SINGLE-USE
PLASTICSA Roadmap
for Sustainability(rev. 2)

Copyright © United Nations Environment Programme, 2018
Reproduction
This publication may be reproduced in whole or inpart and in any form for educational or non-profit
purposes without special permission from the
copyright holder, provided acknowledgement of thesource is made. The United Nations Environment
Programme would appreciate receiving a copyof any publication that uses this publication as asource. No use of this publication may be madefor resale or for any other commercial purpose
whatsoever without prior permission in writingfrom the United Nations Environment Programme.
Disclaimer
The designations employed and the presentationof the material in this publication do not imply
the expression of any opinion whatsoever on
the part of the United Nations Environment
Programme concerning the legal status of any
country, territory, city or area or of its authorities,
or concerning delimitation of its frontiers orboundaries. Moreover, the views expressed do
not necessarily represent the decision or thestated policy of the United Nations Environment
Programme, nor does citing of trade names orcommercial processes constitute endorsement.
Mention of a commercial company or product inthis publication does not imply endorsement by
the United Nations Environment Programme.
ISBN: 978-92-807-3705-9
DTI/2179/JP
Suggested citation:
UNEP (2018). SINGLE-USE PLASTICS:
A Roadmap for Sustainability (Rev. ed., pp. vi; 6).
Credits© Photos, and illustrations as specified.
The International Environmental Technology
Centre works with developing countries toimplement sustainable solutions to environmental
challenges, with focus on holistic waste
management.

UNEP promotes
environmentally soundpractices globally and in its own
activities. This publication will beavailable as an electronic document.
Our distribution policy aims to reduce
UNEP’s carbon footprint.

© Cover photo: londonista_londonist/Flicker.com

Foreword
Plastic is a miracle material. Thanks to plastics, countless lives havebeen saved in the health sector, the growth of clean energy from windturbines and solar panels has been greatly facilitated, and safe foodstorage has been revolutionized.
But what makes plastic so convenient in our day-to-day lives – it’scheap – also makes it ubiquitous, resulting in one of our planet’s
greatest environmental challenges. Our oceans have been used as adumping ground, choking marine life and transforming some marine
areas into a plastic soup. In cities around the world, plastic waste clogs
drains, causing floods and breeding disease. Consumed by livestock,it also finds its way into the food chain.
Plastic packaging accounts for nearly half of all plastic waste globally,
and much of it is thrown away within just a few minutes of its firstuse. Much plastic may be single-use, but that does not mean it iseasily disposable. When discarded in landfills or in the environment,
plastic can take up to a thousand years to decompose.
The good news is that a growing number of governments are taking
action and demonstrating that all nations, whether rich or poor, canbecome global environmental leaders. Rwanda, a pioneer in banning
single-use plastic bags, is now one of the cleanest nations on earth.
Kenya has followed suit, helping clear its iconic national parks andsave its cows from an unhealthy diet.
Learning from the experience of countries that have introduced bansand regulations on single-use plastics, this assessment analyses what
has worked well, what hasn’t, and why. The report is therefore a tool
for policymakers who intend to introduce measures to regulate theproduction and use of disposable plastics.
The assessment shows that action can be painless and profitable –with huge gains for people and the planet that help avert the costly
downstream costs of pollution. In addition, action will drive the kindof innovation that will underpin the future global economy we need.
Plastic isn’t the problem. It’s what we do with it. And that means theonus is on us to be far smarter in how we use this miracle material.

Erik Solheim
Head of UN Environmenti

SINGLE-USE PLASTICS:
A Roadmap for Sustainability

Acknowledgements
Lead author and project management
Claudia Giacovelli (Associate Programme Officer, UN
Environment-IETC)
Research and drafting support
Anna Zamparo (UN Environment-IETC Intern),Andrea Wehrli (Mercator Fellow at IETC)
Supervisor
Keith Alverson (Director, UN Environment-IETC)
Data and case studies contributors
Joi Danielson (Vital Ocean); Liu Jinghao(Environmental Sanitation Engineering Technology
Research Center of MOHURD, China); Yoichi Kodera(Japan National Institute of Advanced Industrial
Science & Technology); Jordi Pon (UN Environment);
Marc Nyhan (Ireland citizen); Thibault Mutabazi(Rwanda citizen); Michael Raymond (Aruba Waste
Management Services, Serlimar); Spurgeon Miller
Molina (Mayor of Guanaja, Honduras).
Technical Review Committee
Bettina Lorz (European Commission); Dominic Hogg
(Eumonia Research & Consulting); Joi Danielson(Vital Ocean); Keith Alverson (UN Environment);
Linda Godfrey (Council for Scientific and Industrial
Research, South Africa); Yoichi Kodera (Japan
National Institute of Advanced Industrial Science &Technology).
Production project team
Claudia Giacovelli (UN Environment -IETC); Tomoya
Motoda (Global Environment Centre), Akiko Doi(Global Environment Centre), Miki Minamino (Global
Environment Centre)
Copy editor
Tara Cannon
Illustrations and design
Lowil Fred EspadaThis assessment has been realized with the kindfinancial contribution of the Government of Norway.

ii

Forewordi

Chapter3

Acknowledgementsii
Table of Contents

iii

Acronymsv
Executive summaryvi

Chapter2

Chapter1

The plastic context
1.1
Definitions

1
2

1.2

Production 

2

1.3

Consumption

2

1.4

End of life

6

Problematic single-use
plastics9
2.1 Plastic bags andfoamed plastic
products11

Actions to minimize plasticbags and Styrofoam
products17
3.1 Waste management
systemimprovements18
3.2

Promotion of
eco-friendly
alternatives19

3.3

Social awarenessand public pressure  19

3.4

Voluntary reduction
strategies andagreements 

19

Policy instruments

23

3.5.

3.5.1 Global trends
23
3.5.2 Regional, national
and local trends 24
3.5.3 Countries with
policies on plasticbags and Styrofoam  27

2.1.1

Environmental
impacts12
2.1.2 Health and Social
impacts14
2.1.3 Economic impacts 15

Table of Contents
Selected case studies
4.1 Europe
4.1.1 Ireland: Levy on consumers
4.1.2 Austria: Voluntary agreements

4.2

Africa4.2.1 Rwanda: Total ban
4.2.2 South Africa: Combined ban
and levy on retailers
4.2.3 Kenya: Punitive total ban

4.3

Asia

45
46
46
48

49

America

4.4.1 New York City: Styrofoam ban
4.4.2 Costa Rica: Total single-use
plastic ban
4.4.3 The Caribbean region

5

50
52

53

4.3.1 China: National and provincial
policies53
4.3.2 Bangladesh: Social pressureand disaster management
55
4.3.3 India: Public engagement
56

4.4

Chapter

49

57
57
58
59

Chapter4

Conclusions 
5.1 Bans and levies

63
65

5.2

Other possible
actions65

5.3

Roadmap forpolicymakers66

References74

iii

SINGLE-USE PLASTICS:
A Roadmap for Sustainability

List of Boxes
Box 1.
Box 2.
Box 3.
Box 4.
Box 5.
Box 6.
Box 7.

Plastic recycling market: China
Reducing PET bottle litter
Biodiversity loss and food chain contamination
Biodegradable plastic: The unintended consequences
The controversy of reusable bagsThe ‘’ban on banning’’
Food for thought

6
11
13
14
20
23
64

List of Figures
Figure 1.1.
Figure 1.2.
Figure 1.3.
Figure 1.4.
Figure 1.5.
Figure 1.6.
Figure 1.7.
Figure 1.8

The two main categories of plastics and their single-use applicationsGlobal plastic production by industrial sector, 2015
Distribution of single-use plastic production by region (2014)
Global primary plastics waste generation, 1950 - 2015
Plastic packaging waste generation, 2014 (million Mt)Disposal of all plastic waste ever generated (as of 2015)
Waste management hierarchy
Global flow of plastic packaging waste, 2015

Figure 3.1. Waste management system design to reduce landfilling and illegal dumping
Figure 3.2. Overview of a circular economy
Figure 3.3 Estimated number of new regulations on single-use plastics
entering into force at the national level worldwide
Figure 3.4. Types of national policies on plastic bags, by continentFigure 3.5. National-level plastic bag bans and Styrofoam regulationsFigure 3.6. Sub-national level plastic bag bans and Styrofoam regulations 
Figure 5.1. Examples of impacts of mismanaged single-use plastics
Figure 5.2. Impact of national bans and levies on plastic bag usage(based on more than 60 countries experience)
Figure 5.3. Roadmap for policymakers: 10 steps to consider when introducingbans or levies on single-use plastics

3
4
4
5
5
7
7
7
18
18
24
25
26
26
64
65
67

List of Tables
Table 1.
Table 2.

iv

Policy tools to limit the use of plastic bags
Example of instruments to minimize single-use plastic waste

23
68

Acronyms
CO2 Carbon Dioxide
EPS Expanded Polystyrene
EU European Union
GDP Gross Domestic Product
HDPE High-Density Polyethylene
LDPE Low-Density Polyethylene
MSW Municipal Solid Waste
Mt Metric ton
NEMA National Environmental Management Authority
NGO Non-Governmental Organization
PE Polyethylene or polythene
PET Polyethylene Terephthalate
PHA Polyhydroxyalkanoates
PLA Polylactic Acid
PP Polypropylene
PS Polystyrene
PVC Polyvinylchloride
SIDS Small Island Developing States
UNDP United Nations Development Programme
UNEP United Nations Environment Programme
WTP Willingness to Payv

SINGLE-USE PLASTICS:
A Roadmap for Sustainability

Executive summary
The benefits of plastic are undeniable. The material is cheap,
lightweight and easy to make. These qualities have led to a boomin the production of plastic over the past century. This trend willcontinue as global plastic production skyrockets over the next 10 to
15 years. We are already unable to cope with the amount of plastic
waste we generate, unless we rethink the way we manufacture,
use and manage plastics. Ultimately, tackling one of the biggest
environmental scourges of our time will require governments toregulate, businesses to innovate and individuals to act.
This paper sets out the latest thinking on how we can achievethis. It looks at what governments, businesses and individuals
have achieved at national and sub-national levels to curb theconsumption of single-use plastics. It offers lessons that may
be useful for policymakers who are considering regulating the
production and use of single-use plastics.

The Age of Plastic – why we need to change
Since the 1950s, the production of plastic has outpaced that of almost
every other material. Much of the plastic we produce is designed
to be thrown away after being used only once. As a result, plastic
packaging accounts for about half of the plastic waste in the world.
Most of this waste is generated in Asia, while America, Japan andthe European Union are the world’s largest producers of plastic
packaging waste per capita.
Our ability to cope with plastic waste is already overwhelmed. Onlynine per cent of the plastic waste the world has ever produced has
been recycled. Most ends up in landfills, dumps or in the environment.
If current consumption patterns and waste management practices
continue, then by 2050 there will be around 12 billion tonnes ofplastic litter in landfills and the environment. By this time, if thegrowth in plastic production continues at its current rate, then theplastics industry may account for 20 per cent of the world’s total
oil consumption.
Most plastics do not biodegrade. Instead, they slowly break down
into smaller fragments known as microplastics. Studies suggest thatplastic bags and containers made of expanded polystyrene foam(commonly referred to as “Styrofoam”) can take up to thousands ofyears to decompose, contaminating soil and water.
The most common single-use plastics found in the environmentare, in order of magnitude, cigarette butts, plastic drinking bottles,vi

>>>>>>>>>>
Executive summary

plastic bottle caps, food wrappers, plastic grocery bags, plastic lids,
straws and stirrers, other types of plastic bags, and foam take-away
containers. These are the waste products of a throwaway culturethat treats plastic as a disposable material rather than a valuable
resource to be harnessed.
Plastic waste causes a plethora of problems when it leaks into theenvironment. Plastic bags can block waterways and exacerbate
natural disasters. By clogging sewers and providing breeding grounds
for mosquitoes and pests, plastic bags can increase the transmissionof vector-borne diseases like malaria. High concentrations of plastic
materials, particularly plastic bags, have been found blocking
the airways and stomachs of hundreds of species. Plastic bags
are often ingested by turtles and dolphins who mistake them forfood. There is evidence that the toxic chemicals added during
the manufacture of plastic transfer to animal tissue, eventuallyentering the human food chain. Styrofoam products, which containcarcinogenic chemicals like styrene and benzene, are highly toxic
if ingested, damaging the nervous systems, lungs and reproductive
organs. The toxins in Styrofoam containers can leach into food anddrinks. In poor countries, plastic waste is often burned for heat or
cooking, exposing people to toxic emissions. Disposing of plastic
waste by burning it in open-air pits releases harmful gases likefuran and dioxin.
The economic damage caused by plastic waste is vast. Plastic
litter in the Asia-Pacific region alone costs its tourism, fishingand shipping industries $1.3 billion per year. In Europe, cleaning
plastic waste from coasts and beaches costs about €630 million
per year. Studies suggest that the total economic damage to theworld’s marine ecosystem caused by plastic amounts to at least$13 billion every year. The economic, health and environmental
reasons to act are clear.

Key findings and recommendations
Plastic bag bans, if properly planned and enforced, can effectively
counter one of the causes of plastic overuse. Nevertheless, totackle the roots of the problem, governments need to improve
waste management practices and introduce financial incentives
to change the habits of consumers, retailers and manufacturers,
enacting strong policies that push for a more circular model ofdesign and production of plastics. They must finance more researchand development of alternative materials, raise awareness among
consumers, fund innovation, ensure plastic products are properly
labelled and carefully weigh possible solutions to the current crisis.
Governments must engage a broad range of stakeholders in thedecision-making process as they seek to tackle the crisis. To meetvii

SINGLE-USE PLASTICS:
A Roadmap for Sustainability

the rising tide of plastics, we urgently need strong government
leadership and intervention.
Governments around the world are increasingly awake to the scaleof plastic pollution. More than 60 countries have introduced bansand levies to curb single-use plastic waste. Plastic bags and, to acertain extent, foamed plastic products like Styrofoam have been
the main focus of government action so far. This is understandable.
These plastic products are often the most visible forms of plastic
pollution. It is estimated that one1 to 5 trillion2 plastic bags are
consumed worldwide each year. Five trillion is almost 10 million
plastic bags per minute. If tied together, all these plastic bags could
be wrapped around the world seven times every hour.
It is too early to draw robust conclusions on the environmental
impact that bans and levies have had. In 50 per cent of cases,
information about their impact is lacking, partly because somecountries have adopted them only recently and partly becausemonitoring is inadequate. In countries that do have data, about 30
per cent have registered drastic drops in the consumption of plasticbags within the first year. The remaining 20 per cent of countries
have reported little to no change.
Of the countries that have reported little to no impact, the main
problems appear to be (i) a lack of enforcement and (ii) a lack ofaffordable alternatives. The latter has led to cases of smuggling andthe rise of black markets for plastic bags or to the use of thicker
plastic bags that are not covered by the bans. This has increased
environmental problems in some cases.
Public-private partnerships and voluntary agreements can begood alternatives to bans. Voluntary reduction strategies allow
citizens time to change their consumption patterns and provide an
opportunity for affordable and eco-friendly alternatives to hit themarket. The promotion and adoption of reusable bags is an example
of a reduction strategy where the choice lies with the consumer.
This strategy has changed consumer behaviour and reduced theuse of conventional plastic bags in many regions.
Given the broad range of possible actions to curb single-use plastics
and their mixed impact, UN Environment has drawn up a 10-steproadmap for governments that are looking adopt similar measuresor improve on current ones. The steps are based on the experiencesof 60 countries around the globe:

1
2

viii

Earth Policy Institute (2014). http://www.earth-policy.org/press_room/C68/plastic_bags_fact_sheet
The Worldwatch Institute estimates that 4-5 trillion plastic bags were produced in 2002, ranging
from large trash bags to thick shopping totes to flimsy grocery sacks. Assuming that the number
has remained stable since then, the value used is the upper estimate of 5 trillion. http://www.
theworldcounts.com/counters/waste_pollution_facts/plastic_bags_used_per_year

>>>>>>>>>>
Executive summary

1. Target the most problematic single-use plastics by conducting
a baseline assessment to identify the most problematic singleuse plastics, as well as the current causes, extent and impactsof their mismanagement.
2. Consider the best actions to tackle the problem (e.g. throughregulatory, economic, awareness, voluntary actions), given
the country’s socio-economic standing and considering theirappropriateness in addressing the specific problems identified.
3. Assess the potential social, economic and environmental
impacts (positive and negative) of the preferred short-listed
instruments/actions. How will the poor be affected? What impact
will the preferred course of action have on different sectors andindustries?
4. Identify and engage key stakeholder groups – retailers, consumers,
industry representatives, local government, manufacturers, civilsociety, environmental groups, tourism associations – to ensure
broad buy-in. Evidence-based studies are also necessary to defeat
opposition from the plastics industry.
5. Raise public awareness about the harm caused by single-usedplastics. Clearly explain the decision and any punitive measuresthat will follow.
6. Promote alternatives. Before the ban or levy comes into force,assess the availability of alternatives. Ensure that the preconditions for their uptake in the market are in place. Provide
economic incentives to encourage the uptake of eco-friendly
and fit-for-purpose alternatives that do not cause more harm.
Support can include tax rebates, research and development
funds, technology incubation, public-private partnerships, andsupport to projects that recycle single-use items and turn waste
into a resource that can be used again. Reduce or abolish taxes
on the import of materials used to make alternatives.
7. Provide incentives to industry by introducing tax rebates orother conditions to support its transition. Governments will
face resistance from the plastics industry, including importers
and distributors of plastic packaging. Give them time to adapt.
8. Use revenues collected from taxes or levies on single-use plastics
to maximize the public good. Support environmental projects
or boost local recycling with the funds. Create jobs in the plastic
recycling sector with seed funding.

ix

SINGLE-USE PLASTICS:
A Roadmap for Sustainability

9. Enforce the measure chosen effectively, by making sure that
there is clear allocation of roles and responsibilities.
10. Monitor and adjust the chosen measure if necessary and update
the public on progress.

Target audience
Drawing from the experience of over 60 countries, this report isdesigned for policymakers considering the introduction of measures
to curb consumption and improve management of single-use
plastics.

Structure
The assessment starts with an overview of the global andregional trends of plastic production, consumption and end-oflife management. The assessment continues by examining theenvironmental, social and economic impacts of mismanaged andproblematic single-use3 plastics, in particular bags and foamed
plastic products.
The study then presents a global mapping of actions introduced byboth public and private sector actors to reduce the production andconsumption of plastic bags and foamed plastic products, followed
by selected case studies from each region of the world. A roadmap
for policymakers looking to reduce single-use plastic pollution isfound in the concluding chapter.

3x

The terms “single-use plastics” and “disposable plastics” are usedinterchangeably in this paper.

>>>>>>>>>>The plastic context

Chapter1

The plastic context© Horia Varian/Flickr.com

1

SINGLE-USE PLASTICS:
A Roadmap for Sustainability

1.1

1.2 Production

Definitions

Plastic is a lightweight, hygienic andresistant material which can be mouldedin a variety of ways and utilized in a wide
range of applications. Figure 1.1 presents
an illustrated overview of the two maincategories of plastics.
Unlike metals, plastics do not rust or corrode.
Most plastics do not biodegrade, but instead
photodegrade, meaning that they slowly4
break down into small fragments known as
microplastics.5 The fragmentation of large
plastic items into microplastics is common
on land such as beaches because of high UV
irradiation and abrasion by waves, while
the degradation process is much slower
in the ocean due to cooler temperaturesand reduced UV exposure.6 The assertions
made in this document refer mostly tofossil-derived plastics and not to plastics
of biogenic origins, although reference tothe latter group is made in section 2.1.1.
Single-use plastics, often also referred
to as disposable plastics, are commonlyused for plastic packaging7 and include
items intended to be used only once before
they are thrown away or recycled. These
include, among other items, grocery bags,
food packaging, bottles, straws, containers,
cups and cutlery. Figure 1.1 introduces themain polymers used to manufacture singleuse plastic items and indicates their mostcommon applications.

Since the 1950s, growth in the productionof plastic has largely outpaced that of any
other material,8 with a global shift from theproduction of durable plastics to single-use
plastics (including packaging), as shownin Figure 1.2. The production of plastic
is largely reliant on fossil hydrocarbons,
which are non-renewable resources.9 If thegrowth in plastic production continues atthe current rate, by 2050 the plastic industry
may account for 20% of the world’s total oil
consumption.10
More than one-fourth of the resins globallyused in the production of single-use plastics11
are manufactured in Northeast Asia. This isfollowed by North America, the Middle Eastand Europe (Figure 1.3).

1.3 Consumption
Global consumption of plastic can be
estimated by observing the amount ofplastic waste produced (Figure 1.4). Plastic
packaging is mostly single-use, especiallyin business-to-consumer applications, anda majority of it is discarded the same year
it is produced.
8
9
10
11

Geyer, Jambeck, and Law, 2017.
Ibid.
World Economic Forum, 2016.
LDPE, HDPE, PS and EPS

Nearly 50% of the plastic
waste generated globally in2015 was plastic packaging.
4
5

6
7

2

Clapp and Swanston, 2009
Primary microplastics are those originally produced at the
micro-size level for applications such as cosmetics or industrial
scrubbers; secondary microplastics are fragments at the microsize level that have resulted from the breakdown of larger plastic
products. Source: GESAMP, 2015b.
GESAMP, 2015a.
Ten Brink, 2016.

© JMacPherson/Flickr.com

>>>>>>>>>>The plastic context

Figure 1.1. The two main categories of plastics and their single-use applications

Two categories of plastics
The most common
Thermoplastics are:Thermosets
Thermoplastics
Polyethylene Terephtalate(PET), Polypropylene (PE),Low Density Polyethylene(LDPE), High Density Polyethylene(HDPE), Polystyrene (PS), Expanded polystyrene(EPS), Polyvinyl-chloride (PVC), Polycarbonate,
Polypropylene (PP); Polylactic acid (PLA) and
Polyhydroxyalkanoates (PHA).’’

Thermoplastics are a family of plastics that can bemelted when heated and hardened when cooled.
These characteristics, which lend the material its
name, are reversible. That is, it can be reheated,reshaped and frozen repeatedly.

The most common
Thermosets are:Polyurethane (PUR), Phenolic
resins, Epoxy resins, Silicone,
Vinyl ester, Acrylic resins, Ureaformaldehyde (UF) resins’’

Thermosets are a family of plastics that undergoa chemical change when heated, creating a three
dimensional network. After they are heated andformed, these plastics cannot be re-melted andreformed.

Main polymers used in the production of single-use plastics
Bags, trays, containers,
food packaging film

LDPE

Milk bottles, freezer bags, shampoo
bottles, ice cream containers

HDPE

Bottles for water and otherdrinks, dispensing containers forcleaning fluids, biscuit trays

PET

PS

Cutlery, plates and cups

Hot drink cups, insulated foodpackaging, protective packaging forfragile items
PP

EPS

Microwave dishes, ice cream tubs,
potato chip bags, bottle caps

Plastics replacing the traditionally used materials
Product

Previous typical
packaging material

Current typical packaging material

Milk, edible oil

Glass, metal

3 or 5 layer film pouches

Toiletries (soap/shampoos)

Paper, glass

Plastic pouches or films

Cement, fertiliser

Jute

PP/HDPE woven sackToothpaste

Metal

Plastic lamitube

3

SINGLE-USE PLASTICS:
A Roadmap for Sustainability

Figure 1.2. Global plastic production by industrial sector, 2015

The
world
produces
more than400
milliontons

of plastics
every year.

Others12%

The largest
industrial sector isplastic packaging,
single-use material
designed for
immediate disposal

Textiles14%

Packaging
36%

Consumer andinstitutional
products
10%
Building andconstruction
16%

Electrical/electronic
4%

Transportation
7%

Source: Adapted from Geyer, Jambeck, and Law, 2017

Figure 1.3. Distribution of single-use plastic12 production by region (2014)
3%
16%

21%

Former USSR

EuropeNorth America

26%
17%

North East Asia

Middle East

4%
Central and SouthAmerica1%
AfricaSource: Adapted from ICIS Supply and demand database (2014)

12 The graph reflects data on the production of virgin and recycled
LDPE, HDPE, PS and EPS. PET and PP are excluded from theanalysis due to lack of region-specific data.

4

Industrial
machinery
1%

12%
Asia and the Pacific>>>>>>>>>>The plastic context

In 2015, plastic packaging waste accounted
for 47% of the plastic waste13 generated
globally, with half of that appearing to comefrom Asia. While China remains the largest
worldwide generator of plastic packaging

waste,14, 15 the USA is the largest generatorof plastic packaging waste on a per-capita
basis, followed by Japan and the EU (Figure
1.5).

Figure 1.4. Global primary plastics waste generation, 1950 - 201516

300 million tons of plastic

Global primary plastic waste
generation (million tons)

300

waste was generated in 2015

250
200

Ongoing increase inplastic waste generation
over the last 60 years

150
100
50
0

1950

1955

1960

1965

1970

1975

1980

1985

1990

1995

2000

2005

2010

2015

Polymers used for single-use plastics
Total additives

Other

PP&A

PUR

PET

PVC

PS

PP

HDPE

LD, LDPE

Source: Adapted from Geyer, Jambeck, and Law, 2017

Figure 1.5. Plastic packaging waste generation, 2014 (million Mt)17
50.0
45.0

million Mt

40.0
35.0
30.0
25.0
20.0
15.0
10.0
5.0
0

USA

China

Total plastic packaging waste (million Mt)

EU 28

Japan

India

Total plastic packaging waste (Kg per capita)

Source: Adapted from Geyer, Jambeck, and Law, 201713 Geyer, Jambeck, and Law, 2017.

14 China, Ministry of Commerce, 2017.
15 Due to a lack of robust data, it is difficult to determine the exact
amount of plastic packaging waste generated in China.
16 “Primary plastics” are plastics produced from virgin materials.
17 The chart is based on an aggregation of datasets. For China,
since no reliable data on plastic packaging is available, the overall
packaging waste data (including plastic) is used in the graph.

5

SINGLE-USE PLASTICS:
A Roadmap for Sustainability

1.4 End of life
At the end of its lifetime, a product orpackaging is recycled, incinerated, landfilled,
dumped in uncontrolled sites, or litteredin the environment. According to recent
estimates,18 79% of the plastic waste everproduced now sits in landfills, dumps or in
the environment, while about 12% has been
incinerated and only 9% has been recycled(Figure 1.6). Although it is not yet possible toshow a similar regional breakdown due to alack of robust data, regional action has beenrecorded recently. For instance, the European
Council, European Parliament and European
Commission reached a preliminary politicalagreement in December 2017 to set a target
for packaging recycling at 65% by 2025, tobe increased to 70% by 2030, and a specifictarget for plastic packaging recycling at
50% by 2025, to be increased to 55% by 2030.
Journey of products at end-of-life

Figure 1.6 also shows the nations generating
the largest amounts of mismanaged plastic
waste.19,20 If current consumption patterns
and waste management practices do not
improve, by 2050 there will be about 12
billion tons of plastic litter in landfills andthe natural environment.21
Energy recovery processes are preferable
to landfilling or improper forms of disposal(Figure 1.7). However, if the desire to recoup
the large investment required to set up
energy recovery infrastructures indirectlydiscourages policies geared at reducing
plastic waste generation, this would be
problematic. In the waste management
hierarchy, prevention of waste should always
take first priority.
Box 1. Plastic recycling market:
China
Imports into China account for 56% (byweight) of the worldwide imports of waste
plastic1 destined for recycling. In July 2017,
the Chinese government announced thatthe importation of eight types of plastic
scraps including PE, PS, PET and PVC will
be banned starting from 2018.2 Chinese
officials reported that the decision was
taken to protect the environment andpublic health, since hazardous waste wasfound mixed inside the waste imported.
While this announcement was initially
met with worldwide alarm, it can present
an opportunity for countries that havehistorically counted on China as a plastic
waste importer to identify new strategies
to deal with plastic waste and strengthen
their local recycling industry.
Source: 1Velis, 2014; 2Toloken. 2017

Incinerated

Recycled

DumpedLandfilled

18 Geyer, Jambeck, and Law, 2017.

6

Littered in theenvironment

19 Mismanaged waste is estimated as the sum of inadequately
managed waste plus 2% littering.
20 Jambeck et al. (2015) provides estimates of the 20 largest waste
generators for 2010, ranked by mass of mismanaged plastic
waste. The paper calculates total mismanaged plastic waste forpopulations within 50 km of the coast in 192 countries.
21 Geyer, Jambeck, and Law. 2017. As of 2015, the total amount ofplastic waste ever produced amounts to approximately 6,300 million
tons.

>>>>>>>>>>The plastic context

Figure 1.6. Disposal of all plastic
waste ever generated(as of 2015)
Recycled

9%

Figure 1.7. Waste management
hierarchy
Most
preferred

Prevention

Incinerated

12%

Minimization

Reuse

Recycling
Other recovery including
energy recovery

Accumulated
in landfill anddumps or litteredin the environment

Landfill

79%

Controlled deposit
Largest generators of mismanaged plastic waste(2010)
China

Least preferred

Uncontrolled deposit

8.8 million Mt/year 27% of world total

Indonesia 3.2 million Mt/year 10% of world total
Source: Adapted from Geyer, Jambeck, and Law, 2017; Jambeck etal., 2015

Figure 1.8

Source: Global Waste Management Outlook, UNEP, 2015.

