UNITED
NATIONS

UNEP/PP/INC.1/7
United Nations
Environment
Programme

Distr.: General
13 September
Original: English

Intergovernmental negotiating committee to develop
an international legally binding instrument on plastic
pollution, including in the marine environment
First session
Punta del Este, Uruguay, 28 November–2 December 2022
Item 4 of the provisional agenda*
Preparation of an international legally binding instrument onplastic pollution, including in the marine environment

Plastics science
Note by the secretariat
1.
Pursuant to paragraph 5 of the United Nations Environment Assembly resolution 5/14 of
2 March 2022, titled “End plastic pollution: towards an international legally binding instrument”,
an ad hoc open‑ended working group met in Dakar from 30 May to 1 June 2022 to prepare for thework of the intergovernmental negotiating committee to develop an international legally binding
instrument on plastic pollution, including in the marine environment. The open‑ended working groupagreed on a list of documents that the secretariat would provide to the intergovernmental negotiating
committee at its first session. Among other things, the secretariat was requested to provide a documenton plastics science, including monitoring, sources of plastic pollution, chemicals used in
manufacturing, flows across the life cycle, pathways in the environment, health and other impacts,
solutions, technologies and costs.
2.
The document set out in the annex to the present note has been prepared in response to therequest of the ad hoc open‑ended working group. It provides the latest available information on plastic
pollution science, for the consideration of the intergovernmental negotiating committee.
3.
Definitions of key terms used throughout this document for which no definition has been
adopted or endorsed by an intergovernmental process are provided in appendix I. The definitions are
for reference only and do not supersede the glossary in document UNEP/PP/INC.1/6.

* UNEP/PP/INC.1/1.
2221533[E]181122

UNEP/PP/INC.1/7

Annex
Plastic pollution science
Contents
A.

Summary ........................................................................................................................... 3

B.

Trends in plastic production, waste generation and chemical use in manufacturing ........ 4

C.

Plastic pollution sources and pathways in the environment .............................................. 6

D.

Impacts of plastic pollution............................................................................................... 8

E.

Monitoring and reporting ................................................................................................ 10

F.

Solutions and technologies and their costs and benefits ................................................. 11

Appendix I .......................................................................................................................................... 19
Key terms ................................................................................................................................. 19
Appendix II .......................................................................................................................................... 20
Selection of sample actions for strategic goal 1 ......................................................................... 20
Appendix III ......................................................................................................................................... 21
Selection of sample actions for strategic goal 2 ......................................................................... 21
Appendix IV ......................................................................................................................................... 23
Selection of sample actions for strategic goal 3 ......................................................................... 23
Appendix V .......................................................................................................................................... 24
Selection of sample actions for strategic goal 4 ......................................................................... 24
Appendix VI ......................................................................................................................................... 25
Measures for achieving the strategic goals for systems change ................................................. 25
Notes ..................................................................................................................................................... 27

2

UNEP/PP/INC.1/7

A.

Summary
1.
The world has seen a massive increase in plastic production. Global plastic production andconsumption has grown exponentially since the 1950s and is set to triple by 2060 if business continues
as usual. Plastic production is associated with the use of chemical additives, many of which are ofconcern for human and environmental health, including those listed as hazardous under the Stockholm
Convention and in national legislation.
2.
There is increasing clarity regarding the links between plastic and human andenvironmental health. The links between plastic with its associated chemicals and plastic pollution
with its detrimental effects on human health and the environment are increasingly clear, although
plastic’s contribution to the global burden of disease across its life cycle has not been yet wellquantified.
3.
Plastic pollution is lethal for many species. Plastic pollution in all forms causes lethal andsublethal effects in a wide array of organisms in marine, freshwater and terrestrial environments.
Plastics can also alter global carbon cycling through their effect on plankton and primary production inmarine, freshwater and terrestrial systems. A 1 per cent decline in annual marine ecosystem services
could equate to an annual loss of $500 billion in global ecosystem benefits.1
4.
Throughout its life cycle, plastic also contributes to climate change. In 2019, plastics
generated 1.8 billion metric tons of greenhouse gas emissions – 3.4 per cent of global emissions – with
90 per cent of those emissions coming from plastics production and conversion from fossil fuels.
5.
The resource-inefficient, linear, take-make-waste plastic economy is at the core of theplastic pollution crisis. Solving the crisis requires shifting economic incentives towards safe, efficientand circular uses of plastic in the economy and acknowledging that some uses cannot be made circularand may need to be eliminated from the economy unless they are essential.
6.
Millions of workers in informal settings ensure some level of waste collection andrecycling in many countries across the world. Measures taken to address plastic waste pollution
must be inclusive of informal waste pickers, and the transition towards a circular economy for plastics
must be leveraged to improve working conditions.
7.
Circularity in the economy is a critical part of the solution. Science shows that by shifting
the plastics economy to a comprehensive circular economy approach,2 most plastic pollution could be
prevented. Benefits (compared to the scenario in 2040 if circular economy approaches are not applied)
include a 25 per cent reduction in greenhouse gas emissions across the global plastic life cycle, whilesaving governments $70 billion over the period 2021–2040 and creating 700,000 additional jobs,
mainly in the global South.
8.
Four strategic goals can guide the transition to a circular economy. This document
proposes four strategic goals to deliver the systems change to a circular economy for plastics, forconsideration by the intergovernmental negotiating committee. These goals are interlinked and need to
be worked towards in an integrated way.
9.
The four strategic goals are: (i) reduce the size of the problem by eliminating andsubstituting problematic and unnecessary plastic items, including hazardous additives; (ii) ensure thatplastic products are designed to be circular (reusable as a first priority, and recyclable or compostable
after multiple uses at the end of their useful life); (iii) close the loop of plastics in the economy byensuring that plastic products are circulated in practice (reused, recycled or composted); and(iv) manage plastics that cannot be reused or recycled (including existing pollution) in anenvironmentally responsible manner.
10.
A comprehensive and integrated approach to solutions is needed. A number of successful
legislative and policy options are demonstrated in this document. Importantly, scientific evidenceshows the need for a comprehensive and integrated application of solutions across the life cycle ofplastics. Solutions may include a combination of regulatory, economic, technological and behavioural
instruments, as well as the use of trade policies (see appendices II to VI).
11.
Following a life-cycle approach is critical. As highlighted in UNEP/PP/INC.1/11, the best
combination of policies across the life cycle will differ based on each Member State’s needs. But
following a life-cycle approach and applying policies in an integrated way can set the world on thepath to a circular plastics economy.
12.
Harmonized measures and legal obligations will be key. To support national actions, aharmonized set of measures and legal obligations agreed internationally will be key to creating a levelplaying field. For example, agreed measures on product design would reduce the challenges of3

UNEP/PP/INC.1/7

managing plastic waste, which often occurs in a region other than where the products were designed.
Appendix VI summarizes options for measures linked to the strategic goals, which, if applied in an
integrated way, would help achieve the necessary systems change.
13.
Systems change is possible, but this demands vision, targets, monitoring and reporting.
Scientific literature shows that a systems change to achieve a safe, circular plastics economy ispossible with the knowledge we have today. This requires a new, shared global vision where plastic
pollution is not an option, coupled with the set of targets, policy instruments and mechanisms that willlead and enable the shift towards this vision. Strong monitoring of harmonized indicators and reporting
will enable accountability and transparency. The international legally binding instrument on plastic
pollution, including in the marine environment, required to achieve the vision can be built to allow
flexibility to incorporate new evidence and solutions as they become available.

B.

Trends in plastic production, waste generation and chemical use in
manufacturing
14.
Plastic production has been rising exponentially since the 1950s, mainly from fossil
feedstocks. About one quarter of chemical additives designed to confer various properties to the final
plastic are of potential concern for human health and safety. Current use of plastic and plastic products
is mostly linear (take resources and make products and then waste them), with a very low rate ofrecycling back into the economy. The rate of change and uptake of recycled plastics will depend on
decisions taken today.

1.

Production
15.
Plastic production is forecast to triple by 2060. Annual global production of plastics doubled
from 234 million metric tons in 2000 to 460 million metric tons in 2019. It is forecast to triple under abusiness-as-usual scenario to an estimated 1,231 million metric tons in 2060.3 Global plastic materials
production in 2020 was dominated by the following regions: Asia (49 per cent), North America(19 per cent) and Europe (15 per cent).416.
The speed of projected growth of plastic use differs across regions. Between 2019 and
2060,5 countries that are not members of the Organisation for Economic Co-operation andDevelopment (OECD) are projected to triple their plastics use. They are expected to account for64 per cent of global plastics use by 2060, with the largest increases expected in emerging economies
in sub-Saharan Africa and Asia.6 Plastic use in OECD member countries is projected to double by
2060.7 OECD member countries are set to remain the largest consumers of plastics on an average percapita basis in 2060: 238 kg, compared with 77 kg in OECD non-member countries.8

2.

Composition and products
17.
Table 1 provides an overview of plastics use in 2019, by application and polymer type.
Plastics are mainly used in packaging, followed by sectors such as building and construction,transportation and textiles.

4

UNEP/PP/INC.1/7

Table 1
Plastics use in 2019, by polymer and application
Polymer or application

Millions of metric tons

Percentage

Other

81

18

Marine coatings

0.5

0

Low-density polyethylene, linear low-density
polyethylene

54

12High-density polyethylene

56

12

PP

73

16

PS

21

5

PVC

51

11

PET

25

5

PUR

18

4

Fibres60

13Road marking coatings

10

Elastomers (tyres)

82Bioplastics2

1

ABS, ASA, SAN

9

2

Total

460

Abbreviations: HDPE – high-density polyethylene; LDPE – low-density polyethylene; LLDPE – linear
low-density polyethylene; PE – polyethylene; PET – polyethylene terephthalate; PP – polypropylene; PPA –polyphthalamide; PS – polystyrene; PVC – polyvinyl chloride.
Source: OECD, Global Plastics Outlook: Economic Drivers, Environmental Impacts and Policy Options(Paris, OECD Publishing, 2022).

18.
Up to 99 per cent of plastics are made from polymers derived from non-renewablehydrocarbons, mostly oil and natural gas.9 Additives – such as plasticizers, fillers, stabilizers,
colourants and flame retardants – help to maintain, enhance and impart specific characteristics(e.g., flexibility, fire resistance) and colours to the plastic.
19.
Some 86 per cent of the global market is dominated by thermoplastics – polymers that canbe moulded into inexpensive and lightweight products. Thermoplastics include polyethylene (PE),polyethylene terephthalate (PET), polypropylene (PP), polyvinyl chloride (PVC), polystyrene (PS) andpolyphthalamide (PPA).10 Polyethylene, the most popular thermoplastic, includes low-density
polyethylene (LDPE), linear low-density polyethylene (LLDPE) and high-density polyethylene(HDPE).
20.
Short-lived plastic products made up 66 per cent of plastics use in 2019.11 Short-lived
plastic products include packaging made from LDPE (e.g., bags, containers, food packaging film),
containers made from HDPE (e.g., bottles, shampoo bottles, ice cream tubs) and PET (e.g., bottles for
fluids).1221.
Durable or long-lasting plastic products found in buildings and construction,transportation, electronics and machinery made up around 35 per cent of plastic product use in
2019.13 Such items may be in use from around 8 years (in electronics, for example) to more than
20 years (in construction materials and industrial machinery). 14
22.
Bio-based plastics are receiving growing attention. Bioplastics are plastics that are madefrom renewable resources, are biodegradable or are made through biological processes, or a
combination of these.15 The term bioplastic should not be used without specification of the material’s
origin and biodegradability conditions.
3.

Chemical use in manufacturing
23.
Around a quarter of the over 10,000 unique chemicals used in plastics are of potential
concern to human health and safety.16 These chemicals are either added deliberately during the
production process17 or are unintentionally added by-products, breakdown products or contaminants.18
In an analysis of common plastic products, around 20 additives per product were found on average.19

5

UNEP/PP/INC.1/7

4.

