Transparent 2020

Mapping corporate action on plastic waste
June 2020

Acknowledgements“In the past few years it has become evident that wemust radically speed up the transition to a circular
economy for plastic, in which it never becomes
waste or pollution. We must eliminate the plastics
we don’t need, innovate to ensure that the plastics
we do need are reusable, recyclable, or compostable,
and circulate all the plastic items we use to keepthem in the economy and out of the environment.
The New Plastics Economy Global Commitment hasbrought unprecedented transparency on industry
action, highlighting progress on elimination of andinnovation for plastic packaging. We welcome
WWF’s inaugural ReSource: Plastic report as a step
towards building further transparency on thecirculation and after-use fate of plastic packaging
across different geographies.”– SANDER DEFRUYT, LEAD OF THE NEW PLASTICS ECONOMYINITIATIVE AT THE ELLEN MACARTHUR FOUNDATION“As a Principal Member of ReSource: Plastic, Keurig
Dr Pepper is proud to be a part of this inaugural
report. The data outlined within provides a landscape analysis of the challenges that brands,
packaging manufacturers and our global recycling
systems face and, as a member of the first cohortof principal members, we are now positioned toaccelerate the path forward with solutions
grounded in data and collective action. The findingsof the report underline the importance of the
packaging and waste elimination goals we have set
for our company and reiterate the importance ofcollaboration. We look forward to the expansionof this promising program and continuing to be
an active and collaborative member as the group
grows and evolves.”– MONIQUE OXENDER, CHIEF SUSTAINABILITY OFFICER,KEURIG DR PEPPER“We recognize that plastic pollution is a challengethat none of us can tackle alone. Collaboration is
critical, and we look forward to continuing to work
alongside WWF and our fellow ReSource: Plastic
Principal Members to identify ways to collectively
advance more sustainable solutions at scale.
McDonald’s is already working on a wide-ranging
program to keep plastic out of nature, which
includes removing and minimizing plastic andimproving recyclability in packaging. We are pleased
to see the findings in this report are aligned with thedirection of our packaging and recycling strategy,
with a strong focus on circularity.”– KEITH KENNY, CORPORATE VICE PRESIDENT, SUSTAINABILITY,MCDONALD’S“Plastics stemming from the food and beverageindustry make up a majority of the items collectedfrom beaches and waterways around the world
during Ocean Conservancy’s annual International
Coastal Cleanup, so there is a critical need to better
understand this sector’s plastics footprint if we wantto make a real dent in the ocean plastics crisis. This
first ReSource: Plastic report is an important step infilling that knowledge gap, and it is encouraging tosee other companies, including several members of
the Trash Free Seas Alliance, committing to greatertransparency, as well. Everyone needs to be partof the solution—the problem is simply too big totackle alone.”– EDITH CECCHINI, PROJECT DIRECTOR FOR CORPORATESTRATEGY AND POLICY AT OCEAN CONSERVANCY“Plastic pollution of our ocean is set to increase
dramatically under current conditions. Pew
welcomes this report by WWF further highlighting
the problem and the need to take collective anddecisive actions.”– SIMON REDDY, DIRECTOR, ENVIRONMENT, THE PEWCHARITABLE TRUSTS“At P&G we’re concerned about plastic waste in ourenvironment. It’s a complex global challenge that
requires a comprehensive approach across theentire plastics lifecycle, and everyone has a role toplay. The findings in WWF’s ReSource: Plastic reportwill help point us to the biggest opportunities towork together on circular solutions so that plastic
is treated as a resource that is collected, recycled
and reused.”– VIRGINIE HELIAS, CHIEF SUSTAINABILITY OFFICER,
PROCTER & GAMBLE“Global crises like plastic waste, climate change, andwater, require private sector leadership and truly
global collaboration. This means actively working
with other brands, governments, NGO’s and key
industry stakeholders to bring about sustainablechange. ReSource and the detailed reporting by theparticipating companies provides a common
framework and insights for us to act.”“In 2018, we launched our World Without Waste
initiative with a simple, focused purpose: make theworld’s packaging waste problem a thing of thepast. We know that we can’t do this alone—we needcollective action. Building on our engagement with
the Ellen MacArthur Foundation, ReSource: Plastic is
another step that Coca-Cola is taking to advance
this work. We need additional companies to join thiseffort as we focus on transparency and common
frameworks that will help drive real, meaningful
results.”– BEN JORDAN, SENIOR DIRECTOR OF ENVIRONMENTAL
POLICY, THE COCA-COLA COMPANY“This thoughtful and transparent report is exactly
what the industry needs to advance the U.S. recycling system and the circular economy. I commend
WWF’s leadership through the ReSource Footprint
Tracker as well as the companies that have boldly
stepped up to be part of this solution-oriented
approach. As stated in the report, the U.S. recycling
system needs help now more than ever. The
Recycling Partnership is proud to work with WWF on
the solutions and actions that will keep plastic outof the environment and in a circular system.”– KEEFE HARRISON, CEO, THE RECYCLING PARTNERSHIP– MICHAEL KOBORI, CHIEF SUSTAINABILITY OFFICERAT STARBUCKSiExecutive Summary
WWF has established a vision of No Plastic in Nature by

This report presents key findings related to the ReSource

2030 and imagines a world where our resources are

Principal Members’ global plastic footprints in 2018,never wasted. ReSource: Plastic leverages the power ofincluding their use of plastic by polymer type and form,business to achieve this vision. In its inaugural year,

use of recycled content and sustainably sourced

ReSource: Plastic worked with five Principal Members

biobased content, and the likely waste management(Keurig Dr Pepper, McDonald’s Corporation, Procter &pathways for their plastic portfolios. The scope andGamble, Starbucks, and The Coca-Cola Company) as wellcharacteristics of each company’s data are outlined

as Thought Partners (The Ellen MacArthur Foundation andwithin the report. Keurig Dr Pepper reported 208,000

Ocean Conservancy) to establish a baseline of plastic use.

metric tons of plastic; McDonald’s Corporation reported
153,000 metric tons; Procter & Gamble reported

The ReSource Footprint Tracker is the main analytical

605,000 metric tons; Starbucks reported 190,000 metric

tool through which corporate action and progress are

tons; and The Coca-Cola Company reported 3 million

measured for ReSource: Plastic. The Tracker provides a

metric tons. In total, 4.2 million metric tons of plastic

standard methodology to track companies’ plastic

were reported by ReSource Members, based on 2018

footprints and publicly report on the progress of theirdata.1 The Tracker identifies four waste management

plastic waste commitments. Converging efforts will bepathways for consumer-facing plastic packaging:key to success, and we are working toward the goal ofrecycled, landfilled, incinerated, or mismanaged.2 Basedaligning the ReSource: Plastic Footprint Tracker with theon the results, we identify concrete calls to action for our

New Plastics Economy Global Commitment, and theMembers, as well as broader recommendations for the

Trash Free Seas Alliance.

private sector and other stakeholders to address global
plastic pollution.

The goal of the pilot year of the Footprint Tracker was toestablish a baseline of plastic use and management

The report frames these opportunities in the context ofpathways for our Members. Results from the first year

the three ReSource: Plastic goals: eliminating unnecessary

and continued tracking in future years will help illumi-

plastic, doubling global recycling and composting, andnate key challenges, provide insight into the mostshifting to sustainable inputs for remaining plastic. Key

impactful opportunities for companies to take effective

calls to action for each goal are highlighted below.

action on the plastic waste crisis, and measure progressover time.

ii

ELIMINATE UNNECESSARY PLASTICS:– The US has been identified as a key opportunity
to increase recycling and reduce landfill rates.

• Build on efforts to reduce and redesign small
plastics, which include familiar single-use items like– In particular, polypropylene recycling in the US is

utensils, coffee stirrers, and straws. These are ahighlighted as a strong opportunity for increased

significant category for three of the five ReSource

recycling. The US recycling rate for polypropylene isMembers. Because small plastics are largely excluded

close to zero (0.6% in 2017), according to the EPA.

from recycling streams, eliminating or finding substi-

The demand for quality recycled polypropylene fartutes for these materials should remain a key priority

exceeds supply, and collective action is needed tofor these companies.

increase availability.3• Explore reusable packaging systems and services• Develop action plans that focus on the largest

as an alternative for other high-volume, low-recyclability

country-level opportunities. In the analysis, theproducts like cups and utensils. To support the enabling

United States, Mexico, China, India, and the Philippines

conditions for this innovation, these companies should

were identified as priority countries to foster systems

focus on setting and reporting reusability targets at

improvements in waste management collections andthe country level and collaborate with other companies

processing. Together, these countries represent 57.4%

on localized solutions.

of ReSource Members’ landfilled plastics, and 58.7% ofMembers’ estimated mismanaged plastics. The United

DOUBLE GLOBAL RECYCLING RATE:States represents the single biggest opportunity for• Scale recycled content availability and use throughthese companies coupled with high landfill rate (72%).

recycling due to the high reported sales volumes ofcollective action.
iii

• Identify opportunities to increase recycling and• Improving data confidence and achieving morecomposting in specific geographies where wastecomprehensive waste management information will

management collection and infrastructure areallow us to more accurately model the pathways ofcurrently insufficient, and report annually on progress.

plastic and design more effective interventions.

Engage in collective action including policy dialogues
and efforts to foster circular systems.

There are some important considerations when interpreting the findings of this report: First, the baseline

SHIFT TO SUSTAINABLE INPUTS FOR REMAINING
PLASTIC

results are not intended to represent global trends• Use recycled plastic for plastic packaging applica-

corporate plastic footprints and waste management

across industries. They instead serve as proof of conceptthat a common framework for the measurement oftions: Increase use of recycled plastic, to address theoutcomes is both possible and a necessary tool forsignificant gap between current use and corporatechange. Second, due to the limited availability of detailed

commitments. Use of recycled or sustainably sourced

data in several key geographies, it is not currently

biobased content ranged from 0.4% to 11.3% acrosspossible to meaningfully distinguish between individual

all five Members. These results call out a clear need tocompany footprint waste management outcomes andaccelerate the use of recycled content. This is indica-

national averages in several regions. Therefore, waste

tive of the larger challenge around availability ofmanagement outcomes are reported in the aggregate

consistently high-quality recycled resin. Many companies

in this report, and not on an individual basis. Improving

have set strong recycled content goals, but it can be athis data detail and confidence is a high priority forchallenge to make progress when price parity between

future reporting years, along with the incorporation ofrecycled and virgin content does not exist. Leaders areimport/export data.

needed who commit to sourcing recycled plastic, evenwhen the market price of recycled content may be
above that of virgin plastic.
• Increase use of sustainably sourced biobased
plastic: As with recycled content, the supply of

Additionally, this baseline assessment represents a
relatively small set of companies, which has resulted inlimitations on what can be concluded from the pilot
results. While the set of companies represents fivewell-known global companies and respective leaders insustainably sourced biobased plastic will need totheir industries, these companies are not necessarily

increase in order to meet demand of company

representative of their respective industries globally.

commitments in upcoming years. However, this

Therefore, the aggregate results only represent the fivecontent must be sourced and managed responsibly atcompanies based on their reported data and are not

end-of-life to contribute effectively to a circular system.

necessarily representative of wider industry trends. As
ReSource grows, we will work to enable broader use of

Finally, these calls to action will determine the progress

the ReSource Footprint Tracker so that the aggregatedon all the goals outlined above; their importance cannot

data produces more generalizable insights across

be overstated:industries.

• Filling critical data gaps and actively sharing

ReSource: Plastic aims to enlist 100+ companies by 2030

information will improve the quality and precision ofin the effort to reach the ultimate goal of preventing at

our understanding of the plastic waste system. There

least 50 million metric tons of plastic waste fromis a clear need for better waste management and fateentering nature. The ReSource Footprint Tracker

data at the national level, international coordination

provides a common measurement framework, andon plastic data collection efforts, and agreement on

through increased adoption of this tool, the highest-

common terminology and best practices. Further-

impact measures can be identified. The baseline results

more, standardization in corporate data collection andof the ReSource Footprint Tracker provide the necessary

reporting is also needed.

starting point for developing solutions whose impact willreverberate across supply chains and industries.

iv

Contents
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  . ii
ABOUT RESOURCE: PLASTIC .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  . 2Vision . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2
An Activation Hub  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4
Participating Members . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5
Program Partnership . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5
RESOURCE FOOTPRINT TRACKER RESULTS  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  . 6Methodology  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7
Interpreting the Baseline Assessment . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10
Key Findings and Results  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10
Member Case Studies  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 20
RECOMMENDATIONS FOR ACTION  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  . 34
Eliminating Unnecessary Plastic through Business Model
Innovation, Reduction, and Substitution . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 35
Shifting to Sustainable Inputs for Remaining Plastic  . . . . . . . . . . . . 35
Doubling Global Recycling and Composting of Plastic  . . . . . . . . . . . 36
Other Opportunities  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 37
Thought Partner Insights  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 39
MOVING FORWARD .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  . 41
GLOSSARY .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  . 42
APPENDIX .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  . 44

1About ReSource: Plastic
VisionEvery day, plastic is flowing into our natural environment at an unprecedented rate—a dump
truck every minute into our oceans alone. In one year, this plastic waste adds up to 8 million
metric tons and impacts over 800 species.4, 5 And as this crisis spreads to every corner of the
globe, World Wildlife Fund (WWF) is leading the charge to unite our global networks of industry
leaders, consumers, and policymakers to transform our systems toward a vision of No Plastic in
Nature by 2030. Because while plastic can help make our hospitals safer, our food last longer,and our packages more efficient to ship, it has no place in nature.
The role of business is critical to fixing the broken plastic system and accelerating progress.
Businesses are uniquely positioned to reduce waste through improved sourcing, design, andbusiness model innovation within their own supply chains, and by supporting recycling andcomposting system improvement efforts beyond their own supply chains.

2

FIGURE 1. Theory of Change for ReSource: Plastic

Fossil Virgin
Plastic

Recycling

Doubleglobalrecovery

Shift tosustainablesources forplastics

Reuse

DesignUse
Reduceunnecessary
plastics

Outflow to
Landfill andIncineration

X
LeakageEliminateplastic
pollution

Through this lens, we find that as few as 100 companies

have entered this space through large-scale commit-

have the potential to prevent roughly 10 million metricments, there hasn’t been a comprehensive, standardized

tons of the world’s plastic waste per year.6 Some of themethodology to track plastic usage and waste manage-

world’s biggest companies have already gotten started

ment outcomes, leaving companies without the ability

with large-scale plastic commitments to reduce, re-source,

to measure the impact and track the progress of theirrecycle, and more. The New Plastics Economy Global

actions. ReSource’s measurement framework, theCommitment, led by the Ellen MacArthur Foundation

ReSource Footprint Tracker, is designed to fill this criticaland UNEP, has been a foundational mechanism to set a

gap by providing a common framework for the measure-common vision and commitment, and track progress.

ment of corporate plastic footprints and waste management outcomes.

Continued action and an amplification of efforts in linewith this vision are needed to follow through on thoseThrough our ReSource: Plastic activation hub, we’recommitments and achieve impact on plastic pollution

helping some of the world’s leading companies translate

at scale.

ambitious plastic commitments into systemic, measurable change across their business operations, and wellEffective action to stop plastic pollution requires anbeyond their supply chains.

understanding of how corporate plastic footprints
contribute to the issue at large. However, as companies

3

An Activation Hub

reach a goal of preventing 50 million metric tons of

ReSource: Plastic is WWF’s activation hub for companies

ecosystems by 2030.

that are ready to translate plastic commitments tomeaningful action but need help building a roadmap to
get there. We close that “how” gap through an innovative
measurement framework that tracks corporate action
against ReSource’s three-pronged approach to leveraging

plastic pollution from entering our oceans and otherTo get there, ReSource is working with its Member
companies to:
MEASURE IMPACT of corporate plastic activities within

business as a catalyst for systems change:

an innovative measurement framework, the ReSource• Eliminating unnecessary plastic through business

into company footprints within the global plastic system.

model innovation, reduction, and substitution• For plastic that is necessary, shifting from virgin plastic
sourcing to sustainable inputs, including recycledcontent,7 sustainably sourced biobased content,
and advanced materials

8• Doubling global collection, recycling, and compostingof plastic so that the plastic going into the system iscirculated back
ReSource launched in 2019 with a goal of tracking the
progress of corporate action year over year to ultimately

4

Footprint Tracker, and provide an unprecedented view

MAXIMIZE IMPACT by tracking implementation andprogress of these activities through the ReSource
Footprint Tracker to identify what interventions to
reduce waste should be prioritized, scaled, or improved
upon.
MULTIPLY IMPACT by uniting companies within acommon plastic sustainability language that enables
collaboration with other companies and stakeholders,bringing speed and scale to critical solutions andinvestments toward systems change.

