Microplastic pollution : the policy context : background paper.
Date: 2018-11-15
Institutions: Directorate-General for Research and Innovation
Subjects: EU environmental policy, air quality, environmental impact, environmental research, health risk, marine pollution, plastic waste, plastics, pollutant

European Commission’s 

Scientific Advice Mechanism 

Microplastic Pollution 

The Policy Context 

Background Paper 

Input to work by the European Commission’s Group of Chief 
Scientific Advisors aimed at delivering science-based policy 
advice on the health and environmental impacts of 
microplastics 

15 November 2018 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
For bibliographic purposes this document should be cited as: 

SAM  (2018).  ‘Microplastic  Pollution:  The  Policy  Context  -  Background  Paper’,  The  Scientific 
Advice Mechanism Unit of the European Commission, 68 p. web version 

Unit RTD.02 - Scientific Advice Mechanism (SAM) 
E-mail: EC-SAM@ec.europa.eu 

Disclaimer 

In  developing  a  Scientific  Opinion  on  Microplastic  Pollution  and  its  Impacts,  the  European 
Commission’s Group of Chief Scientific Advisors asked the Scientific Advice Mechanism Unit to 
prepare this background paper. Its purpose is to provide a snapshot of the policy context with 
respect to which: 1. scientific evidence of relevance to the subject in question can be collated 
and  reviewed;  and  2.  deliberations  can  take  place  regarding  possible  elements  to  address  in 
the intended Scientific Opinion. While effort has been made to ensure accuracy and pertinence 
of  the  information  included,  no  claim  is  made  as  to  the  perfection  and  completeness  of  the 
content. 

Although  staff  of  the  Commission  services  participated  in  the  preparation  of  the  report  and 
provided  information  and  assistance  in  assembling  it,  the  content  may  not  in  any 
circumstances be regarded as stating an official position of the European Commission.  

Neither  the  European  Commission  nor  any  person  acting  on  behalf  of  the  Commission  is 
responsible for the use which might be made of the following information. 

Print  
PDF  

ISBN 978-92-79-97559-2 
ISBN 978-92-79-97560-8 

doi: 10.2777/25898 
doi: 10.2777/998601 

KI-06-18-343-EN-C 
KI-06-18-343-EN-N 

© European Union, 2018. 
Reuse  is  authorised  provided  the  source  is  acknowledged.  The  reuse  policy  of  European  Commission 
documents is regulated by Decision 2011/833/EU (OJ L 330, 14.12.2011, p. 39). 

For any use or reproduction of photos or other material that is not under the EU copyright, permission must 
be sought directly from the copyright holders.

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Microplastic Pollution - The Policy Context 

Table of Contents 

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS ................................................................................ 6 

1. 

2. 

3. 

PURPOSE ............................................................................................ 7 

INTRODUCTION .................................................................................. 8 

THE EUROPEAN UNION ..................................................................... 12 

3.1. 

THE EU PLASTICS STRATEGY .......................................................... 12 

3.2.  WASTE & SUBSTANCE-/PRODUCT-SPECIFIC MEASURES ................. 14 

3.2.1.  Waste Framework Directive ............................................... 14 
3.2.2.  Single Use Plastics and Fishing Gear ................................... 15 
3.2.3.  Chemical Regulation and Microplastics ................................ 16 
3.2.4.  Unintentional Release from Tyres, Textiles & Paint ............... 17 
Packaging and Packaging Waste ........................................ 18 
3.2.5. 
Food and Drinking Water .................................................. 18 
3.2.6. 
3.2.6.1. 
Food Contact Materials and Biocides ................................ 18 
3.2.6.2.  Drinking Water .............................................................. 19 
3.2.6.3.  Human Food Chain - European Food Safety Authority ........ 20 
Industrial Emissions ......................................................... 20 
3.2.7. 
Landfill ........................................................................... 21 
3.2.8. 

3.3.  WATER POLLUTION MEASURES ...................................................... 22 

3.3.1.  Water Framework Directive ............................................... 22 
3.3.2.  Marine Litter .................................................................... 23 
3.3.2.1.  The Marine Strategy Framework Directive ........................... 23 
3.3.2.2.  Port Reception Facilities .................................................... 25 
3.3.2.3.  Funding Measures ............................................................ 25 
3.3.3.  Urban Waste Water Treatment .......................................... 26 

3.4. 

AIR POLLUTION MEASURES ............................................................ 27 

3.4.1.  Ambient Air Quality .......................................................... 27 
3.4.2.  Other initiatives ............................................................... 28 

3.5. 

RESEARCH MEASURES .................................................................... 30 

3.5.1.  Ecological Aspects of Microplastics ..................................... 30 
3.5.2.  Health Aspects ................................................................. 30 
3.5.3.  Human biomonitoring ....................................................... 31 
3.5.4.  RTD initiatives to strengthen the science-policy interface ...... 31 
3.5.5.  Other RTD Framework Programme Projects ......................... 32 

15 November 2018 

                  3 

 
 
 
 
 
  
 
 
Microplastic Pollution - The Policy Context 

3.5.6.  Activities of the Joint Research Centre ................................ 32 
Lanzarote Declaration ....................................................... 33 
3.5.7. 

4. 

INTERNATIONAL LEVEL .................................................................... 34 

4.1.  UNITED NATIONS (UN) ................................................................... 34 

4.1.1.  United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea (UNCLOS ) 35 
4.1.2. 
International Maritime Organisation ................................... 35 
4.1.3.  Waste & Substance-Specific Measures ................................ 36 
4.1.4.  United Nations Environment Programme and United Nations 
Environment Assembly .................................................................. 38 
4.1.5.  The Global Programme of Action ........................................ 40 
4.1.6. 
Environmental Protection ............................................................... 41 
Food and Agriculture Organization ...................................... 41 
4.1.7. 
4.1.8.  World Health Organization ................................................ 42 
4.1.9.  World Bank ..................................................................... 43 

Joint Group of Experts on the Scientific Aspects of Marine 

4.2. 

REGIONAL SEAS CONVENTIONS ..................................................... 44 

4.3. 

THE ARCTIC COUNCIL ..................................................................... 46 

4.4. 

THE NORDIC COUNCIL OF MINISTERS - NORDIC MARINE GROUP .. 47 

4.5. 

THE GROUP OF TWENTY (G20) ....................................................... 47 

4.6. 

THE GROUP OF SEVEN (G7) ............................................................ 48 

4.7.  WORLD ECONOMIC FORUM ............................................................. 49 

4.8.  HONOLULU STRATEGY .................................................................... 50 

4.9.  MAJOR TRANSBOUNDARY RIVER BASINS ....................................... 51 

5.  NATIONAL LEVEL .............................................................................. 53 

5.1. 

EUROPE .......................................................................................... 53 

5.1.1.  Belgium .......................................................................... 53 
5.1.2. 
France ............................................................................ 54 
5.1.3.  Germany......................................................................... 54 
Iceland ........................................................................... 55 
5.1.4. 
Ireland ........................................................................... 55 
5.1.5. 
5.1.6. 
Italy ............................................................................... 55 
5.1.7.  Norway ........................................................................... 55 
5.1.8.  Sweden .......................................................................... 56 
5.1.9.  United Kingdom ............................................................... 57 

4 

             15 November 2018 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Microplastic Pollution - The Policy Context 

5.2.  NORTH AMERICA ............................................................................ 58 

5.2.1.  Canada ........................................................................... 58 
5.2.2.  USA ............................................................................... 60 

5.3. 

CENTRAL - AND SOUTH –AMERICA ................................................. 61 

5.4. 

AUSTRALASIA ................................................................................. 62 

5.4.1.  New-Zealand ................................................................... 62 
5.4.2.  Australia ......................................................................... 63 

5.5. 

ASIA ............................................................................................... 63 

5.5.1.  China ............................................................................. 63 
5.5.2. 
India .............................................................................. 64 
Japan ............................................................................. 64 
5.5.3. 
5.5.4.  South Korea .................................................................... 64 
5.5.5.  Taiwan ........................................................................... 64 

5.6. 

AFRICA ........................................................................................... 65 

6. 

REFERENCES ..................................................................................... 66 

List of Tables 

TABLE I - MEASURES TO CURB PLASTIC WASTE AND LITTER (EXTRACTED FROM EU PLASTICS 

STRATEGY) ............................................................................................... 13 
TABLE II – OVERVIEW OF EU POLICY MEASURES .......................................................... 29 
TABLE III – OVERVIEW OF INTERNATIONAL CONTEXT ..................................................... 52 

List of Figures 

FIGURE 1 – MICROPLASTIC EMISSION PATHWAY MODEL GRAPHICAL REPRESENTATION (HANN, 

SHERRINGTON, JAMIESON, HICKMAN, KERSHAW, BAPASOLA, & COLE, 2018) ................... 8 
FIGURE 2 – GLOBAL RELEASES OF PRIMARY MICROPLASTICS TO THE WORLD OCEANS (BOUCHER ET AL., 
2017) ..................................................................................................... 9 

FIGURE 3 - ANNUAL EMISSIONS OF MICROPLASTICS TO SURFACE WATER (UPPER AND LOWER 

RANGES) – TAKEN FROM  (HANN ET AL., 2018) .................................................... 10 
FIGURE 4 – SKETCH OF A NEW GLOBAL ARCHITECTURE FOR COMBATTING MARINE PLASTIC LITTER AND 
MICROPLASTICS, BASED ON OPTION 2 AND 3 IN UNEPS ASSESSMENT ............................ 40 
FIGURE 5 - MEASURES AND ANTICIPATED EFFECTS - SWEDISH CHEMICALS AGENCY (KEMI) ......... 57 

15 November 2018 

                                   5 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Microplastic Pollution - The Policy Context 

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS 

This  background  paper  was  prepared  by  James  Gavigan,  Dulce  Boavida  and 
Annabelle  Ascher  from  the  European  Commission’s  Scientific  Advice  Mechanism 
(SAM)  Unit  as  input  to  the  work  of  the  European  Commission’s  Group  of  Chief 
Scientific Advisors in developing a Scientific Opinion on Microplastic Pollution and its 
Impacts.  An  earlier  draft  was  provided  to  the  SAPEA  expert  Working  Group  in 
relation to the Evidence Review Report it was preparing on the subject for the Group 
of Chief Scientific Advisors.  

The  SAM  Unit  wishes  to  thank  the  following  who  have  either  reviewed  and 
commented  on  earlier  drafts  or  provided  useful  input,  suggestions  or  helped  in 
different ways in the course of drafting this paper. 

European Commission: 

SG  

CASAER Jeroen, GASC Emilien 

DG ENV   AILE Silvija, BERTATO Valentina, BIERMANN Tobias, HENRICHS 

Thomas, MARMO Luca, NEALE William, PAPADOYANNAKIS Michail 
Georgios, RICHIR Marc, ROSENSTOCK Nele-Frederike, SCHADE Sven, 
SCHALLY Hugo-Maria, SPONAR Michel 

DG RTD 

AGUAR FERNANDEZ Maria Pilar, BALABANIS Panagiotis, BOWADT 
Soren, DE SMET Michiel, GRUBER Sigi, GUIU ETXEBERRIA Garbine, 
KARJALAINEN Tuomo, MALTAGLIATI Silvia, MISIGA Pavel, NORAGER 
Sofie, WEYDERT Marco 

DG MARE  PETRIKOVICOVA Alena, SHEPHERD Iain  

DG GROW  HUALDE GRASA Eva Patricia, KRASSNIG Christian, LEROY CADOVA 
Petra, MANIKAS Rizos-Georgios, D’ACUNTO Salvatore 

DG SANTE  HEROLD Diana, VANHEUSDEN Veerle, VERSTRAETE Frans  

DG JRC  

Others: 

ANGERS Alexandre HANKE Georg, HOEVELER Arnd, MUNOZ-PINEIRO 
Amalia, PETRILLO Mauro, RAFFAEL Barbara, SOKULL-KLUETTGEN Birgit, 
TOUSSAINT Brigitte, VAN DEN EEDE Guy 

ECHA  

SIMPSON Peter, QUINN Bernadette  

EFSA  

MACKAY Karen 

W.H.O.  

DE FRANCE Jennifer 

Government of Canada 

 HANNA Sandy, DA SILVA Sarah 

6 

             15 November 2018 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Microplastic Pollution - The Policy Context 

1.  PURPOSE 

This  paper  has  been  drawn  up  as  background  input  to  work  by  the  European 
Commission’s Scientific Advice Mechanism (SAM) aimed at delivering science-based 
policy  advice  on  the  health  and  environmental  impacts  of  microplastics1.  The 
European  Commission’s  Group  of  Chief  Scientific  Advisors  launched  work  on  this 
topic  following  exploratory  discussions  in  the  first  half  of  2018  including  a  scoping 
workshop  with  experts  on  26  April  2018  and  publication  of  an  Initial  Statement 
published by the Advisors on 09 July 20182.    

In the first stage of this work, an independent group of experts set up by the SAPEA 
consortium of European science academy networks3 will produce by December 2018 
an  evidence  review  report  on  microplastic  pollution  and  its  impacts.  This  evidence 
review,  based  on  publicly-available  scientific  literature,  will  cover  the  natural 
sciences including a specific focus on scientific modelling, the social and behavioural 
sciences as well as political and legal sciences.  

One of the purposes of this background paper is to help set the policy scene for the 
SAM work, and notably for the political and legal sciences component of the  SAPEA 
evidence review. That part of the SAPEA evidence review should provide a synthesis 
of  state-of-the-art  academic  and  any  other  readily-available  and  published  expert 
analyses of legislation, regulation and policies relevant to microplastics.  

This  document  also  forms  part  of  the  basis  on  which  the  Group  of  Chief  Scientific 
Advisors  will  build  the  Scientific  Opinion  it  plans  to  deliver  to  the  European 
Commission in 2019.   

1  The  term  microplastics  commonly  refers  to  man-made  plastic  particles  –  spherical,  elongated  fibre  or  irregularly 
shaped - whose longest dimension 'φ' is < 5 mm (5000 μm). The upper limit of 5 mm is generally accepted because 
this  covers  a  range  of  particle  sizes  that  can  be  readily  ingested  by  organisms.  Researchers  sometimes  further 
distinguish between macroplastics (φ > 5 mm), mesoplastics (1 mm < φ ≤ 5 mm), microplastics (0.1 μm < φ ≤ 1 mm) 
and nanoplastics (φ ≤ 0.1 μm). See also a note by the European Chemicals Agency on the definition of microplastics in 
a specific context 
2 See the Initial Statement and the main points from the Scoping Workshop on the SAM Website; see also the minutes 
of the 13th meeting of the European Commission’s Group of Chief Scientific Advisors 
3 See SAPEA website – SAPEA is a key component of SAM 

15 November 2018 

                                   7 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
                                                
Microplastic Pollution - The Policy Context 

2.  INTRODUCTION 

This paper maps the broad policy landscape relevant to the problem of microplastic 
pollution4.  Its  primary  focus  is  on  EU  policy  though  information  is  also  included  on 
some international and national policy initiatives.  

To  set  the  scene,  published  estimated  ranges  of  microplastic  emissions  of 
petrochemical  origin5  into  the  environments  correspond  to  a  central  value  of  11.7 
million  tonnes  per  year  according  to  (Boucher,  Friot,  &  IUCN,  2017).  3.2  million 
tonnes of this is plastic from  different sources that  enters the environment already 
in  microscopic  form  (dubbed  by  some  as  ‘primary  microplastics’),  with  a  further  8 
million  tonnes  coming  from  the  degradation  of  large  plastic  items  already  in  the 
environment.  

Figures  1  and  2  below  illustrate  some  of  the  complexity  of  the  ‘primary 
microplastics’ component. 

Figure  1  –  Microplastic  Emission  Pathway  Model  Graphical  Representation  (Hann  et 
al., 2018)  

4Adapted from various sources including (Brennholt, Heß, & Reifferscheid, 2018; Steensgaard et al., 2017), (European 
Commission:  Plastics  Strategy  ex-ante  Impact  Assessment  &  The  Single  Use  Plastics  Directive  ex-ante  Impact 
Assessment, 2018) 
5 i.e. not including natural rubber particles which would add a further 33% 

8 

             15 November 2018 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
                                                
Microplastic Pollution - The Policy Context 

Figure  1  schematically  depicts  a  number  of  the  different  pathways  of  primary 
microplastics  from  source  to  sink.  Overall,  it  is  estimated  that  around  48%  of 
primary microplastics end up in the ocean, the remaining 52% remaining trapped in 
soil or sewage sludge. 

Figure 2 shows the estimated breakdown by source of the 48% (1.5 million tonnes 
per  year)  which  ends  up  in  the  world’s  oceans.  It  is  particularly  noteworthy  that, 
according  to  this  report,  tyre  abrasion,  washing  clothes  and  city  dust  together 
account for 87%.  

Figure 2 – Global releases of primary microplastics to the world oceans (Boucher et 
al., 2017) 

The  so-called  Eunomia  study  (Hann  et  al.,  2018)  carried  out  for  the  Commission 
also gives an overview of the different estimates of microplastic emissions into the 
environment and their  fate. Figure  3 below taken from  this study shows estimated 
ranges of emissions into surface water from different sources. Notable in this is the 
impression  that  plastic  pellets  could  account  for  the  second  highest  proportion  of 
microplastic  leakage  into  the  environment,  contrasting  with  the  much  smaller 
proportion of 0.3% for plastic pellets in Figure 2. It is not clear what the discrepancy 

15 November 2018 

                                   9 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Microplastic Pollution - The Policy Context 

between these two plastic pellet proportions is due to. Part of it stems from the fact 
that  Figure  2  refers  to  the  proportion  of  emissions  which  end  up  in  the  oceans  as 
opposed  to  Figure  3  which  refers  to  emissions  to  surface  waters.  More  generally, 
such  discrepancies  in  published  literature  can  also  stem  from  the  wide  variety  of 
definitions,  calculation/modelling  methodologies,  assumptions  and  approximations 
that different authors adopt and make and for which it is therefore always important 
to refer to the original sources to avoid misinterpretations. 

Figure  3  -  Annual  Emissions  of  Microplastics  to  Surface  Water  (Upper  and  Lower 
Ranges) – taken from  (Hann et al., 2018) 

* 

* 

* 

In the following sections,  brief,  mostly factual,  information is given  on  a  variety of 
measures  including  policy  strategies  and  legally-binding  legislation  relevant  to 
microplastic  pollution.  Most  measures  described  are  quite  broad,  forming  part  of 
wider  sets  of  actions  aimed  at  plastics,  all  types  of  waste  or  pollutants  more 
generally. More often than not, the relevance of individual measures to microplastic 
pollution is implicit or indirect. However, some do specifically target microplastics.  

Furthermore,  reflecting  an  evolving  policy  agenda,  the  overview  lists  measures 
which are either already in place, or have been announced and are currently being 
developed,  or  are  at  some  stage  in  the  negotiation  process  between  proposal  and 

10 

             15 November 2018 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Microplastic Pollution - The Policy Context 

adoption. An attempt is also made to capture relevant forward-looking information 
on individual measures.  

In  the  EU  part,  the  measures  are  subdivided  into  sections  in  an  attempt  to 
distinguish  between  different  categories  –  e.g.  measures  aimed  at  different 
environmental  compartments  (air,  water,  land),  or  types  of  substances,  or  with 
different  intervention  logics  (regulatory,  funding,  coordination).  This  typology  only 
works  partially  as  some  measures  cut  across  different  categories.  Nonetheless, 
presenting  the  measures  in  this  way  illustrates  the  relative  paucity  of  policy 
attention  to  the  air  and  land  compartments  and  even  freshwater  compared  to  the 
marine environment.  

No attempt is made to  distinguish  between  different categories in the international 
section given the mostly broad nature of the measures at this policy level. However, 
here too it is obvious that most attention is paid to the marine compartment.  

15 November 2018 

                                   11 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Microplastic Pollution - The Policy Context 

3.  THE EUROPEAN UNION 

3.1. The EU Plastics Strategy 

In the EU, adressing plastic pollution is a high political proirity6 reflecting an equally 
high  and  increasing  concern  among  EU  citizens.  This  is  consistent  with  the  EU’s 
leading role in sustainable development policy and praxis. Examples of overarching 
initiatives include the Circular Economy Package7, of which the Plastics Strategy8 is 
a particularly pertinent part. 

The  Circular  Economy  Package  adopted  by  the  Commission  in  2015,  aims  to 
stimulate  Europe’s  transition  towards  a  circular  economy  in  which  resources  are 
used in a more sustainable way. The actions proposed therein should help to close 
the  loop  in  product  life  cycles  from  production  and  consumption  to  waste 
management and the market for secondary raw materials. Plastics are listed as one 
of its five priorities.  

The  Plastics  Strategy  announced  in  the  circular  economy  package  was  adopted  on 
16  January  2018.  It  contains  a  wide  range  of  legislative  and  non-legislative 
measures  some  of  which  are  new  and  others  which  are  either  already  being 
developed or in the process of review/ revision. The measures are divided into four 
groups:  1.  Improving  the  economics  and  quality  of  plastics  recycling;  2.  Curbing 
plastic  waste  and  littering;  3.  Driving  innovation  and  investment  towards  circular 
solutions;  and  4.  Harnessing  global  action.  In  the  ‘curbing  waste’  group,  the 
strategy launches a broad approach to reducing microplastic emissions (see Table I 
below). Apart from the measures listed directly aimed at microplastics, measures to 
reduce  macroplastic litter, from  which  much  microplastics derive, also form part of 
this approach. All measures considered to be  relevant  are  described in more detail 
in the sections which follow. 