Plastic waste and recycling
24.
Plastic waste20 is forecast to rise, with the packaging sector being the largest generator. A
rise from an estimated 353 million metric tons per year of plastic waste in 2019 to 1,014 million metrictons per year in 2060 is expected under a business-as-usual scenario.21 Plastic waste in Asia and Africa
is forecast to quadruple by 2060.22 The packaging sector is the largest generator of plastic waste(46 per cent), followed by the textile (15 per cent), consumer products (12 per cent), transportation(6 per cent), building and construction (4 per cent) and electrical (4 per cent) sectors. Forty per cent of
all plastic packaging waste ended up in landfills, 32 per cent was lost into the environment, 14 per cent
was incinerated and 10 per cent was recycled (8 per cent into lower value applications and 2 per centinto similar applications); an additional 4 per cent was sent to recycling but was lost in the process.23
25.
In practice, at-scale recycling in specific countries/regions is limited. An expert survey ofmembers of the New Plastics Economy Global Commitment network indicated that, while manypolymers may be recyclable in theory, only a handful of packaging formats have been demonstrated tobe recycled in practice and at scale in specific countries and regions. Those products are PET bottles,
HDPE bottles and other HDPE rigid formats (e.g., pots, trays, cups), PP bottles, and PE mono-material
flexibles bigger than A4 in size, the latter only in the business-to-business context (e.g., pallet wraps).
26.
Most other packaging formats and polymers have not been shown to be recycled inpractice and at scale (e.g., PET trays and other thermoforms; PP other than bottles; all formats of PS
and expanded polystyrene (EPS); all flexible formats except PE in business-to-business contexts),
even if they might technically be recyclable.24 While the survey sample is relatively small, it provides
a first step towards better data availability and transparency on plastic recycling, and indicates themost problematic packaging formats.
27.
More plastic waste is mismanaged than collected for recycling, with global projections
for recycling remaining low. Globally, 46 per cent of plastic waste is landfilled, 22 per cent ismismanaged and becomes litter, 17 per cent is incinerated and 15 per cent is collected for recycling,with less than 9 per cent actually recycled after losses).25 Global recycling rates are forecast to remain
low over the coming decades, increasing from less than 9 per cent in 2019 (29 million metric tons), to17 per cent in 2060 (176 million metric tons).26 Global recycled (secondary) plastics are projected tomake up 12 per cent of total plastics use in 2060, increasing from 6 per cent in 2019.27

C.

Plastic pollution sources and pathways in the environment
28.
Plastic pollution is forecast to grow alongside production and consumption.
Mismanagement of waste is by far the biggest contributor to plastic pollution. By type of plastic
product application, short-lived plastic products – dominated by plastic packaging and other single-use
plastic products – represent the biggest source of plastic pollution. While fishing gear and agricultural
plastics represent a smaller volume, their direct use in the environment is problematic.

1.

Plastic pollution sources
29.
An estimated 60 to 99 million metric tons of mismanaged plastic waste were produced in2015, with a 2.5-fold increase projected by 2040.28 An estimated 19 to 23 million metric tons –11 per cent – of plastic waste generated globally in 2016 entered aquatic ecosystems.29 Plastic leakage
to oceans was estimated at 11 million metric tons, with terrestrial leakage estimated at 31 million
metric tons and open burning at 49 million metric tons in 2016.30 The size of these flows might besmaller, according to OECD (see figure 1). Annual plastic pollution flows are forecast to grow
2.5 times by 2040. An estimated 23 to 37 million metric tons per year of plastic waste could enter theoceans by 2040 in a business-as-usual scenario.31
30.
Figure 1 depicts the major flows of plastic in the economy, showing the main sectors using
plastics (estimated for 2019); the main sources of plastic leakage into the environment (in 2019) andstocks in the economy and the environment (1970–2019).32
31.
Today’s plastic economy is largely linear. In figure 1, the relative thickness of the flows
shows clearly that the current plastics system is mainly linear, from virgin (fossil-based) plastic
production to disposal and leakage into the environment, with very small circular flows being cycled
back (top flow of secondary plastic). A circular plastics economy would show a thick flow of plastic
being cycled back into “plastics use” as “secondary plastics” (top feedback loop) and very small
inflows of new “virgin” plastic (not necessarily from fossil fuels) and outflows going into final
disposal (with zero plastic leaking into the environment).

6

UNEP/PP/INC.1/7

Figure 1
Flows of plastic in the global plastic life cycle, and losses to and accumulated stocks in theenvironment

Note: “Institutional products” refers to products sold mainly to businesses as opposed to individuals (e.g.,cleaning products sold to cleaning companies rather than households); “other sectors” includes a wide array of
sectors such as electrical equipment, industrial machinery, road markings and marine coatings.
Source: Figure built from OECD, Global Plastics Outlook: Economic Drivers, Environmental Impacts
and Policy Options (Paris, OECD Publishing, 2022).

2.

Macroplastics leakage
32.
Macroplastics accounted for 88 per cent of global plastic leakage to the environment in
2019, around 19.4 million metric tons. This figure is projected to increase to 38.4 million metric tons
in 2060. Mismanaged plastic waste is the main cause of macroplastic leakage (82 per cent), withlittering of end-of-life plastic products second (5 per cent).33 Macroplastic leakage to the environment
is high in emerging economies.34
33.
Fishing gear is particularly problematic, as it often becomes waste on-site in sensitive
ecosystems, with high health and environmental risks, despite its lower production volume. It has
been estimated that fishing activities and other marine activities contribute around 0.3 million metrictons35 to global macroplastic leakage. Global fishing gear losses each year may include 5.7 per cent of
all fishing nets, 8.6 per cent of all traps and 29 per cent of all lines. 36 The International Maritime
Organization has published a strategy with specific actions to address marine plastic litter from ships.37
34.
Agricultural plastics also deserve special attention for their use close to sensitive
ecosystems. An estimated 12.5 million metric tons of plastic products are used annually in plant andanimal production.38
35.
Secondary microplastics dominate microplastics leakage. Most microplastics found in theenvironment are secondary microplastics:39 major sources include road transport (1 million metrictons), the release of dust and fibres (0.81 million metric tons)40 and wastewater sludge. Microplastics
are also released from artificial turf (0.05 million metric tons)41 during use or after disposal.42
36.
Primary microplastics are also an important source. Pre-production plastic pellets (ornurdles) are an example of primary microplastics (0.28 million metric tons),43 along with microbeads –spherical or amorphous microplastics added to products such as personal care items, fertilizers, paint,
detergents, food supplements, hand sanitisers and medicinal products.44
37.
Microplastic leakage is projected to more than double globally, from 2.7 million metrictons in 2019 to 5.8 million metric tons in 2060.45 Interventions to address microplastics are generally
less advanced, as this form of leakage has not received the same level of scrutiny as macroplastics.
Microplastic leakage occurs along the life cycle of products.

7

UNEP/PP/INC.1/7

3.

Plastic pollution environmental pathways
38.
Released plastic travels in the environment. Once plastics are released into the environment
they are transported by various means and processes to even the most remote places. The transport ofplastics in aquatic ecosystems is controlled by currents, waves and winds, among other factors.
39.
1,000 rivers deliver 80 per cent of plastic in the oceans. It has been estimated that more than
1,000 rivers account for 80 per cent of the annual releases of plastic waste to the oceans from global
riverine systems (ranging between 0.8 and 2.7 million metric tons per year), with small urban rivers
among the most polluting.46
40.
The speed of plastic’s movement varies... The rate at which plastic pollution moves along
the various transport pathways or the length of time it resides in different environmental compartments
depends on its chemical and physical properties, such as buoyancy, surface properties and size, as wellas on oceanographic processes and meteorological conditions.47
41.
…but move it does. Microplastics can move through the food web, as well as through the air,soil, ice, snow and water – including groundwater. There is also an indication that sea ice functions as
a temporary sink, secondary source and transport medium for microplastics. 48
42.
Significant knowledge gaps remain. knowledge of the absolute volumes of plastics indifferent habitats remains poor, because of limited sampling coverage and the lack of standardized
sampling protocols.49

D.

Impacts of plastic pollution
43.
The impacts of plastic pollution are increasingly evident – altering habitats and naturalprocesses, reducing ecosystems’ ability to adapt to climate change and directly affecting millions
of people’s livelihoods, food production capabilities and social well-being. Plastic pollution has adisproportionate impact on the most vulnerable populations, and affects women more than men.

1.

Impacts of plastic pollution on human health
44.
Plastic pollution can pose risks to human health. At every stage of its life cycle, plastic canpose risks to human health, arising from exposure to the chemicals used in production, the plastic
particles themselves and additives.50 Plastic particles can enter the human body through ingestion andinhalation, while nanoparticles may also enter through the skin.51 There are concerns that plastics, inparticular microplastics, can host microbial pathogens.52
45.
Plastic is ingested by humans and wildlife. Recent studies suggest that adults in the
United States of America could be consuming more than 50,000 pieces of plastic a year,53 with anincreased risk of health effects. A study of microplastics in wild-caught fish revealed evidence ofplastics in the intestinal tract of 65 per cent of the 496 species examined.54
46.
Consumer exposure to chemical additives may also be significant via major productgroups, including plastic-based food contact materials, building materials, electronics, toys andpersonal care and household products. A 2021 study55 found that 25 per cent of children’s toys containharmful chemicals; some 126 substances that could harm children’s health were identified, including
31 plasticizers, 18 flame retardants and 8 fragrances.
47.
Occupational exposure to hazardous chemicals is high in the plastics sector. A review ofoccupational exposure in Europe listed the plastics, rubber and textile industries as common industrial
sectors associated with higher rates of exposure to hazardous chemicals in plastics.56
48.
Plastic pollution is also found in the air. Research is also raising concerns about thecontribution of plastic to air pollution and the potential risks to human health through the inhalation ofplastics. Open burning of plastics results in the release of toxic chemical substances and particles suchas dioxins, furans, mercury and polychlorinated biphenyls.57 This poses serious risks, in particular to
the 11 million informal entrepreneurs who work closely with waste. 58
49.
Plastic is also found in dust. Studies indicate that textiles and fibres are major contributors to
the plastic materials that enter human lungs, food and the environment. 59 It has been estimated thatabout 6 kg of the 20 kg of dust generated by the average household annually consist of microplastics.60
In air, 3 to 7 per cent of particulate matter is estimated to consist of tyre wear and tear.61
50.
Exposure to endocrine-disrupting chemicals in plastics and the hazards that such chemicals
pose to human health are linked with a range of human diseases and conditions, including cancer,
diabetes, reproductive disorders, neurodevelopmental impairment and immune system suppression. 62

8

UNEP/PP/INC.1/7

51.
Numerous reviews and studies point to the need for further research to evaluate the healthimpacts of plastic pollution, including microfibres and other plastic microparticles, on humans, and tounderstand the potential transfer of microplastics and hazardous chemicals to crops and animals. 63
2.

