Contents

List of figures and tables 4

Acknowledgements 6

Abbreviations 7

Executive summary 9

1. Introduction 20
1.1 Objective 21
1.2 Process and engagement 22
1.3 Use of terms 23

2. Why a global agreement on plastic pollution 25

2.1 Positioning the elements within the current global policy framework 26
2.2 How a new agreement can add value to existing frameworks 29

3. Possible objectives and approaches for a new global agreement 31

3.1 Three approaches for objective and scope of a new agreement 31
3.2 Design approaches: Binding, voluntary or hybrid obligations? 0
3.3 Complementing the TBT Agreement of the WTO 36

4. Structuring a new global agreement 39

4.1 Elements of multilateral environmental agreements 39
4.2 Scope of agreement 40
4.3 Definitions and terminology 42
4.4 Fundamental objectives 43
4.5 Strategic goals 43
4.6 International sustainability criteria 44
4.7 National operational implementation mechanisms 44
4.8 Scientific and technical knowledge building 45
4.9 Measuring progress 45
4.10 Supporting measures 46
4.11 Institutional arrangements 46
4.12 Final provisions 47
4.13 Summary of structuring a new global agreement 47

5. Key life cycle measures 49

5.1 Sustainable consumption and production (Upstream and midstream) 51
5.2 Waste management (Downstream) 54
5.3 Chemical hazard reduction 55
5.4 Microplastics 56
5.5 Trade 59
5.6 Sea-based sources 60
5.7 Sustainable removal 61
5.8 Summary of measures 61

2
6. Operational Implementation Mechanisms 65
6.1 National Plastics Management Plans 65
6.2 Sustainability criteria for the plastic products life cycle 72
6.3 National plastics sustainability standards 81
6.4 Summary of operational implementation mechanisms 91

7. Science and knowledge building 93

7.1 Science-policy interface 93
7.2 Monitoring 96
7.3 Research 97
7.4 Summary on science and knowledge building 98

8. Measuring progress 99
8.1 Reporting national performance 99
8.2 Verification of national reporting 102
8.3 Global review 102
8.4 Summary of measuring progress 104

9. Supporting measures 105

9.1 Education and awareness-raising 105
9.2 Funding and capacity building 106

10. Institutional arrangements 108

10.1 Structure 108
10.2 Rules of Procedure 109
10.3 Coordination 109

Annex 1. 111

Annex 2. 115

Annex 3. 123

Annex 4. 127

Annex 5. 134

Annex 6. 136

Annex 7. 138

References 141

About this publication 147

3
List of figures

The main elements of an international agreement and main questions in focus of

Figure 1
this report.

Figure 2 Key elements of a new global agreement to combat plastic pollution.

Figure 3 Overview of the primary phases of a new global agreement.

Figure 4 The value-chain of plastics, indicating circular materials flows in green.

Illustration of the plastics value chain and entry points for market-based
Figure 5
instruments shown in blue and green boxes.

Linkages between implementation mechanisms, highlighting core global

Figure 6
commitments.

The results framework shows the difference between outputs, outcomes and
Figure 7
impacts, helping to design a comprehensive scheme for measuring progress.

Summary of information that could be collected by inventories on controlled flows

Figure 8
and leakage.

Figure 9 Main elements for measuring progress in a holistic manner.

Figure 10 Overview of the role of international sustainability objectives and criteria.

Figure 11 Linking design standards and guidelines to product certification.

List of tables

Table 1 Benefits of a new global agreement for government, industry and civil society.

Alternate approaches for a global agreement to address land-based sources in

Table 2
relation to the life cycle of plastics.

Summary of obligations under the three design approaches for a new global
Table 3
agreement.

Table 4 Linkages between national measures and the WTO’s TBT Agreement.

Table 5 Categorization of microplastic releases and actions needed at the national level.

Table 6 Summary of options for action throughout the life cycle of plastics.

Table 7 Options for addressing life cycle measures within the agreement.

Table 8 Comparison between NDCs (Paris Agreement) and NBSAPs (CBD).

Measures and guidance for updating NAPs in Barcelona Convention Regional Plan
Table 9
on Marine Litter Management in the Mediterranean.

Table 10 Options for setting national targets and indicators.

Table 11 Development of product sustainability criteria and standards.

Table 12 Examples of sustainability objectives from existing instruments.

Regulatory and market-based instruments for consideration and their strengths

Table 13
and weaknesses.

Table 14 Approaches for national measures towards a circular plastics value chain.

Table 15 National measures to support a circular plastics value chain.

Table 16 Examples of subsidiary scientific bodies in MEAs.

4
Table 17 Possible functions for science and knowledge building within the agreement.

Table 18 Examples of inventories under existing MEAs.

Table 19 Examples of existing global review mechanisms within MEAs.

Table 20 Matrix estimating release rates of plastics to the environment.

Table 21 Table of possible national measures across the life cycle of plastics.

Relevance of plastic pollution to the 2030 Agenda and ways a new agreement can
Table 22
contribute to delivering SDGs.

5
Acknowledgements

The authors would like to acknowledge the valuable discussions and support from
participants during two workshops.

Workshop 1 (16–17 September 2019, Reykjavik, Iceland):

Mona Aarhus (Norway), David Azoulay (Center for International Environmental Law,
CIEL), Erlend Draget (Norway), Stéfan Einarsson (Iceland), Christoph Epping
(Germany), Gunnhild Eriksen (Norway), Tim Grabiel (European Investigation Agency,
EIA), Thorbjørn Graff Hugo (WWF Norway), Inger Haugsgjerd (WWF
Norway), Kirsten Jacobsen (Norway), Vilja Klemola (Finland), Maria Laamanen
(Finland), Charlotte Mogensen (Denmark), Ingeborg Mork-Knutsen (Norway), Julius
Piercy (United Kingdom), Ingo Stürmer (Germany), Gordana Topic (European
Commission), Sibylle Vermont (Switzerland), Pernilla Åhrlin (Sweden).

Workshop 2 (14–15 January 2020, Copenhagen, Denmark):

Mona Aarhus (Norway), Hæge Andenæs (Norway), David Azoulay (Center for
International Environmental Law, CIEL), Rasmus Boldsen (Denmark), Erlend Draget
(Norway), Stefán Einarsson (Iceland), Gunnhild Eriksen (Norway), Tim Grabiel
(European Investigation Agency, EIA), Torbjørn Graff Hugo (Norway), Kirsten
Jacobsen (Norway), Helen Klint (Sweden), Sebastian König (Switzerland), Maria
Laamanen (Finland), Eirik Lindebjerg (WWF Norway), Charlotte Mogensen
(Denmark), Ingeborg Mork-Knutsen (Norway), Lone Munk Søderberg (Denmark),
Malene Møhl (Denmark), Julius Piercy (United Kingdom), Hugo-Maria Schally
(European Commission), Ingo Stüermer (Germany), Gordana Topic (European
Commission), Amalie Wang (Denmark), Pernilla Åhrlin (Sweden).

The authors would like to thank the following for taking the time to provide
invaluable comments:

Dr. Ralph Bodle, Dr. Stephan Sina (Ecologic Institute)

Dr. Jianguo Liu (Beijing University)

Dr. Maria Ivanova, Margaret Hassey (University of Massachusetts Boston)

Dr. Robin Warner (University of Wollongong)

The authors would like to acknowledge the assistance of Prof. Greg Rose (University
of Wollongong) in editing the report.

Suggested citation:

Raubenheimer, K., Urho, N. (2020). Possible elements of a new global agreement to

prevent plastic pollution. Nordic Council of Ministers, Denmark, Copenhagen.

6
Abbreviations

10-Year Framework of Programmes on Sustainable Consumption and

10-YFP on SCP
Production

ACC American Chemistry Council

AHEG Ad Hoc Open-Ended Expert Group on Marine Litter and Microplastics

AHTEG Ad Hoc Technical Expert Group

AIA Advance informed agreement

APR Association of Plastics Recyclers

BAT Best available techniques

BEP Best environmental practices

BPA Bisphenol A

BPF British Plastics Federation

BRS Basel, Rotterdam and Stockholm Conventions

CBD Convention on Biological Diversity

CIEL Center for International Environmental Law

Convention on International Trade in Endangered Species of Wild Fauna and

CITES
Flora

CMS Convention on Migratory Species

COP Conference of Parties

DDT Dichlorodiphenyltrichloroethane

EEDI Energy Efficiency Design Index

EIA Environmental Investigation Agency

EPR Extended producer responsibility

ESM Environmentally sound management

FAO The Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations

GEF Global Environment Facility

United Nations-sponsored Joint Group of Experts on the Scientific Aspects

GESAMP
of Marine Environmental Protection

GPML Global Partnership on Marine Litter

HDPE High-density polyethylene

IHR International Health Regulations

IMO International Maritime Organization

INC Intergovernmental negotiating committee

Intergovernmental science-policy Platform on Biodiversity Ecosystem

IPBES
Services

IPCC Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change

7
IUCN International Union for Conservation of Nature

LBS Land-based sources

LMO Living modified organism

LRTAP Convention on Long-Range Transboundary Air Pollution

MARPOL International Convention for the Prevention of Pollution by Ships

MBIs Market-based instruments

MEA Multilateral environmental agreement

MoU Memorandums of Understanding

NAP National action plan

NBSAP National Biodiversity Strategy and Action Plan

NDC Nationally Determined Contribution

NGO Non-governmental organization

NPMP National Plastics Management Plan

OECD Organization for Economic Co-operation and Development

Convention for the Protection of the Marine Environment of the North-East

OSPAR
Atlantic

PCB Polychlorinated biphenyl

PCR Post-consumer resin

PET Polyethylene terephthalate

PIC Prior informed consent

POP Persistent organic pollutant

PRE Plastics Recyclers Europe

PRO Producer responsibility organization

RoP Rules of Procedure

SAICM Strategic Approach to International Chemicals Management

SCP Sustainable consumption and production

SDG Sustainable Development Goal

TBT Technical Barriers to Trade

UNCLOS United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea

UNEA United Nations Environment Assembly

UNEP United Nations Environment Programme

UNFCCC United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change

WHO World Health Organization

WTO World Trade Organization

WWF World Wide Fund for Nature

8
Photo: Ritzau/Scanpix.dk

Executive Summary

Plastics and their chemical components are integrated in all areas of our daily lives.
While plastics will continue to bring various societal benefits, a systematic and
holistic global approach is needed to mitigate marine plastic pollution. In 2017, an
assessment of the effectiveness of relevant international governance strategies and
approaches was presented to the third session of the United Nations Environment
Assembly (UNEA) that highlighted key gaps in international plastics governance. The
report points out that the absence of an institution with a mandate to coordinate
existing efforts, lack of legally binding instruments in key regions to manage marine
plastic pollution originating from land, and limited industry due diligence and lack of
global design standards to mitigate plastic pollution hamper effective international
management of plastics. These shortcomings necessitate a global response that
extends beyond waste management to address the entire life cycle of plastic
pollution. A business-as-usual approach that does not address current governance
gaps is harmful to ecosystems and the services they provide, as well as harmful to
social well-being and economic productivity in multiple sectors.

This report contributes to global discussions by: (1) defining potential objectives and
strategic goals of a potential new global agreement; (2) providing a first outline of a
structure for a potential new global agreement; and (3) identifying and detailing
national implementation measures to achieve the global goal of zero discharge of
plastics into the marine environment.

A global policy setting regarding the prevention of marine pollution by plastics has
been established over recent years and this report contributes to relevant
discussions within this setting in which the international community has agreed to
certain principles, approaches and decisions. Since 2014, UNEA has in its four
consecutive meetings adopted five resolutions specific to the issue of marine plastic
litter and microplastics and the mitigation efforts underway, while emphasizing the
urgent need for greater progress. In 2017, the third session of the Assembly agreed
to the long-term elimination of all discharge of litter and microplastics to the ocean
and established an intersessional Ad Hoc Open-Ended Expert Group on Marine
Litter and Microplastics to consider, inter alia, a stronger governance response at the

9
 1
global level . Its intersessional meetings have discussed the sources, response
options, enabling mechanisms and barriers to long-term elimination, amongst other
issues, and will provide input to the fifth session of UNEA to be held in February
2021.

The vision of UNEA agreed in 2017, for the long-term elimination of all discharge of
litter and microplastics to the oceans, builds on and complements Target 14.1 of the
2030 Agenda on Sustainable Development, which calls for preventing and
significantly reducing marine pollution of all kinds, particularly from land-based
activities, by 2025. The UNEA vision is termed the ‘global objective’ for the proposed
new agreement on marine plastic litter discussed in this report.

In response to numerous calls from the international community for the

development of a new global agreement on marine plastic litter, the Nordic Council
of Ministers for the Environment and Climate (MR-MK) adopted a Declaration in
2019 that called for the development of such an agreement. The Declaration
requested the preparation of a report to inform decision-making, by sketching out
the possible elements and approaches of a new global agreement that addresses
the whole life cycle of plastics (NCM, 2019). This report is delivered in response to
that request.

The report aims to inform the UNEA process and other forthcoming meetings on
managing and preventing pollution by plastics. Meetings of parties to relevant
instruments and various partnerships aiming to address the issue of plastic pollution
also could consider the measures outlined in this report as possibly useful options
within their respective mandates.

Why a new global agreement?

Plastics are found in disturbing quantities in our oceans, air, soil and freshwater
resources. Plastic pollution presents a significant risk to marine ecosystems and
biodiversity globally (UNEP, 2014), as well as to the marine economies of many
nations (McIlgorm et al., 2020). The current international legal and policy framework
is inadequate to address the issue of marine plastic pollution (UNEP, 2017). Policy
and market failures in waste management have also played a key role.

In 2017, governments agreed to the goal of long-term elimination of all discharge of

litter and microplastics to the ocean. The marine litter issue, however, cannot be
solved in the ocean itself. Elimination of discharge to sea requires a much-needed
systemic change that enables better management of plastics on land too. This can
only be achieved when global governance spans the entire plastics life cycle,
addressing product design and the entire supply chain. The plastic pollution problem
is bigger than ineffective and unsound waste management.

This report outlines suggested elements of a new global agreement to combat

plastic pollution. Importantly, the elements aim to engage governments, industry
and consumers by providing better tools for governments to regulate national
markets, global guidance for industry and incentives for consumers. In implementing
those elements, parties to the proposed agreement would approach fulfilment a
number of Sustainable Development Goals, particularly Goal 14 on life below water,
Goal 11 regarding sustainable cities and communities and Goal 12 on responsible

1. UNEA Res. 3/7, para 10

10
consumption and production. Parties would thereby also reduce the global risks of
non-renewable resource depletion, reduced food security, and the health risks of soil,
water and chemical pollution.

Approaches to a new agreement: holistic or filling gaps?

Existing global instruments, such as the Basel Convention, the Stockholm
Convention, the UN Law of the Sea Convention, the Convention on Biological
Diversity, Annex V of the International Convention for the Prevention of Pollution by
Ships (MARPOL) and the London Convention and the Protocol thereto, will be
complemented by the proposed new global agreement. Geographical gaps in the
current regional frameworks concerning land-based sources of marine pollution
(UNEP, 2017) can be addressed through a specific global agreement on plastics.

However, a new global agreement for plastics must go beyond simply closing the
gaps in the current global and regional law and policy framework. A comprehensive
and long-term governance strategy is needed to address prevention as a primary
approach and to ensure sustainable management of plastics throughout the value
2
chain. First, the existing framework’s weakness on upstream and midstream
activities must be addressed (see figure C) by providing robust national financial
mechanisms that improve downstream activities in all countries.

A global agreement can help countries address plastic pollution in upstream

activities, facilitating governments to enact necessary legislation and implement
effective measures. Countries can be provided with the tools to regulate the
products placed on their markets that will create a level playing field for industry
and governments, avoid disputes under the World Trade Organisation and assist in
regulating the growing online sales platform. Most importantly, by addressing the
issue at the design phase, all sources and pathways of marine plastic pollution can
be addressed. Through this life cycle value chain approach, downstream
management services would grow, as risks of exposure to international trade
fluctuations in secondary plastics would be reduced, and the economic stability of
and investment in downstream plastic waste management services would be
enhanced. This, in turn, will benefit those countries that suffer the impacts of
transboundary movement of marine plastic litter.

Thus, a life cycle management approach that goes beyond merely closing existing
governance gaps can more effectively measure the extent of plastic pollution,
including microplastics, and measure progress made at the global level in prevention
and mitigation. Commonly agreed targets and measures can help governments
implement national actions.

The design of a new global agreement

The design of a new global agreement will depend on the agreed objectives and
scope. This will, in turn, influence the design of the obligations parties must commit
to and how parties are expected to implement these obligations. Global discussions
have progressed from a need to reduce marine litter (downstream), to promoting
sustainable waste management in an attempt to achieve such reductions

2. The value chain refers to all business activities undertaken to create a product, including from extraction,
production and distribution to activities that again create value from the product at end-of-life.

11
(midstream), to targeting sources (upstream activities) in order to support
sustainable waste management and thereby prevent marine litter. These
approaches are reflected in Table A.

Table A: The three objectives assessed for the design of a new global agreement.

Objective Design possibilities and limitations

Reduction of marine Build on the Regional Seas Conventions and Action Plans framework.
litter – May have limited options for addressing source materials and design of
plastic products, including the elimination of residual waste across the full life
cycle.
– Tracking progress at the global level may prove challenging.

Sustainable waste Promote 3R waste hierarchy (reduce, reuse, recycle), including a reduction in
management the generation of wastes.
– Would facilitate a reduction in but not eliminate marine litter.
– Options to influence the design of products across the global value chain
may be limited.

Sustainable Address the full life cycle of plastics

consumption and – Would facilitate sustainable waste management and reduction of marine
production litter and microplastics.
– Reduces residual waste across the value chain.

The objectives listed in Table A were considered together with the request in the
Declaration adopted by the Nordic Council of Ministers for the Environment and
Climate Change, requesting that the entire life cycle of plastics be addressed by the
agreement. This led to the study focusing on an agreement that has the objective of
sustainable consumption and production across the life cycle of plastics in order to
achieve all three of these objectives in the long-term. The third objective has
therefore guided the elements outlined in this report.

Options for the design of a new global framework to govern plastic pollution is
presented though three approaches. These can be described simplistically, although
variations are possible, as:

1. a highly regulatory (top-down) approach;

2. a voluntary (bottom-up) mechanism; or
3. a hybrid formulation that combines the two approaches.

The proposed new global agreement is presented in this report as a framework

agreement that provides the legal basis for future development of more detailed
implementing instruments over time. A highly regulatory approach provides limited
flexibility in the selection of national implementation measures. In contrast, a
voluntary approach would not allow for the development of obligations that
countries would commit to. In this context, the hybrid approach is therefore favoured
in this report

The following table lays out how the hybrid approach engages societal actors in
plastics management throughout the life cycle of plastic products. It enables

12
management tools to be utilised by government, industry and consumers at all
points along the plastics value chain.

Table B: Summary of engagement of government, industry and consumers through a

new global agreement.

Governments Industry Consumers

– Tools to regulate domestic markets – Guidance on sustainability – Incentives to reduce, reuse,

– Tools to ensure transparency across objectives & criteria recycle
the value chain of products and – Confidence in a fair & – Penalties for waste and
materials transparent competitive litter
– Tools to develop partnerships with opportunity – Increased opportunity for
industry – Developing countries: – Potential cost savings sustainable income
• Assistance for development of based on performance generation
National Plastics Management Plans outcomes
• Assistance for development of
regulatory & market-based instruments
to reduce the financial & physical
burden of waste management

The building blocks of a new global agreement

Multilateral environmental agreements (MEAs) typically exhibit common structural
features, as illustrated in Figure A. These are usually blocks of provisions that serve
particular functions in the working of an MEA: general, management, supporting,
institutional, assessment and final provisions.

• General provisions elaborate on the agreement’s objective, principles and

strategic goals, scope and definitions or use of terms.
• Management provisions provide the key mechanisms and operational
commitments to be implemented by the parties and other partners in order to
achieve their objectives and goals.
• Supporting provisions enable implementation of the key mechanisms and
specific commitments, such as through advisory functions, international liaison,
capacity building, and technical and financial assistance, and education and
awareness raising.
• Institutional provisions set up the governing body, scientific and technical
bodies, and secretariat.
• Assessment provisions track progress towards the objective of the agreement
at the international and national levels through reporting (disclosure of
standardized information), monitoring and research, and review (third-party
verification).
• Final provisions describe the conditions for ratification and accession, entry into
force, dispute settlement, amendment and withdrawal from the agreement.

These typical MEA structural features have been adopted here for the proposed new
agreement on marine plastic litter and are illustrated in Figure A.

13
Figure A: The building blocks of an international agreement forming the focus of this
report.

The strategic goals of a new global agreement

The strategic goals of the new agreement can guide high-level targets to ensure
convergence of national efforts to eliminate leakage of plastics into the marine
environment. The following are suggested as four strategic goals:

1. Elimination of problematic and avoidable plastic products.

2. Sustainable management of all products.
3. Sustainable waste management.
4. Chemical hazard reduction.

These strategic goals have been chosen because their fulfilment would meet the
overall objective of the proposed agreement, i.e. long-term elimination of all
discharge of litter and microplastics to the ocean. Of necessity, they relate to the
full lifecycle of plastic products. They would be articulated in the general provisions
of the proposed agreement.

To be effective in reducing marine plastic pollution over the long-term, the strategic
goals of a new global agreement must aim to address all sectors and the full value
chain of plastics, upstream, midstream and downstream. Beginning with raw
material extraction, through all phases of the life cycle, to design, international
trade, microplastics and chemical additives, all with the intention of minimising
residual waste across all life cycle phases.

14
International sustainability criteria
The achievement of strategic goals can be facilitated through operational
implementation mechanisms. The fundamental and central operational
implementation mechanism proposed in this report is the formulation and adoption
of international sustainability criteria addressing the full life cycle of products. These
criteria would apply to economic activities along the value chain of plastics, to
incentivise reusability, repairability and recyclability of products. In other words,
economic activities are considered as ‘upstream’, ‘midstream’ and ‘downstream’ in
the context of the controlled flows of the plastics value chain (as illustrated in Figure
B). The following figure sets them out and identifies where the economic activities
relate to the proposed strategic goals and juxtaposes them with risks of plastic
pollution leaking into the environment.

Figure B: The value chain of plastics, indicating circular materials flows in green.

The activities within the value chain would be designed to prevent leakage, thereby
minimising the need for mitigation and removal (i.e. remediation).

The proposed new agreement’s international sustainability criteria would be like the
brain and nerve system guiding how its other implementation measures apply. They
would be formulated by the parties to the agreement, through open-ended technical
working groups, and would be supported by the development of related technical
standards, testing protocols and certification schemes. The obligation to formulate
and adopt international sustainability criteria would be situated in the management
provisions in the body of the proposed new agreement. The structure and processes
for the meetings of parties and for the open-ended technical working groups would
be prescribed in the part of the agreement on institutional provisions.

15
Two other core operational implementation mechanisms
Fundamental to achieving the objectives of any multilateral environmental
agreement is its implementation at the national level. The strategic goals could be
achieved through two additional core operational implementation mechanisms,
following the formulation and adoption of international sustainability criteria. These
mechanisms would be written into the management provisions in the body of the
proposed new agreement.

To implement the international sustainability criteria, parties to the agreement

might commit to:

• Develop National Plastics Management Plans (NPMPs) that aim to address the
main drivers of plastic pollution by helping countries to design a holistic and
comprehensive strategy to manage plastics throughout the life cycle. The plans
promote a bottom-up approach that provides flexibility at the national level for
setting targets, identifying measures and mobilizing resources, while ensuring
progression over time. NPMPs are submitted to the agreement and periodically
updated.
• Develop and agree International Sustainability Criteria under the new
agreement, to be fulfilled through National Plastics Sustainability Standards.
• Develop and fulfil National Plastics Sustainability Standards that can be
operationalized through the regulation of domestic markets in accordance with
the sustainability criteria and deployment of market-based instruments to
promote behaviour change by industry and consumers and provide funding
mechanisms for waste management services. These may be elaborated in
NPMPs.

Supporting measures
The strategic goals and core operational implementation mechanisms are supported
by measures addressing funding, sustainable remediation, education and awareness,
as well as research. A new global agreement can provide the platform for global
coordination to facilitate such measures.

Implementation of the proposed agreement could be supported by funding and

capacity building measures. These would be limited to technical assistance
comprising incremental costs in developing NPMPs, national sustainability standards
and national assessment and reporting.