Participating Members

Program Partnership

ReSource was launched in May 2019 with five companies

THOUGHT PARTNERS

that have demonstrated ambition and sector leadershipon plastic waste to serve as Principal Members: Keurig
Dr Pepper, McDonald’s, Procter & Gamble, Starbucks,
and The Coca-Cola Company. As members of ReSource,
the companies are committed to tracking and reportingon their plastic footprint annually as well as taking
recommended actions to advance ReSource’s goals, andimportantly, pursuing collaborative efforts with othercompanies and stakeholders to address and scalecritical interventions in waste management.
These companies piloted the ReSource Footprint Tracker
in its first year, and their results in this report serve as a

Our Thought Partners, The Ellen MacArthur Foundation
and Ocean Conservancy, are leaders in the global effort
to stop plastic pollution and strengthen the conservation-driven objectives of ReSource. They have helped
guide the strategy of ReSource: Plastic, and their expertise
will continue to inform the work of ReSource in upcoming
years. Furthermore, ReSource: Plastic aims to build on
and align with their programs and tools, notably the
Trash Free Seas Alliance, led by Ocean Conservancy, and
The New Plastics Economy Global Commitment, led by
the Ellen MacArthur Foundation and UNEP.

baseline assessment to measure progress annually
moving forward.

IMPLEMENTATION PARTNERS
Implementation Partners are organizations that are
employing ReSource and/or amplifying our efforts tobring impactful solutions to scale. The American
Beverage Association (ABA) became an Implementation
Partner in 2019 to align measurement methods andprogrammatic expertise with its Every Bottle Backinitiative, focused on increasing PET recycling in the
United States. This collaboration will contribute to
ReSource’s overarching goals of eliminating plastic
pollution and increasing circularity.

OTHER COLLABORATORS
ReSource is also collaborating to identify mitigation
opportunities and align our Footprint Tracker methodology with current best practices. We acknowledge andappreciate the contributions that The Recycling Partnership, Circulate Capital, and the Plastic Leak Project put
into the design of the ReSource Footprint Tracker.

5

ReSource Footprint Tracker
Results
Transparent 2020 is the first of what will be an annual series of reports that detail Members’
plastic footprints and track progress on corporate actions. This inaugural publication follows thepilot year of the ReSource Footprint Tracker methodology and demonstrates proof of concept
for a common framework to measure effective corporate action on plastic. This baseline willserve as a starting point to track the progress of ReSource: Plastic and related activities over timeand enables key recommendations for action, both internal to company supply chains andacross wider multi-stakeholder efforts.
The baseline assessment also offers insights into what immediate, collective, and other actionable interventions can be taken to improve footprint results in the years ahead (see: “Recommendations” section of report, below).

6

Methodology
The ReSource Footprint Tracker is the mechanism thatenables ReSource Member companies to measure,maximize, and multiply the impact of their actions onplastic. The methodology provides insight into how muchand what type of plastic companies use, and where it goesonce it is disposed of (the waste management outcome).

on reducing plastic pollution beyond their own supply
chain, as well as any measured impacts to date
The goals of implementing a pilot of the ReSource
Footprint Tracker included demonstrating the feasibilityof the methodology, establishing a baseline against
which progress will be measured in future years, andraising the bar for transparency and accountability for allcompanies to follow.

The big-picture view is designed to elicit data-driven
actions aligned to ReSource’s theory of change: eliminating

DATA ASSUMPTIONS AND LIMITATIONS

unnecessary plastic, shifting to sustainable inputs forremaining plastic, and doubling global recycling and

The ReSource Footprint Tracker relies on companies

composting.

providing accurate data. WWF works with Member
companies to identify inconsistencies and fill data gaps,

As such, the ReSource Footprint Tracker measures thebut the data submitted by companies for this report was

following variables for each company: the amount of

not verified or audited by a third party.

plastic used and sold by the company, polymer type andform, the source of the material, and where it goes upon

As ReSource was developed to convene the disparate

disposal—whether it circulates back into the system orvariables that contribute to the global plastic waste

becomes a wasted resource (waste management

problem into a single framework, there were inevitableoutcome).

challenges in the data collection process during this pilot
year of the methodology. Companies have had very

Additional information about each component of thedifferent systems for tracking plastic throughout their

Footprint Tracker, including survey structure, data

supply chains, and global data on plastic waste manage-

sources, assumptions, and limitations can be found inment is not consistently collected.

the appendix. A complete methodology document isunder development and is scheduled for publication in

There were three main constraints:

September 2020.
FIRST, secondary packaging and transport packaging are
PILOT & IMPLEMENTATION

not currently included in the data reported by companies.9

The pilot version of the ReSource Footprint Tracker

SECOND, some Member companies were not able toconsists of three components:

access packaging data for every country they operate in,• A survey tool that companies fill out with information

by extrapolating local sales or store count. For theseon the plastics they use and sell, which provides
summary outputs related to the composition of theirportfolio• A plastic waste management model that uses thesurvey data as an input, and estimates the share ofplastic that is recycled, landfilled, incinerated, andmismanaged based on country-level waste manage-

so in some cases the country-level data was generated
reasons, the reporting scope does vary somewhat
between Members, and detailed information about what
is included is provided in each company’s case study.
THIRD, there is limited availability of waste management
data for plastics globally, especially data on how theperformance of waste management varies acrossdifferent packaging forms and polymers. As a result,ment data and the polymer and format of the item

proxy data and assumptions have been used to fill data

• A Beyond Supply Chain survey where companies are

the lack of information on composting infrastructure

gaps, as necessary. It is also important to acknowledge

asked to provide detailed information about any

globally today, and therefore the lack of available data on

projects or investments they are involved in focusedcomposting rates.

7

FIGURE 2. ReSource Members’ aggregate reported plastic volumes by country.
Plastic Volumes (MT)≥ 519,420
188,142 – 519,419
89,349 – 188,141
26,454 – 89,318≤ 26,453

CanadaCanadaUnited States

Portu

United States

BermudaM

BermudaWestern
BahamasBahamasSaharaIslands Haiti Turks and Caicos Islands
Haiti Turks and CaicosCuba
Dominican Republic
Dominican Republic
Puerto Rico Jamaica
Puerto Rico
Jamaica
MauritBelizeCabo Verde
BelizeSaint Kitts and Nevis
Saint Kitts and Nevis
Honduras
Guadeloupe Honduras
Guadeloupe
SenegalMartinique
MartiniqueSaint Lucia
CuraçaoSaint Lucia The Gambia
Curaçao
Nicaragua
GuatamalaNicaragua
GuatamalaVincent
Aruba SaintAruba Saint Vincent
Barbados
Barbados
El Salvador
Guine
El Salvador
Trinidad and Tobago
Trinidad and TobagoGuineaGuyana
Costa Rica
GuyanaCosta
Rica
Venezuela
Venezuela
BissauSuriname
Suriname
PanamaPanamaFrench Guiana
French GuianaSierra Libe
Leone
Colombia
Colombia
Co
d’Ivo
EcuadorEcuadorMexicoMexico
Cuba

Peru
Samoa

Australia

Australia

New Caledonia

New Caledonia

BrazilSamoa
French Polynesia
Fiji

Fiji

Peru
BrazilFrench Polynesia

Bolivia

BoliviaParaguay

Chile
Argentina

New Zealand

8

New ZealandParaguay

Chile
Argentina
Uruguay

UruguayNorway

SwedenFinland Norway

SwedenRussian Federation

Finland

Russian Federation

Estonia
UnitedEstonia
UnitedLatviaKingdom
LatviaKingdom
Denmark
Denmark
Lithuania
Lithuania
Netherlands
Netherlands
BelarusBelgium
BelarusBelgium
Ireland
PolandIreland
PolandGermany
Germany
Luxembourg Czechia
Luxembourg
Ukraine Czechia
UkraineSlovakia
Slovakia
Austria Hungary France
Kazakhstan
Moldova Austria Hungary
FranceKazakhstan
Moldova
Mongolia
Mongolia
Switzerland
SerbiaSerbia Romania
MonacoRomaniaSwitzerland
MonacoSlovinia
Slovinia
AndoraBosnia & Croatia
AndoraUzbekistan
Bulgaria Bosnia & Croatia
Georgia
Uzbekistan
Bulgaria
Georgia
Kyrgystan Rep.
Kyrgystan Rep.
Herzegovinia Montenegro
Albania KosovoHerzegovinia Montenegro
KosovoAlbania Azerbaijan
Azerbaijan
ugal
Italy
Portugal
Armenia
ItalyArmenia
Macedonia
Macedonia
Spain
Spain
Turkmenistan
TurkeyTurkmenistan
Tajikistan
TurkeyTajikistan
GreeceGreece
South
Japan
Syria
Syria
Korea
Malta
Malta
Cypress
Cypress
China
China
Tunisia
Tunisia
Lebanon
Iran Lebanon Afghanistan
Iran
Afghanistan
Iraq
West
Bank
&
Gaza
Iraq
West Bank & Gaza Israel
MoroccoIsraelMorocco
KuwaitJordanKuwaitJordanNepal Bhutan
Nepal Bhutan
Qatar Bahrain Pakistan
Algeria
Qatar Bahrain
Algeria
Pakistan
Libya
Libya
Egypt
EgyptUnited Arab
United
Arab
Saudi
Saudi
Western
Emerites
Emerites Bangladesh
Bangladesh
ArabiaArabiaSaharaTaiwanIndia
India
Myanmar
MyanmarLao P.D.R.
Lao P.D.R.
Oman
tania Cabo Verde
Oman
Mauritania
Niger
Niger
Mali
Mali
Chad
Eritrea
Chad
EritreaThailandPhilippines Vietnam
ThailandRep. of Yemen
SenegalVietnamRep. of Yemen
Sudan
Sudan
The Gambia
Cambodia
Cambodia
Burkina
Faso
Burkina Faso
Djibouti
DjiboutieaGuineaBenin
Benin
GuineaNigeria
Nigeria
BruneiCentralBrunei
Ghana
Ghana
BissauEthiopiaCentral
South
Ethiopia
South
Darussalam
African Rep.
Darussalam
African Rep.
Sudan
Sudan
eria
Liberia
Togo SierraCameroon
Malaysia
Togo
Malaysia
Cameroon
Leone
Somalia Uganda
Somalia
UgandaSingapore
Singapore
Equitoral Guinea
otes
Equitoral Guinea
Cotes
Maldives
Maldives
Kenya
Congo
Kenya
oire
d’IvoireCongo
Indonesia
RwandaIndonesia
Gabon
RwandaGabon
Seychelles
Dem. Rep.
Seychelles
Dem. Rep.
BurundiBurundiof Congoof Congo
Tanzania
Tanzania

AngolaZambiaBotswanaSouth Africa

MalawiAngolaMayotteZambia
Eswatini

Zimbabwe
Namibia

Comoros

MalawiMozambique
Namibia

Lesotho

Zimbabwe
Madagascar
BotswanaSouth Africa

South
Korea

Japan

TaiwanPhilippines

Papua New Guinea

Papua New

Comoros
MayotteEswatini
RéunionMozambique
Mauritius

Madagascar

RéunionMauritius
Australia

New Caledonia

Australia

Lesotho
New Zealand9These constraints demonstrate the need for collaboration
to fill key data gaps and improve data confidence levels,

Key Findings and Results

and such efforts will be a priority for platform refinements

The Footprint Tracker includes analysis of product form

to ReSource moving forward. These efforts will include

and polymer composition, sustainable inputs to plastic,

targeted research and reporting to improve plastic waste

and waste management pathways for plastic after it ismanagement data. Additionally, Members are working todisposed. Data on Members’ plastics product form andimprove their internal data gathering processes andpolymer composition helps identify opportunities toexpand the reporting scope for coming years.

substitute, reduce, or redesign plastics that have low
recyclability rates, thus reducing unnecessary plastic.

Interpreting the Baseline Assessment
When reviewing the findings of the baseline assessment,
please consider the data limitations and assumptions as outlined in the previous section. Due to thelimited availability of detailed data in several key geographies, it is not possible at this time to meaningfully
distinguish between individual company footprint waste
management outcomes and national averages in several
regions. Therefore, waste management outcomes arereported in the aggregate in this report, and not on an
individual basis.
Additionally, this baseline assessment represents a
relatively small set of companies, which has resulted inlimitations on what can be concluded from the pilot
results. While the set of companies represent fivewell-known global companies and respective leaders intheir industries, these companies are not necessarily
representative of their respective industries globally. For
example, The Coca-Cola Company and Keurig Dr Pepper
represent about 16% market share of the non-alcoholic
beverage sector based on their sales; P&G represents
about 11% of the global fabric and home care industry;
and McDonald’s represents 19% and Starbucks represents 11% market share of the restaurant industry.10
Therefore, the aggregate results only represent the fivecompanies based on their reported data and are notnecessarily representative of wider industry trends. For
example, the geographies and specific opportunities
identified as priority largely reflect the geographical andportfolio distributions of the Members, and therefore do
not entirely match global trends. As ReSource grows, wewill work to enable broader use of the ReSource Footprint Tracker so that the aggregated data produces
more generalizable insights across industries.

Information on sustainable material inputs allows for
year-to-year tracking on Members’ conversion to these
inputs, clarifying the largest opportunities for increasing
recycled and biobased content. Calculating estimatedwaste management pathways illuminates top-priority
regions and countries to invest in increased recycling
and waste processing systems.
COMPANY PORTFOLIO AND CONTEXTIn this pilot year, ReSource Members reported a total of
4.2 million metric tons (MT) of plastic, primarily based on
2018 data. Geyer, Jambeck, and Law estimate global
annual plastic generation at 302 million MT in 2015—
141 million MT of which is from packaging.11, 12 Taking
just the packaging figure for 2015, ReSource Members’
contribution to annual global plastic use is approximately 3%. It should also be noted that The Coca-Cola
Company’s reported volumes account for a significant
portion of the total reported volume, which can skew
averages. Therefore, alternate analysis is presented
where appropriate. Waste management outcomes for
Members’ plastic footprints are primarily determined byin-country management rates and country-specificreported plastic volumes and forms. Thus, understanding the geographic distribution of reported plastic
volumes is an important consideration when interpretingthe management pathways results (Figure 2).
Results are reported in relation to ReSource’s three goals:
1. eliminate unnecessary plastic, 2. shift to sustainable
inputs for remaining plastic, and 3. double global
recycling and composting of plastic. All percentages are
by weight of plastic. Portfolios differed significantly
across ReSource Members, which can significantly
influence the average results presented below. Key
observations from the aggregate results include:• PET bottles are a significant proportion of the plastic
footprint for three of the five Member companies,

10

FIGURE 3. Polymer breakdown by form category for ReSource Members’ aggregate portfolio.
n Polyvinyl chloride (PVC)n Polystyrene (PS)n Polypropylene (PP)nH
 igh-density
polyethylene (HDPE)

n NylonnL
 inear low-density
polyethylene (LLDPE)

PS

90%

nL
 ow-density
polyethylene (LDPE)n OthernP olyethylene
terephthalate (PET)n Polylactic acid (PLA)

100%n Polycarbonate (PC)nP
 olyethylene
Terephthalate Glycol(PETG)

PS
PP

Other

PS

80%
PP

70%
60%

PET
PS

50%

PET

40%

LDPE

LDPE

PP

30%
PETG

HDPE

20%
10%
0

PET
HDPE

BottleClosure			

Mono-material
Film

Other
Flexible

ranging from 31% to 91% of the reported usage forthese three companies.

Other Rigid

Rigid Foam

Small Plastics• Lastly, small plastics,15 which are defined as being
smaller than 2 inches in two dimensions,16 account forless than 1% of the aggregate plastic footprint.

• Flexible plastic comprises 7% of the aggregate

However, the range of reported volumes reported

reported usage, ranging from 1% to 34% acrossamong Members is significant, with some Members

Member companies. LDPE is used in 77% of Members’

reporting up to 16% of their reported volumes coming

flexible plastic. In the United States, the recycling ratefrom small plastics. These small plastics require testingfor flexible plastic is 1%.13

to be considered recyclable, as small plastics are often
not incorporated into the recycling stream because of• Other rigids (e.g., cups, containers) account for 6% of

their size, as they fall between the belts and gears of

the aggregate plastic footprint and range from 0% torecycling machinery.17 Sixty-nine percent of small

51% of Members’ total reported usage. Polypropylene

plastics included in this analysis are composed of PP.

(PP) accounts for 55% of other rigids in the results.
• PP accounts for 8% of the aggregate portfolio.
According to the Environmental Protection Agency’s
2017 estimates, the polypropylene recycling rate in
the US is less than 1% for all post consumer PP, and
8% for PP used in food service packaging.14 The
opportunity to increase PP recycling in the US, as wellas the use of recycled PP in corporate supply chains, isidentified as a key action area.

PRODUCT FORM AND POLYMER COMPOSITION
The Footprint Tracker includes an analysis of productform and polymer composition (Figure 3). Understanding
the distribution of forms and polymers used by
Members can help inform mitigation actions including
opportunities to redesign, substitute material types, andadopt innovative business models to eliminate unnecessary plastic. These decisions are complex and often
11

FIGURE 4. B reakdown of recycled, biobased, and virgin content for ReSource Members’

aggregate portfolio.