Impacts of plastic pollution on the environment
52.
The mismanagement of plastic waste has led to contamination of the entire marine
environment, from shores to the deepest ocean sediments.64 Plastics account for at least 85 per centof total marine waste.
53.
When plastics break down in the marine environment, they transfer microplastics,
synthetic and cellulosic microfibres, hazardous chemicals, metals and micropollutants into the waterand sediments and eventually into marine food chains.65
54.
Plastic litter causes lethal and sublethal effects in marine life. Their effects include
entanglement, starvation, drowning, laceration of internal tissue, smothering, deprivation of oxygen
and light, physiological stress and toxicological harm.66
55.
Microplastics may act as vectors for pathogenic organisms. When microplastics areingested, they can cause changes in gene and protein expression, inflammation, disruption of feeding
behaviour, decreases in growth, changes in brain development and reduced filtration and respiration
rates. They can alter the reproductive success and survival of marine organisms and compromise theability of keystone species and ecological “engineers” to build reefs or bioturbated sediments. 67
56.
Plastic pollution can alter global carbon cycling through its effect on plankton andprimary production in marine, freshwater and terrestrial systems. For example, marine
microplastics can affect phytoplankton photosynthesis and growth, have toxic effects on and affect thedevelopment and reproduction of zooplankton, and affect the marine biological pump and the ocean
carbon stock.68
57.
Plastic across its life cycle contributes to climate change. In 2015, plastics generated
1.7 billion metric tons of greenhouse gas emissions, equal to 3.4 per cent of global emissions. Some
90 per cent of those emissions came from plastic production and conversion from fossil fuels. By
2050, emissions from the plastics life cycle could quadruple, reaching 15 per cent of the global carbon
budget69 and leaving the 1.5-degree target practically out of reach.
58.
In addition, airborne microplastics may cause positive net radiative forcing.70 The
light-absorbing properties of microplastics may contribute to accelerated warming by decreasing thesurface albedo of snow and ice.71
59.
Plastics manufacturing has an impact on the ozone layer and the climate through use ofozone-depleting substances and hydrofluorocarbons as feedstock. Several ozone-depleting
substances and hydrofluorocarbons, which are controlled under the Montreal Protocol, are used as
feedstock in the manufacture of plastic products. Feedstock uses of such substances are exempt fromphase-out under the Montreal Protocol on the premise that emissions from feedstocks were
insignificant; however, leakage does occur, causing adverse effects on the ozone layer and theclimate.72
60.
Few studies have investigated the impact of plastic waste on soil ecosystems, but it may
be significant.73 The accumulation of plastic residues in agricultural soils has been found to adversely
affect the physiochemical properties linked to healthy soil and may threaten food production in thelong term.74
61.
The presence of plastic could dramatically shift the ecology of marine and terrestrial
ecosystems. An altered environment and shifts in biodiversity have potentially wide-reaching andunpredictable secondary societal consequences75 and may impair ecosystem resilience. Plastics can act
in concert with other environmental stressors – such as changing ocean temperatures, ocean
acidification and the over-exploitation of marine resources – to cause a cumulative larger and moredamaging impact.76

3.

Socioeconomic impacts of plastic pollution
62.
Communities may suffer social impacts differently, with the impacts of exposure andmanagement of plastic pollution often falling on poorer urban and rural women. 77 Although workers in
informal and cooperative settings collect, sort and recycle plastics, they are subject to low pay andunsafe working conditions.78

9

UNEP/PP/INC.1/7

63.
Addressing plastic pollution will require consideration of the impact on different
communities. There will also be opportunities.
64.
The aggregate value of plastic is lost to the economy when it becomes waste... Because of
the essentially linear nature of the plastics system (take-make-waste), 95 per cent of aggregate plastic
packaging value – $80 billion to $120 billion a year – is lost to the economy following a short first use
cycle.79 In addition, it is projected that by 2040 there could be a $100 billion annual financial risk forbusinesses if governments require them to cover waste management costs at expected volumes andrecyclability; plastic waste collection and management is one of the highest cost items forgovernments (see table 4).
65.
…while plastic waste adds a burden to human health and the environment. The
socioeconomic burden of the health effects associated with endocrine disrupting chemicals is
estimated at 46 billion to 288 billion euros per year.80 While damage to ecosystem services ischallenging to calculate, it has been suggested that a 1 per cent decline in marine ecosystem service
delivery equates to an annual loss of $500 billion in the value of benefits derived from marine
ecosystem services.81
66.
Investing in the prevention of waste and pollution at source is less expensive than
remediation.82 The global economic cost of marine plastic pollution with respect to its impact on
tourism, fisheries and aquaculture, together with other costs such as those for clean-up, is estimated tohave been $6 billion to $19 billion or more in 2018.83
67.
Plastic pollution has a human rights dimension, too. Finally, plastic pollution can infringeon human rights. Plastic pollution affects people in vulnerable conditions disproportionally – including
those living in poverty, indigenous and coastal communities and children – potentially aggravating
existing environmental injustices.84

E.

Monitoring and reporting
68.
Substantial knowledge gaps prevent a full understanding of the global plastic crisis andconsequently our ability to confront it in a comprehensive way. These information gaps havenumerous causes, including inconsistent data collection methods, variable or absent metadata
standards, and the lack of a centralized data repository. While the lack of detailed evidence should notprevent immediate action, the generation of an evidence base of consistent, high-quality information
would support national and global action to tackle plastic pollution.
69.
A harmonized set of metrics should be developed to measure progress toward global andnational targets, building on existing data collection activities (for example, other international
agreements and/or the Sustainable Development Goals). Key metrics to monitor include:(a)
Sustainable Development Goal indicator 11.6.1: proportion of municipal solid waste
collected and managed in controlled facilities out of total municipal waste generated, by cities;(b)
Sustainable Development Goal indicator 12.5.1: national recycling rate, tons ofmaterial recycled;(c)Sustainable Development Goal indicator 14.1.1b: plastic debris density;(d)
Total plastic waste generated (this indicator is being reported by government
signatories of the New Plastics Economy Global Commitment);(e)
Total plastic waste recycled (this indicator is being reported by government signatoriesof the New Plastics Economy Global Commitment);(f)

Percentage of a population with adequate waste collection;(g)

Percentage of a population with access to appropriate effective recycling;(h)Total plastic production, per polymer type and application (statistics available fromindustry, not officially reported);(i)Amount of recycled plastic going into new products.

70.
Some of these metrics need to be assessed as country baselines in order to then measureprogress against them. Effort is need to harmonizing approaches to setting such baselines at thenational level, and to identifying the key flows of plastics and the most effective ways to manage
them.

10

UNEP/PP/INC.1/7

1.

Existing monitoring initiatives
71.
Existing initiatives for monitoring plastics in the economy as well as plastic pollution in theenvironment may be leveraged to build a monitoring framework. Relevant existing initiatives include:(a)
Sustainable Development Goal indicator 12.5.1: national recycling rate, tons ofmaterial recycled: The data on municipal waste recycled are national data provided by countries on abiennial basis through the Questionnaire on Environment Statistics, developed jointly by the Statistics
Division of the Department of Economic and Social Affairs and the United Nations Environment
Programme (UNEP), and the OECD/Eurostat Joint Questionnaire on the State of the Environment.
The latest available data are for the period 2000–2019. The next data collection cycle is scheduled forthe second half of 2022. Results are published in the Global Sustainable Development Goals Indicators
Database and the World Environment Situation Room. In 2021, UNEP launched the “Global
Chemicals and Waste Indicator Review Document” to strengthen the knowledge base of chemicals
and hazardous waste and enhance the capacity of selected countries to track progress towards related
Sustainable Development Goal indicators across sectors. The document provides a coherent
methodology for measuring the Sustainable Development Goal indicators related to municipal waste(indicator 11.6.1), hazardous waste (indicator 12.4.2) and recycling rate (indicator 12.5.1).
(b)
Sustainable Development Goal indicator 14.1.1b: plastic debris density: In 2021,
UNEP launched the methodology for Sustainable Development Goal indicator 14.1.1, entitled“Understanding the State of the Ocean: A Global Manual on Measuring SDG 14.1.1, SDG 14.2.1 andSDG 14.5.1”. UNEP and the Regional Seas Programme report the data collected from countries forthis indicator, including through a harmonized questionnaire for countries that are not members of theregional seas conventions and action plans.
(c)Another reporting initiative worth mentioning is the New Plastics Economy Global
Commitment,85 led by the Ellen MacArthur Foundation and UNEP. More than 500 signatories,
including businesses and governments, have committed themselves to taking specific actions acrossthe full life cycle of plastic products and reporting annually on their progress.
(d)
The Plastics Management Index, launched by the Economist Impact and the Nippon
Foundation, compares and contrasts the efforts made by 25 countries at various stages of developmentin their management of plastics, covering the entire life cycle of plastic products.86(e)
The technical guidelines for the identification and environmentally soundmanagement of plastic wastes and for their disposal (UNEP/CHW.6/21)87 adopted by the
Conference of the Parties to the Basel Convention on the Control of Transboundary Movements ofHazardous Wastes and Their Disposal in 2002 also provide useful guidance for sampling, analysis andmonitoring of plastic wastes.

2.

An opportunity to improve data quality
72.
Harmonized metrics can support better assessments and decisions by all actors. The
reporting provisions within the international legally binding instrument on plastic pollution, includingin the marine environment, could include requirements for a harmonized set of metrics to enhancetransparency and disclosure by public and private sector actors – including the metrics described inthis section. Methods used for data collection should build on and work in coordination with existing
reporting schemes. With enhanced data quality and transparency, stakeholders will be able to inform
optimal decisions, companies and investors will understand how their actions and investments
contribute to solutions, governments will be able to develop the right regulations, policies and targets
and consumers and civil society groups will be empowered to hold companies accountable for theplastics produced and sold. Furthermore, the demonstration of credible, continuous progress towards
achieving the objectives of the instrument will help to secure political support and financing andultimately enhance the impact of the instrument over the long term.

F.

Solutions and technologies and their costs and benefits
73.
Research on plastic pollution shows the need for a comprehensive, integrated application ofsolutions across the entire life cycle of plastics. United Nations Environment Assembly resolution 5/14
shows that this has been embraced politically.
74.
The solutions are based on the pressing need to shift to a resource-efficient circular economy,
where products are kept at their highest value for as long as possible and where plastic is considered avalued resource that continues to circulate in the economy.

11

UNEP/PP/INC.1/7

1.

Life-cycle approach to addressing plastic pollution
75.
A life-cycle approach to plastics considers the impacts of all the activities and outcomes
associated with the production and consumption of plastic materials, products and services – from raw
material extraction and processing (refining, cracking, polymerization) to design, manufacturing,packaging, distribution, use (and reuse), maintenance and end of life management, including
segregation, collection, sorting, recycling and disposal. Transportation and trade of plastic products
also occur at each stage of the life cycle. Plastic pollution can happen at any stage, although the end oflife and use stages are where the biggest share originates.88 Figure 2 illustrates the life-cycle stages.89
Figure 2
Illustration of the life cycle of plastic

76.
Consideration of the full life cycle allows the hidden costs and trade-offs of different
environmental, social and economic impacts and different stages of the life cycle to be taken into
account, ensuring that one solution to a particular problem does not create a greater negative impact
elsewhere. A life-cycle approach also helps to identify the stages that have the highest impact(hotspots) and evaluate alternatives for reducing their impact. For instance, studies by the
UNEP-hosted Life Cycle Initiative on single-use plastic products and their alternatives90 show that, inmost cases, reusable products outperform single-use plastic products across all environmental impact
categories.
77.
Life-cycle stages may also be simplified into upstream, midstream and downstream
activities.91(a)Upstream activities include obtaining the raw materials from crude oil, natural gas orrecycled and renewable feedstock (e.g., biomass) and polymerization. Plastic leakage into theenvironment (e.g., pellets, flakes) already happens at this stage.
(b)
Midstream activities involve the design, manufacture, packaging, distribution, use(and reuse) and maintenance of plastic products and services. Keeping plastic products at midstream
for as long as possible is ideal for circularity, because this is where plastic products have their highest
value.
(c)
Downstream activities involve end-of-life management – including segregation,collection, sorting, recycling and disposal. Recycling is a process that starts downstream and “closes
the loop” by connecting with upstream (i.e., starting a new life cycle for new plastic products with oldmaterials). Similarly, repair/refurbish processes provide another way to close the loop by bringing
products back into the midstream.