The  analysis  underpinning  these  measures9  draws  on  two  studies,  one  of  which10 
aims to clarify sources, pathways and options for reduction of microplastics emitted 
by products, such as textiles, car tyres and synthetic turf sports pitches during their 
life cycle, or by other processes, such as losses of  plastic pellets during production 
and transport. The other study11, which focuses on industries that use intentionally  

6  An  illustration  of  this  is  the  idea  floated  in  the  Commission’s  proposal  for  the  2021-2027  Multiannual  Financial 
Framework to introduce a plastics levy (not a tax) on Member States calculated on the amount of non-recycled plastic 
packaging waste  
7 Commission Communication COM(2015)614 
8 Commission Communication COM(2018)28  
9 As set out in the Staff Working Document SWD(2018)16  
10  Investigating  options  for  reducing  releases  in  the  aquatic  environment  of  MPs  emitted  by  (but  not  intentionally 
added in) products 
11 Intentionally added microplastics in products 

12 

             15 November 2018 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
                                                
Microplastic Pollution - The Policy Context 

Table  I  -  Measures  to  curb  plastic  waste  and  litter  (Extracted  from  EU  Plastics 
Strategy12) 

Measure 

Actions to reduce single-use plastics: 
- 

analytical work, including the launch of a public consultation, to 
determine the scope of a legislative initiative on single-use plastics 

Actions to tackle sea-based sources of marine litter: 
- 

adoption of a legislative proposal on port reception facilities for the 
delivery of waste from ships 
development of measures to reduce loss or abandonment at sea of 
fishing gear (e.g. including recycling targets, EPR schemes, 
recycling funds or deposit schemes) 
development of measures to limit plastic loss from aquaculture 
(e.g. possible Best Available Techniques Reference Document)  

- 

- 

- 

Actions to monitor and curb marine litter more effectively: 
improved monitoring and mapping of marine litter, including 
- 
microplastics, on the basis of EU harmonised methods 
support to Member States on the implementation of their 
programmes of measures on marine litter under the Marine 
Strategy Framework Directive, including the link with their 
waste/litter management plans under the Waste Framework 
Directive 

Actions on compostable and biodegradable plastics: 
- 

start work to develop harmonised rules on defining and labelling 
compostable and biodegradable plastics 
conduct a lifecycle assessment to identify conditions where their 
use is beneficial, and criteria for such application 
start the process to restrict the use of oxo-plastics via REACH 

- 

- 
Actions to curb microplastics pollution: 
- 

start the process to restrict the intentional addition of microplastics 
to products via REACH  
examination of policy options for reducing unintentional release of 
microplastics from tyres, textiles and paint (e.g.  including 
minimum requirements for tyre design (tyre abrasion and 
durability if appropriate) and/or information requirement (including 
labelling if appropriate), methods to assess microplastic losses 
from textiles and tyres, combined with information (including 
possibly labelling)/minimum requirements, targeted research and 
development funding) 
development of measures to reduce plastic pellet spillage (e.g. 
certification scheme along the plastic supply chain and/or Best 
Available Techniques reference document under the Industrial 
Emissions Directive) 
evaluation of the Urban Waste Water Treatment Directive: 
assessing effectiveness as regards microplastics capture and 
removal  

- 

- 

- 

Timeline 

ongoing 

Q1 2018 

2018 onwards 

2018 onwards 

Q1 2018 
onwards 
   Q1 2018 
   onwards 
ongoing  

ongoing 

ongoing 

Q1 2018 
onwards 

ongoing 

12 See Annex 1 of Plastics Strategy at COM(2018)28 

15 November 2018 

                                   13 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
                                                
Microplastic Pollution - The Policy Context 

added microplastics in their products (cosmetics, detergents, paints, etc.), aimed to 
carry out an environmental and human health risk assessment, as well as gathering 
information for a socio-economic analysis of the impacts of risk management actions 
relating to restricted use.  

Recent  /  forthcoming:  European  Parliament  report  on  plastics  strategy13;  an 
Opinion14  published  on  22  June  2018  by  the  EP  Fisheries  committee  calling  for 
several  actions  on  microplastics;  Council  Conclusions  (25  June  2018)15  which 
endorse  the  microplastics  aspects  of  the  Plastics  Strategy  and  request  the 
Commission  to  provide  an  annual  progress  report  on  the  Circular  Economy  Action 
Plan 

3.2. Waste & substance-/product-specific measures 

Measures  relevant  to  waste  management  of  plastics  are  included  in  the  recently-
revised  Waste  Framework  Directive  and  the  Packaging  and  Packaging  Waste 
Directive.  Recycling  targets  for  municipal  waste  (65%  by  2030)  and  plastic 
packaging waste (55% by 2030) should increase capture of plastic waste when they 
enter  into  force  by  2020.  However,  whilst  Member  States  need  to  improve  their 
collection  systems,  the  targets  can  be  reached  without  necessarily  improving  litter 
prevention.  The  waste  prevention  provisions  in  the  revised  Packaging  Directive, 
formulated in terms of “encouraging” packaging reuse, are rather soft in nature. Full 
application  and  enforcement  of  current  waste  legislation  will  therefore  not  stop 
littering and leakage of plastics into the environment. 

In  addition  to  such  broad  framework  directives,  there  are  a  variety  of  other 
substance-specific or product-specific measures relevant to microplastic pollution at 
various  stages  of  development.  Brief  information  is  given  on  all  of  these  in  what 
follows to the extent available. 

  Waste Framework Directive 

The  revised  Waste  Framework  Directive  adopted  by  Council16  on  22  May  2018 
requires waste to be managed without endangering human  health and without risk 
to water, air, soil, plants or animals. It contains broad objectives on prevention (i.e. 
the preferred option) and waste management. It implements the "polluter pays" and 
"extended  producer  responsibility  (EPR)"  principles  and  requires  Member  States  to 
adopt waste management plans and waste prevention programmes. Plastics used in 

13 European Parliament  P8_TA(2018)0352 
14 European Parliament PECH_AD(2018)619288 
15 Delivering on the EU Action Plan for the Circular Economy 
16  Directive (EU) 2018/851 

14 

             15 November 2018 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
                                                
Microplastic Pollution - The Policy Context 

agriculture  are  covered  by  this  Directive17.  Member  States  must  coordinate  these 
different  plans  and  measures  with  others  which  they  are  required  to  implement 
under  international  and  EU  water  legislation18.  The  revised  Directive  sets  general 
targets to increase household waste recycling to a minimum of 50 % by weight by 
including at least waste materials such as paper, metal, plastic and glass plastics.  

Recent / forthcoming: The revised Directive entered into force on 04 July 2018 
and must be transposed into national legislation by 05 July 2020.  

  Single Use Plastics and Fishing Gear  

As  announced  in  the  Plastics  Strategy,  the  European  Commission  proposed  in  May 
2018 new EU-wide rules in the form of the SUP Directive19 targeting the ten single-
use plastic products most often found on Europe's beaches and seas, as well as lost 
and  abandoned  fishing  gear.  Together  these  account  for  70%  of  all  marine  litter. 
Building on the success of the Pastic Bags directive20, a similar, targeted, approach 
is  proposed.  The  measures  include:  a  ban  on  plastic  cotton  buds,  cutlery,  plates, 
straws,  drink  stirrers  and  balloon  sticks;  consumption  reduction  targets;  waste 
management  and  clean-up  obligations  for  producers;  Member  State  obligation  to 
collect  90%  of  single-use  plastic  drinks  bottles  by  2025;  a  labelling  requirement 
indicating  how  waste  should  be  disposed;  and  obligatory  awareness-raising 
measures.  The  measure  for  fishing  gear,  which  accounts  for  about  27%  (11,000 
tonnes per year) of marine litter, is an Extended Producer Responsibility scheme for 
gear  containing  plastic  to  ensure  that  the  cost  of  managing  waste  plastic  fishing 
gear,  once  it  has  arrived  on  shore,  is  covered  by  the  producers  of  plastic  fishing 
gear.  Note  that  the  Fisheries  Control  Regulation21  of  November  2009  already 
requires  gear  to  be  marked,  retrieval  equipment  to  be  carried  on  board,  and  lost 
gear to be retrieved or its loss reported in case it cannot be retrieved.  

17  Note  that  the  specific  case  of  agricultural  mulches and  their  biodegradability  has been discussed at  length in the 
context of their proposed exclusion by the Commission in the revision [COM(2016) 157]  of the 2003 fertilizing 
products regulation, and their proposed inclusion by the European Parliament – the discussion is currently in the 
final trilogue stage of the legislative procedure  

18 Regional Seas Conventions, Marine Strategy Framework Directive & Water Framework Directive (see below) 
19 COM(2018)340 Proposed Directive on the reduction of the impact of certain plastic products on the environment 
20  Plastic  Bags Directive  (EU)  2015/720  amending  Directive  94/62/EC -  Prior  to  the  SUP  Directive  proposal,  the  only 
product-focussed  legal  instrument  specifically  tackling  a  single-use  plastic  was  the  Plastic  Bags  Directive  which  has 
successfully  reduced  the  consumption  of  lightweight  plastic  carrier  bags  and  related  environmental  impacts  while 
stimulating  reuse.  Adopted  in  2015,  it  was  the  first  time  consideration  was  given  to  consumption  in  addition  to 
management of packaging and packaging waste. Member States choose which measures to put in place to achieve a 
consumption rate of below 40 bags per person per year by 2025, including the use of economic instruments such as 
pricing, taxes and levies and marketing restrictions such as bans that are proportionate and non-discriminatory, and 
national reduction targets 
21 See (EC) No 1224/2009 and detailed requirements included in the Control Implementing Regulation (EU) No 404/11 
of 8 April 2011 

15 November 2018 

                                   15 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
                                                
Microplastic Pollution - The Policy Context 

Note that some SUPs are considered to be ‘packaging’ if they contain a product (e.g. 
cups filled with a beverage at the point of sale); drinks bottles, caps and lids; crisp 
packets  and  sweet  wrappers;  plastic  bags;  food  &  fast-food  containers;  cups. 
However,  the  same  SUPs  may  also  fall  outside  the  definition  of  packaging  if  sold 
separately  (e.g.  a  pack  of  empty  cups).  As  a  result,  the  same  product  can  be 
subject to different legal acts and measures.  

Recent  /  forthcoming:  It  is  hoped  that  decision  on  the  SUP  Directive  will  be 
reached  following  the  first  reading  in  the  current  legislature  which  ends  in  May 
2019.  Reports  from  associated  EP  Committees  PECH,  ITRE,  AGRI  and  ECON 
finalised  and  received  a  positive  vote  in  EP  Plenary  in  October  201822;  Council 
discussions on-going with the consideration of the compromise version presented by 
the AT Presidency in September 2018. Intensive meetings and start of the trilogues 
expected during  Austrian  Presidency.  A  revision of  the Fisheries Control  Regulation 
planned for 2018 will introduce daily electronic reporting for all vessels and remove 
the exemption of small vessels from the obligation to carry retrieval equipment.  

  Chemical Regulation and Microplastics 

The European REACH regulation23 adopted in 2006 regulates the production and use 
of chemicals with the main aim to ensure a high level of protection for human health 
and the environment, while promoting alternatives to animal testing as well as the 
free  circulation  of  chemicals  in  the  EU  internal  market,  while  enhancing  the 
competitiveness and innovation. According to REACH, manufacturers, importers and 
downstream  users  must  register  their  chemicals  and  are  responsible  for  their  safe 
use. Also under REACH, selected substances are evaluated and restrictions may be 
imposed  to  address  unacceptable  risks.  Substances  of  special  concern  undergo  an 
authorisation  procedure.  Regarding  microplastics,  REACH  already  refers  to  plastic 
monomers  and  additives.  However,  polymer  substances  as  such  are  exempt  from 
registration  and  evaluation  unless  the  content  of  (unreacted)  monomers  exceeds 
certain limits or they contain certain additives triggering registration and evaluation 
… “until those that need to be registered due to the risks posed to human health or 
the environment can be selected in a practicable and cost-efficient way on the basis 
of  sound  technical  and  valid  scientific  criteria”.  The  polymer  importer  and/or 
producer must (if not already done by another operator) register the monomer with 
the European Chemical Agency (ECHA) if  …  “the polymer is made up of more than 
2%  or  more  of  the  monomer  substance(s),  and  the  total  quantity  usage  of  the 
monomer shall exceed more than 1 t per year”. Polymers, monomers and additives 
can be subject to restriction on the basis of Art. 68(1) of the REACH Regulation. 

22 See EP Briefing on Single-use plastics and fishing gear (July 2018) 
23 Regulation (EC) No 1907/2006 concerning the Registration, Evaluation, Authorisation and Restriction of Chemicals 
(REACH) 

16 

             15 November 2018 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
                                                
Microplastic Pollution - The Policy Context 

Recent  /  forthcoming:  In  line  with  the  REACH  procedures  for  restricting 
substances  that  pose  unacceptable  environmental  or  health  risks,  the  Commission 
has launched the restriction process by requesting the European Chemicals Agency 
to review the scientific basis for  taking  regulatory  action at EU  level to restrict the 
use  of:  1.  Oxo-degradable  plastics24  and  2.  Intentionally-added  microplastics  in 
products  (such  as  cosmetics,  detergents,  paints)25.  The  restriction  intentions  were 
introduced  on  17  January  2018.  ECHA  has  12  months  (i.e.  until  January  2019)  to 
present a technical dossier for a restriction if the conditions are met.  Then, ECHA’s 
scientific committees for Risk Assessment and Socio-Economic Analysis would begin 
work in March 2019 and submit their opinions to the Commission in spring 2020.  If 
the  ECHA  Committees  confirm  that  a  restriction  is  needed,  the  Commission  would 
propose an amendment of Annex XVII of REACH by the end of 2020, to be voted in 
Comitology. 

  Unintentional Release from Tyres, Textiles & Paint 

As indicated in the above table extracted from the Plastics Strategy, policy options 
for  reducing  microplastic  emissions  from  tyres,  textiles  and  paint  would  be 
examined,  citing  a  number  of  different  possibilities.  Acknowledging  that  tyre 
abrasion  is  a  significant  source  of  microplastics  and  that  a  suitable  method  to 
measure tyre abrasion is not currently available, the proposed revision in May 2018 
of  the  tyre  labelling  regulation26    states  that  the  Commission  should  mandate  the 
development  of  such  a  method,  taking  into  full  consideration  all  state-of-the-art 
internationally  developed  or  proposed  standards  or  regulations,  with  a  view  to 
establishing  a  suitable  testing  method  as  soon  as  possible.  Note  that  the  call  for 
such  a  test  method  is  also  found  in  the  EU  Plastics  Strategy  itself.  Voluntary 
measures are being discussed by the tyre and textile industries (see section below). 
Possible  restrictions  under  REACH  covered  in  the  previous  section  could  apply  to 
paints  in  cases  where  microplastics  are  intentionally-added  or  intentional  release 
during their use, e.g. washing paint brushes. 

Recent  /  forthcoming:  The  ordinary  legislative  procedure  for  the  tyre  labelling 
regulation is just beginning. 

24 so-called oxo-degradable plastics',  while claiming biodegradability properties have been found to  offer no  proven 
environmental  advantage  over  conventional  plastics,  while  their  rapid  fragmentation  into  microplastics  cause 
concerns https://echa.europa.eu/registry-of-restriction-intentions/-/dislist/details/0b0236e18244d9bb 
25 bans on the use of microplastics in specific personal care products have been put in place in the United States and 
Canada  and  several  EU  Member  States  have  notified  the  Commission  of  draft  laws  to  ban  microplastics  in  certain 
cosmetics. As this could lead to fragmentation of the single market, the Council has called on the Commission to take 
measures  on  microplastics,  especially  from  cosmetics  and  detergents  https://echa.europa.eu/registry-of-restriction-
intentions/-/dislist/details/0b0236e18244cd73 
26 COM(2018)296 

15 November 2018 

                                   17 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
                                                
Microplastic Pollution - The Policy Context 

  Packaging and Packaging Waste 

The  1994  packaging  and  packaging  waste  directive27  sets  targets  for  the  recovery 
and recycling of  packaging waste  and  essential requirements for placing packaging 
on the market. A revised Packaging and Packaging waste Directive28 adopted on 30 
May  2018,  re-focuses  prevention  objectives  on  re-use  and  envisages  new  rules:  a 
new target of 55% recycling of plastic packaging waste by 2030, a ban on landfilling 
of  separately-collected  waste  and  introduces  an  Extended  Producer  Responsibility 
(EPR) obligation and minimum requirements for EPR schemes.  

Recent  /  forthcoming:  The  revised  Directive  entered  into  force  on  04  July  2018 
and must be transposed into national legislation by 05 July 2020. Relevant novelties 
include:  suggested  reuse  measures  (deposit-return  schemes;  qualitative  or 
quantitative  targets;  economic  incentives;  setting  minimum  percentage  reusable 
packaging); minimum targets for plastic waste recycling set at 50% by 31 Dec 2025 
and 55% by 2030; commercialization, import and export of one-use plastic utensils 
prohibited  from  2020;  from  2030  all  packaging  in  EU  must  be  reusable  or  easily 
recyclable. 

  Food and Drinking Water 

3.2.6.1. 

Food Contact Materials and Biocides 

According to EU legislation in vigour, plastic food contact materials may not release 
over  10 mg/dm2  of  their  constituents  to  food29,  and  shall  not  transfer  any  of  their 
constituents  to  food  in  amounts  hazardous  to  human  health.  The  directive  also 
the 
specifies  the  thresholds  according  to  the 
plastic/polymer  in  question.  It  is  the  task  of  the  competent  Member  State 
authorities  to  ensure  that  these  requirements  are  met.  The  most  comprehensive 
specific EU measure on plastic materials and articles is a 2011 regulation30. This sets 
out rules on the composition of plastic food-contact materials, and establishes a list 
of substances that are permitted for use in the manufacture of food-contact plastics. 
As  the  Regulation  is  regularly  amended,  a  non-legally-binding  version31  is 
maintained.  

form  and  composition  of 

27 Directive 94/62/EC 
28 Directive (EU) 2018/852 
29 Regulation (EU) No 10/2011 of 14 January 2011 on plastic materials and articles intended to come into contact with 
food, OJ L 12, 15.1.2011, p. 1. Also Commission Regulation (EC) No 282/2008 on recycled plastic materials and articles 
intended to come into contact with foods 
30 Regulation (EU) No 10/2011 
31 Consolidated version of Regulation (EU) No 10/2011 

18 

             15 November 2018 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
                                                
Microplastic Pollution - The Policy Context 

Substances  that  require  authorisation  for  use  in  food  contact  materials,  such  as 
functional  constituents  of  plastic,  are  evaluated32  by  the  European  Food  Safety 
Authority  (EFSA)  and  authorised30  at  EU  level.  One  such  example  are  ‘surface 
biocides33’  which  are  used  in  the  manufacture  of  food  contact  materials  and  are 
intended to be present in the final article itself. The purpose of these biocides is to 
keep the surface of the food contact material free from microbial contamination. For 
food  contact  materials  made  from  plastic,  such  biocides  are  regarded  as  additives 
because they are intentionally added to the plastic to exert an effect.  

Recent  /  forthcoming:  Amendments  to  the  plastics  regulation34  on  limits  for 
metals and certain food groups will enter into force in September 2018.  

3.2.6.2.  Drinking Water 

Water for human consumption is considered to be food35 and must be safe once it is 
put into the bottles.  The EU legal framework  for food safety therefore should, as a 
rule,  ensure  the  safety  of  bottled  water  and  that  any  microplastics  therein  do  not 
constitute  a  risk,  and  so  should  not  be  present  in  concentrations  that  could  cause 
negative  effects  on  human  health.  Tap  water  must  meet  the  specifications  of  the 
Drinking  Water  Directive36.  The  Commission  monitors  emerging  scientific  data  on 
possible  health  effects  related  to  micro‐  and  nanoplastics,  their  entry  in  the  food 
chain  and  water  environments,  and  the  resulting  human  and  animal  exposure 
through  regular  diets.  Appropriate  measures  can  be  considered  in  case  evidence 
indicates that a health risk cannot be excluded. Through its 01 Feb 2018 proposed 
revision of the Drinking  Water  Directive37,  the Commission  promotes access to tap 
water  for  EU  citizens  in  order  to  reduce  packaging  needs  for  bottled  water.  At  the 
same  time,  the  proposal  includes  an  obligation  to  monitor  the  presence  of 
microplastics in drinking water when there is a risk and to  take remedial actions in 
case of potential danger for human health. The Regulation on biocides32 also applies 
to drinking water. 

Recent  /  forthcoming:  the  ordinary  legislative  procedure  is  underway  for  the 
revised  drinking  water  directive.  Council  discussion  under  the  Austrian  Presidency 
took place on 25 July and 25 September, next meeting takes place on 16 November 
2018. The European Parliament plenary has adopted its report (Rapporteur Dantin) 

32  Regulation  (EU)  No  1935/2004  of  27  October  2004  on materials  and  articles  intended  to  come  into  contact  with 
food 
33 Regulation (EC) No 528/2012 of 22  May 2012 concerning the making available  on the market and use of biocidal 
products 
34 included in the amending Regulation (EU) 2016/1416 
35 Regulation (EC) No 178/2002 lays down the general principles and requirements  of food law (to which a targeted 
revision  was  recently  proposed  -  see  Com(2018)179),  establishing  the  European  Food  Safety  Authority  and  laying 
down procedures in matters of food safety of 28 January 2002, OJ L 31, 1.2.2002, p. 1. 
36 Directive 98/83/EC on the quality of water intended for human consumption, OJ L 330, 5.12.1998, p. 32 
37 COM(2017) 753 final  

15 November 2018 

                                   19 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
                                                
Microplastic Pollution - The Policy Context 

on 23 October. First reading agreement could be still possible under the Romanian 
presidency in first half 2019. 

