global plastic production and 
consumption far exceeded the capacity of waste treatment facilities. It called for reducing the 
production and consum ption of plastics, especially the most toxic ones, as the primary way to combat 
illegal trade in plastics. It added that another possible solution would be to enhance the transparency 
along the waste shipment routes from the origin of the waste to its dest ination, and on the content 
of the waste containers. In this instance, more digitalisation including the use of block -chains in the 
implementation of the Basel Convention procedures would help enhance such transparency.  
52. One major challenge recurrently not ed by delegations and stakeholders, and recognised in the 
2021 Ministerial Statement, was the lack of granular data to support and inform the development of 
domestic and international approaches to plastics and facilitate the transition to a circular econo mic 
model.94 Efforts to address this issue were underway at the WCO, which spoke on their role in 
enabling the better identification of plastics in the HS and in supporting the implementation of 
environmental policies by Customs Administrations, with a focus on the im plementation of the Basel 
Convention and specifically on matters related to plastic waste and the illegal shipment thereof.95 
One stakeholder further spoke on the need to improve transparency in the reporting of plastic trade 
flows across the life cycle of  plastics.96  
53. Another delegation noted that there were difficulties in capturing the amount of certain 
recycled materials used for trading goods based on conventional governmental statistics, with the 
need to integrate the data and information held by gove rnments and various stakeholders to better 
understand the flow of recycled materials used in trading goods.97  
54. One delegation underscored several challenges that hindered the management of plastic 
waste, including:  
• Ensuring an integrated waste management infrastructure linked to recycling;  
• Need to drive technology growth, advanced recycling and materials recovery methods;  
• Need for standardization around materials feedstock requirements/quality; and  
• Effective planning and investment in the supply chain to  cope with the changes and 
modifications needed to realize circular approaches.98 
 
55. Another challenge raised to be addressed was the misuse of the Basel Convention procedures 
that allowed trade in certain plastics waste containing an illegal mix of prohibit ed plastics waste and 
 
90 Ellen MacArthur Foundation presentation/study, Aide Memoire ( INF/TE/IDP/RD/29 ), 18 March 2022, 
Pre-Plenary Meeting   
91 TESS, Aide Memoire ( INF/TE/IDP/R/7 ), 19 September 2022, Pre -Plenary Meeting .  
92 Pew presentation, Aide Memoire ( INF/TE/IDP/R/7 ), 19 September 2022, Pre -Plenary Meeting . 
93 Aide Memoire ( INF/TE/IDP/R/11 ), 16 February 2023, Pre -Plenary Meeting.  
94 Aide Memoire ( INF/TE/IDP/R/7 ), 19 September 2022, Pre -Plenary Meeting ; 2021 Ministerial Statement . 
95 WCO presentation, Aide Memoire ( INF/TE/IDP/RD/29 ), 18 March 2022, Pre -Plenary Meeting ; TESS 
statement, Aide Memoire ( INF/TE/IDP/R/7 ), 19 September 2022, Pre -Plenary Meeting . 
96 Pew presentation, Aide Memoire ( INF/TE/IDP/R/7 ), 19 September 2022, Pre -Plenary Meeting . 
97 Aide Memoire (INF/TE/IDP/R/9 ), 17 November 2022, Pre -Plenary Meeting.  
98 Informal Summary ( INF/TE/IDP/R/8 ), 11 October 2022, Plenary Meeting.  INF/TE/IDP/RD/125  
 
- 19 - 
 
  allowed plastics waste. One delegation called for these loopholes to be closed by strengthening the 
controls and through application of sanctions.99  
56. Another delegation noted challenges arising from the implementation of its domestic measures 
on eco -design and harmoni zation of domestic regulatory measures, which seeks a gradual reduction 
of the production and consumption of SUP products. The implementation challenges identified 
included:  
• Adaptation challenges for companies facing major changes in their business model;  
• Challenges to access technologies and knowledge for the development of new products;  
• Difficulty in differentiating products, both at the level of their tariff headings but also through 
certifications that were internationally recogni zed and that highlighted the value of products 
that have less plastic content.100  
 