12

UNEP/PP/INC.1/7

2.

Policy and legislative tools across the life cycle
78.

Solutions include actions that support:(a)

The elimination of problematic and unnecessary plastic, including hazardous additives;(b)Innovation to ensure that the plastics used in the economy are reusable, recyclable orcompostable (and reused, recycled or composted in practice);(c)
Circulation of all the plastic items used, to keep them in the economy and out of theenvironment;(d)
The collection and responsible disposal of plastics that cannot be recycled or that haveaccumulated in the environment.
79.
Policies need to target market failures. To effectively address plastic pollution, policies andlegislation need to target the market failures that drive waste and overuse of plastics. A recent WorldBank study catalogued the underlying economic drivers of plastic pollution, which include
underpricing of costs; branding and marketing measures that increase the costs of recycling; andexcessive availability of cheap, virgin plastics that makes it hard for recycled plastics to compete. 92
80.
Market-based instruments complement normative tools. There is a range of policy andlegislative instruments for ensuring that the “polluter pays”, ranging from fiscal instruments, such as
taxes on single-use plastic products, to tipping and advance disposal fees that help to align andtransmit the true costs of plastic pollution to consumers and producers. These market instruments canplay an important, complementary role to normative tools such as outright bans. 93
81.
Table 2 outlines a range of possible policy and legislative tools that can be used to help
eliminate or reduce plastic pollution. A combination of these measures is required to reduce plastic
pollution across the life cycle as part of a comprehensive approach at the national and international
levels.

13

UNEP/PP/INC.1/7

Table 2
Possible measures for addressing plastic pollution
Policy instrument

Description

ExamplesBans or restrictions

Prohibit, restrict or place other controlson the production, use or sale of certain
items.

Ban or restriction of single-use plastic products(e.g., based on thickness or recyclability in the context
where they are sold)
Ban on certain chemicals and additives based on toxicity,
hazard, risk, etc.
Ban on waste trade, except where such trade enables
circularity (e.g., plastic waste destined for recycling inaccordance with the Basel Convention)

Behaviouralinterventions

Promote the voluntary adoption of proenvironment behaviour in societies
through nonprice and nonregulatory
means (e.g., nudging).

Education, communication and public awarenesscampaigns
Voluntary certification schemes

Extended producer
responsibility

Shift product life cycle costs to
producers through take-back mandates;
intended to foster materials recycling
and design for circularity.

Mandated take-back programmes for packaging waste
Eco-modulated fees in extended producer responsibility
schemesStandards andlabelling

Stipulate minimum/maximum
thresholds for product content.
Stipulate definitions.
Stipulate mandatory design features.
Stipulate and require the transmissionof information.

Recycled content standards
Labelling of content
Design requirements (e.g., to ensure reusability of bottles
in common refilling schemes, or recycling within existing
facilities (i.e., “design out” hard-to-recycle plastic
products)
Standards on minimum compostability or biodegradabilityof plastics to avoid microplastics leakage
Information-sharing mechanism to convey plastic
composition information to, for instance, enable safe
recycling
Minimum targets for recycling; maximum targets for
products sent to landfill

Subsidies

Provide payment (e.g., grants) or tax
concessions to consumers or producers
for pollution reduction.

Subsidies for recycling plastic waste or recycled content
Tax reductions / permit facilitations for industrial
activities needed for circularity (e.g., installation ofrecycling plants)

Taxes, tariffs andfees

Charge an importer, producer or
disposer of a product for its production
or disposal, where the charge varies in
the quantity of externality (e.g., plastic)
produced or disposed of.

Taxes on virgin materials / products below a certain
content of recycled material
Volumetric garbage taxes (e.g., “pay-as-you-throw”
pricing)
Product taxes/fees/tariffs (e.g., fees on plastic bags, higher
import tariffs on products that are difficult to recycle in
the local market, custom duties or tariffs on single-use
plastic products)
Advance disposal/recycling fees
Landfill taxes and fees

Combined tax andsubsidy (i.e., twopart instruments)

Pair taxes on producers or consumers
with subsidies for proper disposal.

Deposit–refund schemes

Incentives forinnovation

Support the development of new design
techniques, technologies, processes,
materials and business, models throughvarious incentives.

Product design regulations
Environmental impact assessment or strategic
environmental assessment or other impact assessment
process requirement for production facilities“Rights to repair” schemes or legislation
New return systems and reverse logistics platforms
Materials design and technology investment
Removing barriers to investment
Development of technologies to improve the sorting,recycling and final disposal of plastic waste, throughapplication of the technical guidelines for theidentification and environmentally sound management ofplastic wastes and for their disposal (UNEP/CHW.6/21),
adopted by the parties to the Basel Convention in 2002
(currently being updated(UNEP/CHW.15/6/Add.7/Rev.1))

Source: Adapted from Joshua K. Abbott and U. Rashid Sumaila, “Reducing marine plastic pollution:
policy insights from economics”, Review of Environmental Economics and Policy, vol. 13, no. 2 (summer 2019).

14

UNEP/PP/INC.1/7

3.

A systems change to address plastic pollution
82.
Moving to circularity addresses the root causes of plastic pollution. Addressing plastic
pollution requires a systems (or systemic) change, with actions across the life cycle that address its
root causes rather than its symptoms (i.e., a move to a resource-efficient circular economy).
83.
Four strategic goals to support the systems change, along with a selection of sample
actions, are presented in table 3. Actions can fall under more than one goal due their cross-cutting
nature or role in driving change across the life cycle; further analysis may help assess the costs andbenefits of their application in specific conditions (e.g., geography, capacity for implementation andenforcement, type of plastic).
84.
Appendix VI summarizes options for related measures that could help achieve the necessary
systems change if applied in an integrated way.
Table 3Strategic goals to support a systems change to address plastic pollution
Strategic goals for systems change

Sample actions

Strategic goal 1: Reduce the size of the problem
by eliminating and substituting problematic andunnecessary plastic items, including hazardous
additives

Eliminate problematic or unnecessary polymers andadditives.
Eliminate problematic or unnecessary plastic products.
Substitute virgin inputs with recycled content.

Strategic goal 2: Ensure that plastic products aredesigned to be circular (reusable, recyclable orcompostable)

Provide international guidance or standards forcompostable and biodegradable materials and minimum
recycled content for plastic.
Foster design for circularity (for reuse and recycling) byproviding for standardized rules and labelling, as well as
information needs and economic incentives, where needed.
Develop international guidance, standards and controls on
additives and chemicals of concern.
Increase investment in new materials, additives,technologies and product design, as well as safe andsustainable alternatives.
Encourage the finance sector and markets to stimulateaction towards circularity.
Create enabling conditions for innovative solutions
through policy.

Strategic goal 3: Close the loop of plastic in theeconomy by ensuring that plastic products are
circulated in practice (reused, recycled orcomposted)

Empower the informal plastics waste sector throughinclusive consultation.
Establish deposit return schemes for all suitable products.
Implement extended producer responsibility, product takeback and right-to-repair requirements to stimulate better
product design.
Improve transparency and information-sharing, including
on chemicals associated with plastics.
Promote citizen campaigns to enhance plastic reuse,segregation and collection rates.
Increase investment in plastic waste collection.
Increase mechanical recycling capability and scale-up
sustainable recycling technologies.
Remove trade barriers to plastic circularity.

Strategic goal 4: Manage plastic waste thatcannot be reused or recycled in anenvironmentally sound manner (including
existing pollution)

Minimize end-of-life plastic disposal.
Prevent the export of plastic waste to nations withinsufficient capacity to manage that waste (in line with theBasel Convention).
Reduce transboundary movement of hazardous wastes andother wastes to the minimum consistent with theenvironmentally sound and efficient management of such
wastes (Basel Convention).
Prevent microplastics leakage.
Remediate existing plastic pollution hotspots (legacy
pollution).

15

UNEP/PP/INC.1/7

Strategic goal 1: Reduce the size of the problem by eliminating and substituting problematicand unnecessary plastic items, including hazardous additives
85.
Eliminating products by rethinking design and purpose. Many of the products that might
be considered unnecessary also represent the bulk of plastic leakage into the environment. It is
economically feasible to reduce the consumption of short-lived plastic products by 30 per cent by 2040
while respecting the needs of a growing population and economy. 94 Eliminating problematic andunnecessary plastic products is best achieved by rethinking the design and purpose of products to“design out” problematic or unnecessary plastic use as well as hazardous chemicals and “design in”
sustainable alternatives. Sustainable alternatives should be assessed using a life cycle approach toensure that they do not involve burden-shifting. Examples of sustainable alternatives that demonstratebetter results in life-cycle assessment studies include reusable options95 and products with a highrecycled content. Appendix II sets out a selection of actions, drawn from a range of studies, that could
help to reduce plastic pollution through the elimination and substitution of problematic or unnecessary
plastics.96
Strategic goal 2: Ensure that plastic products are designed to be circular (reusable,
recyclable or compostable)
86.
Necessary plastic products will continue to play an important role in society in terms of
unique utilities – in medical appliances or their ability to preserve food, for example – and properties
like versatility, light weight, durability and low cost. Such essential plastic products need to beembedded in circular systems to avoid pollution and maintain their value in the economy.
87.
The design phase is a critical part of ensuring reuse and recyclability while addressing
chemicals of concern. Designing to facilitate maintenance, collection, sorting, reuse and repurposing
will be key, as well as ensuring plastic products and their additives do not hinder or disrupt therecyclability of other plastic products in the same waste streams. Also critical in the design phase isaddressing associated chemicals of concern. Additionally, the mixing of polymers and the use ofpigments and/or dyes can negatively affect recycling processes and contaminate new products throughrecycling, reducing a product’s recyclability and the economic value of the recycling output. Appendix
III contains a selection of actions, drawn from a range of studies, that could assist in making plastics inthe system reusable, recyclable or compostable.
88.
Compostable plastic products may be part of the solution for very specific applications
provided adequate standards are enforced. Under controlled conditions, compostable plastic candegrade fully into carbon dioxide, biomass and water compliant with relevant standards. Such plastic
can be valuable for targeted applications such as bin liners for collection of organic waste destined forcomposting, if coupled with the relevant collection and composting infrastructure to ensure that it iscomposted in practice.97 Unless used in compliance with adequate standards, however, biodegradable
plastics carry a high risk of microplastic pollution.
Strategic goal 3: Close the loop of plastics in the economy by ensuring that plastic products
are circulated in practice (reused, recycled or composted)
89.
Closing the loop of plastics in the economy is the key to transitioning from a take-make-waste
model to a circular economy. The two main possible technologies for recycling are mechanicalrecycling and chemical recycling.
-

Mechanical recycling (collecting, cleaning, chipping and remelting of thermoplastics) is themore sustainable option; its technology is proven, it can be managed at a profit, and it emits
50 per cent less greenhouse gas emissions per metric ton of plastic product than chemical
recycling.98-

Chemical recycling includes a wide array of technologies that for the most part are not yet
proven at scale. Chemical recycling may be a useful option for products that cannot bemechanically recycled. Chemical recycling tends to be energy intensive and should only be used
when the overall environmental profile is comparable to or better than other proven management
options. The Basel Convention technical guidelines (UNEP/CHW.15/6/Add.7/Rev.1) provide
further useful information on chemical recycling.

90.
Appendix IV contains a selection of actions, drawn from a range of studies, that could help
support the circularity of plastics across their life cycle.

16

UNEP/PP/INC.1/7

Strategic goal 4: Managing plastic waste that cannot be reused or recycled in anenvironmentally sound manner (including existing pollution)
91.
Safe disposal is still needed for non-circular plastic products. Safe disposal will still be
required as a last resort solution by 2040 to prevent about 100 million metric tons of plastic waste
pollution from entering the environment. Existing pollution is also of concern and may need specificremediation activities, particularly in the marine environment. Plastic also has certain legacy issues,
with the long lifespans of some plastics applications locking in waste for decades. For instance, forconstruction, more than 90 per cent of waste up until 2040 will be from plastics produced before
2019.99 Appendix V contains a selection of actions, drawn from a range of studies, that could support
safe collection and responsible disposal of plastics.
4.