16
Figure C: Linkages between implementation mechanisms, highlighting core global
commitments.

Assessment to measure progress

The proposed international agreement would set out National Information Sharing,
Monitoring and Reporting processes to collate technical information and
performance information in prescribed formats to measure national progress in
sustainable plastics management. These would be prescribed in the part of the
agreement on assessment of progress.

A mechanism for measuring progress is proposed with obligations for reporting to

understand performance and monitoring to assess bio-physical and socio-economic
impacts of actions. A periodic global review will help to aggregate national data to
determine global progress, including identifying best practices and possible
implementation gaps, helping to progressively scale up action. Furthermore, national
reviews can provide feed-back on progress for individual countries to inform the
future development of these NPMPs.

Institutional elements
The development of necessary tools and guidelines and evaluation of progress will
require establishment of a governing body that meets at periodic intervals and is
supported by a secretariat. Furthermore, a subsidiary scientific body could help to
address needs for scientific and technical expertise, and economic and market
knowledge, in particular for preparation of necessary guidelines/standards to
facilitate implementation and methodologies for measuring progress.

17
Timeframes
Setting common global timeframes promotes progress towards goals. In the process
of preparation and negotiation of the proposed new agreement, countries would
commit to cooperate in the development of international sustainability criteria to be
included in the text of the agreement, which can then be further developed by
subsidiary bodies into performance outcomes, guidelines and best environmental
practices that address the life cycle of plastics.

Once this planning phase is complete, countries then have an obligation to develop
National Plastics Management Plans (NPMPs) and National Plastics Sustainability
Standards. These standards can be given effect within national regulatory and
market-based frameworks and outlined in NPMPs. Assistance can be provided to
those countries in need during this phase. National plans and standards are part of
the implementation of the new agreement, after it comes into force.

Monitoring and reporting frameworks are then used on rolling cycles to enable
tracking of global progress. National reporting according to the agreed global
standards could lead into national reviews, aggregated to a global review which
ultimately allows for the identification of best practices and possible
implementation gaps where facilitation can be provided.

Figure D: Overview of the primary phases of a new global agreement.

Moving to the next step

The report outlines a new conceptual approach to a global agreement. This
approach is based on the development of international sustainability criteria for
plastics and additives that are formulated in general terms and adopted during the
process of negotiation of the agreement. They would be gradually elaborated in
specific terms by technical working groups later and fulfilled through the

18
development of national plastics sustainability management plans and national
plastics standards.

The concepts presented in this study will require further discussion to take a
potential new global agreement to the next level. A number of fora are tackling the
issue of plastic pollution may consider the concepts presented here within the
contexts of their mandates.

19
4.8–12.7 million tons of plastic enter the ocean each year.
Photo: Unsplash.com

1. Introduction

Plastics have generated several benefits for society and the environment. Plastic
pollution, however, has become a persistent and widespread challenge. To date, 6.3
billion metric tons of plastic waste has been generated, from which only 9% has
been recycled, 12% incinerated and 79% accumulated in landfills or disposed in the
natural environment (Geyer et al., 2017). Consequently, plastics are found in
disturbing quantities in the ocean, air, soil and freshwater resources, even in the
most remote and pristine areas of the world.

An estimated 4.8–12.7 million metric tons of plastic waste enters the oceans each
year from land-based sources alone (Jambeck et al., 2015). The problem of plastic
pollution in the ocean is undoubtedly a marine problem that requires a land-based
solution. It is inherently linked to unsustainable consumption and production
patterns and the inability of waste management infrastructure to keep pace with
our rate of waste generation. Estimates show that if the current consumption
patterns and waste management practices continue, then by 2050 there will be an
estimated 12 billion metric tons of plastic waste in landfills or the natural
environment (Geyer et al., 2017).

Microplastics is an emerging issue of global concern (Galgani et al., 2017) that has
presented challenges in understanding the sources, pathways and impacts thereof,
but also in identifying effective responses. Mitigation and removal options are costly
and such activities are not easily implemented in many countries. No international
agreement addresses the issue of primary or secondary microplastics. Through a life
cycle approach that aims to eliminate residual waste and promote product
sustainability criteria, the intentional addition of primary microplastics and abrasion
of products leading to the leakage of secondary microplastics can be prevented
globally.

Plastics and their chemical additives are integrated in all areas of our daily lives.
Thus, a systematic and holistic global approach is needed to deal with plastic
pollution. In 2017, an assessment of the effectiveness of relevant international
governance strategies and approaches was presented to the third session of the
United Nations Environment Assembly (UNEA) that highlights key gaps in

20
international governance. These gaps include the lack of an institution whose
mandate focuses on the coordination of existing efforts, and gaps in the
development of legally binding instruments in key regions to manage marine
pollution originating from land. In addition, limited industry due diligence and lack of
global design standards to mitigate plastic pollution (including microplastics), as
highlighted in the report, support the need for a global response that addresses
more than waste management. In light of current trajectories, a business-as-usual
approach under current governance models will be grossly inadequate and, indeed,
harmful to ecosystems and the services they provide, as well as social well-being and
economic losses to multiple sectors.

The report aims to respond to the unprecedented concern of plastic pollution across
academic and policy spheres as well as civil society. The report builds on the premise
that incremental and voluntary approaches are necessary but insufficient. A
systemic change spanning the life cycle of plastics is critical but can only be achieved
when the global governance of plastics matches the urgency, magnitude and
complexity of the challenge.

This report exists within an existing policy landscape and contributes to global
discussions in which the international community has agreed to certain principles,
approaches and decisions regarding the prevention of pollution by plastics. Since
2014, UNEA has in its four consecutive meetings adopted resolutions that recognize
the issue of marine plastic litter and microplastics and the efforts underway, while
emphasizing the urgent need for greater progress.

In 2017, the third session of the UN Environment Assembly agreed to the long-term
elimination of all discharge of litter and microplastics into the ocean and established
an intersessional Ad Hoc Open-Ended Expert Group on Marine Litter and
Microplastics to consider, inter alia, a stronger governance response at the global
3
level . These intersessional meetings have discussed the sources, response options,
barriers to implementation and enabling mechanisms, amongst others, and will
provide input to the fifth session of UNEA.

The agreed vision of UNEA for the long-term elimination of all discharge of litter and
microplastics to the ocean builds on and complements Target 14.1 of the 2030
Agenda on Sustainable Development that calls for preventing and significantly
reducing marine pollution of all kinds, particularly from land-based activities, by
2025.

1.1 Objective
In April 2019, the Nordic Council of Ministers adopted a Declaration that calls for the
development of a global agreement to more effectively and comprehensively deal
with marine plastic litter and microplastics (NCM, 2019). The objective of this report
is to lay out possible elements and approaches of a proposed new global agreement
in delivery of paragraph 9 of the declaration.

The report outlines a framework agreement that provides the legal basis for future
development of enabling instruments over time. This new global agreement can set
out various obligations that parties commit to implementing. Ultimately, the report

3. UNEA Res. 3/7, para 10

21
aims to show how an international agreement can be designed to effectively
stimulate needed action at all levels to combat plastic pollution, benefit the climate
and close the loop of material flows by harnessing the collective effort of nations.
Above all, the suggested elements of a new global agreement to combat plastic
pollution aims to benefit governments, industry and civil society. Table 1 highlights
some of the potential benefits.

Table 1: Benefits of a new global agreement for government, industry and civil
society.

Governments Industry Civil Society

– Tools to regulate domestic – Guidance on sustainability – Sustainable environment for

markets objectives & criteria current & future generations
– Tools to develop partnerships – Confidence in a fair & – Preservation of ecosystem
with industry transparent competitive services
–Developing countries: opportunity – Reduced risk from chemical
• Assistance for development of – Potential cost savings based on hazard
National Plastics Management performance outcomes – Reduced risk from mismanaged
Plans waste-related disease
• Assistance for development of – Increased opportunity for
regulatory & market-based sustainable income generation
instruments to reduce the
financial & physical burden of
waste management

The report aims inform the UNEA process and other forthcoming meetings on
managing and preventing pollution by plastics. Meetings of parties to various
relevant instruments and partnerships aiming to address the issue of plastic
pollution could also consider the measures outlined in this report as possible
response options within the mandate of these instruments.

1.2 Process and engagement

The standard elements employed in the design of existing multilateral agreements
are tailored to the specific context of plastic pollution in this report. Here, principles,
approaches and text agreed on within resolutions adopted for marine plastic litter
and microplastics and Ad Hoc Open-Ended Expert Group on Marine Litter and
Microplastics (AHEG) meeting documents form a basis for elements, where
applicable. A summary of text agreed under the UNEA forum relevant to plastic
pollution is collated in Annex 4.

The proposals that will be presented aim to incorporate a wide range of stakeholder
contributions in order to make the proposals as real-world as possible, but still
providing a bold life cycle approach that aims for a far-reaching framework to deal
with a broad range of issues and applications, as well as emerging issues related to
marine plastic litter and microplastics. The methodology consists of literature
review, followed by the organization of two technical expert workshops to inform

22
drafting. In addition, the first draft of the report was submitted for review for select
experts in global plastics governance.

1.3 Use of terms

The following explanation of terms used in this report is provided for the purposes of
interpretation of discussions presented in the report. Where appropriate, commonly
used definitions are provided from the literature.

Abrasion – the release of secondary microplastics during the intended use of a

product

Avoidable or unnecessary plastic products – can currently be reduced or substituted

with non-plastic fit-for-purpose alternatives and/or can be eliminated entirely
without compromising the consumer’s access to the product, inability to meet health
4
or safety regulations, or causing undesirable environmental outcomes (see also
‘problematic plastic products’).

Consumer – any purchaser of plastic items (complete products, parts thereof or

feedstocks), including manufacturers, industry sectors and end-users.

Consumption – the action of using up a resource, product or component thereof,

both directly or indirectly.

Environmentally sustainable – environmental resources are protected and

maintained for current and future generations including by minimising negative
human impact.

Environmentally sound management (ESM) – as per the Basel Convention, “taking

all practicable steps to ensure that hazardous wastes or other wastes are managed
in a manner which will protect human health and the environment against the
adverse effects which may result from such wastes.”

Extended Producer Responsibility (EPR) – a policy approach under which producers

are given a significant responsibility – financial and/or physical – for the treatment
5
or disposal of post-consumer products.

Downcycle – refer to ‘repurpose.’

Leakage – littering, mismanaged plastic waste, and releases of microplastics during

production, product use and after disposal.

Market-based instruments (MBIs) – binding and voluntary policy instruments that

use markets, price, and other economic variables to provide incentives for polluters
to reduce or eliminate negative environmental externalities.

Examples include environmentally related taxes, charges and subsidies, deposit-

refund systems, environmental labelling laws, licenses, and Extended Producer
6
Responsibility schemes.

Post-Consumer Resin (PCR) – plastic waste that has been recycled ready for use in

4. Adapted from Australian Packaging Covenant Organisation (APCO), 2019. Single-Use, Problematic and
Unnecessary Plastic Packaging. Available at: www.packagingcovenant.org.au/documents/item/3183.
5. https://www.oecd.org/env/tools-evaluation/extendedproducerresponsibility.htm
6. Wikipedia, modified.

23
new products.

Problematic plastic products – products that are currently 1) Difficult to collect/

recover for reuse, recycling or composting purposes; or, 2) A material that hinders,
disrupts or obstructs opportunities to recover other materials or resources; or 3) A
significant contribution to the plastic litter problem; or 4) Made using, manufactured
with, contains or has contained hazardous chemicals or materials that pose a
significant risk to human health or the environment. (This type of plastic product
may not be considered problematic should emerging technologies result in effective
collection/recovery for reuse, recycling or composting purposes, provided it can be
7
removed from the environment (see also ‘avoidable or unnecessary plastic products’.

Recycle – the reprocessing of the waste materials to enable use as per the original
purpose of the original material.

Repurpose – use at the end of original purpose for a different purpose, e.g. energy
creation, incorporation into non-related products).

Reuse – a product or packaging that has been conceived and designed to

accomplish, within its lifecycle, a certain number of trips, rotations, or uses for the
same purpose for which it was conceived, without any physical or material change
beyond cleaning and labelling and excluding the use of waste. A program must exist
for collecting the used product or packaging and reusing it, or facilities or products
8
exist that allow the purchaser to reuse the product or package.

Primary Packaging – Packaging that contains the finished or final products,

9
sometimes called retail or consumer packaging.

Secondary packaging – Packaging additional to the primary packaging and that is

used for protection and collation of individual units during storage, transport and
10
distribution.

Sustainable waste management – waste management systems that are

environmentally sound, effective, autonomous and financed long-term from
domestic sources, including market-based instruments.

Tertiary packaging – Outer packaging, including pallets, slip sheets, stretch wrap,
strapping any labels, used for the shipment and distribution of goods and is rarely
11
seen by consumers.

Value chain – all business activities undertaken to create a product, including from
extraction, production and distribution to activities that again create value from the
product at end-of-life.

Viable end-markets – sustainable and profitable reprocessing of an end-of-life

product, particularly collected plastic waste.

7. Adapted from Australian Packaging Covenant Organisation (APCO), 2019. Single-Use, Problematic and
Unnecessary Plastic Packaging. Available at: www.packagingcovenant.org.au/documents/item/3183.
8. Adapted from ISO 14021:2016, Environmental labels and declarations—Self-declared environmental claims
(Type II environmental labelling).
9. http://www.wrap.org.uk/sites/files/wrap/Definitions.pdf
10. http://www.wrap.org.uk/sites/files/wrap/Definitions.pdf
11. http://www.wrap.org.uk/sites/files/wrap/Definitions.pdf

24
The world currently produces 400 million tons of plastics each year.
Photo: Unsplash.com

2. Why a global agreement on

plastic pollution

Marine plastic pollution is recognised globally as a risk to marine ecosystems and

biodiversity (UNEP, 2014). The issues caused by the pollutant, such as ingestion and
entanglement by species spanning the marine food web, habitat destruction,
impaired reproduction of commercial fish stocks (risking food security) and the
potential transfer of contaminants to humans (GESAMP, 2015), have raised the
profile of marine pollution in general within the public sector as well as with
government authorities. Marine plastic pollution is also increasingly recognised as a
risk to the marine economies of many nations (McIlgorm et al., 2020). It undermines
the livelihoods of subsistence and small-scale fishing communities, tourism
operators and aquaculture facilities, amongst others.

The issue of marine plastic pollution highlights the policy and market failures of
waste management more generally (UNEP, 2017). For plastics, these failures are
driven by a global value chain grounded on unsound product design that, in turn,
leads to low value for waste (Ocean Conservancy, 2015). The result is poor collection
rates at the end of a product’s life due to insufficient end-markets for plastic waste,
which increases the opportunity for such waste to enter the marine environment.

Marine plastic pollution is essentially a symptom of a broad and complex problem.

The downstream impacts on marine ecosystems and biodiversity are significant.
Should we continue efforts to address the issue through the lens of the marine
environment, we risk overlooking the root causes on land. These causes are 1) wide-
ranging, 2) are fundamentally linked to our economic models, 3) are deep-rooted in
our lifestyles, and 4) are transboundary. From the necessary services plastics provide
to society to our consumption of avoidable short-lived products, the resulting
pollution from the various life cycle processes of plastics contribute to the global
risks of non-renewable resource depletion, reduced food security and intensified
climate change. In addition, air, soil, water and chemical pollution resulting from
production, manufacture, use and final treatment processes can have far-reaching
consequences on human and environmental health.

25
The World Bank estimates that globally 37% of solid waste generated is dumped or
disposed of in landfill, 33% ends up in open dumps, 19% is recycled or composted and
11% is incinerated (World Bank, 2018). By diverting waste from landfill for recycling,
additional jobs are created, greenhouse gas emissions are reduced and energy
12
efficiency is achieved (The Recycling Partnership, 2020) . Thus, the use of recycled
plastic content in place of virgin content reduces the need for non-renewable
resources. These are global concerns requiring urgent coordinated action.

Residual waste is the fraction that remains after all recyclable materials have been
recovered. This includes residuals from industry (plastics, construction and
demolition, agriculture, shipping, etc.), commercial enterprises, public sector and
households, as well as chemical residues resulting from the production of plastics
through to recycling processes. Residual wastes are commonly sent to landfill or
incinerated. Where waste management services are inadequate, only about 20% of
the municipal plastic waste stream has enough value to incentivize waste pickers to
collect it, thus 80% can be regarded as residual waste and is likely to be dumped,
buried or open-burned (Ocean Conservancy, 2015). Low residual value of plastic
waste is a key driver of leakage and should be centrally acknowledged in the design
of the agreement, including goal setting and activities.

A new global agreement provides the opportunity to develop international

sustainability objectives and criteria that define the desired performance outcomes
for plastic products and associated processes across the life cycle and the global
value chain. The Technical Barriers to Trade (TBT) Agreement of the World Trade
Organization (WTO) strongly encourages basing national regulations on relevant
international standards, thus reducing the risk of disputes under the WTO when
regulating products placed on the domestic market and supporting the need for
developing plastic sustainability criteria at the global level.

2.1 Positioning the elements within the current global policy

framework
A new global agreement to combat plastic pollution must complement the existing
policy framework without duplicating efforts already underway. The 2017 UNEP
report titled Combating marine plastic litter and microplastics: An assessment of
the effectiveness of relevant international, regional and subregional governance
strategies and approaches (UNEP, 2017) identified over a dozen gaps and challenges
in the existing frameworks on marine plastic litter and microplastics. These can be
summarised in three clusters:

1. Coordination: Lack of an institution whose mandate focuses on coordination of

existing efforts and managing the issue upstream.
2. Management: Lack of globally binding standards to mitigate plastic pollution
particularly from land-based sources, including design of products
3. Assessment: Lack of global standards for national monitoring and reporting, as
well as, lack of data on sources and extent of plastics environment and on
health and ecosystem risks

12. As per the report, in the U.S. alone 37.4 million tons of waste is available to be recycled, of which 20 million
tons are thrown in the trash due to lack of access and participation. If these 20 million tons were recycled, it
would generate 370,000 full-time equivalent jobs, reduce U.S. greenhouse gas emissions by 96 million metric
tons of carbon dioxide equivalent, conserve an annual energy equivalent of 154 million barrels of oil and
achieve the equivalent of taking more than 20 million cars off U.S. highways.

26
Consequently, the gaps in the current governance frameworks provide a fragmented
and inefficient approach to address marine plastic litter and microplastics. Binding
international instruments have primarily focused on sea-based sources of marine
plastic litter through Annex V of the International Convention for the Prevention of
Pollution by Ships (MARPOL) and the London Convention and Protocol thereto. This
is despite indications that the majority of marine plastic pollution originates from
land-based activities. In addition, the management of chemicals in plastic products
and associated processes must be strengthened, complementing the Stockholm
Convention on Persistent Organic Pollutants (Stockholm Convention) and the
Strategic Approach to International Chemicals Management (SAICM).

The UNEP report of 2017 presented three response options at the global level. A new
globally harmonised approach was suggested as one of two options that would
enable progress at the global level. This report further explores the third option
outlined in the 2017 UNEP report for a new global architecture with a multilayered
governance approach. To this end, this report moves beyond the prevention of
marine plastic litter and microplastics to focus on plastics across their life cycle, thus
encompassing all sources of plastic pollution and chemical additives in all affected
environmental compartments, recognising that these are all potential pathways to
the marine environment.

2.1.1 Complementing existing international legal and policy frameworks

In recent years, heightened understanding and awareness of plastic pollution has

prompted many international organizations to take action to prevent the
uncontrolled spread of plastics in the environment.

The Basel Convention

In May 2019, the Conference of Parties (COP) to the Basel Convention adopted
amendments that require exporting countries to obtain prior informed consent from
the importing country before exporting hazardous plastic waste and plastic waste
13
that requires special consideration.

Ensuring complementarity with the Basel Convention, in particular Article 4 (para 2),
14
is important including the use of principles and definitions. Where the principle of
15
proximity as defined in the Basel Convention is not feasible due to a lack of scale or
available technology, the trade of plastic by-products (scrap) and wastes must be
managed in accordance with multilateral environmental agreements (MEAs) and
other international and regional instruments (guidelines, best practices, code of
practice, etc.) and in accordance with this agreement. The design of a new global
agreement will need to consider the developments under the Basel Convention,
including the voluntary Partnership on Plastic Waste.

13. BC-14/12: Amendments to Annexes II, VIII and IX to the Basel Convention.
14. Basel Convention, Article 4, para 2: Each Party shall take the appropriate measures to: (a) Ensure that the
generation of hazardous wastes and other wastes within it is reduced to a minimum, taking into account
social, technological and economic aspects.
15. Basel Convention, Article 4, para 2: b) Ensure the availability of adequate disposal facilities, for the
environmentally sound management of hazardous wastes and other wastes, that shall be located, to the
extent possible, within it, whatever the place of their disposal; (d) Ensure that the transboundary movement
of hazardous wastes and other wastes is reduced to the minimum consistent with the environmentally sound
and efficient management of such wastes.

27
The UN Convention on the Law of the Sea

As an overarching framework convention, the UN Convention on the Law of the Sea

(UNCLOS) provides a general obligation for all countries to protect and preserve the
marine environment (Article 192). This has been recognised as customary
international law and all countries, whether party to the Convention or not, must
comply to the best of their ability (Birnie et al., 2009). The new global agreement as
proposed in this report will complement this obligation, as well as the following:

• Article 207 - Pollution from land-based sources,

• Article 208 - Pollution from seabed activities subject to national jurisdiction,
• Article 210 - Pollution by dumping,
• Article 211 - Pollution from vessels, and
• Article 212 - Pollution from or through the atmosphere.

The Stockholm Convention on Persistent Organic Pollutants

By taking a whole life cycle approach, including associated chemicals and waste, a
new global agreement also complements the Stockholm Convention through long-
term prevention of toxins re-entering the market via recycling and reuse processes
(Article 6d(iii)). A new global agreement must therefore aim to close these gaps
where possible, while complementing relevant measures undertaken within the
mandate of the Stockholm Convention.

The Convention on Biological Diversity (CBD)

The Convention on Biological Diversity (CBD) has for a number of years considered
plastic pollution as a risk to species and habitats and the ecosystems of which they
form a part. The Zero draft of the post-2020 global biodiversity framework has
outlined possible targets for reducing pollution by plastic waste by at least 50% by
2030 (CBD, 2020). The measures proposed in this report will complement efforts by
Parties to the CBD in meeting any targets agreed for reducing pollution by plastic
waste.

MARPOL

Sea-based and vessel sources of marine plastic pollution are regulated globally
under MARPOL Annex V and the London Convention and the Protocol thereto.
Should MARPOL Annex V be complied with in full, all operational wastes generated
while at sea will be delivered to port reception facilities for disposal. In addition, the
London Convention and Protocol ban any disposal of plastic wastes at sea or marine
internal waters. These instruments, including the International Maritime
Organization’s (IMO) Action Plan to Address Marine Plastic Litter from Ships, will be
complemented if residual wastes are minimised and plastic wastes have potential
end-markets.

By stimulating the reuse and repairability of products, as well as end-markets for

the recycling of plastic wastes, the release of greenhouse gases can be reduced,
assisting in meeting Paris Agreement targets and achieving Sustainable
Development Goal (SDG) 13 on climate action. A number of additional SDG targets

28
can also be complemented as highlighted in Annex 6, in particular those targeting
responsible consumption and production (SDG 12), sustainable cities and
communities (SDG 11), clean water and sanitation (SDG 6) and good health well-
being (SDG3), amongst others.

2.1.2 Complementing regional legal and policy frameworks

The Regional Seas Conventions and Action Plans have focused on marine litter for
many years. A new global agreement can complement those Regional Seas that
have developed marine litter action plans as well as binding conventions and
protocols for prevention of marine pollution from land-based sources. The experience
gained in monitoring, reporting, awareness-raising and developing action plans and
guidelines, amongst others, must be built on. In this way, the Regional Seas
Conventions and Action Plans can assist in informing best practices and facilitate
monitoring.

The Regional Seas Conventions and Action Plans and other regional platforms, such
as regional nodes for the Global Partnership on Marine Litter (GPML) and the Basel
16
Convention Regional and Coordinating Centres , can also be used to assist countries
in developing National Plastics Management Plans and delivering on obligations
under the new agreement, including capacity building, reporting and research
requirements, and prevent duplication of effort in this regard.