An overview of the global flow of plastic
packaging waste is illustrated in Figure 1.8.22

Global flow of plastic packaging waste, 2015
Total packaging waste in 2015: 141 million tonnes

Effectively recycled, 2%

Landfilled 40%

Disposed andlittered 86%

Incinerated 14%

Leakage 32%

Recycled 14%

Recycled into lower-value
applications, 8%

Lost in process, 4%

Source: World Economic Forum, 2016

22 World Economic Forum, 2016.

7

SINGLE-USE PLASTICS:
A Roadmap for Sustainability

8© A. Davey/Flickr.com

>>>>>>>>>>
Problematic single-use plastics

Chapter2

Problematic single-use plastics

9

SINGLE-USE PLASTICS:
A Roadmap for Sustainability

Most common single-use
items found on beaches

A

ccording to a recent report,23 the most common
finds during international coastal cleanups are,in order of magnitude, cigarette butts, plastic
beverage bottles, plastic bottle caps, food wrappers,
plastic grocery bags, plastic lids, straws and stirrers,
glass beverage bottles, other kinds of plastic bags, andfoam take-away containers. Single-use plastics took
most of the spots in this Top Ten and it is not hard to
imagine the rankings for waste found inland would be
similar.
In addition to people’s negligence, the large presence of
single-use plastics in the environment is symptomaticof poor or failing waste management systems.

Single-use plastics end up littering
the environment in part because ofirresponsible individual behavior.
But poor waste management systems
also play an enormous role.

To reduce plastic pollution, action should be taken inline with the waste management hierarchy (Figure1.7) and the circular economy approach (Figure 3.2), tominimize plastic waste generation first of all, improve
the state of solid waste collection services, strengthen
the recycling industry and ensure safe disposal of waste
to controlled landfills.
Although there are some successful initiatives that
aim to tackle other types of single-use plastics (suchas plastic bottles, with an example given in Box 2), therecent drive for action by governments largely focuseson plastic bags and, to a certain extent, foamed plastic
items. Plastic bags and foamed plastic products seem tobe perceived by governments as the most problematic
single-use plastics, given their easily observable
23 International Costal Cleanup Report 2017: Ocean Conservancy. https://oceanconservancy.org/wp-content/uploads/2017/06/International-CoastalCleanup_2017-Report.pdf

10

>>>>>>>>>>
Problematic single-use plastics

Box 2. Reducing PET bottle litter
In several developed and developing countries, the introduction of Extended Producer
Responsibility (EPR) and deposit-return schemes1 have proven effective in reducing litteringfrom PET bottles while boosting the recycling sector.
Germany, Japan and South Africa are among many successful examples where theresponsibility for recycling used PET bottles is embraced by manufacturers (either voluntarily
or by act of law).
The initiative introduced by the PET Recycling Company (PETCO2) in South Africa, forinstance, shows how the introduction of EPR (even when voluntary) can help develop local
end-use markets for recycling and build the country’s resilience to global shocks in therecycling market. In South Africa EPR has created jobs and business opportunities, while
addressing one kind of problematic single-use plastics. While some other African countries
are now starting to consider banning PET bottles, the South African example shows what
can be achieved if due consideration is given to the socio-economic context and the mostappropriate policy instrument (not necessarily banning) is selected.
12

https://www.unenvironment.org/fr/node/19362
http://petco.co.za/

presence (as an eyesore) in the environment,such as windblown bags clinging onto
fences or trees or floating in rivers.
In the next sections the focus will bemainly on plastic bags and foamed plastic
containers, noting that lessons that are
drawn for these items could be applicableto the broader category of single-use plastics.

2.1 Plastic bags and foamed plastic
products
Single-use plastic bags are used to carrygoods and usually provided to customers
at the point of sale. The most common
shopping bags are made of a type of plastic
called polyethylene – or polythene – a tough,light, flexible, synthetic resin obtained bypolymerizing ethylene.24

24 Oxford Dictionaries, accessed on 21 August 2017.

Foamed plastics, commonly but often
erroneously referred to by the brand name“Styrofoam”,25 is the material most widelyused to produce food containers as it isrigid, lightweight, and has good insulation
properties. There are two main types of
foamed plastics: foamed polystyrenes
and foamed polyurethanes. Foamed
polystyrenes can be further categorized– based on the production method – into
expanded polystyrenes (EPS) and extruded
polystyrenes (XPS). To make the contents ofthis assessment more easily understandable
to non-specialists, this paper will generally
not distinguish between the different typesof foamed plastics, and instead refer toall types of single-use polystyrene foam
25 “Styrofoam” is a Dow Chemical Company trademarked namefor closed-cell extruded (not expanded) polystyrene foam usedprimarily in construction as insulation and water barrier for roofs,
walls, and foundations. In contrast, coffee cups, food trays,
box packaging, and other daily life items commonly referred to
as “Styrofoam” are actually expanded polystyrene (EPS) foam,
which has been moulded into blocks from expanded resin. Thismeans that none of these daily life products are in fact madefrom “Styrofoam.” Despite the inaccuracy of using “Styrofoam” torefer to foamed single-use products, this paper makes use of theterm to refer to such daily-life items because of the high degreeof penetration of this colloquial expression among the generalpublic, while more accurate terms such as “EPS foam products” or“single-use polystyrene foam products” are often unrecognizable
to non-specialists.

11

SINGLE-USE PLASTICS:
A Roadmap for Sustainability

and other foamed plastic products by thecolloquially accepted (but in fact inaccurate)
term “Styrofoam.”

1 to 5 trillion
plastic bags
are consumed
worldwide
every-year. If
tied together, 5
trillion plasticbags would
cover an area

twice thesizeof France.

Single-use
plastic bags

Foamed plastic foodcontainers

2.1.1 Environmental impacts

It is estimated that between one to fivetrillion plastic bags are consumed worldwide
each year. Five trillion is almost 10 million
plastic bags a minute. If tied together, theywould go around the world seven times
every hour and cover an area twice the sizeof France.282627Single-use plastic bags and Styrofoam
products are widely used because they arestrong, cheap and hygienic ways to transport
goods. Plastic groceries bags consume lessenergy and water to produce and generateless solid waste than paper bags, taking
up less space in landfills. However, someof the characteristics that make themcommercially successful – price, durability
and resistance - also contribute to making
them environmentally unsound(when mismanaged) anddifficult to recycle.

While it is still unclear, some studies
suggest that plastic bags and Styrofoam
containers can take up to thousands of years
to decompose, contaminating soil and water,
and posing significant ingestion, choking
and entanglement hazards to wildlife onland and in the ocean (Box 3). Due to theirlight weight and balloon-shaped design,
plastic bags are easily blown in the air,eventually ending up on land and in theocean.

Plastic bags andStyrofoam containers
can take up to

1,000
years
to decompose.

26 Earth Policy Institute (2014). http://www.earth-policy.org/press_
room/C68/plastic_bags_fact_sheet
27 The Worldwatch Institute estimates that 4-5 trillion plastic bags
were produced in 2002, ranging from large trash bags to thickshopping totes to flimsy grocery sacks. Assuming that the number
has remained stable since then, the value used is the upper
estimate of 5 trillion.
28 http://www.theworldcounts.com/counters/waste_pollution_facts/
plastic_bags_used_per_year12

>>>>>>>>>>
Problematic single-use plastics

The Irish have coined the term
Box 3.

Biodiversity loss and food chain
contamination

Plastics in the environment posesignificant hazards to wildlife both on land
and in the ocean. High concentrations ofplastic materials, particularly plastic bags,
have been found blocking the breathing
passages and stomachs of hundreds ofdifferent species. Plastic bags in the ocean
resemble jellyfish and are often ingested
by turtles and dolphins who mistake themfor food. There is emerging evidence thatthe toxic chemicals added during the
manufacturing process transfer from theingested plastic into the animals’ tissues,
eventually entering the food chain forhumans as well. When plastic breaks down
into microplastic particles, it becomeseven more difficult to detect and remove
from the open oceans. Therefore, the mosteffective mitigation strategy is to reduce
their input.
Marine litter: A mammoth
challenge for our oceans
By 2050, an estimated99%of seabirds will have ingested plastic
Marine litter harms over600

marine species

15%

of species affected by ingestion &entanglement from marine litter are
endangered“witch’s knickers” to
Did youknow?

refer to windblown
plastic bags caught intrees?

...that in South Africa, there areso many plastic bags littering
the environment that manyjoke that plastic bags are “thenew national flower”.29

Plastic bags can choke waterways andexacerbate natural disasters. In 1988, poor
drainage resulting from plastic bag litter
clogging drains contributed to devastating
floods in Bangladesh, causing several deaths
as two-thirds of the country was submerged30(see case study 4.3.2).
Styrofoam products, due to their low density
and light weight - like plastic bags - can beblown away by the wind. They can float inwater and break down into smaller pieces
that are highly toxic if ingested.
According to 2015 estimates, 16 of the top
20 countries contributing to marine plastic
litter are middle-income countries, whose
economic growth is outpacing waste
management infrastructure development.31#CleanSeas
Jambeck et al., 2015

29 Ritch, Brennan, and MacLeod, 2009.
30 Ibid.
31 Jambeck et al., 2015.

13

SINGLE-USE PLASTICS:
A Roadmap for Sustainability

Biodegradable plastic: The unintended consequences

In an effort to reduce plastic pollution, many governments
have outlawed conventional plastic bags, allowing only theuse and production of “biodegradable” bags.32 Nonetheless, tolimit leakage and damage to the environment, the presence ofsound waste management systems are as relevant for the socalled bio-degradable options as for fossil fuel-based plastics.
Often “biodegradable” plastic items (including single-use plasticbags and containers) break down completely only if exposed toprolonged high temperatures above 50°C (122°F). Such conditions
are met in incineration plants, but very rarely in the environment.
Therefore, even bioplastics derived from renewable sources (suchas corn starch, cassava roots, or sugarcane33) or from bacterial
fermentation of sugar or lipids (PHA34) do not automatically degradein the environment and especially not in the ocean.35

2.1.2 Health and Social impacts
Styrofoam items contain toxic chemicals
such as styrene and benzene. Both areconsidered carcinogenic and can lead to
additional health complications, including
adverse effects on the nervous, respiratory
and reproductive systems, and possiblyon the kidneys and liver.36 Several studies
have shown that the toxins in Styrofoam
containers can transfer to food and drinks,
and this risk seems to be accentuated whenpeople reheat the food while still in thecontainer.37 In low-income regions, domestic
waste - including plastics - is often burnt for
heating and/or cooking purposes, exposing
largely women and children to prolonged
toxic emissions. Illegal disposal practices of
32 Biodegradable plastic materials include thermoplastics such as
polylactic acid (PLA) and polyhydroxyalkanoates (PHA).
33 These types of bioplastics are called polylactic acid or PLAs. They
are a thermoplastic derived from renewable resources, such as
cornstarch (in the United States, Canada and China), cassava
roots, chips or starch (mostly in Asia), or sugarcane (in the restof the world). In 2010, PLA had the second highest consumption
volume of any bioplastic in the world. https://www.ceresana.com/
en/market-studies/plastics/bioplastics/
34 Polyhydroxyalkanoates or PHAs are thermoplastics producedby numerous microorganisms, including through bacterial
fermentation of sugar or lipids. https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/
abs/10.1080/15583720903048243
35 UNEP, 2016c.
36 Agency for Toxic Substances and Disease Registry.
37 For instance, a study published in Environmental Health
Perspectives conducted by the Tokyo Metropolitan ResearchLaboratory of Public Health (2001) found that styrene gas fromfood containers is a cause for the proliferation of human breast
tumour cells.

14

Na

tural

100ra%
dable

BiodegNatural

Box 4.

plastics often take the form of open burning,
accentuating the release of toxic gases that
include furans and dioxins.
Research has shown that in developed aswell as in developing countries, littering ofplastic bags and Styrofoam containers canlead to perceived ‘welfare losses’ associatedfor instance to the visual disamenity of apark being contaminated with litter. This
increases the indirect social costs of plastic
pollution.38
In developing countries with inadequate
solid waste management regulations, plastic
bag litter can aggravate pandemics. By
blocking sewage systems and providing
breeding grounds for mosquitoes andother pests, plastic bags can raise the riskof transmission of vector-borne diseases
such as malaria.39
As previously mentioned, plastic waste
and microplastics, if ingested by fish orother marine life, can enter our food chain.
Microplastics have already been found incommon table salt40 and in both tap andbottled water.41 Although in recent years
research on the effects of microplastics has
38
39
40
41

Eunomia, 2013. Exploring the direct and indirect costs of litter.
Clapp and Swanston, 2009.
Yang, Shi, Li, Li, Jabeen, and Kolandhasamy, 2015.
Kosuth, Wattenberg, Mason, Tyree, and Morrison, 2017.

>>>>>>>>>>
Problematic single-use plastics

Negative impact of Styrofoam on our healthMany of our food containers are made of foamed plastic or Styrofoam
These items contain styrene and benzene, which are

Toxic and Carcinogenic

They adversely impact our

Respiratory system

Nervous systembeen growing, still little is known about theexact impacts on human health.

2.1.3 Economic impacts
Stranded single-use plastics create visualpollution and are increasingly becoming
a priority especially in countries that rely
heavily on tourism as a major source ofGDP, such as Small Island Developing
States. For instance, Asia-Pacific Economic
Cooperation (APEC) estimated a $1.3 billion42
economic impact of marine plastics to thetourism, fishing and shipping industries
42 In this report, the $ symbol indicates US dollars, the € symbol
indicates euros, and the £ symbol indicates British pounds. For
other currencies, the ISO currency code is used.

Reproductive systemin that region alone.43 Styrofoam productspresent challenging recovery dynamics,
making recycling – although technicallypossible – often financially unviable.44 For
instance, Styrofoam usually can't be recycled
locally but must instead be transported
to a centralized plant. In addition, 95% of
Styrofoam is air, making it not cost-effective
to store or ship for recycling purposes.
Because of the porosity of foamed plastic
products, cleaning such products, which
are often contaminated with food or drinks,
is difficult and energy-intensive, further
increasing the cost of recycling.

43 APEC, 2009.
44 The Styrofoam products that are recycled are often
remanufactured into things like cafeteria trays or packing fillers.

15

SINGLE-USE PLASTICS:
A Roadmap for Sustainability

Plastic Mismanagement:
the future cost

It is more expensive
to clean up tomorrow
than to prevent plastic
pollution today

Finally, the future costs of removing all
single-use plastics accumulating in theenvironment is estimated as higher than thecosts of preventing littering today. In Europe
alone, the estimated costs for cleaning
shores and beaches reach €630 million peryear,45 and studies suggest that the annual
economic damage plastics impart on theworld marine ecosystem is at least $13
billion.46,47

45 European Commission, 2015.
46 UNEP, 2014.
47 The overall economic impact of plastic pollution is still unclear
and being studied.

16

>>>>>>>>>>
Actions to minimize plastic bags and Styrofoam products

Chapter3

Actions to minimize plastic bags
and Styrofoam products© Kurt Bauschardt/Flickr.com

17

SINGLE-USE PLASTICS:
A Roadmap for SustainabilityT

he global commitments against
single-use plastics underline a general
sentiment to act against plastic
pollution.
The following sections map a different
set of actions taken by the public, private
sector entities and governments aimed atminimizing the production and use of plasticbags and Styrofoam items. The objective is
to identify the features that lead to the mostfavourable outcomes, with success stories tobe further detailed through the case studies
given in chapter 4.

3.1 Waste management system
improvements
Bans on plastic bags and Styrofoam
items can effectively counter some of thesymptoms of plastic overuse. However, better
waste management systems, along withcircular thinking, can help achieve long-term

Figure 3.1. Waste management system design to reduce landfilling and illegal
dumping

IMPROVE WASTE
MANAGEMENTSYSTEMS

Segregation ofwaste at sources:
plastics, organic,
metals, paper, etc.

Effective collectionof the segregatedwaste, transportand safe storage

Cost-effective
recycling ofmaterials (including
plastics)

Less landfillingand dumping in
the environment

Figure 3.2. Overview of a circular economy
Fewer raw materials
are used

Improved, cost-efficient collection andtreatment systems will lead to fewer
and fewer materials ending up in
landfill and support the economics ofcircular design
Producers are fully
responsible forrecovering materials
from their products andpackaging throughout
their lifecycle

Reuse/
RepairRecycleDesignCirculareconomyGovernment leadership,
producer responsibility& consumer education,
and awareness will enable
market mechanisms thatdrive higher resource
productivity, innovationand economic
growthThere are many ways consumers
can contribute to a circular economy,
like making greener buying choices,sharing assets (e.g., cars, tools) and Consumer
repairing them or offering them soothers for reuse and refurbishing

ProduceBusinesses collaborate
and coordinate acrosssectors to reducegreenhouse gas
production and fossil
fuel use

Retailers offer products that can beeasily reused and refurbished, offer
end-of-life take back or maintenanceDistributeand repair services, and support
producers in providing education andawareness to consumers

Source: 2017 strategy for a waste-free Ontario. Building the circular economy.
https://www.ontario.ca/page/strategy-waste-free-ontario-building-circular-economy

18

Products and packaging are designed
to last longer and be more durable,using more sustainable materials thatcan be easily recycled at end-of-life>>>>>>>>>>
Actions to minimize plastic bags and Styrofoam products

impacts and better address the problem ofplastics in the environment.

3.2 Promotion of eco-friendly
alternatives
By working together with industry,
governments can support the development
and promotion of sustainable alternatives
in order to phase out single-use plastics
progressively.
By introducing economic incentives,supporting projects which upscale orrecycle single-use items and stimulating thecreation of micro-enterprises, governments
can contribute to the uptake of eco-friendly
alternatives to single-use plastics. Moredetails are provided as part of the Roadmap
for Policymakers in section 5.3.6.

3.3 Social awareness and publicpressureSocial awareness and education are essential
to shape and encourage changes in consumer
behaviour, but a gradual, transformational
process is necessary. A longstanding change
in cultural attitudes towards environmental
matters is often not attainable through briefor stand-alone awareness campaigns. It is
instead best achieved through embedding
messaging in regular didactic practices andschool curriculums from a very young age.
Public awareness strategies can include awide range of activities designed to persuadeand educate. These strategies may focus not
only on the reuse and recycling of resources,
but also on encouraging responsible use andminimization of waste generation and litter.
The relevance of education and awareness ishighlighted in several case studies in section
4 as well as in the concluding chapter.

Public pressure can act as a trigger for policy
decision-making. In Bali for instance, the“Bye Bye Plastic Bags’’ initiative is a social
campaign lead by youth to mobilize people inBali to say no to plastic bags. Two teenagers
campaigned for over four years to get plasticbags banned from the island, startingwith a petition that collected over 100,000
signatures. Despite initial resistance from thelocal government, the governor eventuallysigned a memorandum of understanding tophase out plastic bags by 2018.48
Similarly, in New Zealand, a petition launchedby a group of high school students callingon the central government to impose a NZD
0.10 levy on all plastic bags in supermarkets
gained more than 17,000 signatures. The
public support for action led mayors fromacross New Zealand to sign an open letter,asking the central government to imposea nation-wide plastic bag levy.49 Since thechange in the ruling party following thegeneral elections in September 2017, thegovernment has been considering levies andbans for single-use plastic bags, although noofficial announcement has yet been made.50
Public pressure is also widely recognized as
precipitating private sector choices, giventhat demand drives supply.

3.4 Voluntary reduction strategies
and agreements
Reduction strategies are another option tolessen the number of plastic bags and theamount of single-use plastic packaging.
As opposed to bans and taxes, the valueof reduction strategies is that they do not
attempt to force sudden changes in themarket. They build on the understandingthat for the change to be long-lasting, itneeds to be voluntary and based on choice.
These strategies recognize the complexity
48 Prisco, 2017.
49 Cann, 2017.
50 The status of this report is as of February 2018.

19

SINGLE-USE PLASTICS:
A Roadmap for Sustainability

Box 5. The controversy of reusable bags
There are many types of reusable bags available on the market. They are often produced using
different materials that are heavier and durable to give the bag added strength.
Although more environmentally friendly than traditional single-use plastic bags, recycling reusablebags can be complicated, time intensive, and costly as they often require different processes fromthose locally available. Depending on their composition, reusable bags might have to be deconstructedin the recycling process to separate the different materials. Consequently, in many cases reusablebags are not recycled. This means that millions of reusable bags, currently displacing conventional
plastic shopping bags, will end up in landfills at the end of their useful life.51,52
Suggestion: Before choosing the type of reusable bags to use or promote, it would be important to consider
the options available locally for recycling or upcycling the reusable bags at the end of their life.

of needs linked to bag usage, often leaving
the choice up to the consumers. For the
reduction strategies to be successful,adequate social awareness is necessary, as
discussed in section 3.1.
The promotion and adoption of reusable bags
as alternatives to plastic bags is an example
of a reduction strategy where the choice
rests with the consumer. This strategy has
been effective in many local and national
contexts to change consumer behaviour
and reduce the use of conventional plastic
carrier bags. Linked with social pressure andimage, in Canada for instance, reusable bags
have been widely embraced, as they were
promoted as the “green” choice and often
offered free of charge as a promotional itemby various organizations.5152

51 CIRAIG, 2017.
52 Controversy and recyclability, 2011.

20

Voluntary agreements are another example
of reduction strategies driven by the supply
side. Voluntary agreements between thegovernment and producers/retailers can act
as an alternative to bans and be an effective
instrument demonstrating public-private
collaboration (see the Austria case study
in section 4.1.2). Retailers and producers
are indeed critical partners in effecting
behavioural change by building awarenessand providing alternatives.
For instance, in New Zealand in 2017,
given the considerable public pressure
from various groups to act on single-use
plastic bags, and considering the lengthy
process needed for a law to be enacted, theMinistry of Environment decided to pursue
a voluntary agreement. Officials engaged
with the two largest supermarket chainsto encourage them to either charge for, orvoluntarily ban, single-use carrier bags. Soon
after the meetings, both chains announced
the complete phase-out of such bags by theend of 2018.53

53 https://www.stuff.co.nz/business/98308042/how-thesupermarkets-plastic-bag-bans-will-work

>>>>>>>>>>
Actions to minimize plastic bags and Styrofoam products

How to read the Summary Table?
The table is organized by continent and country, summarizing examples of retailers, municipalities and otherpublic-private cooperation instituted to reduce the use of plastic bags and Styrofoam without the implementationof a policy measure. The column “Features” overviews the initiative and the measures implemented as well as
their impact, if information is available.

Summary of examples of public-private initiatives to reduce single-use plastic bags
and Styrofoam products

Indonesia

2017

ActionType2009 Publicprivate
campaign

Discount to
consumers

Type: Local authorities initiated a 45-day
campaign in Bangkok to reduce the consumptionof plastic bags. Many supermarket chains,
local markets and other stores took part inthe campaign and offered a one-baht (around$0.03) discount for every THB 100 (nearly $3.00)
purchase if they brought their own cloth bags.
In 2009, the campaign targeted a cutback of 4.4
million plastic bags (Corporal, 2010).
Impact: Information not available

2016

Publicprivateagreement

Levy

Type: Levy on plastic bags in major
supermarkets. Agreement signed by Ministry(BMLFUW) and major trade companies andenvironmental protection organizations. Its
target surpasses that of the EU-Directive (United
Nations, 2017a).
Impact: Drop in consumption of plastic carrierbags per person per year from 54.3 very lightweight and 3.1 light-weight (15-50 microns) in2015 to 44 very lightweight and 4.3 lightweightin 2016 (Ministerium für ein lebenswertesÖsterreich, 2017).

2016

Publicprivateagreement

Levy

Type: Voluntary agreement between the
Ministry of Agriculture and Environment
and the Federation of Finnish Commerce toundertake measures to reduce the consumptionof plastic bags. The measures include: advice andinformation to reduce consumption and prevent
litter, a fee on shopping bags >15µ and <50µand no self-service of thin plastic carrier bags
(Plastic Carrier Bag Agreement, 2016).
Impact: Information not available

2016

Publicprivateagreement

Ban or levy

Type: Voluntary ban or levy on plastic bags
(retailers can decide whether to phase out
plastic bags or to apply a fee of €0.05 to €0.50(about $0.06 to $0.60). The agreement was madeby the Ministry, the German Retail Federationand participating companies to curb the use ofplastic bags. Many more companies participate
without having signed the agreement.). (German
government, 2016, Surfrider, 2017)
Impact: Information not available

Germany

Finland

Austria

EuropeFeatures

Government Memorandum Type: Because of a four-year campaign organizedcommitment ofby citizens to get plastic bags banned inunderstanding Bali, the governor signed a memorandum of
understanding to phase out plastic bags by
January 2018 (Prisco, 2017).
Impact: Information not available

ThailandAsia

Area Country Year

21

SINGLE-USE PLASTICS:
A Roadmap for Sustainability

ActionType
Levy

Type: 85 brands (including all big distributors)
participate in the “Eco-sac” (“Öko-Tut”) initiative,
a cooperate project between the Ministry of
the Environment, the Luxembourgian Trade
Confederation and the non-profit association
Valorlux to reduce the consumption oflightweight plastic bags by replacing them withthe so-called “Öko-Tut” (a reusable bag).
Impact: Plastic bag consumption dropped by 85%
in nine years and the “Öko-Tut” has replaced
most free plastic bags at supermarkets acrossthe country (Luxembourger leads way, 2013;
Bänsch-Baltruschat et al., 2017).

2008 Publicprivateagreement

Levy

Type: Voluntary agreement since at least 2008
between main retail associations and regional
authorities to promote prevention and reducethe consumption of plastic carrier bags. Somecharge a fee for the bags; others grant a small
pay-back if plastic carrier bags are not used.
Impact: Pacto por la Bolsa in Catalonia, signed in2009. Its target was a reduction of consumptionof “single-use” bags by 50% by 2012. By 2010, a
reduction of 40% had been achieved (European
Commission, 2013).

1970

Privateinitiative

Levy

Type: Levy on consumer. Since the 1970s, grocery
stores started to charge consumers for plastic
and paper carrier bags (around SEK 2; about$0.24). (Surfrider Foundation Europe, 2017; Radio
Sweden, 2007)
Impact: The charge on plastic bags has led
to “better quality plastic carrier bags” andreduced use of plastic bags in the first years
after implementation. Demand increased again
thereafter (Radio Sweden, 2007).

2016

Publicprivateagreement

Levy

Type: Switzerland’s largest supermarket
chains introduced a plastic bag levy based on a
voluntary agreement, which was approved by theparliament as an alternative to a total ban (Swisssupermarkets, 2016).
Impact: Demand for plastic bags dropped by 8085% (Price tag, 2017).

2016

Privateinitiative

Levy

Type: A big supermarket chain announced that it
will start charging consumers CAD 0.05 (around$0.04) per single-use plastic bag and CAD 0.25
per reusable bag (The Canadian Press, 2016).
Impact: Information not available

2017

Privateinitiative

Ban or levy

Type: Some major supermarkets announced thatthey will phase out lightweight plastic bags orprovide bags but charge AUD 0.15 ($0.12) per bag(Pearlman, 2018).
Impact: Information not available

Spain
SwedenSwitzerland
CanadaAustralia

North
America
Oceania3.5. Policy instruments
Policy interventions to reduce singleuse plastic bags and Styrofoam products

22

Features2004 Publicprivateagreement
Luxembourg

EuropeArea Country Year

have been implemented at national andsubnational levels. Governments haveintroduced different policy tools, from bans,to economic instruments such as taxes (seeTable 1).

>>>>>>>>>>
Actions to minimize plastic bags and Styrofoam products

Table 1. Policy tools to limit the use of plastic bags
Policy tools
Regulatory
instruments

Economic
instruments

Features

Ban

Prohibition of a particular Type or combination of single-use plastics(including plastic bags, foamed plastic products, etc.). The ban can betotal or partial (for those of certain specifications, e.g. plastic bags <30µthickness).

Levy onsuppliers

Levy paid by suppliers of plastic bags (domestic producers or importers).
For such a tax to be effective in inducing behavioural change, it should befully passed on from suppliers to retailers, enticing the latter to (i) charge
consumers for plastic bags or (ii) offer a rebate/reward to consumers who
do not ask for plastic bags, promoting the use of reusable ones.

Levy onretailers

Levy to be paid by the retailer when purchasing plastic bags. The
retailers are not obligated to convey the tax to the consumers.

Levy onconsumers

Charge on each bag sold at the point of sale; standard price defined bylaw.

Combinationof regulatory
Ban andand economic levy
instruments

Combination of ban and levy (for instance a ban on thin plastic bags anda levy on thicker ones)

Governments around the world have definedand regulated the thickness of the plasticbags allowed or banned. For instance, theEuropean Union has defined “lightweight”
bags as those with a thickness not exceeding
50 microns (0.05 millimetres).54
Box 6. The ‘’ban on banning’’
While globally people and governments
have joined hands to fight plastic
pollution, in 2017 the government ofMichigan (USA) enacted a law prohibiting
local governments from regulating or
restricting the use of disposable plastic
items, including plastic bags, Styrofoam
containers and other forms of plastic
packaging. Also, in other states such as
Idaho, Arizona and Missouri, “bans onbanning” disposable plastics have been
introduced, allegedly in an attempt toprotect the industry.