The importance of trade in the plastics economy
92.
Trade is an important component of the plastics system. Exports of primary, intermediate
and final forms of plastics may reach over $1 trillion over one year alone – around 5 per cent of total
global trade in 2018.100 This figure is likely an underestimate owing to the challenges of estimating thevalue and volume of “hidden” plastics embedded in millions of products.
93.
Trade occurs at every step of the plastics life cycle and has a broad geographic spread –virtually all countries are importers of plastic in one form or another, and many are exporters as
well.101
94.
Plastic trade flows are relevant to plastic pollution for three main reasons.102 First, tradeadds to the waste management burden that importing countries face and is a conveyer belt for the
spread of products responsible for microplastic pollution. Second, trade in plastic waste to countries
with inadequate waste management capacity can exacerbate leakage of plastics into the environment.
Third, the plastics sector and its fossil fuel and chemical inputs contribute to greenhouse gas emissions
and environmental and health challenges.
95.
In view of the trade dimension, many solutions across the plastics life cycle require aninternational approach. Appendices II to VI highlight policies and policy elements whose efficacy
would be enhanced by an international approach that ensures a globally level playing field.

5.

Opportunities in moving forward: the costs and benefits of systems change
96.
An 80 per cent reduction of plastic pollution is possible. According to an International
Resource Panel report,103 the comprehensive circular economy approach delivered by the strategic
goals presented in the previous sections could reduce the volume of plastics entering the oceans byover 80 per cent by 2040; reduce virgin plastic production used in short-lived plastic products by
55 per cent; save governments $70 billion over the period 2021–2040; reduce greenhouse gas
emissions by 25 per cent; and create 700,000 additional jobs, mainly in the global South.
97.
700,000 jobs can be created. The systems change scenario would create net direct
employment across the life cycle by 2040 equivalent to 700,000 jobs, redistributed among sectors andregions. Almost all the job growth would occur in middle- and low-income countries, mostly in reuse
schemes, new delivery models and production of compostable alternatives, while job losses would
occur in virgin plastic production, as well as in formal and informal collection, owing to a smaller
volume of waste.
98.
Greenhouse gas emissions would be reduced. Reuse schemes could decrease life cycle
greenhouse gas emissions by 60 to 80 per cent when compared to single-use plastic products, and new
reuse schemes and delivery models could create ~1.4 million jobs globally by 2040. Improving thedesign of plastic products and packaging for recycling could expand the share of economicallyrecyclable plastic from today’s 21 per cent to 54 per cent by 2040, by improving its profitability from$120 per metric ton to $240 per metric ton.104 This could reduce greenhouse gas emissions by
48 per cent when comparing recycling versus landfilling plastic waste.
99.
Governments will reap net savings from reducing plastic waste. In terms of costs, deliveryof the systems change as described would result in a net saving of $70 billion for governments overthe period 2021–2040, mainly because of the reduced volume of plastic waste requiring end-of-life
treatment.105 Savings would occur mainly in high-income countries (where current costs are higher),while net costs are expected in other income groups. Table 4 provides further details of the change in
expected costs for governments for the period 2021–2040, by income group.

17

UNEP/PP/INC.1/7

Table 4
Total change in expected government costs for the period 2021–2040, by income group(Billions of United States dollars)Comparison, system change versus business as usual
Net present value of costs for governmentsa
High
incomeUpper
middleincomeLower
middleincomeLower
income

Total

-107

-16

1

6

-116

Formal sorting-7

11

Thermal treatment

-19

0

3
-

-0
-

-18

Engineered landfills

-4

3

2

1

2

Substitute – paper – waste management (end of life)

14

4

2

0

20

Substitute – coated paper – waste management (end of life)

8

3

1

0

13

Substitute – compostables – waste management (end of life)

7

9

4

1

20

-108

14

14

8

-72

Formal collection

Total
a At a discount rate of 3.5 per cent.

Source: The Pew Charitable Trusts and SYSTEMIQ, Breaking the Plastic Wave: A Comprehensive Assessment of
Pathways towards Stopping Ocean Plastic Pollution: Summary Report (2020).

18

7

UNEP/PP/INC.1/7

Appendix I
Key terms
Essential (plastic products) use refers to uses that are considered necessary for health, safety or otherimportant purposes for which alternatives are not yet established.106(Full) life-cycle approach means considering all potential impacts of all activities and outcomes
associated with the production and consumption of plastics, including raw material extraction andprocessing (for plastics: refining; cracking; polymerization), design and manufacturing, packaging,
distribution, use and reuse, maintenance and end of life management, including segregation,collection, sorting, recycling, and disposal.107 (working definition)
Macroplastics: Anything made of plastic that can be easily seen,108 usually considered as being above
5 mm in diameter.
Microplastics: There is ongoing debate about the size limit; the definition of microplastics as particles
less than 5 mm in diameter is used. 109 Microplastics are categorized into primary and secondary:Primary microplastics are manufactured to carry out a specific function110 (e.g., cosmetics,
abrasive cleaning beads).
Secondary microplastics result from wear and tear or fragmentation of larger objects, bothduring use and following loss to the environment.111
Nanoplastics are a subset of microplastics, usually defined as being under 100 nm in size.112
Plastic leakage refers to the flow of plastics into the terrestrial and aquatic environment.
Plastic pollution is defined broadly as the negative effects and emissions resulting from theproduction and consumption of plastic materials and products across their entire life cycle. Thisdefinition includes plastic waste that is mismanaged (e.g., open-burned and dumped in uncontrolled
dumpsites) and leakage and accumulation of plastic objects and particles that can adversely affecthumans and the living and non-living environment (working definition)
Problematic and unnecessary plastic items: The New Plastics Economy Global Commitment
proposes the following criteria for the identification of problematic or unnecessary plastic packaging
or plastic packaging components:113-

It is not reusable, recyclable or compostable (as per Global Commitment definitions).

-

It contains, or its manufacturing requires, hazardous chemicals114 that pose a significant risk
to human health or the environment (applying the precautionary principle).

-

It can be avoided (or replaced by a reuse model) while maintaining utility.

-

It hinders or disrupts the recyclability or compostability of other items.

-

It has a high likelihood of becoming litter or ending up in the natural environment.

Short-lived plastic products refer to plastics in packaging and consumer products with the shortest
average use cycles – 0.5 and 3 years.115 The categorization is based on average life span, so someproducts will have longer life spans. This category includes single-use plastic products.
Single-use plastic products are designed and produced to be used once before being thrown away or
recycled.
Sustainable, circular plastic products are designed to be reused many times, and their material
recycled or composted at the end of use, in practice and at scale, minimizing their adverse
environmental impacts and respecting the rights of all people involved across their life cycle. (working
definition)
Systems change captures the idea of addressing the causes, rather than the symptoms, of a societal
issue by taking a holistic (or “systemic”) view. Systemic change is generally understood to require
adjustments or transformations in policies, practices, power dynamics, social norms or mindsets. It
often involves a diverse set of players and can take place on a local, national or global level;116
systems change requires modifications in many of the system structures, such as the mindset orparadigm that creates the system or the system’s goals or rules.117

19

UNEP/PP/INC.1/7

Appendix II
Selection of sample actions for strategic goal 1

20

ActionExamples or discussion

Eliminate problematic or unnecessarypolymers and additives

In the European Union, it is estimated that banning the intentional
addition of microplastics to such things as cosmetics, detergents,
paints, polish and coatings would reduce microplastic emissions by
about 400,000 metric tons over 20 years.118 A wide range ofhazardous additives in plastics, such as lead, di(2-ethylhexyl)phthalate(DEHP) and triclosan, are restricted in some countries or regions.

Eliminate problematic or unnecessary
plastic and plastic products

In 2002, Ireland introduced a consumer levy on bags made wholly or
partly of plastic, sold at any sales outlet. The price signal was set at0.15 euros, more than six times higher than the maximum the average
consumer was willing to pay. This led to an immediate 90 per centreduction in the use of plastic bags. As the consumption of single-use
plastic carrier bags started increasing again in 2006, the tax wasincreased from 0.15 to 0.22 euros per bag. Part of the reason the Irish
tax on single-use plastic carrier bags was particularly successful at
reducing bag consumption was the accompanying information
campaign, which paved the way for widespread awareness and buy-in
by explaining policy objectives and tax revenue destinations.119

Replace virgin inputs with recycledcontent

A tax on the purchase of virgin plastic feedstock and plasticcontaining products for manufacturers of plastic packaging could
provide a clear economic incentive for businesses to use less virginplastic in the production of plastic packaging and plastic-containing
products. To determine the optimum taxation levels and rates ofincrease, a country-specific economic appraisal and impact assessment
are required. Analysis by OECD120 suggests that increasing a tax at
the global scale on plastic packaging linearly to $1,000/ton by 2030
and $2,000/ton by 2060 would roughly double the cost of plastic andcould aid in decreasing plastic consumption, increase demand forrecycled plastic and enhance investment in collection and recycling
infrastructure.

UNEP/PP/INC.1/7

Appendix III
Selection of sample actions for strategic goal 2
ActionDiscussion

Foster design for circularity forreuse and recycling by considering
the need for standardized rules andlabelling, as well as informationneeds and economic incentives.

Developing a shared understanding of the hierarchy of actions in acircular system where plastic never becomes waste can incentivize thedesign of more durable and sustainable products that are not toxic tohumans or the environment. Consistent labelling of materials, such as
the use of specific symbols and colours for particular types of plastic,can enhance efficiency in the collection and sorting markets. Consumers
can also use label information to make informed purchasing decisions toprotect themselves from plastic-associated chemical exposure or demandsafer products. Clear labelling can drive market growth and innovation
by generating demand for increased circularity, driving investment andincentives for businesses and producers to conform.

Develop international guidance,
standards and controls for additives
and chemicals of concern.

Identifying hazardous chemicals in plastics and implementing controls
and appropriate management could reduce harm to humans and theenvironment, as well as increasing safe reuse of plastic products andtheir recyclability. Ongoing work to this effect includes the amendments
to annexes II, VIII and IX of the Basel Convention.

Increase investment in new productdesign as well as in safe andsustainable alternatives to plastics.

While much can be done with present technological solutions, there isalso a need to consider technology gaps and opportunities, particularly
in different geographies, that can address the need for sustainable,
affordable and accessible substitutes for problematic and unnecessary
plastic products and additives. Flexible and multi-material plastics are
typically the most difficult formats to recycle. They make up 59 per centof plastic in short-lived products but account for 80 per cent of pollution,highlighting the urgent need to redesign them.

Encourage the finance sector andmarkets to spur action.

Emerging markets offer a significant opportunity for achieving thelargest impact on plastic waste mismanagement and an attractiverisk-adjusted return; however, financial investment in the recycling andcircular economy has not matched this opportunity. Initiatives that could
be considered by the finance sector to support plastic circular economy
action are summarized in a 2021 report entitled “Financing Plastic
Action in Emerging Markets Addressing Barriers to Investment”.
Actions include: 121
Supporting new business models: The Althelia Sustainable Ocean Fund,a $132 million vehicle focused on circular economy invested $2 million
in India in an effort that seeks to transform informal sector actors into
“waste--preneurs”.
Deploying capital at scale by investing in and underwriting, via
early-stage innovation funds or companies, such as Sky Ocean Ventures
Fund, with 25 million pounds sterling deployed to new technologies,
materials and business models; and RWDC (Singapore-registeredfacility located in the United States of America), a
polyhydroxyalkanoate-based biomaterials producer, which raised$133 million in a series B funding round in May 2020.
Public institutions have a significant opportunity to send market signals
through sustainable public procurement (e.g., by setting criteria forminimum recycled content in the plastic products they purchase or
promoting reuse systems in their procurement).