Sustainable Biobased Content 1%

Other Biobased Content .04%

Recycled Content 8%

Virgin Content 91%

involve trade-offs. For example, consolidating polymer

and other innovations that would eliminate the need fortypes and formats has the potential to support highera single-use plastic item or package have been identified

recycling and composting rates by simplifying collection

by several of the Members as key strategies to be

and aggregation,18 but which polymers or formats should

implemented in coming years.

be changed and to what alternative? Another route toeliminating unnecessary plastics is to redesign the

Results suggest that opportunities to eliminate unneces-product form to reduce likelihood of landfill or misman-sary plastic vary by company portfolio. For example,

agement. Without a collective plan, this exercise could

while PP is a priority for some Members, comprising

result in a proliferation of materials and formats instead

8% of the total plastic footprint, 2% of The Coca-Colaof a consolidation. Understanding the breakdown ofCompany’s and 54% of McDonald’s portfolio comprises

applications and formats across industries is the first

PP. Further, flexibles, which are mostly not currently

step in working toward the reality of eliminating unnec-

recycled, vary across Members’ portfolio from 1% to 34%.

essary plastic.
For example, some items falling into the small plastics
category could be substituted for another material, whileothers could be eliminated through redesign or shiftingof business models to reuse or other innovative systems.
However, some small plastics are integrative to theapplication of the product, and the opportunity for somespecific formats lies in enabling and increasing recycling.
The prevalence of reusable systems is currently low,
accounting for only a small portion of the Members’
reported volumes. It should be noted that non-plastic
reusable and refillable packaging can exist in company
portfolios. This report focuses exclusively on plastic
packaging and not on overall packaging portfolios. Reuse
12

USE OF SUSTAINABLE INPUTS
After taking action to eliminate what is unnecessary,shifting to sustainable inputs for remaining plastic can
improve environmental performance. Sustainable inputs
include recycled content or responsibly sourced
biobased content19 and other advanced materials in the
future. Sustainable inputs for plastics represent between
0.4% and 11.3% of total plastic use across the Member
companies. Recycled content is the most prevalentsustainable input and accounts for 8% of the aggregate
reported volume (Figure 4). Recycled content is primarily
used in bottles, followed by small plastics and otherrigids (e.g., cups, containers). Responsibly sourced
biobased content represents 1% of input materials andis exclusively used in bottles. Other types of biobased
content, such as in the polymer polylactic acid (PLA), are

FIGURE 5. Estimated waste management

only used in 0.04% of the portfolio and are used in otherrigids, closures, and small plastics.
WASTE MANAGEMENT PATHWAYS
The waste management pathways are based on in-country
management rates and Members’ respective plastic

outcomes for ReSource Members’
aggregate plastic footprint, comparedto the Ellen MacArthur Foundation
global plastic flow estimates, including
material collected for recycling.22

n Recycling n Incineration n Landfill n Mismanaged

footprints in a given country. The estimated recycling
rate of ReSource’s Principal Members’ aggregate plastic
footprint (19%) is higher than the global estimate of28%

plastic collected for recycling (14%) reported by the Ellen

37%

MacArthur Foundation (Figure 5). As the plastic manage20

ment outcomes are estimated based on country-level
reported plastic volumes and country-specific waste

42%

management (Table 1), the ReSource Principal Members’

38%high landfill rates compared to the global estimate can
primarily be explained by high landfill estimates in the11%

United States (72%), the country where all of the
ReSource Principal Members sell their highest reported

19%

14%

Resource
Members

GlobalAveragevolumes of plastics. This concentration in the UnitedStates and the dominance of PET bottles can also
explain the comparably high recycling rates—the United

8%

States has a PET bottle recycling rate of 29%, compared
to its all-plastics recycling rate of 8.4%.21

TABLE 1. E stimated waste management breakdown by region for ReSource Members’

aggregate plastic footprint.23,24,25

REGIONRECYCLING
RATE

INCINERATIONRATELANDFILLRATEMISMANAGED
RATE

Africa

6%

0%

26%

68%

East Asia

12%

24%

11%

53%

Europe & Central Asia

41%

18%

29%

12%

Latin America & Caribbean

21%

0%

63%

16%

Middle East

4%

0%

76%

21%

North America

20%

15%

63%

2%

Oceania

13%

1%

79%

7%

South Asia

7%

0%

5%

88%

Southeast Asia

8%

4%

14%

74%

13

FIGURE 6. W aste management outcomes for rigid versus flexible plastics for

ReSource Members.

n Recycling n Incineration n Landfill n Mismanaged
Metric Tons
			41%
1,600,000
				28%1,200,000
800,00021%

		11%
400,000
					0
Rigid Plastic

2%

21%

55%

22%

Flexible Plastic

FIGURE 7. Estimated waste management outcomes by region for ReSource Members.
n Recycling n Incineration n Landfill n Mismanaged
Metric Tons
1,200,000
1,000,000
80,00060,00040,00020,000
0
North
Latin
East
America America
Asia		& Caribbean		14Europe &AfricaCentral		
Asia

South
Asia

Southeast
Asia

MiddleEast

OceaniaWaste management pathways were further calculated

low tonnage in those regions (5.8%, 5.5%, and 4.2% ofwith the distinction between rigids and flexible plastics

the global plastic footprint, respectively). Finally, the(Figure 6). Overall, the share of rigid plastic that is

Europe and Central Asia region has the fourth largest

mismanaged (28%) is higher than that of flexibles (22%)

plastic footprint in terms of tonnage, but also has thefor ReSource Members. This is due to the high use ofhighest recycling rate at 36%, which translates to arigid plastics in regions with high mismanagement rates,

decrease in landfilled and mismanaged plastics. The

specifically in East and South Asia. The differences in

landfill rate for Europe and Central Asia is their second

recycling rates between rigids (21%) and flexibles (2%) ishighest estimated waste management pathway, at 35%.

indicative of European trends. Flexibles are also26

landfilled at higher rates than rigids (55% for flexibles;
41% for rigids). A limitation of the current model is thatmismanaged rate estimates between rigids and flexibles
do not differ, which does not reflect known trends thatflexibles are mismanaged at higher rates than rigids. Thisis discussed in more detail in the Methodology section in
the appendix, and we hope to implement improvementsin the next version of the model to address this.

Country Spotlights
As waste management is determined by the recycling
and composting collection infrastructure available in agiven country, the Tracker results help identify opportunities in key geographies to reduce mismanaged plastics
and promote collection and recycling. Examining the fivecountries where Members had the highest volumes forrecycling, incineration, landfill, and mismanagement can

Regional Breakdown

help prioritize geographies for mitigation and intervention (Figure 8). We provide general estimates in aggre-

The likely waste management pathways for plastics bygate for all Members, and we also consider the top five

region are aggregated based on ReSource Members’

countries for each Member, as data can be skewed byreported plastic volumes by country within set regions

Members with higher overall reported plastic volumes.

(Figure 7 and outlined in the appendix). These regional

Because we are looking at volumes, the countries

waste management estimates are dependent on theidentified as having high opportunity for intervention will

geographical distribution of sales and proportions ofbe heavily influenced by where Members reported thevarious plastic forms within the ReSource aggregate

largest sales volumes. These countries may differ

plastic footprint and thus are not meant to be represen-significantly from the countries with the highest recy-

tative of the end-life of plastics across all sectors.

cling, incineration, landfill, or mismanagement rates in
the global waste management model. For instance,

Regionally, ReSource Members’ aggregate plastic foot-based on estimates from Jambeck et al.,27 China andprint is concentrated in North America, with lesser but

India have mismanagement rates of 76% and 87%,

still significant concentrations in Latin America and therespectively. However, Members reported significantly

Caribbean (where landfill rates are also comparatively

higher volumes in China, leading China to have a higherhigh), East Asia (where mismanaged rates are high), andestimated volume of mismanaged waste in this analysis.

Europe and Central Asia (where recycling rates arehighest globally) (Figure 7). The high landfill rates and

For total reported volume of plastic recycled, the United

high reported tonnage volumes in North America (63%States is the top country by tonnage for all Members.

of regional tonnage) and Latin America (63% of regional

The United Kingdom, Germany, and Japan are also in thetonnage) contribute to the higher aggregate landfill rate

top five countries for estimated recycled plastic volumesof ReSource Members (42%), compared to the global

for three of the five Principal Members. For incinerated

estimate of 38% (Figure 5). Further, although East Asia isplastic, the US, Japan, Germany, and China are consis-

third in terms of total tonnage, the high mismanagement

tently within the top five countries across the Members.

rate (53%) and the large footprint in China, where

For landfilled plastic, the United States is the top country

mismanaged rates are 76%, contribute to the regionin terms of estimated volume of landfilled plastic for all

having the highest total tonnage of estimated misman-

Members, with Mexico also frequently showing up in theaged plastics. Africa, South Asia, and Southeast Asia also

top five. China, Brazil, the United Kingdom, and Canada

all have high mismanagement rates (68%, 88%, 74%,

are also within the top five for landfilled plastics acrossrespectively), but ReSource Members’ have comparatively

at least two Members. Lastly, for mismanaged plastic,
15

FIGURE 8. R eSource Members’ countries by total estimated volume (top five) for each waste

management outcome.

Countries by total volume recycled (top 5)
250,000
200,000
150,000
100,000
50,000Metric Tons

0

United Mexico Germany UnitedStates			
Kingdom

BrazilCountries by total volume incinerated (top 5)
180,000
160,000
140,000
120,000
100,000
80,00060,00040,00020,0000Countries by total volume landfilled (top 5)
80,00060,00040,00020,0000

UnitedStates

MexicoBrazilChina

TurkeyChina is the top country by volume for all Members who
operate in the country, typically followed by the US, theUnited Japan Germany China
States				

South
Korea

Countries by total volume mismanaged (top 5)
450,000
400,000
350,000
300,000
250,000
200,000
150,000
100,000
50,0000

China

India Philippines Mexico Pakistan

The United States

Philippines, Indonesia, India, and Thailand, which are

The United States represents the highest reported

also seen in the top five across the Members’ plastic

volume of plastic use for each of the five Principal

footprints. The Philippines is within the top five countries

Members. It also has the highest estimated volumes offor mismanaged plastic for all Members who operate inlandfilled plastic, as landfill rates for all plastics in the US

the country due to its high estimated mismanagement

are 72% (71% and 78% for rigids and flexibles, respec-

rate (83%).

tively). However, as the management pathways of

Waste management context varies significantly acrosscountries due to variations in local collection andrecycling systems and waste processing infrastructure.
Deeper dives into identified priority countries enable amore nuanced understanding of potential interventions,specifically to address landfilled and mismanaged
plastics. Priority countries identified in the analysis are
United States, Mexico, China, India, and the Philippines.
Together, these countries represent 57.4% of ReSource
Members’ landfilled plastics, and 58.7% of Members’estimated mismanaged plastics.
16

ReSource Members’ plastic footprints are also dependent
on the form types and polymers used, the estimatedlandfill rate for the ReSource Members’ portfolio is41%—lower than the US average. This is largely due tothe high concentration of PET bottles in the Members’
aggregate plastic footprint, and the in-country recycling
rate of 29% for bottles, compared to a recycling rate of
9% for all plastics. Regardless, the high landfill rates andthe high overall tonnage within the United States resultin 17% of all ReSource Members’ plastics ending up in US
landfills—the highest estimated end-life destination
across all countries and management outcomes. The USalso has the highest tonnage of recycled plastics (5.2% ofmanagement estimates. This is because of the highall reported plastics) and is within the top two countries

proportion of rigids to flexibles in the Members’

for incinerated plastics (4.0% of all reported plastics)

portfolios.

across the Members. Further, although the US mismanagement rate for all plastics is only 2%, the sheer

Over 5% of ReSource Members’ aggregate plastic

volumes of plastics sold there means that it is in the top

footprint by reported volume is estimated to end up in

five countries by estimated volume of mismanaged

Mexico’s landfills, and Mexico is also within the top five

plastic for four of the five Principal Members. Reported

countries for recycled and mismanaged plastic in thewaste management data for the US is generally of highaggregate data. In Mexico, there are many areas where

quality due to statutory reporting responsibilities.

informal recyclers are responsible for large proportionsof the recycling undertaken.28 There is also a heavy

MexicoMexico, while only within the top five countries byreported volume for two of the five Members, is withinreliance on landfilling of waste via both informal andsanitary landfills.29

China

the top five for landfilled plastic for four of the five
Members. This is largely attributed to its high all-plastics

While the United States has the highest total tonnage,

landfill rate of 71%. However, the management pathways

China is the country with highest tonnage of misman-of ReSource Members’ plastic footprint in Mexico are

aged plastics across all the Members who operate in the

more closely aligned with the estimated management

country due to its high estimated mismanagement rates.

rates of rigids in Mexico (21% recycled, 0% incinerated,

Due to limitations of the model in differentiating waste

64% landfilled, 14% mismanaged) than the all-plastics

management outcomes for different packaging types in

17

China, the management outcomes of ReSource Members’
plastic footprint in China closely match the overall

The Philippines

estimated management rates for all plastics in the

As in Mexico, total plastic tonnage in the Philippines iscountry.

not considerable compared with other countries (1.5%With high mismanaged rates and a high total tonnage,
China is considered a priority country for mitigating
mismanagement risk. In China, recycling economies
traditionally relied on large amounts of international
plastics for recycling, while domestically, there was still a
focus on developing collection systems and relying on
landfills. It should be noted that over the past decade,
China has had several campaigns to restrict imports ofplastics, specifically through the Green Fence andNational Sword campaigns in 2013 and 2018, respectively. From 2018 to 2019, Chinese plastic imports fell by
99%, according to some experts.30 However, restricting
plastic imports has been beneficial in making domestic
recycling more valuable and a higher priority. Since early
2019, over 40 cities in China have piloted waste sorting
programs for waste and plastics.31 The Tracker does notincorporate waste imported into China, and China waste
management estimates are based primarily on datafrom 2015, and thus do not reflect potential improvements in domestic recycling over that time period. While
this is true in several cases, it is notable for China inparticular due to its priority and the recent changes to
its waste management and recycling systems driven by
the discussed policies.

of the total plastic footprint); however, the high mismanaged rate of 83% places the Philippines in the top
countries for absolute mismanaged tonnage for all thecompanies that operate in this country; it is almost
always second to China in terms of potential mismanagement. Due to limitations of the model in differentiating waste management outcomes for different packaging
types in the Philippines, the management outcomes of
ReSource Members’ plastic footprint in the Philippines
closely match the general estimates for all plastics in the
country. The Philippines’ geography as an island nation
with short pathways to the ocean contributes to its highestimated mismanagement rate, and international
policies have driven change in recent years. In thePhilippines, recycling economies providing infrastructure
for global plastics supply and waste imports have nearly
tripled from 2016 to 2018 due to the reallocation of
restricted waste exports to China.32 Domestically, there
is still a high reliance on landfilling of waste with limited
source separation of recyclables.33,34

India
India is second to China in terms of aggregate estimatedvolume of mismanaged plastics but is only in the top fivecountries for mismanagement for two Members. India’s
mismanagement rate of 87% is the highest among
priority countries and is among the highest overall. In
India, recycling economies have previously provided
infrastructure for global plastics supply, but plastic
import bans in March 2019 have mirrored China’s
approach—using import bans in March 2019 havemirrored China’s rationale for import restrictions as anopportunity to invest in domestic waste management
infrastructure.35 Domestically, there is still a high relianceon landfilling of waste, with limited source separation ofrecyclables.36

18

19

Member Case Studies

KEURIG DR PEPPEROVERVIEW AND GOALSKDP is channeling their sustainability efforts to high-impact opportunities through their Drink Well. Do
Good. corporate responsibility
platform. The Company’s portfolio
includes more than 125 owned,
licensed and partner brands suchas Keurig®, Dr Pepper®, Green

Keurig Dr Pepper (KDP)​Data provided by KDP cover consumer-facing plastic packaging during thereporting period January 1, 2018 through December 31, 2018 for the UnitedStates, Mexico, and Canada, which is comprehensive of their wholly owned
operations. Secondary packaging, transport packaging, and franchised bottled
beverage volumes are out of scope for this assessment.

Mountain Coffee Roasters®,
Canada Dry®, Snapple®, Bai®,
Mott’s®, CORE® and The Original
Donut Shop®.

FIGURE 9. I nput, polymer, and form distribution of

Keurig Dr Pepper’s plastic portfolio.