2.2 How a new agreement can add value to existing frameworks

A new global agreement for plastics must go beyond simply closing the gaps in the
current international policy framework. A more comprehensive and long-term
governance strategy is needed to address prevention as a primary approach but also
ensure sustainable management of plastics throughout the value chain. Existing
mechanisms are particularly weak on upstream and midstream activities that will
need to be targeted, coupled with robust national financial mechanisms to improve
downstream activities in all countries. By providing political and economic stability to
downstream activities, the risk of exposure from international trade fluctuations in
secondary plastics can be reduced and investment in these services enhanced.

A global agreement will be particularly important in helping countries to address

plastic pollution in upstream activities, facilitating governments to enact necessary
legislation and implement effective measures. This, in turn, will benefit those
countries that suffer the impacts of transboundary movement of marine plastic
litter. Expanding the policy landscape beyond the marine litter focus will help to
address the problem from land-based sources, without focusing only on the sinks.

A global agreement can provide countries with the tools to regulate the products
placed on their markets that will create a level playing field for industry and
governments, avoid disputes under the WTO and assist in regulating the growing
online sales platform. Most importantly, by addressing the issue at the design phase,
all sources and pathways of marine plastic pollution can be addressed.

Thus, by going beyond merely closing existing governance gaps, a common agreed-

16. See http://www.basel.int/?tabid=2334

29
upon framework can more effectively measure the extent of the plastic pollution and
the progress at the global level in prevention and mitigation. Commonly agreed
targets and measures can help governments implement national actions.

30
Waste pickers often face social marginalization, low living and working conditions,
and are subject to vector-borne diseases.
Photo: Unsplash.com

3. Possible objectives and

approaches for a new global
agreement

A core motivation for the development of a new global agreement is to address the
environmental issues resulting from unsustainable plastic use and mismanaged
plastic waste. The primary objective of an agreement would be to drive the strategic
goals, priority actions and monitoring requirements. This, in turn, would influence to
what degree the different life cycle phases would be addressed and what existing or
new institutional arrangements are best suited. These approaches are summarised
in Table 2 with reflections on the strengths and weaknesses of each approach.

3.1 Three approaches for objective and scope of a new

agreement
When considering the possible primary objective of a new legally binding agreement,
three broad objectives have been reviewed. These are:

1. Reduction of marine plastic litter,

2. Sustainable waste management, or
3. Sustainable consumption and production (SCP) across the life cycle of plastics.

Although the above are not mutually exclusive, it is important to differentiate how
defining the primary objective may influence the scope of an agreement. This will
also guide discussion on where the authority for a new agreement may come from
and which existing institutions are best suited to manage particular elements of
these approaches. In effect, the three approaches build on each other, with the third
approach incorporating SCP principles as well as those elements that would have
been included in a marine litter approach or a waste management approach.
Because of this, and because the Declaration of the Nordic Ministers for the

31
Environment and Climate requested a new agreement provide a life cycle approach
to the issue of marine plastic litter and microplastics, this report focuses on the third
approach of sustainable consumption and production as the most appropriate
holistic and long-term option.

A mandate of 1) reducing marine plastic litter may limit options for eliminating
waste across the life cycle of plastics, particularly upstream activities. Primary
activities are likely to focus on monitoring activities within the coastal and marine
zones, with limited ability to address manufacturing processes at the global level in a
harmonised manner.

Should the mandate be 2) sustainable waste management, it is unrealistic for a new

global agreement to include measures and funding that target greater access to and
technically enhanced waste management practices alone. This is, in part, because
calculating the costs of addressing the necessary requirements to bring waste
management services in all countries to an acceptable standard is challenging. In
addition, a financial mechanism attached to a new agreement would likely not raise
sufficient funds to cover these costs.

A new global agreement must consider the broader challenges that underpin the
processes leading to leakage of plastics into the environment. All processes and
relevant sectors throughout the life cycle of plastics must be addressed within the
possibilities of an MEA. Therefore, a mandate of 3) sustainable consumption and
production of plastics, incorporating a life cycle approach and resource efficiency is
key.

32
Table 2: Alternate approaches for a global agreement to address land-based sources in relation to the life cycle of
plastics.

Marine litter Waste management Sustainable consumption &

Approach
production, full life cycle of plastics

Reduce leakage into the marine Reduce the generation of wastes to Minimise residual waste across life
environment to prevent harm to a minimum and ensure the cycle of plastics by implementing all
marine ecosystems and the human availability of adequate disposal principles of circular economy, based
Objective
activities that depend directly or facilities within the country that on design for recycling and reuse.
indirectly on marine ecosystem generated the waste (Basel
services. Convention)

– Prevent leakage into marine – Elimination of problematic &

environment from land- & sea-based avoidable plastic products.
sources – Sustainable management of
– Harmonised monitoring & essential products.
– Reduction of waste generation
assessment of coastal & marine – Sustainable waste management.
Strategic goals – Sustainable waste management
zones – Chemical hazard reduction.
– Proximity of waste management
– Environmentally sound removal
and disposal of marine litter
– Enhance knowledge, education &
awarenes

– Capacity building for appropriate – Improve collection rate (land- & – Industry compliance with product
national policies, legal instruments sea-based) sustainability criteria, including use
and institutional arrangements – Improve sorting & contamination of additives of concern
– Monitor impacts marine life and rate – Reduction in residual waste across
components of the marine – Reduction of waste generated life cycle
environment, coastal zone, marine – Sustainable reuse of products – National adoption of appropriate
compartments to assess – Sustainable recycling policies, regulations & market-based
Priority actions & effectiveness, incl. developing – Sustainable disposal of land- and instruments
monitoring indicators & reporting standards sea-based sources of waste – National inventories to track
– Determine baselines for beach – Eliminate unsustainable practices progress at national and global level
litter (landfill, dumping, etc.)
– Identification of sources & – Tracking of the above & additives
pathways Sharing of best practices of concern
Coordination with IMO, fisheries
bodies and other marine industry
sectors

Downstream, restoration Midstream, downstream Upstream, midstream &

Life cycle phases
downstream

UNCLOS, Regional Seas. Basel Convention Existing or new global body

The regional approach promoted in (187 parties)
UNCLOS is given effect through the
adoption of 18 Regional Seas,
Possible Institutional comprising of more than 143
arrangements countries.

CBD measures could focus on

environmentally sustainable
restoration activities (Art. 8(f)).

33
 Sustainable consumption &
Approach Marine litter Waste management
production, full life cycle of plastics

Existing geographical gaps do not

provide for a robust global response.
The high number of independent The Basel Convention is limited to
Regional Seas Programmes and the downstream measures, focusing on
variability of their resources transboundary movements of
Precedents of international
capability and performance could waste, with some articles that may
agreements that address life cycle
create challenges for coordination allow for expansion to upstream and
of materials are limited. This
and harmonization of efforts to midstream measures. A full life cycle
presents both a challenge but also
address upstream activities. approach focusing on upstream
an opportunity to agree on global
Weaknesses measures may be questionable.
sustainability objectives and criteria
Tracking progress at the global level
across the value-chain, ensuring a
will be difficult. Limited options for Difficult to determine financial
rapid transition to a closed material
addressing manufacturing & resources required to assist
cycle and the elimination of residual
eliminating waste across the life developing countries.
waste and leakage.
cycle of plastics.
The Basel Convention does not have
Primary activities are likely to focus a financial mechanism.
on monitoring activities within the
coastal and marine zones.

Nine of the Regional Seas have The agreement could benefit from This provides an opportunity to
adopted protocols related to land- existing Rules of Procedure and address plastic pollution at its
based sources of pollution (of which other agreed modalities of the Basel source, focusing on production and
four are not yet in force), which Convention. redesign of plastics, towards
could be complemented with elimination of residual waste.
adoption of regional agreements to Near-universal membership.
address geographical gaps. The agreement could be negotiated
The joint Secretariat of the Basel, as a framework agreement in a
Rotterdam & Stockholm relatively short time with
Conventions (BRS) and physical implementation measures and
proximity to the SAICM Secretariat product sustainability criteria
could help to enhance a more specified in articles, aiming for later
coherent approach to addressing development of more detailed
Strengths plastic polymers and chemical annexes and guidelines.
additives.
The agreement could have broad
The Stockholm Convention will also scope, yet cooperation and
play an integral role in eliminating coordination with existing
the use of POPs (persistent organic agreements could be ensured with
pollutants) in manufacturing, as well the adoption of memorandums of
as the reintroduction of POPs understanding or joint work plans.
through reuse and recycling.
A holistic agreement could help to
minimize impacts of plastic pollution
across all environmental
compartments while helping to
reduce greenhouse gas emissions.

34
3.2 Design approaches: Binding, voluntary or hybrid obligations?
The design of a new global framework to govern plastic pollution considered three
approaches. These can be described simplistically, although variations are possible,
as 1) a highly regulatory (top-down) approach, 2) a voluntary (bottom-up)
mechanism, or 3) a hybrid formulation that combines the two approaches.

A new global framework for governing plastic pollution is presented in this report as
a framework agreement that provides the legal basis for future development of
enabling instruments over time. In this context, a voluntary approach would not
allow for the development of obligations that countries would commit to. It is
included in this section for reflection of the approaches considered in this study.

In contrast, a highly regulatory approach provides limited flexibility in the selection

of national implementation measures, and the hybrid approach is therefore favoured
in this report.

3.2.1 Binding – top-down

A negotiated agreement that sets a strong regulatory framework would include

mandatory obligations to take specific actions towards achieving the agreed
targets. A substantively-oriented agreement would able to address gaps in the
international regime. Obligations could include the development of national targets
that indicate progress towards the global targets as set in the agreement.
Monitoring and reporting procedures would be according to fixed indicators. Limited
discretion is given to governments on how to meet these obligations.

3.2.2 Voluntary

A global framework that employs only voluntary mechanisms would allow

governments to decide on how much action they wish to take and what kind of
action that would include. Environmental, social and economic goals would be
agreed and adopted but compliance mechanisms would not be in place beyond
voluntary reporting by countries.

3.2.3 Binding-voluntary hybrid

A hybrid framework that combines elements from a binding agreement and a

voluntary framework would set minimum targets and outcomes paired with
procedural requirements e.g. for submitting national action plans or national
reports. Governments would then have some discretion as to how they would
achieve these outcomes and requirements but would need to provide a minimum
level of reporting on specified activities.

Table 3 provides a summary of the high-level elements and the strengths and
weaknesses of the three design approaches for a new global agreement.

35
Table 3: Summary of obligations under the three design approaches for a new global agreement.

Binding top-down Voluntary bottom-up Binding-voluntary hybrid

Main Elements – Binding agreement – Voluntary framework – Binding agreement

– Detailed targets, standards & – High-level goals adopted – High-level goals defined in
measures negotiated & defined in the – Self-defined national targets agreement and set by subsidiary
agreement & implementing – Selection of possible measures of bodies
instruments by subsidiary bodies. implementation suggested – Self-defined national targets
– Measures of implementation defined. – Measures of implementation loosely
defined.

Main operational – Elements of National Action Plans – Elements for National Action Plans – Elements of National Action Plans
implementation are defined may be loosely defined suggested
mechanisms – Strict reporting according to defined – Reporting format & indicators may – Reporting format & indicators loosely
indicators be loosely defined defined

Strengths – Limited flexibility – High level of flexibility – Greater flexibility

– Global tracking of progress strongly – High feasibility – Some level of tracking towards
facilitated global progress
– Barriers to implementation and
areas of assistance clearly identified
– Legally on par with existing
agreements

Weaknesses – Feasibility weaker than in other – Global progress difficult to track – – Barriers to implementation and
options, since negotiations could be Barriers to implementation and areas areas of assistance less easily
politicized of assistance less easily identified – identified
Limited effect in guiding other relevant
conventions

Examples – Montreal Protocol – Honolulu Strategy – Paris Agreement

– London Protocol – Regional lLand-Based Sources (LBS) – Convention on Biological Diversity
– Minamata Convention Protocols
– IMO Energy Efficiency Design Index – Regional Marine Litter Action Plans
(EEDI)

*Adapted from Figure 3, The WTO Agreements Series. Technical Barriers to Trade. Available
at: https://www.wto.org/english/res_e/publications_e/tbttotrade_e.pdf

3.3 Complementing the TBT Agreement of the WTO

The WTO Technical Barriers to Trade (TBT) Agreement would need to be taken into
consideration, in particular, the WTO TBT Agreement Annex 3 Code of good practice
for the preparation, adoption and application of standards.

The TBT allows for countries to develop technical regulations, standards and
compliance assessment mechanisms when these are linked to national policies for
the protection of human health and safety, as well as the environment. However,
these must:

1. be non-discriminatory
2. not create unnecessary obstacles to trade
3. make use of international standards, and
4. be transparent.

Although the TBT Agreement may place constraints on countries when regulating

36
their domestic markets, there are elements that support the need for plastic
sustainability objectives and criteria at the global level. The TBT strongly encourages
basing national regulations on relevant international standards, thus reducing the
risk of disputes under the WTO.

“Article 2.5 of the TBT Agreement is also relevant to the discipline on avoiding
unnecessary barriers to trade, as it provides a form of “safe haven”; it states that if
a technical regulation is in accordance with a relevant international standard, it is
presumed (although this presumption can be challenged) not to create an
unnecessary obstacle to international trade. Thus, the international standard
provides a first line of defence against an eventual challenge that the measure is
creating an unnecessary barrier to trade.”

The TBT Agreement strongly encourages members to use "relevant" international

standards, guides or recommendations "as a basis" for their regulations and
standards (Articles 2.4, 5.4 and Annex 3, paragraph F of the TBT Agreement).

Source: The WTO Agreements Series. Technical Barriers to Trade.

The TBT Agreement differentiates between national measures, but supports the
approach identified in the new global agreement to develop product performance
objectives that are refined into design criteria which can, in turn, be included in
national regulations. The recently adopted Canadian Strategy on Zero Plastic Waste
lists Result Area 1 as “All plastic products are designed for greater durability, reuse
and recycling.”

In using standards to regulate imports, it has been noted that:

“one important avenue through which consistency can be achieved is by adherence
to international standards harmonising the requirements imposed on imported
products. Thus, the adoption of such international standards can be seen as another
example … of a coordinated green industrial policy, whereby many States decide to
raise the bar for product characteristics and processes so as to reflect their desirable
environmental and social implications” (PAGE, 2017).

37
Table 4: Linkages between national measures and the WTO’s TBT Agreement.

TBT Measure Description TBT Agreement Text

Technical regulations – Lays down product characteristics or their related Where technical regulations are required and relevant
processes and production methods international standards exist or their completion is
– Compliance is mandatory imminent, Members shall use them, or the relevant
– May address terminology, symbols, packaging, parts of them, as a basis for their technical regulations
marking and labelling requirements. except when such international standards or relevant
parts would be an ineffective or inappropriate means
for the fulfilment of the legitimate objectives pursued,
for instance because of fundamental climatic or
geographical factors or fundamental technological
problems. (Art. 2.4).

Standards – Approved by a recognized body responsible for Where international standards exist or their completion
establishing rules, guidelines or characteristics for is imminent, the standardizing body shall use them, or
products or related processes and production methods the relevant parts of them, as a basis for the standards
– Compliance is not mandatory it develops, except where such international standards
– May address terminology, symbols, packaging, or relevant parts would be ineffective or inappropriate,
marking and labelling requirements. for instance, because of an insufficient level of
protection or fundamental climatic or geographical
factors or fundamental technological problems. (Annex
3, para. F "substantive provisions").

Conformity assessment – Used, directly or indirectly, to determine that relevant In cases where a positive assurance is required that
procedures requirements in technical regulations or standards are products conform with technical regulations or
fulfilled standards, and relevant guides or recommendations
– Include procedures for sampling, testing and issued by international standardizing bodies exist or
inspection; evaluation, verification and assurance of their completion is imminent, Members shall ensure that
conformity; and registration, accreditation and central governments bodies use them, or the relevant
approval.* parts of them, as a basis for their conformity
assessment procedures, except where, as duly explained
upon request, such guides or recommendations or
relevant parts are inappropriate for the Members
concerned, for, inter alia, such reasons as: national
security requirements; the prevention of deceptive
practices; protection of human health or safety, animal
or plant life or health, or the environment; fundamental
climatic or other geographical factors; fundamental
technological or infrastructural problems. (Art. 5.4).

38
Low residual value of plastic waste is a key driver of leakage.
Photo: iStockphoto.com

4. Structuring a new global

agreement

This section sets out an overview of how a new marine plastics pollution control
agreement might be structured.

4.1 Elements of multilateral environmental agreements

Multilateral environmental agreements (MEAs) typically exhibit common structural
features. These are usually elements of provisions that serve particular functions in
the working of an MEA: general, management, supporting, institutional, assessment
and final provisions.

• General provisions elaborate on the agreement’s objective, principles and

strategic goals, scope and definitions or use of terms.
• Management provisions provide the key mechanisms and operational
commitments to be implemented by the parties and other partners in order to
achieve their objectives and goals.
• Supporting provisions enable implementation of the key mechanisms and
specific commitments, such as through advisory functions, international liaison,
and technical and financial assistance, and education and awareness raising
• Institutional provisions set up the governing body, scientific and technical
bodies, and secretariat.
• Assessment provisions track progress towards the objective of the agreement
at the international and national levels through reporting (disclosure of
standardized information), monitoring and research, and review (third-party
verification).
• Final provisions describe the conditions for ratification, entry into force,
amendment and withdrawal from the agreement.

These typical MEA structural features have been adopted here for the proposed new
agreement on marine plastic litter and are illustrated in Figure 1.

39
Figure 1: The main elements of an international agreement and main questions in
focus of this report.

4.2 Scope of the agreement

The introductory block of provisions would elaborate on the agreement’s objective,
principles and strategic goals, scope and definitions. So as to establish common
understanding and terminology, we begin here with the scope and definitions of
some terms.

The scope of application of a new agreement on plastic litter can be framed across
various dimensions, including types of materials, scale of litter, sources of plastics,
environmental pathways, environmental sinks, intervention points, and national
jurisdictions. Among these the most significant for consideration of negotiating
parties concerns whether holistically to include all life cycle phases of plastic litter,
from production to consumption and final treatment, whether directly or indirectly
targeted.

Materials and substances

Plastics is a generic term used in the case of polymeric materials that may contain
other substances to improve performance and/or reduce costs. On average, plastics
contain 93% plastic polymers and 7% chemical additives, necessitating their joint
consideration (Geyer et al., 2017).

Scale of litter

Plastic pollution manifests at different scales. Main categories of plastic debris

based on diameter are listed below (GESAMP, 2015):

• Megaplastics (>1m): fishing nets, boat hulls, plastic films from agriculture, etc.
• Macroplastics (<1m): plastic bags, buoys, balloons etc.
• Mesoplastics (<2.5 cm): bottle fragments, cigarette lighters, toys, toothbrushes,
etc.
• Microplastics (<5 mm size): all aquatic media, beverages, snow, atmosphere of

40
 cities etc.
• Nanoplastics (<0.1 mm size): all aquatic media

Sources of plastics

In terms of leakage to the oceans, two main categories of sources exist. These
include:

• Land-based sources: littering, extractive industries, inadequate wastewater

treatment, inadequate stormwater management, poor landfill management,
run-off from agriculture, and abrasion of plastic products during use, etc. (Gallo,
et al., 2018).
• Sea-based sources: fisheries, aquaculture, shipping (Gallo, et al., 2018), offshore
industry, discharge and dumping.

Pathways and sinks

Plastic pollution affects all environmental compartments. To this end consideration

could be given to the following pathways and sinks:

• Marine plastics
• Freshwater plastics
• Terrestrial plastics
• Atmospheric plastics

Scope of measures

The value chain offers several points at which regulatory interventions can be
considered. The following division provides a useful reference for consideration:

• Upstream: raw materials extraction and production of plastic pellets

• Midstream: manufacturing and consumption of plastic products
• Downstream: waste management of plastics, including trade

Geographical scope

The proposed agreement should apply globally, as plastic litter travels everywhere.
Thus, it should apply to areas within national jurisdiction, areas beyond national
jurisdiction, such as the high seas and Antarctica. Where existing instruments exist,
these should be complemented by the agreement. For the purposes of implementing
an agreement on marine plastic pollution, the national relevant jurisdiction of a
country includes its land and full maritime jurisdiction, i.e. to the limits of the
exclusive economic zone in the continental shelf, as well as its vessels, platforms and
artificial islands.

Life cycle

To address the issue of marine plastic pollution comprehensively would need to shift
focus from sea-based action alone to include also preventive measures on land (such
as waste management) and further upstream to include the sources of plastic

41
waste and pollution (such as design), in order to be effective in the long-term. This
raises the question of whether the scope of the agreement should holistically
address plastic pollution and microplastic residual waste across the life cycle.

4.3 Definitions and terminology

A new agreement would need to be holistic in its inclusion of all life cycle phases of
plastic production, consumption and final treatment, whether targeted directly or
indirectly. Preventive and mitigative interventions must be considered that prevent
the generation of residual waste across all life cycle phases, including chemicals, as
well as leakage into the environment.

Sustainable consumption and production in upstream and midstream phase must

address delivery on two of the strategic goals, namely:

1. elimination of problematic and avoidable plastic products, and

2. sustainable management of essential products.

Waste management (downstream activities) must address contamination, as well as

the quality and quantity of recyclable materials with the goal of supporting viable
end-markets for these materials.

Chemical hazard reduction is a cross-cutting issue and must be considered at the

manufacturing phase, as well as during recycling and reuse processes. Greater
transparency and traceability of chemical additives is also important to address, as
well as complementarities with the Stockholm Convention and SAICM.

Microplastics are released into the environment intentionally and unintentionally

during upstream, midstream and downstream processes. Elimination of primary
microplastics must be targeted, while design standards and improved mitigative
activities can further reduce losses of secondary microplastics into the
17
environment.

Trade of plastics wastes has been addressed under recent amendments to the Basel
Convention. A new agreement must therefore support compliance with these
measures, but also address the trade of problematic plastic products and primary
materials.

Sea-based sources are partly regulated by existing international instruments,

including MARPOL Annex V, London Dumping Convention and Protocol. Compliance
with these measures must be supported and complemented with design standards
and market-based instruments (MBIs) to prevent losses.

Sustainable removal of micro- and macroplastics is a last resort. Identification of

hotspots can make removal efforts more cost-effective and provide opportunity for
engagement, awareness-raising and data gathering.

17. GESAMP describes Plastic pellets and plastic particles manufactured for particular applications, such as
cosmetic products and abrasives, are often called ‘primary’ microplastics. Microplastics produced as a result
of fragmentation from larger items are called ‘secondary’ microplastics (see http://www.gesamp.org/site/
assets/files/1720/24472_gesamp_leaflet_pq.pdf)

42
4.4 Fundamental objectives
There are various possible objectives that a new global agreement could adopt to
ensure that plastic litter does not end up in the ocean. Three possibilities are
suggested here that align with the progression of the three approaches discussed in
section 3.1.

1. Reduction of marine plastic litter: To reduce and eliminate marine pollution by

plastic litter.
This proposal is aligned with the goal agreed in Resolution 3/7 adopted by
consensus at the third session of UNEA in December 2017. It “stresses the
importance of long-term elimination of discharge of litter and microplastics to
the oceans and of avoiding detriment to marine ecosystems and the human
activities dependent on them from marine litter and microplastics” (UNEA Res.
3/7, para 1). The objective aligns with the SDGs, particularly target 14.1.

2. Sustainable plastic waste management: To minimize plastic leakage into the

oceans in accordance with binding, specific and measurable targets, focusing on
waste management practices and waste minimisation.
Management targets might be agreed. For comparison, other international
specific and measurable binding targets have been agreed, including the Paris
Agreement that sets “holding the increase in the global average temperature to
well below 2°C above pre-industrial levels and to pursue efforts to limit the
temperature increase to 1.5°C above pre-industrial levels”.

3. Sustainable plastic consumption and production across the life cycle: To prevent
reduce and eliminate plastic litter in the wider environment by ensuring high-
recycling value of plastic and eliminating residual waste across the value chain.
This proposal extends beyond the marine environment. It addresses the problem
at the source through the elimination of high-risk products and additives,
coupled with sustainable design principles at the production stage. It would
seek to make collection, sorting and recycling of all plastics profitable, thus
incentivizing efforts to eliminate leakage.

4.5 Strategic goals

The strategic goals outline high-level management targets. The following four
components are suggested for elaboration of strategic goals:

1. Elimination of problematic and avoidable plastic products (reduction)

2. Sustainable management of essential plastic products (redesign)
3. Sustainable plastic waste management (reuse, repair, recycling)
4. Chemical hazard reduction.