Implement extended producer
responsibility schemes and producttake-back requirements.

A study of 395 existing extended producer responsibility schemesaround the world showed that policies that directly target productcharacteristics (such as weight, recyclability, etc.) provide the mostdirect incentives for eco-design changes.122 The effectiveness ofextended producer responsibility schemes in meeting reuse andrecycling targets also tends to increase when extended producer
responsibility is coupled with economic instruments such as landfill andincineration taxes, disposal bans for certain products or materials,
packaging taxes and pay-as-you-throw schemes.123 Eco-modulation offees should also be considered. The eco-modulated fees should include
the net costs associated with the collection, sorting and recycling of amaterial stream, thus providing the incentive to use materials with morefavourable recycling economics.
21

UNEP/PP/INC.1/7

22

ActionDiscussion

Provide international guidance on
standards for compostable andbiodegradable materials andminimum recycled content forplastic.

Bio-based plastics made from renewable raw materials and conventional
plastics can also contain hazardous additives and contaminants that,while manufactured from plant-based polymers, are not necessarily
biodegradable, so they can fragment into microplastics and persist in theenvironment for long periods. In the context of recycling, bioplastics canalso contaminate the recycling process if they are not separated fromconventional plastics, hence the desirability of standards for suchmaterials.124
Minimum standards for recycled content are being introduced to drive
new design and reductions in virgin plastic use and the use of plastic
overall. For instance, the European Union requires its members to
produce PET drinks bottles with at least a quarter of recycled plastic by
2025 and at least 30 per cent by 2030.125

UNEP/PP/INC.1/7

Appendix IV
Selection of sample actions for strategic goal 3
ActionDiscussion

Empower the informal
plastics waste sector.

The informal waste sector is a critical stakeholder group that must be inclusively
involved in the design and development of activities and strategies to address plastic
pollution. Such action will be highly context specific. For example, software solutions
are being designed in the context of the Global Plastic Action Partnership to connect
informal waste pickers with potential buyers; such transparency in the value chain
facilitates pickers earning fairer wages and is a first step towards their formalization.

Establish deposit returnschemes for all suitableproducts.

Deposit return schemes can provide a small economic incentive to return the product toa waste-handling point or back into the correct waste flow. For example, in Ecuador, in
2011, a refundable $0.02 deposit was introduced for every PET beverage bottlebought, which was returned to the consumer when the bottle was recycled. The PET
bottle recycling rate rose from 30 per cent in 2011 to 80 per cent in 2012, when
1.13 million of the 1.4 million PET bottles produced were recycled.126

Improve transparency
and information-sharing
for problematic plastics,
including for chemicals
of concern associatedwith plastics.

Clear plastic labelling and/or other methods of information transfer can help todistinguish between plastics, support effective collection and sorting, and reduce therisk of problematic contamination of waste flows. It also aims to identify chemical
exposures and risks, which can then be used by regulators to create measures that
adequately safeguard human and environmental health. Consumers can also use thisinformation to make informed purchasing decisions to protect themselves fromplastic-associated chemical exposure or demand safer products. Clear labelling candrive market growth and innovation by generating demand for increased circularity,
driving investment and incentives for businesses and producers to conform.

Increase investment inplastic waste collection.

It is estimated that 22 per cent (47 million metric tons) of total annual plastic waste
globally is currently left uncollected and that this figure could grow to 34 per cent(143 million metric tons) by 2040 under a business-as-usual scenario. Approximately
4 billion people will need to be connected to collection services by 2040, which
requires connecting approximately 500,000 people to collection services per day, every
single day until 2040, the majority of them in middle-/low-income countries.127

Double mechanicalrecycling capability.

Doubling the global mechanical recycling capacity can cover ~35 per cent of the total
plastics volumes in short-lived products (vs. 15 per cent today), considering actions of
reduce, substitute, design and collection are implemented in parallel. Mechanicalrecycling can bring economic savings into the global plastic system. Mechanicalrecycling has the potential to reduce the total system cost in $/metric ton of plastic(e.g., closed loop including collection and sorting costs) by $80 to $300 per metric ton,depending on the region and in comparison to non-circular life cycles. Regarding
greenhouse gas emissions, mechanical recycling emits ~60 per cent fewer emissions
than controlled incineration on a per metric ton basis. Only the elimination of plastic in
the design or reuse schemes is more beneficial when it comes to greenhouse gas
emissions.

Scale up alternative
sustainable recycling
technologies.

Because of the limitations of mechanical recycling for some plastic types, newrecycling technologies are being advanced that can handle lower-value plastic, such asfilm and multi-materials, and contaminated plastic.128 New technologies such as
chemical recycling should be considered and evaluated on their potential to help
recycle plastics in a sustainable way. Agreed criteria to provide such sustainability
assessment could include the greenhouse gas emissions profile across the life cycle ofalternative technologies for recycling, mass yield (percentage of plastic waste
recovered as secondary material), alongside other environmental impacts, economic
costs, and social implications of the alternative recycling technologies. The Basel
Convention technical guidelines for the identification and environmentally soundmanagement of plastic wastes and for their disposal provide further useful guidance.

Remove trade barriers
that hamper plastic
circularity.

It is important to identify and remove barriers to plastic circularity. For instance,
several countries have implemented complex rules for high-quality recycling plastic
imports, which limits the use of recycled plastic packaging. In other cases,
manufacturers have had to switch to virgin plastic inputs for certain consumer goods,
as the same quality of recycled plastic could not be sourced in the domestic market.
Some markets have slow regulatory approval processes regarding the use of recycledplastic products.

23

UNEP/PP/INC.1/7

Appendix V
Selection of sample actions for strategic goal 4
ActionDiscussion

Minimize end-of-life plastic disposal.

Landfill and incineration charges (e.g., taxes and tipping fees)
can direct waste upward in the waste hierarchy towards recovery
and recycling by giving the other options a monetary benefit. In
OECD countries, the introduction of a tax on waste sent tolandfill has prompted a marked decrease in the volume ofmaterial being disposed of in landfills and an increase inmaterial recovery facilities and mechanical and biologicaltreatment facilities. 129 The Basel Convention provides technicalguidelines for the environmentally sound management of plastic
wastes and for their disposal.

Prevent the export of waste to nations withinsufficient capacity to manage that waste (inline with the Basel Convention).

Studies on trade bans or restrictions on plastic waste exports tocountries that lack waste management capacity have shown that,in the short term, the ban significantly improves indicators ofenvironmental impact, albeit contributed to global warming.130
In the case of a ban in China, an annual saving of about
2.35 billion euros was realized, equivalent to 56 per cent of theplastic waste global trade value in 2017.131

Capture leaked microplastics by enhancing
collection and management systems.

Better product design and selection should be the priority in
reducing microplastic production and consumption; however,the use of technologies to collect and remediate microplastic
pollution efficiently and prevent microplastics from entering thewider environment, such as filtering devices on taps and lint
capture devices in clothes driers, can be beneficial.
Consideration should be given to how such collected
microplastic waste is then appropriately managed.

Foster innovation in technologies for capturing Technologies for the collection of plastics, including
leaked plastic.
microplastics, is also an emerging area, along with new tools
and approaches for preventing plastic leakage (e.g., thedevelopment of traps and sensors in stormwater drains that canhelp capture the estimated 40 to 60 per cent of plastic waste that
ends up in the marine environment). Recycling and waste
management technologies are also a key emerging area of
research and innovation.

24

UNEP/PP/INC.1/7

Appendix VI
Measures for achieving the strategic goals for systems change
Focus points and life-cycle stages

Possible measures for achieving the strategic goals for systems change

Upstream:
Extraction of raw materials-

Processing (refining, cracking,polymerization)
Trade

-

-

Midstream:
Design, manufacture, use, maintenanceand reuse
Trade/distribution

-

-

-

-

-

-

-

-

-

Taxes/tariffs related to upstream activities (e.g., a tax on polymers produced
from virgin feedstock)
Removal of fossil fuel subsidies
Redirecting fossil fuel subsidies to financing a transition to circular systems
Financial or other incentives for the use of recycled content
Investment in reuse and recycling infrastructure
Targets for recycled content in polymer production (e.g., by final application)
Minimum sustainability standards for bio-based feedstock for plastics (e.g.,
no competition with food, zero deforestation, no sourcing from organic soils)
Rules, standards, technical requirements and definitions for labelling ofchemicals used in plastics (to enhance safety over the life cycle andrecyclability at the end of life)
Enhanced safety requirements in the trade of feedstocks and primary plastics(e.g., nurdles) to reduce risk from spills
Phase-out of harmful substances used in polymers, based on agreed-upon
attributes
Ban on problematic or unnecessary polymers and additives (to reduce thenumber of materials requiring differentiated sorting and recycling streams) for
specific applications (e.g., PVC, PS and EPS in packaging)
Implement environmental impact assessment, strategic environmental
assessment or other impact assessment process for production facilities
Taxes/tariffs related to midstream activities (e.g., levied from plastic
converters per weight of virgin plastic in the product, custom duties or tariffs
on single-use plastic products)
Tax incentives for business models based on reuse and keeping resources inthe economy (possibly financed by heavier taxation on extraction of raw
materials); shifting taxes from “circular jobs” (those necessary to keep
resources in the economy) towards virgin resources
Eco-modulated fees in extended producer responsibility schemes to encourage
design for reuse and recycling; fees from extended producer responsibility to
be used in financing reuse and recycling systems
Adoption of key criteria for extended producer responsibility schemes for
packaging and other key sectors (e.g., fishing gear, textiles, transport,
construction)
Deposit refund schemes that combine a deposit on product consumption witha rebate when the plastic product or its packaging is returned for reuse or
recycling
Customs duties and tariffs on single-use plastic products; trade incentives toencourage reuse technology transfer
Rules, standards, technical requirements and definitions for labelling ofplastic products (to enhance safety over the life cycle and recyclability at theend of life)
Adoption of key criteria for green/sustainable institutional procurement,
including criteria for the promotion of reuse schemes to prevent waste, forrecycled content and for recyclability
Targets for reusable/refillable packaging as a key strategy for enhancing
resource efficiency“Right-to-repair” schemes and requirements
Standards for compostable and biodegradable materials for specificapplications (e.g., for food waste, where polymer recycling is not feasible
owing to contamination)
Ban on specific final goods based on agreed criteria regarding what makes
them problematic or unnecessary (e.g., single-use plastic products)
International knowledge hub to deliver life-cycle analyses for identification of
appropriate alternatives to single-use plastic products and other applications
25

UNEP/PP/INC.1/7

Focus points and life-cycle stages

Possible measures for achieving the strategic goals for systems change

Downstream:
Segregation-

Collection-

Sorting
Recycling-

Final disposal

-

Trade
-

-

26

Unit-based or “pay-as-you-throw” pricing – charging plastic waste producers
at the household level either per unit or by weight of plastic waste produced
Trade incentives to encourage sorting, collection and recycling technology
transfer
Minimum targets for recycling percentage; maximum targets for percentage
going to landfill
Landfill and incineration taxes to direct waste upward in the waste hierarchy
towards recovery and recycling; investment of the funds levied in recycling
systems, including labour conditions
Requirements to ensure that traded waste can be recycled at its destination
Recognition of recyclable plastic material as a resource (not as waste) to easetransport and trade for circularity, consistent with the Basel Convention’s
consideration of “end-of-waste”
International standards for plastic credits as a mechanism for removing plastic
pollution from the environment (e.g., environmental and social safeguards forrecycling / safe disposal; reinvestment into a circular infrastructure)

