Response template / INC on Plastic Pollution / 21 June 2023

Submission on the Elimination & Restrictions of Polymers and Chemicals ofConcern, and Problematic and Avoidable Plastic Products by the Co-Chairs of theHigh Ambition Coalition to End Plastic Pollution

Name of country(for Members of the committee)
Name of organization(for observers to the committee)
Contact person and contact
information for the submission
Date of submission

Norway & Rwanda as co-chairs of the High Ambition
Coalition to End Plastic Pollution

Erlend Draget and Juliet Kabera
erlend.draget@kld.dep.no
15 September 2023

Explanatory note
Norway and Rwanda submit this written input as co-chairs of the High Ambition Coalition to End
Plastic Pollution. This submission presents relevant input and a variety of options on the elimination
and restrictions of polymers and chemicals of concern, and problematic and avoidable plastic
products, as well as options for intersessional work between INC-3 and INC-4. The options seek tocontribute to the strategic goals of the HAC to meet our common ambition to end plastic pollution
by 2040. This submission is not intended to replace national submissions Members may submit, nor
is it intended to represent an agreed or exhaustive list of measures considered by Members.

Submission on the Elimination & Restrictions of Polymers and Chemicals ofConcern, and Problematic and Avoidable Plastic ProductsContext
The UNEA mandate is to develop an international legally binding instrument on plastic pollution, includingin the marine environment, that addresses the full life cycle of plastics. Reflecting its commitment to ending
plastic pollution by 2040, the High Ambition Coalition has called for the overarching objective of the treaty
to end plastic pollution from all sources to protect the environment and human health.
Plastics are a group of predominantly fossil fuel-based, complex materials comprising at least one type ofpolymer – made from a range of monomers and compounded with a range of chemical additives to obtain
the desired material properties. A recent UNEP report showed that more than 13,000 different chemicals

1Response template / INC on Plastic Pollution / 21 June 2023
are used in plastics, 1 many of which are hazardous. 2 The High Ambition Coalition has called for aninternational legally binding instrument including control measures, both to restrain and reduce production
and consumption of primary polymers to sustainable levels, and to restrict and eliminate those polymers
and chemicals of concern, and problematic and avoidable plastic products that are harmful to theenvironment and human health. Such measures will contribute to the High Ambition Coalition’s overarching
objective of ending plastic pollution by 2040.
Looking Back at INC-2:
At its second session, the INC requested the Secretariat to invite written submissions on any potential areas
for intersessional work compiled by the co-facilitators of the two contact groups, to inform the work of INC3. Regarding polymers and chemicals of concern, and problematic and avoidable plastic products, the HAC
has called for legally binding obligations to restrict and to eliminate such chemicals and products due totheir adverse effects on the environment or human health, taking into account the precautionary approachand considering their impact on circularity.
During Contact Group 1 discussions on problematic plastic products as well as chemicals and polymers ofconcern, numerous INC members expressed their support for exploring options for the treaty. The
establishment of criteria for identifying problematic substances was recommended by some delegations,noting that such criteria might consider polymers and chemicals of concern, substances with the greatest
adverse impacts on the environment or human health, those that can be easily substituted and those thatcannot be recycled or reused. The need for establishing criteria to identify and prioritize problematic andavoidable plastic products was widely supported. Many members viewed this step as a prerequisite forsubsequent measures aimed at banning, phasing out, restricting (phasing down), or controlling specificproblematic products. The possibility of including criteria and lists of plastic products for elimination or
restriction in annexes to the legally-binding instrument, using a similar approach as other MEAs, wasconsidered, including considerations on how to account for differences in the environmental and health
implications of different applications or uses of products or groups of products.
According to the outcome paper of Contact Group 1, many members expressed the need for intersessional
work on polymers and chemicals of concern, as well as problematic and avoidable plastic products.
However, no agreement was reached to launch intersessional work up to INC 3 on this matter. The INC
decision regarding intersessional work invited members and observers to submit potential areas forintersessional work compiled by the co-facilitators of the two contact groups, to inform the committee’s
work at its third session.

Options Potential Criteria for a List of Polymers, Chemicals of Concern and Problematic and Avoidable
Products in the Instrument

1

See UNEP report UNEP/PP/INC.2/INF/5: Chemicals in Plastics - A Technical Report, https://www.unep.org/resources/report/chemicalsplastics-technical-report.
2Over 2,400 identified as substances of potential concern, see: Deep Dive into Plastic Monomers, Additives, and Processing Aids |Environmental Science & Technology (acs.org).