The Strategic Goals could translate into operational implementation mechanisms.

For example, Strategic Goal 3 (sustainable plastic waste management) could be
implemented through the sustainable reuse and recycling of end-of-life products
facilitated through one or more of the operational implementation mechanisms.
Together these goals enable global coordination in addressing the entire life cycle of

43
plastics, helping to reduce residual waste from plastic products and associated
additives, thereby reducing the risk of discharge into the environment.

4.6 International sustainability criteria

If a life cycle approach is to be adopted, it is essential that the parties develop and
agree international sustainability criteria under the new agreement. These criteria
would apply to economic activities along the value chain of plastics, to incentivise
reusability, repairability and recyclability of products. The proposed new
agreement’s international sustainability criteria would be like the brain and nerve
system, guiding how its other implementation measures apply to meet the strategic
goals and to implement fundamental objectives.

International sustainability criteria could be directed at the operations of

governments and economic activities of industry to reshape plastics production,
consumption and waste management, ‘upstream’, ‘midstream’ and ‘downstream’ in
the context of the flow of the plastics value chain. They would be formulated by the
parties to the agreement, through open-ended technical working groups, and be
supported by the development of related technical standards, testing protocols and
certification schemes.

The obligation to formulate and adopt international sustainability criteria would be

situated in the management provisions in the body of the proposed new agreement.
They could be formulated subsequently at various levels of detail or compulsion; e.g.:
binding high-level targets, voluntary international standards, aspirational targets.
The structure and processes for the meetings of parties and for the open-ended
technical working groups would be prescribed in the part of the agreement on
institutional provisions.

4.7 National operational implementation mechanisms

Two national operational implementation mechanisms that can enable the delivery
of measures across the life cycle of plastics are proposed here for consideration:

• Develop National Plastics Management Plans (NPMPs) that aim to address the
main drivers of plastic pollution by helping countries to design a holistic and
comprehensive strategy to manage plastics throughout the life cycle. The plans
promote a bottom-up approach that provides flexibility at the national level for
setting targets, identifying measures and mobilizing resources, while ensuring
progression over time. NPMPs are submitted to the agreement and periodically
updated.
• Develop and fulfil National Plastics Sustainability Standards that can be
operationalized through the regulation of domestic markets in accordance with
the sustainability criteria and deployment of market-based instruments to
promote behaviour change by industry and consumers and provide funding
mechanisms for waste management services. These may be elaborated in
NPMPs.

Operational implementation mechanisms are discussed in detail in Section 6. At this

44
stage, it is necessary only to note that basic commitments with regard to these
mechanisms could be set out in the proposed agreement and other detailed
standards or guidance could be elaborated later.

4.8 Scientific and technical knowledge building

Scientific and technical knowledge is needed to support evidence-based decision-
making. The following areas outline main areas to benefit from scientific and
technical knowledge building:

• Assessment of the prevalence and impacts of plastic pollution, including

development and use of commonly agreed methodologies for data collection
• Management of plastic pollution across the lifecycle with continuous
development of global policy tools and guidance, in particular the international
sustainability criteria

All countries are expected to participate to the provision of data by reporting on

national performance and participation to monitoring on environmental status and
trends to understand the effectiveness of the agreement. The agreement can also
help to catalyze research at the national level, enabling to swiftly transition to
sustainable management of plastics across the lifecycle.

The agreement can facilitate scientific and technical knowledge gathering, sharing
possible and processing by using existing scientific possible when possible and by
instituting independent or subsidiary scientific and technical bodies that provide
advice to the parties. It can also be facilitated by national sharing of information,
directly or through a central information exchange. Science and knowledge building
are discussed further in section 7 of this paper. In addition, an MEA can include
commitments on parties to collate and provide performance information in
prescribed reporting formats to measure national progress, as discussed in section
8.

4.9 Measuring progress

Reporting is one of the key obligations at the global level undertaken by parties to
MEAs to evaluate their performance of obligations under the agreement. The
information provided by states about their individual national implementation
processes could encompass implementation of NPMPs and international
sustainability criteria. In addition, national inventories on material flows will enable
to understand the movement of plastic across the value chain and identify potential
points of leakage. In some MEAs, national reports are scrutinised by the Secretariat
or a committee of other parties or a third party to verify it. This process can be a
facilitative in nature, to help identify where assistance is needed. Lastly, a periodic
global review is needed to aggregate national data to determine global progress,
including identifying best practices and possible implementation gaps, helping to
progressively scale up action. It is discussed in section 8 of this paper.

45
4.10 Supporting measures
The success of implementation measures can be promoted through a number of
supporting measures. These include:

1. Education and awareness-raising – Training programs, workshops, labelling and

other measures can assist the public, industry and government authorities to
better understand the consequences of unsustainable consumption patterns
coupled with poor waste management practices.
2. Funding and capacity building – A new global agreement can set the legal basis
for a financial mechanism needs to assist countries to meet their obligations. At
the national level, it can provide financial assistance for activities that
contribute to developing context-specific NPMPs and designing regulatory and
market-based instruments.

The above supporting measures are discussed further in section 9.

4.11 Institutional arrangements

A governing oversight body can guide collective action by the parties to a new
agreement towards successful implementation of their agreed objectives and
strategic goals. This body is typically a Conference of Parties established under the
new agreement. It usually instructs and is assisted by a Secretariat that is a
standing body of international civil servants. Given UNEP’s engagement in this field,
it would seem to be the most relevant choice for hosting the Secretariat. Its role
would include liaison with other international bodies relevant to chemicals, waste
and marine pollution control.

An agreement on marine plastic litter would entail substantial technical specificity

and operational sophistication. Therefore, the diplomatic work of the Conference of
Parties would need to be supported by specialist expert advice. A scientific
committee to identify baselines, prioritise threats, and assess progress, as discussed
in section 7, would likely be needed. A parallel technical and economic advisory
committee could also be helpful in developing measures to implement sustainability
criteria for plastic products.

Due to the central importance of industry engagement in the regulation of plastic

products, it would also be necessary to liaise with private sector industry bodies
relevant across the life cycle of plastic products. Due to convergences of their
economic and market interests with those of the Conference of Parties, catalysed by
sustainability criteria for plastic products developed under the proposed agreement,
they might undertake technical work that would articulate into the technical and
economic expert guidance under the agreement. This could include development by
industry of codes for product design and labelling, or of guidelines for best
environmental practice in conformity with the sustainability criteria. These
instruments would form part of the cascade of measures implementing the
sustainability criteria.

46
4.12 Final provisions
The final provisions set out the legal mechanics of the agreement: procedure for
ratification, accession and withdrawal from the agreement; whether reservations
are permitted; circumstances for entry into force; and conditions for amendment.

4.13 Summary of structuring a new global agreement

The key elements outlined in this section for the proposed new global agreement to
combat plastic pollution across the life cycle of plastics and in all environmental
compartments are summarised in Figure 2.

Figure 2: Key elements of a new global agreement to combat plastic pollution.

A new agreement is structured to help its parties, once they have agreed on
fundamental objectives, principles and strategic goals, to then progress through a
cycle of elaborating and refining their commitments, implementing them and
assessing progress, as illustrated in Figure 3. Setting common global targets and
timeframes provides a goal against which to measure progress.

The implementation and review processes illustrated in Figure 3 are discussed in

further detail in sections 6 and 7.

47
Figure 3: Overview of the primary phases of a new global agreement.

48
Ghost fishing by derelict fishing gear results in significant losses of potential food for
human consumption.
Photo: Ritzau/Scanpix.dk

5. Key life cycle measures

Leakage of plastics into the ocean can occur at all stages of the life cycle and need
to be considered when designing the implementing activities of the agreement
(UNEP, 2016). Leakage consists of littering, mismanaged plastic waste, and releases
of microplastics during production, product use and after disposal. Figure 4
illustrates the value-chain of plastics, which has been used to guide the mapping of
proposed measures. Adequate waste management is a prerequisite for eliminating
leakage but needs to be supported through additional measures to make the
agreement effective. This includes minimizing material use through reduction and
reuse, and by ensuring that new and recycled products placed on the market are
designed to promote sustainable plastic use, e.g. repairability, reusability or
recyclability. Trade, chemical additives and microplastics releases need to be
addressed in various phases of the life cycle. In addition, supporting measures must
give greater effect to measures across the life cycle, including education and
awareness-raising and funding and capacity building. Focus on this section is on
land-based sources. Sea-based sources are covered separately in section 5.6.

49
Figure 4: The value-chain of plastics, indicating circular materials flows in green.

It should also be noted that the design of the agreement targets the value chain of
plastics, while addressing the life cycle of products. The activities considered as
‘upstream’, ‘midstream’ and ‘downstream’ are therefore considered in the context of
the controlled flows of the plastics value chain.

Life cycle activities commonly referred to: Value chain activities as referred to in this report:

– Upstream: extraction, production of virgin

– Upstream: production of virgin materials, design,
materials
retail, consumption
– Midstream: manufacturing & design,
– Midstream: waste management (collection,
consumption
sorting, treatment)
– Downstream: waste management
– Downstream: mitigation and removal post-
– Post-value chain: mitigation and removal post-
leakage into the environment
leakage into the environment

The activities within the value chain would be designed to prevent leakage, thereby
minimising the need for mitigation and removal (remediation).

The following sub-sections briefly describes challenges related to the management

of plastics in different phases of the value-chain and lists measures that could be
included in the agreement to guide the development international sustainability
criteria.

50
5.1 Sustainable consumption and production (Upstream and
midstream)
A commonly used definition for sustainable consumption and production is: “the use
of services and related products which respond to basic needs and bring a better
quality of life while minimising the use of natural resources and toxic materials as
well as the emission of waste and pollutants over the life cycle of the service or
product so as not to jeopardise the needs of future generations” (ISSD, 1994).
Sustainable production, consumption and use of plastics entails putting into place
measures to deliver on two of the strategic goals, namely 1) elimination of
problematic and avoidable plastic products, and 2) sustainable management of
essential products. An examination of the value chain for plastics, including the
production, manufacturing and consumption phases, is provided below to illustrate
possible measures for the agreement. Dedicated measures are needed for plastic-
intensive sectors (construction, agriculture and tourism, etc.) and nationally-
determined problematic consumer product groups, including food and drink
packaging, cosmetics and personal care products, and textiles and clothing
(GESAMP, 2016).

5.1.1 Production of primary plastics

Today, 400 million tons of plastics are produced every year (Guyer et al., 2017). At
the present growth rate, plastic production is expected to double by 2040 (Lebreton
& Andrady, 2019). 99% of plastics derive from fossil-based feedstocks, including oil,
natural gas and coal (Guyer et al., 2017). Reducing production will be the most
effective way to tackle plastic pollution and it will simultaneously help to reduce
greenhouse gas emissions. To this end, a more comprehensive and long-term
governance strategy must address prevention as a primary approach by reducing
the amount and types of plastics on the market. In addition, enhancing sustainable
design and production of primary materials (including plastic pellets) is essential,
including incorporation of recycled content in pellet production.

International sustainability criteria should aim to address the following

1. Produce less plastics

2. Limit use of fossil-based feedstocks
3. Increase use of sustainably sourced biomass-based feedstocks
4. Increase use of post-consumer resins
5. Simplify resin types produced
6. Prevent leakage of plastic pellets, powder and flakes from industrial processes.

Specific international workstreams could address the following

• Simplify guidance for the use and types of resins

• Improve on best practices for reducing loss of plastic pellets, powder and flakes
during production and transport.

51
Links to other regimes

• Reducing plastic demand and decoupling plastic production from fossil

feedstocks contributes to achieving the goals of the United Nations Framework
Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC).
• Prevention of leakage prevents negative impacts to biodiversity and ecosystems
under the CBD and is relevant to the possible target to reduce plastic waste by
2030 that could be included in the post-2020 global biodiversity framework.

5.1.2 Manufacturing of plastic products

Environmentally sustainable management of plastics and plastic products is an

important component in combating plastic pollution. Plastics are used in a variety of
sectors, including packaging (45%), building and construction (19%), consumer and
institutional goods (12%), transportation (7%), electrical and electronic products
(4%), and others (14%) (Guyer et al., 2017).

Endeavouring to produce less plastics means that manufacturing could focus on

plastics and applications that are deemed essential in the domestic context and
cannot be eliminated or replaced by alternatives that are more environmentally
sustainable. However, such manufacturing should be conducted within the
constraints of agreed international sustainability criteria that ensures recyclability,
at a minimum. For many countries, packaging is an obvious starting point for design
change given its prevalence, short lifespan and tendency for leakage. Sustainability
criteria may also be needed in other plastic-intensive sectors and across the value
chain to stimulate manufacture of plastics that are manageable at the end of life.

International sustainability principles and criteria should aim to address the

following

1. Develop design standards that enable reuse and economically feasible recycling
2. Increase incorporation of post-consumer resins
3. Prevent leakage during intended use, e.g. abrasion releasing microplastics
4. Develop labelling and certification schemes
5. Develop MBIs to incentivize behavior change by industry

Specific international workstreams could address the following

• Develop sector-specific guidance to promote sustainable design of essential

plastics focusing on sectors that use large volumes of plastics or where leakage
is high

Links to other regimes

• No legally-binding agreement exists that focuses specifically on sustainable

manufacturing of plastics. Relevant voluntary approaches include the 10-Year
Framework of Programmes on Sustainable Consumption and Production
(10-YFP on SCP) and UNEA resolutions.

52
5.1.3 Consumption

The single-use throw-away culture is a primary contributor to the environmental toll

of plastic pollution. Elimination of problematic and avoidable plastic products from
domestic markets is essential to reduce unnecessary use of plastics. This includes
products and materials that are known to cause adverse environmental and health
impacts, have a high probability of leakage into the environment or have little/no
chance of being reused, recycled or composted. Products already identified in this
category and for which elimination efforts are underway in many countries using
bans and other restrictions include bags, straws, cutlery, takeaway containers,
polystyrene packaging, drinks bottles, earbuds and microbeads.

Furthermore, the current labelling system is diverse and generic, necessitating

development of a simple, reliable and trustworthy labelling system to better guide
consumer choices (EASAC, 2020), both at the purchase and disposal phases.
Furthermore, ambiguous definitions (compostable, biodegradable, bio-based, etc.)
can convey a misleading impression to consumers of environmentally benign
properties, when in reality they may be degradable only under special conditions not
encountered in the natural environment, and interfere with recycling processes
(EASCAC, 2020). In this life cycle phase, consumer behaviour can also be influenced
through the use of market-based instruments, such as taxes and pay-as-you-throw
waste collection.

International sustainability criteria should aim to address the following

1. Eliminate products and materials of concern from the domestic market.

2. Influence consumer choice based on product design, including likelihood of
abrasion (release of microplastics).
3. Influence consumer choice based on cost of disposal (MBIs) and likelihood of
leakage.
4. Incentivize sustainable consumption practices across the value chain.

Specific international workstreams could address the following

• Develop guidelines and tools for addressing problematic and avoidable plastic
products. Global criteria could address the full life cycle of plastics e.g.
encourage the use of one single type of polymer in packaging and encourage
conduct of impact assessment before entering full-scale production, ensuring
efforts enable and support the 3R waste hierarchy.
• Develop an inventory and harmonize existing labelling and certification systems,
clarify definitions and develop other needed guidance.

Links to other regimes

No legally-binding agreement exists that focuses specifically on sustainable

consumption of plastics. Relevant voluntary approaches incudes the 10-YFP on SCP
and UNEA resolutions.

53
5.2 Waste management (Downstream)
Today, 58% of plastic waste is mismanaged globally, either through disposal in
landfills, open dumps or the natural environment, while 18% is recycled and 24%
incinerated (Geyer et al., 2017). Effective waste management is critical to prevent
leakage. It should start with a focus on waste prevention and continue with
separation at source, collection, transport, sorting, storage and sustainable end-of-
life treatment. Waste management is also closely linked to socio-economic
considerations: poverty eradication, social equity, and job creation. Many factors
contribute to the current low rates of reuse and recycling including the difficulty of
establishing efficient collection, sorting and recycling technologies, and the price of
virgin material (EASAC, 2020). Furthermore, materials at the end of life are often
mixed and contaminated, making them impossible or expensive to clean and recycle,
or reducing the quality of the recycled material. Waste management would benefit
from following the waste hierarchy, which lays down the following priority order for
plastics:

• Prevention constitutes the primary objective, including reducing the use of raw
materials and avoidable and unnecessary plastic products and packaging.
• Reuse includes designing products for long life, repair and multiple usage.
• Mechanical recycling is dependent on efficient sorting into different plastic
fractions. Once the different types of plastic are separated and the material is
18
thoroughly cleaned it is melted down and reprocessed into pellets. It is a
precondition that the plastic waste is uncontaminated. The use of recycled
content in bottles manufactured from polyethylene terephthalate (PET) has
19
been a first step for recycling in many countries. Downcycling is a challenge as
many plastics degrade when heated and lose material value and can be recycled
only once or twice.
• Chemical recycling breaks down the vast majority of polymers into their
constituent molecules and removes undesired additives in the process, resulting
in pellets of the same standard as virgin resin. However, the present technique is
unlikely to be used at a larger scale, in particular because of the high energy
consumption. Chemical recycling could be used more in the future if the
technologies are developed.
• Energy recovery is not considered recycling, since it is a low-efficiency method of
producing energy and results in airborne particulates and greenhouse gas
emissions. However, when carefully controlled it may provide low- and middle-
income countries the possibility to recover energy as an intermediary solution in
transitioning to recycling (UNEP, 2016).

International sustainability criteria should aim to address the following

1. Increase collection rates

2. Minimize transportation costs
3. Identify means to reduce the costs and challenges of sorting
4. Increase decontamination and recycling of plastic waste

18. See Section 1.2.3 on use of terms for comparison of repurposing versus recycling for the purposes of this
report.
19. See section 1.2.3 on use of terms for the purposes of this report.

54
Specific international workstreams could address the following

• The agreement can facilitate the development and application of best available
techniques (BAT) and best environmental practices (BEP) for implementing the
3R waste hierarchy.
• Provide tools to improve their domestic waste management services by
designing MBIs to eliminate problematic and avoidable plastic products, as well
as regulate the features of products placed on their domestic markets and
subsidize the costs of waste management.

Links to other regimes

• Article 4 of the Basel Convention requests Parties to minimize the generation of

hazardous wastes and other wastes and to ensure the availability of adequate
disposal facilities, for the environmentally sound management of hazardous
wastes and other wastes. In 2019, the Parties of the convention adopted
decision BC-14/13 on further actions to address plastic waste under the
convention, including by updating the 2002 technical guidelines for the
identification and environmentally sound management of plastic wastes and for
their disposal.
• The Stockholm Convention addresses the reintroduction of regulated chemicals
during reuse and recycling operations. It is important to include the
management of legacy chemicals covered by this convention as well as those
that fall outside the scope of the Stockholm Convention (Article 6.1.d(iii)).
• Recycling will help deliver on UNFCCC climate goals, since recycling waste to a
new product can save up to 1.4 tons of carbon dioxide equivalent for each ton of
plastic when a clean single-resin feedstock is available (Denkstaff, 2011).

5.3 Chemical hazard reduction

Chemical groups of concern used in the production of plastics include flame
retardants, perflourinated chemicals, phthalates, bisphenols and nonylphenols that
are found in toys, packaging, electrical and electronic equipment, textile, upholstery
and furniture, and plastics used in the construction sector (BRS, 2019). Plastic
additives, such as phthalates and bisphenol A, are known for their estrogenic activity
and further potential endocrine disruption in vertebrates and some invertebrate
species (Sohoni & Sumpter, 1998). Chemical additives are released into the
environment during manufacturing, use, landfilling, incineration and improper
disposal (Groh et al., 2019). Plastic additives are now reported amongst the most
commonly found anthropogenic substances in environmental samples (Whitacre,
2014). Harmful additives are also problematic in recycling as they can contaminate
secondary raw materials, restricting downstream applications. Chemical additives
enter the oceans via plastic debris, but plastics can also sorb trace contaminants
already present in the ocean, including dichlorodiphenyltrichloroethane (DDT) and
polychlorinated biphenyls (PCBs) (EASAC, 2020). To this end, there is a need to
ensure that design standards restrict the use of hazardous additives. However,
greater transparency is also needed of chemicals used in plastic products (Groh et
al., 2019).

55
International sustainability criteria should aim to address the following

1. Ensure safety of chemical additives incorporated in plastic products

2. Ensure safe use of chemicals in different phases of the life cycle (production,
recycling etc.)
3. Prevent reintroduction of regulated chemicals in recycling and reuse processes
4. Increase transparency and traceability of chemical additives along the value
chain.

Specific international workstreams could address the following

• Identify criteria for hazardous plastic additives to address chemicals, as far as

their use is not already prohibited by other international agreements, and
restrict their use, as well as their recycling, reuse or repurposing to prevent re-
entry of restricted substances onto the market, building on current initiatives,
such as the Substitute It Now (SIN) List of hazardous chemicals (Chemsec,
2020).
• The development of a set of international standards to support sharing of
information of chemical additives across the value chain could help increase
transparency in the use of chemicals, ensuring the composition of chemicals in
products is publicly available.

Links to other regimes

• The Stockholm Convention limits the production and use of persistent organic
pollutants, including many additives, flame retardants and plasticizers used in
plastics. However, most hazardous additives do not qualify for listing under the
convention.
• The scope of SAICM encompasses all chemicals and it could address plastic
additives as an emerging policy issue. The Beyond-2020 framework for sound
management of chemicals and waste is under development that may contain
strategic goals concerning plastic and/or plastic waste. However, the voluntary
nature of SAICM and its successor sets limitations and it could lead to a
fragmented approach to addressing plastic pollution.

5.4 Microplastics
Microplastics are grouped into primary microplastics that are plastic particles
manufactured at 5mm or less for use in specific applications, and secondary
microplastics at 5mm or less that result from fragmentation of larger items
(GESAMP, 2016). A distinction can also be made between unintentional releases of
secondary microplastics during the life cycle of products versus intentional releases
of primary microplastics added voluntarily to products by manufacturers. Table 5
provides a categorization of microplastic releases, including possible response
actions.

Secondary microplastics resulting from breakdown of mismanaged macroplastics

56
constitutes 69–85% of all plastics in the ocean (Boucher & Friot, 2017). Secondary
microplastics deriving from abrasion of products during use is another major source,
with largest releases deriving from wearing of tires and synthetic clothing and
textiles (Boucher & Friot, 2017). Primary microplastic derive from various sources,
including intentional-added microplastic releases from personal care and cosmetic
products, detergents, controlled-release fertilizer encapsulates and granular infill
material that is used in artificial turf pitches as well as, from unintentional
production losses of pellets, powder and flakes.

The concern associated with microplastic particles derives from the potential
environmental and human health risks. These include small size making them readily
available for ingestion and potentially liable to transfer within food chains, strong
resistance to biodegradation leaving them in the environment for a long period after
their initial release, fragmentation in the environment progressively into nanoplastics
that are practically impossible to remove from the environment after release (EU,
2019a). Nanoplastics are the least researched category of plastic debris, but
potentially the most dangerous in terms of accumulation within the tissues and cells
of organisms, as it is inked to reduction of growth of earthworms (Lwanga et al.,
2016), toxicity to fungi (Miyazaki et al., 2015), mammal lung inflammation (Schmid &
Stoeger, 2016) and broad cytotoxicity (Forte et al., 2016). However, there are many
uncertainties and more research is needed to understand the potential effect of
microplastics on the environment and human health.

Many high-income countries have taken action to restrict primary microplastic:

Canada, New Zealand, Korea, USA have banned microbeads in cosmetic and
personal care products (EU, 2019a). The EU is in the process to banning intentionally
added microplastics in most products, including cosmetics, detergents, paints, polish
and coatings, which could result in a reduction in emissions of microplastics of about
400,000 tonnes over 20 years (EU, 2019a). International research indicates that
middle- and low-income countries will become a growing source of primary
microplastics in the next years, with primary microplastic pollution projected to grow
from 148 to 419 grams per capita between 2016 and 2040 (WEF, 2020).

Mitigation of microplastics from wastewater with advanced final stage treatment

technologies enables to capture 99% of microplastic releases helping to avoid the
vast majority of microplastic releases to aquatic ecosystems (Talvitie et al., 2017).
However, wastewater treatment can lead to terrestrial contamination if sewage
sludge is used as fertilizer and concerning levels of microplastics have been
measured in farms and forests around the world (de Souza Machado et al., 2018;
Horton et al., 2017). Stormwater overflows also constitute a significant pathway for
microplastic releases.