UNEP/PP/INC.1/7

Notes
1 Nicola J. Beaumont and others, “Global ecological, social and economic impacts of marine plastic”, Marine

Pollution Bulletin, vol. 142 (May 2019), pp. 189–195.
2 International Resource Panel, Policy Options to Eliminate Additional Marine Plastic Litter by 2050 under the
G20 Osaka Blue Ocean Vision (Nairobi, UNEP, 2021).
3 OECD, Global Plastics Outlook: Economic Drivers, Environmental Impacts and Policy Options (Paris, OECD
Publishing, 2022).
4 Plastics Europe, Plastics – The Facts 2021: An Analysis of European Plastics Production, Demand and Waste
Data (Brussels, 2021).
5 Under a business-as-usual scenario.
6 OECD, Global Plastics Outlook: Economic Drivers, Environmental Impacts and Policy Options (Paris, OECD
Publishing, 2022).
7 OECD, Global Plastics Outlook: Economic Drivers, Environmental Impacts and Policy Options (Paris, OECD
Publishing, 2022).
8 OECD, Global Plastics Outlook: Economic Drivers, Environmental Impacts and Policy Options (Paris, OECD
Publishing, 2022).
9 UNEP, Drowning in Plastics: Marine Litter and Plastic Waste Vital Graphics (Nairobi, 2021).
10 UNEP, Drowning in Plastics: Marine Litter and Plastic Waste Vital Graphics (Nairobi, 2021).
11 These include plastic products with lifespans of less than five years: packaging (40 per cent), consumer
products (12 per cent) and textiles (11 per cent). See OECD, Global Plastics Outlook: Economic Drivers,
Environmental Impacts and Policy Options (Paris, OECD Publishing, 2022).
12 UNEP, Drowning in Plastics: Marine Litter and Plastic Waste Vital Graphics (Nairobi, 2021).
13 OECD, Global Plastics Outlook: Economic Drivers, Environmental Impacts and Policy Options (Paris, OECD
Publishing, 2022).
14 R. Geyer, R. J. Jambeck and K. L. Law, “Production, use, and fate of all plastics ever made”, Science Advances,vol. 3, no. 7 (July 2017).
15 J. G. Rosenboom, R. Langer and G. Traverso, “Bioplastics for a circular economy”, Nature Reviews Material,
vol. 7 (Jan. 2022), pp. 117–137.
16
H. Wiesinger, Z. Wang and S. Hellweg, “Deep Dive into Plastic Monomers, Additives, and Processing Aids”,
Environmental Science and Technology, vol. 55, no. 13 (July 2021), pp. 9339–9351.
17 Including additives such as fillers, flame retardants, plasticizers, antioxidants, antimicrobial agents, ultraviolet
stabilizers, pigments and catalysts trapped in plastic resins.
18 There may be a variety of chemical compounds present in plastic materials that are not added for a technicalreason during the production process and that can originate from various sources. Such non-intentionally added
substances include breakdown products of food contact materials, impurities of starting materials, unwantedside-products and various contaminants from recycling processes. See Birgit Geueke, “Dossier – Nonintentionally added substances (NIAS)” (June 2018).
19 L. van Oers, E. van der Voet and V. Grundmann, “Additives in the plastics industry”. In B. Bilitewski, R.
Darbra and D. Barceló (eds.), Global Risk-Based Management of Chemical Additives I. Production, Usage andEnvironmental Occurrence (Berlin, Heidelberg, Springer, 2011), pp. 133–149.
20 Five different waste-handling categories (recycling, incineration, landfilling, mismanaged waste and littered
waste) are considered in this modelling. Biodegradable plastics that can be composted at the waste stage are notincluded because this stream remains very small. See OECD, Global Plastics Outlook: Economic Drivers,
Environmental Impacts and Policy Options (Paris, OECD Publishing, 2022).
21 OECD, Global Plastics Outlook: Economic Drivers, Environmental Impacts and Policy Options (Paris, OECD
Publishing, 2022).
22 OECD, Global Plastics Outlook: Economic Drivers, Environmental Impacts and Policy Options (Paris, OECD
Publishing, 2022).
23 UNEP, Drowning in Plastics: Marine Litter and Plastic Waste Vital Graphics (Nairobi, 2021).
24 Ellen MacArthur Foundation, “New Plastics Economy 2021 Recycling Rate Survey results summary”.
Available at https://emf.thirdlight.com/link/glw5k7awhdym-qfl3fa/@/. See table 1, pp. 5–6.
25 Globally, almost 40 per cent of plastics collected for recycling, or close to 22 million metric tons, are lost
during recycling and end up being incinerated, landfilled or mismanaged. OECD, Global Plastics Outlook:
Economic Drivers, Environmental Impacts and Policy Options (Paris, OECD Publishing, 2022).
26 OECD, Global Plastics Outlook: Economic Drivers, Environmental Impacts and Policy Options (Paris, OECD
Publishing, 2022).
27 OECD, Global Plastics Outlook: Economic Drivers, Environmental Impacts and Policy Options (Paris, OECD
Publishing, 2022).

27

UNEP/PP/INC.1/7

28 L. Lebreton and A. Andrady, “Future scenarios of global plastic waste generation and disposal”, Palgrave

Communications, vol. 5, no. 6 (Jan. 2019).
29 S. Borrelle and others, 2020. “Predicted growth in plastic waste exceeds efforts to mitigate plastic pollution”,
Science, vol. 369, no. 6510 (Sept. 2020), pp.1515–1518.
30 The Pew Charitable Trusts and SYSTEMIQ, Breaking the Plastic Wave: A Comprehensive Assessment of
Pathways towards Stopping Ocean Plastic Pollution: Summary Report (2020).
31 The Pew Charitable Trusts and SYSTEMIQ, Breaking the Plastic Wave: A Comprehensive Assessment of
Pathways towards Stopping Ocean Plastic Pollution: Summary Report (2020).
32 OECD, Global Plastics Outlook: Economic Drivers, Environmental Impacts and Policy Options (Paris, OECD
Publishing, 2022).
33 Ibid.
34 Eighty-nine per cent of global macroplastic leakage is in OECD non-member countries, suggesting the need forcapacity-building in end-of-life waste management in these countries. OECD, Global Plastics Outlook: Economic
Drivers, Environmental Impacts and Policy Options (Paris, OECD Publishing, 2022).
35 OECD, Global Plastics Outlook: Economic Drivers, Environmental Impacts and Policy Options (Paris, OECD
Publishing, 2022).
36 K. Richardson, B. D. Hardesty and C. Wilcox, “Estimates of fishing gear loss rates at a global scale: A
literature review and meta-analysis”, Fish and Fisheries, vol. 20, no. 6 (Nov. 2019), pp. 1218–1231.
37 International Maritime Organization, “Marine litter”. Available athttps://www.imo.org/en/MediaCentre/HotTopics/Pages/marinelitter-default.aspx.
38 Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations, Assessment of Agricultural Plastics and Their
Sustainability: A Call for Action (Rome, 2021).
39 UNEP, Drowning in Plastics: Marine Litter and Plastic Waste Vital Graphics (Nairobi, 2021).
40 OECD, Global Plastics Outlook: Economic Drivers, Environmental Impacts and Policy Options (Paris, OECD
Publishing, 2022).
41 OECD, Global Plastics Outlook: Economic Drivers, Environmental Impacts and Policy Options (Paris, OECD
Publishing, 2022).
42 UNEP, Drowning in Plastics: Marine Litter and Plastic Waste Vital Graphics (Nairobi, 2021).
43 OECD, Global Plastics Outlook: Economic Drivers, Environmental Impacts and Policy Options (Paris, OECD
Publishing, 2022).
44 UNEP, Drowning in Plastics: Marine Litter and Plastic Waste Vital Graphics (Nairobi, 2021).
45 OECD, Global Plastics Outlook: Economic Drivers, Environmental Impacts and Policy Options (Paris, OECD
Publishing, 2022).
46 L. J. J. Meijer and others, “More than 1000 rivers account for 80% of global riverine plastic emissions into theocean”, Science Advances, vol. 7, no. 18 (April 2021).
47 UNEP, From Pollution to Solution: A Global Assessment of Marine Litter and Plastic Pollution (Nairobi,2021).
48 Melanie Bergmann and others, “Vast Quantities of Microplastics in Arctic Sea Ice – A Prime Temporary Sink
for Plastic Litter and a Medium of Transport”. In Juan Baztan and others, Fate and Impact of Microplastics inMarine Ecosystems (Elsevier Inc., 2017).
49 UNEP, From Pollution to Solution: A Global Assessment of Marine Litter and Plastic Pollution (Nairobi,2021).
50 Centre for International Environmental Law, Plastic and Health: The Hidden Costs of a Plastic Planet (2019).
51 Andre Vethaak and Juliette Legler, “Microplastics and human health: knowledge gaps should be addressed toascertain the health risks of microplastics”, Science, vol. 371, no. 6530 (Feb. 2021), pp. 672–674.
52 Valentin Foulon and others, “Colonization of polystyrene microparticles by Vibrio crassostreae: light andelectron microscopic investigation”, Environmental Science and Technology, vol. 50, no. 20 (Oct. 2016), pp.
10988–10996.
53 Kieran D. Cox and others, “Hidden Consumption of Microplastics”, Environmental Science and Technology,
vol. 53, no. 12 (June 2019), pp. 7068–7074.
54 Ana Markic and others, “Plastic ingestion by marine fish in the wild”, Critical Reviews in Environmental
Science and Technology, vol. 50, no. 7 (July 2019), pp. 657–697.
55 Nicolo Aurisano and others, “Chemicals of concern in plastic toys”, Environment International, vol. 146 (Jan.
2021).
56 D. Montano, “Chemical and biological work-related risks across occupations in Europe: a review”, Journal of
Occupational Medicine and Toxicology, vol. 9, article 28 (July 2014).
57 K. S. Verma and others, “Toxic Pollutants from Plastic Waste – A Review”, Procedia Environmental Sciences,vol. 35 (2016), pp. 701–708.