2

Response template / INC on Plastic Pollution / 21 June 2023
To frame the issue and inform forthcoming discussions, this section presents options and potential criteria
for listing polymers, chemicals of concerns, and problematic and/or avoidable plastic products. Whether or
not such criteria will be included in the treaty text. The COP may also develop further criteria for expanding
the list over time, and may choose to do so in stages, focusing on particular polymers, groups of chemicals,
products or groups of products considering the need for complementarity of criteria and processes decided
under other MEAs.
This section also includes a brief discussion on how the issue of limits on production quantities might beapproached, focusing initially on data collection and definitional work, to lay the foundation for
consideration of potential measures.
This brief is not intended to address the important issue of how the legally binding provisions should be
drafted in the instrument. By way of context, however, we recall the HAC Ministerial Statement to INC-2,
which called for “binding provisions in the treaty to eliminate and restrict unnecessary, avoidable, or
problematic plastics, as well as the plastic polymers, chemical constituents and plastic products that are ofparticular concern due to their adverse effects on the environment and human health, taking into accountthe precautionary principle and considering their impact on circularity.”
Similarly, the HAC does not address here related issues of enhancing transparency and traceability. On thispoint, the HAC Ministerial Statement to INC-2 called for “binding provisions in the treaty to ensure reporting
and transparency in production quantities, material, chemical and product composition, traceability andlabelling across plastics value chains to provide the production and product information necessary to ensureaccountability throughout the value chain.” It called for options reporting requirements by parties on the
production and trade of plastics, polymers, chemicals and plastic products listed for elimination or
restriction. In addition, the submission called for options on non-party trade measures, where each Party
should be required to apply the import and export requirements for listed polymers, chemicals and plastic
products to Parties and non-Parties alike on a non-discriminatory basis.

1. Criteria for listing polymers and chemicals of concern, as well as problematic and avoidable plastic
products
Criteria for elimination and restriction could be approached in a number of different ways (e.g., focused onpolymers, chemicals and plastic products, or around health and/or environmental impacts, or around policy
objectives such as durability, reusability and safe circularity). These approaches may be complementary,
particularly when viewed as an ongoing process during the development of the treaty and after the treaty
comes into force.
A number of potential mechanisms for operationalizing restrictions have been identified3, including:
i.
ii.
iii.

3

a global negative list based on selection criteria;
a global negative list based on existing regulatory lists, such as existing lists of chemicals of concern;a global positive list based, such as of chemicals deemed safer (dependent on availability of data)and polymers deemed more suited for circularity;

UNEP/CHW.16/INF/58, Report on global governance of plastics and associated chemicals.

3Response template / INC on Plastic Pollution / 21 June 2023
iv.

hybrid options.

There may be different criteria for selecting polymers and chemicals of concern, as well as problematic andavoidable products. However, while these three groupings may be conceptually useful, an important firststep would be agreement on an initial target list for elimination or restriction.
Given the time-frame for negotiation of the instrument, a phased approach may be most appropriate,
starting with the establishment of an initial list suitable for short-term prioritization and inclusion as apossible annex to the treaty. For example, the initial treaty text may include an initial negative listing ofpriority products, polymers and/or chemicals of concern, supported by effective mechanisms to amend,
adjust and strengthen the lists after the adoption of the instrument. Following adoption of the instrument,a priority for the COP would then be to develop a class or group approach to identifying and regulating
polymers and chemicals of concern by a specified date. Scientists and regulators have applied this approachto PFAS, organophosphate flame retardants, halogenated flame retardants, and phthalates, among otherclasses of chemicals.4 The benefits of this approach include: a) eliminating the need to collect data on all
chemicals in a class by extrapolating from data-rich to data-poor chemicals; b) avoiding regrettable
substitutions with other similar chemicals in the class; and c) considering the combined effects of multiple
similar chemicals.
For polymers and chemicals of concern, possible criteria for inclusion on the initial list may include:
1. Harmful to the environment and human health (e.g., substances that have high environmental
persistence, bioaccumulate and/or have long-term adverse toxic effects (e.g., carcinogenic,
mutagenic, reprotoxic, endocrine disruptors), risk of mobility in the environment, and significant
greenhouse gas emissions);52. Impeding circularity (e.g., substances that hinder recyclability or reuse) taking into account thatexemptions may be required in some instances;
3. Availability of alternatives with a better environmental and safety profile;
4. Meaningful impacts on the overall scale of plastic production, in particular when it leads topollution or it is beyond planetary constraints;
5. Potential to create an important foundation for future actions by the COP; and/or
6. Existence of national, regional or international precedents for targeting these polymers or
associated chemicals.