57. In the same vein, one delegation shared its domestic structural challenges which were causing 
a market failure f or plastics recycling. It noted its lack of a domestic EPR scheme for industries that 
produced and imported plastic packaging, and observed limited local demand for recycled plastics 
despite voluntary brand commitments. To this end, the delegation was cons idering international 
instruments and guidelines such as the OECD's EPR scheme and the plastic credit syste m as 
international efforts that could be tapped upon by members .101 
58. The lack of global regulations on plastics pollution on the one hand,102 and fragme ntation of 
regulatory approaches on the other hand,103 were also highlighted as challenges impeding 
international efforts to reduce plastics pollution. CIEL noted that it was important not to focus on 
what the worst SUP were, and proposed two criteria to be  considered when assessing SUP:  
• Necessary or essential SUP; and  
• Compelling reason for the plastic product to be necessary or essential.  
 
59. It further suggested that one approach to regulate single -use plastic products was through a 
"positive list" approac h which set out the plastics allowed to be produced and traded, along with 
some conditions and a few exceptions for necessary uses .104 UNCTAD further suggested that the 
Dialogue could discuss criteria for "good" and "bad" products, where the list of "bad" p roducts could 
include for instance "toxic and harmful products that cannot be recycled".105  
60. Based on their preliminary analysis of  applied tariff rates specifically on finished plastics and 
plastics substitutes which had revealed that not only substitutes were more expensive, but also 
faced higher tariffs , UNCTAD suggested review ing downwards applied tariffs to plastics substitutes 
to level the playing field vis -a-vis fossil fuel -based plastics (voluntary scheme for autonomous 
liberalization on MFN basis) , as well as  expanding notification efforts on non -tariff measures 
applicable to plastic substitutes .106 In addition, the Pew Charitable Trusts observed that entirely new 
business models would be needed that went beyond material substitutes, alongside policy incentives 
that encouraged the adoption of delivery models and end -of-life technologies.107 
61. On enhanci ng international efforts to reduce plastics pollution, o ne delegation suggested that 
discussions at the INC could explore measures aimed at bringing down production, consumption and 
use of plastics, as well as promoting ESM of plastic waste. Discussions co uld also explore phase -outs, 
in cases of substances and/or plastics of concern, as well as problematic plastic products and SUP.108  
62. WHO called for initiatives on plastics pollution, including negotiations towards a global legally 
binding instrument on plas tics, to recogni se the protection of human health as an essential element 
 
99 Aide Memoire (INF/TE/IDP/R/9 ), 17 November 2022, Pre -Plenary Me eting.  
100 Informal Summary ( INF/TE/IDP/R/8 ), 11 October 2022, Plenary Meeting.  
101 Informal Summary ( INF/TE/IDP/R/8 ), 11 October 2022, Plenary Meeting.  
102 WWF Lambertini's statement, Informal Summary ( INF/TE/IDP/R/12 ), 13 March 2023, Plenary 
Meeting.   
103 Informal Summary ( INF/TE/IDP/R/8 ), 11 October 2022, Plenary Meeting.  
104 CIEL, Aide Memoire (INF/TE/IDP/R/9 ), 17 November 2022, Pre -Plenary Meeting.  
105 Aide Memoire ( INF/TE/IDP/R/11 ), 16 February 2023, Pre-Plenary Meeting.  
106 UNCTAD,  Aide Memoire ( INF/TE/IDP/R/11 ), 16 February 2023, Pre -Plenary Meeting.  
107 Ibid.  
108 Ibid.  INF/TE/IDP/RD/125  
 