54 EU Directive 2015/720.

3.5.1 Global trends
The remarkable number of national and local
governments that over the last decade havedeveloped and implemented policies andeconomic measure to reduce plastic bags
and Styrofoam products keeps growing.
The number of policies regulating plasticbags and Styrofoam products at the national
level increased steeply after 2015 (see Figure3.3). This is partially due to EU Directive
2015/720,55 which encourages member states
to set reduction targets or adopt economic
instruments to achieve a sustained reductionof ‘’lightweight’’ carrier bags. EU member
states are for instance invited, among otheroptions, to reduce the amount of lightweightplastic bag consumption to a maximum of
90 per person a year by the end of 2019, andto a maximum of 40 by the end of 2025.
Another reason behind the recent growthin the number of plastic bag policies enacted
at the national level is the visibility gainedby governments that introduce bans on theimportation, production and use of singleuse plastics.

55 EU Directive 2015/720.

23

SINGLE-USE PLASTICS:
A Roadmap for Sustainability

Figure 3.3. Estimated number of new regulations on single-use plastics entering
into force at the national level worldwide

Number of regulations on plastic bags, Styrofoam and other plastic utensils that entered into force
Source: Data independently collected by authors

The number of national policies regulating
single-use plastics is likely to continue
increasing in the future. Action has beentaken in developed countries and recently
governments from around the world joined
hands at the third meeting of the United
Nations Environment Assembly (UNEA
3), committing to the vision of a “Pollution
Free Planet”. Resolution UNEP/EA.3/L.20
specifically addresses marine litter andmicroplastics and encourages member
states to reduce unnecessary plastic use
and promote the use of environmentallysound alternatives while prioritizing policies
to reduce the amount of plastics entering
the marine environment.56

56 https://papersmart.unon.org/resolution/index
The United Nations Environment Assembly,[…] Acknowledging the challenges of addressing marine plastic
pollution in the face of increasing production and consumptionof plastic in products and packaging, and urging all countries
and other stakeholders to make responsible use of plastic while
endeavoring to reduce unnecessary plastic use, and to promoteresearch and application of environmentally-sound alternatives.
[…] Encourages also all Member States to, based on best
available knowledge on sources and levels of marine litter andmicroplastics in the environment, prioritize policies and measures
at appropriate scale, to avoid marine litter and microplastics
entering the marine environment.

24

3.5.2 Regional, national and local
trendsBased on the type of policy instruments
introduced to minimize plastic bags andStyrofoam products, it is possible to observe
regional trends.
Africa stands out as the continent where
the largest number of countries instituted
a total ban on the production and use ofplastic bags. Of the 25 African countries
having introduced national bans on plastic
bags, more than half (58%) shifted into
implementation between 2014 and 2017.
In Asia, several countries have attempted tocontrol the manufacture and use of plasticbags through levies, and some governments
already introduced plastic bag bans morethan a decade ago, such as in Bangladesh.
Nonetheless, the enforcement of regulations
has often been poor, and single-use plasticbags continue to be widely used andmismanaged despite prohibitions andlevies.57 In contrast, another Asian example isJapan, where no bans are in place on single57 IRIN, 2011.

>>>>>>>>>>
Actions to minimize plastic bags and Styrofoam products

Figure 3.4. Types of national policies on plastic bags, by continent

Oceania

North America

EuropeCentral & South America

Asia

Africa0
Total or partial ban

5
Economic instruments

10

15
Combination

20

25

Private public agreements

Source: Data independently collected by authors

use plastic, but thanks to a very effective
waste management system and a highdegree of social consciousness, the country
accounts for relatively limited leakages ofsingle-use plastics in the environment.
In Europe, in response to EU Directive
2015/720,58 to achieve a sustained reductionin the number of lightweight plastic bags
used per person by 2025, countries choose
measures ranging from bans, such as in Italy
and France, to agreements with the private
sector, as Austria did. Currently the European
Commission is finalizing a “European
Strategy for Plastics in a Circular Economy”(2018-2030), to reduce the unnecessary
generation of single-use plastic waste andeliminate overpackaging.59
With regards to Oceania, most of the statesin Australia have banned lightweight

58 More information on the EU Directive 2015/720 under section
3.5.1 of this paper.
59 European Commission, Plastic Strategy COM (2018) 28 Final.
http://ec.europa.eu/environment/circular-economy/pdf/plasticsstrategy.pdf

plastic bags and in Papua New Guinea, nonbiodegradable plastic bags are banned.60
In Central and South America, regulations tocurb the consumption of plastic bags are inplace at both the national and subnational
levels, and countries such as Haiti and Costa
Rica also regulate the use of foamed plastic
products. Costa Rica in particular aims tobecome the first country in the world toeliminate single-use plastics by 2021.61
In North America, regulations have been
introduced mostly at the state or city level.
Lightweight plastic bags are banned, forexample in Montreal (Canada) and California
and Hawaii (USA). Action against singleuse Styrofoam products has been taken in
New York City,62 which re-instated in 2017its ban on single-use Styrofoam containers
after a first attempt in 2015 (see case study
in section 4.4.1).

60 PNG prepares for ban, 2015; Queensland, Australia, Department ofEnvironment and Heritage Protection, 2016.
61 UNDP, 2017.
62 Babin, 2017.

25

SINGLE-USE PLASTICS:
A Roadmap for Sustainability

Figure 3.5. National-level plastic bag bans and Styrofoam regulations

Total or partial ban

Economic instruments

Combination

Private public agreement

Source: Data independently collected by authors

Figure 3.6. Sub-national level plastic bag bans and Styrofoam regulations

1
3
8

4

9
11

16

5

6

7

26

10
12

24

32

25

28
15

14

13

23

2

27

30
33

31
29

34

35

17
36

19

37

18

20

38

21

39
40

41

22

Total or partial ban

Economic instruments

Combination

Source: Data independently collected by authors

1. Wood Buffalo
2. 2 cities, Manitoba
3. Seattle
4. Chicago
5. Montreal
6. New York City
7. Washington, D.C.
8. San Francisco
9. California
10. Austin
11. Querétaro, Mexico
12. Mexico City

26

13. Hawaii
14. 4 cities, Guatemala
15. Bay Islands, Honduras
16. America Samoa
17. Galapagos Islands,
Ecuador
18. Rio de Janeiro, Brazil
19. Sao Paolo, Brazil
20. Cordoba, Argentina
21. Buenos Aires, Argentina
22. Pinta Arena, Chile

23. 4 regions, UK
24. 2 regions, Belgium
25. Catalona, Spain
26. Andalusia, Spain
27. NDjamena, Chad
28. Hurghada, Egypt
29. Somaliland, Somalia
30. 4 regions, Pakistan
31. >9 cities/provinces, India
32. Jilin Province, China
33. 3 cities, Myanmar

34. 27 cities/provinces,
Philippines
35. Federal Territories,
Malaysia
36. >20 cities, Indonesia
37. Northern Territory
38. South Australia
39. Australian Capital
Territory
40. Tasmania
41. Coles Bay

>>>>>>>>>>
Actions to minimize plastic bags and Styrofoam products

3.5.3 Countries with policies on plasticbags and Styrofoam
In reflection of the ever-growing number ofcountries and cities regulating single-use

plastics, the tables below provide a summaryof the countries that, at the time of finalizing
this report,63 have either already introduced
legislation on plastic bags and Styrofoam
products or announced imminent action.

How to read the Summary Table?
The tables are organized by continent and country. The “Year” column indicates when the policy action was undertaken,
and the jurisdictional “Level” indicates whether the policy was introduced at the national or local level to regulate theimportation, production or use of plastic bags and Styrofoam. The policy tools analysed include bans, levies, and a
combination of the two. “Ban/levy approved” denotes that a policy has been approved but has not yet entered into effect,
whereas “entered into force” means that the law has been enacted and has entered into effect. The column “Features”
provides more details on the type of policy measure introduced as well as its impact, if information is available.

Summary of countries that have introduced regulations
on plastic bags and Styrofoam products

AfricaArea

Country

Year

Level

PolicyFeatures

Benin

2018

National

Ban – enteredinto force

Type: Ban on import, production, sale anduse of non-biodegradable plastic bags
(LégiBénin, 2018).
Impact: Information not available

Botswana

2007

National

Levy –
entered intoforce

Type: Levy on retailer. No enforcement upon
retailers to charge for plastic bags. Retailers
decide if and how much to charge.
Impact: Tax resulted in voluntary levy onplastic bags. Decline in the consumptionof plastic bags: 50% drop within 18 months,
partial success probably due to consistently
high prices of bags (Dikgang and Visser,2010). However control over pollution
resulting from plastic carrier bags failed,leading to discussions about banning them
(Xinhua, 2018).

Burkina Faso 2015

National

Ban – enteredinto force

Type: Ban on production, import, marketingand distribution of non-biodegradable
plastic bags (UNDP-UNEP, 2015).
Impact: Information not available

Cameroon

National

Ban – enteredinto force

Type: Ban on non-biodegradable plastic
bags.
Impact: Due to a lack of inexpensivealternatives, plastic bags appear to be
smuggled from neighbouring countries.64(Nforngwa, 2014) The government has tried
to encourage the cleanup of plastic litter bypaying citizens for each kilogram of plastic
waste collected. Through the programme, anestimated 100,000 kg of plastic waste wascollected in 2015 alone (Colbert, 2016).

2014

63 February 2018.
64 The law banning plastic bags passed in 1996 but was notenforced. (Nforngwa, 2014)27

SINGLE-USE PLASTICS:
A Roadmap for Sustainability

AfricaArea

Country

Year

Level

PolicyFeatures

Cape Verde2017

National

Ban – enteredinto force

Type: Ban on the sale and use of plastic bags
(EnviroNews Nigeria, 2017).
Impact: Information not available

Chad

2010

Local –N’Djamena

Ban – enteredinto force

Type: Ban on the importation, sale, anduse of plastic bags in the capital city,
N’Djamena.65
Impact: Less observable plastic pollution in
the city. (IRIN, 2010).

Côte d’Ivoire

2014

National

Ban – enteredinto force

Type: Ban on the importation, production,
use and sale of non-biodegradable plasticbags <50µ (Boisvert, 2014).
Impact: Information not available

East Africa

2017

Regional

Ban – enteredinto force

The East African Legislative Assembly(EALA) introduced a ban on the
manufacturing, sale, importation and useof polythene bags under the East African
Community Polythene Materials Control Bill2017 (Karuhanga, 2017).

Egypt

2009

Local –
Hurghada

Ban –enteredinto force

Type: Ban on the use of plastic bags inHurghada. Distribution of 50,000 cloth bags
for free by the Hurghada Environmental
Protection and Conservation Association,
together with letters explaining the healthand environmental reasons behind thecampaign (Zohny, 2009).
Impact: Information not available

Eritrea2005

National

Ban – enteredinto force

Type: Ban on the importation, production,
sale, and distribution of plastic bags.66
Impact: Problems associated with plastic
bags, such as the blockage of drains andwater pipes, dramatically decreased(Fikrejesus, 2017).

Ethiopia

2007

National

Ban – enteredinto force

Type: Ban on production and importationof non-biodegradable plastic bags <30µ(Ethiopian News Agency, 2016).
Impact: Enforcement unclear (Sisay, 2016;
Alicia, 2011).

Gambia2015

National

Ban – enteredinto force

Type: Ban on the sale, importation and useof plastic bags.
Impact: Success was seen in the first phase
after implementation, but there has beena reappearance after a political impasse(Coker, 2017).

GuineaBissau

2016

National

Ban – enteredinto force

Type: Ban on the use of plastic bags.
Impact: Law not strictly enforced. Strong
resistance from both consumers andretailers, claiming a lack of consultation(TrendType, 2017).

Kenya

2017

National

Ban – enteredinto force

Type: Ban on the importation, production,
sale, and use of plastic bags (The Guardian,2017).
Impact: Information not available

65 The law banning plastic bags passed in 1992 but was notenforced. (IRIN, 2010)
66 A ban on plastic bags was introduced earlier in Asmara (2002) andother regions. (IRIN, 2002)28

>>>>>>>>>>
Actions to minimize plastic bags and Styrofoam products

AfricaArea

Country

Year

Level

PolicyFeatures

Malawi2015

National

Ban – enteredinto force

Type: Ban on the use, sale, production,
exportation and importation of plastic bags
<60µ (UNDP, 2015b).
Impact: Information not available

Mali

2012

NationalBan –approved

Type: Ban on the production, importation,possession, sale and use of nonbiodegradable plastic bags.
Impact: The ban was adopted in 2012, but
has not yet entered into force (Braun andTraore, 2015).

Mauritania

2013

National

Ban – enteredinto force

Type: Ban on the manufacture, use andimportation of plastic bags. It was estimatedthat 70 percent of cattle and sheep
deaths were due to plastic bag ingestion(Mauritania bans, 2013).
Impact: Information not available

Mauritius

2016

National

Ban – enteredinto force

Type: Ban on the importation, manufacture,sale or supply of plastic bags, with 11 Typesof plastic bags for essential uses andhygenic and sanitary purposes exempt(for example roll-on bag for meat products,
waste disposal bags, bags as integral part ofpackaging, bags manufactured for export)(Government of Mauritius, 2016).
Impact: Information not available

Morocco2009

National

Ban – enteredinto force

Type: Ban on the production, importation,
sale and distribution of black plastic bags.
Impact: Although only considered partiallysuccessful, the law is considered an
important step forward. (Ellis, 2016).

2016

National

Ban – enteredinto force

Type: Ban on the production, importation,
sale and distribution of plastic bags.
Impact: 421 tons of plastic bags were seizedin one year. Citizens have switched to fabricbags. The Moroccan government declaredthat plastic bags are virtually no longer usedin the country (Morocco seizes bags, 2017).

Mozambique

2016

National

Ban – enteredinto force

Type: Ban on the production, importation,possession and use of plastic bags <30µ.
People were advised to use baskets made byeither grass or coconut trees (MozambiqueNews Agency, 2015; Mozambique plastic
ban, 2016).
Impact: Information not available.

Niger

2015

National

Ban – enteredinto force

Type: Ban on production, importation,
usage and stocking of plastic bags (Niger
government bans production, 2014).
Impact: Limited because of poor
enforcement. New efforts were made in 2017
(Niamey, 2017), but no information is yet
available on the outcome.

Rwanda2008

National

Ban – enteredinto force

Type: Ban on the production, use,
importation and sale of all polyethylene
bags.
Impact: In the first phase the ban resulted ina black market for plastic bags. Over time,
plastic bags were replaced by paper bags
(Clavel, 2014; Pilgrim, 2016).

29

SINGLE-USE PLASTICS:
A Roadmap for Sustainability

AfricaArea

Country

Year

Level

Features

Senegal2016

National

Ban – enteredinto force

Type: Ban on the production, importation,possession and use of plastic bags <30µ(Kicking the plastic, 2015).
Impact: Information not available

Somalia2015

Local –
Somaliland

Ban – enteredinto force

Type: Ban on disposable plastic bags inSomaliland67 (Masai, 2015)
Impact: Despite the law, plastic bags are stillwidely used (Hasan, 2017).

South Africa

2003

National

Ban – enteredinto force

Type: Ban on plastic bags <30µ and levy on
retailer for thicker ones.
Impact: In the first phase the consumptionof plastic bags fell, but then increased
again due to lack of enforcement. (Dikgang,
Leiman, Visser, 2012a)

Tanzania

2006

NationalBan –approved

Type: Ban on plastic bags and bottles.
Impact: Ban has not been implemented.
Since then, the government made constantefforts to phase out plastic bags. The latest
ban was issued in 2016, but implementation
has been pushed back (The EastAfrican,2017).

2006

Local –
ZanzibarBan – enteredinto force

Type: Ban on the importation, distribution
and sale of plastic bags <30µ. (IRIN, 2006)
Impact: Information not available

Tunisia2017

National

Ban and levy
– entered intoforce

Type: Ban on the production, importationand distribution of single-use plastic bags inmajor supermarkets and levy on consumers
on thicker ones (>50µ)68 (Quillen, 2017;
Martinko, 2017).
Impact: Information not available

Uganda2009

National

Ban – enteredinto force

Type: Ban on lightweight plastic bags <30µ.
Impact: Enforcement was weakened bymanufacturers’ lobby. Implementation
attempts by the National Environmental
Management Agency (NEMA) in April 2015
had no sustained impacts. Plastic bags canstill be found in some parts of the country,
although local entrepreneurs started to
produce woven, reusable bags (Wakabi, 2015;
Namara, 2016).

Zimbabwe

2010

National

Ban and levy
– entered intoforce

Type: Ban on plastic bags <30µ and levy on
consumer for thicker ones.
Impact: Implementation has been difficult
because of resistance from the informal
sector. Flimsy plastic bags have beensmuggled in from Mozambique. The levy
has proved not to be a deterrent over thelong term (Chitotombe, 2014).

67 The law banning plastic bags passed in 2005 but was notenforced. (Medeshi, 2010)30

Policy68 Before implementation of the law, an agreement was signed withmajor supermarket chains on a strategy for how to eliminate
single-use plastic bags without harming businesses andconsumers. (Martinko, 2017)

>>>>>>>>>>
Actions to minimize plastic bags and Styrofoam products
Country

Asia

Year

Level

PolicyFeatures2017

National

Ban – enteredinto force

Type: Ban on Styrofoam products
Impact: Ban temporary lifted shortly after
its introduction to allow businesses moretime to replace Styrofoam containers withrecyclable or biodegradable ones69 (Mhofu,
2017).

Bangladesh

2002

National

Ban – enteredinto force

Type: Ban on polyethylene plastic bags.
Impact: Initial positive response from thepublic. Use of plastic bags increased aftersome years due to lack of enforcement andabsence of cost-effective alternatives (IRIN,
2011).

Bhutan2009

National

Ban – enteredinto force

Type: Ban on plastic bags
Impact: Bags are still commonly used.
Compliance has been difficult to monitor.70(CleanBhutan, 2014)

China

2008

National

Ban and levy
– entered intoforce

Type: Ban on non-biodegradable plasticbags <25 μ and levy on consumer for thicker
ones.
Impact: In Chinese supermarkets, plastic
bag use decreased between 60 and 80%.
Ban has been ineffectively enforced infood markets and among small retailers.71(Xanthos, 2017).

2009

Local - Hong
Kong

Levy –
entered intoforce

Type: Levy on consumer.
Impact: Implementation in different
phases. Initially limited Impact due to
implementation only in selected chains andoutlets. In 2015, the levy was extended toover 100,000 retailers. 25% fewer bags were
disposed in landfills within one year (in2016 vs. 2015) (Hong Kong Environmental
Protection Department; Kao, 2016).

2015

Local – Jilin
province

Ban – enteredinto force

Type: Ban on production and sale of nonbiodegradable plastic bags and tableware in
Jilin province (Sun, 2015).
Impact: Limited because of poor
enforcement (Zixiong, 2017).

Africa

Area

India

Besides the national law, several states and cities have introduced bans on plastic
carrier bags and other plastic materials. A selection of them can be found in the tablebelow.72
2016

National

Ban – enteredinto force

69 The law banning Styrofoam products was enacted in 2012 but
was not enforced. (Mhofu, 2017)
70 The law banning plastic bags was enacted in 1999 andreintroduced in 2005 but was not enforced. (CleanBhutan, 2014)
71 In 1999 a ban on the production and use of Styrofoam tableware
was introduced in China. The ban was not enforced and officiallylifted in 2013. (Kao, 2013)

Type: Ban on non-compostable plasticbags <50μ73 (Notification on Plastic Waste
Management Rules, 2016).
Impact: Information not available

72 Further states and cities include: Madhya Pradesh, Uttar Pradesh,
Jammu & Kashmir, Uttarakhand, Andhra Pradesh, Arunachal
Pradesh, Assam, Goa, Gujarat, Odisha, Tamil Nadu and more. (PTI,
2017; Business Standard Web Team, 2017)
73 The regulatory framework is provided by the Plastic Waste(Management and Handling) Rules of 2011, which replaced theearlier Recycled Plastics Manufacture and Usage Rules of 1999
(amended in 2003 to bring them into effect, but implementation
was poor). (Notification on Plastic Waste Management Rules,
2016)

31

SINGLE-USE PLASTICS:
A Roadmap for Sustainability

Asia

Area

Country

Year

Level

Features2004

Local –
Himachal
PradeshBan - enteredinto force

Type: Ban on the production, storage, use,sale and distribution of non-biodegradable
plastic bags <70μ in the Indian state of
Himachal Pradesh. (The Himachal Pradesh
Non-Biodegradable Garbage (Control) Act,
1995). In 2011 a ban on disposable plastic
products, such as plastic cups, drinking
glasses and plates was introduced (Duboise,2012).
Impact: Significant decrease in plastic
pollution (IANS, 2009).

2016

Local –
KarnatakaBan - enteredinto force

Type: Ban on manufacturing and sale ofplastic bags in the Indian state of Karnataka(DHNS, 2017).
Impact: Plastic bags continue to be bothavailable and commonly used (Deepika,2017).

2016

Local –
PunjabBan - enteredinto force

Type: Ban on the manufacture, stocking,distribution, sale or use of single-use plastic
carry bags and containers in the state of
Punjab74 (The Punjab Plastic Carry Bags
(Manufacture, Usage and Disposal) Control(Amendment) Act, 2016).
Impact: Information not available

2010

Local –
Haryana

Ban - enteredinto force

Type: Ban on manufacture, stocking,distribution, sale or use of plastic carry bagsin the state of Haryana (NDTV, 2010).
Impact: Limited because of poor
enforcement. (PTI, 2016b).

2016

Local – Kerala

Ban - enteredinto force

Type: Ban on plastic bags <50μ in the Indianstate of Kerala (Deccan Chronicle, 2016).
Impact: Information not available

2001

Local – West
BengalBan - enteredinto force

Type: Several regulations from 2001
onwards. Ban on plastic bags <40μ andblanket ban in certain areas in West Bengal(Mahesh et al., 2015; West Bengal Pollution
Control Board).
Impact: Plastic bags are still commonly
used. Implementation is limited (Mahesh etal., 2015).

1998

Local –
SikkimBan - enteredinto force

Type: Ban on delivery or purchasing ofgoods and materials in plastic wrappers or
plastic bags in the state of Sikkim.
Impact: Although plastic bags are stillcommon (used by 34% of shops) the majority
switched to paper bags or newspaper (66%)(Bari, 2018).

2016

Local –
SikkimBan - enteredinto force

Type: Ban on sale and use of disposable
Styrofoam in Sikkim75 (Styrofoam ban, 2016).
Impact: Information not available

74 Amendment of the “The Punjab Plastic Carry Bags (Manufacture,
Usages & Disposal) Control Act (2005)” which banned nonbiodegradable plastic bags <30μ, but was poorly enforced (PTI,
2016b)
75 Also the use of plastic water bottles during government meetings
was prohibited. (The Telegraph, 2016)32

Policy>>>>>>>>>>
Actions to minimize plastic bags and Styrofoam products
Country

Level

PolicyFeatures2017

Local – New
Delhi

Ban - enteredinto force

Type: Ban on all kinds of disposable plastics
in New Delhi76 (Naik, 2017a).
Impact: Limited because of poor
enforcement. (Bari, 2018)2018

Local –
Maharashtra

Ban - enteredinto force

Type: Ban on plastic bags <50μ in the stateof Maharashtra77 (Naik, 2017b).
Impact: Information not available

2016

Local – 23
cities

Levy - enteredinto force

Type: Levy on plastic bags imposed on
customers (equivalent to $0.015 per bag) atselected retailers in 23 cities.
Impact: 40% reduction, on average, in thenumber of plastic bags used in the selected
cities, but resistance has been seen fromconsumers and the plastic industry. The
government is considering the impositionof a nationwide tax on plastic bags startingfrom 2018. (Black, 2016).

2016

Local –
Banjarmasin

Ban - enteredinto force

Type: Ban on plastic bags in the city of
Banjarmasin.
Impact: Reduced bag consumption by 80%(The Jakarta Post, 2017).

2016

Local –
Bandung

Ban - enteredinto force

Type: Ban on the use of Styrofoam in thecity of Bandung (Hong, 2016).
Impact: Information not available

Israel2017

National

Ban and levy
- entered intoforce

Type: Ban on bags <20µ and levy on thicker
ones in supermarkets (around $0.03)(Udasin, 2016).
Impact: A survey revealed that, four months
after the law came into effect, 42% of
shoppers had not bought any plastic bags
from supermarkets (Raz-Chaimovich, 2017).

Malaysia

2011

Local –
Penang State

Levy –
entered intoforce

Type: MYR 0.20 charge on plastic bags, inline with the campaign: “No free plasticbags”.
Impact: Information not available

2012

Local –
Penang State

Ban – enteredinto force

Type: Ban on polystyrene (PS)
Impact: Information not available

2017

Local –
FederalTerritories

Ban - enteredinto force

Type: Ban on non-biodegradable plasticbags and food containers in Malaysia’sFederal Territories (Kuala Lumpur, Putrajaya,
and Labuan)78 (The Straits Times, 2017).
Impact: Information not available

Mongolia

2009

National

Ban - enteredinto force

Type: Ban on the importation and use ofnon-biodegradable plastic bags <25µ.
Impact: After a few years the ban wasincorporated into a new “Waste Law”,
negatively affecting the enforcement of theban and the administrative supervision(Zoljargal, 2013).

Myanmar2009

Local –
Mandalay and
Nay Pyi Taw

Ban - enteredinto force

Type: Ban on the use of small and thinplastic bags in Mandalay and Nay Pyi Taw(Myanmar works for conservation, 2009).
Impact: Information not available

Asia

Area

Indonesia

Year

76 A ban of the use, sale and distribution of plastic bags passed in
2009, but was not enforced. (Lalchandani, 2016)
77 This law banning plastic bags in the state of Maharashtra passed
in 2005, but it was never enforced. (Naik, 2017b)

78 Since 2011, there has been a “no plastic bags on Saturday”
campaign, in which selected big retailers charge for plastic bags
on Saturdays. (Zen et al., 2013)33

SINGLE-USE PLASTICS:
A Roadmap for Sustainability
Country

Year

Level

PolicyLocal –
YangonBan - enteredinto force

Type: Ban on the production, storage,
and sale of polyethylene bags in Yangon(Myanmar’s main city, 2011).
Impact: Information not available

2013

Local –
PunjabBan - enteredinto force

Type: Ban on the manufacturing, sale andusage of non-degradable plastic products in
Punjab.
Impact: Limited because of insufficient
implementation79 (Masud, 2017).

2018

Local – Sindh

Ban - enteredinto force

Type: Ban on certain non-degradable plastic
products, including carrier bags, in Sindh.
(The Sindh Prohibition of Non-degradable
Plastic Products (Manufacturing, Saleand Usage) Rules, 2014). Notification to
implement the ban in 201880 (The Express
Tribune, 2018).
Impact: Information not available

2013

Local –
Islamabad
CapitalTerritory

Ban - enteredinto force

Type: Ban on the sale, purchase, and useof polyethylene bags in the Islamabad
Capital Territory, and introduction of oxobiodegradable plastic bags (Naeem, 2013).
Impact: Information not available

2017

Local –
Khyber
Pakhtunkhwa

Ban - enteredinto force

Type: Ban on the manufacture, importation,
sale, and use of non-biodegradable plasticbags and regulation of oxo-biodegradable
plastic products in Khyber Pakhtunkhwa(Khattak, 2017).
Impact: Information not available

Philippines

2011

Local –
Muntinlupa

Ban - enteredinto force

Type: Ban on the use of plastic bags on dry
goods, regulations on their use for wet goodsin the city of Muntinlupa. Ban on the useof Styrofoam and styropor81 (Earthjustice,2015).
Impact: Information not available.

Sri Lanka

2017

National

Ban - enteredinto force

Type: Ban on the import, sale, and use ofpolyethylene bags <20µ and Styrofoam
containers (Sri Lanka bans plastic, 2017b;
Jayasekara, 2012).
Impact: Information not available

Viet Nam2012

National

Levy - enteredinto force

Type: Non-biodegradable plastic bags aretaxed by weight at VND 40,000 ($1.76) per
kilogram (levy on retailer).
Impact: Plastic bags are still widely used
across Viet Nam. The government is
considering an amendment to increase thetax fivefold (Viet Nam considers fivefold
gallop, 2017).

Pakistan

79 In 2002 an ordinance on the prohibition on manufacture, sale, use
and import of polythene bags (black or any other polythene bag
below <15µ) was issued, but not enforced. (Masud, 2017)
80 A ban on the sale and use of plastic bags <30µ was issued in
Karachi in 2006. (APP, 2007)

34

Features

2011

Asia

Area

81 Since the implementation of the ban in Muntinlupa, more than 27
cities and several provinces have introduced similar bans or levies
on plastic bags, including the City of Quezon, Las Pinas, City of
San Fernando, Makati Citz, Bacolod and Manila City. Styrofoam isbanned in some municipalities. (Dezalyx, 2016; Earthjustice, 2015)

Area

Country

Central and South America>>>>>>>>>>
Actions to minimize plastic bags and Styrofoam products

Antigua andBarbuda

Year

Level

PolicyFeatures2016

National

Ban - enteredinto force

Type: Ban on the use and importation ofplastic bags (Observer Media, 2017).
Impact: Plastic bags can still be found insmall supermarkets (Observer Media, 2017).