Keurig Dr Pepper’s packaging goals,
set or re-affirmed in June of 2019,are comprised of three main

InputsPolymerForm

99.7% Virgin Content
0.3%	Recycled
Content

74% PET
16% PS
8% PP
1% HDPE
1% LDPE
0% LLDPE
0% PETG
0% Nylon

73% Bottle
19% Other Rigid
5% Closure
1%	Mono-material
Film
1% Small Plastics
1% Other Flexible

components:
1. Make all K-Cup® pods in the US
recyclable by the end of 2020
2. Convert to 100% recyclable orcompostable packaging by 2025
3. Use 30% post-consumer recycledcontent across the packaging
portfolio by 2025
Eliminating packaging waste is a

Keurig Dr Pepper has a significant proportion of PET bottles, which comprise

top priority for KDP, with a focus

72% of their plastic footprint. Increasing the use of recycled PET or substituting

on holistic solutions that start with

PET with sustainably sourced biobased content pose viable opportunities fordesigning for recyclability andshifting to sustainable content. Collective action associated with improving

reducing the amount of material

actual recycling of bottles in the United States is also an identified opportunity inused. KDP’s journey to ensure thatwhich KDP is already engaged. Specifically, KDP is a founding member and

K-Cup® pods are recyclable andfunder of the American Beverage Association’s Every Bottle Back initiative, which

recycled remains a critical priority.

aims to increase available-to-use recycled PET by 20% by 2030 through investments in collection and recycling sorting, as well as consumer education.37
Another identified priority is related to polystyrene (PS) containers used forcoffee pods which, at 16% of the portfolio in 2018, were a notable contributor totheir total plastic footprint. In the US, only 0.4% of all PS and 1.8% of PS

20

packaging is recycled due to limitations on recycling infrastructure.38 KDP has
committed to completely eliminating PS from their packaging by 2020, redesigning K-Cup® pods to be made of PP.
Aligning with their commitment to eliminate unnecessary plastics, KDP has
committed to invest in light-weight options to reduce sheer tonnage of plastic.
In addition, the company develops package-free options, such as batch-brewed
coffee and fountain drinks in reusable glassware. Identifying opportunities toscale up reuse or package-free options in specific markets is a key area of action
for KDP. Lastly, KDP’s market is concentrated in the United States where landfill
rates are high; therefore, the management outcome of their portfolio is dependent on the overall performance of the US waste management and recycling
system. Engaging in collective action efforts and policy advocacy in the US is
identified as a significant opportunity for KDP, including the enabling of reuseand other alternative models.
INSIGHTS FROM KDP:The Tracker results have strong alignment with KDP’s current efforts and strategy.
For example, KDP has already made significant efforts regarding packaging
design for recyclability, with a focus on high-value materials such as PET and PP.
Smart design and material choice at KDP include eliminating unnecessary plastic
use, enabling recycling, and facilitating the use of recycled plastic — all outcomesaligned with the goals of ReSource: Plastic. KDP also designs packaging materials
to be the highest value possible for recycled plastic buyers. Current examples of
KDP’s efforts include replacing dark-colored plastics with clear plastic, making
bottle labels and caps compatible with recycling processes, and pursuing consumer education campaigns on ‘recycle right’ behavior to reduce contaminationin the recycling stream.
KDP is also focusing on material substitution for polystyrene (PS) containers. KDP
has committed to transitioning 100% of its K-Cup® pods from PS and into
recyclable, all white polypropylene (PP) by the end of 2020. In Canada, KDP’stransition to the PP container was completed in 2018, two years ahead of its
publicly stated goal. Through this process, KDP did extensive testing with material
recycling facilities (MRFs) and communities to ensure that the product was not
only recyclable by design, but that it would be recyclable in practice.
The initial pilot of the ReSource Footprint Tracker has illuminated useful insights
across participating companies and highlights areas of common polymer use andform applications. The data reinforces KDP’s partnership and collaboration
strategy to affect change and deepen impact. KDP launched this strategy in 2014as an initial investor in the Closed Loop Fund and supporter of community
projects led by The Recycling Partnership in the US. KDP is now mobilizing on

21

material-specific, regional collaborations for PET with the American Beverage
McDONALD’S CORPORATIONOVERVIEW AND GOALSWith more than 38,000 locations inover 100 countries and 69 million
guests served daily, McDonald’s is
one of the world’s largest restaurant chains. McDonald’s recognizes
the opportunity to use its scale totake action on some of these mostpressing social environmental
challenges. That’s why McDonald’s
launched its Scale for Good
commitments, which address five
key areas where it believes it canhave the greatest global impact,
including packaging and recycling.

Association and for PP in both the US and Canada. In order to optimize plastics
recycling in Canada, KDP co-founded the Circular Plastics Task Force with several
other companies. The Task Force aims to identify and trial concrete solutions toalign market needs with the plastics recycling value chain and to build a circular
plastics economy in that country. Overall, KDP has committed over $26 million tocollaborative projects and partnerships across the value chain in North America
to encourage the circular economy.
While the Tracker’s data inputs will require improvement over time, the results will
demonstrate the impact of companies investing in the future and will show
progress– something which will be critical for reusable solutions. In addition tosignificant volumes of refillable beverage servings available as batched brewed
coffee, fountain beverages and reusable glass bottles that are currently notevident in a beverage company’s plastic footprint, new options and investment inreuse infrastructure is critical. In 2018, KDP invested in LifeFuels, Inc., to accelerate the commercialization of their reusable, portable drink maker.

The majority of McDonald’s global
packaging portfolio by weight isfiber (78%) with the remaining
comprised of plastics (22%).
McDonald’s wants to use its global
scale to help accelerate a circular
economy and has made two key
commitments:
1. Source 100% of McDonald’s
guest packaging from renewable, recycled, or certified sources by 2025. This includes aninterim goal to source 100% ofprimary fiber-based guest
packaging from recycled orcertified sources where no
deforestation occurs by 2020.

McDonald’s Corporation
The data provided by McDonald’s covers consumer-facing plastic packaging,excluding pre-packaged items, during the reporting period January 1, 2018
through December 31, 2018, with some data carried over from 2017. Almost
93% of McDonald’s restaurants are owned by franchisees and therefore due to
tracking complexities this data represents an estimated 75% of the company’s
total sales volume. Secondary packaging and transport packaging are out of
scope for this assessment. Overall, plastics make up about 22% of McDonald’s
global packaging portfolio with the remaining 78% being fiber.
Cups are the most prevalent form in McDonald’s plastic footprint, comprising
42% of all plastic. This is followed by lids at 28% and utensils at 16%. Utensils areclassified as small plastics which, due to their size and shape, have limited
acceptance in recycling systems across geographies.39 Exploring opportunities

2. Recycle guest packaging in 100%for substitution or reuse models for small plastics, as well as reuse models forof McDonald’s restaurants bycups, is an identified opportunity. McDonald’s is already exploring this opportu-

2025. McDonald’s understands

nity for cups and lids, including reuse models, redesigning packaging to mini-that recycling infrastructure

mize material use, and switching to different materials. For smaller plastics suchvaries from city to city andas utensils, McDonald’s is testing alternative materials, including fiber.

country to country but plans to
be part of the solution and help

McDonald’s has a small amount of recycled content (2%) and biobased PLA

influence powerful change.

(0.1%) in their packaging portfolio, including salad bowls and bags in the US and22

cups and lids in European markets. PP is 54% of McDonald’s plastic footprint,
mostly represented by cups. Currently, there are challenges in the use ofrecycled PP for food contact applications, including an extremely limited supply,
which constrains opportunity to scale its use across product lines. This is achallenge for McDonald’s sourcing goal and directly informs the recommendations focusing on increasing PP recycling in the US.
McDonald’s market concentration is in the US, and therefore, the waste management outcomes of their portfolio are largely dependent on the overall
conditions of the US waste management system. McDonald’s also has an added
in-store opportunity to increase recycling and composting through optimizationof in-store recycling systems and customer engagement. As part of their Scalefor Good goals, McDonald’s committed to globally increasing recycling efforts,
including testing in-store recycling separation.

FIGURE 10. I nput, polymer, and form distribution of

McDonald’s plastic portfolio.

InputsPolymer

98% Virgin Content
2%	Recycled
Content
0.1%	Other Biobased
Content

54% PP
30% PS
8% PET
6% LDPE
1% Other
0% HDPE
0% PLA

Form

42% Cup
28% Lid
15% Utensil
4% Bag4% Container
4% Platter
2% Bag for Toy
1% Wrap

Finally, building upon and enhancing data collection efforts will enable morerobust insights regarding potential mismanagement pathways for McDonald’s.
Targeted waste audits in high mismanagement risk locations (e.g. China, thePhilippines, the United States, Thailand, Indonesia) will help identify the mostimportant action points moving forward. Expanding data collection efforts will
enable analysis of a broader swathe of McDonald’s supply chain in the future, toincrease the threshold of coverage beyond 75%. McDonald’s identified this as aneed in 2018 and continues to expand data collection efforts across the globe,
which will be reported annually through ReSource.

23

INSIGHTS FROM McDONALD’S
The McDonald’s packaging and recycling strategy looks at the company’s plastic
footprint and beyond, encompassing a range of initiatives to reduce the use of
packaging, switch to more sustainable materials and help customers reuse andrecycle. McDonald’s has partnered at a global and market level, including with
Quantis on the Plastic Leak Project, in order to help find solutions to drive change
at scale.
McDonald’s is pleased to see the findings in this report are aligned with thedirection of their packaging and recycling strategy, with a strong focus on
circularity. While some plastic packaging is necessary to maintain food quality,
safety, and reduce food waste, finding ways to first eliminate unnecessary plastic
use and then to responsibly manage those waste streams is key to reducing
plastic pollution. McDonald’s believes that transparent reporting and working
collaboratively across the industry will enable the collective advancement ofsolutions which help address plastic waste.
McDonald’s focuses on four key strategies to make progress on the Scale for Good
packaging goals:• Eliminate packaging through design innovation, reusable solutions, andencouraging behavior change. This includes reducing plastic in guest packaging
which is hard to recycle, is not needed for safety or functionality, and is likely toleak into the environment, such as straws, plastic bags and cutlery.
• Shift materials to use 100% renewable, recycled or certified content andstreamline the variety of materials used to enable customers to more easily
recycle packaging, without compromising on quality and performance.
• Recover and recycle by finding ways to scale up systems to allow for greater
acceptance of recycling, and making it easier for guests to recycle. This includes
partnering with companies and non-profit organizations to support thedevelopment and expansion of recycling programs for plastics and using local
restaurants to support community level anti-litter initiatives such as consumer
communication campaigns and clean-up days.
• Close the loop by using more recycled materials, including recycled plastic
content, in packaging, restaurants, and facilities, and helping to drive global
demand for recycled content.
As part of these strategies, McDonald’s uses its restaurants as mini innovation
hubs to conduct pilot tests around the world. This allows for immediate customer
feedback and identification of the best solutions to accelerate and scale acrossmultiple markets.
• Since the end of 2018, all centrally managed guest packaging does not use
foam for any local guest packaging items.
24• McDonald’s is working on increasing the recoverability of existing cups as well
as exploring additional solutions for cups. This includes becoming a founding
partner of the NextGen Consortium, to improve the recoverability of the fiber
to-go cup and to test reusable cup schemes. In Germany, McDonald’s is piloting
a program called ReCup, where customers can ask for a reusable coffee cup
and return it at partnering restaurants to be cleaned and reused.
• Across France and in some restaurants in Canada, McDonald’s has introduced
an innovative new fiber lid for cold drinks which replaces the plastic lid and ismade from 100% certified sustainable sources and recyclable materials. In
France alone this change will save 1,322 metric tons of plastic per year.
• The McFlurry ice-cream packaging no longer requires a separate plastic lid inAustralia and some markets in Asia, and this will be fully implemented acrossEurope by the end of 2020.
• An evolved, more durable, paper straw is being rolled out across Europe. In
addition, McDonald’s is offering straws upon request in several markets to cut
down material use and drive behavior change.
• McDonald’s is working to find a more sustainable solution for plastic cutlery
globally and is currently testing alternatives, including transitioning to wooden
cutlery in Australia.
McDonald’s is expanding its focus beyond packaging including the toys in Happy
Meals. A global working group is exploring the development and production of
more sustainable Happy Meal® toys, and markets around the world are currently
testing different options. Specific toy sustainability initiatives vary market-to-market. As an example, in March 2020, McDonald’s UK and Ireland pledged to remove
non-recycled and non-renewable hard plastic from its iconic Happy Meal® toys.
From 2021, every Happy Meal® in the UK & Ireland will include either a soft toy,
paper-based toy, or book.

PROCTER & GAMBLEOVERVIEW AND GOALS
P&G serves consumers around theworld, with brands including
Always®, Ambi Pur®, Ariel®,
Bounty®, Charmin®, Crest®,
Dawn®, Downy®, Fairy®,Febreze®, Gain®, Gillette®, Head
& Shoulders®, Lenor®, Olay®,Oral-B®, Pampers®, Pantene®,
SK-II®, Tide®, Vicks®, andWhisper®. P&G operates inapproximately 70 countries
worldwide.
P&G’s Ambition 2030 Environmental Sustainability program includes
a number of goals specific topackaging, including:• 100% recyclable or reusable
packaging• Decreasing our use of virgin
petroleum plastic packaging by
50%• Finding solutions to ensure no
P&G packaging finds its way toProcter & Gamble (P&G)
The data provided by P&G covers the company’s consumer-facing plastic
packaging for the reporting period July 1, 2018 through June 30, 2019, with anestimated completeness of 90% for all polymer types. Because P&G tracks dataregionally, regional plastic tonnages were proportionately divided among
countries that account for 80% of sales in each region to calculate country level
estimates. Secondary packaging and transport packaging are out of scope forthe ocean
As we advance progress against
these goals, we are guided by threeoverarching principles:• Lifecycle Thinking: Plastic
packaging can drive significant
and meaningful benefits such as

this assessment.
continues next page25

Based on the data provided for this pilot, half of P&G’s plastic footprint is HDPE
and PET bottles, a quarter of their plastic footprint is LDPE flexibles, and an
Proctor & Gamble overview
continued

eighth is comprised of PP closures. Seven percent of the portfolio is recycledcontent, which is exclusively in bottles. P&G has a goal to reduce use of virginplastic in their packaging by 50% by 2030. The intention is to achieve this goal

product protection, consumer

though a combination of eliminating unnecessary plastic, increasing use ofsafety, and GHG emission

recycled content, redesigning products, and using alterative materials. While

benefits. As we assess packaging

recycling systems exist in some geographies for mono-material films, global

material and design choices thatrecycling rates for flexible films as a broad class are low (1-2%). This represents

drive greater circularity, we arean opportunity for redesign as well as collective action on collection andcareful to look at full lifecycle

recycling. PP also generally has low recycling rates and low availability of recycled

implications to help guide ourmaterial, and represents an opportunity for collective action to improve recy-

choices and avoid unintended

clability in priority regions.

consequences.
• Waste Management Hierarchy:
We subscribe to the waste
management hierarchy and asmuch as feasible seek to

FIGURE 11. I nput, polymer, and form distribution ofProcter & Gamble’s plastic portfolio.

progress our efforts towards thehigher order and preferredsolutions within the hierarchy,

InputsPolymerForm

93% Virgin Content
7%	Recycled
Content

31% PET
25% LDPE
19% HDPE
13% PP
8% Other
4% PETG

50% Bottles
25% Flexibles
13% Closures
8%	Mixed Materials
Multi-Layer
Laminates
4% Jars

starting with source reduction
and reuse.
• Collaboration: The challenge ofplastic waste is bigger than any
one company, and we believe
collaboration across the value
chain and with civil society andgovernments will be key todriving solutions at scale. That is
one of the reasons why we joined
ReSource: Plastic—it represents
an opportunity to work withWWF and industry leaders
seeking to drive reporting tools,
which can help better inform
where strategic interventions areneeded.

Approximately one-third of P&G’s plastic footprint is in the US, while about
one-sixth is in China. Due to high estimated mismanagement rates in China andhigh landfill rates in the US, these two countries are priorities for action. By
2030, P&G aims to have no P&G packaging entering nature as pollution, which
will require broad changes in waste management systems, especially in these
key locations.
Finally, since P&G reported regional data, targeted data collection efforts in highmismanagement risk countries (e.g., China, India, the Philippines) can help
validate the Tracker’s baseline findings and provide more detailed insight for
strategy and action planning.