- 20 - 
 
  of any sustainable approach to addressing plastics pollution. It added that such approaches should 
be modified as scientific knowledge of risks, including the health risks associated  with plastics, their 
product, use and disposal, continue to develop.109 
63. QUNO suggested that the Dialogue consider including references to the need to address 
plastics subsidies in its statement to MC13 and that the statement be complimented by a High-Level 
Work Plan that would seek,  among other aims, to :  
• Reach agreement on what parts of the value chain of making plastic goods should be covered 
by the term "plastics subsidies," and what forms of government support were of interest to 
the group .   
• Initiate an exercise under which each DPP participant produced an inventory of the subsidies 
to plastics it had provided to its domestic industries, and what financing its plastics industry 
had received from public entities, including foreign and multilater al lenders, over the 
previous three years.110 
 
64. Similarly, UNCTAD suggested delegations could also pledge to n otify any public support to the 
fossil fuel -based polymer sector (up, mid and downstream)  and not to increase existing subsidy 
levels to the fossil fuel-based polymer sector (stand still clause) .111 
65. A number of stakeholders also presented their projects on plastics policies. The OECD  
proposed two policy packages under Part II of its Global Plastics Outlook, which sought to project 
future plastics use, waste and leakage. It called for:  
• regional action with a focus on gradual increase in stringency of measures; and  
• global ambition through coordinated policy action on measures such as packaging tax; tax 
on non -packaging items; eco -design; enhancing recycl ing through waste management; 
recycled content target; EPR; improving plastic waste collection; and improving litter 
collection.112 
 
66. The Global Plastics Policy Centre at the University of Portsmouth  presented its analysis of 
plastic policies and found that reuse (compared to substitution) had a lower climate impact across 
the entire lifecycle and kept material circulating in the economy for longer.  It highlighted that the 
complexity of the plastics value chain lifecycle, which was often international but iso lated, meant 
that fragmented policies at domestic and regional scales lacked the reach to be effective to tackle 
problems that were international in scope and source. There was thus a need for a package of policies 
that expanded across the value chains and  that addressed multiple points of the lifecycle and were 
coordinated and integrated.113 
67. The Pew Charitable Trusts presented its study applicable to SUP and products, and found that 
a suite of solutions combined was needed for system change that could reduce plastic pollution by 
82%. The study identified six plastic applications which trade policies could focus on, with greater 
emphasis to be placed on it ems (i) to (iv):  
(i) multilayer/multi -material  flexibles;  
(ii) business -to-business packaging;  
(iii) films;  
(iv) bottles;  
(v) carrier bags; and  
(vi) food service disposables.  
 
68. It observed that current domestic  and regional  product bans and regulations focused 
overwhelmingly on car rier bags and food service items , but that these two applications together 
made up just 10 % of the entire plastic waste stream and 16 % of the potential plastic reduction . It 
argued that t he other four applications,  represented a huge, untapped opportunity,  with sachets and 
multilayer/multi -material  flexibles (such as for shampoo and condiment portions, chips and sweets 
 
109 Ibid.  
110 QUNO statement, Informal Summary ( INF/TE/IDP/R/12 ), 13 March 2023, Plenary Meeting.  
111 UNCTAD statement, Aide Memoire  (INF/TE/IDP/R/11 ), 16 February  2023, Pre-Plenary Meet ing. 
112 Aide Memoire ( INF/TE/IDP/R/7 ), 19 September 2022, Pre -Plenary Meeting . 
113 Aide Memoire (INF/TE/IDP/R/9 ), 17 November 2022, Pre -Plenary Meeting.  INF/TE/IDP/RD/125  
 