3.2.6.3. 

Human Food Chain - European Food Safety Authority 

In  2016,  the  European  Food  Safety  Authority  (EFSA)  took  a  first  step  towards  a 
future  assessment  of  the  potential  risks  to  consumers  from  microplastics  and 
nanoplastics  in  food,  especially  seafood,  producing  a  comprehensive  literature 
review in a Statement on - Presence of microplastics and nanoplastics in food, with 
particular  focus  on  seafood38,  taking  stock  of  scientific  developments,  identifying 
data  and  knowledge  gaps  and  recommending  future  research  priorities  to  address 
them.  The  review  concluded  that  there  are  insufficient  data  on  the  occurrence, 
toxicity  and  fate  after  digestion  of  these  materials  to  carry  out  a  full  risk 
assessment.  It  also  concluded  that  nanoplastics  require  particular  attention.  The 
review reported many data gaps on the impacts of microplastics on human health as 
well as some studies showing that microplastics can be transferred between trophic 
levels and that microplastic and nanoplastics can penetrate deeply into organs with 
yet  unknown  consequences.  It  also  concluded,  based  on  conservative  estimates, 
that  microplastics  in  seafood  represent  a  very  small  proportion  of  the  overall 
exposure of  humans to  additives or  contaminants. Toxicity data is lacking  for  both 
microplastics and nanoplastics for a human risk assessment to be possible. In 2011, 
EFSA’s Scientific Committee also published  Guidance on the risk assessment of the 
application of nanoscience  and  nanotechnologies in  the food and feed chain39.  This 
guide was updated on 4 July 201840. 

Recent  /  forthcoming:  At  present,  EFSA  has  no  mandate  from  the  European 
Commission  (EC)  or  the  EU  Member  States  (MS)  to  update  the  2016  statement. 
However,  on  the  request  from  the  EC/MS,  and  once  more  data  become  available, 
then a full risk assessment would be carried out. 

  Industrial Emissions 

The  Industrial  Emissions  Directive  (IED)41  aims  at  preventing,  controlling  and 
reducing  the  impact  of  industrial  emissions  on  the  environment  (air,  water,  and 
land).  According  to  the  directive’s  guiding  principle  of  sustainable  production,  an 
integrative  approach  to  pollution  emissions,  production  process  consumption  of 
resources  and  energy  and  environmental  damage  caused  by  operation  and  post-
closure  of  an  industrial  plant,  must  be  followed.  Best  available  techniques  (BATs) 
have to be applied.  Annex  I of the Directive,  lists industrial activities giving rise  to 

38 http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.2903/j.efsa.2016.4501/epdf  
39 http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.2903/j.efsa.2011.2140/epdf  
40 https://efsa.onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.2903/j.efsa.2018.5327  
41 Directive 2010/75/EU on industrial emissions (integrated pollution prevention and control) 

20 

             15 November 2018 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
                                                
Microplastic Pollution - The Policy Context 

pollution  including  the  production  of  organic  chemicals  such  as  plastic  materials 
(polymers, synthetic fibres). 

The  release  of  plastic  pellets  along  the  industrial  supply/  production  chain,  which 
accounts for a sizeable fraction of microplastic emissions42, is within the scope of the 
Directive.  Member  States  have  to  ensure  that  industrial  installation  operators  take 
all appropriate preventive measures against such pollution and apply BATs. Member 
State issued permits must include requirements to ensure protection of the soil and 
groundwater  as  well  as  waste  monitoring  and  management,  and  limit  values  for 
listed  and  non-listed43  substances.  For  polymers,  the  Reference  Document  on  Best 
Available Techniques in the Production of Polymers is relevant44. Another draft BAT 
reference  Document 
and  waste  water 
“Common  waste 
treatment/management  systems  in  the  chemical  sector”45  does  not  include 
information  on  limiting  polymer  emissions  but  discusses  the  benefits  of  polymers 
(polyelectrolytes)  as  adsorbents  in  regard  to  waste  water  treatment/management, 
polymer addition for various types of sludge and for various methods of dewatering 
when it comes to sludge treatment techniques. 

gas 

on 

Recent / forthcoming: The EU Plastics Strategy announced the development from 
2018  onwards  of  measures  to  reduce  plastic  pellet  spillage such  as  a  certification 
scheme along the plastic supply chain and/or a Best Available Techniques reference 
document under the Directive. 

  Landfill 

Landfilled waste must comply with the requirements of the recently revised directive 
(adopted on 30 May 2018)46, which aims to prevent negative impacts of landfills on 
groundwater, surface waters and human health via strict technical requirements. It 
defines landfills for 1) hazardous waste, 2) non-hazardous waste and 3) inert waste. 
Under the Directive there are no limits to the amounts of plastic waste that can be 
landfilled though several Member States have introduced their own limits. Protection 
of nearby soil, coastal- and fresh waters must also  be accounted for when location 
and  implementation/design  of  the  landfill  are  decided.  The  recently-adopted 
revisions  require  Member  States  to  significantly  reduce  landfill  waste  disposal. 
Member States are required to ensure that, as of 2030, waste suitable for recycling 
or other recovery, in particular contained in municipal waste, will not disposed of as 
landfill.  Use  of  landfills  should  remain  exceptional  rather  than  the  norm. 

42http://ec.europa.eu/environment/marine/good-environmental-status/descriptor-
10/pdf/microplastics_final_report_v5_full.pdf  
43  Substances  likely  to  be  emitted  from  the  installation  concerned  in  significant  quantities,  having  regard  to  their 
nature and their potential to transfer pollution from one medium to another 
44 European Commission, 2007 
45 European Commission, 2016 
46 Directive (EU) 2018/850 

15 November 2018 

                                   21 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
                                                
Microplastic Pollution - The Policy Context 

Furthermore, the Member States must ensure that  by 2035, no more than 10% of 
municipal waste is disposed of in landfills.  

Recent  /  forthcoming:  The  revised  Directive  entered  into  force  on  04  July  2018 
and must be transposed into national legislation by 05 July 2020. 

3.3. Water pollution measures 

The  most  important  water-related  legislative  acts  are  the  Water  Framework 
Directive  (WFD)47  and  the  Marine  Strategy  Framework  Directive  (MSFD)48.  They 
establish  legal  frameworks  for  the  protection  of  European  freshwater  and  marine 
environments  respectively,  but  with  some  overlap  as  far  as  transitional  (estuaries) 
and  coastal  waters  are  concerned.  Although  both  aim  at  achieving  good 
ecological/environmental  status,  there  is  a  discrepancy  between  them  regarding 
plastic waste. In MSFD, descriptor 10 “marine litter” – one of 11 indicators of good 
environmental status - defines waste, whereas in WFD such waste is not mentioned. 
In a possible future revision of the WFD (next review due in 2019), this discrepancy 
might be removed. 

  Water Framework Directive  

The Water Framework Directive (WFD), which entered into force in December 2000. 
It does not oblige Member States to take measures against litter in surface waters, 
but  if  they  do,  they  should  report  this.  Recital  40  states  that  “with  regard  to 
pollution  prevention  and  control,  Community  water  policy  should  be  based  on  a 
combined  approach  using  control  of  pollution  at  source  through  the  setting  of 
emission  limit  values  and  of  environmental  quality  standards”.  Article  10  describes 
the approach for point and diffuse sources in more detail in terms of BAT49 emission 
controls, emission limit values, or best environmental practice in the case of diffuse 
impacts, and points to further relevant directives50. 

Microplastics are not explicitly addressed in the WFD though this discrepancy could 
be addressed in a possible revision due in 2019. However (Wesch, Klein, & Paulus, 
2014)  argue  that  plastic  waste  is  already  indirectly  covered  by  the  WFD  as  it 
currently stands. In their opinion, as litter - including microplastics – may influence 
water quality, it is relevant to determining the good ecological status of freshwater 
systems. 

47 Directive 2000/60/EC 
48 Directive 2008/56/EC 
49 best available techniques 
50 Council Directive 96/61/EC concerning integrated pollution prevention and control; Council Directive 91/271/EEC 
concerning urban waste-water treatment; Council Directive 91/676/EEC concerning the protection of waters against 
pollution caused by nitrates from agricultural sources 

22 

             15 November 2018 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
                                                
Microplastic Pollution - The Policy Context 

WFD Article 16 gives rise to a list of 45 priority substances, several of which  - e.g. 
di(2-ethylhexyl)phthalate,  nonylphenol,  or  octylphenol  -  are  contained  in  plastic 
products  which  member  states  are  legally  obliged  to  monitor.  However,  the 
measured concentration of a substance includes all sources and cannot indicate the 
plastic-related  percentage.  WFD  Annex  VIII  contains  an  indicative  list  of  the  main 
pollutants  such  as  “persistent  hydrocarbons  and  persistent  and  bioaccumulative 
organic  toxic  substances”  and  “substances  and  preparations,  or  the  breakdown 
products  of  such,  which  have  been  proved  to  possess  carcinogenic  or  mutagenic 
properties  or  properties  which  may  affect  steroidogenic,  thyroid,  reproduction  or 
other  endocrine-related  functions  in  or  via  the  aquatic  environment”  which  might 
include synthetic polymers and their additives.  

Recent / forthcoming: the WFD is currently undergoing a detailed review51 which 
may lead to a possible revision in 2019. 

   Marine Litter  

The problem of marine litter has led to a variety of measures under different policy 
areas (water, marine, waste, product and fisheries policies) some of which focus on 
reducing entry into the sea via different pathways such as waste or sewage systems 
or  from  sea  based  sources.  For  instance,  Article  9  of  the  Joint  Communication  on 
international  ocean  governance52  deals  with  plastic  pollution,  in  support  of 
Sustainable Development Goal 14 under UN Agenda 2030. 

3.3.2.1. 

The Marine Strategy Framework Directive 

The  Marine  Strategy  Framework  Directive  (MSFD)  is  the  only  EU  legal  instrument 
tackling  marine  litter  explicitly  and  directly.  It  does  not  regulate  specific  human 
activities but requires Member States to achieve Good Environmental Status (GES) 
by  2020  for  eleven  MSFD  descriptors,  one  of  which  focuses  on  marine  litter  while 
leaving  specific  measures  up  to  Member  States.  GES  is  achieved  when  "properties 
and  quantities  of  marine  litter  do  not  cause  harm  to  the  coastal  and  marine 
environment".  It  has  led  to  an  improved  understanding  of  macro-  and  micro-litter 
(notably  from  plastics)    mostly  attributed  to  tourism  and  recreational  activities, 
urban  waste,  industrial  activities,  shipping,  and  commercial  fishing.  Under  MSFD, 
Member States had to adopt measures to address marine litter by 2016. However, 
on  the  basis  of  the  programmes  of  measures  submitted  (in  2016)  by  Member 
States,  it  was  not  possible  to  calculate  by  how  much  marine  litter  would  be 
reduced53.  The  most  common  type  of  measures  reported  by  Member  States  were 
beach  clean-ups  and  'fishing  for  litter'  –  i.e.  costly  downstream  measures,  as 

51 See Evaluation and fitness review plan 
52 JOIN(2016)49 
53See COM/2017/03 

15 November 2018 

                                   23 

 
 
 
 
 
 
                                                
Microplastic Pollution - The Policy Context 

opposed  to  more  effective  upstream  waste  management  and  prevention  measures 
which raise awareness but only have a modest impact. However, wide application of 
such measures could eventually lead to harmonisation at EU level, shifting the focus 
to  upstream  measures.  On  31  July  2018,  the  Commission  published  a  report54 
assessing  Member  States’  programmes  of  measures  under  the  Marine  Strategy 
Framework Directive. 

Urgent  improvements  are  needed  in  the  monitoring  of  micro-litter  and  of  seabed 
and surface litter. Systematic and comparable monitoring of the impact of litter on 
marine  animals  and  nature  as  well  as  localisation  and  extent  of  human  activities 
generating  marine  litter  should  also  be  covered  by  monitoring  programmes.  Also, 
the  lack  of  agreed  baselines  or  thresholds  for  litter  and  micro-litter,  hampers 
progress  monitoring.  Overall  the  EU  is  unlikely  to  meet  internal  (7th  Environment 
Action  Programme  to  2020,  Circular  Economy  action  plan)  and  international 
commitments55 without additional measures. 

According  to  a  revised  Commission  Decision56  (April  2017),  Good  Environmental 
Status (GES) should be determined on the basis of amounts, with threshold values 
established at Union or other levels (regional/sub-regional) for litter and micro-litter 
on  beaches/water  column/seafloor,  for  litter  ingested  by  marine  animals  and  for 
adverse  effects  (entanglement,  other  types  of  injury  or  mortality  or  health  effects, 
of  the  species  concerned  due  to  litter).  Setting  thresholds  for  litter  quantities  and 
impacts  at  the  appropriate  geographic  level  will  also  enable  the  setting  of  targets 
and  monitoring  of  progress  towards  their  achievement.  EU  funding  is  also  being 
deployed  to  understand  and  combat  the  rise  of  marine  litter57,  supporting  global, 
national  and  regional  action  —  for  example,  in  November  2017,  the  Commission 
launched a call for proposals for €2 million to tackle marine litter58. 

54 See COM(2018)562 & SWD(2018)393 
55  Such as  its commitment  in 2014  as part  of  the  Circular  Economy  package  to  meet  the  UN  SDG  30% marine  litter 
reduction target - endorsed by the Council but not linked to specific measures 
56 Commission Decision C(2017)2901 –e.g. for D10C2 —  The composition, amount and spatial distribution of micro-
litter  on  the  coastline,  in  the  surface  layer  of  the  water  column,  and  in  seabed  sediment,  are  at  levels  that  do  not 
cause harm to the coastal and marine environment. Member States shall establish threshold values for these levels 
through cooperation at Union level, taking into account regional or subregional specificities; for D10C3 — The amount 
of  litter  and  micro-litter  ingested  by  marine  animals  is  at  a  level  that  does  not  adversely  affect  the  health  of  the 
species  concerned.  Member  States  shall  establish  threshold  values  for  these  levels  through  regional  or  subregional 
cooperation. 
57 For instance, in the Arctic Region, the Circular Ocean INTERREG project is testing new opportunities for reusing old 
fishing  nets,  including  a  material  to  remove  pollutants  from  water  (http://www.circularocean.eu/).  In the  Baltic  Sea 
Region,  the  BLASTIC  project  maps  potential  litter  sources  in  urban  areas  and  monitors  litter  levels  in  the  aquatic 
environment (https://www.blastic.eu/). Both projects are supported by the European Regional Development Fund. 
58  Under  the  overarching  ‘Sustainable  Blue  Economy’  call:  https://ec.europa.eu/easme/en/information-day-blue-
growth-calls-under-emff. 

24 

             15 November 2018 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
                                                
Microplastic Pollution - The Policy Context 

Recent  /  forthcoming:  Member  States  were  due  to  report  updates  of  their 
determination  of  good  environmental  status,  targets,  and  assessment  of 
environmental status by 15 October 2018 [Article 17(2) (a) & (b)]. The Commission 
will  build  on  these  different  elements  to  issue  an  implementation  report  in  2019 
which  will  review  progress  [Article  20],  ahead  of  the  2020  deadline  for  achieving 
good environmental status. Also, an MSFD position paper on micro-litter is due at the 
end of 2018. 

3.3.2.2. 

Port Reception Facilities 

Directive 2000/59/EC on port reception facilities for ship-generated waste and cargo 
residues  (PRF  Directive)  aims  to  reduce  all  discharges  of  waste  from  ships  at  sea, 
including  from  fishing  vessels  and  recreational  craft.  It  requires  Member  States  to 
provide adequate port reception facilities,  and  ships to deliver their waste to these 
facilities  before  departure  from  the  port.  It  also  requires  Member  States  to  set  up 
cost-recovery  systems  ensuring  there  is  no  incentive  for  ships  to  discharge  their 
waste at sea. In 2018, the European Commission adopted a proposal for a new PRF 
Directive59 (as part of the Commission’s Circular Economy Package), seeking further 
alignment  with  the  International  Convention  for  the  Prevention  of  Pollution  from 
Ships  (MARPOL  Convention)  with  a  special  focus  on  addressing  marine  litter  from 
sea-based  sources.  Through  a  mix  of  incentive  and  enforcement  measures,  the 
proposed Directive should result in maximising garbage delivery from ships to waste 
reception facilities in ports. The charges for bringing litter ashore, including fished-
up litter, will be independent of the amount. Reporting and inspection obligations for 
fishing  vessels  and  small  recreational  craft  have  been  brought  more  in  line  with 
other vessels. The proposal will improve the adequacy of port reception facilities, in 
particular  their  operation  in  accordance  with  EU  waste  legislation,  including  the 
obligation for separate collection of waste from ships.  

3.3.2.3. 

Funding Measures 

The structural support tool for the Common Fisheries Policy, the  European Maritime 
and  Fisheries  Fund  (EMFF),  may  provide  financial  support  for  the  recovery  of  litter 
and  gear  from  the  sea.  Such  support  can  come  for  action  that  is  either  part  of 
fishing  activities,(i.e.  bringing  litter  that  is  caught  in  the  nets  while  fishing  back 
ashore  -  so  called  "passive"  fishing  for  litter),  or  as  part  of  specific  retrieval  and 
recovery  actions  of  waste  and/or  lost  and  abandoned  gear  ("active"  fishing  for 
litter). Over the seven year period 2014-2020, 14 Member States plan a total of 108 
such  projects  supported  with  around  €22  million  from  the  EMFF.    The  European 
Marine Observation and Data Network (EMODnet) which in its current third phase of 

59 COM(2018)33 

15 November 2018 

                                   25 

 
 
 
 
 
 
                                                
Microplastic Pollution - The Policy Context 

deveopment (2017-2020) includes data collection on plastics and microlitter60 is also 
funded  unde  the  EMFF.  The  improvement  of  waste  handling  infrastructure  and 
management processes on vessels and at ports is also eligible for support under the 
EMFF, as are other measures to reduce the impact of fishing on ecosystem such as 
innovation in catch handling, storing, processing and marketing processes61.  
In  addition  to  the  EMFF,  other  EU  funding  programmes  (Horizon  2020,  Life,  ERDF 
etc.) also finance actions for the prevention, reduction and retrieval of marine litter 
via  actions  under  shared  management  with  Member  States.  The  Commission  also 
directly finances action to understand and combat the rise of marine litter.62  

Recent / forthcoming:  Under the EMFF a €2 million call for proposals to address 
marine  litter  was  launched  in  November  201763.  The  proposals  received  are 
currently being evaluated (Update). Post 2020, in line with the plastic strategy, it is 
envisaged  to  addressing  marine  litter  is  proposed  as  a  priority  in  the  new  EMFF 
proposal64.  

  Urban Waste Water Treatment  

As well as ending up as solid waste disposal, a significant amount of plastic ends up 
in urban wastewater systems. To protect the environment from the adverse effects 
of urban  wastewater discharges and discharges from  certain industrial sectors, the 
European Urban Waste Water Treatment Directive (UWWTD)65 was adopted in 1991. 
It concerns the collection, treatment, and discharge of domestic effluent or mixture 
of domestic and certain industrial wastewater (see Annex III of the directive) and/or 
rainfall water. Whilst UWWTD has improved the quality of discharges over the years, 
the  Directive  does  not  entail  any  requirements  when  it  comes  to  the  amount  of 
plastic  in  the  effluent.  There  are  cases  of  plastic  and  other  litter  entering  the 
environment  through  the  sewage  network,  for  example,  through  combined  sewer 
overflows  (CSOs)/  storm  water  overflows.  Microplastics  are  either  not  completely 
captured  (capture  potential  is  between  50-80%)  in  the  treatment  plants  or 
accumulate in the sludge – part of it being reused in agriculture with a clear risk of 
releases  of  microplastics  back  to  the  environment.  In  this  regard,  There  are  no 
monitoring  requirements  for  microplastics  in  place  and  no  comparable  results  for 

60  Note  that  microplastic  is  a  major  component  of  microliter  which  also  includes  many  other  classes  of  discarded 

material 

61 EMFF, Articles 38.1c, 39, 40.1a and 43.1 
62 For instance, in the Arctic Region, the Circular Ocean INTERREG project is testing new opportunities for reusing old 
fishing  nets,  including  a  material  to  remove  pollutants  from  water  (http://www.circularocean.eu/).  In the  Baltic  Sea 
Region,  the  BLASTIC  project  maps  potential  litter  sources  in  urban  areas  and  monitors  litter  levels  in  the  aquatic 
environment (https://www.blastic.eu/). Both projects are supported by the European Regional Development Fund. 
63  Under  the  overarching  ‘Sustainable  Blue  Economy’  call:  https://ec.europa.eu/easme/en/information-day-blue-
growth-calls-under-emff. 
64 COM(2018)390 
65 Directive 91/271/EEC 

26 

             15 November 2018 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
                                                
Microplastic Pollution - The Policy Context 

different  types  of  facilities  or  treatments.  There  is  also  no  known  method  of 
removing microplastics from sludge.  

regards  microplastics 

Recent  /  forthcoming:  The  Commission’s  on-going  evaluation  of  the  UWWTD66 
due  to  be  completed  in  2019,  will,  according  to  the  Plastics  Strategy,  assess 
effectiveness  as 
Improved 
implementation  should  result  from  the  new  requirement  to  coordinate  measures 
with  those  under  the  MSFD  and  Waste  Framework  Directive.  The  UWWTD 
assessment  could  have  important  implications  for  the  1986  Directive67  regulating 
agricultural  use  of  sewage  sludge  and  which  has  been  under  consideration  for 
revision in recent years. 

capture  and 

removal. 