2017

National

Ban - enteredinto force

Type: Ban on Styrofoam with an
implementation plan of three stages. Ban
on food service containers since 2017, from2018 onwards ban on plastic utensils (e.g.
spoons, straws, food trays, etc.) and ban on
importation and use of Styrofoam coolers(Nice, Ltd, 2017).
Impact: Information not available

2017

Local –
Buenos Aires

Ban - enteredinto force

Type: Ban on non-biodegradable plastic
shopping bags <50µ in Buenos Aires82(Martin, 2017).
Impact: Shortly after the ban was
introduced, sales of changuitos (individual
shopping carts) rose sharply (Tavella, 2017;
Oceguera, 2017).

2009

Local –
CórdobaBan - enteredinto force

Type: Ban on the use of polyethylene bagsin Córdoba (Legislatura de la provincia deCórdoba, 9696, 2009).
Impact: No information available

Belize2018

National

Ban approved

Type: Ban on single-use plastic shoppingbags, Styrofoam, and plastic food utensils(Government of Belize Press Office, 2018).
Impact: Information not available

Brazil2009

Local – Rio deJaneiroLevy - enteredinto force

Type: Requirement to substitutepolyethylene and polypropylene bags withalternatives, or, if not done, to take back any
quantity of plastic bags from any source anddispose of them properly and compensate
the public by giving them a discount if theybring their own bag, or to pay them withfood products for every 50 plastic bags theybring (Beverage & Diamond, 2009).
Impact: Reduction of 24% of plastic bags
used each year (Siqueira, 2011).

2015

Local – SaoPaulo

Ban - enteredinto force

Type: Ban on non-biodegradable plasticbags in Sao Paulo (Petrone, 2015).
Impact: Information not available

2014

Local – Punta
ArenasBan - enteredinto force

Type: Ban on polyethylene bags except for
perishable food products (fresh food suchas meat, seafood, etc.) in Punta Arenas(Southern Cities, 2014).
Impact: Information not available

2017

National

Bill - approved Type: Ban on the sale of plastic bags in 102
coastal villages and towns (Chow, 2017a).
Impact: Information not available

Argentina

Chile

82 The law on banning non-biodegradable plastic shopping bags <50µ was passed in 2009 in province of Buenos Aires, but was notenforced. (Martin, 2009)35

SINGLE-USE PLASTICS:
A Roadmap for Sustainability

Central and South America

Area

36

Country

Year

Level

PolicyFeatures

Colombia

2017

National

Ban and levy
- entered intoforce

Type: Ban on disposable plastic bags smaller
than 30x30 cm and levy on consumer on
single-use plastic bags (20 Colombian pesos,
around $1).
Impact: 27% reduction in the use of plasticbags (UNEP Stories, 2017).

Ecuador2015

Local –
Galápagos
Islands

Ban - enteredinto force

Type: Ban on plastic bags in the Galápagos
Islands (Haskell, 2014).
Impact: Information not available

Guatemala2017

Local – San
Pedro La
Laguna andother cities

Ban - enteredinto force

Type: Ban on plastic bags and Styrofoam
containers in San Pedro La Laguna. Cantel,
Quetzaltenango and San Juan Sacatepéquez
have introduced similar laws (Chiyal, 2017).
Impact: Information not available

Guyana2016

National

Ban - enteredinto force

Type: Ban on the importation and use of
Styrofoam items (Environmental Protection
Agency of Guyana, 2015)
Impact: Information not available

Haiti

2013

National

Ban - enteredinto force

Type: Ban on the importation andproduction of plastic bags and Styrofoam
containers (Lall, 2013).
Impact: Information not available

Honduras

2016

Local –
Roatán, Utila,
GuanajaBan - enteredinto force

Type: Ban on plastic bags instituted at
the municipal level in Roatán, Utila, andGuanaja. Accompanied by an awarenessraising campaign.
Impact: 100% elimination in Guanaja, 80%
decline on Utila and 50% decline in Roatán(The Summit Foundation, 2017).

Mexico2018

Local –
Queretaro

Ban - enteredinto force

Type: Ban on disposable plastic bags inQueretaro City (Reyes, 2018).
Impact: Information not available

2010

Local –
Mexico City

Ban and levy
- entered intoforce

Type: Retailers in Mexico City must charge
for plastic bags, which, according to the law,must also be biodegradable (Malkin, 2009;
Mexico City bans, 2010).
Impact: Information not available

Panama2018

National

Ban - enteredinto force

Type: Ban on the sale and use of nonbiodegradable plastic bags (Central America
Data, 2018).
Impact: Information not available

St. Vincent
and theGrenadines

2017

National

Ban - enteredinto force

Type: Ban on the importation of Styrofoam
products used for sale or storage of food;value added tax (VAT) removed frombiodegradable alternatives to lower theircost (United Nations, 2017).
Impact: Information not available>>>>>>>>>>
Actions to minimize plastic bags and Styrofoam products

EuropeArea

Country

Year

Level

PolicyFeatures

European
Union

2015

EU directive: Member states must ensure that by the end of 2019 no morethan 90 lightweight (<50µ) bags are consumed per person per year. By theend of 2025 that number should be down to no more than 40 bags per person.
Member states can choose whether to introduce bans, taxes, or other policy
tools. (Directive (EU) 2015/720 of the European Parliament and the Council)

Belgium

2007

National

Levy - enteredinto force

Type: Levy on consumer to reduce
distribution of free plastic carrier bags.83 A
bill on plastic bags has been drafted but not
yet adopted as law (Surfrider Foundation
Europe, 2017).
Impact: Consumption of plastic bags
decreased by 80% over ten years (Alpagro,2016).

2016

Local –
Wallonia

Ban - enteredinto force

Type: Ban on the use of single-use plasticbags in Wallonia. Exception of thincompostable bags for foods that can bemoist, until the end of 2018 (Surfrider
Foundation Europe, 2017).
Impact: Information not available

2017

Local –
Ban - entered
Brussels
into force
Capital Region

Type: Ban on non-compostable plasticbags <50µ in the Brussels Capital Region(Alpagro, 2016).
Impact: Information not available

Bulgaria

2011

National

Levy - enteredinto force

Type: Levy on supplier on PE bags <15µ(around $0.10), increased every year until
2015 (Surfrider Foundation Europe, 2017).
Impact: The Ministry of Environment
reported drastic reduction in the use ofplastic bags (Bulgaria’s Environment
Ministry Reports, 2015).

Croatia2014

National

Levy - enteredinto force

Type: Levy on supplier, with levies to go to
the Environmental Protection and Energy
Efficiency Fund (Surfrider Foundation
Europe, 2017, Environmental Protection andEnergy Efficiency Fund, n.d.).
Impact: Information not available

Cyprus2018

National

Levy approved

Type: Levy on consumer (€ 0.05, around$0.06) for plastic bags in supermarkets (CNA
News Service, 2018).
Impact: Information not available

Czech
Republic

2018

National

Levy - enteredinto force

Type: Levy on consumer for plastic bags
>15µ. Retailers determine the price, butcharge must at a minimum cover the
production cost of the plastic bag (Plastic
Portal, 2018; Expats.cz, 2017).
Impact: Information not available

Denmark

1994

National

Levy - enteredinto force

Type: Levy on supplier for plastic bags. Fee
passed on to retailers, who in turn pass it on
to consumers (currently a bag costs around$0.56 per bag) (Larsen & Venkova, 2014).
Impact: Decrease from around 800 million
bags to 400 million bags (The Danish
Ecological Council, 2015).

83 Before: voluntary agreement with supermarkets for 15 years(European Commission, 2013)

37

SINGLE-USE PLASTICS:
A Roadmap for Sustainability

EuropeArea

Country

Year

Level

PolicyFeatures

Estonia2017

National

Levy - enteredinto force

Type: Levy on consumer on plastic bags
<50µ (exemption of very light weight bags
used to ensure hygiene and prevent foodwaste). Avoidance of sale or free of charge
oxo-degradable plastic carrier bags84(Packaging Act, 2004).
Impact: Information not available

France2016

National

Ban - enteredinto force

Type: Ban on lightweight single-use plastic
carrier bags (<50µ and <10litres), expanded
in 2017 on all other plastic bags except
compostable bags. (EuroNews, 2016; Swisssupermarkets, 2016) Prohibition of the
production, distribution, sale, provision or
use of oxo-degradable plastic bags.85 (LOI n°
2015-992, Article 75).
Impact: Information not available

2015

National

Ban approved

Type: By 2020, a ban on all disposable
tableware not made from 50% biologicallysourced materials that can be composted athome (Eastaugh, 2016; CNN, 2016).
Impact: Information not available

Greece2018

National

Levy - enteredinto force

Type: Levy on consumer (€ 0.034, around$0.04) for non-biodegradable plastic bags
<50µ. The levy will be raised to € 0.07($0.086) in 2019. Businesses will be allowed
to charge customers for thicker bags (up to70µ) (Manifava, 2017).
Impact: After the first month of
implementation lightweight plastic bag
consumption decreased by 75-80% and salesof reusable shopping bags increased sharply(Smith, 2018).

Hungary2012

National

Levy - enteredinto force

Type: Levy on supplier. Re-regulation of
the environmental protection fee obliged
producers and distributors to pay the fee inany case, which they incorporated into the
products’ price. Retailers voluntarily put afee on plastic bags (European Commission,
2013; Balázs & Kovátsits Legal Partnership,
2011; Kis, 2015).
Impact: Information not available

Ireland2002
withreview
in 2007

National

Levy - enteredinto force

Type: Levy on consumer for plastic bags
(initially set at €0.15 and later augmented
to €0.22, around $0.26). Aims to limit use toa maximum of 21 bags per person per year.
In 2011 legislation allowed the levy to beamended once a year, with a ceiling of €0.70($0.86) per bag (O’Neil, 2016).
Impact: One year after the introduction of
the fee, the consumption of plastic bags
decreased by more than 90% (Convery etal., 2007); (Department of Communications,
Climate Action & Environment, n.d.).

84 The producer is responsible for collection, recovery and recycling.
A levy is imposed on the producer when recovery/recvcling targets
are not met. (Larsen & Venkova, 2014)38

85 Since 1996, some supermarkets have voluntarily replaced freethin plastic bags with biodegradable, reusable and cotton bags.
Others have put a fee on plastic bags. A law banning the sale ofnon-biodegradable plastic bags was adopted in 2005, but wasnever applied, as it conflicted with other provisions. (European
Commission, 2013)

>>>>>>>>>>
Actions to minimize plastic bags and Styrofoam products

EuropeArea

Country
Italy

Year

Level

PolicyFeatures2011

National

Ban - enteredinto force

Type: Ban on non-biodegradable plasticbags <100µ, with exemption of reusable
plastic bags. (Messia, 2010) Promotion of
reusable bags. The ban only became fully
effective in 2014.86
Impact: Reduction of plastic bag
consumption by more than 55% since 2011
(Surfrider Foundation Europe, 2017).

2018

National

Levy - enteredinto force

Type: Levy on consumer for lightweightplastic bags in supermarkets and grocery
stores (around $0.025 – $0.12).(ESM, 2017;
The Florentine, 2018). Only biodegradable
and compostable lightweight plasticbags are allowed to be provided or sold(Stemaplast, 2018).
Impact: Information not available

Latvia2009

National

Levy - enteredinto force

Type: Levy on retailer for plastic carrierbags (with two different rates for single
and multiple use bags and depending on
weight). Since then, most supermarkets
charge for plastic carrier bags and offer
reusable carrier bags.
Impact: Plastic bag consumption dropped
rapidly after implementation while use of
reusable bags increased, but stabilized after
the first year (Brizga, n.d.).

Lithuania

2016

National

Levy approved

Type: Levy on consumer. Prohibition of freelightweight plastic bags with a thickness
between 15 and 50µ. Supposed to enter into
effect by 31 December 2018 (Ministry of theEnvironment of Lithuania, 2016; Surfrider
Foundation Europe, 2017).
Impact: Information not available

Malta

2009

National

Levy - enteredinto force

Type: Levy on consumer on all sorts ofplastic bags (€0.15, around $0.18).87 (Xuereb,
2009; Times of Malta, 2009)
Impact: Information not available

Netherlands

2016

National

Levy - enteredinto force

Type: Levy on consumer. Very lightweightbags for primary packaging are exempt.
While businesses have the freedom todecide how much they will charge, theofficial guideline is €0.25 per bag (around$0.30). (Pieters, 2015)88
Impact: The number of plastic bags ending
up as litter decreased by 40% in one year
(Pieters, 2017).

86 In 1988 a manufacturing tax (around $0.06 per bag) was
introduced but did not cause a reduction in plastic bag
consumption and was abolished after 5 years. A law in 2006
provided the legal framework for a pilot program that was
launched in 2007 to gradually implement measures to achieve
the ban on non-biodegradable carrier bags on the market and on
bags that don’t comply with the criteria adopted at the EU level.
(European Commission, 2013)

87 In 2005 an eco-contribution was introduced but was not effective.
(Xuereb, 2009)88 Since the mid-1990s, voluntary agreements obliged consumers
to pay a fee for most plastic carrier bags. Bag bins are installed insome supermarkets, where used bags can be deposited and usedagain by other consumers. (European Commission, 2013)

39

SINGLE-USE PLASTICS:
A Roadmap for Sustainability

EuropeArea

Country

Level

PolicyFeatures

Portugal

2015

National

Levy - enteredinto force

Type: Levy on supplier. The charge of € 0.10
(around $0.12) per bag between 15-50µ was
mostly passed on to the consumer (ThePortugal News Online, 2016) .
Impact: After the tax was introduced, theconsumption of lightweight plastic bags
decreased by 74%, while that of reusable
plastic bags, exempted from the levy,
increased by 61% (Martinho et al., 2017).

Romania2009

National

Levy - enteredinto force

Type: Levy of €0.05 (around $0.06) on
consumer on non-biodegradable plasticbags (European Commission, n.d.).
Impact: Information not available.

2018

National

Draft law-approved

Type: Ban on plastic bags <50µ in
supermarkets and <15µ on national markets.
To enter into effect on 1st of July 2018
(Marica, 2018; Romania to ban bags, 2018).
Impact: Information not available

Slovakia

2018

National

Levy -enteredinto force

Type: Levy on consumer for plastic bags
between 15 and 50µ (Plastic Portal, 2018).
Impact: Information not available

Spain

2011

Local –
Andalusia

Levy - enteredinto force

Type: Levy on consumer for plastic bags inAndalusia (€0.05, around $0.06). From 2012,
increases to €0.10 (around $0.12) (ENDS
Europe, 2010).
Impact: Information not available

2017

Local –
Catalonia

Ban - enteredinto force

Type: Ban on free disposable plastic bags,
including biodegradable and oxo-degradable
ones in Catalonia (Surfrider Foundation
Europe, 2017; Municipal Consumer
Information Office, n.d.).
Impact: Information not available

2017

National

Law - enteredinto force

Type: Law that requires supermarkets to
educate customers on the environmental
effects of plastic bags (Harford, 2017).
Impact: Information not available

2011

Local – Wales

Levy - enteredinto force

Type: Levy on consumer for plastic bags(£0.05) in Wales.
Impact: The consumption of single-use
plastic bags has declined by more than 70%
since the tax was introduced (Morris, 2015).

2013

Local –
Northern
IrelandLevy - enteredinto force

Type: Levy on consumer for plastic bags(£0.05, around $0.07) in Northern Ireland.
Impact: Within one year, a 71% drop in the
consumption of plastic bags, followed byanother 42.6% decrease the following year
(Plastic bag use continues to fall, 2015).

2014

Local –
ScotlandLevy - enteredinto force

Type: Levy on consumer for plastic bags in
Scotland (£0.05, around $0.07)
Impact: Plastic bag usage declined by 80%
in the year after the tax was introduced(Plastic bag charge in Scotand, 2015).

SwedenUnitedKingdom

40

Year

>>>>>>>>>>
Actions to minimize plastic bags and Styrofoam products
Country

North America

EuropeArea

CanadaUnitedStates ofAmerica

Year

Level

PolicyFeatures2015

Local –EnglandLevy - enteredinto force

Type: Levy on consumer (£0.05, around$0.07) for plastic bags to be charged bycompanies with 250+ employees and on
a voluntary basis for smaller retailers in
England.
Impact: The number of single-use plasticbags used dropped by more than 85% in thesix months following the introduction of thetax (Smithers, 2016).

2007

Local – Leaf
RapidsBan - enteredinto effectType: Ban on plastic bags in Leaf Rapids(Manitoba) (Duboise, 2012a).
Impact: Information not available

2010

Local – Wood
BuffaloBan - enteredinto effectType: Ban on single-use plastic bags (<571µ)in in Municipality of Wood Buffalo withexceptions (Regional Municipality of Wood
Buffalo, 2010; Single-use Shopping Bag
Bylaw, No. 12/007).
Impact: Information not available

2010

Local –
ThompsonBan - enteredinto effectType: Ban on the sale or give-away for freeof plastic shopping bags in Thompson(Manitoba) (Duboise, 2010).
Impact: Information not available

2018

Local –
Montreal

Ban - enteredinto effectType: Ban on plastic bags <50µ in Montreal(Quebec) (Fundira, 2016).
Impact: Information not available

In the table are included policies enacted at the state level as well as a limited numberof municipal-level regulations whose development has been documented.89, 90
2010

Local –
Washington,
DC

Levy - enteredinto force

Type: Levy on consumer for plastic bags($0.05) in Washington, DC (Department ofEnergy & Environment, 2010).
Impact: A survey in 2014 revealed that theconsumption of plastic bags decreased on
average from 10 to 4 plastic bags a week
(Department of Energy & Environment,2014).

2011

Local –
AmericanSamoa

Ban - enteredinto force

Type: Ban on the sale and use of petroleumbased plastic bags (some exceptions
possible for fresh and frozen products andothers) (American Samoa Environmental
Protection Agency, 2011).
Impact: Information not available

2011

Local –
HawaiiBan - enteredinto force

Type: Ban on single-use plastic bags in
Hawaii. 2013: Big Island Hawaii, 2018:
Honolulu (ban and fee), 2011: Kauai, 2008:
Maui and Pala (S. Walter Packaging, n.d.).
Impact: Information not available

89 In addition to the policies listed, single-use plastic bags arebanned in Cambridge, Massachusetts (Annear, 2016), andPortland, Oregon (City of Portland, 2017), among others. Plastic
bag levies are in place in Boulder, Colorado ($0.10, City of Boulder,n.d.) and Montgomery County, Maryland ($0.05, Turque, 2016). As
of 2014, more than 150 municipalities in the United States have
implemented plastic bag bans or levies. (Larsen, 2014)

90 A law in Michigan prohibits local governments from banning or
imposing fees on plastic bags. Idaho, Arizona and Missouri all
have enacted similar laws. (Harvey, 2017)41

SINGLE-USE PLASTICS:
A Roadmap for Sustainability

North America

Area

42

Country

Year

Level

PolicyFeatures2012

Local – SanFrancisco,California

Ban and levy
- entered intoforce

Type: Ban on single-use checkout plasticbags and levy on consumer on compostablebags, recycled paper bags or reusable (>125uses) bag of $0.10 in the county and city of
San Francisco (sfenvironment, n.a.).
Impact: Information not available

2013

Local –
Austin, Texas

Ban - enteredinto force

Type: Ban on single-use plastic bags (< 101µ)in Austin, Texas. (abagatatime, n.d.)
Impact: While the consumption of singleuse plastic bags decreased, that of reusable,
thicker plastic bags increased (Richards,
2015).

2015

Local – New
Ban - entered
York City, New into force
York

Type: Ban on single-use Styrofoam
containers instituted in New York City.
The ban was challenged by a coalition ofrecycling firms and plastics manufacturers
who claimed the material is recyclable. The
ban was lifted in 2015 and reintroduced in2017 (Alexander, 2017).
Impact: Information not available

2016

Local –
California

Ban - enteredinto force

Type: Ban on single-use plastic bags andlevy on thicker reusable ones (US$ 0.10) in
California.
Impact: Plastic bags accounted for about 3%of the litter collected during the 2017 Coastal
Cleanup Day, compared to 7.4% in 2010 (LosAngeles Times Editorial Board, 2017).

2017

Local –
Chicago,Illinois

Levy - enteredinto force

Type: Levy on consumer plastic bags in
Chicago ($0.07).
Impact: The number of plastic bags (andpaper bags, as these are also taxed) declined
by 42% one month after the introduction of
the tax (Cherone and Wetli, 2017).

2017

Local – Seattle Ban - enteredinto force

Type: Ban on single-use plastic bags,
including bags labelled with biodegradable,
degradable, decomposable or similar, andvoluntary levy on thicker (> 57µ) plasticbags in Seattle (Seattle Government, 2017).
Impact: Information not available>>>>>>>>>>
Actions to minimize plastic bags and Styrofoam products

Oceania

Area

Country

Level

PolicyFeatures2003

Local – ColesBay

Ban - enteredinto force

Type: Ban on non-biodegradable plastic
checkout bags in Coles Bay (Fickling, 2003).
Impact: It has been estimated that in ten
years, the ban has avoided the use of two
million plastic bags. (Twomey, 2013).

2009

Local – South
Australia

Ban - enteredinto force

Type: Ban on lightweight plastic bags inSouth Australia (SA EPA, 2009).
Impact: Consumption of reusable, thicker
plastic bags increased (Watson, 2013).

2011

Local –
Australian
CapitalTerritory

Ban - enteredinto force

Type: Ban on lightweight plastic bagsin the Australian Capital Territory (ACTGovernment, 2011).
Impact: Two years after the implementationof the ban, 36% reduction in the amount ofplastic bag waste in landfills (Hayne, 2017).

2011

Local –
Northern
Territory

Ban - enteredinto force

Type: Ban on plastic bags <35µ in the
Northern Territory. (NT Government, 2017)
Impact: A survey revealed that, five years
after the ban was introduced, plastic bag
litter increased (Rigby, 2017).

2013

Local –
Tasmania

Ban - enteredinto force

Type: Ban on plastic bags <35µ in Tasmania.
(EPA Tasmania)
Impact: Increased consumption of thicker
bags (Richards, 2017)2018

Local –
Queensland

Ban -approved Type: Ban on plastic bags <35µ in
Queensland. (Queensland Government).
Ban on lightweight plastic bags in Victoria(Cooper, 2017) and in Western Australia(Cooper, 2017b).
Impact: Information not available

Fiji

2017

National

Levy - enteredinto force

Type: Levy on consumer, FJD 0.10 ($0.05) per
plastic bags (Vanuatu joins PIC, 2017).
Impact: Information not available

Papua New
Guinea2016

National

Ban - enteredinto force

Type: Ban on non-biodegradable plastic
shopping bags91 (Plastic bags banned, 2015).
Impact: Information not available

Vanuatu

2018

National

Ban - enteredinto force

Type: Ban on manufacture, use and importof single-use plastic bags, straws andpolystyrene takeaway food containers. Bags
to wrap and carry fish or meat are exempt(SPREP, 2018; Vanuatu bans plastic, 2018).
Impact: Information not available

MarshallIslands

2017

National

Ban - enteredinto force

Type: Ban on importation, manufacture
and use of single-use plastic carrier bags.
Ban on Styrofoam and plastic cups, plates
and packages (SPREP, 2018; Styrofoam andPlastic Products Prohibition Act, 2016).
Impact: Information not available

Palau

2017

National

Ban - enteredinto force

Type: Ban on the importation anddistribution of plastic shopping bags
(Carreon, 2017; SPREP, 2018).
Impact: Information not available

Australia

Year

91 Ban on plastic bags was introduced in 2005 but failed due tomissing practical and social preparation. (Wayang, 2017)43

SINGLE-USE PLASTICS:
A Roadmap for Sustainability

Summary of countries that have announced imminent action
on plastic bags and Styrofoam products

Oceania

EuropeCentral andSouth America

AfricaArea

44

Policyannounced

Country

Year

Level

Features

Botswana

2017

National

Ban

Government is considering the introduction of a ban
on plastic bags <24µ (Marumoloa, 2017, Botswana,
2018).

Nigeria2013

National

Ban

Ban on production, importation, usage and stockingof low density smooth plastic and packaging bags
(Obateru, 2016).

Republic of
the Congo

2011

National

Ban

The government announced a ban on the production,
importation, sale, and use of plastic bags, but did
not announce when it would take effect (Congo bansbags, 2011).

Costa Rica

2021

National

Ban

The government announced the phasing out of all
kinds of disposable plastics by 2021 (UNDP, 2017).

Jamaica2018

National

Ban

The government is considering the introductionof a ban on non-biodegradable plastic bags below
50-gallon capacity and on Styrofoam containers(Serju, 2017).

Uruguay

2017

National

Levy

Levy on consumer on single-use plastic bags (UNEP,2017C; Hui, 2016).
Impact: Information not available

Croatia2017

National

Levy

Levy on consumer for lightweight carrier bags, tobecome effective after 31 December 2018 (Pavlic,2017).

Poland2017

National

Levy

The government is planning the introductionof a PLN 1 (around $0.28) levy on plastic bags
(Adamowski, 2016) Implementing measures were
notified to the European Commission in November
2017. The first fees are supposed to be collected in2019 (Surfrider Foundation Europe, 2017).

Slovenia

2017

National

Ban

Ban on free lightweight plastic bags. The Ministry ofEnvironment issued a legislative blueprint (Surfrider
Foundation Europe, 2017).

Spain

2017

National

Levy

Levy on consumer for disposable plastic bags witha thickness between 15 µ and 50µ. The levy was
intended to be introduced in March 2018, but was
postponed. A total ban of lightweight and very
lightweight non-compostable plastic carrier bags is
supposed to come into effect in 2020 (All Shops, 2017;
Gerrard, 2018).

New Zealand

2017

Local

Levy

Levy on plastic bags. Almost half of the nation’s
mayors have signed an open letter to the Ministryof the Environment to impose a mandatory charge
on plastic bags (Cann, 2017). A supermarket chain
launched a campaign, letting shoppers decide howmuch to pay (or not) for plastic bags (Huffadine,2017). Another supermarket chain announced that it
will phase out all plastic bags by 2018 (Clayton, 2017).

Vanuatu

2018

National

Ban

Ban on the use, manufacture and importation of
single- use plastic bags (SPREP, 2018)

>>>>>>>>>>
Selected case studies

Selected case studies

Chapter4© USFWS - Pacific Region/Flickr.com

45

SINGLE-USE PLASTICS:
A Roadmap for SustainabilityBy analysing case studies from countries
around the world, this chapter has
the objective of identifying lessons
learned and common trends that have

4.1

led to positive long-term impacts. Theselessons will be summarized in the form ofrecommendations to policymakers in the
concluding section of this report (chapter 5).

Europe4.1.1 Ireland: Levy on consumers
The Irish “PlasTax”
Context

Photo Credit: European Parliament/Flickr.com

In the 1990s, plastic bags were a significant problem in
Ireland, littering towns, the countryside and the coastline,
and accounted for 5% of the total waste stream. In 1998,
the Irish Department of the Environment, Heritage andLocal Government commissioned a study to assess
how to reduce the use of plastic bags and to estimate
consumers’ maximum willingness to pay (WTP) fora plastic bag. The assessment revealed that retailers
gave out 1.26 billion plastic bags every year, with anaverage consumption of 328 bags per person per year.
The average consumers’ WTP for a plastic bag was foundto be around €0.024.
Introduction of the tax

In 2002 the Irish government introduced a tax on plasticbags at points of sale, known as the “PlasTax”. The levy
was set six times higher than the estimated willingness
to pay, at €0.15, with the aim to trigger behaviour change
in consumers and promote the use of reusable shoppingbags. The tax did not apply to small so-called knot bags
used to separate certain fresh produce, such as raw meat,
fruits and vegetables, for hygiene purposes.92
What worked well

The policy design and implementation phases wereaccompanied by extensive consultations with key
stakeholders, including industry representatives,
retailers and citizens. To reduce public resistance, a
92 This was decided after concerns raised particularly by butchers.

46

>>>>>>>>>>
Selected case studies“When the plastic bag
tax was introduced,
there was a bit ofgrumbling but now it
feels completely normal.
Ireland is definitely
cleaner now and people
are more protective of theenvironment.”- Mark Nyhan, Ireland (2017)strong awareness campaign on the reasons for the
introduction of the levy was launched, linking priceand good environmental benefits. The result was wider
public recognition and smooth enforcement of the levy,
with consumers in favour of increased environmental
protection. In addition, the revenues of the levy were paid
into an Environment Fund, created ad hoc and controlled
by the Minister for the Environment, Heritage and Local
Government. To support smooth implementation,
the governance functions were clearly defined andseparated between the local authorities responsible for
enforcing the application of the levy at point of sale andthe newly appointed revenue commissioners tasked tocollect the levy receipts due from retailers. The latter also
had the power to “carry out a full tax audit of retailers
suspected of not charging the levy.”93
ImpactWithin one year from the introduction of the tax, the useof plastic bags in Ireland dropped by more than 90%94
and the consumption per person fell from 328 plasticbags per year to 21 bags.95 Likewise, while prior to the2002 levy, plastic bags accounted for 5% of the national
waste, in 2004 this number fell to 0.22%, with a strong
perception among surveyed households of the positiveeffects of the levy on the environment.96
Monitoring and review of the tax

After four years from the introduction of the “PlasTax”, aregulatory impact assessment revealed that plastic bag
usage had risen to 31 bags per person, so in July 2007
the levy was raised to €0.22. Again, bag consumption
decreased. With the aim of keeping the use of plasticbags to a maximum of 21 bags per person per year, the2011 legislation passed to allow the levy to be amended
once a year, with a ceiling at €0.70 per bag.
Lessons learned

The success of the Irish levy on plastic bags demonstrates
that the adoption of a sufficiently high levy can influence
consumer behaviour. Furthermore, it proves thatstakeholder buy-in and wider public acceptance are
93 O’Neill, 2016
94 Convery, McDonnell, and Ferreira, 2007.
95 Plastic bag consumption per person per year calculated comparing data from before
the tax introduction, until 2005.
96 The Litter Monitoring Body, 2004.