- 21 - 
 
  packets) offer ing the highest reduction potential. Further, paper and compostable materials could 
substitute 17% of plastic waste generated by 2040 without fundamentally decreasing the 
performance, affordability, and social and environmental acceptability of packaging as single -use 
items.114 
4  CRITERIA USED WHEN PRIORITIZING TRADE ACTION ON UNNECESSARY OR HARMFUL 
PLASTICS, PLASTIC PRODUCTS AND OT HER GOODS  
69. The 2021 Ministerial Statement recalls the need to identify best practices and share 
experiences regarding several issues, including trade -related cooperation to support efforts to 
reduce unnecessary or harmful plastics and plastic products, incl uding SUP and plastic packaging 
associated with international trade. In this context, during the last two years, there have been 
discussions on various policy efforts, which also touched upon criteria used when prioritizing trade 
action on unnecessary or h armful plastics, plastic products and other goods.  
70. In preparation to the Workshop, a few harmonized criteria were developed  to help structure 
and compute the written submissions provided by delegations and stakeholders in response to the 
guiding questions (see table 10 below) . To the extent possible, this factual summary tries to map 
the discussions held in the Dialogue so far  based on such harmonized criteria.  
Table 10: Harmonized  criteria used when prioritizing trade action on unnecessary or 
harmful plastics, plastic products, and other goods  
Relative importance in leakage  Relative importance in total plastics waste generation  
Environmental damage  Relative importance of material flows of plastics moved by trade  
Risk of pollution  Substitutability for the same functionality and cost effectiveness 
(incl. in the health system)  
Human health  Technical and economic viability of recycling the product  
Food security  Potential to negatively impede circularity  
Single vs multi -use goods  Embedded and related (e.g. transport) GHG -emissions  
Multi -material, multi -polymer 
structure  Negative impact in n on-plastic materials' industries being 
substituted by plastics  
Other:  Costs of cleaning up and losses for tourism, fisheries and 
shipping  
 
71. In total , 30 interventions (14 by delegations and 16 by stakeholders) in the Dialogue included 
identifiable criteria (see Graph 8 below). These vary significantly and often depended on the specific 
situations, sectors, or goods targeted. In the Dialogue so far, th e most frequently mentioned criterion 
was "relative importance in leakage"  (mentioned in 12 interventions), followed by "technical and 
economic viability of recycling the product"  (10) and  "risk of pollution " (10). The fourth and fifth 
most commonly discus sed criteria were "environmental damage " (8) and  "human health" (7) . 
Graph 8: Criteria most often identified in interventions115  
 
 
114 Aide Memoire (INF/TE/IDP/R/9 ), 17 November 2022, Pre-Plenary Meeting.  / 
breakingtheplasticwave_mainreport.pdf (pewtrusts.org) . 
115 Each intervention could include multiple criteria. In this sense, the total number of these add up to 
more than the total number of interventions in which criteria could be identified.  
223556678101012
0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14Potential to negatively impede circularityNegative impact in non-plastic materials' industries being substituted by plasticsCosts of cleaning up and losses for tourism, fisheries and shippingSingle vs multi-use goodsEmbedded and related (e.g. transport) GHG-emissionsRelative importance in total plastics waste generationSubstitutability for the same functionality and cost effectiveness (incl. in the health system)Human healthEnvironmental damageRisk of pollutionTechnical and economic viability of recycling the productRelative importance in leakageINF/TE/IDP/RD/125  
 