26

INSIGHTS FROM PROCTER & GAMBLE
The initial pilot of the ReSource Footprint Tracker proved to be helpful by reinforcing the importance of several elements of our plastics strategy, and identifying
areas where tracking and reporting could be enhanced. Elements of our existing
strategy that were validated or informed by the initial exercise included:• The Tracker highlighted that the largest portion of our plastic footprint is in the
United States, which has the highest volume of landfilled waste. While landfilling in the US serves to prevent leakage, increasing recycling rates in the US
represents a significant opportunity to drive greater circularity in the use ofplastics. Our efforts with groups like the Closed Loop Fund and The Recycling
Partnership, who are focused on increasing recycling rates in the US, are a key
part of our approach to address this opportunity.
• The Tracker highlighted that while our plastic footprint in Southeast Asia was a
relatively small portion of our overall plastic footprint, the high mismanagement rates in several countries in the region made it a major contributor to
P&G’s overall mismanaged waste. This was one of the key drivers for P&G toplay a leadership role in the formation of the Alliance to End Plastic Waste,
which is a cross-value chain effort to invest $1.5 billion over five years insolutions that will help stop the flow of plastic to the world’s oceans.
• The Tracker highlighted that ¼ of our plastic footprint was flexible packaging,which has a relatively low recycling rate. This reinforces the importance ofefforts like Materials Recovery for the Future, where we have partnered withseveral other companies to demonstrate the feasibility of curbside collection offlexible films. A large-scale pilot is now underway in the United States, and ourintent is to broadly share outputs from the pilot to enable reapplication of what
we believe will be a success demonstration of curbside collection of flexible film.
• The Tracker highlighted polypropylene (PP) as a relevant resin for P&G which
has a relatively low recycling rate. This is why we are advancing efforts like
Purecycle, a technology developed by P&G scientists that takes recovered PP
and returns it to near virgin-like state, which we have now licensed externallyfor commercial development. Based on the insights the tracker provided onpolypropylene, we are also actively exploring collaboration opportunities with
Resource members and other partners such as The Recycling Partnership thatwould serve to drive greater recycling of polypropylene.
The Tracker pilot also highlighted areas where enhancing data collection andreporting can help better inform future efforts. For example, from a waste
management standpoint, it highlighted the global need to get better data on the
management outcome of packaging in key geographies to better target specificinterventions that can have the greatest impact. From a plastic footprint standpoint, we have been tracking our use of packaging on a global and regional basis

27

for many years. The initial pilot allowed us to better understand the value of
having more granular country specific tracking, and we will be working towards
that objective.
STARBUCKS COFFEECOMPANY OVERVIEWAND GOALSAligning with its organizational
vision, Starbucks is looking ahead
with a heightened sense of urgency

Starbucks Coffee Company

and conviction that we must

The data provided by Starbucks include all consumer-facing and ‘behind thechallenge ourselves, think bigger,

counter’ plastic packaging for US company-operated stores during the reportingand do much more in partnership

period October 1, 2017 through September 30, 2018. The company’s global

with others to take care of theplastic footprint for all company-operated and licensed stores was extrapolated

planet we share. In January 2020,

based on the average plastic use of US company-operated stores and per-country

we announced our commitment tostore counts. Country- and region-specific data on polymer types were applied topursue a bold, multi-decade

the extrapolated numbers. Secondary packaging, transport packaging, non-store

aspiration to become resource

operations, and Starbucks’ CPG business are out of scope for this assessment.

positive and give more than wetake from the planet.
Starbucks has set preliminary
targets for 2030 that will be thefocus of our research and operational plans over this next year:• A 50% reduction in carbon
emissions in our direct operations and supply chain.
• 50% of our water withdrawal for

Cold cups comprise 46% of Starbucks’ plastic footprint, and are composed of PP
in the US, and PET in other markets. PP closures (lids for both hot and coldcups) comprise 12% of Starbucks’ plastic footprint. These polymers and forms
vary in their acceptance for recycling. Exploring substitution, redesign, and reuse
options is an opportunity to enable Starbucks to achieve their goal of removing
unnecessary plastics from supply chains and operations and potentially piloting
circular business models. As part of Starbucks’ recently announced sustainability
commitment, they will prioritize the shift from single use to reusable packaging.
Starbucks sources a small amount of recycled content (6%) and a smaller amountof biobased content in the form of PLA (1%); however, the majority of theirdirect operations and coffee

content is conventional virgin. A current barrier to achieving their above goals is

production will be conserved or

the limited availability of recycled PP approved for food contact applications.

replenished with a focus oncommunities and basins with

Fifty percent of Starbucks’ plastic footprint is in the United States, while the nexthigh water risk.

highest market is China with only 12% of their plastic footprint. The US andChina both have relatively high landfilling rates, and China has a high estimatedcontinues next page

mismanagement rate, making these two markets the priorities for action.
Starbucks has made a commitment to become resource positive, including
eliminating waste and moving to reusable packaging.40 Focusing this work in theidentified priority regions is an opportunity to maximize outcomes and has thepotential to accelerate uptake of reusable systems and improve recycling,
composting, and collection across the restaurant and beverage sectors.
Finally, since Starbucks reported extrapolated data based on plastic use in US
stores, targeted data collection efforts in high mismanagement risk countries

28

(particularly China, Indonesia, and the Philippines) can help validate the Tracker’s
baseline findings. Enhanced data collection efforts in the future would ensure astrong data foundation for more specific action plans and opportunity evaluation.
While the recycling rate for PET is higher than other polymer types, this is driven
by water and soda bottles. Thus, it is not necessarily true for PET food service
packaging when compared to PP food service packaging. Both rigid PP and rigid
PET (non-bottles) are equivalent in their levels of recyclability claims and labelingin the most recent guidance from How2Recycle. More importantly, Starbucks
41

intentionally chooses PP for its cold cups, because on a per cup basis, it has a
35% lower carbon footprint than one made from PET, based on a comparative
Life Cycle Analysis conducted by Starbucks. This is because PP allows for
significantly less material by weight than PET, due to its lower density and higher
performance properties.

Starbucks overview continued• A 50% reduction in waste sent tolandfill from stores and manufacturing, driven by a broader
shift toward a circular economy.
To underscore this commitment,
Starbucks joined Ellen MacArthur
Foundation’s New Plastics
Economy Global Commitment,setting ambitious circular targets
for our packaging, as well as the
ReSource: Plastic platform tomeasure our progress and

FIGURE 12. I nput, polymer, and form distribution ofStarbucks’ plastic portfolio.

implement meaningful interventions.
This is an aspiration that we takeon, recognizing it will come with

InputsPolymerFormchallenges and will requiretransformational change. We also
know that leadership in sustain-

93% Virgin Content
6%	Recycled
Content
1%	Other Biobased
Content
0%	Sustainable
BiobasedContent

52% PP
29% PET
13% HDPE
5% LDPE
4% PS
1% PLA
0% PVC

51% Other Rigids
20% Closures
15% Bottles
7% Other Flexibles
5% Small Plastics
2%	Mono-material
Filmability takes commitment, investment, innovation, and partnership,and so we are excited to work withWWF and the ReSource: Plastic
Members to reduce plastic waste.

INSIGHTS FROM STARBUCKS
Regarding the Tracker findings focused on unnecessary plastics, Starbucks is wellon the way to reducing its single use plastic usage. Starbucks is taking specificactions in alignment with this analysis, namely:• In July 2018, Starbucks announced it would phase out plastic straws from morethan 30,000 stores worldwide by 2020. The new lightweight, strawless cold
drink lid will complete its roll out in 2020. The core PP straw will be replacedwith an alternative material later in early 2021.

29

• Starbucks is continuing R&D efforts to find alternative materials for difficult-to-recover plastics, reduce plastic usage through lightweighting, and
THE COCA-COLA COMPANYOVERVIEW AND GOALSThe Coca-Cola Company’s vision of
a World without Waste guides theirapproach to this topic. They work
to reduce the impact of packaging
waste on the environment throughincorporate recycled plastic into our packaging.
• In January 2020, Starbucks announced they will prioritize the shift from single
use to reusable packaging.
• Starbucks assesses all new packaging items as well as changes to existing items
by completing a full life cycle analysis to inform the business as it shifts to amore sustainable packaging offering

partnerships with bottling partners,

To further commit to making operations more sustainable, in 2019 Starbucks

NGOs, regulators, retailers, local

joined the Ellen MacArthur Foundation New Plastics Economy to make thecommunities, and competitors. The

following commitments:

development of more complete
data and metrics is critical toadvancing this work. In January
2018, The Coca-Cola Company
established three fundamental• Take action to help eliminate problematic or unnecessary plastic packaging by2025• Take action to move from single-use towards reuse models where relevant by 2025

goals:• 100% of plastic packaging to be reusable, recyclable, or compostable by 2025

• Make packaging 100% recyclable• Use 5-10% recycled content across all plastic packaging used by 2025

globally by 2025—and use atleast 50% recycled material in
our packaging by 2030.
• Collect and recycle a bottle orcan for each one sold by 2030.

More broadly, Starbucks recognizes that its targets and aspirations will come withchallenges and will require transformational change. We also know that leadershipin sustainability takes commitment, investment, innovation, and partnership.
For these reasons, we are excited to continue working with WWF and the
ReSource: Plastic Members to reduce plastic waste.

• Bring people together to supporta healthy, debris-free environment.
Underlying these three goals is theneed for more inclusive collection
rates to include all consumer
packaging, for stronger accountingof plastic packaging that reflects
the breakdown of packaging byunits sold, and for the use of moremeaningful metrics to drive
progress toward stated goals.

The Coca-Cola Company
The data provided by The Coca-Cola Company covers all consumer-facing plastic
packaging during the reporting period January 1, 2018 through December 31,
2018. Secondary packaging, transport packaging, and packaging items withvolumes over three liters or three kilograms are out of scope for this assessment.
Closures and labels were not reported separately; however, the volume of closures
was estimated by WWF based on understanding of global industry averages and
The Coca-Cola Company’s regional split of resin type usage for closures.
The Coca-Cola Company’s reported plastic footprint is 91% comprised of PET
bottles, which have high recyclability generally around the world. The next
highest reported volume form is closures representing 8% of their reported
footprint (75% of closures comprised of HDPE, and 25% comprised of PP). Finally,
LDPE flexible plastics are 1% of The Coca-Cola Company’s reported footprint.

30

The Coca-Cola Company has completed several activities focused on reuse,including a portfolio analysis, piloting, and implementation of key reuse initiatives. They have set a goal focused on innovating technologies, such as the
Coca-Cola Freestyle® soda fountain, to enable the use of reusable cups/bottles;
this aligns with ReSource’s goal of eliminating unnecessary plastics. The Coca-Cola
Company has also invested USD $25 million in reusable PET bottles and $400
million in expanding reuse infrastructure.42 The company has set specific reusetargets—e.g., a target of 50% reusable packaging by 2030. Setting and reportingon reuse targets in key markets are increasingly important components ofpublic commitments.

FIGURE 13. I nput, polymer, and form distribution of

Coca-Cola Company’s reported plastic portfolio.

InputsPolymerForm

90% Virgin Content
8.6%	Recycled
Content
1.6%	Sustainable
BiobasedContent
0.4%	Other Biobased
Content

91% PET
6% HDPE
2% PP
1% LDPE
0.2% PC

91% Bottles
8% Closures
1% Other Flexibles

Nine percent of The Coca-Cola Company’s bottles are made of recycled content,
while 2% of bottles and 2% of their plastic footprint are made of responsibly
sourced biobased content. The Coca-Cola Company has set a goal of at least
50% recycled materials for packaging by 2030. Activities working toward thisgoal include 100% rPET bottles in 16 countries, including Japan, the Philippines,
Peru, Western Europe, and South Africa.
The company also aims to collect and recycle the equivalent of every bottle andcan it sells globally by 2030, which will require beyond supply chain action given
varying regional capacities. Regional priorities for promoting collection andrecycling should include China, India, and Mexico. While in North America(United States and Canada) the recycling rate for bottles is 29%, according to theanalysis The Coca-Cola Company’s highest reported usage volumes by region
are in Latin America and the Caribbean, where recycling rates for rigids areapproximately 21% (specific bottle recycling rates were unavailable). Based on
the Tracker analysis, the most significant countries for mismanagement are
China and India, respectively.
31

It is important to acknowledge the current limitations in publicly available data
regarding waste management outcomes for PET bottles. Robust, publicly
available waste management data is only available for a select few regions of theworld (primarily North America and Europe). Due to their value and recyclability,
it is likely that PET bottles are recycled at a higher rate than most other plastic
packaging items, including in areas of high mismanagement. However, withoutrobust polymer- and form-specific data to substantiate this, we often have torely on data sources for plastics more broadly. The current analysis may
therefore underestimate recycling rates and overestimate mismanagement
rates for PET bottles in many regions. Utilizing beverage industry estimates toinform future iterations of the waste management model is being explored.
INSIGHTS FROM THE COCA-COLA COMPANY
The takeaways from this analysis are aligned with many activities alreadyunderway at The Coca-Cola Company. In addition to the efforts on reuse andrecycled content discussed in the analysis, activities to address closures are being
pursued. Aligned with the need to reduce and redesign small plastics, the Coca-Cola
company has been leading the industry in lightweighting of closures, removing
approximately 20% of plastic from these compared with three years ago. On theuse of recycled plastic, in addition to increasing the use of rPET in bottles, the firstever recycled HDPE content in closures was launched in 2019 in Dasani® products.
Additionally, increasing transparency about packaging footprints is critical in
helping industry, government and key stakeholders prioritize areas of action.
But significant data gaps exist across supply chains, particularly on the fate ofpackaging materials after use by consumers.
Beverage packaging is some of the most highly collected material in plastics
recycling, as PET is a high value plastic that can sustain a circular economy.
However, collection and recycling rates for PET beverage containers are not yet
fully reflected in models that look generally at all plastics. We need to learn fromwhat’s working in some areas and apply it more broadly to others.
As examples, 2018 collection rates for PET as reported by the beverage industry
were 77% for China, 82% for India and 56% for Mexico. And these rates didn’t
happen by accident. Recycling programs targeted at beverage containers are
successful in many markets. In Mexico, the cross-industry platform, ECOCE, raises
awareness about recycling, encourages consumers to recycle and helps support
informal sector collection. Organizations like PetStar turn old bottles into newbottles, and through high rates of collection, we are even able to produce bottles
with 100% recycled content, as we now do in over 16 markets.
Industry has a real role to play in helping improve data on the fate of packaging
materials in the marketplace. We need our industry peers and supply chain
partners to engage in platforms like ReSource plastic so we get an accurate
picture of the global situation, and can prioritize future collective action.
32

33

Recommendations for Action
The pilot year of ReSource: Plastic identified several key takeaways for Members to target whendeveloping interventions, as well as broader insights on what actions and information areneeded for the private sector to drive progress on the plastic pollution crisis. These learnings
and opportunities have been categorized below using the three goals that ReSource strives for:eliminating unnecessary plastic, shifting to sustainable inputs for remaining plastic, and doubling
global recycling and composting. All three of these categories of action are needed, as there isno one action that can solve the plastic waste crisis. Therefore, one product or application may
need multiple action points—for example, moving to a reuse system for some demand, and also
working to increase recycled content in the portion that can’t be changed to a reusable system.
ReSource’s Principal Members intend to use the takeaways from this analysis to inform theirstrategies and focus action, and they will share learnings and progress in the next report.

34

Eliminating Unnecessary Plastic

Shifting to Sustainable Inputs forthrough Business Model Innovation,

Remaining Plastic

Reduction, and Substitution
BUILD ON EFFORTS TO REDUCE AND REDESIGNSMALL PLASTICS
Small plastics, such as utensils, coffee stirrers, andstraws less than two 2x2 inches in two dimensions, are asignificant category for three of the five ReSource
Principal Members. Small plastics are often not incorporated into the recycling stream,43 which presents
opportunities to implement reduction and substitution
in some cases, and to improve uptake into recycling
streams via sorting equipment (initial or secondary),collective action, product design, and/or policy engagement in others. Members have committed to working
toward eliminating specific single-use plastics, and thisshould remain a priority. For example, Starbucks has
committed to eliminating plastic straws across global
stores and providing reuse products for in-store
consumer consumption.
EXPLORE REUSABLE PACKAGING AND SERVICESYSTEMS
Reuse systems are estimated to have the potential toreplace 20% of single-use plastic packaging,44 and several
ReSource Members have identified these systems as key
to their strategies moving forward. Opportunities exist,
particularly for cups, utensils, and other high-volume,
low-recyclability products, especially in high-volume anddensely populated markets. The baseline results indicatethat implementation on this front is very much still intesting phases across the board. Drivers for the relatively
small volumes reported in reusable formats likely include
both the fact that these efforts have only begun relatively
recently, and lack of existing supports for reusable formats(in regulations, in retail settings, etc.). Setting and reportingon reusability targets at the country level are recommended,
as conditions are highly variable. Additionally, collaboration
on localized solutions (i.e., across companies operating inthe same area) should be investigated, as these have
proven successful under certain conditions. In order for
reusable packaging systems to be successful on a significant
scale, cooperation across supply chains and industries isneeded, and restaurants and retailers must engage thepublic to test promising models.