57
Table 5: Categorization of microplastic releases and actions needed at the national level.

Category Derivate Intention Examples of releases Release phase Actions needed

Primary microplastics Voluntarily added Intentional 3D-printing and printing Midstream Ban or restrict
Plastic pellets and plastic to products ink, personal care and intentionally added
particles manufactured for cosmetic products, microplastics
specific applications, such detergents and
as cosmetic products and maintenance products
abrasives containing microbeads or
encapsulated fragrance,
fertilizers, controlled-
release fertilizer
encapsulates and fertilizer
additives, capsule
suspension plant
protection products and
coated products, paints
and coatings, products
used in the oil and gas
industry, granular infill
material in artificial turfs,
waxes and polishes

Production losses Unintentional Accidental loss of pellets All phases, mainly Apply best
during manufacturing, upstream practices to avoid
processing, transport and accidental losses
recycling

Secondary microplastics Abrasion during use Unintentional Wearing of tiers, synthetic Midstream Targeted policies,
Microplastics produced as clothing and textiles, including labelling
a result of fragmentation painted surfaces (marine and product
from larger items coatings and road standards
markings) and agricultural
plastic mulch

Breakdown after Unintentional Breakdown of Downstream Waste

disposal mismanaged management and
macroplastics, including product standards
packaging and abandoned
fishing gear

International sustainability criteria should aim to address the following

1. Eliminate primary microplastic releases.

2. Material and product redesign to minimize abrasion during intended use. This
could include, inter alia, developing low-abrasion tyres and using natural fibers
and improving fabric cuts and weaving style in textiles.
3. Ensure industrial standards mitigate release of microplastics to air, water and
soil, including improving the capture of microplastics in wastewater treatment
using best available treatment technologies giving due consideration to avoiding
contamination of soils.

58
Specific international workstreams could address the following

• Lay down foundations to develop principles, guidelines and/or standards to

cover the life cycle of microplastics. This could be achieved by setting up an ad
hoc scientific or technical group under the agreement.

Links to other regimes

• Decision BC-14/13 (2019) of the Basel Convention emphasizes that work under
the convention plays an important role in addressing the high and rapidly
increasing levels of marine plastic litter and microplastics by preventing plastic
waste from entering the marine environment.
• The UN Environment Assembly has explicitly addressed microplastics in its four
consecutive sessions, including Resolution 3/7 (para 1) that stresses “the
importance of long-term elimination of discharge of litter and microplastics”,
and Resolution 4/6 (para 4) that invites States to a) reduce the discharge of
microplastics into the marine environment, including phasing out of products
that contain microplastics, b) foster innovation in product design to reduce
secondary microplastics release c) prevent losses of primary microplastics, in
particular pre-production pellets across the supply chain.
• The IMO recognizes the maritime sources of microplastics in the Action Plan to
address marine plastic litter from ships.

5.5 Trade
A new global agreement for plastics could complement the global trade of plastics.
As discussed in section 2.1.1, the measures of a new agreement could complement
the Basel Convention, both in the trade of plastic waste and in the reduction of
waste generation. However, plastic is not only traded in the form of waste, but also
as products and primary materials, including pre-production pellets, semi-processed
plastic, semi and fully assembled products, components of finished products (e.g.
vehicles), clothing fibers and items within consumer products (e.g. microbeads), as
20
well as primary, secondary and tertiary packaging (Dauvergne, 2018). Exports of
plastic items alone was worth USD 79 billion in 2018 (Workman, 2020). Cross-border
movement of plastics may occur through traditional retail supply chains or more
direct online sales. Better management of the characteristics of plastic products
traded can be implemented through the regulation of domestic markets (see section
6.3 and 6.4).

International sustainability criteria should aim to address the following

1. Ensure compliance with Basel Convention amendments concerning trade of

plastic waste.
2. Address particularly problematic environmental aspects of trade of plastic
products and primary materials (pellets, powder and flakes).

20. Primary Packaging: Packaging that contains the finished or final products, sometimes called retail or
consumer packaging. Secondary packaging: Packaging additional to the primary packaging and that is used
for protection and collation of individual units during storage, transport and distribution. Tertiary packaging:
Outer packaging, including pallets, slip sheets, stretch wrap, strapping any labels, used for the shipment and
distribution of goods and is rarely seen by consumers. (http://www.wrap.org.uk/sites/files/wrap/
Definitions.pdf)

59
Specific international workstreams could address the following

• Consider opportunities to develop tools to assist countries in regulating

problematic plastic products and primary materials placed on their markets
from international and domestic sources, including by developing international
sustainability criteria and product certification schemes (see section 6.2 and
Annex 2).
• Consider ways to enhance the traceability of the trade of all plastics.

Linkages to other regimes

• In 2019, the Basel Convention adopted amendments to Annexes II, VIII and IX
that require countries to obtain prior informed consent from destination States
before exporting hazardous plastic waste and plastic waste that requires
21
special consideration.
• The Organization for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD) has
published a number of reports on stimulating sustainable plastics, including
Extended Producer Responsibility (EPR, revised 2016) and the Impact of Online
Sales (2018).

5.6 Sea-based sources

Sea-based sources of plastic pollution include fisheries, aquaculture, shipping and
offshore industry, discharge and dumping. Estimates of the contribution of maritime
sources of leakage range between 10 and 30% of ocean leakage, but there is much
uncertainty. Abandoned, lost or otherwise discarded fishing gear is a growing issue
of concern for sustainable fisheries due to its subsequent effects on target and
non‐target species, habitats and human users in marine systems. 6% of all fishing
nets, 9% of all traps, and 29% of all lines are lost around the world each year
(Richardson et al., 2019). Furthermore, the continuous expansion of aquaculture
contributes to leakage due to mismanagement of plastics used both in equipment
and product packaging (Huntington, 2019).

International sustainability criteria should aim to address the following

1. Ensure sustainable design of fishing gear, including minimize use of hazardous

chemicals that make recycling challenging (OSPAR, 2020)
2. Reduce the loss or abandonment of fishing gear, including through MBIs and by
increasing their traceability
3. Use BEP to retain lost and abandoned fishing gear
4. Ensure compliance with existing conventions to prevent dumping and discharges
of plastic waste

21. Decision BC-14/12

60
International action

• International sustainability criteria to address fishing gear by preventing use of

plastic components that are more likely to be lost or break up during their use
and explore the possibility of a ban on sale and use of such items (OSPAR,
2020).

Linkages to other regimes

• Sea-based sources are addressed in several legally binding instruments. Annex

V (1988) of MARPOL (1973) specifically prohibits the discharges of any plastics
at sea and the London Convention (1972) and the London Protocol (1996)
prohibit dumping of any land-generated wastes containing plastics at sea.
Other relevant conventions include UNCLOS (1982) and the UN Straddling Fish
Stocks Agreement (1995).
• Relevant voluntary instruments include, inter alia, the FAO’s (The Food and
Agriculture Organization of the United Nations) Code of Conduct for
Responsible Fisheries (1995) and the IMO Action Plan to address marine plastic
litter from ships. The FAO has also published a report on Microplastics in
Fisheries in Aquaculture (2017).

5.7 Sustainable removal

Prevention at source is the most cost-efficient strategy to reduce leakage. Removal
of plastics should be considered as a supporting measure because the main
emphasis must be placed on preventing the release of plastics and microplastics in
the ocean from the outset. Removal is challenging and limited to a small portion of
plastics in the ocean, as estimates show that 94% of the plastic that enters the
oceans ends up on the sea floor and 1% is found at or near the ocean surface
(Sherrington et al., 2016). Removal of lost and abandoned fishing gear is particularly
important, since ghost fishing has detrimental impacts on fish stocks and potential
impacts on endangered species and benthic environments. Macro- and microplastics
removal programmes targeting hotspots, including rivers, waterways, coastal areas,
oceans and land, can make removal efforts more cost-effective. Participatory
removal programmes also encourage awareness-through-action and provide an
opportunity to gather monitoring data.

5.8 Summary of measures

A summary of possible measures across the life cycle of plastics is provided in table
6. The table indicates with green measures that are covered by existing global
agreements and with orange measures that are partly covered by existing global
agreements. No coloring means that the measures are beyond the scope of existing
global agreements.

Measures covered fully by existing global agreements (in green) focus predominantly
on sea-based sources: Annex V of the MARPOL Convention prohibits the discharges
of any plastics at sea and the London Convention and London Protocol prohibit

61
dumping of any wastes containing plastics at sea. Furthermore, the Basel
Convention regulates trade of plastic waste by requiring countries to obtain prior
informed consent before exporting contaminated or mixed plastic scrap.

Measures that are partly covered by existing global agreements (in orange) include
downstream measures of land-based sources, in particular though the Basel
Convention that includes general provisions (Article 4.2 a–b) to ensure minimum
generation of hazardous and other waste, and to ensure the availability or adequate
waste disposal facilities for their environmentally sound disposal. Furthermore, the
Stockholm Convention restricts the production use and disposal of certain chemicals
additives present in plastics listed under the convention, however, many plastic
additives do not fall within the scope of Stockholm Convention

Nine out of the 14 Regional Seas Conventions and Action Plans that have adopted
binding conventions have also adopted a protocol on land-based sources, each with
varying mandates for upstream activities and four of which are not yet in force
(UNEP, 2017). To this end, upstream and midstream activities are largely absent
from existing global agreements, thus important measures for prevention are
missing. The Regional Seas Conventions and Action Plans include varying provisions
on research, public awareness and education and monitoring of marine litter, which
are not shown in the table.

62
Table 6: Summary of options for action throughout the life cycle of plastics.
= Measures that are fully covered by existing global agreements

= Measures that are partly covered by existing global agreements

= Measures that are predominantly beyond existing global agrements

Upstream Midstream Downstream

Land-based – Produce less plastics – Redesign plastic products to allow – Expand separate sorting and
sources – Increase use of post-consumer resins for greater durability, reuse and collection systems
– Increase use of sustainably sourced recycling – Instigate bans on – Increase material recovery through
biomass-based feedstocks problematic and avoidable plastic mechanical and chemical recycling
– Limit use of fossil-based feedstocks products – Create viable end-markets – When other viable alternatives do
for recycled and bio-based plastics, not exist, increase energy recovery
including recycled content standards– through waste-to-energy solutions
Develop product labeling and – Reduce/eliminate landfilling of
certification schemes– Harmonize plastics
definitions and labels for ambiguous
terms (compostable, degradable, etc.)

Chemical additives - Instigate bans and restrictions on – Eliminate the release of chemicals of – Prevent reintroduction of regulated
chemicals of concern in plastics concern in products during intended chemicals in recycling and reuse
use (e.g. Bisphenol A (BPA), flame processes
retardants)
– Increase transparency and
traceability of chemical additives
throughout the value chain

Microplastics - Prevent accidental loss of plastic – Instigate bans and restrictions on – Capture microplastics in wastewater
pellets, powder and flakes using best intentionally added microplastics treatment
practices (cosmetics, pesticides etc.) – Prevent use of wastewater sludge as
– Restrict secondary microplastic fertilizer to avoid contamination of
releases with proper design of soils
products (textiles, tires etc.)

Trade - Promote sustainable international – Promote sustainable international - Regulate international trade of
trade of plastic pellets, powder and trade of plastic products plastic waste
flakes

Sea-based sources - Encourage use of bio-degradable – Promote sustainable design of – Prohibit dumping and discharge of
components in fishing gear where fishing gear, including introduce bans plastics at sea e.g. remove financial
possible or taxes on unsustainable fishing gear disincentives to bringing waste ashore
– Develop standards to encourage – Ensure adequate port reception
responsible use of plastics in facilities
aquaculture

Options for addressing life cycle measures in the agreement include a) conventional
approach: translating then into operative articles of the agreement, b) bottom-up
approach: defining the life cycle measures as soft law, possibly as a tool-box to be
included as an annex to the agreement, and c) systems approach: incorporating the
life cycle measures within the international sustainability criteria. The options are
not mutually exclusive and can be pursued in parallel. For instance, the life cycle
measures could be defined in articles of the agreement at a general level, yet they
could be simultaneously elaborated in greater detail in the toolbox and/or in
conjunction with the sustainability criteria. To this end, the life cycle measures
provide a broad suite of actions that can be incorporated into NPMPs to meet
national needs and circumstances and/or they can be incorporated in sustainability

63
 criteria, discussed in sections 6.1 and 6.2, respectively. Table 7 outlines pros and cons
of different options.

Table 7: Options for addressing life cycle measures within the agreement.

Conventional approach Bottom-up approach Systems approach

Description – Articulates life cycle measures in the – Lists life cycle measures in form of – Targets the entire value chain in a
convention text setting obligations in soft law, possibly as a toolbox holistic manner through incorporation
form of hard law containing a selection of measures to of life cycle measures into international
address the life cycle of plastics sustainability criteria

Strengths – Provides clear guidance what is – The content could be outlined – Provides an unconventional
expected from governments, helping to between the time of adopting the systematic and technical and approach
harmonize implementation and follow- agreement and the first meeting of the to address the life cycle at the
up efforts governing body, giving ample time for international level that could attract
– Enables to outline the life cycle and identifying measures broad interest across policy fields,
adopt measures accordingly, which – Could shorten the duration of the sectors and stakeholders
could ensure a balanced approach for negotiations to ensure a swift – Could elevate and give more teeth to
tackling downstream and upstream adoption of the agreement the international sustainability criteria
measures – Could give more flexibility for as the principal tool of the agreement
– Could enable to prepare more implementation without risking – Could seal the connection between
detailed protocols and/or annexes on contradiction with existing the agreement and its role in
specific articles in a later stage e.g. agreements, in relation to downstream promoting industry engagement
microplastics measures innovatively
– Could better empower governments
to lead efforts in ensuring sustainable
design of plastic products
– Could set a precedent for closing the
loop of other materials that similarly
suffer from linear material flows

Weakness – The elaboration of the life cycle – Follows the model of a voluntary – Agreeing on criteria at the
measures in the agreement could framework questioning whether it international level could become
extend the duration of negotiations would result in the desired impact subject of fierce lobbying of industry,
– Could result in duplication with other – Risk resulting in a fragmented and weakening their potential to impact
agreements, which could be avoided piecemeal approach to addressing the design
with MoUs or joint work programs problem with little if any impact on – The industry is not directly bound by
production and design standards adopted at the international
– The absence of articulating measures level and their implementation will
in the agreement text could hinder require the development of necessary
efforts to measure progress regulatory policies and use of market-
based instruments at the national level

Existing models – The Minamata Convention provides a – FAO Code of Conduct for – Existing agreements provide a
useful reference for a life cycle Responsible Fisheries provides an plethora of elements that function as
agreement example of a bottom-up approach, standards, thus affecting industry
– The CBD outlines a broad scope and targeting an overall objective, engagement (see table 8)
details measures in articles, but supported by UNCLOS articles 116-120.
delegates certain activities to other
MEAs

64
Microplastics are commonly released into waterways and enter drinking water.
Photo: iStockphoto.com

6. Operational Implementation
Mechanisms

This section outlines the possibilities for the operational provisions that could be
established in a new agreement on marine plastic pollution control. It proposes that
the parties develop three key operational implementation mechanisms, two of which
are national and one of which is international:

• National Plastics Management Plans (NPMPs);

• International Sustainability Criteria for plastics (including additives) to be
elaborated into detailed cascading measures;
• National Plastics Sustainability Standards to be operationalized through the
regulation of domestic markets and deployment of market-based instruments
in accordance with the international sustainability criteria and the national
context.

The implementation mechanisms could operate across the entire life cycle of
plastics, as illustrated in Figure 4. Consideration is given to examples from existing
agreements, bearing in mind that tailored solutions would be needed to address the
specificities of marine plastic litter and microplastics in particular circumstances.

6.1 National Plastics Management Plans

The development of National Plastic Management Plans (NPMPs) is proposed as a
central commitment under the new agreement. The NPMPs could provide a vehicle
tailored to meet specific national needs and circumstances for developing and
implementing national policies across the life cycle of plastics.

The NPMPs enhance national opportunities to design a holistic and comprehensive

approach covering all sources and relevant sectors. The NPMPs could promote the
fundamental objective and strategic goals of the agreement to tackle plastic
pollution. NPMPs can also raise political awareness and preparedness to adopt
national plastic policies, promote institutional innovation and more coordination
across policy sectors, and grant better access to financial and technical support.

65
Procedural elements of the commitment could ensure that NPMPs aim to meet
strategic goals, are updated regularly and are reported upon.

Key options for consideration include:

1. Form and the structure

Should the form of the NPMP be a high-level strategic document, or a detailed

prescriptive action plan, or encompass elements of both? Functioning as a high-level
strategic document would help to generate a cross-sectoral approach, leverage
financial resources and engage relevant stakeholders. However, in practice, it might
need to be underpinned with some form of detailed action plan to outline more
specific measures, identify entities responsible for implementation, and to estimate
financing sources for each of the measures, and specify institutional arrangements
for implementation and monitoring, in order to fully operationalize the high-level
strategic document in a meaningful way.

2. NPMP content

As an operational mechanism, the NPNP could set out either procedural

commitments, or minimum substantive commitments. If the mechanism is limited to
procedural commitments it will enable countries to quickly join in, as the content
would rely completely on countries. However, the content could vary significantly
between countries, raising questions as to whether the agreement is sufficient to
promote the proposed strategic goals or to eliminate plastic leakage into the
environment.

A lack of minimum common substantive commitments could also hinder the

meaningful review of progress at the international level. Therefore, inclusion of some
minimum substantive content commitments could be needed while retaining a level
of flexibility for implementation of national target setting and action plans. The
articulation into an NPMP of content derived from international sustainability
criteria for plastic products management that could be adopted pursuant to the
new agreement would be an effective use of some of those criteria.

6.1.1 How are NPMPs addressed in existing agreements?

National action plans are employed by many MEAs. Normally, the action
plan mechanism is outlined in general terms in the agreement and specific guidance
for their development, in terms of substance and procedure, is adopted at a later
stage. This includes both global and regional conventions as exemplified below.

The CBD requires parties to develop National Biodiversity Strategy and Action Plans
(NBSAPs). In 2010, the CBD adopted the Strategic Plan for Biodiversity 2011–2020
that includes 20 timebound Aichi Biodiversity Targets and parties were asked to
develop and implement an updated NBSAP by 2015 and to set their own national
targets in NBSAPs by using the Aichi Biodiversity Targets as a flexible
22
reference. While the flexibility to develop national targets has helped parties take
into account national priorities and capacities, it has led to the use of different

22. Decision X/2 (para 3b)

66
targets in NBSAPs that weakens comparability. Importantly, Parties are asked to
reflect the full range of activities of all biodiversity-related conventions in NBSAPs
23
helping to align activities conventions with related objectives.

The Paris Agreement on climate change obliges parties to regularly prepare their
climate plan known as nationally determined contribution (NDC) that gives parties
flexibility in developing NDCs and in determining their mitigation pledges, which has
made it easy for countries to join the convention and to develop NDCs (Bodle et al.
2016). Many Parties have formulated their NDCs as high-level strategic documents
and underpinned them by more detailed action plans or roadmaps that set out how
the objectives will be met (Fuertes & Harries, 2019). An important feature of NDCs is
that they need to represent a progression from previous NDCs and reflect the
highest possible ambition. Annex 1 of the Paris Rulebook adopted in 2018 provides
clarity on information required to facilitate clarity, transparency, and understanding
24
of NDCs, but does not specify the content of measures. In this sense, the Paris
Agreement reflects a hybrid approach – blending bottom-up flexibility, to promote
broad participation, with top-down rules, to promote accountability and ambition
(Huang, 2019).

23. Decision X/20 (para 11b)

24. Decision 4/CMA.1 (Annex 1)

67
Table 8: Comparison between NDCs (Paris Agreement) and NBSAPs (CBD).

NDCs NBSAPs

Structure – Many Parties have formulated their NDCs as a high-level – Consists of a strategy to set out a vision, principles and
strategic document and underpinned them by more priorities and targets, and an action plan to outline
detailed action plans or roadmaps that set out how the measures, identify resources, specify national coordination
objectives will be met. However, it is worth noting that the structures and establish a monitoring approach, including
preparation of an NDC implementation plan is not required identify indicators by which progress towards national
under the Paris Agreement targets will be measured and reported.

Status of plans – 186 Parties have submitted their first NDC – 185 Parties have submitted at least one NBSAP, from
which 170 Parties have submitted a post-2010 NBSAP

Procedural Article 4: Article 6:

commitments – Prepare, communicate, and maintain successive NDCs – Develop NBSAPs for the conservation and sustainable use
– Pursue domestic mitigation measures of biological diversity or adapt for this purpose existing
– Communicate NDCs every five years strategies, plans or programmes to reflect the measures set
– Account for NDCs and promote environmental integrity, out in the Convention
transparency, accuracy, completeness, comparability, and – Integrate biodiversity into relevant sectoral or cross-
consistency and ensure the avoidance of double counting sectoral plans, programmes and policies
– Regularly provide information on national inventories of
emissions
– Information necessary to track progress made in
implementing and achieving NDCs

Specification Annex I of the Paris Rulebook (2018): Decision X/2 (2010):

– Reference points – The Strategic Plan for Biodiversity 2011-2020 is a
– Time frames voluntary framework that includes 20 timebound Aichi
– Scope and coverage Biodiversity Targets to be used as a flexible reference in
– Planning processes for developing the plan setting national targets and measures when updating
– Assumptions and methodological approaches NBSAPs
– How the plan is fair and ambitious
– How the plan contributes towards achieving the objective
of the Convention

In 2013, the Barcelona Convention Regional Plan on Marine Litter Management in

the Mediterranean specifies that marine litter should be included in national action
25
plans (NAPs) for land-based sources. Table 9 lists measures to be included in the
NAPs and outlines steps for preparing NAPs. The Regional Plan for Marine Litter
Management includes several commitments for participating states to take future
action to address the problem by firm deadlines, and/or develop specific types of
instruments to do so.

25. Decision IG.21/7

68
Table 9: Measures and guidance for updating NAPs in Barcelona Convention Regional Plan on Marine Litter
Management in the Mediterranean.

Measures (Art 7) Secretariat’s NAP guidelines

• Develop and implement policy, legal instruments and institutional 1. Assess existing baseline and implementation of original NAP
arrangements measures
• Monitor and assess programmes for marine litter 2. Define quantifiable objectives & operational targets
• Develop measures to prevent and reduce marine litter 3. Identify gaps that prevent the country from meeting the targets
• Develop programmes for removal and environmentally sound 4. Prioritize issues and identify potential measures
disposal of existing marine litter 5. Select programme of measures
• Develop awareness raising and education programmes 6. Develop a follow-up and reporting plan
7. Draft the action plans

6.1.2 Precedents for NPMPs for marine plastic litter and microplastics

In 2017, UNEA-3 encouraged countries “to develop and implement action plans for
preventing marine litter and the discharge of microplastics” and specifies focusing of
26
following measures:

• Re-design and re-use of products and materials

• Encouraging resource efficiency
• Increasing collection and recycling rates of plastic waste
• Avoiding the unnecessary use of plastic and plastic containing chemicals of
particular concern

Many countries have pioneered national action plans with varying approaches taken,
most notably in relation to the extent to which the life cycle of plastics is addressed
and to what extent they address plastics beyond the marine environment. The
following examples illustrate different approaches taken and elements included in
some existing national and sub-national action plans on plastics:

• Indonesia’s national action plan on marine plastic debris has been

complemented with a multi-stakeholder action plan with targets across the life
cycle aiming to create 150.000 jobs (Ministry of the Environment of Indonesia,
2017; WEF, 2020).
• Finland’s national plastics roadmap focuses on the life cycle of plastics and
includes sectoral measures for the building and construction sectors, as well as
the agriculture and horticulture sectors (Ministry of the Environment of Finland,
2019).
• The Kenya plastic action plan consists of a three-year plan to set up an EPR
scheme aiming to operationalize a producer responsibility organization to
collect and manage the end-of-life of all streams of plastics (Kenya Association
of Manufacturers, 2019).
• The Canada-wide action plan on zero plastic waste outlines six priority areas
across the lifecycle, including development of design standards for recyclability
(Canadian Council of the Ministers of the Environment, 2018).
• The Thailand plastic waste management roadmap 2018–2030 aims to ban
certain plastics products and to make all plastic waste reusable by 2027.
• Norway has a national strategy that focuses on all sources of marine litter and

26. UNEP/UNEA/3/7 (para 4c)

69
 microplastics.
• Subnational action plans have been developed in the United States in the states
of Florida, California, Oregon, Hawaii, Washington and Virginia that focus on
education, public awareness, and research.