3.4. Air pollution measures 

The main instruments of relevance to air quality in the EU are a series of Directives 
setting  standards  to  prevent  excessive  pollution  concentrations  and  other  policy 
initiatives.  Air  pollution  is  covered  by  the  Sustainable  Development  Goal  SDG11 
"Sustainable cities and communities".  

No consideration is given in any of these to air-borne microplastics per se. However, 
detailed prescriptions are provided in the legislation regarding air-borne particulate 
matter  specifying  two  different  size  thresholds  –  PM10  and  PM2.5  which  refer 
respectively  to  particles  of  up  to  10  microns  or  2.5  microns  in  their  longest 
dimension.  No  mention  is  made  of  the  type  of  material  or  composition  of  such 
particulate  matter  and  so,  by  default,  microplastics  under  the  size  thresholds  are 
covered.  However, the  characteristics of  airborne microplastics  –mostly  fibres from 
synthetic  fabric  which  are  of  micron  scale  in  their  narrow  dimension  but  can  be 
hundreds  of  microns  in  their  long  dimension  –  mean  they  are  not  covered  by  the 
current  terms  of  the  legislation.  Furthermore,  household  exposure  –  the  main 
exposure situation - to such microfibers is not covered by the legislation.  

  Ambient Air Quality  

The  current  framework  for  the  control  of  ambient  concentrations  of  air  pollution  in 
the  EU  consists  of  two  Ambient  Air  Quality  Directives:  2008/50/EC  and 
2004/107/EC. An additional 2015 Directive 2015/1480/EC amends several annexes 
to  Directives  2004/107/EC  and  2008/50/EC  (i.e.  rules  concerning  reference 
methods,  data  validation  and  location  of  sampling  points  for  the  assessment  of 
ambient air quality). 

Recent  / forthcoming:  A fitness check of the relevant  legislation started in 2017 
and  will  end  at  the  end  of  2019.  Relevant  to  the  fitness  check  and  any  eventual 

66 https://ec.europa.eu/info/law/better-regulation/initiatives/ares-2017-4989291_en 
67 Directive 86/278/EEC 

15 November 2018 

                                   27 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
                                                
Microplastic Pollution - The Policy Context 

follow-up is on-going work in the W.H.O. on air quality guidelines which will run to 
2020/21  and  other  W.H.O.  work  focusing  on  ultrafine  particles  (<0.1 μm  in 
diameter). 

  Other initiatives 

In 2013, the Commission adopted a Clean Air Policy Package which included a Clean 
Air Programme for Europe (setting objectives for 2020 and 2030), and proposals for 
Directives  on  the  reduction  of  national  emissions  of  certain  atmospheric  pollutants 
(the NEC Directive) and on  limitation of emissions of  certain pollutants into the air 
from  medium  combustion  plants  (the  MCP  Directive).  A  long-term,  strategic  and 
integrated policy to protect against the effects of air pollution on human health and 
the  environment  was  adopted  in  200568.  On  17  May  2018,  the  Commission 
published  a  Communication  'A  Europe  that  protects:  Clean  air  for  all'  outlining 
measures available to help EU Member States to fight air pollution.  

68 The Clean Air for Europe (CAFÉ) Programme (2001; now closed) was a programme of technical analysis and policy 
development  that  underpinned  the  development  of  the  Thematic  Strategy  on  Air  Pollution  under  the  Sixth 
Environmental Action Programme. 

28 

             15 November 2018 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
                                                
Microplastic Pollution - The Policy Context 

    Table II – Overview of EU policy measures 

A.  The date of the most recent relevant official document referred to in the text above (such as proposal date or adoption date or launch date, etc. as applicable);  
B.  Current status and forthcoming milestones; 
C.  The main environmental compartment(s) concerned by the measure; 
D.  Whether or not the measure explicitly targets microplastics;  

Measure 

Date [A] 

Status & Milestones [B] 

Concerned 

MP$ 

Environmental 

Explicitly 

Compartments 

Targeted 

The EU Plastics Strategy  

Waste Framework Directive  

Single Use Plastics and Fishing Gear  

REACH Oxo-degradable  

REACH Intentionally added  

Jan 2018 

May 2018 

May 2018 

Jan 2018 

Jan 2018 

New – implementation ongoing 

Soil/Water/Air 

Revised version to transpose 

Soil/Water/Air 

Legislative process ongoing 

Water (Marine) 

Milestones: Jan 2019; spring 2020 

Milestones: Jan 2019; spring 2020 

Soil/Water 

Soil/Water 

[C] 

Unintentional Release from Tyres, Textiles & Paint 

Jan 2018 

Ongoing 

Soil/Water/Air 

Packaging and Packaging Waste 

Food Contact Materials 

Drinking Water 

Industrial Emissions  

Landfill 

Water Framework Directive  

The Marine Strategy Framework Directive  

Port Reception Facilities  

Urban Waste Water Treatment Directive  

Ambient Air Quality  

$ MP - Microplastic 

May 2018 

Aug 2016 

Dec 2017 

Nov 2010 

May 2018 

Dec 2000 

Jun 2008 

Jan 2018 

May 1991 

Aug 2015 

Revised version to transpose 

Evolving amendments 

Legislative process ongoing 

Soil/Water 

Soil/Water 

Freshwater 

Pending: Certification scheme / BAT BREFs 

Soil/Water 

Revised version to transpose 

Ongoing review 

Ongoing implementation 

Legislative process ongoing 

Ongoing review 

Ongoing review 

Soil/Water/Air 

Fresh Water 

Water (Marine) 

Water (Marine) 

Fresh Water 

Air 

[D] 

Yes 

No 

No 

Yes 

Yes 

Yes 

No 

No 

Yes 

Yes 

No 

No 

No 

No 

No 

No 

29 

       15 November 2018                

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Microplastic Pollution - The Policy Context 

3.5. Research measures 

Given that the study of microplastics is a relatively new field, it is not surprising that 
a  significant  amount  of  activity  is  taking  place  in  the  research  and  research-policy 
realms.  This  is  the  certainly  the  case  in  the  EU’s  RTD  Framework  Programme 
Horizon 2020 and it is likely to continue under the next one – Horizon Europe. Note 
that  the  idea  of  making  “plastic-free  oceans”  one  of  the  themes  of  a  new  mission 
approach to be inaugurated under Horizon Europe was proposed in an independent 
report by Prof Mazzucato69 submitted to the Commission in Feb 2018.  

Some recent and on-going EU-level research-related activities are summarised here. 

  Ecological Aspects of Microplastics 

As  part  of  the  Oceans  Joint  Programming  Initiative70,  four  research  projects  with 
overall  funding  of  €  7.7  million  were  launched  in  January  2016  to  investigate 
ecological  aspects  of  microplastics  as  a  three-year  pilot71:  BASEMAN  focuses  on 
overcoming standardisation and comparability deficiencies in the measurement and 
the 
monitoring  of  environmental  microplastics;  EPHEMARE 
ecotoxicological  effects  of  marine  microplastics;  PLASTOX  is  investigating  the 
ingestion, food-web transfer, and ecotoxicological  impact of  microplastics, together 
with  persistent  organic  pollutants  (POPs),  metals  and  plastic  additive  chemicals 
associated  with  them,  on  marine  species  and  ecosystems;  and  WEATHER-MIC 
investigated the weathering processes of microplastics and the distribution and toxic 
impacts of the resultant particles and the implications for risk assessment.  As these 
projects are due to end in 2018, it is pertinent that a central concern of JPI Oceans 
is  to  ensure  that  all  its  policy-relevant  research  is  effectively  communicated  to 
relevant policy mechanisms.   

is  examining 

  Health Aspects 

The  long-term  impact  of  microplastics  on  human  health  remains  largely  unknown 
since most studies to date have been limited to the impact on marine life consuming 
microplastics  directly.  An  article  in  The  Economist  on  3  March  201872  offered  the 
following perspective:  

Whereas  filthy  air  kills  7m  people  a  year,  nearly  all  of  them  in  low-  and 
middle-income  countries,  plastic  pollution  is  not  directly  blamed  for  any.  A 
report last year by the Lancet Commission on pollution and health, which put 

69 Mission-Oriented Research & Innovation in the European Union - A problem-solving approach to fuel innovation-led 
growth 
70 JPIOceans 
71 http://www.jpi-oceans.eu/ecological-aspects-microplastics 
72 The known unknowns of plastic pollution 

30 

        15 November 2018 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
                                                
Microplastic Pollution - The Policy Context 

the total number of pollution-related deaths at 9m, mentions plastics once in 
its 45 pages.   

However,  it  is  clear  that  humans  are  everywhere  exposed  to  these  particles  via 
seafood, water supply, the air we breathe and the dust in our home. Therefore, it is 
imperative to measure and monitor such exposure and take precautionary measures 
to reduce and eliminate such exposure when the potential risks justify doing so. 

  Human biomonitoring  

The  European  Human  Biomonitoring  Initiative  (HBM4EU)73  is  a  joint  effort  of  28 
countries  and  the  European  Environment  Agency,  co-funded  by  the  European 
Commission under Horizon 2020. The main aim of the initiative is to coordinate and 
advance  human  biomonitoring  in  Europe.  HBM4EU  will  provide  better  evidence  of 
the  actual  exposure  of  citizens  to  chemicals  and  the  possible  health  effects  to 
support policy making. 

A  first  HBM4EU  prioritisation  exercise  resulted  in  nine  substance  groupings74  for 
work in 2017 and 2018. For these substances,  many of which are  found in plastics 
as  additives,  scoping  documents  compiling  information  on  substance  classification, 
policy-related  research  questions  and  research  objectives  are  available  and  will 
regularly be updated75 

Recent  /  forthcoming:  A  second  round  of  prioritisation  has  been  finalised  in  the 
first half of 2018 and will be included in the work plans for 2019-2021. Substances 
selected have been published on the HBM4EU website76. 

  RTD initiatives to strengthen the science-policy interface 

These  RTD  initiatives  aim  to  provide  inputs  to  strategic  programming  for  R&I,  in 
particular for Horizon Europe, and to other areas of EU policy, in the form of policy-
relevant  evidence,  identification  of  policy  gaps  or  barriers  or  innovative  policy 
opportunities.  The  evidence  and  insights  are  distilled  from  the  findings  of  EU  RTD 
Framework  Programme  projects  and  contextualized  by  drawing  in  wider  state-of-
the-art  scientific  expertise  available  in  the  research  community.  At  present,  there 
are  two  of  these  initiatives  on-going  of  relevance  to  Microplastics  which  aim  to 
deliver reports by late 2018/ early 2019. One is on a Circular Economy for Plastics 
which is very broad in scope but which does cover Microplastics in the part focusing 
on  plastic  pollution  –  it  will  help  to  shape  an  EU  strategic  research  and  innovation 

73 https://www.hbm4eu.eu/  
74  phthalates  and  Hexamoll®  DINCH;  bisphenols;  per-/polyfluorinated  compounds;  flame  retardants;  cadmium  and 
chromium VI; PAHs; aniline family; chemical mixtures;  and emerging substances 
75 https://www.hbm4eu.eu/wp-content/uploads/2017/03/scoping-documents-for-2018.pdf  
76 Acrylamide, aprotic solvents, arsenic, diisocyanates, lead, mercury, mycotoxins, pesticides, benzophenones 

15 November 2018 

                31 

 
 
 
 
  
 
 
 
                                                
Microplastic Pollution - The Policy Context 

agenda for plastics as announced in the Plastics Strategy. The second project is on 
Urban Water Management and is following a similar timeline to the one on Plastics.   

Recent / forthcoming: draft reports shared with stakeholders over summer 2018 
and  due  to  be  finalised  by  end  of  2018  (Circular  Economy  for  Plastics)  and  early 
2019 (Urban Water Management). 

  Other RTD Framework Programme Projects 

The  coordination  and  support  action  Seas,  Oceans  and  Public  Health  in  Europe 
(SOPHIE) which runs from 2017 to 2020 exploring the interplay between the health 
of  the  marine  environment  and  that  of  humans  includes  work  on  microplastics.  It 
aims  to  build  a  network  of  researchers  and  practitioners  from  two  traditionally 
distinct groups: marine and maritime specialists; and the medical and public health 
community.  

TOPIOS  (Tracking  of  Plastic  in  Our  Seas)  is  a  5-year  (2017-22)  research  project, 
funded  through  a  European  Research  Council  Starting  Grant  project  to  Erik  van 
Sebille. Its goal is to improve understanding of the way plastic litter moves through 
our ocean by developing a comprehensive model for tracking marine plastic through 
our  ocean.  CLAIM  (2017-21)  is  a  19-partner,  14  country  project  targeting 
prevention and in-situ management of visible and invisible marine litter, through the 
development  of  five  innovative  new  technologies  and  redefined  methodologies. 
GoJelly  (2018-21)  is  15  partner,  8  country  project  developing  a  prototype 
microplastics  filter  (GoJelly)  for  commercial  and  public  use,  where  the  main  raw 
material is jellyfish mucus. 

Relevant finished projects include:  CLEANSEA (2013-15) addressing the monitoring 
and  management  of  marine  litter;  NANOPLAST  (2013-16)  consisting  of  a 
computational  modelling  approach  to  the  interaction  of  nanoplastics  with  biological 
membranes;  and  FreshwaterMPs  (2015-17)  investigating  the  degradation  and  fate 
of  plastics  in  freshwater  systems  and  the  toxicity  of  microplastics  to  frechwater 
biota. 

  Activities of the Joint Research Centre 

The  European  Commission’s  Joint  Research  Centre  (JRC)  is  exploring77  the  lack  of 
harmonisation  and  reference  materials  in  scientific  work  (methods,  definitions, 
protocols,  etc.)  aimed  at  measuring  and  monitoring  microplastic  presence  and 
exposure routes. It is also carrying out a mapping of data and methodologies gaps, 
focusing  on  the  food/feed  chain78.  The  JRC  also  supports  the  Marine  Strategy 

77 Reference Materials Unit (JRC.F6) 
78 Knowledge for Health & Consumer Safety Unit (JRC.F7) 

32 

        15 November 2018 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
                                                
Microplastic Pollution - The Policy Context 

Framework Directive’s Technical Group on Marine Litter79 on litter as a threat to the 
marine  environment  and  as  potentially  creating  harm,  including  socioeconomic 
aspects.  Baselines  are  being  derived,  thresholds  discussed  and  there  is  work  on 
monitoring guidance to improve exposure data80.  

Recent / forthcoming: Review paper/ report on microplastics in the food chain to 
be published before end of 2018 or early 2019; a MSFD micro-litter position paper 
due  at  the  end  of  2018  and  a  draft  of  which  will  be  discussed  at  the  MICRO2018 
conference on 20 Nov 2018. 

  Lanzarote Declaration 

In 2016, members of the microplastic research community met in Lanzarote, Canary 
Islands,  Spain  for  the  first  international  conference  on  microplastics,  MICRO  2016: 
"Fate and Impact  of  Microplastics in Marine Ecosystems: From  the Coastline to the 
Open Sea."  
During  the  conference,  members  of  the  scientific  committee  and  organising  board 
launched a collaborative process culminating in  the Lanzarote Declaration81. In  this 
Declaration,  the  scientific  community  recognises  its  responsibility  as  individual 
scientists to change  behaviours  related to plastic production  and  consumption, and 
to inform others of their social, cultural, economic and environmental implications.  

Recent / forthcoming: MICRO2018 Conference82 The international conference will 
take  place  from  19  –  23  November  2018,  Lanzarote,  Spain.  Main  topics  to  be 
addressed  include:  marine  ecosystems;  freshwater  bodies;  from  macro  to  nano; 
social change and behaviour; human health; policy. 

79 Water & Marine Resources Unit (JRC.D2) 
80 See http://mcc.jrc.ec.europa.eu/dev.py?N=41&O=434&titre_chap=TG%20Marine%20Litter  
81 https://micro2016.sciencesconf.org/conference/micro2016/pages/Lz_Declaration_june21st2016.pdf  
82 https://micro2018.sciencesconf.org/  

15 November 2018 

                33 

 
 
 
 
  
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
                                                
Microplastic Pollution - The Policy Context 

4.  INTERNATIONAL LEVEL  

Microplastic  pollution  is  a  cross-border  issue  for  which  governments  should  co-
ordinate  efforts  to  understand  and  address  their  possible  health  and  environment 
impacts  (Borrelle  et  al.,  2017).  International  regulation  -  namely,  conventions, 
agreements, regulations, strategies, action plans, programmes, and guidelines - are 
mostly  not  legally  binding  on  individual  nations  but  they  can  shape  mutually-
consistent  regional  and  national  policies,  priorities  and  actions.    The  need  for 
international regulation of plastic pollution is presently being discussed and actioned 
in  different  international  settings  –  inter-governmental,  supra-national,  trans-
governmental  and  private.  Such  initiatives  help  to  foster  effective,  inclusive  and 
relevant  multilateral  action  and  to  address  the  fragmentation  that  may  undermine 
domestic measures.  

Global  international  plastic  pollution  policy  agreements  are  currently  in  a  state 
similar  to  that  in  which  climate  change  agreements  were  in  1992,  when  the  UN 
Framework  Convention  on  Climate  Change  (UNFCCC)  formally  recognized  the 
climate  change  problem  and  encouraged  voluntary,  undefined  support  (Borrelle  et 
al.,  2017).  If  international  efforts  on  plastic  pollution  evolve  at  the  same  pace  as 
those for climate and carbon emissions, an effective agreement may not be in place 
before  2040.  To  avoid  waiting  20  years,  the  lessons  learned  from  the  policy 
processes related to carbon emissions should be applied (Steffen et al., 2015). 

Table  III  on  page  48  presents  an  overview  the  International  regulations  -  namely, 
conventions,  agreements,  regulations,  strategies,  action  plans,  programmes,  and 
guidelines. 

4.1. United Nations (UN) 

There  are  several  United  Nations  (UN)  instruments,  specialised  structures  and 
agencies (autonomous organizations) coordinating efforts and initiatives relevant to 
this topic.  

Many of the 17 Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs)83 and 169 associated targets 
of the UN’s overarching 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development adopted in 2015 
are relevant to microplastic pollution. The EU and its Member States are committed 
to  the  2030  Agenda84.  This  Agenda  has  a  strong  call  to  action  on  marine  litter  in 
Goal  14:  Conserve  and  sustainably  use  the  oceans,  seas  and  marine  resources.  A 
number  of  the  other  SDG  targets,  even  if  not  directly  aimed  at  protecting  marine 

83 https://sustainabledevelopment.un.org/post2015/transformingourworld      
84 Council conclusions 'A sustainable European future: The EU response to the 2030 Agenda for Sustainable 
Development' (General Affairs Council, 20 June 2017); 'Next steps for a sustainable European future – European action 
for sustainability' (COM(2016) 739) 

34 

        15 November 2018 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
                                                
Microplastic Pollution - The Policy Context 

resources,  will  have  beneficial  effects  on  microplastics,  in  particular  under  Goal  12 
on Sustainable Consumption and Production (UN Environment, 2018). 

 Note  for  example,  target  12.4:  “By  2020,  achieve  the  environmentally  sound 
management of chemicals and all  wastes throughout  their life cycle, in accordance 
with agreed international frameworks, and significantly reduce their release to air, 
water and soil in order to minimise their adverse impacts on human health 
and  the  environment”.    And  target  14.1  “  By  2050,  to  prevent  and  significantly 
reduce marine pollution of all kinds, particularly from land-based sources, including 
marine litter as this is the most relevant commitment related to microplastics. 

  United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea (UNCLOS ) 

At  the  global  level,  the  United  Nations  Convention  on  the  Law  of  the  Sea 
(UNCLOS85),  which  sets  out  the  legal  framework  within  which  all  activities  in  the 
oceans and seas must be carried out, provides for the general obligation to protect 
and  preserve  the  marine  environment  and  includes  the  obligation  to  take  all 
measures  necessary  to  prevent,  reduce  and  control  pollution  of  the  marine 
environment  from  any  source.  UNCLOS  is  the  only  binding  policy  that  requires 
nations  to  minimise  pollution  from  both  marine  and  land  based  sources  that  may 
enter the marine environment. 

  International Maritime Organisation 

International  binding  agreements  on  marine  plastic  litter  and  microplastics  vary  in 
reporting  and  compliance 
scope,  objectives,  approaches,  principles,  and 
requirements.  Those  dealing  with  sea-based  pollution 
include  the  London 
Convention,  especially  its  1996  London  Protocol,  and  the  International  Convention 
for the Prevention of Pollution from  Ships (MARPOL)  implemented through national 
law by its signatories. Despite growing attention to marine plastic in these contexts, 
deficiencies in policy integration and coherence remain a large governance gap. 

The International Maritime Organisation (IMO)  - a specialised agency of the United 
Nations responsible for regulating shipping including the discharge of garbage (food, 
domestic and operational waste, plastics, fishing gear) from ships in the context of 
MARPOL  -  pioneered the prohibition  of  plastic disposal from  ships anywhere at sea 
almost  30  years  ago.  MARPOL  Annex  V  prohibits  the  discharge  of  all  types  of 
garbage into the sea from all ships, with some exceptions such as food waste, cargo 
residues, cleaning agents/additives that are not harmful to the marine environment.  