4

Kwiatkowski CF, Andrews DQ, Birnbaum LS, Bruton TA, DeWitt JC, Knappe DRU, et al. Scientific Basis for Managing PFAS as a Chemical Class.
Environ Sci Technol Lett [Internet]. 2020 Jun 30;0(0):acs.estlett.0c00255. Available from: https://pubs.acs.org/doi/10.1021/acs.estlett.0c00255
Blum A, Behl M, Birnbaum LS, Diamond ML, Phillips A, Singla V, et al. Organophosphate Ester Flame Retardants: Are They a Regrettable
Substitution for Polybrominated Diphenyl Ethers? Environ Sci Technol Lett [Internet]. 2019 Nov 12 [cited 2019 Oct 23];6(11):638–49. Available
from: https://pubs.acs.org/doi/10.1021/acs.estlett.9b00582
Commission Regulation (EU) 2019/2021 of 1 October 2019 laying down ecodesign requirements for electronic displays pursuant to Directive
2009/125/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council. Available from: https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legalcontent/EN/TXT/?uri=CELEX%3A32019R2021
5This criterion of "toxicity" could be established based on either experimental toxicological research or observational human research, andestablished for either the chemical itself or its environmental breakdown products or biotransformation products. See also UNEP report
UNEP/PP/INC.2/INF/5: Chemicals in Plastics - A Technical Report.

4Response template / INC on Plastic Pollution / 21 June 2023
Regarding problematic and avoidable plastic products, these are not widely identified by particular polymer
types. Instead, they are often identified by particular properties, uses, or impacts. Indicative criteria for
selecting problematic and avoidable plastic products have been developed by a range of governments,
partnerships, companies, and experts, a number of which were mentioned in submissions and statementsin the context of INC-2. Criteria commonly mentioned include:
1. Single use products for which use is avoidable or replaceable with reusable options and items madefrom alternative materials with a less negative environmental impact (e.g., materials that aresuitable for recycling and reduce the overall impact on the environment if leakage were to occur; or
2. Products that contain hazardous chemicals or their production, use, recycling or disposal poses risks
to human health or the environment; or
3. Products that are not recyclable and/or hinder the recycling of other items and/or cannot safely berecycled having regard to hazardous content that is not a necessary use; or
4. Products that have a high risk of release to the environment, including the likelihood of becoming
litter, such as single use or short-lived products;6 or
5. Products that include intentionally added microplastics or that easily degrade into microplastics.

2. Elaboration of lists of polymers and chemicals of concern and problematic and avoidable plastic
products targeted for reduction / elimination
In regard to a list of plastic polymers, chemicals of concern and problematic plastic products for inclusion in
an Annex to the treaty, this could be based upon the work already done in this area by governments andstakeholders. A key priority should be to build on and avoid duplication with already existing mechanisms,
such as the Minamata Convention, the Basel, Rotterdam and Stockholm Conventions, and the Strategic
Approach to International Chemicals Management. The treaty needs therefore to fill the gaps in existing
MEAs. Following are some suggestions for ‘quick-win’ items that could be included in an initial list.
Polymers made from monomers of concern may be an appropriate short-term priority, since without suchmonomers of concern, the polymer cannot be manufactured. Examples of such polymers and associatedmonomer components are:●●●●Poly Vinyl Chloride – vinyl chloride
Polystyrene – styrene
Polycarbonate – bisphenols
Polyurethane – diisocyanates

In the case of PVC, a number of stakeholder and public-private partnerships have targeted PVC use inpackaging and cling film. Similarly, there has been a focus on polystyrene packaging and cups. In the case ofpolycarbonate, initial attention could be directed toward food-contact materials and skin-contact materials(i.e. toys). A staged sector-by-sector phase out approach may be required considering the distinction
between those plastics where no alternatives are available and those who could be phased out imminently.
6

As applied by those entities which developed these criteria, it is sufficient for the problematic plastics to meet any of these criteria, thus not
all these criteria will be applicable to any individual listing.