6.1.3 What should be considered in designing a mechanism for NPMPs?

Based on existing national action plan mechanisms, several useful features and
principles for the development of NPMPs can be identified. They could be embedded
in the agreement and specified in subsequent guidance. The following principles and
features could be considered in designing a national action plan mechanism.

Progression needs to be reflected as a key principle enabling action plans to function

as a ‘living document’ that reflects the highest possible ambition and progression
over time. This will ensure that targets and measures set by countries are
incremental within successive plans. For this to happen, political support is needed
for enhanced action.

Transparency means that information is presented in a way that is clear and can be
understood and verified. Reporting on information necessary to track the
implementation and achievement of action plans will help to further increase
transparency. Agreeing on minimum common elements could help to avoid
challenges deriving from the flexibility in the development of NPMPs that could lead
to incomplete and incomparable information between countries. Possible minimum
elements for consideration include:

• Baseline
• Timeframe
• Description of the methodology
• Description of scope
• Consideration of synergies with other relevant initiatives

Policy coherence across all relevant sectors can be achieved through a participatory
approach to planning, implementation and review of NPMPs. Commitment and
leadership at the highest political level is needed throughout the process. Coherence
can also be achieved by allowing the plan to function as an overarching framework
for all relevant international instruments, including relevant goals and targets of the
2030 Agenda on Sustainable Development.

Context-sensitivity in addressing national sources and pathways is important given

that national priorities and circumstances vary greatly. In other words, the plans
could promote a bottom-up approach that provides flexibility at the national level
for setting targets and identifying measures. Annex 1 lists possible national
measures grouped different categories.

Measurability through the use of quantified national targets could constitute an

integral part of NPMPs. The strategic goals could provide a common framework for
setting measurable targets to ensure convergence between plans, thus helping track
global progress. Table 10 illustrates possibilities for setting targets and indicators at
different levels in line with the proposed strategic goals. Furthermore, broad
categories of indicators for different types of measures could be identified and
countries would then define which indicators within these categories they will use to

70
 track progress towards their action plans. Ideally, the targets should be formulated
to be smart (specific, measurable, ambitious, realistic, and time-bound).
Accountability is important to assess the achievement of national targets through
the development of common methodologies for reporting (see section 7).

Table 10: Options for setting national targets and indicators.

Strategic goals Targets Outcome indicators Impact indicators

Elimination of problematic and – Problematic and avoidable – Measurable quantitative – An impact-oriented target would include
avoidable products plastic products are phased out reduction of problematic and detecting a x% decrease of microplastics
by 20xx avoidable plastic products and plastics present in the environment by
setting a specific goal year. Some
Sustainable management of – Plastics are designed to be – Loss of pellets, powder and countries have already ambitious
essential plastics reused and recycled by 20xx flakes reduction targets, with Vietnam and
– Plastic products include x% – Quantity of plastics produced, Thailand striving for 50% reduction and
recycled content by 20xx consumed and traded Indonesia 70% reduction of marine plastic
– Recycled content of plastics litter by 2025.

Sustainable waste management – Plastics are reused and – Rate of collection, reuse, – Thresholds for good environmental
recycled in practice by 20xx recycling, landfilling, and status identified in the EU Marine
– An EPR scheme is developed by incineration of plastic waste Strategy Framework Directive are
20xx relevant, including 20 pieces of litter along
100 meters of beach. A closely related
Chemical hazard reduction – Toxic chemical additives are – Measurable quantitative national environmental target includes
phased out from plastic reduction in use of toxic chemical reducing plastic litter found on the shore in
products by 20x additives Finland by 30% by 2024.

Long-term financial stability of the plans should be pursued by securing funding

from all relevant sources, including public, private, international and domestic
sources. The role of international funding will be pronounced in the initial phase,
enabling the development of NPMPs and the introduction of relevant measures,
including market-based instruments, that will help to generate a stable and long-
term source of funding needed for ensuring sustainable management of plastics
across the life cycle.

Strengthening of institutional capacity should be centrally featured in the

preparation and implementation of NPMPs to minimize potential challenges that
could present in terms of weak political support, lack of financial, human and
technical resources; and analytical capabilities (Röser et al., 2020). Preparing NPMPs
requires substantive amounts of data, knowledge and capacity to assess the
potential outcomes of various policy options, as well as financial and human
resources. Without proper analysis and data, goals, targets and policies risk being
under- or over-ambitious, which in turn affects the chances of successful
implementation.

71
6.2 Sustainability criteria for the plastic products life cycle
‘Sustainability criteria’ is a broad term for cascades of inter-related directives,
guidelines, best practices, codes, standards, and procedures intended to enable
environmentally sound management of plastics. A new agreement could include a
commitment by parties to develop international sustainability criteria and flow-on
implementing measures for sustainable management of plastic products.

6.2.1 The idea of Sustainability Criteria

Core sustainability criteria for plastic products would be formulated during the
negotiation of the new agreement but these could create only a bare framework for
the subsequent development of more specific technical measures by the State
parties, in consultation with industry partners and civil society. The outputs of a
time-bound multilateral negotiation for a new international agreement would most
likely be limited to general directives for sustainability criteria. (An illustration is
provided in box 1, which sets out Annex II of the UNECE Watercourses Convention.)

72
Box 1: UNECE Watercourses Convention, ANNEX II

GUIDELINES FOR DEVELOPING BEST ENVIRONMENTAL PRACTICES

1. In selecting for individual cases the most appropriate combination of measures

which may constitute the best environmental practice, the following graduated
range of measures should be considered:

(a) Provision of information and education to the public and to users about
the environmental consequences of the choice of particular activities and
products, their use and ultimate disposal;

(b) The development and application of codes of good environmental

practice which cover all aspects of the product’s life;

(c) Labels informing users of environmental risks related to a product, its

use and ultimate disposal;

(d) Collection and disposal systems available to the public;

(e) Recycling, recovery and reuse;

(f) Application of economic instruments to activities, products or groups of

products;

(g) A system of licensing, which involves a range of restrictions or a ban.

In determining what combination of measures constitute best environmental

practices, in general or in individual cases, particular consideration should be given
to:

(a) The environmental hazard of:

(i) The product;

(ii) The product’s production;

(iii) The product’s use;

(iv) The product’s ultimate disposal;

(b) Substitution by less polluting processes or substances;

(c) Scale of use;

(d) Potential environmental benefit or penalty of substitute materials or

activities;

(e) Advances and changes in scientific knowledge and understanding;

(f) Time limits for implementation;

(g) Social and economic implications.

73
Negotiators might formulate an agreement that sets the sustainability criteria and
requiring the formulation at a later stage of more specific measures to promote the
agreement’s fundamental objectives and strategic goals. These criteria could seek to
promote the environmentally sound management of plastics through the detailed
development at the national level of: (a) public information and education; (b) codes
of best environmental practice across the life cycle; (c) environmental labelling; (d)
collection and disposal; (e) reuse, repair and recycling; (f) economic instruments; or
(g) licensing and restrictions.

A more specific example in relation to the application of ‘best environmental

practice’ is the formulation of codes for particular plastic product types that
promote their reuse, durability and repairability and that eliminate hazardous
products. Should more detailed criteria, standards or guidelines be needed for
particular product categories (additives, for example), these could be developed in
stages and by different subsidiary or parallel bodies.

Additional measures giving effect to the sustainability criteria might be developed in

the form of binding protocols or annexes to the agreement, or otherwise made
mandatory through parallel industry standards. However, most measures that fulfil
the criteria might be expressed through voluntary guidelines, best practices, and
codes. The specific measures could be developed through decision-making
mechanisms subsidiary to the agreement, such as decisions of the Conference of
Parties informed by a technical and economic advisory group, or parallel to the
agreement, such as by industry associations, as appropriate to the type of measure.
The advantages of setting criteria for further measures include allowing for
innovation and adaptation to new technologies.

Sustainability criteria Sustainable management measures

– Direct the outputs to be achieved – Define how the criteria are to be met

• Define performance outcomes • Standardise performance

• Promote innovation • More prescriptive, restrictive
• Allow for adaptation to technology • May mandate specific inputs
• Provide for flexible, cost-effective measures • May specify compliance with standards

6.2.2 Industry engagement

Engagement of industry at both the national and international levels is needed.

Although industry is not directly governed through international agreements or
financial mechanisms, industry is influenced by standards that are established and
promoted globally through multilateral agreements, and their commerce is indirectly
governed by standards or obligations established in national legislation (UNEP, 2013).
International agreements do therefore influence industry and can spur the
mobilization of resources and assist in a number of other ways, including (Ellen
Macarthur Foundation, 2019):

• Increase participation by signalling market stability, fairness and known

requirements for access.
• Streamline auditing by specifying measurement boundaries and information

74
 requirements.
• Demonstrate compliance by clarifying adhesion to a set of mandatory or
voluntary levels of performance.
• Build trust by informing customers and consumers about performance within a
given context and removing uncertainty, thereby helping them make informed
purchasing decisions.

The new agreement could formulate obligations or guidance for States to promote
industry compliance with the performance measures set out in the sustainability
criteria. This can be achieved through the development of national plastics
sustainability standards that give effect to the international sustainability criteria.
At the same time, the convergence of industry standards at the international level,
harmonised by international sustainability criteria, could help create a level playing
field for industry and governments, incentivize the design of products that generate
less waste or waste that is more likely to be collected and recycled. This would
ultimately reduce the burden of waste management on municipalities and taxpayers.

“[T]he single market provides a critical mass enabling the EU to set global standards
in product sustainability and to influence product design and value chain
management worldwide.” (EU circular economy action plan)

Table 11 illustrates the possible stages that would address deeper levels of design
criteria, the instrument type in which these could be reflected and in which fora they
could be developed. Further standards could satisfy the needs for adoption within
national legislation towards globally sustainable production of plastics (see row A in
Table 13).

75
Table 11: Development of product sustainability criteria and standards.

A. Objectives, goals and criteria – Fundamental objectives – Defined in agreement

– Four strategic goals
– Sustainability criteria directive (to be further
expressed in other measures)

For possible development post-adoption of global agreement:

B. Sustainability criteria outputs – Performance outcomes – Defined in annexes, guidelines, etc. by a

– Address product categories, additives & technical and economic advisory committee
transparency. with sector representation across life cycle,
– Promote reuse, durability, repairability & e.g. recyclability outcomes
prevention of leakage.

C. Design standards for recyclability – Product design standards – Defined in technical codes and standards by
– Defines desirable product and/or process Technical Expert Committees with sector
characteristics representation (e.g. tourism, agriculture,
– Address sectors, product categories & construction)
additives
– Labelling standards

National adoption of sustainability objectives and criteria:

D. National adoption measures – National plastics sustainability standards – Defined by national standards setting
– Technical regulations bodies for use in regulatory, co-regulatory and
– Standards voluntary mechanisms
– Conformity assessment procedures

The sustainability criteria may be grouped by the desired outcome and benefits of
products on the wider environment, improvement to social conditions and economic
enablers towards a circular economy. Alternatively, they could form categories of
measures, cascading in groups according to the particular strategic goal, or the
plastic product type or life cycle phase. A step-wise description (steps A–D) is set
out below. Examples can also be found in existing global instruments (see Table 10).

A. The product sustainability criteria for plastic products, including additives, can be
embodied in the text of a new global agreement.

B. The broad measures for achieving these product sustainability criteria can then be
further detailed in annexes and guidelines developed by a subsidiary body. For the
purposes of this report, the focus of the criteria is on “design for recyclability”.

C. Technical standards and sectoral codes of practice can be developed to promote

‘design for recyclability’. The aim of design for recyclability is to:

• enable economically viable collection and recycling, but also to

• set criteria against which products can be reduced on domestic markets.

By including ‘design for recyclability’ objectives and criteria in a global agreement,

governments are provided a tool to 1) reduce products on the market that do not

76
meet the ‘recyclability’ criteria and 2) promote the circularity of the value chain
through the reuse and recycling of products and components, with recycling being a
‘catch all’ for products for which reuse is not an option.

D. At the national level, countries develop national sustainability standards for

plastics and additives in fulfillment of the international sustainability criteria.
Countries may then choose to implement regulatory or voluntary measures, as well
as market-based instruments, based on a product meeting, at a minimum, the
agreed international product sustainability criteria.

Where packaging waste materials cease to be waste as a result of a preparatory

operation before being actually reprocessed, such materials can be counted as
recycled provided that they are destined for subsequent reprocessing into products,
materials or substances, whether for their original or other purposes. End-of-waste
materials which are to be used as fuels or other means to generate energy, which are
backfilled or disposed of, or which are to be used in any operation that has the same
purpose as recovery of waste other than recycling, should not be counted towards
the attainment of the recycling targets. (DIRECTIVE (EU) 2018/852 Packaging and
packaging waste)

6.2.3 Sustainability criteria to fulfil the agreed strategic goals

The sustainability criteria would be set out in the agreement text and logically reflect
the strategic goals of the new agreement. They could provide a pathway to the
development of tools to address all life cycle phases of plastic products.
International sustainability criteria should aim to foster the following high-level
outcomes:

1. Elimination of problematic and hazardous applications,

2. Transmission of information about material and chemical characteristics of
product across value chain
3. High rates of waste collection,
4. Near-100% rates of recycling for collected wastes,
5. Creation of preconditions for functioning markets for secondary raw materials
and
6. Sound management of wastes and export of wastes, where necessary, in
compliance with the 2019 Basel Convention amendments.

Table 12 provides examples from existing global instruments to illustrate the use of
performance outcomes as they may relate to the four strategic goals of a new
agreement.

77
Table 12: Examples of sustainability objectives from existing instruments.

STATEGIC GOAL 1 – ELIMINATION OF PROBLEMATIC AND AVOIDABLE PLASTIC PRODUCTS

Examples illustrate support for objectives that aim to reduce to a minimum those products manufactured or placed on the market that do not
contribute to a circular plastics value chain

Strategy of the – To have phased out, by 1 January 2017, the discharge of offshore chemicals that are, or which contain substances,
Convention for the identified as candidates for substitution, except for those chemicals where, despite considerable efforts, it can be
Protection of the Marine demonstrated that this is not feasible due to technical or safety reasons (OSPAR Recommendation 2006/3).
Environment of the North-
East Atlantic (OSPAR)
Commission for the
Protection of the Marine
Environment of the North-
East Atlantic 2010–2020

DIRECTIVE 2000/53/EC – Vehicles may be put on the market only if they are reusable and/or recyclable to a minimum of 85% by mass and
on end-of life vehicles are reusable and/or recoverable to a minimum of 95% by mass.

IMO, Briefing: 06 13/04/ – Carbon intensity of international shipping to decline with reductions in CO2 emissions per transport work, as an
2018* average across international shipping, by at least 40% by 2030, pursuing efforts towards 70% by 2050, compared
to 2008.

STATEGIC GOAL 2 – SUSTAINABLE MANAGEMENT OF ESSENTIAL PRODUCTS

Examples illustrate support for objectives that aim towards improving design for recyclability and ensuring traceability

Energy Efficiency Design Index (EEDI):

– to reduce the amount of CO2 emissions from international shipping.
– non-prescriptive, performance-based mechanism
IMO, MARPOL Annex VI, – choice of technologies for a specific ship design left to industry
Prevention of Air Pollution – provides specific figure for individual ship design (grams of CO2 per ship’s capacity-mile – a smaller EEDI
from Ships indicates more energy efficient ship design)
– calculated by formula based on the technical design parameters for a given ships**
– embraces 72% of emissions from new ships
– Imposes increasing limits on the index to drive more energy efficient ship technologies over time.***

– Products placed on EU market will be designed to last longer, to be easier to repair and upgrade, recycle and
EU Circular Economy reuse.
Action Plan. The European – Driving new business models will boost sorting, reuse and recycling of textiles, and allow consumers to choose
Green Deal (doi:10.2775/ sustainable textiles. Ecodesign will apply to a broader range of products: clothes will be made to last longer.
458852) – Measures will be introduced for waste prevention and reduction, increasing recycled content, minimising waste
exports outside EU. An EU model for separate collection and labelling of products will be launched.

– Aims at the prevention of waste from vehicles and at the reuse, recycling and other forms of recovery of end-of
life vehicles and their components
– Aims to reduce the disposal of waste
DIRECTIVE 2000/53/EC
– Aims to improve the environmental performance of all economic operators in the life cycle of vehicles, particularly
on end-of life vehicles
those directly involved in of end-of life treatment.
– Requirements for dismantling, reuse and recycling of end-of life vehicles and their components should be
integrated in the design and production of new vehicles.

78
MSC Fisheries Standard – The stock is at a level which maintains high productivity and has a low probability of recruitment overfishing
v2.01, 2018 – The stock is at a level which has a low probability of serious ecosystem impacts.
– Where the stock is reduced, there is evidence of stock rebuilding within a specified timeframe.
– Serious or irreversible harm to “structure or function” means changes caused by the Unit of Assessment (UoA)
that fundamentally alter the capacity of the habitat or ecosystem to maintain its structure and function.
– For the habitat component, this is the reduction in habitat structure, biological diversity, abundance and function
such that the habitat would be unable to recover to at least 80% of its unimpacted structure, biological diversity
and function within 5–20 years, if fishing were to cease entirely.
– For the ecosystem component, this is the reduction of key features most crucial to maintaining the integrity of its
structure and functions and ensuring that ecosystem resilience and productivity is not adversely impacted. This
includes, but is not limited to, permanent changes in the biological diversity of the ecological community and the
ecosystem’s capacity to deliver ecosystem services.

Operation Clean Sweep – Aims for zero pellet loss

– Resin pellets should be contained, reclaimed and/or disposed of properly

STATEGIC GOAL 3 – SUSTAINABLE WASTE MANAGEMENT

Examples illustrate support for objectives that aim towards application of best practices, adequate processes and infrastructure to enable a
circular plastics value chain

Basel Convention – “Environmentally sound management of hazardous wastes or other wastes” means taking all practicable steps
to ensure that hazardous wastes or other wastes are managed in a manner which will protect human health and
the environment against the adverse effects which may result from such wastes. (Article 1. 8)
– Each Party shall take the appropriate measures to:
(a) Ensure that the generation of hazardous wastes and other wastes within it is reduced to a minimum, taking
into account social, technological and economic aspects;
b) Ensure the availability of adequate disposal facilities, for the environmentally sound management of hazardous
wastes and other wastes, that shall be located, to the extent possible, within it, whatever the place of their
disposal;
(d) Ensure that the transboundary movement of hazardous wastes and other wastes is reduced to the minimum
consistent with the environmentally sound and efficient management of such wastes and is conducted in a
manner which will protect human health and the environment against the adverse effects which may result from
such movement (Article 4.2.).

General objectives of – The purpose of the Waste Act is to support sustainable development by promoting the rational use of natural
waste policy, Finland**** resources and preventing and combating the hazard and harm to health and the environment arising from wastes.
In general, it requires the recovery of waste if this is technically and economically feasible, primarily in the form of
material and secondarily as energy.
– Preventing the generation of waste through improved material efficiency
– More efficient recycling
– Promoting the management of hazardous substances from the waste point of view
– Reducing the harmful climatic impacts of waste management
– Reducing the health and environmental impacts of waste management
– Putting trans-frontier waste shipments on a safe and well-managed basis

79
STATEGIC GOAL 4 – CHEMICAL HAZARD REDUCTION

Examples illustrate support for objectives that aim towards elimination of harm to human health and environment from chemicals used in the
manufacture, recovery, recycling, reclamation, direct reuse or alternative uses of plastic products, and enabling the tracking of legacy chemicals.

Stockholm Convention – Protect human health and the environment by taking the necessary measures to minimize or prevent releases
(Article 3.2.b.II).
– In order to ensure that stockpiles consisting of or containing chemicals listed either in Annex A or Annex B and
wastes, including products and articles upon becoming wastes, …, are managed in a manner protective of human
health and the environment 6.1(d).
– Each Party shall … take appropriate measures so that such wastes, including products and articles upon
becoming wastes, are:
(i) Handled, collected, transported and stored in an environmentally sound manner;
(ii) Disposed of in such a way that the persistent organic pollutant content is destroyed or irreversibly transformed
so that they do not exhibit the characteristics of persistent organic pollutants …;
(iii) Not permitted to be subjected to disposal operations that may lead to recovery, recycling, reclamation, direct
reuse or alternative uses of persistent organic pollutants; and
(iv) Not transported across international boundaries without taking into account relevant international rules,
standards and guidelines; (Article 6.1)
– The Conference of the Parties shall cooperate closely with the appropriate bodies of the Basel Convention …l to,
inter alia:
(a) Establish levels of destruction and irreversible transformation necessary to ensure that the characteristics of
persistent organic pollutants as specified in paragraph 1 of Annex D are not exhibited;
(b) Determine what they consider to be the methods that constitute environmentally sound disposal referred to
above; and
(c) Work to establish, as appropriate, the concentration levels of the chemicals listed in Annexes A, B and C in order
to define the low persistent organic pollutant content referred to in paragraph 1 (d) (ii). (Article 2.)

Background Document on – GREEN – Concentrations of contaminants are at levels where it can be assumed that little or no risks are posed
CEMP assessment criteria to the environment and its living resource at the population or community level. No significant risk of adverse
for the QSR 2010, OSPAR effects to the environment, or to human health.
Commission – BLUE – Concentrations are close to background or zero, i.e. the ultimate aim of the OSPAR Strategy for
Hazardous Substances has been achieved.

DIRECTIVE 2000/53/EC – Hazardous materials and components shall be removed and segregated in a selective way so as not to
on end-of life vehicles contaminate subsequent shredder waste from end-of life vehicles (more details provided in Annex I (3)).

Notes:
* Available at: http://www.imo.org/en/MediaCentre/PressBriefings/Pages/06GHGinitialstrategy.aspx
** https://www.marpol-annex-vi.com/eedi-seemp/
***IMO, 2016. Module 2 - Ship Energy Efficiency Regulations and Related Guidelines. Available at:
http://www.imo.org/en/OurWork/Environment/PollutionPrevention/AirPollution/Documents/Air%20pollution/
M2%20EE%20regulations%20and%20guidelines%20final.pdf
**** Available at: https://www.un.org/esa/dsd/dsd_aofw_ni/ni_pdfs/NationalReports/finland/WASTE.pdf

It is important that the expected outcomes of the sustainability criteria support

achievement of the strategic goals. These, in turn, would guide national measures,
targets, indicators and reporting (see Section 6.2.7). The international sustainability
criteria for plastics and the NPMPs are given effect through the development of
national plastics measure. These measures are:

• Develop national plastics sustainability standards to fulfill international criteria

for plastic products sustainability.
• Integrate the national plastics sustainability standards within regulations to
eliminate problematic plastics that can be avoided.

80
 • Integrate the national plastics sustainability standards within market-based
instruments to support a sustainable market for plastic products, such as by
increasing reusability, repairability and recyclability of products and support
financial mechanisms to fund waste management services.

6.3 National plastics sustainability standards

International sustainability criteria for plastics and their additives can be given
effect at the national level through the development of national standards that
fulfill the international objectives and criteria. States have flexibility in designing
their national plastics sustainability standards to reflect the prevailing legal, social
and geographical conditions, including other MEAs they may be party to. This
hierarchy of objectives, criteria and criteria could, in the future, lead to the
development of international indicators which, in turn, can be used to determine
national indicators.

National plastics sustainability standards can be integrated into national legal and
policy instruments to suit the national circumstances. These can include regulations
to minimise products that do not meet the standards, or incentivise design change
through market-based instruments to promote new the development of new
products that meet the national design standards.

To develop product design standards, a technical and economic advisory committee

could be established as a subsidiary body to the new global agreement. As for any
standard-setting organisation, this committee should consider the following when
developing product design standards:

• define the scope, justification of the need for the standard, clear social,
environmental and economic outcomes, assessment of the risks,
• level of performance expected and baselines (where appropriate)
• economic feasibility
• review and revision process – assess outcomes as well as relevance and
effectiveness
• transition periods
• exceptions and exemptions
• resolution process
27
• assistance for developing countries.

Table 13 provides a high-level overview of some of the regulatory and market-based

instruments in use in various countries, including strengths and weaknesses to
consider when designing regulatory interventions and market-based instruments.
The list is not exhaustive and examples exist of implementation that vary from what
is provided in this summary.