28

UNEP/PP/INC.1/7

58 C. Velis and E. Cook, “Mismanagement of Plastic Waste through Open Burning with Emphasis on the Global

South: A Systematic Review of Risks to Occupational and Public Health”, Environmental Science andTechnology, vol. 55, no. 11 (June 2021), pp. 7186–7207.
59 Austine Ofondu Chinomso Iroegbu and others, “Plastic Pollution: A Perspective on Matters Arising:
Challenges and Opportunities”, ACS Omega, vol. 6, no. 30 (July 2021), pp. 19343–19355.
60 R. Dris and others, “A first overview of textile fibers, including microplastics, in indoor and outdoor
environments”, Environmental Pollution, vol. 221 (Feb. 2017), pp. 453–458.
61 P. J. Kole and others, “Wear and Tear of Tyres: A Stealthy Source of Microplastics in the Environment”,
International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health, vol. 14, no. 10 (Oct. 2017).
62 Jodi Flaws and others, Plastics, EDCs and health: A guide for public interest organizations and policy-makers
on endocrine disrupting chemicals & plastics (Washington, Endocrine Society, 2020).
63 Centre for International Environmental Law, Plastic and Health: The Hidden Costs of a Plastic Planet (2019).
64 UNEP, Drowning in Plastics: Marine Litter and Plastic Waste Vital Graphics (Nairobi, 2021).
65 UNEP, From Pollution to Solution: A Global Assessment of Marine Litter and Plastic Pollution (Nairobi,2021).
66 UNEP, From Pollution to Solution: A Global Assessment of Marine Litter and Plastic Pollution (Nairobi,2021).
67 UNEP, From Pollution to Solution: A Global Assessment of Marine Litter and Plastic Pollution (Nairobi,2021).
68 Maocai Shen and others, “(Micro) plastic crisis: un-ignorable contribution to global greenhouse gas emissions
and climate change”, Journal of Cleaner Production, vol. 254, article 120138 (May 2020).
69 Jiajia Zheng and Sangwon Suh, “Strategies to reduce the global carbon footprint of plastics”, Nature Climate
Change, vol. 9 (April 2019), pp. 374–378.
70 L. E. Revell and others, “Direct radiative effects of airborne microplastics", Nature, vol. 598 (Oct. 2021), pp.
462–467.
71 Yu-Lan Zhang, Shi-Chang Kang and Tan-Guang Gao, “Microplastics have light-absorbing ability to enhancecryospheric melting”, Advances in Climate Change Research, vol. 13, no. 4 (June 2022), pp. 455–458.
72 Stephen O. Andersen and others, “Narrowing feedstock exemptions under the Montreal Protocol has multiple
environmental benefits”, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, vol. 118, no. 49 (Nov. 2021).
73 Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations, Assessment of Agricultural Plastics and Their
Sustainability: A Call for Action (Rome, 2021).
74 Dan Zhang and others, “Plastic pollution in croplands threatens long‐term food security”, Global Change
Biology, vol. 26, no. 6 (June 2020), pp. 3356–3367.
75 Boris Worm and others, “Impacts of biodiversity loss on ocean ecosystem services”, Science, vol. 314, no. 5800
(Nov. 2006), pp. 787–790.
76 Nicola J. Beaumont and others, “Global ecological, social and economic impacts of marine plastic”, Marine
Pollution Bulletin, vol. 142 (May 2019), pp. 189–195.
77 UNEP, Drowning in Plastics: Marine Litter and Plastic Waste Vital Graphics (Nairobi, 2021).
78 J. Nikiema and Z. Asiedu, “A review of the cost and effectiveness of solutions to address plastic pollution”,
Environmental Science and Pollution Research, vol. 29 (Jan. 2022), pp. 24547–24573.
79 The Pew Charitable Trusts and SYSTEMIQ, Breaking the Plastic Wave: A Comprehensive Assessment of
Pathways towards Stopping Ocean Plastic Pollution: Summary Report (2020).
80 I. Rijk, M. van Duursen and M. van den Berg, Health Costs That May Be Associated with Endocrine Disrupting
Chemicals: An Inventory, Evaluation and Way Forward to Assess the Potential Socio-Economic Impact of
EDC--Associated Health Effects in the EU (Utrecht, Institute for Risk Assessment Sciences, 2016).
81 Nicola J. Beaumont and others, “Global ecological, social and economic impacts of marine plastic”, Marine
Pollution Bulletin, vol. 142 (May 2019), pp. 189–195.
82 UNEP, Mapping of Global Plastics Value chain and Plastics Losses to the Environment: With a Particular
Focus on Marine Environment (Nairobi, 2018).
83 UNEP, From Pollution to Solution: A Global Assessment of Marine Litter and Plastic Pollution (Nairobi,2021).
84 UNEP, From Pollution to Solution: A Global Assessment of Marine Litter and Plastic Pollution (Nairobi,2021).
85 UNEP, “The New Plastics Economy Global Commitment”. Available at https://www.unep.org/new-plasticseconomy-global-commitment.
86 Back to Blue, “Plastic Management Index”. Available at https://backtoblueinitiative.com/plastics-managementindex/.
87 Currently being updated (UNEP/CHW.15/6/Add.7/Rev.1).

29

UNEP/PP/INC.1/7

88 M. W. Ryberg and others, “Global environmental losses of plastics across their value chains”, Resources,

Conservation and Recycling, vol. 151 (Dec. 2019).
89 Building from UNEP, Greening the economy through life cycle thinking: Ten Years of the UNEP/SETAC Life
Cycle Initiative (Paris, UNEP, 2012); K. Raubenheimer and N. Urho, Possible elements of a new global
agreement to prevent plastic pollution (Copenhagen, Nordic Council of Ministers, 2020).
90 UNEP, Addressing Single-Use Plastic Products Pollution Using a Life Cycle Approach (Nairobi, 2021).
91 See, for instance, K. Raubenheimer and N. Urho, Possible elements of a new global agreement to prevent
plastic pollution (Copenhagen, Nordic Council of Ministers, 2020).
92 World Bank, Where Is the Value in the Chain? Pathways out of Plastic Pollution (Washington, D.C., 2022)
93 Thornton Matheson, Disposal Is Not Free: Fiscal Instruments to Internalize the Environmental Costs of Solid
Waste, International Monetary Fund Working Paper No. 2019/283 (Dec. 2019).
94 The Pew Charitable Trusts and SYSTEMIQ, Breaking the Plastic Wave: A Comprehensive Assessment of
Pathways towards Stopping Ocean Plastic Pollution: Summary Report (2020).
95 UNEP, Addressing Single-Use Plastic Products Pollution Using a Life Cycle Approach (Nairobi, 2021).
96 Note that the selected examples do not represent an exhaustive list.
97 Based on: “New Plastics Economy Global Commitment: Commitments, Vision and Definitions” (Ellen
MacArthur Foundation, 2020). Available at https://emf.thirdlight.com/link/pq2algvgnv1n-uitck8/@/preview/1?o.
98 The Pew Charitable Trusts and SYSTEMIQ, Breaking the Plastic Wave: A Comprehensive Assessment of
Pathways towards Stopping Ocean Plastic Pollution: Summary Report (2020).
99 OECD, Global Plastics Outlook: Economic Drivers, Environmental Impacts and Policy Options (Paris, OECD
Publishing, 2022).
100 Diana Barrowclough, Carolyn Deere-Birkbeck and Julien Christen, Global trade in plastics: insights from thefirst life-cycle trade database, UNCTAD/SER.RP/2020/12 (Dec. 2020).
101 Diana Barrowclough, Carolyn Deere-Birkbeck and Julien Christen, Global trade in plastics: insights from thefirst life-cycle trade database, UNCTAD/SER.RP/2020/12 (Dec. 2020).
102 Diana Barrowclough, Carolyn Deere-Birkbeck and Julien Christen, Global trade in plastics: insights from thefirst life-cycle trade database, UNCTAD/SER.RP/2020/12 (Dec. 2020).
103 International Resource Panel, Policy options to eliminate additional marine plastic litter by 2050 under the
G20 Osaka Blue Ocean Vision (Nairobi, UNEP, 2021), quoting from The Pew Charitable Trusts and SYSTEMIQ,
Breaking the Plastic Wave: A Comprehensive Assessment of Pathways towards Stopping Ocean Plastic Pollution:
Summary Report (2020).
104 The Pew Charitable Trusts and SYSTEMIQ, Breaking the Plastic Wave: A Comprehensive Assessment of
Pathways towards Stopping Ocean Plastic Pollution: Summary Report (2020).
105 The Pew Charitable Trusts and SYSTEMIQ, Breaking the Plastic Wave: A Comprehensive Assessment of
Pathways towards Stopping Ocean Plastic Pollution: Summary Report (2020).
106 K. Garnett and G. Van Calster, “The Concept of Essential Use: A Novel Approach to Regulating Chemicals in
the European Union”, Transnational Environmental Law, vol. 10, no. 1 (March 2021), pp. 159–187.
107 UNEP, “Life Cycle Initiative”. Available at https://www.lifecycleinitiative.org/life-cycle-approach-to-plasticpollution/.
108 UNEP, From Pollution to Solution: A Global Assessment of Marine Litter and Plastic Pollution (Nairobi,2021).
109 UNEP, From Pollution to Solution: A Global Assessment of Marine Litter and Plastic Pollution (Nairobi,2021).
110 M. Cole and others, “Microplastics as contaminants in the marine environment: A review”, Marine Pollution
Bulletin, vol. 62, no. 12 (Dec. 2011), pp. 2588−2597.
111 Joint Group of Experts on the Scientific Aspects of Marine Environmental Protection, Sources, Fate andEffects of Microplastics in the Marine Environment: A Global Assessment (London, International Maritime
Organization, 2015).
112 A. A. Koelmans, E. Besseling and W. J. Shim (2015), “Nanoplastics in the Aquatic Environment: Critical
Review”. In M. Bergmann, L. Gutow and M. Klages, eds., Marine Anthropogenic Litter (Springer, Cham, 2015).
113 Based on Ellen MacArthur Foundation, “New Plastics Economy Global Commitment – Commitments, Vision
and Definitions.( 2020). Available at https://emf.thirdlight.com/link/pq2algvgnv1n-uitck8/@/preview/1?o.
114 Hazardous chemicals are those that exhibit intrinsically hazardous properties such as being persistent, bioaccumulative and toxic; very persistent and very bio-accumulative; carcinogenic, mutagenic and toxic for
reproduction; or endocrine disruptors; not just those that have been regulated or restricted in other regions (source:
Roadmap to Zero, glossary).
115 R. Geyer, R. J. Jambeck and K. L. Law, “Production, use, and fate of all plastics ever made”, Science
Advances, vol. 3, no. 7 (July 2017).

30

UNEP/PP/INC.1/7

116 Ashoka and others, New Allies. How governments can unlock the potential of social entrepreneurs for thecommon good (Ashoka Deutschland GmbH and McKinsey & Company, Inc., 2021).
117 Donella Meadows, “Leverage Points: Places to Intervene in a System”; see also Anna Birney, “What issystems change? An outcome and process”, School of Systems Change, 2 Sept. 2016.
118 European Chemicals Agency, “Annex XV Restriction Report: Proposal for a Restriction” (Aug. 2019).
Available at https://echa.europa.eu/documents/10162/05bd96e3-b969-0a7c-c6d0-441182893720.
119 OECD, “Taxes on single-use plastics”. Available at https://www.oecd.org/stories/ocean/taxes-on-single-useplastics-186a058b.
120 OECD, Global Plastics Outlook: Economic Drivers, Environmental Impacts and Policy Options (Paris, OECD
Publishing, 2022).
121 GPAP, Circulate Capital, Financing Plastic Action in Emerging Markets: Addressing Barriers to Investment(Singapore, Circulate Capital, 2021).
122 Daniel Kaffine and Patrick O’Reilly, “What have we learned about extended producer responsibility in the past
decade? A survey of the recent EPR economic literature”, ENV/EPOC/WPRPW(2013)7/FINAL .
123 Emma Watkins and others, EPR in the EU Plastics Strategy and the Circular Economy: A Focus on Plastic
Packaging (Brussels, Institute for European Environmental Policy, 2017).
124 UNEP, Drowning in Plastics: Marine Litter and Plastic Waste Vital Graphics (Nairobi, 2021).
125 European Commission, “Single-use plastics”. Available athttps://environment.ec.europa.eu/topics/plastics/single-use-plastics_en.
126 Emma Watkins and others, “Policy approaches to incentivise sustainable plastic design", OECD Environment
Working Papers, No. 149 (Paris, OECD Publishing, 2019).
127 The Pew Charitable Trusts and SYSTEMIQ, Breaking the Plastic Wave: A Comprehensive Assessment ofpathways towards Stopping Ocean Plastic Pollution: Summary Report (2020).
128 The Pew Charitable Trusts and SYSTEMIQ, Breaking the Plastic Wave: A Comprehensive Assessment of
Pathways towards Stopping Ocean Plastic Pollution: Summary Report (2020).
129 Emma Watkins and others, “Policy approaches to incentivise sustainable plastic design", OECD Environment
Working Papers, No. 149 (Paris, OECD Publishing, 2019).
130 Zongguo Wen and others, “China’s plastic import ban increases prospects of environmental impact mitigationof plastic waste trade flow worldwide”, Nature Communications, vol. 12 (2021), pp. 1–9.
131 Zongguo Wen and others, “China’s plastic import ban increases prospects of environmental impact mitigationof plastic waste trade flow worldwide”, Nature Communications, vol. 12 (2021), pp. 1–9.

31