SCALE RECYCLED CONTENT AVAILABILITY AND USE
THROUGH COLLECTIVE ACTION
Recycled and responsibly sourced biobased content ofplastics ranged from 0.4% to 11.3% across all five
Members, with higher concentrations in some markets
and for some package types, like bottles in Europe.
These results call out a clear need to accelerate the useof recycled content and support continued efforts topromote industry-wide availability and adoption ofrecycled content. Collective action around sustainable
inputs and disincentivizing virgin plastic should continue
to be a priority for Member portfolios. Compared to theMembers’ goals, the current level of recycled content is
low and indicative of the larger challenge aroundavailability of consistently high-quality recycled resin.
This is true for all plastics, even the most widely recycled
PET bottle.
While many companies have committed to increasing
their recycled content in the coming years, evidence
indicates that the current supply of recycled plastic is not
sufficient to meet demand for high-quality recycledplastic.45 Furthermore, the current recycling infrastructure in the United States, identified as an opportunity
due to high landfill rates and reported sales volumes, isinsufficient to deliver on our shared circular economy
goals, and according to The Recycling Partnership will
require $500 million in investments to meet demandand function effectively.46
There are examples of successful recycling markets insome places, providing a proof point of what is possible.
So far, bottles have been the most significant applicationof recycled content, and films are the second largest (forsecondary and non-contact packaging).47 There areseveral cases of policies mandating the use of recycledcontent in certain products—these include the European
Union (requirement for 30% recycled content for bottles
by 2030) and for Oregon in the US.48,49 Learning fromprevious successes in scaling recycled content can help
accelerate current efforts.50
Collective action in this space, where many stakeholders
commit to purchasing recycled content in future years,

35

can be especially beneficial in bolstering markets,t as it

their fossil-based counterparts, but there is still a needsignals continued demand. However, as has been seen

to drive interventions to improve end-of-life manage-

in the past, it can be a challenge to make progress whenment of these materials.

price parity between recycled and virgin content does
not exist. Leaders are needed who follow through oncommitments to sourcing recycled plastic, even when

Doubling Global Recycling andthe market price of recycled content is above that ofComposting of Plastic

virgin plastic.
In order to further deliver on high-quality recycling
streams, action to increase the recyclability of plastic
packaging is a complementary effort to the use ofrecycled content. This means following existing standards
for recyclability and reducing the variety of material
composition, additives, and colors, aiming for a harmonization of plastic materials. Simplifying the plastic palettecan enable a cleaner and more efficient recycling stream.

INCREASE POLYPROPYLENE RECYCLING IN THE US,
AND INCREASE ITS USE IN CORPORATE SUPPLYCHAINS
PP is significant for four of the five Principal Members
and is the highest-reported-volume polymer for two of
the Members. Currently, there is a huge mismatch
between demand for high-quality, recycled PP and actual
availability of recycled PP. According to the Association of
Plastic Recyclers (APR), in North America alone, demand

INCREASE USE OF SUSTAINABLY SOURCED
BIOBASED CONTENT WHERE APPROPRIATE

for recycled PP holds at 1 billion pounds annually.54
Incorporating a larger share of recycled PP into existing

As with recycled content, the supply of sustainably

PP supply chains can reduce the direct consumption

sourced biobased content will need to increase in orderof crude oil and gas and achieve energy savings as

to meet the demand laid out in company commitments

compared to virgin PP. Despite previous challenges

in upcoming years. Sustainably sourced biobased

in recycling polypropylene, The Recycling Partnershipcontent can play an important role in the circularreleased a joint statement along with Closed Loopeconomy, filling in demand for virgin plastic afterPartners, The Association of Plastic Recyclers, andreduction and reuse strategies have been prioritized andGreenBlue in February 2020 in support of polypropylene

when recycled content is not available or cannot be used

as a valuable material in the circular economy whose

for the application.

recycling at scale is possible.55 There is an opportunity
for industry collaboration to increase PP recycling in the

Sourcing biobased content must be done within theUS, including improving quality and bolstering markets

context of the One Planet Perspective, ensuring that ourfor recycled PP. There are specifics to be considered,sourcing decisions are respecting the limits of natureincluding availability of clear recycled PP, and theand not trading one negative impact for another.

acceptance (and consistent quality to warrant accep-

Biobased plastic can provide environmental advantages

tance) of recycled PP for food contact. Collective action

over virgin fossil-based plastic, but it must be sourced

opportunities on this topic are emerging, such as theand managed responsibly to realize this potential.

Polypropylene Recycling Coalition led by The Recycling

Metric-based decision making51 and adherence to aPartnership.

credible standard such as the Roundtable for Sustainable
Biomaterials52 are highly recommended. The Bioplastic
Feedstock Alliance, convened by WWF, provides thought
leadership on the responsible sourcing of bioplastics,
and the role of bioplastics in circular systems.53 Biobased
plastics are not a solution for plastic pollution, as they
face the same end-of-life challenges as traditional plastic,
and in most cases are as likely to become plastic
pollution as fossil-based plastics. If appropriately
sourced, they may offer environmental advantages over36

DEVELOP ACTION PLANS THAT FOCUS ON THE
LARGEST COUNTRY-LEVEL OPPORTUNITIES
While the highest estimated volumes of mismanaged
plastic are concentrated in East and South Asia (specifically China and India), countries vary in significance foreach company’s footprint. The Philippines was thesecond-highest country for estimated mismanagement
volume for several companies, following China. Othernotable countries for mismanagement in Asia include

geographies, specifically targeted at addressing highIndia, Indonesia, and Thailand. Within Latin America,

mismanagement rates in China and Southeast Asia and

Mexico is in the top five countries for mismanagement

high landfill rates in North America and Latin America

for four ReSource Members. Although there are limita-

and the Caribbean.

tions to current mismanagement estimates, the regions
identified in this report provide an important opportu-

Additionally, opportunities to collaborate with NGOs andnity for action for ReSource Members. We encourageconservation groups to improve recycling and engage

companies to contextualize these insights with findings

local waste pickers could also be explored in China andfrom other data sources, whether internal reports orSoutheast Asia where informal waste management is

industry sources, to ensure a robust approach. Morehigh.56, 57 However, these projects require strong social

broadly, we recommend that companies undertake theand environmental safeguards, and are therefore

Tracker assessment or similar measurement activities tocurrently time and resource intensive. Project standards,

understand the largest opportunities for action andwhich are currently emerging on this topic, have thecreate country-level action plans.

potential to reduce barriers to engagement on these
activities if they are created and managed according to

Although the US has a low estimated mismanagement

best practices that ensure inclusion and environmental

rate (2% for all plastics), it has very high reported sales

performance.58, 59

volumes and therefore is listed in the top five countries
from a volume perspective for estimated mismanagement. Further, the high landfill rates of 72% in the United

Other Opportunities

States makes it the top country for landfilled plastics
across the plastic footprint of all Member companies

FILL DATA GAPS AND SHARE INFORMATION

and presents the single largest opportunity to increase
recycling.

There are ongoing challenges for data collection andquality related to the production, use, disposal, andFor this reason, the United States, Mexico, China, India,

waste management outcomes of plastics. As a global

and the Philippines were identified in the analysis ascommunity, we need more complete data from multiple

priority countries for the Members to foster systems

stakeholders—cities, national level agencies, andimprovements in waste management collections andcompanies. The low and medium data confidence

processing. Together, these countries represent 57.4%

underlying many of the Tracker’s results underlines thisof ReSource Members’ landfilled plastics, and 58.7% ofneed. At the national level, there is a demand forMembers’ estimated mismanaged plastics.

consistent reporting of municipal solid waste management (MSW) using standardized definitions. Until more

IDENTIFY OPPORTUNITIES TO INCREASE
RECYCLING IN SPECIFIC GEOGRAPHIES

comprehensive MSW reporting is rolled out, any

As waste management footprints in these countries will

recycling, composting, and other forms of management

always be dependent on the overall performance andfunction of country waste management systems, efforts
to increase recycling and composting and close leakage
points at a system level are necessary to successfully
address the issue. While individual companies have
limited and variable influence in this arena, they canamplify this influence by joining collective action efforts.
Such efforts can take the form of engagement in country
level dialogues for improved policy and regulatory
measures for waste management systems and theimplementation of circular systems in the identified

mitigation strategies will be based on an incomplete
understanding of rates of collection, sanitary landfill,
at a country level. The highly variable data quality andlack of country-level reporting on this issue represent asignificant impediment to prevention of plastic leakage.
Innovation is necessary to accelerate data collection, as
it is clear that traditional national reporting is not currently
sufficient. However, which innovative methods will bepractical and reliable remain to be seen. It is the intention of ReSource to further explore how this acceleration
can be accomplished. Furthermore, long-term successwill likely require policy action at an international level, toensure consistent reporting across borders.60

37

Areas for action on this topic over the next year for

Additional data gaps for future research and reporting

Member companies could include 1. identifying opportu-

include more comprehensive data collection focused on

nities for improvement in supply chain data collection

China, particularly due to the recent changes in its waste(e.g., selecting locations and providing transparent

management and recycling industries in recent years;

protocol for waste or supply chain audits depending on

information on recycling for different plastic types (e.g.,company structure), 2. refining internal data collection

rigid vs. flexible); updating and refining information

for a year two assessment based on the pilot’s lessons

regarding the scale and relevance of informal recycling inlearned, and 3. targeting data collection to high-misman-key markets; and information regarding the prevalence

agement-risk locations.

of industrial and home composting for plastic. The latter
is important in order to establish a baseline for the

The lack of data on waste management globally is aprevalence of composting,61 which is necessary to track

shared challenge—no one institution can address it

progress and design interventions appropriately.

alone, and coordinated collective action is needed.

ReSource: Plastic will continue to look for opportunities to

ReSource: Plastic will continue to drive progress on thisaccelerate and amplify current data collection efforts.

front through public release of our Tracker methodology
and advocacy for improved measurement by companies
and at national levels through relevant government
agencies. International coordination of plastic datacollection efforts will vastly improve our ability to makescience-based decisions regarding plastics sustainability
and reduction of plastic pollution.

38

Thought Partner Insights“

This initial report provides valuable insights, including the types of plastics being
utilized across geographies. This is critical as it may ultimately allow for greater
mitigation efforts, such as the elimination of unnecessary plastic and/or allow forredesign to support higher recycling rates through consolidation. It is also important to recognize that this is just the beginning of the data collection and there is a
lot more we can learn as more data is provided. The Footprint Tracker has thepotential to track real progress made by these and additional companies in theyears ahead. We look forward to seeing the results and tying them to the work of
the Trash Free Seas Alliance.”“– Edith Cecchini, Project Director for Corporate Strategy
and Policy, Ocean Conservancy

In the past few years it has become evident that we must radically speed up thetransition to a circular economy for plastic, in which it never becomes waste or
pollution. We must eliminate the plastics we don’t need, innovate to ensure thatthe plastics we do need are reusable, recyclable, or compostable, and circulate all
the plastic items we use to keep them in the economy and out of the environment.
The New Plastics Economy Global Commitment has brought unprecedented
transparency on industry action, highlighting progress on elimination of and innovation for plastic packaging. We welcome WWF’s inaugural ReSource: Plastic reportas a step towards building further transparency on the circulation and after-use
fate of plastic packaging across different geographies.”– Sander Defruyt, Lead of the New Plastics Economy initiativeat the Ellen MacArthur Foundation

39

40

Moving Forward
ReSource: Plastic aims to fill a critical gap by helping companies translate large-scale plastic
commitments into meaningful and measurable action. In the first year since launch in May 2019,
ReSource took the critical step of defining what “meaningful” and “measurable” look like throughaddressing an important missing piece of the puzzle: a common measurement framework.
By measuring and tracking Members’ progress to the same standard, the ReSource Footprint
Tracker bolsters accountability not just for individual companies, but across an entire system.
It also enables companies to identify common pain points, which in turn can catalyze collective
action toward solving them. The plastic pollution crisis requires solutions at scale that matchits daunting scope—and through a common measurement framework, we are hopeful thatcollaboration will flourish and set the path toward transformational change. The baseline
assessments shared in this report will provide that vantage point from which companies can not
only collaborate effectively, but shape their strategies at large, and we look forward to reportingon the progress they yield next year and on an annual basis to follow.
Furthermore, we aim to adapt and improve as more information becomes available in the near
future. Several significant efforts are underway across the spectrum of actors in this space, which
we predict will advance the current knowledge state and enable more precision in solution
pathways. Converging efforts will be key to success, and we are already working toward the goalof aligning metrics, reporting, and targeted interventions with our Thought Partners on theirsignature initiatives, The New Plastics Economy Global Commitment and The Trash Free Seas
Alliance.
As our research demonstrates that 100 influential companies have the power to prevent roughly
10 million metric tons of plastic waste per year, we seek to recruit at least 100 ReSource
Members. While there is a need for mitigation across many industry sectors, in the short term,
ReSource will continue to target the food and beverage and fast-moving consumer goods sectors,
while expanding our engagements into retail, hospitality, and technology. Long-term plansinclude a much more diverse portfolio of Member companies, from clothing and footwear tosolution providers so that we can collectively meet the challenge of plastic pollution. While somecompanies have already set ambitious goals, others are just getting started, and all would benefit
from a clear roadmap. Given limited time and resources, prioritizing actions to improve a
company’s sustainability performance will continue to be a challenge. ReSource: Plastic provides
the framework and the platform to drive progress in our shared fight against plastic pollution.

41

Glossary
Advanced Materials

Mono-material Film

Advanced products are those that are sustainably

Recycled content is post consumer recycled content andproduced, mitigate climate change, and reduce the risk

does not include pre-consumer recycled content.

of fossil depletion. This term typically captures future

Post consumer recycled content is defined as thematerials innovations that are currently in the design

proportion, by mass, of post consumer recycled material

stage or at a very small scale. We align with the Round-in a product or packaging.

table for Sustainable Biomaterials’ Advanced ProductsStandard.

Shrink Film
Shrink film is a plastic material that shrinks in size when

Bottleheated to conform to the item(s) packaged.

A bottle is a form of rigid packaging having a compara-

Source: ISO 21067: 2016

tively narrow neck or mouth with a closure and usuallyno handle.

Stretch Wrap

Source: ISO 21067: 2007

Stretch wrap is a material that elongates when applied
under tension and which, through elastic recovery,

Closureconforms to item(s) packaged.

Closures include caps and closures that would be left on

Source: ISO 21067:2016

containers going to recycling. Caps/closures that would
be disposed separately from the primary container

Other Flexible

would fall under small plastics (problematic to recycle as

Other flexible includes multi-material/laminate films.

separate components due to size).
Other Rigid
Compostable

The “other rigid” category is used to capture rigids that

Packaging or a packaging component is compostable if it

are not classified as bottles, closures, foamed rigids, oris in compliance with relevant international compostability

small plastics.

standards and if its successful post consumer collection,(sorting), and composting are proven to work in practice

Recyclable

and at scale.

Packaging or a packaging component is recyclable if

Source: EMF Global Plastics Commitment

its successful post-consumer collection, sorting, andDurable Productpackage is considered recyclable if its main packaging

Durable goods are products with a life span of threecomponents, together representing greater than 95% ofyears or more.

the entire packaging weight, are recyclable according to

Source: US Environmental Protection Agency

this definition, and if the remaining minor components

Mismanaged Waste

hinder the recyclability of the main components.

We follow the definition of mismanaged waste outlined

Source: EMF Global Plastics Commitment

by Jambeck et al. 2015: “material that is either littered orinadequately disposed.” Mismanaged waste typically
includes uncontrolled landfills and open dumps, wastethat is not collected, and waste that is littered. Thus, thisvalue is not how much plastic enters the ocean, butrather a potential volume that is not adequately
managed, which has the potential to enter ecosystems.
42

recycling are proven to work in practice and at scale. A

are compatible with the recycling process and do notRecycled Content

Sustainable Plastic Inputs

Recycled content is post consumer recycled content andSustainable plastic inputs as referred to throughout thisdoes not include pre-consumer recycled content.

report include recycled content, responsibly sourced

Post consumer recycled content is defined as thebiobased content, and advanced materials.

proportion, by mass, of post consumer recycled material
in a product or packaging..
• Pre-consumer recycled content is defined as material
diverted from the waste stream during a manufacturing process.
Source: ISO 14021:2016

Responsibly Sourced Biobased Content

Unnecessary Plastic
Unnecessary plastic is plastic that, if not used, would not
create adverse environmental or social trade-offs—
related to, for example, energy use, food waste, or
quality of life.
Polymer Classification

Responsibly sourced biobased content is, at a minimum:

List of Polymers for Single Use Plastics

1. Legally sourced;

Acrylonitrile-butadiene-styrene

Abbreviation

copolymer

ABS

Ethylene vinyl alocohol

EVOH

High-density polyethylene

HDPE

Low-density polyethylene

LDPE

4. Must provide environmental benefits.

Linear low-density polyethylene

LLDPE

Credible certifications such as the Roundtable on

Nylon

Nylon

Other

Other

sourced biobased content and post consumer recycled

Polybutylene adipate terephthalate

PBAT

content as constituting sustainable plastic inputs.

Polybutylene succinate

PBS

Source: Bioplastics Feedstock Alliance (https://bioplasticfeedstockalliance.org/)

Polybutylene succinate adipate

PBSA

Polycarbonate

PC

Rigid Foam

Polyethylene furanoate

PEF

Polyethylene terephthalate

PET

Polyethylene terephthalate Glycol

PETG

Polyhydroxyalkanoate

PHA

Polylactic acid

PLA

dimensions require testing to determine the appropriate

PolypropylenePP

APR recyclability category. These small packages are lost

Polystyrene

PS

Polyvinyl chloride

PVC

Polyvinyl alcohol

PVOH

2. Derived from renewable biomass and must pose no
adverse impacts on food security;
3. Does not have negative impact on land conversion,
deforestation, or critical ecosystems; and,

Sustainable Biomaterials certification can help ensure
responsible sourcing. Together, we consider responsibly

Forms under the “rigid foam” category include rigid
products made from foamed polymers, typicallypolystyrene (PS).
Small Plastics
Small plastics are items smaller than 2 inches in two

to the plastic recycling stream.
Source: The Association of Plastic Recyclers

43Appendix
TABLE A1. Form description and classification

Packaging
Classification

Form Category(Column E)

Form Category Definition

Form Description Examples(Column)

BottleA form of rigid packaging having acomparatively narrow neck or mouthwith a closure and usually no handle.
Source: ISO 21067:2007

BottleClosureIncludes caps and closures that would
be left on containers going to recycling.
Caps/closures that would be disposed
separately from the primary container
would fall under small plastics (problematic to recycle as separate components due to size)

Screw caps on plastic bottles

Rigid Foam

Rigid products made from foamed
polymers, typically Polystyrene (PS).