27. Adapted from Social and Environmental Standards ISEAL Code of Good Practice, v6.0, 2014

81
Table 13: Regulatory and market-based instruments for consideration and their strengths and weaknesses.
Policy measure Type of fund Strengths Weaknesses

Voluntary EPR Industry or Lower government administration. Schemes Transparency to ensure inflated waste
(industry initiated) government may be certified by government. May require management costs are not transferred to
cooperation between government and industry consumers.
to set targets. Opportunity for free-riders. May reduce waste-
picker income.

Co-regulatory EPR Industry or Medium government administration. Opportunity for free-riders. May reduce waste-
government Cooperation between government and industry picker income.
to set targets.

Mandatory EPR Industry or High government administration. Third-party Open tender for waste services to prevent
government auditing. Certification of waste services. monopolies and price increases. Opportunity for
free-riders. May reduce waste-picker income.

Advanced recycling Industry or Lower government administration. May not incentivise design for recycling. May
fee, licensing fees government reduce waste-picker income.

Fixed taxes (volume Government Medium government administration. May not incentivise design for recycling. May
or weight placed on reduce waste-picker income.
market)

Differential taxes Government High government administration to determine Can incentivise design for recycling. May be
tax rates. Requires transparency on waste combined with exemptions for low producers.
management costs.

Deposit return Government Consumer provides sorting and first-leg New infrastructure and collection services
scheme collection required. Opportunity for free-riders.

Pay-as-you-throw Government Incentive to reduce waste generation and sort Preferable to combine with separate collection
(pre-paid garbage recyclables. Can be implemented where systems of wet waste and recyclables to reduce volume in
bags) not in place to collect municipal rates. pre-paid garbage bags.

Landfill levies Government Incentive to reduce, repair, reuse, repurpose. Can Requires infrastructure (weighing stations) and
apply higher rate to disposal of recyclables. sorting. May increase illegal dumping.

Environmental Government Low government administration. Funds may not be allocated to waste
levies management only.

Fines Government High enforcement. Fines often not sufficient to deter dumping.

82
6.3.1 Domestic regulatory measures to manage plastics sustainably

National regulatory measures are essential to achieving environmentally sound

management of plastics, not only as waste, but also across the value chain of plastic
products to implement international sustainability criteria. Environmentally sound
management of plastics can be greatly enhanced by managing the products placed
on domestic markets based on the following objectives:

1. Eliminating avoidable and problematic products and chemicals,

2. Increasing supply and quality of recyclable material for end-markets, and
3. Increasing demand (end-markets) for recycled materials.

To meet those sustainability criteria for plastic products formulated pursuant to a

new international agreement, countries would regulate the products placed on their
domestic markets with the aim of facilitating sustainable management of the
product at the end of its intended life.

Elimination of avoidable and problematic products and chemicals

Domestic regulations can stimulate the use of systems that reuse products and
promote the repairability of products. Where products are considered problematic
within the domestic context, e.g. because they are not suited to reuse or repairability
systems, a ban may be considered as a suitable way to implement sustainability
criteria.

Domestic regulations can also reduce the use of hazardous substances associated
with the production, use and recycling of plastic products. For example,
sustainability criteria can provide a basis for assessing the reintroduction to the
market of regulated substances through recycling processes.

Recyclability

Efforts are underway in many countries to increase the recycling rate of plastic
products, particularly those that are not made of PET. A number of factors influence
the recycling rate, including those that enhance the supply of quality recyclable
material and the demand for such material. Regulations such as landfill taxes and
bans on recyclable materials being disposed of in landfill or incinerated can ensure
such materials are not lost to the economy. Up-take of these materials can be
facilitated through regulations for minimum recycled content and procurement
policies to sustain demand. See tables 11 and 12 for further examples of policy and
regulatory options to support improved recycling rates.

Where a domestic market is not yet available for particular recycling processes or
materials, products that meet the preferred design criteria can be more easily
disassembled, sorted and traded. Thus, the transboundary movement of plastic
waste as per the Basel Convention can be complemented.

6.3.2 Domestic market-based instruments to influence industry and consumers

Management and financing of solid waste management is predominantly the

responsibility of local government. A lack of funding in many regions contributes to

83
an estimated 2 billion people globally not having access to adequate waste collection
services (Wilson et al., 2015). International financial support alone cannot provide
the necessary improvements to waste management that is required to ‘catch up’ to
forecast increase in production rates of plastics.

A significant portion of finance for waste management therefore needs to come

from domestic sources, coupled with strategies to reduce the volumes of plastic
waste generated. The principles of polluter pays and EPR are instrumental in
reducing the financial burden of the public sector in managing plastic wastes.

Market-based instruments can be efficiently utilised by governments to promote

sustainable plastic management, incentivise residual waste minimisation, and to
assist in subsidising the costs of end-of-life treatment of plastic wastes. The
development and implementation of domestic market-based instruments relevant
to the management of plastic products and residual wastes across the life cycle of
plastics is a commitment that countries might undertake when becoming a Party to
the new agreement.

It is for governments to determine which market-based instruments (MBIs) are best

suited to their socio-economic context and how these are best designed. There are
no international standards for MBIs that address sustainable management of
plastics. However, national governments could be guided by international criteria
and national plastics sustainability standards for sustainable management of
plastic products when formulating their own domestic MBIs. International
sustainability criteria can be integrated into national economic policies as countries
consider appropriate within their domestic context.

Value chain entry-points for economic and regulatory policies could be mapped for
each country but could include extended producer responsibility schemes that
incorporate the producer and the consumer, as well as incentives to engage novel
methods of transporting waste that go beyond traditional collection systems. The
intention of such economic and regulatory policies would be to subsidise waste
management processes where necessary to ensure long-term viability of the
provision of waste management services and to stabilize end-markets and recycling
industries.

By incorporating international sustainability criteria, governments can aim to allow

products on the domestic market that fall within their ‘preferred’ category. This, in
turn, will stimulate investment in end-markets, increase collection rates and reduce
contamination through simplified sorting procedures.

A number of instruments are in use to varying degrees in different countries and can
be applied at different entry points within the national value chain. Examples of such
incentives can be found around the world. Some examples include: importers and
manufacturers; distributors; retailers; and consumers.

Low-technology options should also be considered. In lower-income communities,

services for collection, sorting and waste transport may not be available provided by
the government or the private sector. Incentives to collect and return plastic waste
will need to be suited to the socio-economic context. Many examples exist around
the world that can be scaled and supported by government, including:

• India – school children are encouraged to bring plastic waste to school to pay
for school fees (initially no school fees were imposed, but schools announced

84
 children must bring plastic or pay cash)
• Indonesia – bus fares are paid with plastic waste
• Technology applications – participants are placed in direct contact with
recycling facilities and can advertise collected material, which is then exchanged
for cash

Economic interventions to drive the recycling rates for plastic wastes include (OECD,
2018a):

1. Mobilise investment for developing collection, sorting and processing systems,

particularly in low-income contexts.
2. Use financial market mechanisms to increase the resilience of the market to
fluctuations in prices (e.g. futures markets or centrally managed risk funds)
3. Support development of domestic reprocessing capacity to reduce reliance on
global markets.
4. Use taxes or trading mechanisms to internalise the externalities associated with
primary plastics. This will support the price of recycled plastics.
5. Tax additives that cause detrimental effects on recycled plastics (including
degradability enhancers)
6. Incentivise recycling over energy from waste by introducing a tax to reflect the
relative environmental burden/benefit.
7. Introduce tax incentives to encourage use of recycled plastics (e.g. VAT
exemptions).
8. Charge waste producers for collection and disposal of non-recyclable waste.

How funds are collected pursuant to MBIs and the value charged for such funds is at
the discretion of governments. These decisions should be based on robust socio-
economic studies conducted within the context of each country to determine which
sectors may benefit or be disadvantaged by such policy interventions. Consideration
of vulnerable communities, particularly waste-pickers, is essential to ensure
appropriate integration within sustainable waste management strategies. In most
scenarios, waste management services need to be certified and the declared costs
of services need to be transparent in order to prevent distortion of costs to the
producer and consumer.

Figure 5 provides a high-level overview of the primary components of the plastics

value chain associated with most market-based instruments, as well as examples of
possible entry points for such instruments within the value chain of plastics.

85
Figure 5: Illustration of the plastics value chain and entry points for market-based
instruments shown in blue and green boxes.

Taxes, benefits and charges

Taxes, benefits and charges can stimulate desirable responses from industry and
consumers. A product that is easily reused and repaired, or is more easily collected,
sorted and recycled within the domestic context could gain easier access to the
market, whereas those that are not easily collected, sorted and recycled may incur
greater market restrictions, such as higher taxes. Those features that render a
product unrecyclable within the domestic context may also be placed under a take-
back scheme to cover the costs of sorting and exporting the resulting waste
components.

Funds may be collected at the national level in the form of taxes, advanced recycling
fees, deposits and levies. These funds can be administered by industry or
government, but funds collected should be allocated to the improvement and
subsidising of waste management services. Auditing of funds, certification of waste
service providers and transparency of the costs of providing waste services must all
be considered in the design of MBIs, where appropriate.

Extended Producer Responsibility

EPR schemes are one example of economic interventions available for consideration
at the national level. Such schemes incentivise industry to change the design of
products, particularly when based on the desirable characteristics of products
(Kaffine & O'Reilly, 2015).

Mandatory EPR schemes may not be the preferred option for some countries or for
some products. A voluntary mechanism to engage with industry may be considered
more appropriate. Such mechanisms may also be required as a temporary measure
to pilot industry-managed schemes or while mandatory and other requirements for
implementation are developed. Voluntary measures can be migrated to co-

86
regulatory or mandatory programmes based on government and industry
requirements.

An example may be found in South Africa where, in place of legislating EPR schemes,
the government called for Industry Waste Management Plans. In response,
Packaging SA and a number of producer responsibility organisations (PROs) co-
operated in the development of their individual industry-led waste management
plans and submitted these together as a Federation of Plans to the South African
government. The Industry Waste Management Plan for PET bottles requires
collaboration between multiple stakeholders, including brand owners, retailers PET
converters and local councils. The plan aims to advance the circular economy, reduce
the use of virgin materials and integrate the formal and informal sectors. The
Industry Waste Management Plans have been submitted to government for review,
28
including a Shared Cost plan.

Options for national measures towards a circular plastics value chain

The economic viability of most business models relies on the adequate supply of
quality materials and a constant demand for these materials. Economic viability also
varies with local circumstances. Therefore, optimal costing and funding models will
vary. For example, funding models to support product end-of-life processes include:

• Polluter Pays – manufacturer, importer fee (differential);

• User Pays – pre-paid garbage bags (cost transferred to user);
• Licensing fees – producer pays for end-of-life treatment and places certifying
label on product to inform consumer;
• Deposit – cost transferred to user, but refunded on return of item; and
• Visitor, hospitality fees (tourist arrival levy, service fee on accommodation, etc.).

Table 14 provides examples of national measures that could integrate international

sustainability criteria, as well as national plastics sustainability standards. These can
target specific outcomes that aim to minimise high-risk products and increase the
supply and demand of recyclable plastics, thereby improving the economic viability
of recycling operations.

28. https://www.rpc-astrapak.com/minimising-our-impact/

87
Table 14: Approaches for national measures towards a circular plastics value chain.

SUSTAINABILITY OUTCOME - SUPPLY:

Improve the quality of materials recovered for recycling in order to improve the quality of recycled material.

Elimination and Remove problematic products from the market. Ban problematic products.
reduction Encourage design for reusability, repairability, elimination of
hazardous substances and leakage (incl. microplastics)
through differential taxes/fees.

Improve sorting at Ease dismantling. Incentives to design for components separation to assist in
facilities recycling processes.

Ease identification of different polymers. Marking of polymers to assist in separation for recycling
processes.

Reduce delays at sorting facilities due to entanglement. Restrict lightweight and single use products.
Provide alternate collection systems.

Enhance ease of Reduce number of polymers in separable plastic Incentives for design (e.g. differential taxes/fees).
recycling components. Inclusion of design criteria in EPR schemes (mandatory,
industry-led).

Increases end-markets by producing recycled material in Use of colours of plastics and inks printed directly onto
readily usable colours. components.

Improve ease of label separation, improve options for Incentivise sustainable use of glues, printing inks.
recycling labels, reduce toxicity.

Use of non-recyclable materials. Incentives for design (e.g. differential taxes).

Reduce disposal costs by recycling facilities. Inclusion in EPR schemes for collection of non-recyclable
material (mandatory, industry-led).

SUSTAINABILITY OUTCOME - DEMAND:

Establish secure end-markets independent of virgin feedstocks.

Increase uptake of Procurement policies (mandatory or voluntary) Inclusion of recycled content in products purchased. E.g.
recycled content Government, universities, public events,
Sectors (e.g. tourism, agriculture).

Policies (mandatory or voluntary) for inclusion of recycled MoU with industry (targets, minimum quality standards,
content in products manufactured reporting).
Industry-led commitments.

Improve consumer Preference for recycled content, recyclability of product Labelling (education).
choice

The above measures can be further supported by additional actions that may not
specifically target the quality of recyclable materials available or the uptake thereof.
Table 15 highlights some additional strategies that can increase the quantity of
recyclable materials returned to the economy and should be included in an
integrated plastics management plan at the national level.

88
Table 15: National measures to support a circular plastics value chain.

SUSTAINABILITY OUTCOMES:

– Increase quantity and proportion of recyclable materials returned to the economy.

– Establish a holistic integrated management strategy to support measures to increase supply of and demand for recyclable plastics

Reduce By non-plastics: Separation at source of organic and other Mandatory separation./Mandatory separate collection for
contamination wastes. organic and other wastes by councils.

By other plastics: Separation at source of recyclable and Mandatory separation./Mandatory separate collection of
non-recyclable plastics. recyclable and non-recyclable plastics by councils.

Prevent loss of Disincentivise linear disposal models. Landfill levies./Ban on sending recyclables to landfill or
recyclables to incineration.
economy

Improve correct disposal practices for product. Labelling (education).

Reduce the need for final disposal. Increase reusability of products.

Improve collection EPR Schemes. Hold producers physically and/or financially responsible for
rates collection.

Return schemes. Incentivise consumers to return containers, electronics,

bulky items, etc.

Reduce transport EPR schemes. Hold producer completely/partially physically and/or

costs financially responsible for collection.

Advanced recycling fees. Producer contributes to scheme for cost of collection

(without physically responsibility).

Reverse logistics. Through deposit schemes or supply chain processes.

Backloading. Incentivise transport sector to participate in waste

transport, particularly for remote/rural areas.

Labelling

In addition to the optional measures listed in tables 14 & 15, labelling can assist in
promoting the use of recycled material in the manufacturing phase of the plastics
life cycle and in the choice of purchases in the consumer phase. The types of labelling
that may be considered within national standards and codes of practice include:

1. Ecolabels – links the product to the state of the resource and/or its related
management regime, e.g. private standards and certification in fisheries and
29
aquaculture.
2. Product content labels – provide advice on how a product is made up, such as
the content, process or country of origin, e.g. regulatory compliance with design
standards; energy usage; food ingredients.
3. Product usage labels – e.g. product safety.
4. Product disposal labels – educate the consumer on how to dismantle and/or
dispose of the product and its components, e.g. How2Recycle.

The development of labelling standards can be considered at the international level

by a subsidiary body or an expert group for inclusion within sustainability criteria or

29. UN FAO, 2011. Available at: http://www.fao.org/3/i1948e/i1948e04.pdf

89
standards. Suggestions provided in the OECD report on policy interventions that
drive recycling rates for plastic waste (OECD, 2018a) can offer a basis for the
development of National Plastics Management Plans, as well as regulatory and
market-based instruments. These and further examples of policy interventions to
manage domestic markets are provided in Annexes 2 and 3.

6.3.3 Achieving the four strategic goals through national implementation of

sustainability criteria

The performance outcomes of sustainability criteria and their related technical

design standards are fulfilled through adoption and implementation at the national
level of national plastics sustainability standards. These may be integrated into
regulatory, co-regulatory and voluntary mechanisms. Upstream design of products
placed on the domestic market can be incentivised with the aim of reducing the
number of products that do not meet the required characteristics, production
methods or performance standards.

Strategic Goal 1 – Elimination of problematic and avoidable plastic products

Plastic products that fall into an ‘undesirable product design’ category will alert
government authorities to assess the ability of domestic facilities to collect, sort and
manage the waste component of the product at the end of its useful life. Where
governments determine a product is not compatible with domestic processes for
reuse, repair and recycling, international sustainability criteria and national plastics
sustainability standards can support the decision to deny access to domestic
markets through bans or differential taxes that strongly discourage consumption of
the product, thereby working towards elimination of such products from the waste
stream.

Strategic Goal 2 – Sustainable management of essential plastics, including resource

efficiency and circular material flows

Products that fall into a ‘preferred product design’ category can be more readily
allowed access to domestic markets, whether imported or produced locally. Such
categorisation would indicate the product is more readily reusable, repairable, less
likely to abrade or leak microplastics, etc. Products in this category would also be
supported by domestic collection, sorting and recycling facilities. The uptake of
secondary raw materials is facilitated by improved quality and performance of the
recycled materials, reducing the need for virgin materials. This is also facilitated
through Strategic Goals 1 and 4 of the new global agreement by removing products
from the market that contaminate recycling processes with hazardous substances
or non-recyclable materials.

Strategic Goal 3 – Sustainable waste management

Sustainable waste management requires efficient infrastructure and well-

functioning institutions and include many steps e.g. collecting, sorting, reuse,
repurposing and recycling processes. The cost burden has predominantly been left to
local government authorities. By integrating international sustainability criteria into

90
domestic regulatory and policy instruments, governments can work towards
ensuring products placed on their markets and entering waste streams have
sustainable end-markets. Those products that have features rendering them
difficult to collect, sort and manage sustainably within the waste stream are 1)
prevented from entering the domestic market, or 2) subsidised by producers for end-
of-life processes.

Strategic Goal 4 – Chemical hazard reduction

Global and regional instruments exist that can play a key role in reducing the risks to
human and environmental health from chemicals. Not all additives and related
chemicals used in the extraction, production and end-of-life treatment of plastics
are addressed through existing global frameworks. A new global agreement for
plastics would need to complement existing international and regional regulatory
and policy instruments, including developments under the Stockholm Convention
and SAICM. The use of chemicals and additives of concern must be integrated into
the determination of a product’s category. This may be based on white lists as for
30
the London Protocol. The intention of such categorisations would be to prevent the
use of chemicals and additives of concern across the life cycle of plastics, but also
prevent the re-entry of controlled substances through recycling processes or
exposure through reuse or repurposing.

Further illustration of measures to implement sustainability criteria for

management of plastic products are set out in the following subsections of Section
6, on national regulatory measures.

6.4 Summary of operational implementation mechanisms

Parties to the agreement might commit to develop:

• National Plastics Management Plans (NPMPs) that aim to address the main
drivers of plastic pollution by helping countries to design a holistic and
comprehensive strategy to manage plastics throughout the life cycle. The plans
promote a bottom-up approach that provides flexibility at the national level for
setting targets, identifying measures and mobilizing resources, while ensuring
progression over time. NPMPs are submitted to the agreement and periodically
updated.
• International Sustainability Criteria
• National Plastics Sustainability Standards that can be operationalized through
the regulation of domestic markets and deployment of market-based
instruments. These may be elaborated in NPMPs.

Figure 6 illustrates the interlinkages between the global commitments, national

objectives and the global objective of a new global plastics agreement. For example,
in addition to regulating the products placed on the market (based on the product’s
recyclability within the national context), modular fees can also be based on the
likelihood of the secondary plastics being used within the domestic market. This
considers local recycling capacity and end-markets, which may encourage

30. White lists provide the substances that are explicitly allowed. All other substances not listed are prohibited.

91
investment in recycling facilities (EASAC, 2020) if supported by a robust regulatory
framework.

Figure 6: Linkages between implementation mechanisms, highlighting core global

commitments.

92
800 species are affected by plastic pollution via ingestion or entanglement.
Photo: Unsplash.com

7. Science and knowledge building

The need for scientific information to assess the extent of plastic pollution,
understand its effects and identify solutions has been acknowledged (UNEP, 2017).
In 2019, UNEA-4 adopted Resolution 4/6 that stresses the urgent need to strengthen
the science-policy interface at all levels and to do more to support science-based
approaches, including enhance global cooperation, coordination and governance on
marine plastic litter. Broader discussions on enhancing the science-policy interface
for chemicals and waste are currently taking place in the Intersessional Process
considering the Strategic Approach and the sound management of chemicals waste
beyond 2020.

7.1 Science-policy interface

A strong science-policy interface should yield authoritative outputs through a
credible, relevant, legitimate, transparent, iterative and inclusive process (Kohler and
Templeton, 2020). Two principal forms of science-policy interfaces can be
distinguished depending whether it functions in a subsidiary role or independently in
relation to the governing body of the agreement. The principles, rules and procedures
of a subsidiary body are generally outlined in the agreement and can be specified by
subsequent decisions. Similarly, the relationship to relevant existing scientific bodies
can be defined in the agreement.

7.1.1 Examples of science-policy interfaces in MEAs

MEAs rely on a science-policy interface that has been designed to engage scientists
and policymakers in dialogue to ensure evidence-based decision-making, as
exemplified in Table 16. While the Minamata Convention and Montreal Protocol are
both lifecycle agreements, they have taken different approaches for scientific
support: three assessment panels of the Montreal Protocol (Scientific,
Environmental, and Technical) focus on the status, effects and solutions to protect
the ozone layer, whereas, the Minamata Convention has not outlined a scientific

93
 mechanism, but relies on a periodic effectiveness evaluation. The CBD and UNFCCC
are supported by both subsidiary and independent scientific bodies. Useful examples
from relevant regional agreements include the Convention on Long-Range
Transboundary Air pollution (LRTAP) and the Convention on the Protection and Use
of Transboundary Watercourses and International Lakes (Water Convention).

Table 16: Examples of subsidiary scientific bodies in MEAs.

Agreement Subsidiary scientific bodies Timebound expert groups External assessments / bodies

Montreal The agreement has three panels that n/a n/a

Protocol carry out an assessment at least every 4
years:
1) Scientific Assessment Panel assesses
the status of the depletion of the ozone
layer,
2) Environmental Effects Assessment
Panel assesses effects of ozone layer
depletion, and
3) Technology and Economic Assessment
Panel provides technical information on
alternative technologies.

Minamata The Effectiveness Evaluation is expected The Technical Experts Group on The Global Mercury Assessments
Convention to include arrangements for producing Emissions was established by the provides information on sources,
comparable monitoring data and to be Conference of Plenipotentiaries on the pathways, and transport of mercury, as
conducted based on available scientific, Minamata Convention that adopted the well as mercury levels in biota and
environmental, technical, financial and Convention in Kumamoto, Japan, in humans. Four editions have been
economic information. 2013, to prepare a set of guidelines for prepared by request of UNEP’s
adoption at COP-1, including, on BAT/ governing body. The Minamata
BEP and preparation of inventories on Convention COP has made no formal
emissions. linkage to the global mercury
assessment

UNECE Water The convention has two subsidiary n/a n/a

Convention bodies:
1) Working group on Integrated Water
Resources Management provides
guidance for management of
transboundary water resources, and
2) Working group on Monitoring and
Assessment prepares periodic
assessments of the status of trans-
boundary waters and international
lakes.

CBD The Subsidiary Body on Scientific, Ad Hoc Technical Expert Groups The Intergovernmental Platform on
Technical and Technological Advice (AHTEG) are established on a needs Biodiversity and Ecosystem Services
(SBSTTA) provides the COP with advice basis to prepare specific assessments (IPBES) produces thematic reports on
relating to implementation and mandated by the COP. The assessments topics of interest and provides global
responds to questions presented by the are prepared by a maximum of 15 overviews of biodiversity and ecosystem
COP. Parties and relevant organizations experts nominated by parties and a services, with its first global assessment
can submit proposals on emerging issues limited number of experts from released in 2019.
for consideration of the body that can appropriate organizations.
elaborate a technical and scientific
analysis and provide options for actions
for the COP.