IMO is one of the partners in the Global Partnership on Marine Litter (GPML), which 
is managed by UN Environment. IMO co-leads on sea-based sources of marine litter 
together with the Food and Agricultural Organization (FAO).  Under this partnership, 

85 http://www.un.org/depts/los/convention_agreements/texts/unclos/UNCLOS-TOC.htm  

15 November 2018 

                35 

 
 
 
 
  
 
 
                                                
Microplastic Pollution - The Policy Context 

several  activities  have  been  undertaken,  including  the  development  of  a  training 
package on MARPOL Annex V and port reception facilities and a review of plastics in 
the waste streams under the London Convention and Protocol. IMO has contributed 
to  the  development  of  the  Massive  Open  Online  Course  (MOOC)  on  Marine  Litter. 
The  MOOC  has  been  created  in  order  to  stimulate  leadership  and  offers 
opportunities  for  actionable  and  change-oriented  learning  related  to  marine  litter.  
The  Marine  Environment  Protection  Committee  (MEPC)  addresses  environmental 
issues  under  IMO’s  remit.  This  includes  the  control  and  prevention  of  ship-source 
pollution  covered  by  the  MARPOL  treaty,  including  oil,  chemicals  carried  in  bulk, 
sewage, garbage and emissions from ships, including air pollutants and greenhouse 
gas  emissions.  Other  matters  covered  include  ballast  water  management,  anti-
fouling  systems,  ship  recycling,  pollution  preparedness  and  response,  and 
identification of special areas and particularly sensitive sea areas. 

In  their  73rd  session86,  22-26  October  2018  Marine  Environment  Protection 
Committee  (MEPC),  adopted  an  action  plan  to  address  marine  plastic  litter  from 
ships,  intended  to  contribute  to  the  global  solution  for  preventing  marine  plastic 
litter entering the oceans through ship based activities. The Action Plan identifies a 
number of actions,  which  will  be reviewed  at  MEPC  74 (May 2019)  prior to further 
work  being  undertaken,  including  a  proposed  study  on  marine  plastic  litter  from 
ships;  looking  into  the  availability  and  adequacy  of  port  reception  facilities; 
consideration of making marking of fishing gear mandatory; promoting the reporting 
of  loss  of  fishing  gear;  facilitating  the  delivery  of  retrieved  fishing  gear  to  shore 
facilities; reviewing provisions related to the training of fishing vessel personnel and 
familiarization  of  seafarers  to  ensure  awareness  of  the  impact  of  marine  plastic 
litter;  and  strengthening  international  cooperation,  in  particular  the  Food  And 
Agriculture Organization (FAO) and UN Environment. 

  Waste & Substance-Specific Measures 

Global  instruments  regulating  land-based  pollution  (not  specifically  plastic)  to 
protect human health and the environment, and which consider different  aspects of 
the life cycle of chemical products and waste, include: 

–  The  Rotterdam  Convention  on  the  Prior  Informed  Consent  Procedure  for 

Certain Hazardous Chemicals and Pesticides in International Trade87 

–  The  Basel  Convention  on  the  Control  of  Transboundary  Movements  of 

Hazardous Wastes and their Disposal88. 

–  The Stockholm Convention on Persistent Organic Pollutants89.  

86 http://www.imo.org/en/MediaCentre/MeetingSummaries/MEPC/Pages/MEPC-73rd-session.aspx  
87 http://www.pic.int/  
88 http://www.basel.int/TheConvention/Overview/tabid/1271/Default.aspx  

36 

        15 November 2018 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
                                                
Microplastic Pollution - The Policy Context 

The  Stockholm  and  Basel  Conventions  are  international  binding  instruments  that 
may  offer  the  best  opportunity  to  reduce  the  impacts  of  plastics  and  plastic  waste 
globally.  

The  agreement  of  most  relevance  at  the  international  level  to  the  management  of 
plastics  is  the  Basel  Convention.  This  agreement  provides  solid  vision  for 
international governance of plastics. The Preamble states “the most effective way of 
protecting  human  health  and  the  environment  from  the  dangers  posed  by 
[hazardous and other] wastes is the reduction of their generation to a minimum in 
terms  of  quantity  and/or  hazard  potential.”  Thus,  quantity  as  well  as  the 
characteristics of a product are important once it becomes waste. The current Basel 
policy  framework  does  not  classify  plastics  as  hazardous  unless  they  contain 
persistent organic pollutants (POPs) regulated under the Stockholm Convention or if 
they  meet  certain  criteria  under  the  Basel  Convention.  As  per  the  latter,  plastics 
from  household  wastes  are  regarded  as  “other”  wastes  “requiring  special 
consideration” (Annex II) and for the most part do not fall within the discussions on 
hazardous wastes.  

Raubenheimer  &  McIlgorm  (2018)  discuss  the  limitations  and  opportunities  of  the 
international legal and policy framework to reduce the impact of plastics throughout 
their  lifecycle,  in  particular,  the  roles  of  the  Basel  Convention  and  the  Stockholm 
Convention.  Both  conventions  are  found  to  be  inadequate  to  manage  the  entire 
lifecycle  of  all  plastic  applications.  Options  were  suggested  for  strengthening  the 
international legal and policy framework in order to reduce on a global scale: 1) the 
quantity  of  plastic  waste generated,  and  2)  the  hazard  of  plastics  throughout  their 
lifecycle.  

In  2017,  the  Conference  of  the  Parties  to  the  Basel  Convention  decided  that  its 
subsidiary body, the Open-ended Working Group, should consider options under the 
Convention  to  address  marine  plastic  litter  and  microplastics.  In  September  2018 
this  working  group  made  breakthrough  recommendations  to  better  address  wastes 
including  marine  plastic  litter  and  microplastics90.  The  decision,  which  will  be 
submitted  to  the  next  meeting  of  the  Conference  of  the  Parties  to  the  Basel 
Convention  (COP),  to  be  held  at  the  end  of  April  2019  in  Geneva,  included  the 
following: 

-  A  proposed  new  Partnership  on  Plastic  Waste  under  the  Basel  Convention, 
designed  as  an  international  vehicle  for  public-private  cooperation,  sharing  of  best 
practices,  and  technical  assistance  in  the  area  of  at-source  measures  to  minimise 

89https://treaties.un.org/Pages/ViewDetails.aspx?src=IND&mtdsg_no=XXVII-15&chapter=27&clang=_en  
90http://www.basel.int/TheConvention/OpenendedWorkingGroup(OEWG)/Meetings/OEWG11/Overview/tabid/6258/

Default.aspx   

15 November 2018 

                37 

 
 
 
 
  
 
 
                                                                                                                             
Microplastic Pollution - The Policy Context 

and  more  effectively  manage  plastic  waste,  thus  helping  tackle  the  global 
environmental problem of marine plastic litter; 

-Consideration of possible amendments to Annexes of the Convention, in relation to 
solid  plastic  waste,  in  order  to  assist  Parties  to  better  minimise  and  control  their 
transboundary movement. 

  United  Nations  Environment  Programme  and  United  Nations 
Environment Assembly  

The United Nations Environment Programme (UNEP) is an agency of United Nations 
and  coordinates  its  environmental  activities,  assisting  developing  countries  in 
implementing  environmentally  sound  policies  and  practices.  The  United  Nations 
Environment Assembly (UNEA) - the main governing body of UNEP - is the world’s 
highest-level decision-making body on the environment. Through its resolutions and 
calls  to  action,  the  Assembly  provides  leadership  and  catalyses  intergovernmental 
action  on  the  environment.  Its  Resolutions  are  not  legally  binding  on  Member 
States. 

A report on Single-use plastics: A Roadmap for Sustainability91 (2018) presents the 
experience  of  countries  that  have  introduced  bans  and  regulations  on  single-use 
plastics. The analysis features best practices and lessons learned from cases studies 
on  single-use  bans,  levies  and  other  forms  of  government  intervention.  The  report 
recognises  that  single-use  plastic  waste  generation  and  waste  management 
practices  differ  across  regions.  While  no  single  measure  against  pollution  will  be 
equally  effective  everywhere,  the  authors  outline  ten  universal  steps 
for 
policymakers to tackle the issue in their communities. 

The  UNEA92  has  put  marine  plastic  debris  and  microplastics  amongst  the  issues  of 
global importance. The second UNEA session (UNEA-2) in 2016, adopted resolution 
UNEP/EA.2/Res.11  on  marine  plastic  litter  and  microplastics  .  In  it,  governments 
requested an assessment93 by the United Nations Environment Programme (UNEP)94 
of the effectiveness of relevant international, regional and  sub-regional governance 
strategies and approaches to  combat  marine  plastic litter and microplastics, taking 
into  consideration  the  relevant  international,  regional  and  sub-regional  regulatory 
frameworks  which  was  published  in  2017  (Karen  Raubenheimer,  Niluefer  Oral, 
2017).  

91https://wedocs.unep.org/bitstream/handle/20.500.11822/25496/singleUsePlastic_sustainability.pdf?sequence=1&is

Allowed=y  

93  UNEP  (2017),  Combating  marine  plastic  litter  and  micro-plastics:  An  assessment  of  the  effectiveness  of  relevant 
international, regional and subregional governance strategies and approaches 
94 UNEP initiatives addressing the impacts of plastic waste entering the sea from land include: The Global Programme 
of Action for the Protection of the Marine Environment from Land-based Activities (GPA); the Global Partnership on 
Marine Litter (GPML); and Clean Seas - a global campaign to eliminate major sources of marine litter (microplastics in 
cosmetics and the excessive, wasteful usage of single-use plastic) by the year 2022 

38 

        15 November 2018 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
                                                
 
Microplastic Pollution - The Policy Context 

The United Nations Environment Assembly session in Nairobi on 4-6 December 2017 
(UNEA-3), addressed the theme 'Towards a pollution-free planet' embracing broadly 
pollution of air, land, waterways, oceans, and management of chemicals and waste. 
Among  the  many  outputs  was  a  resolution  on  marine  litter  and  microplastics 
building on the above-mentioned assessment.  

The  Resolution  builds  on  the  increasing  scientific  knowledge  on  marine  litter  and 
microplastics  and  on  previous  initiatives95  to  reduce  marine  plastic  debris  and 
microplastics.  It  also  builds  on  the  latest  UNEP  report96  in  which  States  are 
encouraged  to  "develop  and  implement  laws  to  ban  or  diminish  the  production  of 
single-use trash items and other waste”.  

The resolution established an Ad Hoc Open Ended Expert Group to further examine 
the  barriers  to,  and  options  for,  combating  marine  plastic  litter  and  micro-plastics 
from  all  sources,  especially  land-based  sources.  It  aims  to  help  reach  SDG  14  and 
target  14.1:  “prevent  and  significantly  reduce  marine  pollution  of  all  kinds,  in 
particular from land-based activities including marine debris and nutrient pollution” 
by 2025.  

The Ad hoc open-ended expert group on marine litter and microplastics had the first 
meeting in Nairobi, 29–31 May 201897, with a view to further examining the barriers 
to and options for combating marine plastic litter and microplastics from all sources, 
especially  land-based  sources.  Many  participants  noted  the  need  for  enhancing  a 
broader  approach,  facilitating  resource  mobilisation  and  minimising  duplication  of 
efforts.  Other  participants  recognized  enhanced  utilization  of  existing  global  and 
regional  mechanisms  as  important  possible  support  measures,  within  their 
respective  mandates.  Many  participants  noted  that  future  actions  should  build  on 
existing  global  and  regional  mechanisms  that  could  support  the  process  and  seek 
out avenues where strengthening is needed to enhance their functionality.  Several 
participants pointed to the need for something new and additional to fill governance 
gaps  at  the  international  level.  Sweden,  subsequently  supported  by  others, 
proposed  a  three  pillar  approach  involving:  1)  the  Regional  Seas  Programmes  and 
Conventions (RSCs), 2) the Basel Convention (BC), and 3) the prevention of plastic 
pollution. This proposal was visualized in a sketch – Figure 4. 

95 including the  two previous resolutions on marine litter and microplastics at UNEA-1 and UNEA-2 (Resolutions 1/6 
and  Resolution  2/11),  the  Declaration  “Our  ocean,  our  future:  call  for  action”  adopted  at  the  2017  UN  Ocean 
Conference, and other voluntary commitments and recommendations, such as the G-20 Action Plan on Marine Litter 
96UNEP: "Marine Litter Legislation: A Toolkit for Policymakers"   
http://cep.unep.org/meetings/documents/cc6f8715c1e1ecf5b561c49d8358605a/@@download/en_file/Marine_Litte
r_Legislation-A_Toolkit_for_Policymakers-en.pdf  
97 https://papersmart.unon.org/resolution/uploads/k1801471.pdf  

15 November 2018 

                39 

 
 
 
 
  
 
 
                                                
Microplastic Pollution - The Policy Context 

Figure  4  –  Sketch  of  a  New  Global  Architecture  for  combatting  marine  plastic  litter  and 
microplastics, based on Option 2 and 3 in UNEPs assessment98 

Recent  /  forthcoming:  Ad  hoc  open-ended  expert  group  on  marine  litter  and 
microplastics will have the next meeting from 3 to 7 December 2018 at the United 
Nations Offices in Geneva, Switzerland99  

  The Global Programme of Action  

The Global Programme of Action (GPA) for the Protection of the Marine Environment 
from  Land-based  Activities  is  the  only  global  intergovernmental  mechanism 
addressing  the  connectivity  between  terrestrial,  freshwater,  coastal  and  marine 
ecosystems. It aims to be a source of conceptual and practical guidance for national 
and/or  regional  authorities  for  devising  and  implementing  actions  to  prevent, 
reduce,  control  and/or  eliminate  marine  degradation  from  land-based  activities. 
UNEP  hosts  the  GPA  and  coordinates  some  of  its  activities.  Intergovernmental 
meetings are  organized every five years to review the progress made by countries 
in the implementation of the GPA through their National Action Plans. Marine litter is 
a priority under the GPA. As part of its strategy, the GPA secretariat has established 
and  is  strengthening  three  global  multi-stakeholder  partnerships:  the  Global 
Partnership  on  Nutrient  Management  (GPNM),  the  Global  Partnership  on  Marine 
Litter (GPML) and the Global Wastewater Initiative (GWI). 

98 file://net1.cec.eu.int/homes/117/Boavidu/Desktop/stament_by_sweden-item_5-1.pdf 
99 https://papersmart.unon.org/resolution/second-adhoc-oeeg  

40 

        15 November 2018 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
                                                
Microplastic Pollution - The Policy Context 

  Joint  Group  of  Experts  on  the  Scientific  Aspects  of  Marine 
Environmental Protection 

The  Joint  Group  of  Experts  on  the  Scientific  Aspects  of  Marine  Environmental 
Protection  (GESAMP)  is  an  advisory  body  that  advises  the  UN  system  on  scientific 
aspects of marine environmental protection. At present GESAMP is jointly sponsored 
by nine UN organizations100 with responsibilities relating to the marine environment. 
They  utilise  GESAMP  as  a  mechanism  for  coordination  and  collaboration.  GESAMP 
functions  are  to  conduct  and  support  marine  environmental  assessments,  to 
undertake in-depth studies, analyses, and reviews of specific topics, and to identify 
emerging  issues  regarding  the  state  of  the  marine  environment.  Each  of  the 
sponsoring  bodies  appoints  a  Technical  Secretary  and  IMO  an  Administrative 
Secretary. 

In 2015,  Working Group  40  of  GESAMP “Sources,  Fate and Effects of plastics and 
micro-plastics  in  the  marine  environment”  [for  which  the  lead  agencies  are  the 
Intergovernmental  Oceanographic  Commission  (UNESCO-IOC)  and  United  Nations 
Environment Programme (UNEP)] was tasked to conduct a global assessment, based 
on  published  information,  of  the  sources,  fate  and  effects  of  microplastics  in  the 
marine  environment101.  In  2016,  this  report  was  updated  to  inform  the  Second 
United  Nations  Environment  Assembly102.  The  current  third  phase  of  WG40’s  work 
aims are  to: 1.  develop guidelines covering  terminology and methodologies for the 
sampling  and  analysis  of  marine  macro-plastics  and  microplastics,  2.  assess  the 
occurrence  and  effects  of  nano-sized  plastics  on  marine  organisms;  and  3.  assess 
the  significance  of  plastics  and  microplastics  as  a  vector  for  indigenous  and  non-
indigenous  organisms  –  making  research  and  policy-relevant  recommendations  in 
the case of 2and 3. 

Recent  /  forthcoming:  The  above  mentioned  Guidelines  are  expected  to  be 
published before the end of 2018. 

  Food and Agriculture Organization 

The FAO is a specialised agency of the United Nations that leads international efforts 
to  defeat  hunger.  Abandoned,  Lost  or  Otherwise  Discarded  Fishing  Gear  (ALDFG) 

100  GESAMP  is  co-sponsored  between  eight  organizations:  International  Maritime  Organization  (IMO),  Food  and 

Agricultural 

Organization of the United Nations (FAO), United Nations Education, Scientific and Cultural Organization 
Intergovernmental  Oceanographic  Commission  (UNESCO-IOC),  World  Meteorological  Organization  (WMO),  World 

Health 

Organization  (WHO),  International  Atomic  Energy  Agency  (IAEA),  United  Nations  (UN),  and  United  Nations 

Environment 
Programme (UNEP) 
101 http://www.gesamp.org/site/assets/files/1272/reports-and-studies-no-90-en.pdf  
102http://www.gesamp.org/site/assets/files/1275/sources-fate-and-effects-of-microplastics-in-the-marine-

environment-part-2-of-a-global-assessment-en.pdf  

15 November 2018 

                41 

 
 
 
 
  
 
 
                                                
Microplastic Pollution - The Policy Context 

has been a concern for FAO and its Members for many decades. Discussions led by 
FAO  about  marking  of  fishing  gear  date  back  to  1991,  when  the  first  meeting 
discussing possible guidelines was held in Canada but did not move forward.  

In February 2018 FAO adopted voluntary Guidelines on the Marking of Fishing Gear 
which  were  endorsed  by  the  FAO  Committee  of  Fisheries  in  July  2018103.  The 
Guidelines include indications to  implement a gear marking system; to control and 
enforce  it;  to  report  on  and  encourage  recovery  of  Abandoned,  Lost  or  otherwise 
Discarded Fishing Gear (ALDFG); to improve commercial traceability of fishing gear 
marking; to encourage research, awareness raising and capacity development; and 
guidance on the special requirements of developing States and small scale fisheries. 
An Annex on a Risk Based Approach to assist relevant authorities in determining the 
appropriateness or otherwise  of  implementing a system  for marking fishing gear is 
part  of  the  guidelines.  It  is  expected  that  FAO  will  be  requested  to  develop  a 
comprehensive  global  strategy  to  address  ALDFG  and  to  encourage  States  to 
develop ALDFG action plans.  

In  2014,  the  Global  Oceans  Action  Summit  for  Food  Security  and  Blue  Growth104 
requested  FAO,  IMO  and  UNEP  to  work  together  with  GESAMP  to  improve  the 
knowledge  base  on  microplastics  in  the  marine  environment  and  provide  policy 
advice  on  this  topic.  UNEP  approached  GESAMP,  FAO  and  other  partners  with  a 
proposal to make a global assessment of sources, fate and impacts of microplastics 
on  the  marine  environment  with  funding  provided  by  the  Government  of  Norway. 
FAO was requested to contribute specifically on fisheries and aquaculture - the two 
main  concerns  were  to  assess  the  potential  impact  of  microplastics  on  consumer 
health  and  perception,  and  understand  the  potential  consequences  on  fish 
productivity  as  physiological  processes  are  likely  to  be  affected  by  microplastics 
(because  of  their  occurrence  and  of  the  presence  of  additives  and  contaminants 
contained in the plastic). 

The  resulting  report105  took  stock  of  the  scientific  knowledge  available,  provided 
information  on  the  most  likely  pathways  in  terms  of  sources,  transport  and 
distribution  in  both  marine  food  chains  and  seafood  value  chains,  and  provided  a 
framework to assess the risks that may (or might not) affect commercial fish stocks 
and consumers. In addition, the report provides policy-relevant recommendations. 

  World Health Organization  

The World Health Organization (WHO) is a specialised agency of the United Nations 
that  acts  as  a  coordinating  authority  on  international  public  health.  WHO  produces 
international  norms  on  water  quality  and  human  health  in  the  form  of  guidelines 

103 http://www.fao.org/fileadmin/user_upload/bodies/Conference_2019/MX970_23/MX970_C_2019_23_en.pdf 
104 http://www.fao.org/3/a-bl007e.pdf  
105 http://www.fao.org/3/a-i7677e.pdf  

42 

        15 November 2018 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
                                                
Microplastic Pollution - The Policy Context 

that are used as the basis for regulation and standard setting world-wide. Safe and 
readily available water is important for public health, whether it is used for drinking, 
domestic use, food production or recreational purposes. Improved water supply and 
sanitation,  and  better  management  of  water  resources,  can  boost  countries’ 
economic growth and can contribute greatly to poverty reduction. 

WHO produces a series of water quality guidelines, including on drinking-water, safe 
use  of  wastewater,  and  safe  recreational  water  environments.The  Guidelines  for 
drinking-water  quality  (GDWQ)106  promote  the  protection  of  public  health  by 
advocating for the development of locally relevant standards and regulations (health 
based  targets),  adoption  of  preventive  risk  management  approaches  covering 
catchment  to  consumer  (Water  Safety  Plans)  and  independent  surveillance  to 
ensure  that  Water  Safety  Plans  are  being  implemented  and  effective  and  that 
national standards are being met.  