Foamed products like EPS
cups, foamed PS plates, egg
cartons, meat and produce
trays

Other Rigid

Category used to capture rigids that are
not classified as bottles, closures,
foamed rigids, or small plastics.

Solid cups, jars, disposable
utensils, thermoforms, trays,
blisters, non-foam clamshells

Small Plastics

Items smaller than 2 inches in two
dimensions require testing to determine the appropriate APR recyclability
category. These small packages are lostto the plastic recycling stream. Source:
APR

Plastic coffee sticks, coffee
pods

Raw Material

Polymer used as raw material for
manufacturing plastic products or
packaging

Polymer pellets used as
primary content of molded or
extruded product; polymer
used as coating or barriermaterial

Mono-material Film

Includes monomaterial stretch andshrink films or monomaterial film bags
and sacks that are suited for recycling.

Pallet wrap, stretch or shrink
wrap around products forshipment, single-use plastic
grocery bags

RIGID

RIGID/FLEXIBLE

Shrink film: plastic material that shrinks
in size when heated to conform to theitem(s) packaged. Source: ISO 210671:2016
FLEXIBLE

Stretch wrap: material that elongateswhen applied under tension and which,through elastic recovery, conforms toitem(s) packaged. Source: ISO 210671:2016
Other Flexible

44

Other Flexible would include multi-material/laminate films.

Direct product packaging,laminated beverage or foodpouches, metallized films,
snack bags and wrappers

TABLE A2. L
 ist of countries reported by ReSource Members and the regional groupings

used in the analysis.

RegionCountry

Africa	Algeria, Angola, Benin, Botswana, Burkina Faso, Burundi, Cabo Verde, Cameroon, Chad, Comoros,
Côte d’Ivoire, Democratic Republic of the Congo, Djibouti, Egypt, Eswatini, Ethiopia, Gabon, Gambia,
Ghana, Guinea, Kenya, Lesotho, Liberia, Libya, Madagascar, Malawi, Mali, Mauritania, Mauritius,
Morocco, Mozambique, Namibia, Nigeria, Rwanda, Senegal, Seychelles, Sierra Leone, Somalia, South
Africa, Sudan, Tanzania, Togo, Tunisia, Uganda, Zambia, Zimbabwe
East Asia

China, Hong Kong SAR, Japan, Republic of Korea, Taiwan

Europe &Albania, Andorra, Armenia, Austria, Azerbaijan, Belarus, Belgium, Bosnia and Herzegovina, Bulgaria,

Central Asia	Croatia, Cyprus, Czechia, Denmark, Estonia, Finland, France, Georgia, Germany, Greece, Hungary,
Iceland, Ireland, Italy, Kazakhstan, Kosovo, Kyrgyzstan, Latvia, Lithuania, Luxembourg, Macedonia,
Malta, Moldova, Monaco, Montenegro, Netherlands, Norway, Poland, Portugal, Romania, RussianFederation, Serbia, Slovakia, Slovenia, Spain, Sweden, Switzerland, Tajikistan, Turkmenistan, Ukraine,
United Kingdom, Uzbekistan
Latin America

Argentina, Aruba, Bahamas, Barbados, Belize, Bolivia, Brazil, Chile, Colombia, Costa Rica, Curaçao,&

Dominican Republic, Ecuador, El Salvador, Grenada, Guatemala, Guyana, Haiti, Honduras, Jamaica,

Caribbean	Mexico, Nicaragua, Panama, Paraguay, Peru, Puerto Rico, St. Kitts and Nevis, St. Lucia, St. Vincent and
the Grenadines, Suriname, Trinidad and Tobago, Turks and Caicos Islands, Uruguay, Venezuela
Middle East	Bahrain, Iraq, Israel, Jordan, Kuwait, Lebanon, Oman, Qatar, Saudi Arabia, Turkey, United ArabEmirates, Yemen
North America

Bermuda, Canada, United States

Oceania

Australia, Fiji, French Polynesia, New Caledonia, New Zealand, Papua New Guinea, Samoa

South Asia

Afghanistan, India, Pakistan

Southeast

Brunei Darussalam, Cambodia, Indonesia, Lao PDR, Malaysia, Myanmar, Philippines, Singapore,

Asia

Thailand, Viet Nam

45

ReSource Footprint Tracker
Methodology
PART 1: RESOURCE FOOTPRINT TRACKER DATASURVEYThe ReSource Footprint Tracker data survey is an
Excel-based tool shared with Member companies fordata entry and returned to WWF for analysis. The survey
was developed by ERG (Eastern Research Group, Inc.),with review and input from World Wildlife Fund, key
Thought Partners, and Member companies in fall 2019.
The key data fields required for each product or packaging type include country (in which the product is ultimately used and disposed), form category anddescription,62 polymer type, weight, percent recycledcontent, percent biobased content, and a mono-material
or multi-material designation.63 Additionally, companies
can indicate whether these plastics are compostable,
recyclable, durable, or reusable based on standardized
definitions. In cases where companies manage theirwaste internally or have other insights into how theirplastic waste is managed, companies can report thisinformation directly.
Additional portions of the survey request that companies provide high-level company and contact information, as well as information on the reporting period,
scope of the data provided, and the company’s plastic
goals and commitments. The ReSource Footprint Tracker
is intended to gather data covering a company’s entire
direct operations, as determined by the company, acrossall business units, brands, and geographies. This
includes consumer-facing packaging, back-of-housepackaging, and transport packaging, and both single-use
and reusable or durable plastics. In cases wherecompanies are unable to report on the full scope of theiroperations, this is indicated in their submission.

To develop the model, Anthesis first conducted aliterature review of publicly available data sources on
recycling, landfill, incineration, and mismanagement
rates for plastics and constructed a country-level waste
management database.64 As there is currently not acomplete data set available for the global flows andmanagement of plastic waste, Anthesis used thisdatabase as a basis for developing assumptions to fill in
the remaining data gaps. Advice from an expert in plastic
waste management was used to fill in data gaps andinform and verify the assumption development. The
identified data sources provided the following:• Waste management information at various
levels of material. E.g., some data sets look at all
waste materials (including plastic), others at plastic
waste, others at plastic packaging waste, and stillothers at specific formats and/or plastic resins.
• Varying levels of completeness of waste management data for each country. E.g., some data sets
only provide information on one form of management(such as recycling), whereas others provide information for the complete set of management systems.
• Different number of countries within the data
set. E.g., some data sets are only relevant to theEuropean Union, and in some cases, there is information at a regional level but not for specific countries
within the region.
Plastic waste management data was evaluated across
two dimensions: (1) tier, based on the level of granularityof the waste management data; and (2) assumptions
made, based on robustness of the data source and/or
the number of assumptions used to calculate themanagement rates.
The model uses six tiers of data with increasing specificity
to identify the management of single-use plastic packaging

PART 2: RESOURCE FOOTPRINT TRACKER PLASTICWASTE MANAGEMENT MODEL(Figure A1), from all solid waste (Tier 1) to specific

The ReSource Footprint Tracker plastic waste manage-

For each assumption, a level of confidence has been

ment model is designed to estimate the share ofapplied using the following confidence rating (Table A3).

consumer-facing plastic packaging for individual companies that is recycled, landfilled, incinerated, or
mismanaged.

46

polymers and packaging forms e.g. PET bottles (Tier 6).

FIGURE A1. T
 iered Approach Taken to Identify and Report on the Management of

Plastic Waste

1

SOLID WASTE

2MUNICIPAL SOLID WASTE(as defined nationally)

3

ALL PLASTICS

All countries will have Tier 4 data

4

RIGIDSFLEXIBLE

Tier 5/6 data will be included when quality data and reasonable assumptions can be inferred

5

BOTTLES

6

PLASTICTYPE AOTHER
RIGIDS
PLASTICTYPE B

PLASTICTYPE AFILM

PLASTICTYPE B

PLASTICTYPE AOTHERFLEXIBLE
PLASTICTYPE B

PLASTICTYPE A

PLASTICTYPE BTABLE A3. Confidence ratings applied to each data output.

Confidence Level

Description/Criteria of Source Data

HIGH

Robust data set, specific to country and waste management tier

MEDIUM

Robust data set, but estimated from a lower waste management tier or proxy data

LOW

Limited data set

47

FIGURE A2. P roportion of Tier 4 and 5 data used to calculate waste management outcomesof ReSource Members’ aggregate plastic footprint.

n Tier 4 Data n Tier 5 Data

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

70%

80%

90%

100%

Waste Management Data

All countries in the model have waste management rates

Most reported waste management data for plastic iscountries in North America and Europe have form-spe-

aggregated for all plastics (Tier 3). At this tier, country-cific rates (Tier 5) for bottles, “other rigids,”70 andlevel plastic recycling rate data is either sourced,

mono-material film. The model does not currently utilize

assumed to be similar to a comparator country, or

any polymer- and form-specific rates (Tier 6). This limits

estimated based on Anthesis’ knowledge and engage-

the ability of the analysis to differentiate waste manage-

ment with an external expert on secondary plastics. The

ment pathways for specific packaging types (e.g., PP

model’s country-level mismanagement rates are basedcups) from their broader category (e.g., rigid plastic). The

on those estimated by Jambeck et al. If landfill andmodel is designed for assumptions to be easily updated

incineration rates specific to plastic are not available,

as better information is published, and this information

estimates from the World Bank’s What a Waste 2.0

will be reviewed and available updates incorporated

report are used to apportion the remaining material

prior to 2021 reporting.

for rigid and flexible plastic (Tier 4), and additionally,

65

66

after taking account of recycling and mismanagement.
Reported rates may be adjusted to allow for consistency
across all waste management pathways (e.g., to ensure

In order to generate each company’s model results,
packaging forms that have form-specific (Tier 5) data arethat all rates add up to 100%).

first analyzed, multiplying the total tonnage of that

Waste management rates for rigid and flexible plastics

incineration, and mismanagement rates. For thewere either calculated using the ratio of recycling rates

remaining forms, rigid and flexible (Tier 4) rates were

for rigids and flexibles in Europe based on the Waste

applied. Although additional assumptions are generally

and Resources Action Programme (WRAP)67 and Deloitte

needed as waste management estimates become more

Sustainability and Plastic Recyclers Europe and thenform-specific, incorporating this data allows the results

multiplied by the Tier 3 all-plastics recycling rates for theto more accurately reflect each company’s individual

remaining countries. Mismanagement estimates from

portfolio. This is particularly important for portfolios

Jambeck et al.69 are applied across all waste management

predominantly composed of PET bottles, which aretiers, meaning estimated mismanagement is currently

known to have a significantly higher recycling rate than

the same for rigids and flexibles. This does not reflect

other forms (half of PET bottles are recycled globally,

known trends that flexibles are mismanaged at higher

reaching 80%–90% in some markets, as compared to therates than rigids and has been identified as a desired key

14% global average for all plastics in 2013).71 The waste

improvement area in the next version of the model.

management pathways were estimated using Tier 5 data

packaging form by the estimated recycling, landfill,68

for about 31% of ReSource Members’ aggregate tonnage,with the remainder using Tier 4 data (Figure A2).

48

FIGURE A3. P roportion of high-, medium-, and low-confidence data used to calculate waste

management outcomes of ReSource Members’ aggregate plastic footprint.

n Low Confidence n Medium Confidence n High Confidence

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

70%

80%

90%

100%

In terms of confidence level, waste management

Second, waste and recycling rates are not globally

pathways were estimated using high-confidence data fordefined, and national reporting frameworks for eachabout 10% of ReSource Members’ aggregate tonnage,

country differ. For example, while management report-

and 34% and 56% for medium- and low-confidence data,

ing for the United States is generally of high quality due

respectively (Figure A3). High-confidence data primarily

to statutory reporting responsibilities, in many countries

includes form-specific (Tier 5) recycling rates in Northin Africa, there are limited formal collections for waste,

America and Europe. Medium-confidence data includes

which restricts the extent of waste management reporting.

calculated recycling rates for rigids and flexibles (Tier 4),
calculated using robust data for all plastics (Tier 3), andThird, informal recycling rates make it difficult to collectmismanagement estimates for Tier 4 and Tier 5, reduced

reliable data, which can lead to underestimation in cases

from the high-confidence rating for Tier 3 mismanage-

where informal recycling is significant. It was estimatedment estimates. Landfill and incineration estimates,that globally, informal recycling rates ranged from 20%

which in many cases are based on World Bank estimatesto 30% in low-income economies.72 In India, it is esti-

for all municipal solid waste (Tier 2), account for most of

mated that urban waste recyclers can decrease thethe low-confidence data. This reliance on low-confidence

amount of waste sent to landfills by 70%.73

data directly underlines the need for better datacollection and sharing, described in our calls to action at

Fourth, materials may be sent for recycling but may

the conclusion of this report.

not be recycled (e.g., black plastic, multilayer film bags,
paper coffee cups lined with PE), which can lead to an

Limitations and Assumptions
In this initial baseline assessment, several limitations arepresent.
First, the model estimates waste management outcomes and does not provide any estimate of plastic
pollution inputs into the environment (e.g., the ocean or
freshwater) specifically. While mismanaged plastic islikely to be leaked, this is also influenced by local factors
like weather, infrastructure, etc., which are beyond thescope of the current waste management model.

overestimation of recycling rates in some cases.
Finally, data on waste imports and exports is notincluded in this version of the model. In the UnitedStates, plastic waste exports equaled 1.7 million metrictons (MT) in 2017.74 However, the EPA estimates that theUnited States generated 32.1 million MT of plastic waste
in 2017, indicating an export rate of approximately 5.3%.
Due to recent waste import restrictions from China in
2017, US waste exports went down from 1.7 million MT
in 2017 to 1.1 million MT in 2018. However, globally,
plastic waste export and import are still significant andhave been identified as key to improving future model
updates.

49

PART 3: BEYOND SUPPLY CHAIN SURVEY

ReSource Footprint Tracker—Lessons from the Pilot

The Beyond Supply Chain survey is an Excel-based

How will the ReSource Footprint Tracker look in thecomponent of the Tracker survey.

future? First, Member companies will continue to report
data on an annual basis, and as new Members joinMember companies are asked to report information

ReSource, they will complete a baseline assessment

about efforts to reduce plastic pollution outside theirduring their first year of membership. WWF will publish a

direct operations to develop an understanding of thereport annually that will track Members’ progress andscope and locations of such projects, as well as theirprovide accountability against their goals.

potential and actual impact. Beyond Supply Chain data is
primarily qualitative and was not integrated with theSecond, we have identified key opportunities for updates

quantitative data of companies’ plastic footprint.

and improvements to the ReSource Footprint Tracker

However, Beyond Supply Chain information can bebased on learnings from the pilot year. In the next

paired with information about plastic waste manage-reporting year, WWF will work with Members to further

ment to inform strategy for reducing plastic leakage into

standardize (and where relevant, expand) the scope ofthe environment.

operations on which companies report, ensure consistency in data gathering processes and methods forIn the pilot year of the ReSource Footprint Tracker, WWF

imputing or extrapolating to fill data gaps, and apply bestand Member companies prioritized data collection andpractices identified in this report.

development of metrics for companies’ direct plastic
footprint. The Beyond Supply Chain survey poses a

Third, WWF will initiate the development of a web-based

relatively high reporting burden given the large number

version of the ReSource Footprint Tracker in order toof activities in which our Members are engaged andstreamline the data gathering and analysis process andoften requires significant coordination with otherenable use by a larger number of companies. The launchbusiness units or regional offices. There is also currentlyof the web-based tool is tentatively scheduled for May

not a consistent framework for reporting on the impact

2021.

of projects or investments targeting plastic pollution
reduction. WWF and Member companies will continue

Finally, in terms of the waste management model, WWF

improving data collection and alignment with relevant

will update the database as new information on plastic

third-party initiatives for the Beyond Supply Chain survey

waste management becomes available. The priorities willin upcoming reporting cycles.

be improving data confidence for all plastics (Tier 3) andrigids/flexibles (Tier 4) estimates globally, particularly inregions that currently rely on assumptions and proxydata, and providing better coverage of form- andpolymer-specific data (Tiers 5 and 6), particularly inregions that have high reported volumes for ourMembers and high estimated mismanagement. This
includes data that would allow the model to differentiate
mismanagement rates for rigids and flexibles, as well as
specific packaging forms. A longer-term goal is tointegrate global trade flows of plastic waste into themodel.