- 22 - 
 
   
72. Overall, the criteria mentioned in the Dialogue so far r eflect the complexity of the issue of 
plasti c pollution and the need to consider the environmental, economic, and human health impacts 
of plastic products . For example, the European Union116 identified the 10 SUP products most often 
found on its beaches as well as lost and abandoned fishing gear  and took various measures in 
response  adapted to each product and circumstances . These measures included banning specific 
items (as reviewed under section 3), setting targets for recycled plastic in PET beverage bottles , 
implement ing EPR requirements for several SUPs containing plastics  and targeted microplastics 
through measures such as a general ban on their use in cosmetics, detergents, paints, and other 
products.  Import antly, the EU noted that o nly items for which alternatives were easily available and 
affordable would be banned from  markets of EU Member States (e.g. cotton bud  sticks, cutlery, 
plates, stirrers, and straws) . Similarly , the Maldives shared117 that it heavi ly relied  on healthy oceans 
for its two largest economic activities, namely tourism and fisheries. It had thus taken several 
significant steps to phase  out SUP, such as the prohibition of the import of any goods declared as 
SUP and the compilation and publ ication of an evolving list of goods to be classified as banned SUP.  
73. The Philippines118 informed participants that under its legislation , environmentally 
unacceptable products should not be prohibited unless there were alternatives available to 
consumers a t no more than ten percent greater cost than the disposable product . It was thus very 
challenging to identify solutions  that met this legal requirement.  One delegation119 defined 
"particularly problematic products" as products made from oxo -degradable plast ics, which degraded 
into micro plastic  particles when littered. Another delegation said that characteristics that could be 
considered for identifying SUP and problematic plastics, included, inter alia , single -use (low 
durability), non -biodegradable and non -recyclable, containing harmful additives, prone to leaching, 
and impact on inland waterways and oceans.  Based on this categorization, it saw polystyrene 
(styrofoam) as fitting the profile of a problematic plastic.120 Another added that the criteria to be 
considered in the identification of SUP were related to the "degree of use" before disposal of the 
product, and the possibility for the product to perform multiple circuits, rotations, or uses within its 
life cycle.121 Finally, one delegation emphasized that the choice of optimal measures needed to be 
based on their economic and environmental efficiency, as well as scientific validity and verifiability.122  
74. Throughout the discussions , stakeholders also provided insights and recommendations 
regarding  criteria to prioritize  trade actions to reduce plastic pollution. Pew shared findings from the 
Breaking the Plastic Wave report, highlighting that focusing on six plastic applications - 
multilayer/multi -material  flexibles, business -to-business packaging, films, bottles, carrier bags, and 
food service disposables - could account for 86% of the total reduction achievable in 2040. However, 
current domestic and regional product bans and regulations primarily target ed carrier bags and food 
service items, which ma de up only 10% of the plastic waste stream and 16% of the potential 
reduction. Sachets and multilayer/multi -material  flexibles were identified as having the highest 
reduction potential at 26 million metric tons per y ear.123 TESS emphasized the need to address the 
production and trade of problematic plastic materials and harmful chemicals and additives. It 
recommended starting with identifiable SUP and considering this effort in the larger context of 
problematic plastic s.124 
75. The W HO stressed that protecting human health should be an essential element of any 
sustainable approach to addressing plastic pollution. It recommended considering health in all 
policies and prioritizing co -benefits to health and the environment.125 The OECD reported126 that 
global plastics use was expected to nearly triple by 2060, with transportation, construction, and 
packaging industries accounting for 60% of consumption. It modelled two scenarios to address this, 
 
116 EU presentation (INF/TE/IDP/RD/35 ), 30 March 2022 Plenary Meeting. 
117 CTE minutes  (WT/CTE/M/74 ), meeti ng held on 2 February 2022.  
118 Philippines presentation INF/TE/IDP/RD/34 ,  30 March 2022 Plenary meet ing. 
119 Aide memoire ( INF/TE/IDP/R/9 ), 17 November 2022  Pre-plenary Meeting. 
120 Aide memoire ( INF/TE/IDP/R/9 ), 17 November 2022  Pre-plenary Meeting . 
121 Aide memoire ( INF/TE/IDP/R/9 ), 17 November 2022  Pre-plenary Meeting . 
122 Aide memoire ( INF/TE/IDP/R/11 ), 16 Febr uary Pre -plenary Meeting.   
123 Pew presentation ( INF/TE/IDP/RD/76 ), 17 November 2022  Pre-plenary Meeting . 
124 Intervention by TESS ( INF/TE/IDP/RD/77 ), 17 November 2022 Pre -plenary Meeting.  
125 Aide memoire ( INF/TE/IDP/R/11 ) 16 February Pre-plenary Meeting.  
126 OECD presentation ( INF/TE/IDP/RD/48 ), 19-20 September 2022 Pre -plenary Meeting referring to its 
report  "Global Plastics Outlook POLICY SCENARIOS TO  2060". INF/TE/IDP/RD/125  
 