These  GDWQ  are  updated  through  a  "rolling  revision"  process  which  ensures  that 
the GDWQ presents the latest scientific evidence and addresses key concerns raised 
by  countries.  This  has  been  achieved  by  systematically  updating  sections  of  the 
GDWQ  as  new  or  updated  evidence  becomes  available.  The  purpose  of  the  rolling 
revision  process  is  to  maintain  the  relevance,  quality  and  integrity  of  the  GDWQ, 
whilst  ensuring  their  continuing  development  in  response  to  new,  or  newly-
appreciated,  information  and  challenges.  The  GDWQ  are  also  supported  by  several 
studies  and  publications  that  provide  background  information  underpinning  their 
advice and to serve as additional information to support implementation.   

Recent  /  forthcoming:  WHO  is  currently  working  on  a  guidance  document  on 
microplastics in drinking water. This should be finished by the first quarter of 2019. 

  World Bank 

The  World  Bank  Group  is  part  of  the  United  Nations  system  and  has  a  formal 
relationship agreement with the UN, but retains its independence. The World Bank's 
Pollution Management and Environmental Health (PMEH) programme107, established 
in 2015 aims to reduce the impact of air, land and water pollution on human health 
and  the  environment  in  target  countries  and  cities  among  low  and  middle  income 
countries (LMICs). 

Three strategic objectives guide progress toward this goal: 

  Help selected countries to significantly reduce air, land, and marine pollution 

levels and thereby improve environmental health outcomes 

106http://apps.who.int/iris/bitstream/handle/10665/254637/9789241549950-

eng.pdf;jsessionid=74C7C55E94014B2CD366D261C1947468?sequence=1  

107 http://www.worldbank.org/en/programs/pollution-management-and-environmental-health-program#1 

15 November 2018 

                43 

 
 
 
 
  
 
 
                                                
Microplastic Pollution - The Policy Context 

  Generate new knowledge and improve our understanding of pollution and its 

health impacts in urban, rural, and marine areas 

 

Promote  increased  awareness  of  environmental  health  and  pollution  issues 
among policy makers, planners, and other relevant stakeholders in low- and 
middle-income  countries  (LMICs)  through  dissemination  of  scientific 
evidence in this area, including but not limited to content generated through 
this program.  

One component  of the PMEH program activities dealing with integrated solid waste 
management to reduce land-based pollution in marine environments refers to plastic 
litter.  It  addresses  issues  such  as  upstream  control  of  solid  waste  generation  to 
prevent and reduce downstream impacts, focusing on reducing the inflow of plastic 
litter into marine environments. 

4.2. Regional Seas Conventions  

Around the world there are a number of regional seas conventions and action plans 
underway  to  act  on  plastic  and  microplastics  pollution.  The  UNEP-coordinated 
Regional  Seas  Programme  (RSP)108  ,  covers  18  regions  with  more  than  146 
countries  participating  in  18  Regional  Seas  Conventions  and  Action  Plans.    Among 
them, 14 regional seas  programmes were  established under the auspices  of UNEP. 
These  are:  the  Black  Sea;  Wider  Caribbean;  East  Asian  Seas;  East  Africa;  South 
Asian Seas; ROPME Sea Area; Mediterranean; North-East Pacific; Northwest Pacific; 
Red Sea and Gulf  of  Aden; South-East  Pacific; Pacific; West, Central and  Southern 
Africa; and Caspian. Seven of these programmes are directly administered by UNEP 
(Mediterranean,  Caribbean,  Western  Indian  Ocean,  West,  Central  and  Southern 
Africa,  East  Asia  Seas,  Northwest  Pacific  and  Caspian  Sea).  The  regional  seas 
programme  functions  through  an  accompanying  Action  Plan.  In  most  cases,  the 
Action  Plan  is  underpinned  with  a  legal  framework  in  the  form  of  a  regional  seas 
convention and associated protocols on specific issues. 

Starting from pollution abatement, the Regional Seas Programme evolved in the last 
four  decades  to  cover  regular  monitoring  and  assessment,  land-based  and  sea-
based  sources  of  pollution,  Specially  Protected  Areas  and  biodiversity,  oil  spill 
contingency/recovery  plans,  coastal  habitat  management,  Integrated  Coastal  Zone 
Management, marine litter, and legal and institutional frameworks. 

Most of the Regional Seas Programmes function  through action plans109, which  are 
adopted  by  member  governments  in  order  to  establish  a  comprehensive  strategy 

108 www.unep.org/regionalseas  
109https://www.unenvironment.org/explore-topics/oceans-seas/what-we-do/working-regional-seas/regional-seas-

action-plans  

44 

        15 November 2018 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
                                                
Microplastic Pollution - The Policy Context 

framework 

for  protecting 

and 
the  environment  and  promote  sustainable 
development. An action plan outlines the strategy and substance of the programme, 
based  on  the  region's  particular  environmental  challenges  as  well  as  its  socio-
economic and political situation. 

Fourteen  of  the  Regional  Seas  Programmes  have  also  adopted  legally-binding 
conventions110  that  express  the  commitment  and  political  will  of  governments  to 
tackle their common environmental issues through joint coordinated activities. Most 
conventions have added protocols, legal agreements addressing specific issues such 
as protected areas or land-based pollution. 

Four  partner  programmes,  for  the  Antarctic,  Arctic,  Baltic  Sea,  and  North-East 
Atlantic Regions, respectively,  are  also  members of  the Regional Seas Conventions 
(RSC) and participate in global exchange of lessons and information. 

In  Europe,  there  are  four  cooperation  structures  which  aim  to  protect  the  marine 
environment  and  bring  together  Member  States  and  neighbouring  countries  that 
share marine waters under the Regional Sea Conventions (RSC). 

 

 

 

 

The  Convention  for  the  Protection  of  the  Marine  Environment  in  the  North-
East  Atlantic  of  1992  (further  to  earlier  versions  of  1972  and  1974)  –  the 
OSPAR Convention (OSPAR) 
The  Convention  on  the  Protection  of  the  Marine  Environment  in  the  Baltic 
Sea  Area  of  1992  (further  to  the  earlier  version  of  1974)  –  the  Helsinki 
Convention (HELCOM) 
The  Convention  for  the  Protection  of  Marine  Environment  and  the  Coastal 
Region of the Mediterranean of 1995 (further to the earlier version of 1976) 
– the Barcelona Convention (UNEP-MAP) 
The Convention for the Protection of the Black Sea of 1992 – the Bucharest 
Convention. 

They focus on prevention or reduction of marine litter covering both land- and sea-
based  sources,  through  a  range  of  actions  at  national  or  regional  level  such  as 
improved  waste  and  waste  water  management,  port  reception  facilities,  targeted 
fishing for litter, education, awareness raising and outreach activities.  

-  Convention  for  the  Protection  of  the  Marine  Environment  of  the  North  ‐  East 
Atlantic -OSPAR Commission  

This has a Regional Action and Implementation Plan that focusses on key areas that 
include  inter  alia  port  reception  facilities,  fishing  for  litter,  education  and  outreach 

110https://www.unenvironment.org/explore-topics/oceans-seas/what-we-do/working-regional-seas/regional-seas-

programmes/regional-seas  

15 November 2018 

                45 

 
 
 
 
  
 
 
                                                
Microplastic Pollution - The Policy Context 

and  reduction  of  single  use  items.  OSPAR  has  developed  consistent  data  collection 
approaches  for  marine  litter  monitoring  and  data  reporting  for  the  last  several 
years111.  In 2017 it published a  Report Assessment document of land-based inputs 
of microplastics in the marine environment112. 

One  of  the  requirements  of  the  OSPAR  convention  is  to  assess  the  quality  of  the 
marine  environment  and  each  of  its  compartments  (i.e.,  water,  sediments,  and 
biota),  as  well  as  anthropogenic  inputs  that  may  affect  the  quality  of  the  marine 
environment.  To  fulfill  this  commitment  for  marine  litter,  OSPAR  has  developed 
three  indicators on beach  litter,  seabed litter,  and  plastic particles in the stomachs 
of  fulmars  (Fulmarus  glacialis).  The  OSPAR  expert  group  on  marine  litter,  the 
Intersessional Correspondence Group on Marine Litter (ICG-ML), is also developing a 
range of other indicators using other  biota for outside  the range of the fulmar and 
indicators for microplastics. 

- Convention for the Protection of the Marine Environment and Coastal Region of the 
Mediterranean (the Barcelona Convention)  

This  addresses  pollution  from  land  and  sea  based  sources.  In  2013,  the 
Mediterranean countries adopted the Regional Plan of the Barcelona Convention for 
Marine  Litter  Management  in  the  Mediterranean—the  first  legally  binding  regional 
plan for marine litter management at European Regional Seas Level. Its signatories 
adopted the Mediterranean Action Plan which was one of UNEP's first regions in the 
Regional  Seas  Programme.  In  2016  UN  Environment  launched  the  ambitious 
Integrated  Monitoring  and  Assessment  Programme  (IMAP)  which  aims  to  enable  a 
“quantitative,  integrated  analysis  of  the  state  of  the  marine  and  coastal 
environment,  covering  pollution  and  marine  litter,  biodiversity,  non-indigenous 
species, coast, and hydrography, based on common regional indicators, targets and 
Good Environmental Status descriptions.”  

- The Black Sea Region 

Under  the  auspices  of  the  Bucharest  Convention,  this  is  the  last  region  which  has 
yet  to  develop  an  Action  Plan  and  when  implemented,  will  complete  the  region's 
efforts in having regional action plans to combat marine pollution. 

4.3.  The Arctic Council 

Two of the six working groups under the Arctic Council are of relevance. One is the 
Protection  of  the  Arctic  Marine  Environment  Working  Group  (PAME).  As  part  of  its 
work on Arcitic marine pollution, PAME is undertaking a study from 2017 to 2019 on 

111 https://www.ospar.org/work-areas/eiha/marine-litter  
112 https://www.ospar.org/documents?v=38018  

46 

        15 November 2018 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
                                                
Microplastic Pollution - The Policy Context 

marine litter in the Arctic including microplastics113  Plastic and  microplastic litter in 
the  Arctic  are  also  covered  in  the  work  of  the  Arctic  Monitoring  and  Assessment 
Programme (AMAP)114 

4.4. The Nordic Council of Ministers - Nordic marine group 

The Nordic co-operation involves Denmark, Finland, Iceland, Norway and Sweden as 
well as the Faroe Islands, Greenland and the Åland Islands. 

The Nordic Council of Ministers  (NCM)115  is the  official inter-governmental  body for 
co-operation  in  the  Nordic  Region.  Nine  working  groups  operate  under  the 
environmental NCM, one of them being the marine group. The group17 supports the 
Nordic  countries  with  activities  and  seeks  to  fund  projects  that  contribute  to  the 
build  up  of  a  scientific  basis  and  create  a  foundation  for  joint  efforts  against 
pollution  in  the  Nordic  marine  and  coastal  environments.  It  creates  a  basis  for 
common  Nordic  initiatives  within  international  work  on  marine  and  coastal  areas, 
generates  a  common  knowledge  about  the  state  and  development  of  marine 
pollution in the Nordic countries and their neighbouring areas, and promotes Nordic 
cooperation within the marine environment. 

A  Joint  Nordic  Statement  on  marine  plastic  litter  and  microplastics116  was  adopted 
on 27 April 2016. It points out the need to assess the effectiveness of the relevant 
international and regional regulatory frameworks to combat marine plastic litter and 
microplastics,  including  their  implementation  and  enforcement,  to  identify  possible 
gaps and synergies. 

In May 2017, the Nordic Ministers for the Environment took the decision to launch a 
Nordic  programme  to  reduce  the  environmental  impact  of  plastic.  Marine  plastic 
debris is one of the focus areas in the Nordic Plastics Programme 2017–2018117. 

4.5. The Group of Twenty (G20) 

The G20118 recognises the urgent need for action to prevent and reduce marine litter 
in order to preserve human health and marine and coastal ecosystems, and mitigate 
marine  litter’s  economic  costs  and  impacts.  It  stresses  the  direct  relationship 

113 https://www.pame.is/index.php/projects/arctic-marine-pollution 
114 See https://www.amap.no/documents/doc/AMAP-Assessment-2016-Chemicals-of-Emerging-Arctic-Concern/1624 
115 http://www.norden.org/en/nordic-council-of-ministers  
116http://www.norden.org/en/nordic-council-of-ministers/council-of-ministers/nordic-council-of-ministers-for-the-

environment-and-climate-mr-mk/declarations-and-statements/joint-nordic-statement-on-marine-plastic-litter-
and-microplastics-27.04-2016/  

117 https://norden.diva-portal.org/smash/get/diva2:1092150/FULLTEXT01.pdf  
118 is an international forum for the governments and central bank governors from Argentina, Australia, Brazil, Canada, 
China, Germany, France, India, Indonesia, Italy, Japan, Mexico, Russia, Saudi Arabia, South Africa, South Korea, Turkey, 
the United Kingdom, the United States and the European Union 

15 November 2018 

                47 

 
 
 
 
  
 
 
                                                
Microplastic Pollution - The Policy Context 

between  the  challenge  of  marine  litter,  environment,  human  health,  economic 
development, social well-being, biodiversity and food security. 

G20  promotes  measures  and  actions  at  local,  national,  and  regional  levels  to 
prevent and reduce marine litter. It recognises that the lack of effective solid waste 
management,  wastewater  treatment  and  storm  water  systems,  and  unsustainable 
production  and  consumption  patterns,  are  primary  land-based  sources  and 
pathways  for  marine  litter.  G20  acknowledges  the  role  of  non-state  actors  and 
encourages private sector engagement and solutions to reduce marine litter. 

In  2017,  G20  members  endorsed  the  G20  Action  Plan  on  Marine  Litter119  and  a 
voluntary Global Network of the Committed120 was established, as a G20 platform to 
address marine litter with  secretary support from UNEP’s GPML. In addition, a G20 
Resource  Efficiency  Dialogue121  was  established  in  2017  to  exchange  views  and 
experiences  on  policy  options  and  good  practice  examples  for  resource  efficiency 
along the entire lifecycle of natural resources, products and infrastructure. 

4.6.  The Group of Seven (G7) 

As environmental issues play an important role alongside economics, foreign policy, 
and security, topics discussed at G7122 summits include climate change, sustainable 
development, resource efficiency, marine pollution, and nuclear safety. 

Similar to the G20, the G7 Action Plan to Combat Marine Litter commits members to 
actions and solutions to combat marine litter and stresses the need to address land- 
and  sea-based  sources,  removal  actions,  as  well  as  education,  research  and 
outreach.  G7  has  also  advanced  related  work  on  resource  efficiency  with  the 
establishment  of  the  G7  Alliance  on  Resource  Efficiency  (2015)123,  the  Toyama 
Framework for Material Cycles (2016)124, adopted by the G7 Environment Ministers' 
Meeting in July 2016 in Toyama (Japan), underlines the importance of reducing the 
consumption of natural resources and promoting recycled materials so as to remain 
within the boundaries of the planet and achieving a sustainable low carbon Society 
and the Five-Year Bologna Roadmap (2017)125. 

119 https://www.mofa.go.jp/mofaj/files/000272290.pdf 
120 https://www.g20germany.de/Content/EN/Artikel/2017/06_en/2017-06-01-meeresmuell_en.html 
121https://www.g20germany.de/Content/DE/_Anlagen/G7_G20/2017-g20-resource-efficiency-dialogue-

en___blob=publicationFile&v=4.pdf  

122 Canada, France, Germany, Italy, Japan, the United Kingdom, the United States and the European Union 
123 https://www.neress.de/fileadmin/media/files/pdf/2015/Agenda_Additional_Information.pdf 
124 https://www.mofa.go.jp/files/000159928.pdf 
125http://www.g7italy.it/sites/default/files/documents/Communiqu%C3%A9%20G7%20Environment%20-

%20Bologna_0.pdf 

48 

        15 November 2018 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
                                                
Microplastic Pollution - The Policy Context 

In  June  2018,  the  G7  released  the  Charlevoix  Blueprint  for  Healthy  Oceans,  Seas 
and Resilient Coastal Communities with, in annex, an Ocean Plastics Charter126. The 
Charter  sets  a  target  of  ensuring  100  percent  reuse,  recycling  and  collection  of  all 
plastic  products  by  2030  and  lists  23  priority  actions.  The  following  is  an  extract 
from the preamble to the Charter: 

"We, the Leaders of Canada, France, Germany, Italy, the United Kingdom, and the 
European Union, commit to move toward a more resource-efficient and sustainable 
approach to the management of plastics. We resolve to take a lifecycle approach to 
plastics  stewardship  on  land  and  at  sea,  which  aims  to  avoid  unnecessary  use  of 
plastics  and  prevent  waste,  and  to  ensure  that  plastics  are  designed  for  recovery, 
reuse,  recycling  and  end-of-life  management  to  prevent  waste  through  various 
policy measures." 

In September 2018, the G7 Environment Ministers continued advancing discussions 
on  Working  Together  on  Climate  Change,  Oceans  and  Clean  Energy.  G7 
Environment  Ministers  agreed  to  the  G7  Innovation  Plastic  Challenge  to  Address 
Plastic  Marine  Litter.  Through  the  Challenge,  all  G7  members  committed  to 
undertake  international  and/or  domestic  initiatives  to  address  marine  plastic 
pollution by managing plastics more sustainably. 

Recent / forthcoming: G7 Environment Ministers discussed how to implement the 
Charter at their meeting on 20 September 2018 in Halifax (Canada). Point 11 of the 
Chairs’ summary of the Halifax Ministerial reads: “Ministers noted the efforts by G7 
members  on  scientific  advice  cooperation  on  microplastics,  and  welcomed  the 
commitment by Canada and the European Commission to host a workshop in 2019 
and the invitation for all G7 partners to participate”.  

As  of  October  2018,  the  Ocean  Plastics  Charter  has  been  endorsed  by  11 
governments  and  18  major  businesses  and  organizations  from  around  the  world. 
Others  are  invited  to  join  the  call  for  action  to  move  toward  a  more  resource-
efficient and sustainable approach to the management of plastics.  

4.7. World Economic Forum  

In  January  2016,  the  World  Economic  Forum  (WEF)  and  the  Ellen  MacArthur 
Foundation127,  with  analytical  support  from  McKinsey  &  Company,  published  “The 
New  Plastics  Economy:  Rethinking  the  Future  of  Plastics.”128  Based  on  the  report, 
the Ellen MacArthur Foundation launched an ambitious, three-year initiative to build 
momentum  towards  a  plastics  system  that  works.    This  ‘New  Plastics  Economy’ 

126https://g7.gc.ca/wp-content/uploads/2018/06/HealthyOceansSeasResilientCoastalCommunities.pdf  
127 Ellen MacArthur Foundation - The Ellen MacArthur Foundation works with business, government and academia to 
build a framework for an economy that is restorative and regenerative by design. 
128 https://newplasticseconomy.org/publications/report-2016 

15 November 2018 

                49 

 
 
 
 
  
 
 
                                                
Microplastic Pollution - The Policy Context 

initiative  applies  the  principles  of  the  circular  economy  and  brings  together  key 
stakeholders to rethink and redesign the future of plastics, starting with packaging. 
The  second  report  “The  New  Plastics  Economy:  Catalysing  action”129  provides  a 
global  action  plan  to  move  towards  70%  reuse  and  recycling  of  plastic  packaging, 
endorsed  by  over  40 industry  leaders,  while  highlighting  the  need  for  fundamental 
redesign and innovation of the remaining 30%. 

4.8. Honolulu Strategy  

The Honolulu Strategy: A Global Framework for the Prevention and Management of 
Marine Debris130 is a framework for a comprehensive and global effort to reduce the 
ecological, human  health,  and  economic impacts of  marine debris131.  This Strategy 
was  developed  with  the  support  and  assistance  of  scientists,  practitioners, 
managers,  and  the  private  sector  from  around  the  world.  The  United  Nations 
(UNEP)  and  National  Oceanic  and  Atmospheric 
Environment  Programme 
Administration  (NOAA)132  Marine  Debris  provided  technical  and  financial  support 
throughout the development process. 

Many countries and international organisations have been tackling the marine debris 
problem  for  decades,  with  some  signs  of  progress  to  reduce  their  amount  and 
impact  from  land-based  and  sea-based  sources.  The  framework  document  is 
intended  to  help  improve  collaboration  and  coordination  among  the  multitude  of 
groups and governments across the globe in a position to address marine debris and 
to serve  as a common  frame of reference  for  action  among these  communities, as 
well  as  a  tool  for  groups  to  develop  and  monitor  marine  debris  programs  and 
projects. 

Therefore, the Honolulu Strategy is intended for use as a: 

 

Planning tool for developing or refining spatially or sector-specific marine debris 
programs and projects 

  Common frame of reference for collaboration and sharing of best practices and 

lessons learned 

  Monitoring tool to measure progress across multiple programs and projects 

It  does  not  supplant  or  supersede  activities  of  national  authorities,  municipalities, 
industry,  international  organisations,  or  other  stakeholders,  but  it  provides  a  focal 

129 https://newplasticseconomy.org/publications/report-2017 
130 https://marinedebris.noaa.gov/sites/default/files/publications-files/Honolulu_Strategy.pdf  
131  Marine  debris is defined  to  include  any  anthropogenic,  manufactured,  or  processed  solid  material  (regardless of 
size) discarded, disposed of, or abandoned in the environment, including all materials discarded into the sea, on 
the shore, or brought indirectly to the sea by rivers, sewage, storm water, waves, or winds. Marine debris may 
result from activities on land or at sea. 

