COMMISSION STAFF WORKING DOCUMENT EXECUTIVE SUMMARY OF THE IMPACT ASSESSMENT Single Use Plastics & Fishing Gear Accompanying the document Proposal for a Directive of the European Parliament and of the Council on the reduction of the impact of certain plastic products on the environment
Date: 2018-05-28
Institutions: Directorate-General for Environment, European Commission
Subjects: EU environmental policy, environmental impact, environmental protection, fishing industry, marine pollution, non-durable goods, plastics, pollution control measures, waste, waste management

EN 

  EN 

   EUROPEAN COMMISSION  Brussels, 28.5.2018 SWD(2018) 255 final  COMMISSION STAFF WORKING DOCUMENT  EXECUTIVE SUMMARY OF THE IMPACT ASSESSMENT  Single Use Plastics & Fishing Gear  Accompanying the document Proposal for a Directive of the European Parliament and of the Council on the reduction of the impact of certain plastic products on the environment {COM(2018) 340 final} - {SEC(2018) 253 final} - {SWD(2018) 254 final} - {SWD(2018) 256 final} - {SWD(2018) 257 final}  
 
 
The problem 

The  amount  of  plastic  marine  litter  in  the  seas  is  growing,  threatening  ecosystems, 
biodiversity,  human  health  as  well  as  tourism,  fisheries  and  shipping.  The  problem  is 
transboundary.  

Plastics makes up 85% of litter items on European beaches. Half is ‘single-use plastic’ used 
only once, for a short time, before being discarded. Abandoned, lost or otherwise discarded 
fishing gear (ALDFG) accounts for another 27%.  

European  policies  on  water,  marine,  waste,  product  and  fisheries  do  not  yet  adequately 
address marine litter with many measures left to Member States' discretion, fragmenting the 
internal market.  

Why should the EU act and what is the objective? 

Joined-up  and  proportionate  action  at  EU  level  can  reduce  marine  litter  while  ensuring  a 
single market and legal certainty for businesses.  

The  general  objective  is  to  reduce  the  environmental  harm  from  certain  plastic  products, 
while  promoting  the  transition  to  a  circular  economy  with  innovative  and  multi-use 
alternatives. 

Policy options 

The analysis focussed on fishing gear and the 10 most found single use plastics (around 86% 
of single-use plastic ): cigarette butts; drinks bottles and caps; cotton bud sticks; crisp packets; 
wet  wipes;  sanitary  towels;  cutlery;  straws;  stirrers;  drinks  cups;  food  containers  as  well  as 
fishing gear.  

A range of options were analysed against a baseline that includes the ongoing revision of the 
Fisheries Control Regulation and the Port Reception Facilities Directive as well as the Plastic 
Strategy and the reviewed waste legislation.  

The preferred option  

This option will significantly reduce the amount of marine litter. For single use plastics, 
measured by counts, the reduction is about half. It includes: 

  Extended  Producer Responsibility for the cost of prevention and cleaning up litter from 
cigarette filters, drinks bottles, crisp packets, wet wipes, sanitary towels, drinks cups, food 
containers,  balloons  and  ensure  proper  waste  management  of  damaged,  end-of-life  and 
fished-up fishing gear; 
Incentives  for fishers  to return damaged, end-of-life and fished-up gear delivered to the 
port;  

 

  Product design measures to tether caps to drink bottles;  
  Reduction  targets  for  single-use  plastic  versions  of  drinks  cups,  wet  wipes,  and  food 

containers;  

  A  ban  of  single-use  plastic  versions  of  cotton  bud  sticks,  plastic  balloon  sticks,  cutlery, 

straws and stirrers. 

1 

 
 
In 2030, for single-use plastic , this option would save 2.6 million tonnes of CO2 equivalent. 
It  would  avoid  environmental  damages  (equivalent  to  €11 billion).  There  would  be 
compliance  costs  for  business  (around  €2 billion)  and  waste  management  (€510 million). 
Consumers would save money (around €6.5 billion), but face some inconvenience.  

An  additional  measure,  a  Deposit  Refund  or  equivalent  system,  would  further  significantly 
reduce marine litter, at an acceptable extra cost (around 1,4 billion €).  

The  preferred  option  for  fishing  and  aquaculture  gear  is  the  introduction  of  Extended 
Producer Responsibility for producers of plastic incorporated in fishing and aquaculture gear 
and financial incentives to encourage the returning of gear to shore. This would result in costs 
to the industry of about 0.16% of revenue. It will complement measures targeting fishing gear 
and  make  sure  plastic  material  from  fishing  gear  enters  the  waste  and  recycling  stream, 
involving the producers of plastic material for fishing gear and increasing recycling rates for 
fishing gear material. 

2