47

SINGLE-USE PLASTICS:
A Roadmap for Sustainability

essential for the successful implementation of sucha policy tool. Extensive consultation and awarenesscampaigns on the environmental impacts of plastic
bag litter were of utmost importance. Clear division ofroles and responsibilities among local authorities were
key for good governance and, regular monitoring andreview of the tax ensured its continued effectiveness.

4.1.2 Austria: Voluntary agreements
The power of public-private agreements
Context

According to the EU Plastic Bags Directive,97 member
states of the European Union should adopt measures
to cut the consumption of plastic bags with a thickness
below 50 microns, ensuring that by the end of 2019 no
more than 90 bags are used per person per year.
Photo Credit: Mo Riza/Flickr.com

Signing the agreement

In 2016 the Federal Ministry of Agriculture, Forestry,
Environment and Water Management (BMLFUW) of
Austria signed an agreement with large retailers andenvironmental protection organizations to reduce theusage of carrier bags. The agreement sets a target more
ambitious than the one in the EU Directive, aiming to
reduce the consumption of plastic bags to a maximumof 25 bags per person per year, including also any
single-use carrier bags made from other materials suchas paper. As of January 2017, most of Austria’s large
supermarket chains have voluntarily stopped providing
customers with free carrier bags (made from any kind of
material).98 Some supermarkets have gone a step further
and if customers don’t bring their own shopping bags,
they can only purchase reusable ones at the checkout
counters.
The plan going forward

The government will support the promotion of awarenessraising campaigns and environmental projects. A firstcampaign targeting customers via radio, print and social
media was implemented from February to April 2017.99
97 EU Directive 2015/720.
98 United Nations, 2017b.
99 Ibid48

>>>>>>>>>>
Selected case studies

To monitor and communicate the progress of the policy,
a report will be published annually with an analysis ofdata provided by the signing retailers.

4.2

Africa4.2.1 Rwanda: Total ban
Total plastic bag ban: Cleaner cities and rural areas
Context

Photo Credit: Ministry of Environment - Rwanda/
Flickr.com

In 2004, the Rwandan Ministry of Environment,
concerned by the improper disposal of plastic bags, as
they were often burned or clogged drainage systems,
commissioned a baseline study which revealed thatplastic bag litter was threatening agricultural production,
contaminating water sources, killing fish and creating
visual pollution.
Introduction of the ban“After the ban plastic bags
could be easily found in
local markets and shops,
but with time people
started to comply andnow everybody enjoys acleaner environment.”- Thibault Mutabazi, Rwanda (2017)

In 2008 the Rwandan government banned the
manufacturing, use, sale and importation of all plasticbags. Paper bags replaced plastic ones,100 and citizens also
started using reusable bags made of cotton.101 Along with
the new ban, tax incentives were provided to companies
willing to invest in plastic recycling equipment or in
the manufacturing of environmentally friendly bags.
What didn’t work so wellCritics claim that stakeholders were insufficiently
consulted during the policy design and that the poorest
fractions of the population were not considered.102
Despite the good intentions, after the entry into forceof the ban, investments in recycling technologies werelacking, as were good and cheap alternatives. As a result,people started smuggling plastic bags from neighbouring
countries and a lucrative black market emerged.

100 It remains controversial whether paper bags can be considered a suitableenvironmentally sound alternative to plastic bags.
101 Fullerton, 2017.
102 Pilgrim, 2015.

49

SINGLE-USE PLASTICS:
A Roadmap for Sustainability

What worked wellWith time, enforcement of the law became stricter, and if
caught, offenders would face high fines and even jail.103 In
the long run, citizens became used to the new regulation
and, Kigali, the capital of Rwanda, was nominated by
UN Habitat in 2008 as the cleanest city in Africa.

4.2.2 South Africa: Combined ban
and levy on retailers
Behaviour change needs prompting
Context

By the late 1990s, plastic bag litter had become sowidespread in South Africa that plastic bags werereferred to as the “new national flower”.
The ban and levy introduction
Photo Credit: warrenski/Flickr.com

In 2003, the Government of South Africa introduced a ban
on single-use plastic bags less than 30 microns thick.104
The new regulation was combined with a nominal levy
on retailers of ZAR 0.04 (roughly $0.04) on 24 litre bags.105
After only three months the levy was reduced to ZAR
0.03, partly because of the pressures from plastic-bag
producers. A non-profit company was established froma percentage of the revenues from the levy, “Buyisa-eBag”, with the mandate to promote waste minimization
and recycling, create sustainable job opportunities in
the plastic recycling industry and awareness initiatives.
What didn’t work so well

The levy on plastic bags affected the food sector but
excluded other industries, such as clothing retailers,
which still gave out free plastic bags. The levy on plasticbags seemed to be particularly problematic for poorer
segments of the population, which use plastic bags ascheap means to carry goods over long distances.

103 Ibid
104 The government allowed for an initial 20% margin of flexibility on the thickness ofthe banned bags for a five-year period, after which the ban would extend to all plasticbags thinner than 24 microns.
105 Dikgang, Leiman, and Visser, 2012a.

50

>>>>>>>>>>
Selected case studies

Despite the initial success, with little to no consultation
with stakeholders and no awareness raising on why
the levy was being implemented, consumers started
to budget the small charge for plastic bags into their
shopping, and the number of bags consumed slowly
returned to pre-levy levels. Currently the nominal levy
on retailers is set at ZAR 0.08 per bag (with a thicknessof 24 microns or more)106, but retailers charge consumers
between ZAR 0.35 and 0.75 per bag.107
In 2009 (six years after the introduction of the levy),
only 13% of the revenues collected reached “Buyisae-Bag”.108 The non-profit company was closed but noother dedicated purpose was identified for the levy’s
revenues.109 Questions have been raised in Parliament
on how this levy is being utilized and the benefits (ifany) to the local waste and recycling sector.
Lessons learned

The mix of policy tools implemented in South Africa,
albeit initially successful in reducing the demand forplastic bags, had diminishing effects over the longer
term due to limited consultations with and awarenessof the stakeholders. The (too) small nominal levy
on retailers did not prompt the desired change in
consumers’ behaviour, suggesting that people havebecome habituated to paying for plastic bags. It remains
unclear if any part of the revenues collected from thelevy are utilized for the benefit of the local waste andrecycling sector.

106 https://www.iol.co.za/business-report/economy/sas-plastic-bag-taxdiverted-2045284
107 https://www.iol.co.za/news/south-africa/were-throwing-money-away-on-plasticbags-2093938
108 Nahmann, 2010.
109 Estimates suggest that in 11 years (between 2003 up to the end of August2014) more than ZAR 1 billion (roughly $90 million) has been collected in public
revenues, and about ZAR 5 billion (roughly $400 million) was charged by retailers to
consumers.

51

SINGLE-USE PLASTICS:
A Roadmap for Sustainability

4.2.3 Kenya: Punitive total ban
Severe plastic bag ban
Context

Reusable carrier bags being sold at
Wakulima Market in Nakuru County
on 27 August 2017, the day before
the ban on plastic bags entered into
force.
Photo Credit: Ayub Muiyuro; Nation Media Group“We cut fresh cabbages into small
pieces and before the ban, we used topack them in transparent plastic bags.
Now we cannot cut them because
there is nowhere to put the vegetables.
If we do they will go bad or get dirty,
unless the customers bring their own
containers.”“I also sell boiled beans and othergitheri, but i might have to quit thatbusiness as well [as there are nocheap packaging alternatives].”
Emma Wangari, a 36-year-old
vegetable seller in Kangemi market.

Prior to 2017, about 100 million plastic bags were usedin Kenya every year in supermarkets alone, impacting
the environment, human health and wildlife especiallyin areas where waste management systems are
inadequate.110 In Western Kenya, veterinarians claimed
that in their lifetime cows ingest an average of 2.5 plastic
bags, among other plastics.111
The ban

In February 2017, the Government of Kenya announced
a ban on the production, sale, importation and use ofplastic carrier bags, which came into full effect after six
months (in August 2017). Under the new law, representing
the third attempt in the past decade, offenders can facefines of up to $38,000 or four-year jail terms, making
Kenya’s plastic bag ban the most severe in the world.112
Before the law entered into force, UN Environment
supported the organization of a stakeholder dialogue
where national and local-level officials could engage
with private sector representatives to exchange views
on how best to implement the regulation.113 114
ImpactLarge supermarket chains are selling reusable clothbags,115 as the government116 encourages retailers tooffer consumers alternatives to plastic bags.117 Kenyans
are slowly adjusting to life without plastic bags but
there is not yet a clear account of the impact of theban. The government is now starting an analysis tomeasure the overall act of the ban.118 On one hand local‘green’ businesses see this as an opportunity for new
innovative solutions to succeed and prosper, on the
110 UNEP Newscentre, 2017a.
111 UNEP Stories, 2017b.
112 BBC, 2017.
113 UNEP Stories, 2017b.
114 http://www.theeastafrican.co.ke/business/Kenya-effects-ban-on-plastic-bags-/25604086512-10oy0x4/index.html
115 Kenya brings toughest bag ban, 2017.
116 In particular the agency responsible for the enforcement of the ban, Kenya’s National
Environmental Management Authority (NEMA).
117 Kuo, 2017.
118 https://amp-theguardian-com.cdn.ampproject.org/c/s/amp.theguardian.com/
world/2018/apr/25/nairobi-clean-up-highs-lows-kenyas-plastic-bag-ban52

>>>>>>>>>>
Selected case studies

other hand, during this transition period - where thereis lack of affordable eco-friendly alternatives - hygieneand food loss concerns are being raised by small-scale
vendors (selling for instance pre-cooked foods, fruits
and vegetables in markets).119

4.3

Asia

4.3.1 China: National and provincial policies
Regulations at the national and local level
National plastic tableware ban

In 1999 the Chinese government banned the production
and use of all single-use plastic tableware, but the ban
was never effectively enforced and it was officiallylifted in 2013.120
Photo Credit: Pete Jelliffe/Flickr.com

Plastic bags context

Plastic litter in China has become known as “white
pollution”. Prior to 2008 about 3 billion plastic bags wereused in China every day, creating more than 3 million
tons of garbage each year.121
The national ban and levy

To curb the production and consumption of plastic bags,
in 2008 the Government of China introduced a ban onbags thinner than 25 microns and a levy on thicker ones,
promoting the use of durable cloth bags and shoppingbaskets. Exemptions were allowed for bags used in thehandling of fresh food such as raw meat and noodles
for hygiene reasons.122
ImpactOne year after the introduction of the legislation, thedistribution of plastic bags in supermarkets fell on

119 https://www.the-star.co.ke/news/2018/03/14/plastic-bag-makers-mama-mboga-andharassed-kenyans-rue-ban_c1728261
120 China File, 2013.
121 Block, 2013.
122 Xanthos and Walker, 2017.

53

SINGLE-USE PLASTICS:
A Roadmap for Sustainability

average by 70%,123 avoiding the use of 40 billion bags.124,125
Within seven years, the number of plastic bags used bysupermarkets and shopping malls shrank by two-thirds,
with 1.4 million tons of bags avoided.126 However, plasticbags do remain common, especially in rural areas andfarmers’ markets, due to weak enforcement.127
China has recently (January 2018) introduced a ban on
the import of plastic scraps (see Box 1). The impact of
the ban on the global plastic recycling industry has not
yet been estimated.
Provincial level ban boosting bio-alternatives

In addition to the national policies, initiatives in China
have been taken also at the provincial level. Jilin Province
in Northeast China is the nation’s largest producer ofcorn and corn derivatives (also generating large amountsof bio-waste). To transform the bio-waste into a resourceand boost the bioplastic sector, Jilin Province introduced
in 2015 a ban on single-use non-biodegradable plasticbags and tableware, promoting the production and useof a corn-based biodegradable plastic.128,129

123 Government sources reported a drop in the consumption of plastic bags in the firstyear of the ban of between 60 and 80%. Other sources suggest that there was a big
variation on the impact depending on the area. For instance, the consumption ofplastic bags in supermarkets dropped by 90% in Beijing and almost 50% in Guangzou
City in less than a year.
124 Block, 2013.
125 Liu, 2008.
126 You, 2013. Also, data released in 2016 by the National Development and Reform
Commission, China’s economic planning agency.
127 Zhu, 2011.
128 Sun, 2015.
129 Polylactic acid resin.

54

>>>>>>>>>>
Selected case studies

4.3.2 Bangladesh: Social pressureand disaster management
Environmental impacts of plastic bag litter
Context

Photo Credit: UK Department forInternational Development/Flickr.com

In the early 1990s, environmental NGOs and the Ministryof the Environment of Bangladesh started supporting
campaigns against single-use plastic bags. Initiallylimited to Dhaka, the capital city, the initiatives rapidly
spread throughout the country due to the large positive
response received from the public. Environmental groups
estimated that in 2002, more than nine million plasticbags were wasted daily in the capital city of Dhaka.
Of this, about 10% reached landfills and dumpsites,
while the remaining was improperly discarded in theenvironment.130
The ban

In 2002, after plastic bags were found responsible forexacerbating the deadly flooding of 1989 and blocking
drainage systems in 1998, the government introduced
a ban on all shopping bags made of polyethylene (PE).
After the implementation of the ban, the government
promoted a campaign informing citizens that offenders
could face fines of up to $71 and six months in jail.
What didn’t work so wellDespite public support, the ban was not strictly enforced
and plastic bags are still widely used in Bangladesh,
especially in food markets. Activists found that the lackof cheap alternatives largely contributed to the failureof the policy.131

130 IRIN, 2011.
131 Ibid.

55

SINGLE-USE PLASTICS:
A Roadmap for Sustainability

Versona Beach, Mumbai 2015

4.3.3 India: Public engagement
Public action as driver of change
Context

High plastic consumption rates and improper waste
handling has increased the amount of environmental
pollution in India, with plastic litter becoming an eyesorein many places.

2017

Versova is a flat sandy Mumbai beach with thickmangroves. It used to be an ignored strip of ocean nearslums, used mostly as dumping ground. In October 2015
Afroz Shah, a young Indian lawyer and environmentalist
from Mumbai, frustrated with the rotting waste on
Versova beach, decided to act. Afroz Shah and his then84-year-old neighbour started cleaning up the beachthemselves.
Impact of mobilizing the public

Since October 2015, Afroz Shah has inspired thousands ofvolunteers to join what he calls weekend “dates with theocean”. Shah started mobilizing residents by knocking
on doors and explaining the damages caused by marine
litter.

2018

Over two years, using their hands, tractors and diggers,
the volunteers have removed 13,000 tons of waste,
mostly plastics. This year, for the first time in overtwo decades, the nesting and hatching of Olive Ridley
turtles, a vulnerable turtle species, has taken place on
Versova beach.
Main issues

Photographs: Afroz Shah

56

However great the success of the weekly beach cleanups, there is still much more to do before the plastic
pollution problem on Versova beach can be considered
resolved. A study found that the largest source ofpollution comes from the garbage that residents dump
into nine creeks in Mumbai’s northwest suburbs, which
washes ashore and flows into the sea. This is aggravatedby storm water drains that are open along the coastline
and carry even larger amounts of garbage during themonsoon season.

>>>>>>>>>>
Selected case studies

Lessons learned

Beach clean-ups can be a powerful tool to achieve positiveenvironmental impacts and community engagement.
To sustain the good results achieved through the cleanups, it is key to identify the main sources of pollution
and take action to resolve the issue at source. In mostcases this links back to establishing improved waste
management systems and to education and awarenessraising among local communities.132

4.4

America

4.4.1 New York City: Styrofoam ban
Perseverance in the fight against Styrofoam products
The banPhoto Credit: jsnsndr/Flickr.com

In 2015, single-use Styrofoam containers (EPS foam)
were banned in New York City. Shortly after the ban was
instituted, the city was sued by a coalition of recycling
firms and plastic manufacturers, who claimed that
Styrofoam is recyclable and proposed a recycling planfor the foamed plastic items.133 The ban was overturned,
that same year, by a ruling of the New York Supreme
Court. The ban was reinstated in 2017, following a reportby the New York City Department of Sanitation whichfound that it is not possible to recycle Styrofoam in amanner that is economically feasible or environmentallyeffective.134 The ban applies to all stores that sell oroffer polystyrene packaging, and was re-instated witha six-month time window for retailers and customers
to adapt to the new legislation.

132 In addition to citizens’ actions, the Indian government in 2016 banned noncompostable plastic bags below 50 microns under its Plastic Waste Management
Rules. Several states and cities have also passed local regulations, ranging fromstricter regulations to total bans.
133 Babin, 2017.
134 New York City, Department of Sanitation, 2017.

57

SINGLE-USE PLASTICS:
A Roadmap for Sustainability

4.4.2 Costa Rica: Total single-use plastic banFirst to pledge phasing out all single-use plastics
Context

Costa Rica has emerged as an environmental leader inmany ways. It was successful in doubling its forest coverfrom 26% in 1984 to more than 52% in 2017 and plans to becarbon neutral by 2021.135 Government officials pointed

Photo Credit: gracelinks/Flickr.com

out that despite the various successes, “one fifth of thesolid waste produced daily is not collected and ends
up in the Costa Rican landscape, polluting rivers andbeaches.”136 Costa Rica now aims to become the first
country in the world to ban all single-use plastics by 2021.
The ban

On 5 June 2017, World Environment Day, the government
announced a National Strategy to phase out all formsof single-use plastics by 2021 and replace them withalternatives that biodegrade within six months. The ban
aims at eliminating not only plastic bags and bottles, butalso other items such as plastic cutlery, straws, Styrofoam
containers and coffee stirrers. The Strategy promotes thesubstitution of single-use plastic through five actions:(i) municipal incentives, (ii) policies and institutionalguidelines for suppliers, (iii) replacement of single-use
plastic products, (iv) research and development, and(v) investment in strategic initiatives. In implementing
this project, the government is supported by the United
Nations Development Programme (UNDP), local
governments, civil society and private sector groups.137

135 UNDP, 2017.
136 Chow, 2017a.
137 UNDP, 2017.

58

>>>>>>>>>>
Selected case studies

4.4.3 The Caribbean region
Regulation in the Caribbean SIDS and countries with islands
Caribbean context

Photo Credit: Garett Coakley/Flickr.com

Due to their limited size and increasing consumptionof resources, the Caribbean Small Island Developing
States (SIDS) face serious challenges in managing solid
waste and plastic litter. Policies have been introduced
in many Caribbean SIDS to encourage more sustainableconsumption patterns, and an effort to develop a
regional approach to waste management is currently
ongoing and supported by UN Environment and theDutch Government.

Antigua and Barbuda
In January 2016, Antigua and Barbuda prohibited theimportation, manufacturing and trading of plastic
shopping bags. In July of the same year, the distributionof such bags at points of sale was banned, leaving
enough time for retailers to finish their stocks. Since
plastic bags sold in large retailers accounted for 90% of
the plastic litter in the environment, the ban was first
implemented in major supermarkets, and later extended
to smaller shops.
What worked well

Key elements for the success of the policy include
four rounds of stakeholder consultations to ensure
engagement and acceptance of the policy. Stakeholders
engaged include major retailers, the National Solid
Waste Management Authority, the Ministry of Tradeand the Department of Environment. After approvalby the Cabinet, it was decided that the ban would beincorporated in the existing legislation, as this wasmore expedient than instituting a new law.138
An awareness-raising campaign titled “I’m making
a difference one bag at a time” included frequent
television short clips by the Minister of Health and theEnvironment providing information on the progressof the ban and feedback from stakeholders. A jingle
was produced to promote the use of durable bags
138 Presentation at Waste Management: High Level Forum 19-20 October 2017,
Georgetown, Guyana.

59

SINGLE-USE PLASTICS:
A Roadmap for Sustainability

for a cleaner and healthier environment. Moreover,
shoppers were provided with reusable bags outsidesupermarkets, and seamstresses and tailors were taught
how to manufacture such bags so as to meet increasing
demand. Major supermarkets were also required tooffer paper bags from recycled material, in addition
to reusable ones.139 To encourage the manufacturing
and use of alternatives to plastic bags, the legislation
includes a list of materials that will remain tax free,such as sugar cane, bamboo, paper, and potato starch.140
ImpactIn the first year, the ban contributed to a 15.1% decreasein the amount of plastic discarded in landfills in Antigua
and Barbuda, and paved the way for additional policies
targeting the reduction of plastics. For instance, theimportation of plastic food service containers and cups
was prohibited in July 2017. As of January 2018, singleuse plastic utensils were banned, as well as food trays
and egg cartons. At a later stage, Styrofoam coolers arealso expected to be outlawed.

Aruba
A ban on single-use plastic bags was proposed in
Aruba in 2005. The legislation was not considered by
Parliament until 2016, and the ban entered into force
on 1 January 2017. Retailers were initially reluctant asswitching to alternatives meant higher costs for theirbusinesses, especially for clothing stores and take-out
restaurants. To overcome this resistance, meetings were
held with the Aruba Trade & Industry Association, with
the Aruba Hotel and Tourism Association, and with
the Aruba Tourism Authority. Furthermore, workshops
were organized at local schools on the importance ofprotecting Aruba’s environment, as the island economy
depends primarily on tourism. Thanks to the stakeholder
consultations and education programme, the new
ban gained wide acceptance and endorsement by thecommunity. Since the introduction of the ban, citizens
have even started to report grocery stores that might beproviding the outlawed plastic bags by posting pictures
on social media.141

139 Presentation at Waste Management: High Level Forum 19-20 October 2017,
Georgetown, Guyana.
140 Ibid.
141 Michael J.R. Raymond, personal communication, December 2017.

60

>>>>>>>>>>
Selected case studies“Trees and mangroves are now free fromplastic bags. Moreover, grocery stores get rid ofempty boxes easily, because customers reuse
them to carry out their groceries.”- Michael Raymond, Aruba (2017)

Bay Islands - Honduras
In 2016, a ban on plastic bags was instituted at themunicipal level on the three main islands of Roatán,
Utila and Guanaja, resulting in substantial declines in
the amount of plastic litter in the environment. The ban
was announced one year before its implementation andaccompanied by well-designed outreach and notification
activities.142 Through a door-to-door awareness raising
campaign, each household was provided with two
reusable bags made of canvas and leaflets explaining thereasons for the ban. Events to sensitize the community
to the problem of plastic litter were organized in thelocal schools. As a result, the initiative gained strong
support from retailers and citizens.143 Bans on otherproblematic single-use plastic items, such as Styrofoam,
are being discussed.

142 The Summit Foundation, 2017.
143 Spurgeon Miller Molina, Mayor of Guanaja, personal communication, July 2017.

61

SINGLE-USE PLASTICS:
A Roadmap for Sustainability

62©

Arbel egger-Nadan/Flickr.com

>>>>>>>>>>
Conclusions

Conclusions

Chapter

563

SINGLE-USE PLASTICS:
A Roadmap for SustainabilityLarge amounts of single-use plastics are
improperly discarded in dumpsites,in the environment, or burned outof necessity as cooking fuel, especiallyin countries with inadequate waste
management systems and limited publicawareness. Only a small percentage isdisposed of properly in sanitary landfills,
and an even smaller portion is recycled.

From the case studies it is evident that thepresence and impacts of mismanaged singleuse plastics are not solely characteristic ofdeveloping countries. To date for instance,
the so called “knot plastic bags” used for fresh
food handling (such as raw meat, fruits andvegetables, and fresh produce) are still themost practical and hygienic option available
cross-borders, and there is no expectationof their imminent phase-out.

Box 7. Food for thought
Reusable bags will not abolish the need for conventional plastic bags for household waste
and unexpected purchases

Conventional plastic bags, although designed to be single-use, can be multi-purpose
and used as carry bags but also for instance, to manage household waste or pet waste.
In Canada for instance, like in several countries around the world, many people reuse the conventional plastic bags beyond the one time that they serve to transport
groceries home from the supermarket.
The Grocery Bag Controversy, Silverhill Institute for Environmental Research and Conservation, July 2011.

Figure 5.1. Examples of impacts of mismanaged single-use plastics

Threats toeconomyTourism

Aggravation ofnatural disasters(drainage system
blockages)

Fisheries

Agriculture

Contamination ofwater sources

Food chain
contamination

Impacts onhuman health
Toxic fumes ifburnedImpacts onenvironment
Loss of biodiversity

64

Ocean pollution

Land pollution© Storm Ceypt; Papahānaumokuākea Marine National Monument; Marco De Stabile; Chesapeake Bay Program; Ria Tan; Peretz Partensky;
Jedimentat; Jeni F./Flickr.com

>>>>>>>>>>
Conclusions

Transitioning to more eco-friendly alternatives
can be a lengthy process. In the meantime,strengthening circular thinking and waste
management systems can successfully help
in reducing plastics pollution.

5.1 Bans and levies
To date, regulations on plastic bags andStyrofoam products have been introduced at
the national level in more than 60 countries,
and more will follow.
Of the bans and levies analysed in thispaper which have entered into force(over 140 regulations at the national andlocal levels), there is not yet sufficient
information to draw robust conclusions on
the environmental impacts achieved bylevies and bans on plastic bags. In 50% ofcases, there is no information on impact:
partially this is due to lack of monitoring andreporting systems, and partially, it is due tothe fact that many of the measures analysed
have been implemented only recently, andtherefore they are too recent to have robust
data on achieved impacts.
Figure 5.2. Impact of national bansand levies on plastic
bag usage (based on
more than 60 countries
experience)
No to little impact

20%

Reduced consumption
or less pollution

30%
50%

No data on impact

Source: Data independently collected by authors

Roughly 30% of cases have registereddramatic drops in plastic pollution and theconsumption of plastic bags within one year
from the entry into force of the nationalban or levy, while the remaining 20% havereported no to little impact.
Of the countries that have introduced
national bans on plastic bags and havereported no to little impact, the main issues
seem to be (i) lack of enforcement and (ii)lack of affordable alternatives. The latter has
led to cases of smuggling (development of
black markets for plastic bags) or to shifts
towards the use of thicker plastic bags
(which is not regulated), a transition that has
in some instances worsened environmental
concerns.
Strategies to minimize the use of and phaseout single-use plastics, other than bags
and Styrofoam, have recently started to beconsidered in several countries.
Bans on single-use plastics can be a step
towards more comprehensive policies
aiming at reducing the generation of plastic
waste and at replacing single-use plastics
with more sustainable, environmentallyfriendly alternatives. For instance, the plastic
bag ban in Antigua and Barbuda has led tothe introduction of further measures to forbid
the import of food plastic containers and theuse of plastic utensils. Bans on single-use
plastics are considered by small and medium‘green’ businesses as opportunities to prosper
by marketing innovative, environmentallysound alternatives.

5.2 Other possible actions
Instead of, or in addition to the abovementioned policy instruments, otheractions that could be pursued to reduce theamount of single-use plastic waste include
technological, social and waste management
system responses.

65

SINGLE-USE PLASTICS:
A Roadmap for Sustainability

Public-private partnerships and voluntaryagreements can for instance be valid
alternatives to bans and can achieve
reductions in the consumption of singleuse plastics, like in the case of Austria.
The progressive introduction of voluntary
reduction strategies can be a great way
to successfully allow enough time for the
population to begin changing consumption
patterns and for affordable and ecofriendly alternatives to become available
in the market. Social pressure can trigger
changes among both policymakers andmanufacturers and eventually help to reduce
plastic pollution.

 what are the most problematic single-use

Public awareness is a common denominator
for the success of any of the above-mentioned
initiatives aiming at having a broader social
impact (whether dictated by law or engaged
in voluntary). Similarly, awareness raising,monitoring and continued communicationof progress to the public will help to build
confidence and strengthen commitment
to the cause.

(what is the source of pollution – citizen
negligence, poor collection systems,
improper disposal sites, etc.).

5.3 Roadmap for policymakers
This section presents a 10-step roadmap
to guide governments that decide to opt
for a policy approach (the introductionof a ban or levy). The roadmap draws
upon the experiences, both positive andnegative, of over 60 countries that havealready implemented bans and levies on
single-use plastics (primarily plastic bags
and Styrofoam) and for which details are
overviewed in chapters 3 and 4 of this report.

1.