132 https://www.noaa.gov/  

50 

        15 November 2018 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
  
                                                
Microplastic Pollution - The Policy Context 

point  for  improved  collaboration  and  coordination  among  the  multitude  of 
stakeholders across the globe concerned with marine debris.  

For example, the US government’s NOAA is using the Honolulu Strategy to align its 
programs and measure outcomes through local and state-level actions, such as the 
Hawaii Marine Debris Action Plan133. 

4.9. Major transboundary river basins 

River  systems  and  other  types  of  waterway  represent  a  major  route  for  carrying 
waste,  including  plastics,  to  the  ocean.  When  a  waterway  crosses  a  national 
boundary it is defined as a transboundary waterway.  

Almost half the Earth’s land surface (excluding Antarctica) falls within transboundary 
basins  (including  ground  water  and  lakes)  and  there  are  a  large  number  of 
multilateral  agreements  dealing  with  transboundary  river  basins,  some  of  which 
address  environmental  concerns.  Such  agreements  provide  a  mechanism  which, 
potentially,  could  be  utilised  to  reduce  the  entry  of  plastic  and  microplastics  into 
waterways  and  hence  reduce  their  introduction  to  the  ocean.  For  example,  the 
International  Commission  for  the  Protection  of  the  Danube  (ICPDR)134  provides  a 
legal instrument for cooperation and transboundary management of the Danube.  It 
covers a range of issues including water quality and the transboundary transport of 
hazardous  substances,  and  has  been  ratified  by  15  contracting  parties.  The  ICPDR 
Joint Action Plan includes measures to reduce water pollution. 

In  the  case  of  plastic  pollution,  published  modelling  work  (Schmidt,  Krauth,  & 
Wagner, 2017) (Lebreton et al., 2017) shows that rivers collectively dump anywhere 
from 0.47 million to 2.75 million metric tons of plastic into the seas every year. Ten 
rivers carrying 93 % of that trash - the Yangtze, Yellow, Hai, Pearl, Amur, Mekong, 
Indus  and  Ganges  Delta  in  Asia,  and  the  Niger  and  Nile  in  Africa  –  underlines  the 
extent  to  which  Asia  and  Africa  are  at  the  origin  of  the  vast  majority  of  marine 
plastic  pollution,  the  brunt  of  which  is  shared  globally  by  all.  The  Yangtze  alone 
dumps  up  to  an  estimated  1.5  million  metric  tons  of  plastic  waste  into  the  Yellow 
Sea. 

133 https://marinedebris.noaa.gov/report/hawaii-marine-debris-action-plan  
134 https://www.icpdr.org/main/  

15 November 2018 

                51 

 
 
 
 
  
 
 
                                                
            Microplastic Pollution - The Policy Context 

    Table III – Overview of international context 

Instrument/ initiative 

UN -United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea (UNCLOS ) 

UN - International Maritime Organisation 

Type 

Regulation 

Regulation 

Concerned Environmental 

Compartments 

Water (Marine) 

Water (Marine) 

UN - Waste & Substance-Specific Measures 

Basel Convention 

Stockholm Convention  

Convention 

Soil/Water/Air 

UN - United Nations Environment Programme and United Nations 

Convention/Action Plan 

Environment Assembly 

Water (Marine) 

UN - The Global Programme of Action  

Programme/Action Plan 

Soil (coast)/Water (Marine & Fresh) 

UN - Joint Group of Experts on the Scientific Aspects of Marine 

Advice/ Guidelines 

Environmental Protection (Sponsored by nine UN agencies) 

UN - Food and Agriculture Organization 

UN - World Health Organization 

UN - World Bank 

Regional Sea Conventions – OSPAR 

Regional Sea Conventions – HELCOM 

Regional Sea Conventions – MED 

Regional Sea Conventions – Bucharest 

The Arctic Council 

The Nordic Council of Ministers - Nordic marine group 

The Group of Twenty (G20) 

The Group of Seven (G7) 

World Economic Forum 

Honolulu Strategy 

Major transboundary river basins 

Guidelines 

Guidelines 

Guidelines 

Action Plan 

Action Plan 

Action Plan 

Action Plan 

Action plans and guidelines 

Programme 

Agreement/Strategy 

Agreement/Strategy 

Action Plan 

Water (Marine) 

Soil/Water/Air 

Fresh Water (drinking) 

Soil/Water 

Water (Marine) 

Water (Marine) 

Water (Marine) 

Water (Marine) 

Soil/Water 

Water (Marine) 

Water (Marine) 

Water (Marine) 

Fresh Water 

Global Framework 

Soil (coast)/Water (Marine) 

Regulation 

Fresh Water 

52 

      15 November 2018 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
       
 
 
 
 
 
       
 
 
 
Microplastic Pollution - The Policy Context 

5.  NATIONAL LEVEL 

This  section  mentions  relevant  measures  in  a  sampling  of  countries  by  region 
(Europe,  North  America,  Africa,  etc.),  particularly  ones  which  explicitly  refer  to 
microplastics.  The  examples  described  in  no  way  intend  to  provide  a  complete  or 
balanced account of the situation – they are included for illustrative purposes on the 
basis a simple internet search for readily available public information in English.  

Local  and  national  actions  have  been  the  primary  approach  for  mitigating  plastic 
pollution,  using  mechanisms  such  as  bans  (e.g.,  microbeads,,  plastic  bags), 
maximum daily limits for emissions into watersheds, and incentives for fishing gear 
retrieval.  

EU  Member  States  draw  on  EU  legislation,  as  well  as  on  international  agreements 
and  regional  action  plans  to  fight  marine  litter135.  The  Commission  supports 
technically  and  financially  the  implementation  of  such  plans  developed  under  the 
Regional  Seas  Conventions  and  encourages  Member  States  to  use  them  for  more 
efficient coordination of their national efforts to fight marine litter.  

The  choice  of  measures  at  national  or  local  level  is  left  to  EU  Member  State 
administrations - in line with the principle of subsidiarity.  For example, a number of 
Member  States  have  refundable  deposit  schemes  for  bottles.  Targeted  deposit 
schemes  can  help  reduce  littering  and  boost  recycling,  and  have  already  helped 
several countries achieve high collection rates for beverage containers.136  

Several  EU  Member  States  have  banned  or  will  ban  very  soon  certain  products 
containing plastic microbeads. A number of non-EU countries, like the USA, Canada 
and  New-Zealand,  have  already  introduced  bans  on  microbeads  or  have  drawn  up 
voluntary  agreements  with  industry  for  their  phaseout.  Others  like  Japan  are  not 
ready  for  tight  regulations  on  plastic  products  and  microbeads  pending  a  careful 
assessment of the impact on people’s lives and its industries. 

5.1. Europe 

  Belgium 

In 2015 the Belgian federal government (Belgian DG Environment, FPS Health, Food 
Chain Safety and Environment) ordered the design of a test - to assess and prevent 

135  Regional  action  plans  exist  for  the  North-east  Atlantic,  Baltic  and  Mediterranean  regions,  while  the  one  for  the 
Black Sea is being developed. 
136  The  five  best  performing  Member  States with deposit  schemes for  PET bottles (Germany,  Denmark, Finland,  the 
Netherlands and Estonia) reached an average collection rate for PET of 94% in 2014.  

15 November 2018 

                53 

 
 
 
 
 
 
     
                                                
Microplastic Pollution - The Policy Context 

the emission of primary synthetic micro particles (primary microplastics)137 to assist 
companies in assessing their use of synthetic micro particles and in taking measures 
to prevent the emission of synthetic micro particles to the environment.  

The  Federal  Minister  for  Energy,  the  Environment  and  Sustainable  Development, 
Marie  Christine  Marghem,  and  representatives  of  the  Belgian  and  Luxembourg 
association  for  producers  and  distributors  of  cosmetics,  cleaning  and  maintenance 
products,  adhesives,  sealants,  biocides  and  aerosols  are  concluding  a  sector 
agreement  for  the  gradual  removal  of  microplastics  from  a  series  of  consumer 
products. The primary aim of the draft agreement is to enact a total ban on minute 
plastic  particles  (microbeads)  in  all  rinse-off  cosmetic  products  and  toothpastes  by 
2019.  The  draft  agreement  also  obligates  the  parties  to  monitor  the  relevant 
advances  in  science  and  technology  and  take  the  measures  necessary  in  cases  of 
newly substantiated problems138.  

  France 

The  French  government  set  a  target  to  recycle  100%  of  plastics  in  the  country  by 
2025 and reduce greenhouse gas emissions by about eight million tonnes per year 
through  enhanced  plastics  recycling.  This  is  part  of  the  country’s  broader  circular 
economy roadmap (FREC)139. 

France  has  defined  the  conditions  of  application  of  the  legislative  provisions  of  the 
Environmental  Code  aimed  at  prohibiting  the  placement  on  the  market  of  rinse-off 
cosmetic products for exfoliation or cleaning that contain solid plastic particles, from 
1 January 2018140. 

  Germany 

Germany's  Federal  Environment  Agency  (UBA)  released  a  report  in  2015  on 
microplastics  in  the  environment  -  Sources  of  microplastics  relevant  to  marine 
protection  in  Germany  141  which  features  a  comprehensive  overview  of  scientific 
papers.  It  deals  with  inputs,  sources  and  induced  effects  in  aquatic  ecosystems.  It 
concludes that microplastics from cosmetic products thus play only a minor though 
avoidable role in environmental pollution from plastic. Therefore, to reduce the input 

137 
https://www.health.belgium.be/sites/default/files/uploads/fields/fpshealth_theme_file/microplastics_manual_voor_
de_website_env2.pdf  
138http://ec.europa.eu/growth/tools-

databases/tris/en/index.cfm/search/?trisaction=search.detail&year=2017&num=465&mLang=EN  

139 https://www.ecologique-solidaire.gouv.fr/sites/default/files/FREC%20anglais.pdf  
140http://ec.europa.eu/growth/tools-

databases/tris/en/index.cfm/search/?trisaction=search.detail&year=2016&num=542&fLang=FR&dNum=1  

141 
https://www.umweltbundesamt.de/sites/default/files/medien/378/publikationen/texte_64_2015_sources_of_micro
plastics_relevant_to_marine_protection_1.pdf  

54 

        15 November 2018 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
                                                
Microplastic Pollution - The Policy Context 

of microplastics into the environment, and in particular the marine environment, it is 
not  enough  to  focus  on  the  use  of  microplastics  in  cosmetic  products  and  other 
applications. Additional measures which drastically cut the overall quantities and the 
further  introduction  of  plastic  litter  in  the  environment  are  needed  –  not  only  in 
Germany and the EU, but throughout the world.  

  Iceland 

The  Federation  of  Icelandic  Fishing  Vessel  Owners  has  given  instructions  on  how 
fishing  gear  waste  should  be  categorised  and  disposed.  If  a  ship  loses  its  fishing 
gear  it  is  obliged  by  law  to  record  and  report  the  GPS  coordinates  so  it  can  be 
claimed.  An  agreement  has  been  made  with  the  Icelandic  Recycling  Fund  and 
information  on  annual  collection  of  fishing  gear  is  recorded  and  published  in  a 
report. The Icelandic fishing industry has created a deposit-refund system on fishing 
gear  which  has  decreased  derelict  fishing  gear  –  this  is  a  system  that  has  been 
proven effective globally.  

  Ireland 

The  Irish  Ministry  for  Housing,  Planning,  Community  and  Local  Government, 
launched  in  2017  a public consultation process  in relation to  a proposed legislative 
ban on certain products containing plastic microbeads. Ireland intends to sign a law 
to ban microbeads in products by the end of 2018. 

  Italy 

Italy  will  ban  non-biodegradable  cotton  bud  sticks  (ban  to  come  into  force  from 
1/1/2019)  and  microplastics  in  cosmetics  ("cosmetici  da  risciacquo  ad  azione 
esfoliante o detergente contenenti microplastiche") from 2020142.  

  Norway 

In  March  2017  the  Norwegian  Climate  and  Environment  Ministry  asked  the 
Environment Directorate for a report on a series of new measures to reduce marine 
litter  and  microplastics.  Norway  is  stepping  up  its  efforts  to  reduce  the  amount  of 
microplastics  ending  up  in  the  ocean  and  intends  to  target  the  most  important 
sources of this kind of pollution. Measures are  now  being developed in cooperation 
with relevant governmental  bodies and in  dialogue  with relevant stakeholders. The 
main focus will be on land-based sources of microplastics including wear and tear of 
car tires, artificial turf, paint and textiles. Concrete measures towards the difference 
sources are being examined and considered.  

142http://ec.europa.eu/growth/tools-

databases/tris/en/index.cfm/search/?trisaction=search.detail&year=2018&num=258&mLang=EN  

15 November 2018 

                55 

 
 
 
 
  
 
 
                                                
Microplastic Pollution - The Policy Context 

is  also  exploring 

The  Government 
for  extended  producer 
responsibilities  for  certain  product  groups.  Since  fishing  gear  and  other  forms  of 
plastic  equipment  used  in  the  fisheries  and  aquaculture  sectors  are  among  the 
sources  that  contribute  to  marine  littering  in  Norway  and  regionally,  extended 
producer responsibility schemes for these product groups are now being considered. 

the  potential 

  Sweden 

A  Swedish  ban  on  rinse-off  cosmetics  containing  microbeads  entered  into  force  at 
the beginning of July 2018. The ban applies to cosmetic products "rinsed or spotted 
and which contain plastic particles with a cleaning, scrubbing or polishing function". 
It  includes,  for  example,  toothpastes,  body  scrubs,  shower  gels,  shampoos  and 
conditioners with added microbeads. Products consisting solely of "natural polymers, 
long molecules that have not been synthesised, and which have not been modified 
chemically" are excluded from the ban. There will be a six-month transition period - 
products  purchased  in  stock  before  July  may  continue  to  be  sold  in  stores  until 
January 2019. 

Sweden is considering extending the ban to all products that release microplastics. 
In  March  2018,  the  Swedish  Chemicals  Agency  (Kemi)  produced  a  report  on  a 
broader  proposal143.  The  aim  of  the  report  was  to  explore  the  potential  need  for 
further national restrictions to protect the water environment in Sweden. The report 
concludes that the action regarding microplastics in cosmetic and chemical products 
firstly should take place  at  EU  level. They believe  that EU  level work on restriction 
proposals  could  result  in  a  reliable  decision  with  clear,  harmonized  rules  and 
regulations which would also be cost-effective (Figure1). Their assessment is based 
on  striking  a  balance  between  environmental  concerns  and  the  consequences  of  a 
national  restriction.  The  assessment  also  takes  into  account  the  uncertain  level  of 
knowledge about microplastics.  

The Kemi report uses the following definition of microplastics: solid plastic particles 
that  are  smaller  than  5  mm  in  any  dimension  and  insoluble  in  water.  According  to 
this definition, they have identified polymers144  that might be microplastics in both 
cosmetic  and  chemical  products.  However  they  have  concluded  that  they  do  not 
have sufficient material at present to assess with certainty which polymers ought to 
be  designated  as  microplastics.  Information  on  polymers  where  these  exist  in 
cosmetic  or  chemical  products  is  often  unavailable.  This  particularly  applies  to 
properties such as the composition of the polymers, chemical properties, solubility in 
water and size.  

143https://www.kemi.se/en/global/rapporter/2018/rapport-2-18-mikroplast-i-kosmetiska-produkter-och-andra-

kemiska-produkter.pdf in Swedish - summary in English 

144 A polymer is not a plastic. Polymers are the main ingredients of plastics. 

56 

        15 November 2018 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
                                                
Microplastic Pollution - The Policy Context 

Furthermore,  it  was  concluded  that  there  is  no  established  definition  that  makes 
clear  limits  on  these  types  of  properties.  It  is  therefore  difficult  to  identify  which 
alternatives  there  are  today  or  what  can  be  developed  to  replace  microplastics  in 
products. 

Figure 5 - Measures and anticipated effects - Swedish Chemicals Agency (Kemi) 

  United Kingdom 

The  Waste  and  Resources  Action  Programme  (WRAP)  together  with  the  Ellen 
MacArthur Foundation, launched (April 2018) The UK Plastics Pact145, supported by 
DEFRA  (Department  for  Food  and  Rural  Affairs)  is  designed  to  help  drive  the  UK 
towards  a  circular  economy  for  plastics.  It  is  part  of  an  international  Plastics  Pact 
initiative  which  in  turn  is  part  of  the  Ellen  MacArthur  Foundation's  New  Plastics 
Economy initiative.  

145 http://www.wrap.org.uk/content/the-uk-plastics-pact  

15 November 2018 

                57 

 
 
 
 
  
 
 
 
                                                
Microplastic Pollution - The Policy Context 

The  UK  Plastics  Pact  has  published  its  Roadmap  to  2025146  on  the  15th  November 
2018.  The  document  is  intended  as  a  guide  to  help  signatories  achieve  four  key 
milestones  by  2025,  all  intended  to  reduce  the  consumption  of  single-use  plastics 
and keep material in use for longer.  

A  ban  on  the  sale  of  products  containing  microbeads  has  come  into  force  in  June 
2018.  This  followed  January’s  2018147  ban  on  the  manufacture  of  products 
containing  microbeads.  The  regulations  prohibit  the  use  of  microbeads  as  an 
ingredient in the manufacture of rinse-off personal care products and the sale of any 
such products containing microbeads. 

5.2. North America 

  Canada 

In  Canada,  national  and  sub-national  governments  share  the  responsibility  for  the 
protection  of  the  environment  and  the  sound  management  of  wastes  and 
wastewater.  A  combination  of  laws  and  regulations,  scientific  research  and 
monitoring,  waste  prevention  initiatives,  investments  in  waste  and  wastewater 
infrastructure,  public  education  and  outreach  programs,  and  the  sharing  of  best 
practices  complement  each  other  to  address  plastic  waste,  marine  litter,  and 
microplastics in Canada.  

New  federal  wastewater  regulations  were  established  in  2012,  developed  in 
consultation  with  provinces,  territories,  Indigenous  communities  and  relevant 
organizations. The Wastewater Systems Effluent Regulations, established under the 
Fisheries  Act,  include  mandatory  minimum  standards  for  secondary  wastewater 
treatment.  These  standards  ensure  that  untreated  and  under-treated  wastewater 
will  no  longer  be  discharged  to  Canada’s  freshwater  and  marine  environment.  The 
Regulations  also  implement  a  federal  commitment  under  the  2009  Canada-wide 
Strategy for the Management of Municipal Wastewater Effluent.  

In  2014,  researchers  for  Ontario’s  Ministry  of  Environment  and  Climate  Change 
found  significant  quantities  of  microplastics  in  water  samples  from  Lake  Erie  and 
Lake Ontario, with microbeads comprising 14% of the total (Government of Ontario 
2016) Government of Ontario, 2016. In response, the Ontario government began to 
work  with  communities,  local  NGOs  and  manufacturers  to  phase  out  microbeads 
from  personal  care  products  sold  in  the  province.  The  provincial  ministry  also 
cooperated  with  the  federal  department  for  government’s  Environment  Canada 
Department of the Environment to conduct further research.  

146 http://www.wrap.org.uk/content/the-uk-plastics-pact-roadmap-2025  
147 http://www.legislation.gov.uk/uksi/2017/1312/pdfs/uksi_20171312_en.pdf  

58 

        15 November 2018 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
                                                
Microplastic Pollution - The Policy Context 

In 2015, the federal department for the Environment Canada held consultations and 
reviewed  more  than  130  scientific  studies  of  microbead  pollution.  Then,  in  2016, 
after  listing  microbeads  as  a  ‘toxic  substance’  under  the  Canadian  Environmental 
Protection  Act,  the  federal  Government  of  Canada  announced  a  ban  on  the  sale, 
import  and  production  manufacture  of  personal  care  products  toiletries  containing 
microbeads as exfoliants or cleansers as of 1 July 2018 with prohibitions starting in 
2018 and a complete ban by 2019.  

The Government of Canada is conducting and investing in science to understand the 
sources,  fate,  distribution  and  impacts  of  macro  and  microplastic  debris  in  marine 
and freshwater systems, as well as in fauna. In November 2018, the Department of 
the  Environment  will  host  science  workshops  to  inform  the  development  of  a 
Canadian science agenda on plastics.  

Provincial, territorial and municipal governments have also implemented regulatory 
(e.g.  bans,  levies,  extended  producer  responsibility  programs,  litter  by-laws)  and 
non-regulatory  measures  (e.g.  educational  campaigns,  recycling  and  deposit 
programs) that target some plastic products and other wastes.  

In 2009, federal, provincial and territorial governments, via the Canadian Council of 
Ministers  of  the  Environment  (CCME),  adopted  the  Canada-wide  Action  Plan  for 
Extended  Producer  Responsibility  (CAP-EPR)  to  improve  waste  diversion  and 
increase recycling across Canada. All provincial and territorial jurisdictions have EPR 
or product stewardship programs in place or under development for a wide range of 
products  including  packaging,  electronic  waste,  printed  materials  and  beverage 
containers.  There  are  over  160  regulated  and  voluntary  programs  in  Canada.  For 
example,  beverage  container  recycling  programs  are  very  well  established  across 
the country, with deposit return programs consistently showing higher return rates 
compared with curb side waste collection programs.  