50

Endnotes
1 It is also important to acknowledge that the current
2020 COVID-19 pandemic has introduced newchallenges and ways of operating within our economic
and materials systems. The information presented inthis report was collected before the impact of
COVID-19 and does not reflect any emerging trends
connected to the pandemic.
2 We follow the definition of mismanaged waste outlined
by Jambeck et al. 2015: “material that is either litteredor inadequately disposed.” For more information, see
the Glossary.
3 “The APR Design Guide for Plastics Recyclability.” The
Association of Plastic Recyclers, 2018. https://plasticsrecycling.org/images/pdf/design-guide/Full_
APR_Design_Guide.pdf.
4 “The New Plastics Economy: Rethinking the Future of
Plastics.” World Economic Forum, Ellen MacArthur
Foundation, and McKinsey & Company, January 2016.
https://newplasticseconomy.org/publications/
report-2016.
5 “Marine Debris: Understanding, Preventing and
Mitigating the Significant Adverse Impacts on Marine
and Coastal Biodiversity.” Technical Series No.83.
Secretariat of the Convention on Biological Diversity,
2016. https://www.cbd.int/doc/publications/cbd-ts-83en.pdf.
6 Analysis conducted by WWF using data from UNEP,
Trucost, and the Plastic Disclosure Project.
7 We rely on the ISO 14021:2016 definition of
postconsumer recycled content, and the USDA
definition of biobased content. Together, we consider
postconsumer recycled content and responsibly
sourced biobased content as constituting “sustainable”
or “responsible” inputs. WWF follows the Bioplastic
Feedstock Alliance’s definition of responsibly sourced
biobased content; see Glossary for complete
definitions.

10 2019 financial reports for the following companies:“KO’s Competition by Segment and its Market Share.”
CSI Market, 2019. https://csimarket.com/stocks/
competitionSEG2.php?code=KO.
“KDP’s Competition by Segment and its Market Share.”
CSI Market, 2019. https://csimarket.com/stocks/
competitionSEG2.php?&code=KDP.
“MCD’s Competition by Segment and its Market Share.”
CSI Market, 2019. https://csimarket.com/stocks/
competitionSEG2.php?&code=MCD.
“PG’s Competition by Segment and its Market Share.”
CSI Market, 2019. https://csimarket.com/stocks/
competitionSEG2.php?code=PG.
“SBUX’s Competition by Segment and its Market Share.”
CSI Market, 2019. https://csimarket.com/stocks/
competitionSEG2.php?code=SBUX.
11 Geyer, R., J. R. Jambeck, and K. L. Law. “Production, use,
and fate of all plastics ever made.” Science Advances 3,
no. 7 (July 19, 2017). https://doi.org/10.1126/
sciadv.1700782.
12 More recent estimated annual plastic production
statistic unavailable.
13 Flexible plastics can be mono-material or comprised ofmultiple materials and laminates. These different
compositions lead to different recycling capabilities
and outcomes, with multi-material packaging typicallyposing additional recycling challenges.
14 “Advancing Sustainable Materials Management: 2016
and 2017 Tables and Figures.” US Environmental
Protection Agency, November 2019. https://www.epa.
gov/sites/production/files/2019-11/documents/2016_
and_2017_facts_and_figures_data_tables_0.pdf. See
pages 14 and 15 for recycling figures.
15 The small plastics category as reported in our baselineis primarily composed of straws, cutlery, and splash
sticks. Bottle caps fall under the “closures” category,rather than the small plastics category.

8 Advanced products are those that are sustainably
produced, mitigate climate change, and reduce the riskof fossil depletion. This term typically captures futurematerials innovations that are currently in design stage
or at a very small scale. We align with the Roundtablefor Sustainable Biomaterials’ Advanced ProductsStandard.

16 “The APR Design Guide for Plastics Recyclability.” The
Association of Plastic Recyclers, 2018. https://plasticsrecycling.org/images/pdf/design-guide/Full_
APR_Design_Guide.pdf.

9 Secondary packaging can have a higher recycling rate
than postconsumer plastic because it is generally
possible to aggregate secondary packaging waste inrelatively high volumes of homogenous material. For
this reason, primary packaging was prioritized for thispilot.

18 “No Plastic in Nature: A Practical Guide for Business
Engagement.” World Wildlife Fund, February 25, 2019.
https://c402277.ssl.cf1.rackcdn.com/publications/1208/
files/original/WWF_McK_Plastic_Waste_FinalWeb2.
pdf?1560193480.

17 Davis, R. and C. Joyce. “Plastics: What’s recyclable, what
becomes trash – and why.” NPR, August 21, 2019.
https://apps.npr.org/plastics-recycling/.

51

19 WWF believes that responsibly sourced biobased
content at a minimum must be legally sourced; derived
from renewable biomass; pose no adverse impact onfood security; have no negative impact on land
conversion, deforestation, or critical ecosystems; andprovide environmental benefits — including near-termclimate benefits — compared with fossil-based plastic.
Credible certifications such as the Roundtable on
Sustainable Biomaterials can help ensure responsible
sourcing.

30 Katz, C. “Piling Up: How China’s Ban on Importing
Waste Has Stalled Global Recycling.” Yale Environment
360 (blog), March 7, 2019. https://e360.yale.edu/
features/piling-up-how-chinas-ban-on-importingwaste-has-stalled-global-recycling.

20 “The New Plastics Economy: Rethinking the Future of
Plastics.” World Economic Forum, Ellen MacArthur
Foundation, and McKinsey & Company, January 2016.
https://newplasticseconomy.org/publications/
report-2016.

32 Leung, H. “Southeast Asia Doesn’t Want to Be theWorld’s Dumping Ground. Here’s How Some Countries
Are Pushing Back.” Time, June 3, 2019. https://time.
com/5598032/southeast-asia-plastic-waste-malaysiaphilippines/.

21 “Plastics: Material-Specific Data.” US Environmental
Protection Agency (blog), October 30, 2019. https://www.epa.gov/facts-and-figures-about-materials-wasteand-recycling/plastics-material-specific-data

33 Castillo, A. L., and S. Otoma. “Status of Solid Waste
Management in the Philippines.” Proceedings of theAnnual Conference of Japan Society of Material Cycles andWaste Management 24 (2013): 677. https://doi.
org/10.14912/jsmcwm.24.0_677.

22 “The New Plastics Economy: Rethinking the Future of
Plastics.” World Economic Forum, Ellen MacArthur
Foundation, and McKinsey & Company, January 2016.
https://newplasticseconomy.org/publications/
report-2016..
23 Region categories with countries can be found in the
appendix.
24 Rounding is to the nearest whole number for regional
management rates.
25 Waste management rates are generally based on
averages for all plastics but have been adjusted toaccount for differences by form (subject to data
availability).
26 “PlasticFlow 2025 – Plastic Packaging Flow Data
Report.” Waste and Resources Action Programme,
October 12, 2018. https://www.wrap.org.uk/content/
plasticflow-2025-plastic-packaging-flow-data-report.
27 Jambeck, J. R., R. Geyer, C. Wilcox, T. R. Siegler, M.
Perryman, A. Andrady, R. Narayan, and K. L. Law.
“Plastic Waste Inputs from Land into the Ocean.”
Science 347, no. 6223 (February 13, 2015): 768–71.
https://doi.org/10.1126/science.1260352.
28 Botello-Álvarez, J. E., P. Rivas-García, L. Fausto-Castro, A.
Estrada-Baltazar, R. Gomez-Gonzalez. “Informal
collection, recycling and export of valuable waste astranscendent factor in the municipal solid waste
management: A Latin-American reality.” Journal of
Cleaner Production 182 (May 1, 2018): 485–495. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2018.02.065.
29 Rodriguez, A., M.L. Castrejon-Godinez, M.L. OrtizHernandez, and E. Sanchez-Salinas. “Management ofMunicipal Solid Waste in Mexico.” FifteenthInternational Waste Management and Landfill
Symposium Conference Paper (November 2015).

52

31 Kanthor, R. “After limiting imports, China aims to boost
domestic plastic recycling.” Plastics News, December 11,
2019. https://www.plasticsnews.com/news/afterlimiting-imports-china-aims-boost-domestic-plasticrecycling.

34 Mawis, S. M. D. “Solid Waste Mismanagement in thePhilippines.” Philippine Daily Inquirer, May 18, 2019.
https://business.inquirer.net/270819/solid-wastemismanagement-in-the-philippines.
35 Staub, C. “India to end plastic scrap imports.” Resource
Recycling (blog), March 6, 2019. https://resourcerecycling.com/recycling/2019/03/06/india-to-endplastic-scrap-imports/.
36 Kumar, S. S. R. Smith, G. Fowler, C. Velis, S. J. Kumar, S.
Arya, Rena, R. Kumar, and C. Cheeseman. “Challenges
and opportunities associated with waste managementin India.” Royal Society Open Society 4 (2017). https://soi.
org/10.1098/rsos.160764.
37 “Every Bottle Back.” American Beverage Association,
2020. https://www.innovationnaturally.org/plastic/.
38 “Advancing Sustainable Materials Management: 2016
and 2017 Tables and Figures.” US Environmental
Protection Agency, November 2019. https://www.epa.
gov/sites/production/files/2019-11/documents/2016_
and_2017_facts_and_figures_data_tables_0.pdf.
39 “APR Design® Guide for Plastics Recyclability.” The
Association of Plastic Recyclers, 2020. https://plasticsrecycling.org/apr-design-guide/apr-designguide-home.
40 “A message from CEO Kevin Johnson: Starbucks new
sustainability commitment.” Starbucks (blog), January
21, 2020. https://stories.starbucks.com/stories/2020/
message-from-starbucks-ceo-kevin-johnson-starbucksnew-sustainability-commitment.
41 https://how2recycle.info/.

42 “The New Plastics Economy Global Commitment: 2019
Progress Report.” Ellen MacArthur Foundation, October
2019. https://www.newplasticseconomy.org/assets/
doc/Global-Commitment-2019-Progress-Report.pdf.

55 “Joint Industry Statement: We Stand by Polypropylene.”
The Recycling Partnership(blog), February 28, 2020.
https://recyclingpartnership.org/joint-industrystatement-we-stand-by-polypropylene/.

43 Davis, R. and C. Joyce. “Plastics: What’s recyclable, what
becomes trash — and why.” NPR, August 21, 2019.
https://apps.npr.org/plastics-recycling/.

56 Linzner, R., and S. Salhofer. “Municipal solid waste
recycling and the significance of informal sector in
urban China.” Waste Management & Research 32, no. 9(2014):896-907. https://doi.
org/10.1177/0734242X1453555.

44 “Reuse—Rethinking Packaging.” The Ellen MacArthur
Foundation, 2019. https://www.
ellenmacarthurfoundation.org/publications/reuse.
45 “The Bridge to Circularity: Putting the New Plastics
Economy into Practice in the US.” The Recycling
Partnership, October, 2019. https://
recyclingpartnership.org/circularity/.
46 “The Recycling Partnership Announces First-Ever US
Circular Economy Roadmap.” The Recycling Partnership(blog), October 22, 2019. https://recyclingpartnership.
org/the-recycling-partnership-announces-first-ever-u-scircular-economy-roadmap/.
47 LLP, Infoholic Research. 2019. “Recycled Plastics
Market Size To Reach USD 66.73 Billion by 2025.” 2019.
https://www.prnewswire.com/news-releases/recycledplastics-market-size-to-reach-usd-66-73-billionby-2025--300957455.html.
48 Arthur, Rachel. 2019. “EU sets out 30% recycledcontent target for plastic bottles.” Beveragedaily.com.
2019. https://www.beveragedaily.com/
Article/2019/05/21/European-Council-sets-out-30recycled-content-target-for-plastic-bottles.
49 ORS 459A.655. Minimum reuse, recycled material or
recycled content for rigid plastic containers. https://www.oregonlaws.org/ors/459A.655.
50 For several examples of increased use of recycledcontent in specific products highlighting challenges,
successes, and bottlenecks, see this report from the
Ellen MacArthur Foundation: https://www.
ellenmacarthurfoundation.org/assets/downloads/
ce100/Scaling-Recycled-Plastics-across-Industries.pdf.
51 “Methodology for the Assessment of Bioplastic
Feedstocks.” The Bioplastic Feedstock Alliance, 2015.
https://bioplasticfeedstockalliance.org/mdocs-posts/
methodology-for-the-assessment-of-bioplasticfeedstocks/.
52 “Our Work.” Roundtable on Sustainable Biomaterials(RSB), n.d. https://rsb.org/.
53 “Encouraging the responsible development of plantbased plastics.” Bioplastic Feedstock Alliance, n.d.
https://bioplasticfeedstockalliance.org/.
54 “The APR Design Guide for Plastics Recyclability.” The
Association of Plastic Recyclers, 2018. https://plasticsrecycling.org/images/pdf/design-guide/Full_
APR_Design_Guide.pdf.

57 Castillo, A. L., and S. Otoma. “Status of Solid Waste
Management in the Philippines.” Proceedings of theAnnual Conference of Japan Society of Material Cycles andWaste Management 24 (2013): 677. https://doi.
org/10.14912/jsmcwm.24.0_677.
58 ISEAL is the global membership organization for
credible sustainability standards. See https://www.
isealalliance.org/.
59 “WWF Certification Assessment Tool (CAT).” WWF, 2014.
https://wwf.panda.org/?228430/WWF-CertificationAssessment-Tool-CAT.
60 WWF advocates for a global, legally binding agreementthat clearly stipulates the vision, the ambition, and therequired means and measures to achieve No Plastic in
Nature. https://d2ouvy59p0dg6k.cloudfront.net/
downloads/tackling_marine_plastic_pollution___wwf_2019.pdf.
61 Composting is currently estimated to account for lessthan 1% of global plastics management outcome
globally but is expected to increase in the future.
62 Form categories included in the survey are bottles,
closures, rigid foam, other rigid, mono-material film,
other flexible, small plastics, and raw material. The
form description field is used to provide additional
detail, e.g. cold cup, lid, beverage carton, cutlery.
63 Please see appendix for a description of form
categories and types.
64 Recycling includes both mechanical and chemical
recycling; landfill refers to sanitary landfills; incineration
includes incineration both with and without energy
recovery; and mismanagement includes waste that islittered or inadequately disposed, including in open
dumps and uncontrolled landfills (following thedefinition in Jambeck et al., 2015).
65 Jambeck, J. R., R. Geyer, C. Wilcox, T. R. Siegler, M.
Perryman, A. Andrady, R. Narayan, and K. L. Law.
“Plastic Waste Inputs from Land into the Ocean.”
Science 347, no. 6223 (February 13, 2015): 768–71.
https://doi.org/10.1126/science.1260352.
66 Kaza, S., L. Yao, P. Bhada-Tata, and D. Van Woerden.
“What a Waste 2.0: A Global Snapshot of Solid Waste
Management to 2050.” World Bank (2018).

53

67 “PlasticFlow 2025 – Plastic Packaging Flow Data
Report.” Waste and Resources Action Programme,
October 12, 2018. https://www.wrap.org.uk/content/
plasticflow-2025-plastic-packaging-flow-data-report.
68 “Blueprint for plastics packaging waste: Quality sorting& recycling.” Deloitte Sustainability and Plastic Recyclers
Europe Final Report, 2014. https://www2.deloitte.com/
content/dam/Deloitte/my/Documents/risk/my-riskblueprint-plastics-packaging-waste-2017.pdf.
69 Jambeck, J. R., R. Geyer, C. Wilcox, T. R. Siegler, M.
Perryman, A. Andrady, R. Narayan, and K. L. Law.
“Plastic Waste Inputs from Land into the Ocean.”
Science 347, no. 6223 (February 13, 2015): 768–71.
https://doi.org/10.1126/science.1260352.
70 Other rigids is a category used to capture rigids thatare not classified as bottles, closures, foamed rigids, or
small plastics. It includes solid cups, jars, disposable
utensils, thermoforms, trays, blisters, non-foamclamshells, and others.
71 “The New Plastics Economy: Rethinking the Future of
Plastics.” The Ellen MacArthur Foundation & McKinsey
Center for Business and Environment, January 2016.
https://newplasticseconomy.org/publications/
report-2016.
72 Mwanza, B. G., C. Mbohwa, A. Telukdarie, and C.
Medoh. “Value Addition to Plastic Solid Wastes:
Informal Waste Collectors’ Perspective.” Procedia
Manufacturing 33 (2019): 391-397. https://doi.
org/10.1016/j.promfg.2019.04.048.
73 Hande, S. “The informal waste sector: a solution to therecycling problem in developing countries.” Field Actions
Science Reports Special Issue 19 (March 1, 2019): 28–35.
http://journals.openedition.org/factsreports/5143.
74 Dell, J. “157,000 Shopping Containers of US Plastic
Waste Exported to Countries with Poor Waste
Management in 2018.” Plastic Pollution Coalition (blog),
March 6, 2019. https://www.plasticpollutioncoalition.
org/blog/2019/3/6/157000-shipping-containers-of-usplastic-waste-exported-to-countries-with-poor-wastemanagement-in-2018.

54

https://resource-plastic.com/