Assess baseline conditions

An assessment of the baseline conditions
can help to gain a clear understanding of
the issue to be corrected. Policymakers may
wish to assess:plastics that require government action. A
baseline study could for instance provide
evidence that the single-use plastic mostprevalent in the environment in a certain
country is PET bottles (rather than plastic
bags, cigarette butts, etc).

 what is the extent of the problem; what are the impacts that themismanaged single-use plastics are
imparting on human health and wildlife,
the environment, and the economy; and what is currently causing the problem

Estimating the consumers’ willingness
to pay for a certain good or service, canprovide a powerful tool as part of thebaseline assessment process to ensurethat the instrument chosen will eventually
be dissuasive and influence consumer
behaviour. In the case of a levy, for instance,
it would be important to set a tax that ishigh enough to discourage consumers fromasking for plastic bags. For example, one of
the success measures the Irish government
adopted before the imposition of the plastic
bag tax was to commission a survey toestimate the amount that citizens werewilling to pay for a plastic bag. They then
set the levy at a value more than six times
higher,144 effectively influencing consumers’
behaviour.

2. Evaluate the appropriateness of
possible actions
Based on the findings of the baseline study,
it will be important to evaluate what are themost appropriate instruments that will bebeneficial in addressing the specific problem
or need that has been identified.
144 Convery, McDonnell, and Ferreira, 2007.

66

>>>>>>>>>>
Conclusions

Figure 5.3. Roadmap for policymakers: 10 steps to consider when introducingbans or levies on single-use plastics

1

2

3

• Identify the most problematic
single-use plastics•
Know the Assess current causes• Assess extent
baseline • Assess impacts• Evaluate consumers’
willingness to pay

Evaluatepossible
actions• Regulatory• Voluntary• Economic• Combination

Assess
impacts of • Social• Economic
preferred • Environmental
option• Audits• Surveys• Studies and interviews Monitor andadjust policy
Keep the public
updated on progress!
• Set roles andresponsibilities• Ensure sufficienthuman-power for enforcement• Communicate the Enforce
enforcement process• Prosecute offenders in linewith policy revisions
In order to support:• Waste minimization• The recycling industry Ringfence• Environmental projects and torevenues
finance awareness initiatives

10

9

8

Communicate the chosen purpose!

4

5• Government (central and local)• Industry
Engage • Retailers
stakeholders • Waste management authority• Citizens• Tourism associations• Education programmes• TV adverts
Raise • Campaigns to explain:is the policy being
awareness >>Why
introduced?

>>What are the expected benefits?
>>Are there punitive measures?

Among the elements to be analysed, of
upmost importance are the institutional
capacity and the existing economic
conditions to ensure that the instrument(s)being considered are realistic and have highchances of being successfully implemented.
Institutional capacity: as demonstrated by
the success of the Irish levy, institutional
capacity and political influence of the• Allow enough time
for the transition Incentivize• Offer tax rebates
industry• Keep certain eco-friendly
materials tax-free7• Eco-friendly Promote• Affordable• Fit for purpose alternatives

6

entity (ministry) championing the policy
is essential to ensure broad support andenforcement.
Economic conditions: Instruments suchas levies require the existence of effective
legal and fiscal systems. If for instance these
are not in place, governments may wish toconsider other types of action, rather than
the introduction of levies.

67

SINGLE-USE PLASTICS:
A Roadmap for Sustainability

Table 2. Example of instruments to minimize single-use plastic waste
Type of instruments to
reduce single-use plastic
waste

Overview of
MethodIt builds on theunderstandingthat for change to
be long-lasting,it needs to be
voluntary andbased on choice
Voluntary
reduction
strategies

The agreement
sets theoverarching goal,
Publicbut leaves the-privatechoice to thepartnerships
private sector on
how to achieve
the results

It requires a
gradual andtransformational
process, key
to change
consumers’
behaviour

Publiceducation

Regulatory

Policyinstruments

Example of applications

Positive impacts

Promotion of reusable
alternatives to single-use
plastics (e.g. promotionof reusable bags, reusablebottles, etc.)

Allows time forpopulation to change
consumption patterns,
which can trigger
changes among
manufacturers
Allows time foraffordable and ecofriendly alternatives toenter the market

Voluntary agreements
between government andretailers (e.g. to encourageretails to voluntarily ban or Valid alternative to bansphase out single-use plastic Achieves reductions
in single-use plastic
bags)
consumptions
Agreements with producers Stimulates businesses(e.g. to voluntarily establish
Extended Producer
Responsibility, including
deposit return schemes)
Introduction ofenvironmental
conservation principles inschool curriculums
Social campaigns

Bans the use,sale, etc. ofBan (total or partial)
certain single-use
plastic items

Relatively simple tointroduce
Can reduce amountof single-use plastic
consumedCan be a step towards
more comprehensive
policies

Laws and acts
mandatingthat packaging
manufacturers
bear some
responsibility
in recovering
packaging waste

Reduces amount of
packaging lingering in
the environment
Fosters business
responsibility
Stimulates recycling
sectorExtended Producer
Responsibility

Levy on suppliers
Economic

Combinationof regulatory
andeconomic

68

Common denominator
for the success of any
initiative

Levies or taxes on Levy on retailers
certain items
Levy on consumers
Ban and levy
Extended Producer
Responsibility

Dissuasive effect,leading to behaviouralchangeGenerates (short-term)
incomeA combination of theabove>>>>>>>>>>
Conclusions

At this stage, government has the opportunity
to assess the best process to follow for the
introduction of the preferred instrument(s),and estimate the time and resources needed.
For instance, if one of the instruments
considered were regulatory, perhaps theinclusion of provisions in an existing law
or act might be sufficient and more timeand resource efficient than opting for theenactment of a new law.

3. Assess sustainable development
impacts of preferred options
Once appropriateness of possible actions has
been assessed, governments may be left witha short list of possible suitable instruments.
Before selecting the most appropriate optionthat would address the issues and needs
identified in the baseline assessment, a key
step is to study the sustainable development
impacts of the short-listed choices, taking
into consideration all sectors (including
food, clothing, etc.) and all segments of the
population. For instance, it might be thecase that in a certain country, although
the foreseen environmental benefits ofintroducing a ban might be highly positive,
the social impacts on a large part of the
population might be unsustainable, makingbans not the most desirable option. Assessing
the social, economic and environmental
impacts of a policy will also help identify
its boundaries and scope (for instanceproviding guidance on the need to exclude
from the ban knot bags for fresh meat andvegetables).

4. Foster stakeholder engagement
Acceptance from the broadest range ofstakeholders is of utmost importance, andcan be ensured through calls for early inputs,
policy discussion meetings, and widereaching awareness campaigns.

Special attention should be paid to mapping
the main stakeholder groups that will beaffected by the new policy and their relative
power. Opposition from industry can be
expected, especially in the case of regulatory
instruments. Being able to present evidencebased options (informed by a thoroughbaseline study) can help support the policy
chosen and ensure successful results. In
the case of the ban on Styrofoam products
in New York City, for instance, the ban was
lifted shortly after its introduction as a resultof protests from the plastic industry, but
it was eventually restored after two years,
when the government could prove that theclaims of the industry were unfounded (seecase study 4.4.1.).
The most common stakeholder groups thatmight be engaged from the onset include: National and local government entities National waste management authorities
 Local waste management officers
 Trade and industry associations
 Single-use plastic producers
 Retailers
 Individual citizens and organized civilsociety groups

 Environmental NGOs
Depending on the specificity of the country,
local conditions and priorities, it might
be possible to identify additional groupsof stakeholders. For instance, gaining the
support of tourism associations in SIDS could
play an essential role in reducing single-use
plastic waste. A good example of citizens’
engagement is provided by the Governmentof Queensland (Australia), which invited the69

SINGLE-USE PLASTICS:
A Roadmap for Sustainability

public to complete an online survey andsubmit written feedback on how the plastic
bag ban should be implemented.145

5.

Raise awarenessEvidence shows that resistance is likely
to decrease if consumers are aware of thesocial, environmental and economic impactsof mismanaged single-use plastics. Thesecan be communicated through a variety ofmethods, ranging from: Educational programmes Workshops in schools Extensive multi-media awareness-raising
campaigns (TV, radio, newspapers, social
media).

 Door-to-door campaigns (this type ofawareness raising has proven particularly
successful in small towns, communities
and islands).

Nationwide campaigns seem to be lesseffective than locally targeted campaigns. In
the case of bans or levies, awareness-raising
activities, adapted to the local context,
should be launched before the impositionof the instrument and persist after the
introduction, to facilitate acceptance of thepolicy over the long term. At the time theban was imposed in Antigua and Barbuda, awide-reaching awareness-raising campaign
was organized. A jingle promoting the usageof reusable bags was produced and used indifferent media, creating buy-in from thepublic.147

6. Support uptake of eco-friendly
alternatives

and/or distributing
alternative options to single-use plastics(reusable bags, reusable bottles, etc).

Before banning plastic bags (or any singleuse plastic), governments may wish toverify the presence of valid alternatives.
Especially in developing countries, if cheap
and resistant alternatives to plastic bags
are lacking, the ban may end up negatively
impacting the poorest segments of the
population.

Each campaign should have a clear andsimple message, relevant for a wide rangeof stakeholders. The messaging should
clarify why a certain instrument has beenchosen and what will be the benefits forthe population. For instance, if a levy is to
be introduced, it would be important for the
public to fully understand the link between
the fee that will have to be paid and theenvironmental benefits that will derive. The
public should also be made aware of eventual
punitive measures included in the law.

Eco-friendly and fit-for purpose alternatives
should provide the same or better propertiesof the items that are to be regulated. For
instance, the materials used for fresh foodpackaging are often scientifically tested
and chosen to provide high quality barrier
protection to keep the food fresh. If theavailable replacement doesn’t provide
the same benefits, a policy to reduce
overpackaging of fresh food could lead tounintended impacts such as greater foodlosses and waste.

145 Australia, Department of Environment and Heritage Protection,
2016.

146 United Kingdom, Environment Agency, 2011.
147 Presentation at Waste Management: High Level Forum 19-20
October 2017, Georgetown, Guyana.

 Development and distribution of
information material.

 Showcasing

70

Finally, consumers should be aware that theeasiest way to minimize the environmental
impact of carrier bags is to reuse them as
many times as possible146 and, at the end oflife, dispose of them soundly.

>>>>>>>>>>
Conclusions

The uptake of affordable, eco-friendly andfit-for-purpose alternatives and recycling
technologies can be facilitated throughthe introduction of economic incentives(including tax rebates, research anddevelopment funds, technology incubation
support and public-private partnerships).
For instance, Antigua and Barbuda havelegislated, as part of the plastic bag ban,that certain materials used to manufacture
alternatives are to be kept tax-free, including
sugar cane, bamboo, paper, and potato
starch. In addition to this, reusable bags
were distributed for free at the entrance ofmajor supermarkets. Support to projects thatupscale or recycle single-use items can bea way to transform potential wastes into a
resource. To stimulate the creation of microenterprises, trainings could be organized toteach new skill-sets related to the promotionof alternatives (for instance training could
be organized for seamstress and tailors on
how to produce durable reusable bags using
eco-friendly or used materials).

It is not waste until it iswastedWhen promoting the use of alternatives,
governments may wish to consider theirenvironmental and life cycle impacts, which
in most cases are determined primarily inthe production stage (see for instance “Box2.3: Biodegradable plastic: The unintended
consequences’’ and “Box 3.1: The controversy
over reusable bags”).
A common alternative, generally proposedto swiftly replace single-use plastic bags, ispaper bags. Note should be taken that it isstill controversial if paper bags should beconsidered an affordable and eco-friendly
alternative to plastic. Although paper bags

degrade much quicker in the environment,
they require more energy to be produced,
are more expensive and once discarded takemore space in collection trucks and landfills.
Communication materials can be distributed
to inform citizens about available
alternatives. On the island of Guanaja(Honduras), each household was provided
with information through a door-to-door
campaign and in addition, each household
was given two canvas reusable bags.

7. Provide incentives to industry
When wanting to regulate the production
and consumption of single-use plastics,
governments are likely to face resistancefrom the plastic industry as well as frompackaging importers and distributors. To
limit resistance and gain as much support as
possible, governments may wish to consider
providing incentives to industry. It may bebeneficial to introduce the incentives long
before the new legislation is put into effectin order to guarantee enough time for plastic
manufactures, distributors and retailers toadapt to the new stipulations. Such measures
might include: Provisions to allow time to adapt to thetransition (for instance provide enoughtime for retailers to deplete existing plasticbags stocks, begin alerting consumers of
the upcoming change and purchase newalternatives).

 Tax rebates and financial incentives tostimulate production of cost-effective
alternatives to plastic bags (for instancemake provisions to keep tax free theimportation of certain materials/productsthat are to be used to manufacture ecofriendly and fit-for-purpose alternatives,
as noted in the Antigua and Barbuda casestudy).

71

SINGLE-USE PLASTICS:
A Roadmap for Sustainability

8. Ringfence revenues

9. Enforce the policy

When introducing a levy on single-use
plastic products, consideration should begiven to how revenues from that economic
instrument will be used. To maximize publicbenefits, the revenues from the levy could
be ringfenced and reinvested to:

To guarantee good governance, enforcement
and monitoring of the policy it is important
to clearly distribute and define roles andresponsibilities between local, national andsub-national authorities and organizations.
The Ireland case study serves as a goodreference example. As part of the policy
development, it would be advisable toconsider measures that ensure that thenecessary skills and human resources (andtherefore budget) will be in place before thepolicy enters into force.

 Support specific environmental projects
 Boost the local recycling industry (enduse markets)

 Create job opportunities in the plastic

recycling industry (through seed funding) Finance awareness initiatives which

promote for instance waste minimization

Given that the main objective of the levy
is to be dissuasive, it is important that thelevy’s revenues are ringfenced for activities
that are time-bound. For instance, if thelevy is successful, people will be dissuaded
from continuing to use single-use plastic
bags, and revenues should be expected togradually decrease and eventually stop.
To ensure a transparent process andmaximize public support, it is important towidely communicate the chosen purpose
for which the revenues will be utilized.
It has been reported that in South Africa,
consumers’ acceptance of the plastic bag
levy decreased partly due to the unclear
administration of the revenues and poor
results in terms of recycling and green jobs
creation.148

148 Nahmann, 2010.

72

It is key to ensure that the process for
enforcement is made clear to the users thatwill be impacted by the policy. For instance,in the case of a levy on retailers, it should bemade clear to the retailers how and when
the levy should be collected or deposited. In
the case of a levy on consumers, the publicshould be made aware of the amount they
are expected to pay.
When the law includes punitive measures,prosecution of offenders will help ensurecompliance to the policy (carrot and stick
approach).

>>>>>>>>>>
Conclusions

10. Carry out monitoring andadjustment
As conditions change over time, it is important
to monitor the progress and effectiveness ofthe policy introduced and adjust the policy
accordingly. It is important for governments
to keep the public updated on the progressand benefits achieved, to continue building
consensus and demonstrate accountability.
Progress could be monitored in several ways,
including through audits, surveys, impact
assessments and focus-group interviews.
It would be advisable to review the policy
instruments on a regular basis (for instancewith a yearly frequency for the first three tofive years, and afterwards every five years
or as deemed necessary).

on thin plastic bags (below 35 microns) was
introduced, a survey revealed that plastic
litter increased, as people had begun paying
for thicker bags but continued to treat themas single-use items.150
In the case of total bans, law enforcement
and monitoring of compliance are criticalto ensure that the prohibited items are
not illegally produced or imported fromneighbouring countries.

In Ireland, thanks to a regulatory impact
assessment the government learned thatthe consumption of plastic bags increaseda few years after the levy was introduced
as people became used to it. As a result, thelevy was revised upward.149 In the Northern
Territory of Australia, five years after a ban

To gather data on effectiveness,governments may consider includingin the legislation a reporting obligation(providing a standard template to allow forcomparability across years) to estimate thereduction in consumption. Once progressand effectiveness have been estimated,these would inform and form part of the
new baseline scenario. The steps presented
in the road map for policymakers could thenbe reviewed and refreshed to ensure that themeasures in place continue to be the mosteffective and appropriate for the country or
local context.

149 O’Neill, 2016.

150 Rigby, Steer, and O’Toole, 2017.

73

SINGLE-USE PLASTICS:
A Roadmap for Sustainability

References
Adamowski, Jaroslaw (2016). Polish government
eyes plastic bag fee. Plastic News Europe, 28
September. http://www.plasticsnewseurope.
com/article/20160928/PNE/160929840/polishgovernment-eyes-plastic-bag-fee
Alexander, Paul (2017). New York City Tries
to Ban Styrofoam: It’s Déjà Vu All Over Again.
Huffington Post, 25 October. https://www.
huffingtonpost.com/entry/new-york-city-triesto-ban-styrofoam-its-d%C3%A9j%C3%A0-vu_
us_59f08cefe4b02ace788ca8ea
Alicia (2011). Plastics forever. Road to Ethiopia(blog),12 June. https://ethiopia.limbo13.com/index.
php/plastics_are_forever/All Shops in Spain to Charge for Plastic Carrier Bags
from January (2017). The Courier, 17 February.
http://thecourier.es/2017/02/17/all-shops-in-spainto-charge-for-plastic-carrier-bags-from-january/
Alpagro Plastics (2016). Plastic bags soon to bebanned?, 30 June. https://www.alpagro-plastics.
be/en/news/carrier-bags/plastic-bags-soon-to-bebanned/90
American Samoa, Environmental Protection Agency(n.d.). Plastic Bag Ban. http://www.epa.as.gov/
plastic-bag-ban
Amou, Eric (2017). Interdiction des sachets plastiqueau Bénin: une avancée qui va bouleverser les
habitudes. La Nouvelle Tribune, 8 November. https://lanouvelletribune.info/2017/11/loi-interdisantusage-sachets-plastiques-benin-interview-erichouessou/
Andreou, Evie (2017). Plastic bag levy from next
year. Cyprus Mail Online, 13 July. http://cyprus-mail.
com/2017/07/13/134580/
Annear, Steve (2016). Cambridge’s plastic bag
ban begins. Boston Globe, 31 March. https://www.
bostonglobe.com/metro/2016/03/31/cambridgeplastic-bag-ban-begins/KsDgiFS9zl1OEcIFpvh6LJ/
story.html
Antigua Nice, Ltd., (2017). Stages andimplementation of Styrofoam ban, 27 September.
h t t p : // w w w. a n t i g u a n i c e . c o m / v 2 / c l i e n t .
php?id=806&news=10298

74

Argentina (2009). La Legislatura de la provincia
de Córdoba Sanciona con fuerza de Ley: 9696.
Legislación provincial. Publicación 27 November.
http://web2.cba.gov.ar/web/leyes.nsf/0/D7C6F9AB6756B6A10325767E00683ACC?OpenDocume
nt&Highlight=0,9696
Austin Bag Ban (n.d). 1 bag at a time .
https://1bagatatime.com/learn/guide-bag-bans/
austin-bag-ban/
Australian Capital Territory Government, Australia(2011). Plastic bag ban. https://www.environment.
act.gov.au/waste/plastic-bag-ban
Austria, Federal Ministry for Sustainability andTourism (2017). Vereinbarung 2016-2025 zur
Vermeidung von Tragetaschen. Bericht 2017. http://
www.bmnt.gv.at
Babin, Janet (2017). New York City Reinstates
Styrofoam Ban. WNYC News, 13 May. http://www.
wnyc.org/story/new-york-city-reinstates-styrofoamban/
Ban on non-biodegradable plastic bags takes effectin Malaysia Federal Territories (2017). The Straits
Times, 2 September. http://www.straitstimes.com/
asia/se-asia/ban-on-non-biodegradable-plasticbags-takes-effect-in-malaysias-federal-territories.
Bänsch-Baltruschat, Beat, and others (2017).
Environmental Research of the Federal Ministry
for the Environment, Nature Conservation,
Building and Nuclear Safety. German Federal
Environment Agency, Dessau-Roßlau. https://www.researchgate.net/profile/Jan_Koschorreck/
publication/318128423_Conference_on_
Plastics_in_Freshwater_Environments/
links/595b4f84458515117740ee0c/Conferenceon-Plastics-in-Freshwater-Environments.pdf
Bari, Prachi (2018). Plastic ban has worked
in Sikkim but not in Delhi, finds Pune-based
NGO. HindustanTimes, 25 March. https://www.
hindustantimes.com/pune-news/plastic-ban-hasworked-in-sikkim-but-not-in-delhi-finds-pune-basedngo/story-EGV9D4hl1yhUFFLGt9vcTK.html
The beginning of the end for the plastic bag in
Tunisia? (2017). Zero Waste Europe. https://www.
zerowasteeurope.eu/2017/02/the-beginning-ofthe-end-for-the-plastic-bag-in-tunisia-zero-wastetunisia/.

>>>>>>>>>>
References
Belize, Press Office (2018). Joint Press Release:
Phasing Out of Single-use Plastic Bags andStyrofoam and Plastic Food Utensils, 20 March.
https://www.facebook.com/GOBPressOffice/photos/a.150654578303387.21501.1493509984
33745/1627401217295375/?type=3&theater

Business Standard Web Team (2017). From Punjab
to Delhi, check regulation on use of plastics in Indianstates. Business Standard, 26 April. http://www.
business-standard.com/article/current-affairs/
from-punjab-to-delhi-check-regulation-on-use-ofplastics-in-indian-states-117042600682_1.html

Beveridge & Diamond, P.C. (2009). Rio de Janeiro
Imposes Retailer Responsibility for Plastic ShoppingBags, Latin American Region Environmental
Quarterly. October. http://www.bdlaw.com/news697.html

Cabinet approves ban on free plastic bags (2016).
The Slovak Spectator, 14 December. https://spectator.sme.sk/c/20410495/cabinet-approvesban-on-free-plastic-bags.html

Black, Euan (2016). Indonesia’s plastic bag tax
not enough, say experts. Southeast Asia Globe,
16 September. https://www.theguardian.com/
environment/the-coral-triangle/2017/mar/02/
indonesia-pledges-us1-billion-a-year-to-curb-oceanwaste
Block, Ben (2009). China reports 66-percent dropin plastic bag use. Worldchanging, 25 June. http://
www.worldchanging.com/archives/010037.html
Boisvert, Marc-Andre (2014). Côte d’Ivoire Chokes
on its Plastic Shopping Bags. Inter Press Service,
26 September. http://www.ipsnews.net/2014/09/
cote-divoire-chokes-on-its-plastic-shopping-bags/
Botswana government plans to ban plastic carrierbags (2018). Xinhuanet, 28 February. http://www.
xinhuanet.com/english/2018-02/28/c_137004264.
htm
Boulder, Colorado, USA (n.d.). Boulder Disposable
Bag Fee. https://bouldercolorado.gov/zero-waste/
disposable-bag-fee
Braun, Yvonne, and Assitan Sylla Traore (2015).
Plastic Bags, Pollution, and Identity: Women and
the Gendering of Globalization and Environmental
Responsibility in Mali. Gender & Society. 29.
10.1177/0891243215602101.
Brizga, Janis (n.d). Packaging tax in Latvia.
Institute for European Environmental Policy
publication. https://ieep.eu/uploads/articles/
attachments/2295371a-be98-4ab0-92be9cd755a148e4/LV%20Packaging%20Tax%20final.
pdf
Bulgaria’s Environment Ministry Reports Substantial
Reduction in Plastic Bag Use (2015). Novinite, 1
May. http://www.novinite.com/articles/168268/Bu
lgaria’s+Environment+Ministry+Reports+Substantial+Reduction+in+Plastic+Bag+Use

California, USA, Air Resources Board (2013).
Outdoor Residential Waste Burning, 31 December.
http://www.arb.ca.gov/smp/resburn/resburn.htm
Canadian Press (2016). Walmart Canada plans tostop handing out free plastic bags. CBC News, 25
January. http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/toronto/
walmart-plastic-bags-1.3418598
Cann, Ged (2017). Nearly half the country’s
mayors join call for compulsory charge on plasticbags. Stuff, 25 June. https://www.stuff.co.nz/
environment/94015572/nearly-half-the-countrysmayors-join-call-for-compulsory-charge-on-plasticbags
Carreon, Bernadette H. (2017). Palau bans useof plastic bags. Marianas Business Journal, 27
November. https://mbjguam.com/2017/11/27/
palau-bans-use-of-plastic-bags/
Central America Data (2018). Panama: Use of
Plastic Bags Banned. Centralamericadata.com,
22 January. https://en.centralamericadata.com/
en/article/home/Panama_Use_of_Plastic_Bags_
BannedChauhan, Beldev (2003). Indian state outlaws plasticbags. BBC News, 7 August. http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/
hi/south_asia/3132387.stm
Cherone, Heather, and Patty Wetli (2017). Chicago’s
Plastic Bag Tax is Working – Big Time, Study Shows.
DNA info, 24 April. https://www.dnainfo.com/
chicago/20170424/lincoln-square/were-using-42percent-fewer-bags-since-7-cent-tax-started-citystudy-says
China File (2013). The long battle over ‘white
pollution’, 1 May. http://www.chinafile.com/
reporting-opinion/media/long-battle-over-whitepollution
China, Ministry of Commerce (2017). China
Renewable Resource Recovery Industry Development
Report 2017, 2 May.

75

SINGLE-USE PLASTICS:
A Roadmap for Sustainability
Chitotombe, J.W. (2014). The plastic bag ‘ban’
controversy in Zimbabwe: An analysis of policy
issues and local responses, International Journalof Development and Sustainability, Vol. 3 No. 5, pp.
1000-1012. https://isdsnet.com/ijds-v3n5-6.pdf
Chiyal, Brenda Leticia Saloj (2017). To help Conserve
Lake Atitlán, Town Bans Plastic Bags. Global Press
Journal, 4 May. https://globalpressjournal.com/
americas/guatemala/to-help-conserve-lake-atitlantown-bans-plastic-bags/
Chow, Lorraine (2017a). Chile Bans Plastic Bags in100+ Areas. EcoWatch, 26 October. https://www.
ecowatch.com/chile-plastic-ban-2501794220.html__________ (2017b). Costa Rica wants to become
world’s first country to eliminate single-use plastics.
EcoWatch, 7 August. https://www.ecowatch.com/
costa-rica-ban-single-use-plastics-2470233949.html
CIRAIG (2017). Analyse du cycle de vie des sacs
d’emplettes au Québec. International ReferenceCentre for the Life Cycle of Products, Processes
and Services, December. https://www.recyc-quebec.
gouv.qc.ca/sites/default/files/documents/acvsacs-emplettes-rapport-complet.pdf

Coker, Olimatou (2017). NEA: plastic bags stillbanned. The Standard, 16 November. http://
standard.gm/site/2017/11/16/nea-plastic-bagsstill-banned/
Colbert, Gwain (2016). Cameroon: Bagging it after
the plastic ban. African Argument, 30 November.
http://africanarguments.org/2016/11/30/
cameroon-bagging-it-after-the-plastic-ban/
Congo bans plastic bags to fight pollution (2011).
Reuters, 2 June. http://www.reuters.com/article/
ozatp-congo-environment-plastic-20110602idAFJOE7510G320110602
Controversy and recyclability of reusable bags.
(2011). Le Journal de Montreal. http://www.
allaboutbags.ca/Docs/LE%20JOURNAL%20DE%20
MONTREAL%20STUDY%20OF%20REUSABLE%20
BAGS%20IN%20FRENCH.pdf

Clapp, Jennifer, and Linda Swanston (2009). Doing
away with plastic shopping bags: International
patterns of norm emergence and policy
implementation. Environmental Politics, Vol. 18(3).

Convery, Frank, Simon McDonnell, and Susana
Ferreira (2007). The most popular tax in Europe?
Lessons from the Irish plastic bags levy .
Environmental Resource Economy, Vol. 38, pp 1-11.

Clarifications European legislation biodegradablebags (2018). Stemaplast srl, 4 January. http://www.
stemaplast.it/2018/01/08/chiarimenti-normativaeuropea-sacchetti-biodegradabili/?lang=en

Cooper, Luke (2017a). Victoria jus announced it will
ban single-use plastic bags. HuffPost Australia,
18 October. http://www.huffingtonpost.com.
au/2017/10/17/victoria-just-announced-it-will-bansingle-use-plastic-bags_a_23245619/

Clavel, Émilie (2014). Think you can’t live without
plastic bags? Consider this: Rwanda did it. The
Guardian, 15 February. https://www.theguardian.
com/commentisfree/2014/feb/15/rwanda-bannedplastic-bags-so-can-we
Clayton, Rachel (2017). Countdown to ban all single
use plastic bags by 2018. Stuff, 4 October. https://www.stuff.co.nz/business/97528655/countdownto-ban-all-single-use-platic-bags-by-2018
Clean Bhutan (2015). Ban on plastic (1999). 21 April.
http://www.cleanbhutan.org/ban-on-plastic-1999/
Clean Up Australia (2015). Report on Actions to
Reduce Circulation of Single-use Plastic Bags
Around the World, August.