Canadian businesses are also taking action to reduce plastic waste and marine litter 
at every stage of the plastics lifecycle. For instance, the Canadian Circular Economy 
Leadership  Initiative  brings  together  leading  NGOs  (National  Zero  Waste  Coalition; 
The  Natural  Step  Canada;  Institute  of  the  environment,  sustainable  development 
and  the  circular  economy;  International  Institute  for  Sustainable  Development; 
Smart  Prosperity  Institute)  and  businesses  (Unilever  Canada,  Walmart  Canada, 
Loblaw  Companies  Ltd;  Ikea  Canada;  NEI  Investments)  to  provide  leadership, 
technical expertise and a  platform for  collaborating on innovative circular economy 
solutions for plastics and other materials.  

Canada’s vision is a zero plastic waste future. Building on these existing efforts, the 
federal,  provincial  and  territorial  governments  are  working  together  through  the 
Canadian Council of Ministers of the Environment (CCME) to develop a Canada-wide 
approach to eliminate plastic waste and reduce marine litter.  

15 November 2018 

                59 

 
 
 
 
  
 
 
Microplastic Pollution - The Policy Context 

In  September  2018,  the  Government  of  Canada  announced  it  is  investing  $65 
million  for  plastic  waste  solutions  in  developing  countries  through  the  World  Bank, 
$20 million to support the G7 Innovation Challenge to Address Marine Plastic Litter, 
$6  million  for  innovative  private-public  partnerships  through  the  World  Economic 
Forum  Global  Plastics  Action  Partnership.  Canada  also  committed  to  another  $12 
million  for  domestic  plastic  innovation  challenges.  In  addition,  the  Government  of 
Canada  committed  to  diverting  at  least  75  per  cent  of  the  plastic  waste  from 
government operations by 2030 and joined the Global Ghost Gear Initiative to tackle 
abandoned fishing gear. 

  USA 

The  US  wastewater  regulations  established  by  the  Federal  Water  Pollution  Control 
Act (i.e. the Clean Water Act), provide the basic structure for regulating discharges 
of pollutants and regulating quality standards for surface waters. The Act  regulates 
wastewater and entry of waste from diffuse sources. Total maximum daily loads of 
waste  are  defined  aiming  at  reducing  the  waste  input  to  freshwater  systems. 
However,  it  should  be  noted  that,  for  example,  under  Californian  law,  debris  less 
than 5 mm is not considered litter subject to regulation. 

In 2014, Illinois became the first state to  pass legislation on microbeads. However, 
this bill fell short of the goals of most environmental groups. The Illinois legislation 
defined synthetic plastic microbeads as “any intentionally added non-biodegradable 
solid  plastic  particle”.  The  bill  excluded  biodegradable  plastics,  but  did  not  define 
that  term,  creating  a  loophole.  One  could  argue  that  a  material  is  “biodegradable” 
even though it degrades only marginally over several years, for example, modestly 
changing  in  shape  and  form,  but  persisting  in  the  environment.  The  definition  of 
“plastic”  was  also  problematic.  Plastic  was  defined  as  “a  synthetic  material  made 
from  linking  monomers  through  a  chemical  reaction  to  create  an  organic  polymer 
chain  that  can  be  moulded  or  extruded  at  high  heat  into  various  solid  forms 
retaining  their  defined  shapes  during  life  cycle  and  after  disposal”  (Illinois  Bill 
SB2727148).  However,  not  all  polymers  in  plastics  are  made  by  linking  monomers. 
Some  are  made  by  modifying  existing  polymers  –  e.g.  cellulose  acetate  (which  in 
some  forms  can  be  biodegradable)  is  made  by  acetylating  the  natural  polymer 
cellulose,  rather  than  by  linking  monomers.  Also,  this  definition  would  not  cover 
plastics  that  melt  at  low  temperatures.  Finally,  it  might  not  cover  certain  plastics 
depending on the design of the final product. 

As a result, when proposing legislation in California, the groups aggressively pushed 
for  wording  to  eliminate  loopholes  with  respect  to  biodegradability.  However, 
inability to reach  an agreed  definition  led to the deletion  of that  term  from  the  bill 
altogether. As a consequence, the California bill banned microbeads made from any 

148 http://www.ilga.gov/legislation/BillStatus.asp?DocNum=2727&GAID=14&DocTypeID=SB&SessionID=91&GA=100  

60 

        15 November 2018 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
                                                
Microplastic Pollution - The Policy Context 

plastic,  with  no  exceptions.  However  the  legislation  applies  only  to  “rinse-off 
products  excluding  items  such  as  makeup,  lotions,  deodorant  and  industrial  and 
household  cleaners.  Legislation  that  passed  in  other  states  had  language  that  was 
modelled  upon  either  the  Illinois  bill  (i.e.,  full  of  loopholes),  or  the  California  bill 
(i.e., all plastics banned, irrespective of their environmental impact).  

The  US  federal  government  Microbead-Free  Waters  Act  of  2015  will  prohibit  the 
formulation  and  distribution  of  rinse-off  cosmetics  (and  specifically  stated  that  this 
included  toothpaste)  that  intentionally  contain  plastic  microbeads.  The  term 
microbead  means  any  solid  plastic  particle  that  is  less  than  5mm  in  size  and  is 
intended to be used to exfoliate or cleanse any part of the human body. There are 
different deadlines for the prohibition of manufacture (July 2017) and placing on the 
market (July 2018), respectively. The respective deadlines are postponed for a year 
for ‘non-prescription rinse-off cosmetics. 

5.3. Central - and South –America 

In  May  2016,  Chile  became  the  first  South  American  country  to  approve  a 
nationwide  ban  on  single-use  plastic  bags.  Soon  after,  Antigua  and  Barbuda,  and 
Colombia passed a similar ban, and in 2017 applied a tax to large plastic bags, while 
ordering  changes  to  their  design  with  the  aim  of  achieving  greater  resistance  and 
reusability. 

Several  other  countries  in  Latin  America  and  the  Caribbean  are  using  taxes,  bans, 
and  technological  innovation  to  restrict  the  production  and  consumption  of  plastic 
bags.  The  tax  began  at  20  Colombian  pesos  for  each  plastic  bag  in  2017,  and  will 
increase  10  pesos  each  year  until  reaching  50  pesos  in  2020  –  equivalent  to 
approximately 0.02  USD.  Colombia’s neighbour, Panama, became  at the beginning 
of 2018 the first country in Central America to ban polyethylene bags. 

Costa  Rica  adopted  a  national  strategy  to  drastically  reduce  the  use  of  disposable 
plastics  by  2021,  while  in  the  Caribbean,  Belize,  Bahamas  and  Bermuda  have 
passed  or  are  drafting  laws  to  eradicate  single-use  plastics.  Ecuador  aims  to 
transform  the  remote  Galápagos  Islands  into  a  plastics-free  archipelago:  no  more 
plastic straws, bags or bottles will be sold or used after 21 August 2018. 

In  Peru,  several  bills  on  the  issue  of  plastic  bags  are  debated  in  Congress.  The 
region’s three biggest cities – Mexico City, São Paulo and Buenos Aires – have also 
joined the fight against plastic bags. The Mexican capital was one of the first to do 
so. In August 2009, the capital city government reformed the Solid Waste Law and 
prohibited  stores  from  dispensing  bags  free  of  charge.  Buenos  Aires  went  a  step 
further: starting from 1 January 2017, all of the city’s supermarkets were prohibited 
from using or selling disposable plastic shopping bags. 

15 November 2018 

                61 

 
 
 
 
  
 
 
Microplastic Pollution - The Policy Context 

5.4. Australasia 

  New-Zealand 

In  January  2017,  the  New-Zealand  Government  released  a  public  consultation 
document on a proposed ban of the sale  and  manufacture  of  plastic microbeads  in 
personal care products like facial cleansers and toothpastes.  

The consultation document set out the rationale for the ban, summarised below: 

 

 

 

 

 

plastic microbeads are a problem because they are too small to be retrieved, 
are cumulative and do not biodegrade 

recent studies have shown that microbeads can be  mistaken by marine life 
as food, causing long-term damage to aquatic animals like fish and mussels. 
This in turn poses a potential threat to human health 

there  are  suitable  alternatives  to  plastic  microbeads  in  personal  care 
products that do not have adverse impacts on the environment 

the  products  are  designed  to  be  washed  straight  down  the  drain,  and  are 
only partially captured by the waste water treatment system 

this initiative is part of wider global efforts to reduce  the  amount of plastic 
waste in the oceans. The New Zealand ban parallels similar initiatives in the 
United States of America (USA), United Kingdom (UK), Canada, Europe and 
Australia (by industry self-regulation in Australia). 

The  New  Zealand  government  regulation  banning  plastic  microbeads149  came  into 
effect  on  7  June  2018.  The  regulation  prohibits,  under  section  23  of  the  Waste 
Minimisation Act 2008, the sale and manufacture of wash-off products that contain 
plastic  microbeads  for  the  purposes  of  exfoliation,  cleaning,  abrasive  cleaning  or 
visual  appearance  of  the  product.  A  Regulatory  Impact  Statement150  was  prepared 
by  the  Ministry  for  the  Environment  (MfE).  It  provides  an  analysis  of  options  to 
prevent  the  sale  and  manufacture  of  “wash-off”  products  containing  plastic 
microbeads.  Microbeads  are  defined  as  synthetic,  non-biodegradable  plastic  beads, 
used  in  personal  care  products  such  as  bath  products,  facial  scrubs  and  cleansers, 
and  toothpastes.  The  NZ  Environment  Protection  Authority  (EPA)  has  published 

149http://www.legislation.govt.nz/regulation/public/2017/0291/latest/DLM7490715.html?search=ts_act%40bill%40re
gulation%40deemedreg_microbeads_resel_25_a&p=1  
150 http://www.mfe.govt.nz/sites/default/files/media/Legislation/RIS/RIS-microbeads-2017.pdf  

62 

        15 November 2018 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
                                                
Microplastic Pollution - The Policy Context 

information151  on  what  the  ban  means  for  manufacturers,  suppliers,  retailers  and 
the public. 

  Australia 

After the New Zealand ban on the sale and manufacture of microbeads to cover all 
'wash  off'  products,  there  is  speculation  on  whether  Australia  will  follow.  In 
December  2016,  an  official  meeting  of  environment  ministers  (MEM)  from  federal, 
state and territory level across Australia endorsed a voluntary industry phase-out of 
microbeads by 1 July 2018. 

5.5. Asia 

The East Asia Civil Forum on Marine Litter152 is a network of non-profit organizations 
devoted  to  addressing  the  marine  litter  issue.  Current  membership  includes 
organisations from South Korea, Japan, China (mainland and Taiwan),  Bangladesh, 
Philippines and Brunei. 

  China 

In  2015,  research  published  in  the  journal  of  the  International  Solid  Waste 
Association  identified  China  as  the  world’s  largest  source  of  marine  plastics.  China 
participated  in  the  December  2017  UN  Environment  Assembly  which  passed  a 
resolution on marine litter and microplastics setting a non-binding target to prevent 
and reduce marine pollution of all kinds by 2025. But China has not yet signed up to 
the  UN  Environment  Programme’s  Clean  Seas  campaign  which  calls  on 
governments,  businesses  and  individuals  to  take  measures  to  stop  plastic  litter 
reaching the seas. 

In  January  2018,  China’s  highest  planning  body,  the  National  Development  and 
Reform  Commission  (NDRC),  announced  that  it  is  looking  at  measures  to  reduce 
plastic  waste  pollution.  It  has  promised  rules  on  plastic  products  that  are 
comprehensive and detailed, as well as more bans, and an accelerated switch to less 
polluting materials. 

A  relevant  precedent  is  China’s  2008  restrictions  on  ultra-thin  plastic  bags,  which 
started  an  effective  clean-up  of  a  once-universal  form  of  litter.  The  new  measures 
are  likely  to  focus  on  the  highly  visible  waste  packaging  generated  by  the  rise  of 
online retail and takeaway food.  

In  the  annual  meeting  between  the  environment  ministers  of  Japan,  China  and 
South  Korea  on  24th  June  2018  in  Suzhou  (China),  the  three  agreed  to  take 

151 https://www.epa.govt.nz/news-and-alerts/alerts/microbeads-ban-is-your-product-affected/  
152 www.osean.net  

15 November 2018 

                63 

 
 
 
 
  
 
 
                                                
Microplastic Pollution - The Policy Context 

leadership roles in tackling the issue of microplastics and other marine garbage and 
to  propose  it  as  the  main  agenda  item  for  the  2019  G20  meeting  of  environment 
ministers to be held in Karuizawa (Japan). 

  India 

India  today  produces  more  than  25,000  tonnes  of  plastic  waste  daily,  of  which 
10,000 tonnes goes to landfills, or is casually discarded. From banning of plastic to 
beach  clean-up,  plastic  pollution  is  being  fought  at  various  levels,  by  state 
governments, NGOs and individuals across India. Several Indian states have banned 
or  regulated  the  use  of  plastic,  but  India  still  struggles  to  manage  its  huge  plastic 
waste.  

For  microplastics  and  their  presence  in  consumer  goods  regulations  are  still  under 
development.  The  National  Green  Tribunal  in  January  2017  had  asked  the  Union 
Government to test leading cosmetics brands for microplastics. The submission was 
made in response to a plea filed by Delhi-based lawyer seeking complete ban on the 
use  of  microbeads  in  the  manufacture,  import  and  sale  of  various  cosmetics  or 
personal  care  products.  The  Bureau  of  Indian  Standards  (BIS)  has  classified 
microbeads  as  “unsafe”  for  use  in  cosmetic  products  and  banned  the  use  of 
microbeads in cosmetics in October 2017, but it will only be implemented in 2020. 

  Japan 

Japan,  along  with  the  United  States,  abstained  from  signing  the  “Ocean  Plastic 
Charter”  that  was  endorsed  by  other  G7  members  and  the  European  Union  at  the 
G7 summit in Canada in June 2018. The government explained that Japan was not 
ready for tight regulations on plastic products because it has to carefully assess the 
impact  on  people’s  lives  and  its  industries.  The  Japanese  government  reportedly 
plans  to  devise  a  strategy  for  cutting  back  on  plastic  waste  through  more  efficient 
recycling, reducing the use of plastics and promoting alternative materials that are 
more environment-friendly in time for the Group of 20 summit in Osaka June 28 and 
29, 2019. 

  South Korea 

In Oct 2016, the Korean Ministry of Food and Drug Safety (MFDS) has notified the 
World Trade Organization (WTO) of its ‘Proposed Amendments to the “Regulation on 
Safety Standards of Cosmetics”. The proposed amendments have banned the use of 
microbeads in rinse-off cosmetics from July 2017. 

  Taiwan 

As part of its "Sea Waste Management Platform" Taiwan has an  ambitious 12-year 
timeline  to  eliminate  four  types  of  single-use  plastics—takeaway  beverage  cups, 
drinking  straws,  shopping  bags  and  disposable  tableware.  For  example,  in  2020, 
free plastic straws will be banned from all food and beverage establishments; from 

64 

        15 November 2018 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Microplastic Pollution - The Policy Context 

2025,  plastic  straws  for  carryout  will  be  banned  and  customers  will  need  to  pay  a 
fee to use them; in 2030, the use of plastic straws at all establishments in Taiwan 
will be banned. 

5.6. Africa 

Unlike most developed nations where plastic waste is separated from  other wastes 
prior  to  disposal,  the  management  of  solid  wastes  in  many  developing  countries 
suffers  from  deficient  legal  foundations,  technology  and  infrastructure.  This  results 
in urban and industrial wastes being sent to disposal sites or dumped and has been 
documented  as  a  major  cause  of  pollution  in  African  waters  and  is  a  recognized 
source  for  microplastic  pollution153.  Most  of  African  freshwater  bodies  are 
transboundary,  and therefore  their management requires cooperation and effective 
regional  environmental  policies.  However,  the  management  of  most  African 
transboundary  lakes  and  rivers  ecosystems  is  compromised  by  conflicting  politics. 
Furthermore,  when  conventions  and  cooperation  do  occur,  the  focus  is  mostly  on 
sharing  natural  resources  rather  than  the  control  of  pollutants.  Thus,  the  political 
will to combat issues like microplastic pollution is not strong.  

In  short,  in  most  African  countries,  microplastic  pollution  is  not  recognized  as 
emergent issue of concern, although the efforts to levy, reduce, and ban the use of 
plastic  bags  show  that  the  issue  is  not  entirely  ignored.  Indeed,  several  African 
countries  have  introduced  measures  to  address  plastic  bag  pollution.  Kenya 
introduces a total ban on plastic bags in August 2017 and the Nigerian government 
is presently under a lot of pressure to do something similar. Botswana introduced a 
levy  on  plastic  bags  ten  years  ago,  while  in  2014  Cameroon  outlawed  disposable 
plastic bags. Eritrea banned plastic bags in 2005, while Mauritania banned the use, 
manufacture, and importation of plastic bags from 2013. In 2016, Morocco, Africa’s 
second  largest  consumer  of  plastic  bags,  affected  a  law  banning  the  use  of  plastic 
bags.  Rwanda  banned  plastic  bags  in  2008  as  part  of  its  Vision  2020  plan  for 
sustainability. Tanzania introduced a ban in 2006. In March 2017 Tunisia introduced 
a  ban  on  plastic  bag  distribution  in  supermarkets.  In  South  Africa,  a  bag  levy  was 
introduced in 2004 although they were never banned. In 2007, Uganda introduced a 
ban of lightweight plastic bags which came into effect that year. However, the ban 
was never implemented. 

153 https://link.springer.com/chapter/10.1007/978-3-319-61615-5_6#Fig2  

15 November 2018 

                65 

 
 
 
 
  
 
 
 
 
                                                
Microplastic Pollution - The Policy Context 

6.  REFERENCES 

Borrelle,  S.  B.,  Rochman,  C.  M.,  Liboiron,  M.,  Bond,  A.  L.,  Lusher,  A.,  Bradshaw,  H.,  & 
Provencher,  J.  F.  (2017). Opinion:  Why  we  need  an  international  agreement  on  marine 
plastic pollution. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 114(38), 9994–9997. 
https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.1714450114 

Boucher, J., Friot, D., & IUCN. (2017). Primary Microplastics in the Oceans: Global Evaluation 
of  Sources.  InternatIonal  UnIon  for  ConservatIon  of  Nature  and  Natural  Resources. 
Gland,  Switzerland:  International  Union  for  Conservation  of  Nature  and  Natural 
Resources . https://doi.org/dx.doi.org/10.2305/IUCN.CH.2017.01.en 

Brennholt,  N.,  Heß,  M.,  &  Reifferscheid,  G.  (2018).  Freshwater  Microplastics  (Vol.  58). 

https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-61615-5 

Hann,  S.,  Sherrington,  C.,  Jamieson,  O.,  Hickman,  M.,  Kershaw,  P.,  Bapasola,  A.,  &  Cole,  G. 
(2018).  Investigating  options  for  reducing  releases  in  the  aquatic  environment  of 
microplastics emitted by (but not intentionally added in) products  - Final Report. Report 
for  DG  ENV  EC.  Retrieved 
from  http://ec.europa.eu/environment/marine/good-
environmental-status/descriptor-10/pdf/microplastics_final_report_v5_full.pdf 

Karen  Raubenheimer,  Niluefer  Oral,  A.  M.  (2017).  Combating  marine  plastic  litter  and 
microplastics: an assessment of the effectiveness of relevant international, regional and 
subregional  governance  strategies  and  approaches.  In  UNEP.  UNEP.  Retrieved  from 
www.unenvironment.org 

Lebreton, L. C. M. M., Van Der Zwet, J., Damsteeg, J. W., Slat, B., Andrady, A., & Reisser, J. 
(2017). River plastic emissions to the world’s oceans. Nature Communications, 8, 15611. 
https://doi.org/10.1038/ncomms15611 

Raubenheimer, K., & McIlgorm, A. (2018). Can the Basel and Stockholm Conventions provide a 
global framework to reduce the impact of marine plastic litter? Marine Policy. Pergamon. 
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.marpol.2018.01.013 

Schmidt, C., Krauth, T., & Wagner, S. (2017). Export of Plastic Debris by Rivers into the Sea. 
12246–12253. 

Technology, 

51, 

& 

Environmental 
https://doi.org/10.1021/acs.est.7b06377 

Science 

Steensgaard, I. M., Syberg, K., Rist, S., Hartmann, N. B., Boldrin, A., & Hansen, S. F. (2017). 
From  macro-  to  microplastics  -  Analysis  of  EU  regulation  along  the  life  cycle  of  plastic 
289–299. 
Environmental 
bags. 
https://doi.org/10.1016/J.ENVPOL.2017.02.007 

Pollution, 

224, 

Steffen,  W.,  Richardson,  K.,  Rockström,  J.,  Cornell,  E.,  Fetzer,  I.,  Bennett,  E.  M.,  …  Linn,  M. 
(2015).  Article:  Planetary  Boundaries:  Guiding  Human  Development  on  a  Changing 
Planet. 
for  Sustainable  Development,  9(2),  235–235. 
https://doi.org/10.1177/0973408215600602a 

Journal  of  Education 

UN  Environment.  (2018).  Addressing  marine  plastics:  A  systemic  approach  -  Stocktaking 

report. Nairobi, Kenya. 

Wesch,  C.,  Klein,  R.,  &  Paulus,  M.  (2017).  Quality  Assurance  in  Microplastic  Detection.  Fate 
and  Impact of  Microplastics  in  Marine  Ecosystems, 95.  https://doi.org/10.1016/B978-0-
12-812271-6.00096-X 

66 

        15 November 2018 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
European Commisson’s Scientific Advice Mechanism 

ec.europa.eu/research/sam 

#SAMGroup_EU 

Microplastic Pollution - The Policy Context