5Response template / INC on Plastic Pollution / 21 June 2023

In terms of list(s) of chemicals of concern (additives) for immediate action, examples for consideration
include:●●●Bisphenols
Per- and polyfluoroalkyl substances (PFASs)
Brominated flame retardants (BFRs)

Notably, some of these substances are already regulated under the Stockholm s Convention on persistentorganic pollutants (POPs), which should be taken into account.
Illustrative examples of problematic and avoidable plastic products, as identified already through a diversityof submissions to the INC process, include:●●●●

Plastic products (polymer microbeads) containing intentionally added microplastics, such as
microbeads in cosmetics or other personal care products;
Plastic products made from oxo-degradable plastics;
Plastic products containing pigments, which make them difficult to recycle (e.g., carbon black thatis difficult to detect in the sorting process);
Single-use or short-lived plastic products of various types and uses.

3. Mechanisms to update annexes and monitoring and communication framework
To be globally effective, Annexes to the treaty must be clear in their scope and descriptions, would optimally
apply to design, production, retail, trade and disposal of the listed items, and would become effective by aspecified date. Drafting considerations include whether listings are broadly written with exclusions or morenarrowly identified without exclusions; whether and how long exemptions to delay the effective dates areavailable to Parties; and the process associated with those exemption requests. For example, under the
Minamata Convention on Mercury, there are two time-limited exemptions for mercury-added products andprocesses, with the second exemption requiring COP approval (see Article 6 of the Minamata Convention).
Another important treaty drafting consideration relates to the process for amending the annexes over time(e.g., revising, updating, or expanding lists), including accounting for new technologies and alternative
substances. Since annex revisions can be reasonably anticipated (see below), it may be necessary to draft
the treaty so that annexes can be amended more easily than the treaty text and so amendments can be
operational in a timely and efficient manner.
Regarding revisions of the annexes, the treaty should include one or more mechanisms for revising,
updating, and/or expanding the annexes via decision without the need for additional ratification. This will
help ensure an adaptive instrument that can evolve easily over time in response to scientific understandings
or emerging threats. There are various options for such enabling mechanisms, and the INC could consider
more than one of these mechanisms:
1. Specify the process for Parties to submit proposed annex amendments;

6

Response template / INC on Plastic Pollution / 21 June 2023
2. Request the COP to periodically review the annexes within a specific timeframe and develop annex
revisions as appropriate;
3. Request the COP to develop a class or group approach to identifying and regulating chemicals ofconcern in plastic production by a specified date;
4. Require the COP to develop an approach for determining sustainable levels of production for specificpolymers or groups of polymers of concern by a specified date. Production limits on specificpolymers or groups of polymers could be established using a Montreal Protocol type approach, andcould be combined with temporary measures to limit growth of production, until the COP
establishes the production targets, following advice from an expert technical working group;
5. Request the COP to periodically review data reported by members on production and trade in listed
polymers and chemicals of concern and problematic and avoidable plastic products. Authorize the
COP to create subsidiary bodies, such as a scientific and technical group or expert panels as needed
to assist in the above activities.
The treaty should also recognize the importance of a complementary monitoring and reporting frameworkthat produces information on inter alia production and use of polymers and chemicals as well as the
manufacture of plastic products and chemicals of concern, coupled with measures / obligations to ensuretransparency across the supply chain, such as mandatory disclosure, labeling, communication, etc. Reporting
obligations from existing MEAs should be assessed and considered.
Intersessional Work Between INC-3 and 4
The concrete work and content in the intersessional period will depend on the discussions and outcomes of
INC-3 related to the restriction and elimination of plastic polymers and chemicals of concern, andproblematic and avoidable plastic products. The following points should be discussed and elaborated at the
INC-3 to provide a basis for intersessional work up to INC-4:
●

●
●
●
●

Setting-up an Expert Group⮚ Consider the establishment of an expert group to assist with developing lists or annexes; thecomposition of the Group; and conflict of interest policy.
⮚ Consideration of an expert group to work on baseline estimates of plastic production andother matters related to frameworks for monitoring.
Mandate & Scope of Work for such expert groups and other intersessional activities
Working Modalities (including coordination)
Coordination and Communication of the Outcomes
Timeline for work for the duration of the INC process in this issue area

Supporting deliverables from the Secretariat may include a compilation of information regarding existing
regulations, criteria, and lists as well as planned restrictions on monomers, polymers, chemicals, andproducts, based on submissions by Parties and Observers, and the work of existing MEAs.
The Secretariat may also propose relevant definitions, including of polymers and chemicals of concern, andproblematic and avoidable plastic products, to support the development of common understandings andterminologies. In order to maximize effectiveness and avoid duplication, the Secretariat could also be
asked to prepare a brief to show which chemicals of concern related to plastic products, materials andproduction are covered by other MEAs, and where there are gaps.

7

Response template / INC on Plastic Pollution / 21 June 2023___________________

8