76

CNA News Service (2018). Bill on plastic bags
was rushed through without enough debate,
Theopemptou says. CyprusMailOnline, 23 January.
http://cyprus-mail.com/2018/01/23/bill-plasticbags-rushed-without-enough-debate-theopemptousays/__________ (2017b). Western Australia will ban singleuse plastic bags from next year. HuffPost Australia,
12 September. http://www.huffingtonpost.com.
au/2017/09/12/western-australia-will-ban-singleuse-plastic-bags-from-next-year_a_23205446/
Corporal, Lynette Lee (2010). Thailand fights
addiction to plastic bags. The Guardian, 28 June.
https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2010/
jun/28/thailand-plastic-bags
Corrosionpedia (2017). https://www.corrosionpedia.
com/definition/2473/expanded-polystyrene-eps

>>>>>>>>>>
References
Croatia, Environmental Protection and Energy
Efficiency Fund (n.d.). Fees pursuant to the Act on
Sustainable Waste Management, Fond Za Zaštitu
okoliša i energetsku učinkovitost. http://www.
fzoeu.hr/en/environmental_fees/fees_pursuant_to_the_act_on_sustainable_waste_management/
fee_for_packaging_and_packaging_waste/__________ (2012b). Elasticity of demand, price andtime: lessons from South Africa’s plastic-bag levy.
Applied Economics, Vol. 44(26), pp 3339-42.

Cunningham, Marnie (2017). This South Pacificnation is the first of its kind to ban plastic bags
and bottles. Global Citizen, 2 August. https://www.
globalcitizen.org/en/content/vanuatu-to-banplastic-bags-and-bottles/

Duboise, Ted (2010). Thompson, Subarctic City In
Canada, Bans Plastic Bags. Friends Across The
Globe, 28 December. http://plasticbagbanreport.
com/thompson-subartic-city-in-canada-bansplastic-bags/

Czech Republic Says Goodbye to Free Plastic Bags
(2017). News Expats, 3 February. https://news.
expats.cz/community/czechia-says-goodbye-tofree-plastic-bags/__________ (2012a). Leaf Rapids, Manitoba Plastic
Bag Ban. Friends Across The Globe, 11 June. http://
plasticbagbanreport.com/leaf-rapids-manitobaplastic-bag-ban/

Danish Ecological Council (2015). Fact Sheet: Tax
on plastic bags.

__________ (2012b). Dharamsala, India Plastic Bag
Ban. Friends Across The Globe, 1 February. http://
plasticbagbanreport.com/dharamsala-india-plasticbag-ban/

Deccan Chronicle (2016). Ban on plastic bags
from today in Kochi. Deccan Chronicle, 1 October.
http://www.deccanchronicle.com/nation/in-othernews/011016/ban-on-plastic-bags-from-today-inkochi.html
Deepika, K.C (2017). Plastic ‘garbage bags’ areavailable in plenty online. The Hindu, 24 July. http://
www.thehindu.com/news/national/karnataka/plastic-garbage-bags-are-available-in-plenty-online/
article19338420.ece
Dezalyx (2016). Plastic ban in the Philippines:
Prohibitions & clarifications. Soapboxie, 30
September. https://soapboxie.com/social-issues/
Plastic-Ban-in-the-Philippines-One-City-at-a-Time
DHNS, New Delhi (2017). Supreme Court rejects plea
against Karnataka decision to ban plastic. Deccan
Herald, 17 November. http://www.deccanherald.
com/content/641501/sc-rejects-plea-againstkarnataka.html
Dikgang, Johane, and Martine Visser (2010).
Behavioral Response to Plastic Bag Legislationin Botswana. Environment for Development.
Discussion Paper Series. May. http://www.rff.
org/files/sharepoint/WorkImages/Download/EfDDP-10-13.pdf
Dikgang, Johane, Anthony Leiman, and Martine
Visser (2012a). Analysis of the plastic-bag levy
in South Africa. Resources, Conservation andRecycling, Vol. 66, pp 59-65.

Do Something (n.d.) Do Something about… plastic
pollution. http://dosomething.net.au/issues/colesbay.aspx

Dyer, John (2016). Caribbean nations are trying to
make Styrofoam illegal. Business Insider, 21 March.
http://www.businessinsider.com/caribbean-nationsmake-styrofoam-illegal-2016-3
Earthjustice (2015). Philippines: Plastic bags
bans to reduce land-based marine pollution.
Earthjustice. https://ocean.si.edu/sites/default/
files/Philippines%20Earth%20Justice%20Law%20
Summary.pdf
Eastaugh, Sophie (2016). France becomes first
country to ban plastic cups and plates. CNN, 20
September. http://edition.cnn.com/2016/09/19/
europe/france-bans-plastic-cups-plates/index.html
Eliminating Plastic Pollution on the Mesoamerican
Reef (2017). The Summit Foundation, 17 July.
http://www.summitfdn.org/mesoamerican-reef/eliminating-plastic-pollution-on-the-mesoamericanreef/
Ellis, Monique (2016). Morocco Bans Plastic
Bags to Combat Plastic Waste Pollution. Better
World International , 9 August. https://www.
betterworldinternational.org/planet/morocco-bansplastic-bags/
ENDSEurope (n.d.). Andalucia introduces Spain
to carrier bag tax. https://www.endseurope.com/
article/24584/andalucia-introduces-spain-to-carrierbag-tax

77

SINGLE-USE PLASTICS:
A Roadmap for Sustainability
EnviroNews Nigeria (2017). Cape Verde outlaws
plastic bags, Congo launches ‘Blue Fund’.
environewsnigeria.com, 6 April. http://www.
environewsnigeria.com/cape-verde-outlaws-plasticbags-congo-launches-blue-fund/European Union (2015). Directive (EU) 2015/720of the European Parliament and of the Councilof 29 April 2015. Official Journal L 115,6.5.2015,
p.11. http://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/
TXT/?uri=celex%3A32015L0720

Estonia, Ministry of the Environment (2016). A
minimum price for plastic bags will be established
as of 2019 to reduce plastic bag consumption, 29
August. http://www.envir.ee/en/news/minimumprice-plastic-bags-will-be-established-2019-reduceplastic-bag-consumption

Eurostat. 2015. http://appsso.eurostat.ec.europa.
eu/nui/submitViewTableAction.do

Estonia, Packaging Act 2004 (2004). § 5 (EE).
Riigi Teataja. https://www.riigiteataja.ee/en/eli/
ee/512012016003/consolide/current
Ethiopia, Proclamation No.513/2007 (2007).
Solid Waste Management Proclamation. Federal
Negarit Gazeta of the Federal Democratic Republicof Ethiopia, February 12. http://phe-ethiopia.
org/pdf/Solid%20Waste%20Management%20
Proclamation%202.pdf
Ethiopian News Agency (2016). Over Dozen Plastic
Factories Producing Sub-Standard Bags in Addis
Ababa. Ethiopian News Agency, 29 March. http://
www.ena.gov.et/en/index.php/environment/
item/1058-over-dozen-plastic-factories-producingsub-standard-bags-in-addis-ababaEuronews (2016). France bans plastic bags, what
about the rest of the EU?. Euronews, 30 June. http://
www.euronews.com/2016/06/30/france-bansplastic-bags-what-about-the-rest-of-the-eu
European Commission (2013). Commission Staff
Working Document Impact Assessment for a
Proposal for a Directive of the European Parliamentand of the Council amending Directive 94/62/EC
on packaging and packaging waste to reduce theconsumption of lightweight plastic carrier bags.
EUR-Lex. http://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/
EN/ALL/?uri=CELEX:52013SC0444
European Commission, Directorate General for
Environment (2015). Our Oceans, Seas and Coasts:
10: Marine Litter. http://ec.europa.eu/environment/
marine/good-environmental-status/descriptor-10/
index_en.htm
European Commission (n.d). 2008 Environment
Policy Review - Romania. http://ec.europa.eu/
environment/archives/pdf/policy/romania.pdf

78

Expats.cz (2017). Czech Republic Bids Farewell toFree Plastic Bags in 2018. Expats.cz, 18 December.
https://news.expats.cz/weekly-czech-news/czechrepublic-bids-farewell-free-plastic-bags-2018/
Express Tribune (2018). Sind government imposes
ban on use of plastic bags. The Express Tribune,
22 March. https://tribune.com.pk/story/1666275/1sindh-govt-imposes-ban-use-plastic-bags/
Federation of Indian Chambers of Commerce &Industry (2016). 2nd National Conference: Plastic
Packaging – The Sustainable Choice. Joint study
by FICCI and TATA Strategic Management Group. A
Report on the Plastic Industry, January. http://ficci.
in/spdocument/20690/Plastic-packaging-report.pdf
Felongco, Gilbert P. (2011). Philippines city bansplastic bags. Gulf News, 23 January. http://www.
dailymail.co.uk/news/article- http://gulfnews.com/
news/asia/philippines/philippines-city-bans-plasticbags-1.750492
Fickling, David (2003). Tasmania carries the ecofight by banning plastic bags carries hopes ofenvironment. The Guardian, 29 April. https://www.
theguardian.com/world/2003/apr/29/australia.
davidfickling
Fikrejesus (2017). Banning Plastic Bags – The
Case of Eritrea. Fikre, 29 August. https://fiqre4eri.
wordpress.com/2017/08/29/banning-plastic-bagsthe-case-of-eritrea/
Finnish Commerce Federation, Frameworkagreement to reduce the consumption of lightweightplastic carrier bags (Plastic Carrier Bag Agreement)(2016). 31 October. http://kauppa.fi/content/
download/104467/1315947/.../Plastic_Carrier_
Bag_Agreement.pdf
Fundira, Melissa (2016). Montreal bylaw on plastic
bag ban passed. CBC News, 24 August. http://www.
cbc.ca/news/canada/montreal/montreal-plasticbag-ban-1.3733504

>>>>>>>>>>
References
Fullerton, Ken (2014). Reflecting on Rwanda’s plasticbags ban. International Development Journal.
https://idjournal.co.uk/2017/04/24/reflectingrwandas-plastic-bags-ban/Harford, Sarah (2017). Coop Sweden Works to
Reduce Plastic Bag Usage. European Supermarket
Magazine, 1 June. https://www.esmmagazine.com/
coop-sweden-works-reduce-plastic-bags/43980

Garcia, Evan (2016). Chicago’s Plastic Bag Ban
Extended to Smaller Chain Stores. Chicago
Tonight, 1 August. https://chicagotonight.wttw.
com/2016/08/01/chicago-s-plastic-bag-banextended-smaller-chain-stores

Harvey, Chelsea (2017). The US state that bannedbanning plastic bags. Independent, 2 January. http://
www.independent.co.uk/news/world/americas/
michigan-the-us-state-that-just-banned-banningplastic-bags-a7505611.html

German government signs deal to reduce plastic
bag use (2016). Deutsche Welle, 26 April. http://p.
dw.com/p/1Icli

Haryana, India, Environment Department (2010).
Plastic Carry Bags notification, No.16/52/2010.
Haryana February 3. http://hspcb.gov.in/Plastic.pdf

Gerrard, Joe (2018). Spain’s plastic bag ban
postponed amid lack of support. EuroWeek,
28 February. https://www.euroweeklynews.
com/news/on-euro-weekly-news/spain-newsin-english/1471777-spain-s-plastic-bag-banpostponed-amid-lack-of-support

Hasan, Yusuf M. (2017). Somaliland: Despite Ban
Use of Plastic Bag Continues Unabated. Somaliland
Sun, 6 February. http://www.somalilandsun.
com/2017/02/06/somaliland-despite-ban-use-ofplastic-bag-continues-unabated/

GESAMP (2015a). Microplastics in the ocean: a
global assessment. United Nations Joint Group ofExperts on the Scientific Aspects of Marine Pollution(GESAMP), Working Group 40. http://www.gesamp.
org/site/assets/files/1720/object_2404_large.pdf__________ (2015b). Sources, fate and effects of
microplastics in the marine environment: a global
assessment. Kershaw P.J ed. (IMO/FAO/UNESCOIOC/UNIDO/WMO/IAEA/UN/UNEP/UNDP Joint
Group of Experts on the Scientific Aspects of Marine
Environmental Protection). Rep. Stud. GESAMP
No.90
Geyer, Roland, Jenna R. Jambeck, and Kara Lavender
Law (2017). Production, use, and fate of all plastics
ever made.

Science Advances 3, e1700782.
Government fails to ensure ban on use of plasticbags (2017). Pakistan Today, 14 August. https://www.pakistantoday.com.pk/2017/08/14/govt-failsto-ensure-ban-on-use-of-plastic-bags/.
Gu, Hallie, and Dominique Patton (2017). With
plastic bags and plates, China tries to cure its corn
hangover. Reuters, 27 January. http://www.scmp.
com/news/china/article/1190498/china-lift-bandisposable-styrofoam-lunch-boxes
Guinea-Bissau: Retailers hit back at plastic bagban (2017). TrendType, 17 April. https://trendtype.
com/2017/04/17/guinea-bissau-retailers-hit-backat-plastic-bag-ban/

Haskell, Pete (2014). Galapagos Bans Plastic Bags.
Galapagos Conservation Trust, 16 December. http://
galapagosconservation.org.uk/galapagos-bansplastic-bags/
Hasson, Retviva, Anthony Leiman, and Martine
Visser (2007). The economics of plastic bag
legislation in South Africa. South African Journalof Economics, Vol. 75(1).
Hayne, Jordan (2017). What difference did theplastic bag ban make to Canberra’s waste? ABC
News (Australia), 18 April. http://www.abc.net.
au/news/specials/curious-canberra/2017-04-10/
what-difference-did-the-plastic-bag-ban-make-tocanberras-waste/8392804
Himachal Pradesh, India (1995). Non-Biodegradable
Garbage (Control) Act, 1995. No. STE-A(3)-4/2003.
Issued and published in Hindi in R.H.P. Extra.,dated, 11-6-04.p. 819. http://www.hpforest.nic.in/files/THE%20HIMACHAL%20PRADESH%20NONBIODEGRADABLE%20GARBAGE.pdf
Hong Kong, Environmental Protection Department(n.d). Environmental Levy Scheme on Plastic
Shopping Bags. http://www.epd.gov.hk/epd/
english/environmentinhk/waste/pro_responsibility/
env_levy.html__________ (2015). Environmental levy scheme onplastic shopping bags. http://www.epd.gov.hk/epd/
english/environmentinhk/waste/pro_responsibility/
env_levy.html

79

SINGLE-USE PLASTICS:
A Roadmap for Sustainability
Hong, Tan Heng (2016). Bandung bans sturofoam,
Pop Mie to switch to paper packaging. Minime
Insights , 2 November. http://edition.cnn.
com/2017/08/16/asia/melati-isabel-wijsen-bali/
index.html
Honolulu, Hawaii, USA, Department of Environmental
Services (2015). Plastic Bag Ban. http://www.opala.
org/solid_waste/archive/plastic_bag_ban.html
Huffadine, Leith (2017). New World supermarket
asks for feedback on plastic bags. Stuff, 14
September. https://www.stuff.co.nz/business/
industries/96625069/new-world-supermarket-asksfor-feedback-on-plastic-bagsx
IANS (2009). Ban on plastic bags make Himachal
Pradesh clean. ZeeNews, 19 January. http://zeenews.india.com/news/eco-news/ban-on-plasticbags-makes-hp-clean_499827.html
ICIS Supply and Demand Database (2014). https://www.icis.com/services/analysis/supply-anddemand/
India, Ministry of Environment, Forest and Climate
Change (2016). Notification on Plastic Waste
Management Rules, published in the Gazette ofIndia, Part-II, Section-3, Sub-section (i), March 18.
http://www.indiaenvironmentportal.org.in/files/file/
Plastic%20Waste%20Management%20Rules%20
2016.pdf
Institute for European Environmental Policy (2016).
Plastics, Marine Litter and Circular Economy –Product Briefings. Single Use Plastics. https://ieep.
eu/archive_uploads/2128/IEEP_ACES_Product_
Fiche_Single_Use_Plastics_Final_October_2016.pdf
Ireland, Department of Communications, Climate
Action & Environment (n.d). Plastic Bags. https://www.dccae.gov.ie/en-ie/environment/topics/
waste/litter/plastic-bags/Pages/default.aspx
IRIN (2002). Flying bags banned. Irin News, 15 April.
http://www.irinnews.org/report/31134/eritreaflying-bags-banned__________ (2006). Zanzibar implements ban onplastics. Irin News, 9 November. http://www.
irinnews.org/fr/node/228317__________, (2010). Just say no to plastic bags.
Irin News, 24 November. http://www.irinnews.org/
news/2010/11/24/just-say-no-plastic-bags

80__________, (2011). Plastics proliferate despiteban. Irin News, 2 March. http://www.irinnews.org/
report/92072/bangladesh-plastics-proliferatedespite-ban
It’s official: Manitoba town gives plastic bags the boot(2007). CBC News (Canada), 2 April. http://www.cbc.
ca/news/canada/manitoba/it-s-official-manitobatown-gives-plastic-bags-the-boot-1.657651
Jambeck, Jenna R., and others (2015). Plastic waste
inputs from land into the ocean. Science, February
13, Vol. 347(6223).
Jayasekara, Sandun (2017). Use of polythene,
rigifoam, shopping bags banned. Daily Mirror, 12
July. http://www.dailymirror.lk/132675/Use-ofpolythene-rigifoam-shopping-bags-banned
Jin, Zixiong (2017). Has China’s plastic ban failed?
China Global Television Network, 24 June. https://
news.cgtn.com/news/3d6b444e7a51444e/share_p.
html
Jong, Hans Nicholas (2017). Government looks toexpand plastic bag ban nationwide. The Jakarta
Post, 20 February. http://www.thejakartapost.com/
news/2017/02/20/govt-looks-expand-plastic-bagban-nationwide.html
Kao, Ernest (2013). China to lift ban on disposable
Styrofoam lunch boxes. South China Morning
Post, 14 March. http://www.scmp.com/news/
china/article/1190498/china-lift-ban-disposablestyrofoam-lunch-boxes__________ (2016). Everything you need to know
about Hong Kong’s new 50 cent plastic bag charge.
South China Morning Post, 31 March. http://www.
scmp.com/news/hong-kong/article/1752512/
everything-you-need-know-about-hong-kongs-newplastic-bag-levy
Karachi: No leniency in plastic bag ban (2007).
Associated Press of Pakistan, March 31. https://www.dawn.com/news/240119
Karuhanga, James (2017). Eala votes to ban
polythene bags. The New Times, 2 June. http://
www.newtimes.co.rw/section/read/213545/
Kenya brings in world’s toughest plastic bagban: four years jail or $40,000 fine (2017). The
Guardian, 28 August. https://www.theguardian.
com/environment/2017/aug/28/kenya-brings-inworlds-toughest-plastic-bag-ban-four-years-jail-or40000-fine.

>>>>>>>>>>
References
Kenya plastic bag ban comes into force after yearsof delays (2017). BBC News, 28 August. http://www.
bbc.com/news/world-africa-41069853
Khattak, Sohail (2017). Khyber-Pakhtunkhwa bansplastic products, again. The Express Tribune, 22
June. https://tribune.com.pk/story/1441526/k-pbans-plastic-products/
Kicking the plastic: Senegal among latest to ban
flimsy bags (2015). Associated Press, 29 May. http://
www.dailymail.co.uk/wires/ap/article-3102733/
Kicking-plastic-Senegal-latest-ban-flimsy-bags.html
Kiprop, Viktor (2017). Finally, Kenya effects ban onplastic bags. The East African, 7 September. http://
www.theeastafrican.co.ke/business/Kenya-effectsban-on-plastic-bags-/2560-4086512-10oy0x4/index.
html
Kis, Gábor (2015). Environmental protection
product fee on invoices. Finacont Tax Newsletter,
15 June. http://www.finacont.com/finacont_uploads/files/hirlevel/Tax%20Newsletter%20-%20environmental%20protection%20product%20
fee%20on%20invoices%2015062015.pdf
Kosuth, Mary, and others (2017). Synthetic Polymer
Contamination in Global Drinking Water. Orbmedia,
May 16. https://orbmedia.org/stories/Invisibles_
final_report
Kuo, Lily (2017). After issuing the world’s harshest ban
on plastic bags, Kenya adjusts to life without them.
Quartz Africa, August. https://qz.com/1065681/
after-issuing-the-worlds-harshest-ban-on-plasticbags-kenya-adjusts-to-life-without-them/Lalchandani, Neha (2016). Delhi to push for plastic
bag ban. The Times of India, 25 January. https://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/city/delhi/Delhi-topush-for-plastic-bag-ban/articleshow/50710376.
cms
Lall, Rashmee Roshan (2013). Haiti police raid
warehouses in plastics ban crackdown. The
Guardian, 15 August. https://www.theguardian.
com/world/2013/aug/15/haiti-police-raid-plasticsban-crackdown
Lamentillo, Anne Mae Yu (2012). Ban on plastic bags
slowly gaining momentum. GMA News Online, 28
August. http://www.gmanetwork.com/news/news/
nation/271569/ban-on-plastic-bags-slowly-gainingmomentum/story/

Larsen, Janet (2014). Plastic Bag Bans or Fees
Cover 49 Million Americans. Earth Policy Institute,
1 October. http://www.earth-policy.org/data_
highlights/2014/highlights49
Larsen, Janet & Savina Venkova (2014). The
Downfall of the Plastic Bag: A Global Picture. Earth
Policy Institute, 1 May. http://www.earth-policy.org/
plan_b_updates/2013/update123
Latvia, Natural Resources Tax Law (2013). vvc.
gov.lv/export/sites/default/docs/LRTA/Likumi/
Natural_Resources_Tax_Law.doc
LégiBénin (2018). Vers la répression: A partir du 19août 2018, emprisonnement ferme et amende pourquiconque détient en sa possession des sachets
plastiques! Journal officiel de la république deBénin, 12 February. http://www.legibenin.net/index.
php/component/k2/item/132-emprisonnementferme-et-amende-pour-quiconque-detient-en-sapossession-des-sachets-plastiqueså
Lithuania, Ministry of the Environment (2016).
Retailers will no longer be allowed to hand out
plastic carrier bags free of charge, June 16. http://
www.am.lt/VI/en/VI/article.php3?article_id=823
Litter Monitoring Body (Ireland) (2004). The National
Litter Pollution Monitoring System – system result.
TES Consulting Engineers, Dublin. http://www.
litter.ie/Website/2007%20website/www.litter.ie/
Litter%20Reports%202005/Systems%20Survey%20
Report%20Annual%20Report%20August%202005.
pdf
Liu, Jack (2016). Mountains to climb: China’s
booming e-commerce market creating wastemanagement headache, environment at risk.
South China Morning Post, 21 March. http://www.
scmp.com/tech/article/1932688/mountains-climbchinas-booming-e-commerce-market-creatingwaste-management
Liu, Yingling (2008). China Watch: Plastic bag ban
trumps market and consumer efforts. World Watch
Institute. http://www.worldwatch.org/node/5808
LOI n° 2015-992, Article 75. Loi du 17 août 2015
relative à la transition énergétique pour la croissanceverte (1). Titre IV: Lutter contre les gaspillages etpromouvoir l’économie circulaire: de la conception
des produits à leur recyclage. https://www.
legifrance.gouv.fr/affichTexteArticle.do;jsessioni
d=1BF76C49A0610997334F24747D350FAF.tplgfr3
6s_2?idArticle=LEGIARTI000031048035&cidTexte=LEGITEXT000031047847&dateTexte=20180406å

81

SINGLE-USE PLASTICS:
A Roadmap for Sustainability
Los Angeles Times Editorial Board (2017). It’s beena year since California banned single-use plasticbags. The world didn’t end. Los Angeles Times,
16 November. http://www.latimes.com/opinion/
editorials/la-ed-plastic-bag-ban-anniversary20171118-story.html
Lu, Hui (2016). Uruguay to ban free plastic bags.
Xinhuanet, 29 July. http://www.xinhuanet.com/
english/photo/2016-07/29/c_135549340.htm
Luxembourg leads the way in cutting plastic bag
use (2013). Luxembourg Times, 4 November.
https://www.wort.lu/en/luxembourg/luxembourgleads-the-way-in-cutting-plastic-bag-use5277d1c2e4b0c9544cdea6bf
Mahesh P.B., and others (2015). Kolkata andEnvironment, Plastic Menace. Toxics Link. http://
toxicslink.org/docs/Plastic-Report-RevisedJustified-june-2015.pdf
Mali bans use of non-biodegradable plastic bags(2013). Panapress, 17 May. http://www.panapress.
com/Mali-bans-use-of-non-biodegradable-plasticbags--12-871360-40-lang2-index.html
Malkin, Elisabeth (2009). Unveiling a Plastic Bag
Ban in Mexico City. The New York Times, 21 August.
https://green.blogs.nytimes.com/2009/08/21/
unveiling-a-platic-bag-ban-in-mexico-city/
Manifava, Dimitra (2017). Plastic bag charge to
be introduced from January. Ekathimerini.com,
12 August. http://www.ekathimerini.com/220859/
article/ekathimerini/business/plastic-bag-chargeto-be-introduced-from-january
Marica, Irina (2018). Romania to ban thin plasticbags. Romania-Insider.com, 20 February. https://www.romania-insider.com/romania-ban-thin-plasticbags/
Marshall Islands (2016). Styrofoam andPlastic Products Prohibition Act 2016.
h t t p s : // r m i p a r l i a m e n t . o rg / c m s / i m a g e s /L E G I S L AT I O N / B I L L S / 2 0 1 6 / 2 0 1 6 - 0 0 2 8 /StyrofoamandPlasticProductsProhibitionAct2016.
pdf
Martin, Georges (2009). Second Argentina province
to ban non-biodegradable plastic bags. ICIS, 5
November. https://www.icis.com/resources/
news/2009/11/05/9261344/second-argentinaprovince-to-ban-non-biodegradable-plastic-bags/

82__________ (2017). Argentina’s PE demand impairedby economy, flooding. ICIS, 20 January. https://www.
icis.com/resources/news/2017/01/20/10072009/
argentina-s-pe-demand-impaired-by-economyflooding/Martina, Katherine (2017). Tunisia bans disposable
plastic shopping bags. Treehugger, 23 March.
https://www.treehugger.com/environmental-policy/
tunisia-bans-disposable-plastic-shopping-bags.html
Martinho, G., N. Balaia, and A. Pires (2017). The
Portuguese plastic carrier bag tax: The effects on
consumers’ behavior. Waste Management, Vol.
61, pp. 3-12.
Marumoloa, Gaone (2017). Government to ban retailplastic bags. Mmegionline. http://www.mmegi.bw/
index.php?aid=67958&dir=2017/april/05
Mauritius (2016). Mauritius bans the use of plastic
bags, 4 January. http://www.govmu.org/English/
News/Pages/Mauritius-bans-the-use-of-plasticbags.aspx
Masai, Latifa Yusuf (2015). Somaliland: Ban on
Plastic Bags Imposed. Somaliland Sun, 14 April.
http://www.somalilandsun.com/politics1/44government/government/7236-somaliland-banon-plastic-bags-imposedMasud, Shahbano (2017). Danger of using plasticbags. Environment, 18 December. https://www.
sciremag.com/single-post/2017/12/18/Dangersof-using-plastic-bags
Mauritania bans plastic bag use (2013). BBC News,
2 January. http://www.bbc.com/news/worldafrica-20891539
McIlgorm, A., H.F. Campbell, and M.J. Rule (2008).
Understanding the economic benefits and costs ofcontrolling marine debris in the APEC region (MRC
02/2007). A report to the Asia-Pacific Economic
Cooperation Marine Resource Conservation
Working Group by the National Marine ScienceCentre (University of New England and Southern
Cross University), Coffs Harbour, NSW, Australia,
December. http://www.nowpap.org/data/ML%20
ref/APEC%27ML-control...Cost-vs-Benefit.pdf
Medeshi, M. Ali (2010). Somaliland still blighted byplastic bags, despite ban. Pontus Marine LTD, 25
October. http://www.medeshivalley.com/2010/10/
somaliland-still-blighted-by-plastic.html

>>>>>>>>>>
References
Messia, Hada (2010). Italy to ban plastic bags
in New Year. CNN, 31 December. http://edition.
cnn.com/2010/WORLD/europe/12/31/italy.plastic.
bags/index.html

Nahmann, Anton (2010). Extended producer
responsibility for packaging waste in South Africa:
Current approaches and lessons learned. Resources,
Conservation and Recycling, Vol. 54(3), pp 155-162.