- 23 - 
 
  including measures to restrain plas tic demand and production, enhance recycling, and close leakage 
pathways.   
76. The I UCN co-developed (together with UNEP) domestic level footprinting methodologies to 
identify interventions and instruments for addressing hotspots  of plastic pollution  related t o trade. 
IUCN's  work on hotspots focuse d on identifying leakage of plastic polymers, the sectors that were 
producing the leakage (such as plastic packaging), and also waste management and geographical 
areas of where this  was happening.127 Finally, t he World  Bank recommended adopting adequate 
legislation and provisions, defining ESM criteria for plastic waste treatment, and implementing 
importing procedures and trade measures to manage plastic waste trade.128 
77. To help illustrate the interactions between TrPMs, targeted plastic products and the criteria 
considered for the trade -related intervention, t he table below provides a few examples  of 
experiences shared in the Dialogue . As can be noted, different types of TrPMs reflect a range of 
approaches, from bans and prohibitions to EPR schemes. The criteria used to prioritize these policies 
include a combination of environmental concerns, economic factors, and practical considerations 
related to the functionality and cost of plastic products and  their usage . 
Table 11: Matrix with e xamples of trade policies , criteria and targeted  goods  
Trade action  Criteria cited  Example s of targeted product s 
Ban/prohibition  on 
imports129  Costs of cleaning up and losses for 
tourism, fisheries and shipping  SUP 
Ban/prohibition , 
technical regulation 
or specifications; EPR 
scheme; Other 
environmental 
requirements  and 
measures130 Risk of pollution; environmental 
damage; relative importance in 
leakage; single vs multi -use 
goods; substitutability for the 
same functionality and cost 
effectiveness  plastic cutlery, plates and straws; 
food and beverage containers made 
of expanded polystyrene whose 
content is intended for immediate 
consumption; oxo -degradable 
plastics and cotton bud sticks made 
of plastic; microplastics in 
cosmetics, detergents, paints and 
other products; biodegradable, 
compostable and bio -based plastics  
Ban/prohibitions on 
exports131 Relative importance in leakage; 
risk of pollution  waste plastics  
Internal taxes132 Risk of pollution; embedded and 
related (e.g. transport) 
GHG-emissions  plastic packaging; plastic waste  
EPR scheme funded 
and implemented by  
operators  (brand 
owners, producers, 
importers)133 Substitutability for the same 
functionality and cost effectiveness  rigid and flexible plastic packaging, 
including multi -layered  paper 
packaging with at least 1 layer of 
plastic. E.g. PET, PP , PE and PS; 
filler material for plastic products 
and construction materials; mixed 
plastic waste to asphalt road and 
plastic lumber  
 
 
__________  
 
127 Informal Summary ( INF/TE/IDP/R/6 ), 24 May 2022, Plenary Meeting.  
128 WB presentation ( INF/TE/IDP/RD/118 ), 16 February 2022, Pre -plenary Meeting.  
129 CTE minutes  (WT/CTE/M/74 ), meeti ng held on 2 February 2022.  
130 CTE minutes ( WT/CTE/M/73 ), meeting held on 12 October  2021. Informal Summary  
(INF/TE/IDP/R/11 ), 30 March  2022, Plenary Meet ing. Aide Memoire  (INF/TE/IDP/R/9 ), 17 November  2022, 
Pre-Plenary Meet ing. 
131 Informal Summary ( INF/TE/IDP/R/5 ), 30 March 2022, Plenary Meeting. 
132 Informal Summary ( INF/TE/IDP/R/5 ), 30 March 2022, Plenary Meeting. 
133 Philippines presentation INF/TE/IDP/RD/34 , 30 March 2022, Ple nary Meeting.