Mexico City bans free plastic bags (2010). BBC
News, 19 August. http://www.bbc.com/news/worldlatin-america-11032252

Naik, Yogesh (2017a). India just banned all formsof disposable plastic in its capital. Mumbai Mirror,
25 January. https://mumbaimirror.indiatimes.com/
mumbai/cover-story/state-bans-plastic-bags-fromgudi-padwa/articleshow/60487040.cms

Mhofu, Sebastian (2017). Zimbabwe Temporarily
Lifts Ban on Foam Food Containers. Voa News,
18 July. https://www.voanews.com/a/zimbabweenvironment-styrofoam-eps-containers/3949063.
html
Montreal to ban plastic shopping bags as of 2018(2016). CBC News (Canada), 22 February. http://
www.cbc.ca/news/canada/montreal/denis-coderreplastic-bag-ban-future-montreal-1.3458240
Morocco seizes 420 tons of plastic bags in year
since ban (2017). Agence France-Presse, 28 April.
https://www.news24.com/Africa/News/moroccoseizes-420-tons-of-plastic-bags-in-year-sinceban-20170428
Morris, Steven (2015). Plastic bag use down 70%
in Wales since charges began. The Guardian,
4 September. https://www.theguardian.com/
environment/2015/sep/04/plastic-bag-use-down70-wales-since-charges-began
Mozambique News Agency (2015). Mozambique will
limit use of plastic bags. AsokoInsight, 2 January.
https://asokoinsight.com/news/mozambique-willlimit-use-of-plastic-bags
Mozambique plastic bag ban comes into force next
Friday (2016). Zitamar News, 28 January.https://zitamar.com/mozambique-plastic-bag-ban-comesinto-force-next-friday/
Myanmar’s main city bans plastic bags: State media(2011). The Independent, 26 April. http://www.
independent.co.uk/environment/myanmars-maincity-bans-plastic-bags-state-media-2275309.html
Myanmar works for environment conservation(2009). People’s Daily Online, 2 December. https://en.people.cn/90001/90777/90851/6830589.html
Naeem, Waqas (2013). Ban on plastic bags from
April 1. The Express Tribune, 1 February. https://
tribune.com.pk/story/501287/ban-on-plastic-bagsfrom-april-1/__________ (2017b). State bans plastic bags from
Gudi Padwa. Mumbai Mirror, 13 September. https://mumbaimirror.indiatimes.com/mumbai/coverstory/state-bans-plastic-bags-from-gudi-padwa/
articleshow/60487040.cms
Namara, Edna (2016). As Uganda’s Plastic Bag
Ban Takes Hold, Women Create Woven, Reusable
Bags. Global Press Journal, 25 February. https://globalpressjournal.com/africa/uganda/as-ugandasplastic-bag-ban-takes-hold-women-create-wovenreusable-bags/
National Conference of State Legislatures (USA)(2017). State plastic and paper bag legislation, 5May. http://www.ncsl.org/research/environmentand-natural-resources/plastic-bag-legislation.aspx
NDTV (India) (2010). Haryana bans use of plastic
carry bags. NDTV, 25 November. https://www.ndtv.
com/india-news/haryana-bans-use-of-plastic-carrybags-440253__________ (2016). National Green Tribunal For
Complete Ban On Plastic Bags in Punjab, Haryana.
NDTV, 17 January. https://www.ndtv.com/indianews/national-green-tribunal-for-complete-ban-onplastic-bags-in-punjab-haryana-1266790
New York, New York, USA, Department of Sanitation(2017). Determination on the Recyclability ofFood-Service Foam. New York. 12 May. http://
www1.nyc.gov/assets/dsny/docs/2017-0512FoamDetermination_FINAL.pdf
Nforngwa, Eugene (2014). Cameroon grapples
with ban on plastic bags. Al Jazeera, 5 September
http://www.aljazeera.com/news/africa/2014/09/
cameroon-grapples-with-ban-plasticsbags-20149410285350718.html
Niger: Government bans production, import, trade,use of plastic bags (2014). Panapress, 29 October.
http://www.panapress.com/Niger--Govt.-bansproduction,-import,-trade,-use-of-plastic-bags--12630408542-40-lang2-index.html

83

SINGLE-USE PLASTICS:
A Roadmap for Sustainability
Northern Territory, Australia (2017). Plastic bagban. https://nt.gov.au/environment/environmentprotection-recycling-waste/plastic-bag-ban
Obateru, Taye (2016). Nigeria and the Menaceof Plastic Bags. Actions against plastic bags,
14 April. https://globalreportingblog.wordpress.
com/2016/04/14/nigeria-and-the-menace-ofplastic-bags/
Observer Media (2017). Mixed results on plastic
bag ban. The Daily Observer, 9 November. https://antiguaobserver.com/mixed-results-on-plastic-bagban/
Ocean Conservancy (2017). International Costal
Clean Up Report 2017. https://oceanconservancy.
org/wp-content/uploads/2017/06/InternationalCoastal-Cleanup_2017-Report.pdf
Oceguera, Rita (2017). Shopping Carts All The Rage
After Plastic Bags Get Banned in Buenos Aires. The
Bubble, 25 January. http://www.thebubble.com/
shopping-carts-all-the-rage-after-plastic-bags-getbanned-in-buenos-aires/
Okeke, Chidimma C and, Mudashir, Ismail (2018).
Nigeria: Govt Under Pressure to Ban Plastic Bags.
Daily Trust, allAfrica. 28 March. https://allafrica.
com/stories/201803280044.html
O’Neill, Brendan (2016). Economic Instruments to
Reduce Usage of Plastic Bags: The Irish Experience.
Presentation, Informal Meeting of EU Waste
Directors, Brussels, 26 October. http://ec.europa.eu/
transparency/regexpert/index.cfm?do=groupDetail.
groupDetailDoc&id=27612&no=6
Oxford Dictionaries, https://en.oxforddictionaries.
com/definition/polythene
Pavlic, Vedran (2017). From 2019, No More Free
Plastic Bags in Croatian Stores. Total Croatia
News, 6 October. https://www.total-croatia-news.
com/business/22586-from-2019-no-more-freelightweight-plastic-bags-in-supermarkets
Pekic, Branislav (2017). Italina Consumers To
Pay For Plastic Fruit & Veg Bags. ESM European
Supermarket Magazine, 16 October. https://www.
esmmagazine.com/italians-pay-fruit-veg-plasticbags/50626
Petrone, Anna (2015). Brazil Launches Ban on
Traditional Plastic Bags. The Global Grid, 6 May.
http://theglobalgrid.org/city-of-sao-paulo-brazillaunches-ban-on-traditional-plastic-bags/

84

Pieters, Janene (2015). Free plastic bags at checkout
counters banned from January 1.

NL Times , 18 December. https://nltimes.
nl/2015/12/18/free-plastic-bags-checkoutcounters-banned-january-1__________ (2017). Dutch ban on free plastic bags
sees 71 pct drop in use. NL Times, 18 April. https://
nltimes.nl/2017/04/18/dutch-ban-free-plastic-bagssees-71-pct-drop-use
Pilgrim, Sophie (2015). Smugglers work on thedark side of Rwanda’s plastic bag ban. Al Jazeera
America, 25 February. http://america.aljazeera.com/
articles/2016/2/25/rwanda-plastic-bag-ban.html
Plastic bag charge in Scotland sees usage cut by
80% (2015). BBC News, 20 October. http://www.
bbc.com/news/uk-scotland-34575364
Plastic bags banned (2015), The National, 8
December. https://www.thenational.com.pg/plasticbags-banned/
Plastic bags banned in PNG from 01 (2015). PacificIslands News Association, January 2016. http://
www.pina.com.fj/?p=pacnews&m=read&o=7699
06672566773a3e6998c16d95dc
Plastic Bags Hard to Phase Out (2007). Radio
Sweden, 10 September. https://sverigesradio.
se/sida/artikel.aspx?programid=2054&artik
el=1588504.
Plastic bags on the way out in Austria’s supermarkets(2017). The Local, January 16. https://www.thelocal.
at/20170116/plastic-bags-on-the-way-out-inaustrias-shops-and-supermarkets.
Plastic bag use continues to fall in Northern Ireland(2015). BBC News, 24 July. http://www.bbc.com/
news/uk-northern-ireland-33645149
Plastic bag use plummets a year after tax
introduction (2016). The Portugal News Online,
2 February. http://www.theportugalnews.com/
news/plastic-bag-use-plummets-a-year-after-taxintroduction/37473
Plastic ban from today (2016). The Hindu, 1 July.
http://www.thehindu.com/todays-paper/tp-national/
tp-kerala/Plastic-ban-from-today/article14464604.
ece>>>>>>>>>>
References
Plastic Portal (2018). We pay for plastic bags in
Slovakia and in the Czech Republic. PlasticPortal.
eu, 16 January. http://www.plasticportal.eu/en/wepay-for-plastic-bags-in-slovakia-and-in-the-czechrepublic/c/4795/
PlasticsEurope (2016). Plastics – the Facts 2016. An
analysis of European plastics production, demand
and waste data. http://www.plasticseurope.org/
documents/document/20161014113313-plastics_
the_facts_2016_final_version.pdf
Plastic Waste Management Institute (2016). An
Introduction to Plastic Recycling: 2016.
PNG prepares for ban on non-biodegradable plasticbags (2015). ABC News (Australia), 15 December
http://www.abc.net.au/news/programs/pacificbeat/2015-12-15/png-prepares-for-ban-on-nonbiodegradable-plastic/7031006
Portland, Oregon, USA (n.d). Frequently-asked
Questions on the Plastic Bag Ban. https://www.
portlandoregon.gov/bps/article/402484
Price tag ends Swiss love affair with plasticbags (2017). Swissinfo.ch, 20 February. https://www.swissinfo.ch/eng/society/green-groceries_
price-tag-ends-swiss-love-affair-with-plasticbags/42974802.
Prisco, Jacopo (2017). The teenagers getting plasticbags banned in Bali. CNN, 17 August. http://edition.
cnn.com/2017/08/16/asia/melati-isabel-wijsenbali/index.html
Psyllides, George (2017). Five-cent charge for plasticbags on tis way. Cyprus Mail Online, 31 August.
http://cyprus-mail.com/2017/08/31/five-centcharge-plastic-bags-way/
PTI (2016a). Ban on plastic bags in urban areasof Punjab from April 1. India Today, 18 February.
https://www.indiatoday.in/pti-feed/story/banon-plastic-bags-in-urban-areas-of-punjab-fromapril-1-558471-2016-02-18
PTI (2016b). NGT for complete ban on plasticbags in Punjab, Haryana. The Tribune, 17 January.
http://www.tribuneindia.com/news/punjab/
ngt-for-complete-ban-on-plastic-bags-in-punjabharyana/184593.html

PTI (2017). Plastic carrybags completely bannedin 17 states, Union Territories: Government.
The New Indian Express, 9 August. http://www.
newindianexpress.com/nation/2017/aug/09/
plastic-carrybags-completely-banned-in-17-statesunion-territories-government-1640552.html
Punjab, India. The Punjab Plastic Carry Bags
(Manufacture, Usage & Disposal) Control Act,
2005. PUNJAB ACT NO. 17 OF 2005. Punjab Govt.
Notification. https://punjabxp.com/punjab-plasticcarry-bags-control-act-2005/
Punjab Plastic Carry Bags (Manufacture, Usage& Disposal) Control (Amendment) Act, 2016.
(Punjab Act. No. 21 of 2016). http://www.
ppcb.gov.in/Attachments/Plastic%20Waste/
PlasticActJune2016.pdf
Queensland, Australia (n.d). About the ban on
the supply of lightweight plastic shopping bags.
https://www.qld.gov.au/environment/pollution/
management/waste/plastic-bags/about
Queensland, Australia, Department of Environmentand Heritage Protection (2016). Implementing alightweight plastic shopping bag ban in Queensland.
Discussion paper.
Quillen, Stephen (2017). Tunisia bans plastic bagsin supermarkets. The Arab Weekly, 19 March.
https://thearabweekly.com/tunisia-bans-plasticbags-supermarkets
Rayne, Sierra (2008). The need for reducing plastic
shopping bag use and disposal in Africa. African
Journal of Environmental Science and Technology,
Vol. 3(3).
Raz-Chaimovich, Michal (2017). 42% of Israelis
don’t buy plastic bags. Globes, 6 April. http://www.
globes.co.il/en/article-42-of-israelis-dont-buyplastic-bags-1001184395
Reilly, Jill (2013). The 25ft-high tidal wave of
rubbish that highlights just why plastic shoppingbags and Styrofoam food containers are bannedin Manila from today. Mail Online, 20 June. http://
www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2345160/The25ft-high-tidal-wave-rubbish-highlights-just-plasticshopping-bags-Styrofoam-food-containers-bannedManila-today.html
Reyes, Chloe (2017). Querétaro first city in Mexico
to ban use of plastic bags. Science and Technology,
20 December. https://www.riviera-maya-news.com/
queretaro-first-city-in-mexico-to-ban-use-of-plasticbags/2017.html

85

SINGLE-USE PLASTICS:
A Roadmap for Sustainability
Richards, Blair (2017). Concerns about single
use bags prompt review into use of thicker bags
at retailers. The Mercury, 9 July. http://www.
themercury.com.au/news/tasmania/concernsabout-single-use-bags-prompt-review-into-use-ofthicker-bags-at-retailers/news-story/8439ed6547
2ac35e66de62d57b5ac178
Richards, Emily (2015). Austin’s Plastic Bag Ban
Worse for Environment Than Bags It Outlaws. CNS
News, 15 June. https://www.cnsnews.com/news/
article/emily-richards/austins-plastic-bag-banworse-environment-bags-it-outlaws
Rigby, Mark, Adam Steer, and Kate O’Toole (2017).
War on waste: NT environmental groups claim
plastic bag ban has failed. ABC News (Australia), 24
May. http://www.abc.net.au/news/2017-05-24/waron-waste-nt-plastic-bag-ban-fails-say-environmentgroups/8553614
Ritch, Elaine, Carol Brennan, and Calum MacLeod(2009). Plastic bag politics: modifying consumer
behavior for sustainable development. International
Journal of Consumer Studies, Vol. 33, pp 168-174

Smith, John (2018). Greek shoppers responding toplastic bag ban. GreekReporter.com, 6 February.
http://greece.greekreporter.com/2018/02/06/greekshoppers-responding-to-plastic-bag-tax/
Smithers, Rebecca (2016). England’s plastic bag
usage drops 85% since 5p charge introduced.
The Guardian, 30 July. https://www.theguardian.
com/environment/2016/jul/30/england-plasticbag-usage-drops-85-per-cent-since-5p-chargedintroduced
South Australia, Australia, Environmental Protection
Agency. (2009). Plastic bag ban. http://www.epa.
sa.gov.au/data_and_publications/all_publications/for_councils/plastic_bag_ban

Romania to Ban Thin Plastic Bags (2018).
Positive News Romania, 24 January. http://positivenewsromania.com/2018/01/24/romaniaban-thin-plastic-bags/

Southern cities ban plastic bags in effort to keep
Patagonia pristine (2014). Patagon Journal, 7
February. http://www.patagonjournal.com/index.
php?option=com_content&view=article&id=2940:
southern-cities-ban-plastic-bags-in-effort-to-keeppatagonia-pristine&catid=89:environment&Itemid=260&lang=en

Seattle, Washington, USA (2017). Bag Requirements.
http://www.seattle.gov/util/MyServices/Recycling/
ReduceReuse/PlasticBagBan/index.htm

Spokas, K. (2007). Plastics: Still young, but having
a mature impact. Editorial, Waste Management,
28(3), pp 473–474.

Serju, Christopher (2017). Government Wants
Public Input On Plastic Ban. The Gleaner, 17
August. http://jamaica-gleaner.com/article/leadstories/20170817/govt-wants-public-input-plasticban

SPREP (2018). Vanuatu Plastic Bag Ban Now in
Effect, 9 February. http://www.sprep.org/wastemanagement-pollution-control/vanuatu-plastic-bagban-now-in-effectSindh, Pakistan, Environment Protection Agency(2014). Sindh Prohibition of Non-degradable Plastic
Products (Manufacturing, Sale and Usage) Rules,
16 December. http://sindhlaws.gov.pk/setup/publications_SindhCode/PUB-15-000259.pdf
Siqueira, Leo (2011). Plastic bag bans in Brazil spark
debate. ICIS News, 11 July. https://www.icis.com/
resources/news/2011/07/22/9479546/plastic-bagbans-in-brazil-spark-debate/
Sisay, Andualem (2016). Ethiopia to restrict the useof plastic products. Africa Review, 29 March. http://
www.africareview.com/news/Ethiopia-to-restrictthe-use-of-plastic-products/979180-3137822jumv3o/index.html

86

Slezak, Michael (2017). Woolworths and Colesto phase out single-use plastic bags. The
Guardian, 14 July. https://www.theguardian.com/
environment/2017/jul/14/woolworths-to-phase-outsingle-use-plastic-bags-over-12-months

Sri Lanka bans plastic after garbage crisis (2017).
Agence France-Presse, 1 September. http://www.
dailymail.co.uk/wires/afp/article-4843304/SriLanka-bans-plastic-garbage-crisis.html
Styrofoam ban in Sikkim (2016). The Telegraph, 25
May. https://www.telegraphindia.com/1160525/
jsp/siliguri/story_87417.jsp.
Sun, Nina Ying (2015). China’s new plastics
ban in Jilin province boosts bioplastics sector.
Plasticsnews Europe, 14 January. http://www.
plasticsnewseurope.com/article/20150114/
PNE/301149981/chinas-new-plastics-ban-in-jilinprovince-boosts-bioplastics-sector

>>>>>>>>>>
References
Surfrider Foundation Europe (2017). Enough
Excuses: Time for Europe to act against plastic bag
pollution. International Plastic Free Day 2017. https://www.surfrider.eu/wp-content/uploads/2017/06/
report_EUMemberStateslegislations_PlasticBags_
web_en.pdf
S. Walter Packaging (n.d.). Hawaii – Bag Legislation.
www.baglaws.com/legislation.php?state=Hawaii
Swiss supermarkets to charge for plastic bags(2016). The Local, 23 September. https://www.
thelocal.ch/20160923/swiss-supermarkets-bringin-plastic-bag-charge.
Tasmania, Australia, Environmental Protection
Authority (n.d). Plastic Shopping Bags. http://
epa.tas.gov.au/sustainability/resources-for-thecommunity/plastic-shopping-bags
Tavella, Juliana Munoz (2017). BYO Bag? Plastic
Shopping Bags Banned in Buenos Aires. The Bubble,
2 January. http://www.thebubble.com/byo-bagplastic-shopping-bags-banned-in-buenos-aires/
Tekle, Biniam (2017). Banning Plastic Bags – The
Case of Eritrea. Dehai, 1 September. http://www.
dehai.org/dehai/dehai_hagers/202393
This Caribbean country is banning Styrofoam (2015).
Caribbean Journal. https://www.caribjournal.
com/2015/10/18/this-caribbean-country-isbanning-styrofoam/
Thompson passes plastic bag ban (2010). CBC
News (Canada), 21 December. http://www.cbc.ca/
news/canada/manitoba/thompson-passes-plasticbag-ban-1.911576
Toloken, Steve (2017a). China plastic scrap
ban reactions range from ‘devastating’ to an
opportunity. Plastic News Europe. http://www.
plasticsnewseurope.com/article/20170724/
PNE/170729960/china-plastic-scrap-ban-reactionsrange-from-devastating-to-an-opportunity__________ (2017b). China to WTO: Scrap plastic
imports banned by year-end. Plasticsnews, 18 July.
http://www.plasticsnews.com/article/20170718/
NEWS/170719892/china-to-wto-scrap-plasticimportations-banned-by-year-end
Turnbull, Jay (2017). What you need to know about
Montreal’s plastic bag ban. CBCNews, 31 December.
http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/montreal/whatyou-need-to-know-about-montreal-s-plastic-bagban-1.4451421

Turque, Bill (2016). A Maryland county’s nickel tax
for plastic bags is paying off, but not as planned.
The Washington Post, 4 July. https://www.
washingtonpost.com/local/md-politics/a-marylandcountys-nickel-tax-for-plastic-bags-is-paying-offbut-not-as-planned/2016/07/04/5b6acbc0-3e2811e6-84e8-1580c7db5275_story.html?utm_term=.
bc4e44b49b3b
Twomey, David (2013). Tas town says national ban
should be in the bag. Econews, 29 April. http://
econews.com.au/28246/tas-town-says-nationalban-should-be-in-the-bag/Udasin, Sharon (2016). Plastic bag ban to take effecton January 1. The Jerusalem Post, 27 December.
http://www.globes.co.il/en/article-42-of-israelisdont-buy-plastic-bags-1001184395
United Kingdom, Environment Agency (2011). Life
cycle assessment of supermarket carrierbags: areview of the bags available in 2006. https://www.
gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/
attachment_data/file/291023/scho0711buan-e-e.
pdf
United Nations (2017a). Expanded polystyrene(Styrofoam) Ban. https://oceanconference.un.org/
commitments/?id=18100__________ (2017b). Farewell plastics carrierbag!
h t t p s : // o c e a n c o n fe re n c e . u n . o rg /commitments/?id=16526
United Nations Development Programme (2015).
Malawi introduces ban on thin plastic. 8 September.
http://www.mw.undp.org/content/malawi/en/
home/presscenter/articles/2015/09/08/malawiintroduces-ban-on-thin-plastic.html__________ (2017). Costa Rica paves the way to end
single-use plastics. 18 July. http://www.undp.org/
content/undp/en/home/blog/2017/7/14/CostaRica-abre-el-camino-hacia-el-fin-de-los-pl-sticosde-un-solo-uso.html
United Nations Development Programme –United Nations Environment Programme Poverty–Environment Initiative (2015). Burkina Faso
endorses law on sustainable development andbans non-biodegradable plastic bags. http://www.
unpei.org/latest-news/burkina-faso-endorseslaw-on-sustainable-development-and-bans-nonbiodegradable-plastic-bags

87

SINGLE-USE PLASTICS:
A Roadmap for Sustainability
United Nations Environment Programme (2005).
Selection, design and implementation of economic
instruments in the Kenyan solid waste management
sector. Geneva, Switzerland.

__________ (n.d). Advancing Sustainable Materials
Management: Facts and Figures. https://www.
epa.gov/smm/advancing-sustainable-materialsmanagement-facts-and-figures#Materials__________ (2014). Valuing Plastic: The Business
Case for Measuring, Managing and Disclosing
Plastic Use in the Consumer Goods Industry.

Vaessen, Step (2016). Indonesia: Plastic tax to curb
rubbish dumped in rivers. Al Jazeera, 15 September.
http://www.aljazeera.com/news/2016/09/
indonesia-plastic-tax-curb-rubbish-dumpedrivers-160915073853961.html__________ (2015). Global Waste Management
Outlook, September 2015. http://web.unep.org/
ietc/resources/publications__________ (2016a). Marine Litter Legislation: A
Toolkit for Policymakers.
__________ (2016b). Marine Plastic Debris andMicroplastics – Global Lessons and Research toInspire Action and Guide Policy Change. Nairobi,
Kenya.
__________ (2016c). UNEP Frontiers 2016 Report:
Emerging Issues of Environmental Concern. Nairobi,
Kenya.
__________ (2017a). Asia Waste Management
Outlook. https://www.unep.org/ietc/sites/unep.
org.ietc/files/Asia%20outlook_ENG.pdf__________ (2017b). Colombia’s plastic bag tax:
A concrete step towards fighting marine litterin the Caribbean, 26 July. http://web.unep.org/
stories/story/colombia%E2%80%99s-plastic-bagtax-concrete-step-towards-fighting-marine-littercaribbean

Vanuatu, Ozone Protection Act 2010. http://www.
ecolex.org/ecolex/ledge/view/RecordDetails;-DIDPFDSIjsessionid=B4F37C03B789B0223982DC5F22
2121AB?id=LEX-FAOC110179&index=documents.
Vanuatu bans plastic and fines rubbish dumpers(2018). Radio New Zealand, 23 March. https://www.
radionz.co.nz/international/pacific-news/353201/
vanuatu-bans-plastic-and-fines-rubbish-dumpers
Vanuatu joins other PICs to tackle plastic problems(2017). LoopVanuatu.com, 1 August. http://www.
loopvanuatu.com/vanuatu-news/vanuatu-joinsother-pics-tackle-plastic-problems-64061
Vaugh, Samantha (2018). The war on bags. The
Florentine, 10 January. http://www.theflorentine.net/
news/2018/01/bag-charges-italy-supermarkets/__________ (2017c). Kenya announces breakthroughban on plastic bags. https://www.unenvironment.
org/news-and-stories/story/kenya-announcesbreakthrough-ban-plastic-bags

Velis, Costas (2014). Global recycling markets –plastic waste: A story for one player – China. ISWA.
Vienna, September 2014.

__________ (2017d). Kenyans prepare for nationwide
ban on plastic bags, June. http://www.unep.org/
stories/story/kenyans-prepare-nationwide-banplastic-bags

Vietnam considers fivefold gallop in plastic bag
tax (2017). Tuoi Tre News, 28 September. https://tuoitrenews.vn/news/business/20170928/vietnamconsiders-fivefold-gallop-in-plastic-bag-tax/41784.
html__________ (2017e). UN Declares War on Ocean
Plastic, 23 February. http://www.unep.org/
newscentre/un-declares-war-ocean-plastic
United States of America, Environmental
Protection Agency (2016). Advancing Sustainable
Materials Management: 2014 Fact Sheet. https://www.epa.gov/sites/production/files/2016-11/
documents/2014_smmfactsheet_508.pdf

88__________ (2017). Indonesia to impose excise
tax on plastic bags in 2018 – budget proposal.
Reuters, 16 August. http://www.aljazeera.com/
news/2016/09/indonesia-plastic-tax-curb-rubbishdumped-rivers-160915073853961.html

Wakabi, Michael (2015). Uganda in plastic bag ban
dilemma. The East African, 13 April. http://www.
theeastafrican.co.ke/news/Uganda-in-plastic-bagban-dilemma/2558-2683982-4oll4l/index.html
Washington, District of Columbia, USA, Departmentof Energy & Environment (2010). Skip the bag, savethe river. https://doee.dc.gov/bags

>>>>>>>>>>
References__________ (2014). New Survey Data Shows District’s
Bag Law is Working, 7 January. https://doee.dc.gov/
release/new-survey-data-shows-district’s-bag-lawworking

Xuereb, Matthew (2009). Eco tax on plastic bags
from March 1. Times Malta, 29 January. https://www.timesofmalta.com/articles/view/20090129/
local/eco-tax-on-plastic-bags-from-march-1.242668

Watson, Callie (2013). Plastic bag use still rife
despite South Australia’s shopping bag ban.
AdelaideNow, 24 March. http://www.adelaidenow.
com.au/news/south-australia/plastic-bag-use-stillrife-despite-south-australias-shopping-bag-ban/news-story/a02398d8295da04dcbe04b5343377
186?sv=467d4722e2060125ce98c7a555a90d2f

Yang, Dongqi and others (2015). Microplastic
Pollution in Table Salts from China. Environmental
Science & Technology, Vol. 49 (22), pp. 13622-13627.

Wayang, Leonie (2017). Stop Use of Plastic Bags.
National New, 28 September. https://postcourier.
com.pg/stop-use-plastic-bags/
West Bengal, India, Pollution Control Board (n.d).
Restriction on use of plastic carry bags in West
Bengal. http://web.wbpcb.gov.in/html/pressrelease/plastic.shtml
Women in Europe for a Common Future (n.d.).
Dangerous Health Effects of Burning of Plastics
and Waste.
www.wecf.eu/cms/download/2004-2005/
homeburning_plastics.pdf
Wood Buffalo, Alberta, Canada (2010). Single-Use
Shopping Bag Bylaw. https://www.rmwb.ca/DoingBusiness/Bylaw-Enforcement/Single-Use-ShoppingBag-Bylaw.htm__________ (2012). Single-Use Shopping Bag
Bylaw. No.12/007. https://www.rmwb.ca/Assets/
Departments/Legislative+and+Legal+Services/
Bylaws/ShoppingBag.pdf

Yang, Hai-lan, and Robert Innes (2006). Economic
incentives and residential waste management in
Taiwan: An empirical investigation. Environmental
and Resource Economics, Vol. 37, pp. 489-519.
You, Li (2017). Experts question China’s ban on“free” plastic bags. Sixth Tone, 13 June. http://www.
sixthtone.com/news/1000322/experts-questionchinas-ban-on-free-plastic-bags
Zen, Irina, Rahmalan Bin Ahamad, and Wahid Omar
(2013). No plastic bag campaign day in Malaysia andthe policy implication. Environment, Development
and Sustainability. 15. 10.1007/s10668-013-9437-1.
Zhu, Qunfang (2011). An Appraisal and Analysis of
the Law of “Plastic-Bag Ban”. Energy Procedia, Vol.
5, pp 2516-2521.
Zohny, Hazem (2009). Red Sea Governorate bansplastic bags. Egypt Independent, 14 November.
http://www.egyptindependent.com/red-seagovernorate-bans-plastic-bags/
Zoljargal, M. (2013). Less paper, more plastic.
The UB Post, 15 April. http://ubpost.mongolnews.
mn/?p=3657

World Economic Forum (2016). The New Plastics
Economy. Rethinking the future of plastics, January.
www3.weforum.org/docs/WEF_The_New_Plastics_
Economy.pdf
Xanthos, Dirk, and Tony R. Walker (2017).
International policies to reduce plastic marine
pollution from single-use plastics (plastic bags
and microbeads): A review. Marine Pollution Bulletin,
Vol 118(1-2), pp. 17-26.
Xing, Xiufeng (2009). Study on the Ban of Free
Plastic Bags in China. Journal of Sustainable
Development, Vol. 2(1).

89

SINGLE-USE PLASTICS:
A Roadmap for Sustainability

90United Nations Environment Programme (UNEP)
P.O. Box 30552, Nairobi, Kenya, 00100
Tel: +254 20 7621234
Web: www.unenvironment.org

International Environmental Technology Centre (IETC)
Economy Division of UNEP
2-110, Ryokuchi koen, Tsurumi-ku, Osaka, 538-0036, Japan
Tel: +81 6 6915 4581
E-mail: ietc@unep.org
Web: www.unep.org/ietc