94
UNFCCC The Subsidiary Body for Scientific and n/a The Intergovernmental Panel on Climate
Technological Advice (SBSTA) advises Change (IPCC) has three working
the COP on matters relating to science, groups:
technology and methodology. Key areas 1) The Physical Science Basis,
of work for include the impacts, 2) Impacts Adaptation, and
vulnerability and adaptation to climate Vulnerability, and
change, promoting the development and 3) Mitigation of climate change. IPCC
transfer of environmentally-sound Task Force on Greenhouse Gas
technologies and conducting technical Inventories prepares methodologies for
work to improve the guidelines for estimating and reporting emissions.
preparing inventories

7.1.2 Possible functions of a science-policy interface

To discuss the options for scientific support it is important to first clarify and
understand prevalent needs for scientific and technical advice. These have been
discussed in previous sections, which relate to: 1) assessment (prevalence of plastics
in the environment, effects of plastic pollution on the environment, and socio-
economic impacts), and 2) management (supporting the development of relevant
policy tools and technologies needed to manage the life cycle of plastics). An
important cross-cutting function could be participation in the preparation of the
iterative global review (see section 8.3.2). Table 17 aims to illustrate possible
functions for science-policy interface.

Table 17: Possible functions for science and knowledge building within the agreement.

Workstream Scientific and technical activities

Environmental monitoring – Compile national and regional monitoring data to increase the knowledge about the global status
Strengthen the knowledge on the – Development of indicators for measuring progress, including standardization of methodologies for
prevalence of plastic pollution and data collection
microplastics in the environment – Identification of new and emerging problems based on the overall global status
– Identification for hazardous chemical additives for possible restrictions, focusing on chemical
groups

Scientific Assessment – Collect and synthesize data and evidence from peer reviewed scientific publications, government
Strengthen the knowledge on the effects reports and grey literature
from plastic pollution and microplastics in – Assessment of impacts of plastic pollution on human health and the environment
the environment – Assessment of impacts plastic pollution on livelihoods (agriculture, fisheries and aquaculture),
tourism, traditional values, and cultural practices
– Identification of new and emerging issues based on novel findings

Technical and Economic Management – Support development of international sustainability criteria for plastic products
Support the development of technical – Develop guidelines and best practices (BAT/BEP) for other needs, including reducing loss of plastic
and technological response guidance pellets, labelling and certification schemes, end-of-life management of plastics, minimizing
microplastic releases, increasing transparency and traceability chemical additives throughout the
life cycle, etc.

95
7.1.3 Possible forms of a science-policy interface

Options for addressing scientific and technical needs of the agreement include a)
use of existing scientific bodies, b) establishment of a permanent subsidiary
scientific body, and c) development of an independent scientific body. A combination
of different options could also be pursued.

The use of existing scientific mechanisms can help to address some needs for
scientific and technical advice. The United Nations-sponsored Joint Group of Experts
on the Scientific Aspects of Marine Environmental Protection (GESAMP) has
supported the scientific basis on plastics pollution with several reports, including on
sources, fate and effects of microplastics in the ocean, and on monitoring and
assessment of plastic litter in the ocean. Opportunities to expand the use of existing
mechanisms incudes, inter alia, the example of the independent IPBES that could
assess the status and effects of plastic pollution on in terrestrial and freshwater
ecosystems. It is independent but has secretarial services provided by UNEP. In
addition, the International Resource Panel an independent body launched and with
secretarial services provided by UNEP, could assess ways to improve resource
efficiency across the lifecycle of plastics.

The functions listed above could be delivered through a subsidiary or independent

scientific body organized in 2-3 working groups. If the option for a subsidiary
scientific body is pursued, the assessment panels of the Montreal Protocol could
inspire the way forward. However, given the vast scope of the challenge, the
development of a more robust science policy interface – that extends beyond the
agreement - might be needed. To this end, the development of an independent
science-policy body could be considered, but it could entail significant costs and
require dedicating time for negotiations.

7.2 Monitoring
Monitoring is needed to assess the impacts of activities on the ground to understand
if the agreement is on track to fulfil its intended goals. The agreement can help to
coordinate monitoring efforts, fill in geographical gaps of current efforts, support
technical and methodological development, and strengthen data collection
capacities at the national and regional levels. In addition, monitoring can benefit
from citizen science that can also function as an awareness raising tool.

Currently, there is no common agreed-upon methodology to measure the extent of

the plastic pollution crisis (Boucher et al., 2019; GESAMP, 2015). The lack of
quantitative baselines, as well as measures taken, prevents effective elimination of
plastic leakage. This results from the inadequate development of harmonized
protocols and standardization of data to measure trends over time in a consistent
way that is conducive to data sharing and aggregation. The harmonization and
standardization of global data collection is an area where the agreement could help
to make significant progress.

The development of standardized methodologies for data collection will help to

ensure verifiability, relevance, and consistency of information. The subsidiary
scientific body of the agreement could help in standardizing and harmonizing
methodologies building on existing efforts. Existing monitoring schemes, including

96
those developed under the regional conventions, should be used to the fullest extent.
A formal, consistent monitoring program could help to focus on the following
components:

1. Monitoring of plastics in the marine environment, in line with SDG indicator

14.1.1b (floating, water column, seafloor, and beach litter)
2. Monitoring of plastics in other environmental compartments, including
freshwater, terrestrial ecosystems, and atmosphere
3. Biological monitoring of plastics in biota, including entanglement and ingestion

Monitoring levels of plastics in the marine environment should be aligned with SDG
indicator 14.1.1b (plastic debris density) that focuses on floating plastics, water
column plastics, seafloor litter and beach litter. SDG reporting is expected to collect
data from relevant Regional Seas Programmes, but significant membership gaps
exist and variation in methodologies sets limits to these efforts (UNEP, 2019).
Furthermore, indicator 14.1.1b is limited to the marine environment and excludes
microplastics and socio-economic impacts.

Gradually, expanding monitoring levels of plastics in other environmental

compartments, including land, freshwater and atmosphere, will help to portray a
more comprehensive picture of the extent of contamination by plastic pollution.
Airborne microplastics have been observed in atmospheric fallouts and are present
in outdoor and indoor air (Gasperi et al., 2018). In addition, researchers estimate
that microplastic contamination on land might be 4-23-fold larger than in the ocean
and that agricultural soils alone might store more microplastics than oceanic basins
(Horton et al., 2017; Nizzetto, et al., 2016).

This monitoring of levels of plastic pollution in the marine environment could be

complemented by biological monitoring of plastics in biota. Existing monitoring
strategies include ingestion, entanglement and habitats (GESAMP, 2015). For
instance, monitoring plastic ingestion rates in dead northern fulmars, collected
during North Sea beach surveys, has been developed by OSPAR (GESAMP, 2015).
Utilizing biota for monitoring requires the selection of a suitable species to act as a
bio-indicator of plastic contamination.

In the long-run, human bio-monitoring could be introduced to assess microplastic

levels and trends in human populations worldwide. The Stockholm Convention has a
long tradition of monitoring concentrations of POPs in human milk under the global
monitoring plan.

Furthermore, assessing socio-economic impacts of plastic pollution on fisheries and

aquaculture sectors, tourism, traditional values, and cultural practices could help to
better understand impacts and most efficient response options.

7.3 Research
Research needs to play a central role in the agreement. The agreement could be
formulated to request parties to boost research at the national level so that
universities and research institutions can develop multidisciplinary research
programmes. The development and harmonisation of data collection methodologies
will be important, necessitating international cooperation. Set up multi-disciplinary
research programmes to serve national and international purposes to understand

97
the scientific underpinning for combatting plastic pollution. Below is a non-
exhaustive list of possible research areas:

• Physical and chemical traits, life cycle, transport, quantity, and accumulation
rate of plastics
• Impacts of microplastics on human health and the environment
• Effectiveness of policy measures across the life cycle of plastics
• Environmental and socio-economic impacts, including human health
• Environmentally sound solutions, materials and technologies focusing on
degradability, product design, recycling technologies and processes to improve
performance etc.

7.4 Summary on science and knowledge building

Incorporating science and knowledge building in the agreement is a crucial part of
building a knowledge-driven and responsive agreement. The nexus between scientific
and technical advice and decision-making can be reflected in the institutional
arrangements of the agreement and/or it can be managed to function in
cooperation with external scientific bodies. Areas that would benefit from technical
and scientific advice include assessment of the status and effects of plastic
pollution, as well as supporting the preparation of necessary technologies and policy
tools, including sustainability criteria for plastic products. Taking full advantage of
relevant existing scientific mechanisms is important.

Indicators provide information on the state of, or change in, the system that is being
measured, thus they help to measure performance and impact. A suite of global
indicators and common methodologies would ensure that that measurement of
quantities of flows and sources of plastics is constant across countries. Challenges
could be encountered in engaging national and regional institutions for collection,
analysis and communication of needed data and information. Enabling funding and
capacity support are needed to facilitate gathering of data and reporting in low-
and middle-income countries.

98
44% of plastic waste consists of packaging that often ends up in the environment.
Photo: Ritzau/Scanpix.dk

8. Measuring progress

Currently, there does not exist a general overview of efforts taken by governments
to combat plastic pollution, as information is scarce and scattered. Reporting
requirements and associated protocols are needed to understand progress at the
national level, facilitating a global synthesis of ongoing activities and trends.

8.1 Reporting national performance

A reporting scheme will help to collect information from countries and understand
the collective performance of parties. Almost all MEAs require Parties to report on
their national performance (UNEP, 2007). Reporting formats and intervals vary
greatly between international instruments as they are designed to meet different
needs. At minimum, the agreement should include an obligation to report and a
mandate to negotiate the modalities and procedures for under the agreement. The
subsequent negotiations under the agreement need to come up with rules and
guidance on what is the subject of reporting and how reporting should be carried
out.

The main components of national reporting for the agreement could focus on:

1. Progress towards general commitments and targets, including implementation

of international sustainability criteria and NPMPs
2. Inventories of controlled flows (production, consumption, disposal, and trade),
and leakage (sources, pathways, and sinks)

It is important to consider designing a comprehensive reporting system, while

striving to minimize the reporting burden. Balancing between simplicity and
comprehensiveness means essentially choosing to focus on outputs or outcomes in
designing the reporting scheme. To this end, main options for reporting include:

1. Simple reporting: One option would be to go for a minimalistic reporting

scheme that would consist of output-based binary questions (with yes/no
responses) requesting information of products delivered from activities. This

99
 could be coupled with descriptive questions on measures taken. While simple
reporting would help to draw global progress maps, it would portray a very
limited picture of progress excluding outcomes achieved and impacts on the
ground. The limitations of output-based reporting are highlighted by the
independent evaluation of SAICM (SAICM, 2019).
2. Results-based reporting: This option would focus on quantitative outcomes with
numeric questions. This could be paired with descriptive questions for detailing
outcomes achieved. This could include the preparation of national inventories
that would help to focus on what is essential to prevent leakage, namely
understanding the quantities of plastics across the value-chain from production
to disposal. At the national level, statistical agencies and research institutes can
play a central role in data collection.

The results-chain framework enables to illustrate different levels for measuring

progress (see Figure 7). A simple reporting framework would focus predominantly on
measuring outputs, whereas a results-based reporting framework would give
greater focus on outcomes. Performance reporting needs to be complemented with
a monitoring scheme to measure impacts.

Figure 7: The results framework shows the difference between outputs, outcomes
and impacts, helping to design a comprehensive scheme for measuring progress.

The agreement or an annex to it could incorporate basic principles and modes to

report, as elaborated below:

• Comparability of information is essential for understanding and explaining

performance across countries and regions through collection of quantitative
and statistical data.
• Transparency is important to ensure that reporting data is made publicly
available in a meaningful way to help in outreach, including the use of online
databases.
• Completeness refers to full geographic coverage of implementation, as well as,
acknowledgement of all sources of plastic pollution across the value chain.
• Accuracy and consistency are needed to reduce uncertainties as far as

100
 practicable relying on use of harmonized and standardized data collection
methodologies.
• Stakeholder engagement can help to minimize the reporting burden and engage
a broad community in data collection, building on existing efforts.

Many MEAs include obligations for inventories that provide essential numeric data
needed to track progress, as illustrated in Table 18. In context of plastics, inventories
could focus on assessing controlled flows and leakage, as they are closely related to
understanding the achievement of the proposed overall objective of the agreement.

Table 18: Examples of inventories under existing MEAs.

Minamata convention Paris Agreement Montreal Protocol

Obligation Articles 7 and 8 request Article 13 requests Parties Article 7 requests parties to
parties to submit no later to report emissions by report annually statistical
than five years after the sources and removals by data on production,
date of entry into force of sinks of greenhouse gases imports, exports and
the Convention, and annually. The inventories destruction of the nine
maintain thereafter, an undergo a technical expert groups of ozone-depleting
inventory of emissions and review. substances regulated under
releases of mercury. the Protocol.

Resources Countries can use the Inventories must be An online reporting tool has
UNEP Mercury Inventory prepared using good been developed and the
Toolkit (2017) to help practice methodologies reporting data is displayed
establish a national accepted by the IPCC and online in the Ozone Data
inventory of mercury uses, agreed by the governing Access Center that
emissions, and releases. body. visualizes real-time trends.

Inventories of controlled flows could include upstream, midstream and downstream

processes, including the production of virgin pellets, compliance with international
design standards, resin types and volumes in use, elimination of problematic and
avoidable plastic products, reduction of chemical hazard, as well as rates of
collection, reuse, recycling, landfilling and incineration, amongst others. The
minimum design criteria for inventories must therefore be based on the agreed
global reporting requirements. Individual countries may add additional national data
to inventories where appropriate and where data is available. Understanding
controlled flows of plastics in the value chain is essential to determine leakage.

Inventories of leakages into the marine environment are needed to measure

progress. Estimates of the magnitude of different sources of leakage have been
made in several countries, but there is scarce information on measurements of
leakage along different pathways (Jambeck et al., 2015; GESAMP, 2015). Inventories
can provide information of leakage across the life cycle, including upstream (e.g. loss
of plastic pellets during production), midstream (e.g. leakage from sectoral and
individual consumers) and downstream (leakage from unmanaged or poorly

101
managed waste disposal and wastewater treatment). The scope for assessing
sources can range from macroplastics (lost fishing gear, dumping, medical and
personal hygiene products, packaging and other household products, etc.) to
microplastics (textile abrasion, tire abrasion, plastic pellet production, road
markings, artificial turf, etc.).

In essence, inventories could help to understand the flows of plastic across the value
chain and various sectors and assist in informing the process of reviewing the
efficiency and effectiveness of policy interventions. Figure 8 summarizes information
that could be collected in inventories, including controlled material flows and leakage
focusing on sources, pathways, and sinks.

Figure 8: Summary of information that could be collected by inventories on

controlled flows and leakage.

8.2 Verification of national reporting

Third-party verification of data submitted by parties in the reports can induce
transparency and accountability (UNEP, 2007). Verification of national reports can
provide feed-back on progress for individual countries to inform the future
development of their NPMPs. Most MEAs have subjected their reports to a
systematic review process, which is often led by the secretariat, the governing body
or a specific subsidiary body established within the agreement. The content of the
review can focus on procedural and/or substantive aspects of implementation. At
minimum, third-party verification could focus on compliance with obligations for
reporting (submission of reports, adherence to reporting guidance etc.) and
preparation of NPMPs (preparation of plans, adherence to structure, form, and
content requirements, etc.). More ambitiously, the national reviews could provide a
comprehensive, technical assessment of a state's implementation of its
commitments, including comprehensiveness and effectiveness of measures at the
domestic level.

8.3 Global review

A periodic global review process synthesises information from various sources to
provide feedback on collective progress towards the overall goal of the agreement.
The process enables the parties to refine the design of the agreement to address
implementation challenges and new related environmental problems, and by
optimising efficiency and effectiveness.

102
 Table 19 provides examples of existing global review processes. The Global Stocktake
of the Paris Agreement aims to factor in the obligation to increase ambition over
time making it a hybrid between an effectiveness review and a progressive increase
in commitments mechanism (Milkoreit & Haapala, 2018). The first Global Stocktake
will set the minimum standard defined by the level of action, which is to be
succeeded by increased commitments in the future (Milkoreit & Haapala, 2018). Its
dynamic nature is also given effect by functioning as a peer-learning platform to
increase shared understanding among all Parties of the meaning, measurement and
status of progress (Milkoreit & Haapala, 2018). The effectiveness evaluation of the
Stockholm Convention provides a valuable model but does not include a progressive
increase in commitments mechanism. The Montreal Protocol relies on
implementation review based on an aggregation of emission and production data
reported annually by each party, complemented by information produced by three
subsidiary scientific and technical panels.

Table 19: Examples of existing global review mechanisms within MEAs.

Overview Scheduling

Paris Agreement The Global Stocktake aims to assess collective efforts of The outcome of the global stocktake is intended
parties every five years based on information from primarily to inform the preparation of NDCs. The first
NDCs, national reports, IPCC, and other sources. It global stocktake has been scheduled for 2023, to allow
consists of two phases: technical assessment for inclusion of the results in the preparation of the next
(information collection and preparation) and political round of NDCs in 2025.
phase (consideration of outputs).

Stockholm Convention The Effectiveness Evaluation aims to assess how the The effectiveness evaluation has produced two reports
convention has succeeded in achieving its objectives and (2009 and 2017). The second report relied on a
identify ways to improve effectiveness. It draws from framework adopted in COP-6 in 2013 and was carried
national reports, monitoring information, national out by a committee of fourteen members (ten parties
implementation plans, and non-compliance information. and four other experts) confirmed by the COP.

Montreal Protocol The Implementation Review considers the adequacy of The Implementation Review is based on an aggregation
parties’ collective contribution to achieve shared of emission and production data reported annually by
emission reduction goals for ozone-depleting each party. The Scientific Assessment Panel and
substances. Furthermore, the three assessment panels Environmental Effects Assessment Panel produce
provide an independent assessment drawing data from reports every four years, and the Technology and
industry and other sources, as well as data reported by Economic Assessment Panel produces reports annually.
the parties under the Protocol.

A periodic global review could help to track collective progress against obligations
and targets of the agreement and reveal remaining action gaps. The global review
could draw information from a variety of sources both within the agreement and
beyond, including scientific literature, national reporting, inventories, monitoring
data and NPMPs.

The review mechanism could be accompanied with a progressive increase in

commitments mechanism (following the model of the Paris Agreement) to increase
transparency and peer-pressure as states’ motivators for treaty compliance. The
first global review would set the “minimum baseline” for global action and ambition

103
that would need to be surpassed consecutively. The progressive increase in
commitments mechanism would include a direct and transparent link between
Parties’ actions and global outcomes inspiring new activities that close any potential
gaps between what countries have committed to in their NPMPs and what it will
take to achieve the strategic goals and elimination of leakage.

The design of the global review mechanism will be influenced on whether the
agreement includes substantive commitments or if they are limited to the
procedural level. If the agreement includes substantive commitments, a “traditional”
review mechanism could suffice. Whereas, if the agreement relies solely on
procedural commitments, it could be coupled with a progressive increase in
commitments mechanism to motivate states to act.

It could be worthwhile to consider possibilities to execute the global review as a living

online platform, which could bring together the information needed to provide an
ongoing assessment of progress towards the agreement in an accessible and visually
compelling way. This could provide many benefits, including increase meaningfulness
of reporting as well as help in outreach and communication. A valuable example is
provided by the Global Health Observatory that has interactive online progress
maps that display information of country performance of implementing World
Health Organization’s (WHO) International Health Regulations (IHR). Similarly, the
Ozone Secretariat displays information on Montreal Protocol national reports to
show real-time trends and country profiles.

8.4 Summary of measuring progress

Figure 9 summarizes a holistic system for measuring progress. Research plays an
important role in supporting methodological development and data collection. The
global review will aggregate data from performance, monitoring schemes and other
sources to assess the effectiveness of the agreement.

Figure 9: Main elements for measuring progress in a holistic manner.

104
4% of the world’s oil production is used as feedstock to make plastics and a similar
amount is used as energy in the process.
Photo: Ritzau/Scanpix.dk

9. Supporting measures

Supporting measures can enhance the effectiveness of measures across the life
cycle of plastics. These include 1) education and awareness-raising, and 2) funding
and capacity building.

9.1 Education and awareness-raising

Education and awareness raising have important roles, thus the agreement could
request parties to take activities in this regard to support measures relating to both
management and assessment.

Education is needed to guide consumer behaviour, including purchasing, use and

disposal of plastic products. Education through labelling can inform consumers and
should be centrally featured in the agreement. For instance, labelling can inform
consumers of the product content, including any hazards that the product may
present to human health through intended use or incorrect use of the product (e.g.
use in a microwave), as well as hazards to the environment should the product not
be disposed of properly. Education can inform consumers on the required separation
of components, which bin to dispose of a product (recycling or landfill), where
collection points are located and whether a deposit can be claimed by the person
returning the item.

Awareness-raising allows the public, industry and government authorities to better

understand the consequences of unsustainable consumption patterns coupled with
poor waste management practices. Public awareness is therefore important to
facilitate recycling and to stimulate a reduction in our consumption of materials, in
line with the waste hierarchy.

105
9.2 Funding and capacity building
Some MEAs include a financial mechanism to enable developing country parties to
meet the agreed incremental costs of implementing measures which fulfil their
obligations under the convention. Supporting low and middle-income countries will
be important to achieve the objective of a new global plastics agreement. A new
global agreement could set the legal basis for a financing mechanism to assist
implementation of obligations under the new agreement by parties lacking the
necessary capacity to do so. Waste management is a vast socio-economic enterprise
with huge and increasing costs in modern consumer societies. It is important that
contracting parties to the new agreement are clear on the limits to what activities
the financial mechanism under the agreement will apply to.

Ultimately, the agreement will need to channel investments of all kinds: public and
private, domestic and international. Involving the private sector will be critical to
complement development efforts funded through domestic resources and official
development assistance. The use of market-based instruments has been highlighted
throughout this report. Other viable sources include the use of blended finance that
is the strategic use of development finance and philanthropic funds to mobilize
private capital flows that is already having a significant impact in the climate and
energy sectors (WEF, 2015).

The agreement will have an important role to provide necessary funding to

formulate the national operational implementation mechanisms, i.e. NPMPs and
national plastics sustainability criteria, and to assist in national reporting the
evaluation of national implementation. Thus, the activities proposed for funding
could target the following:

1. scientific and technical assessments to inform the formulation of policy and

legal instruments to implement the agreement;
2. technical assistance for the formulation of those instruments, i.e. NPMPs and
national plastics sustainability criteria; and
3. scientific and technical evaluation of subsequent implementation outputs and
outcomes required as part of national reporting on outputs and national
assessment of environmental outcomes pursuant to the agreement.

The costs funded should be limited to incremental costs incurred by governments in

the implementation of the agreement, i.e. costs above and beyond those of business
as usual in projected national plastics waste management activities.

The related activities, with some examples listed below:

1. Mapping of:

• Waste profiles and trends,

• Flow of plastics through the domestic market,
• Market entry points for application of MBIs, and
• Import and export of plastic wastes (current and projected under different
intervention scenarios).

2. Design of national inventories, data collection and reporting.

3. Identification of potential regulatory & policy requirements
4. Identification of capacity needs (customs, treasury, etc)

106
 5. Conducting socio-economic studies on the positive and negative impacts of
regulatory and economic interventions, including job losses and job creation.
6. Planning of transition periods for implementation of regulatory and economic
interventions based on socio-economic studies and stakeholder engagement.
7. Establishment of a review process based on agreed and harmonised timeframes
at the international level.
8. Improve capacity building for trade-related aspects of reducing plastic pollution.

Against this backdrop, it is important to identify credible funding options for

supporting low and middle-income countries. A non-exhaustive list of options
includes:

• UNEP’s integrated approach to the financing of sound management of

chemicals and waste is relevant in context of funding the activities of the
agreement. It includes three mutually reinforcing components: mainstreaming,
industry involvement and dedicated external finance. The component of
external finance is delivered by the Special Programme on institutional
strengthening for the sound management of chemicals and waste, which has
helped many low- and middle-income countries set in place needed
implementation structures and mechanisms.
• The Global Environment Facility (GEF) could be entrusted to serve as financial
mechanism of the agreement, through its international waters program. It
would also make sense in terms of ensuring institutional efficiency as its
sustainment would not depend solely on the plastic agreement.
• Technical support and training could be delivered by establishing a specialized
unit within the secretariat, or it could be decentralized to function in conjunction
with select universities or research institutions, if funding is made available.
• Bilateral arrangements can be used for the transfer of technology and
improvement of waste management services to assist in meeting the self-
determined targets set by countries under the possible new global agreement.
• International financial institutions, foundations, and philanthropies could help
to leverage financial resources. There is growing momentum in support of
blended finance as a systemic approach for development finance, with a range
of development funders already showing strong will and allocating funds to
innovative financing mechanisms.

107
Only 9% of all plastic waste generated has been recycled.
Photo: iStockphoto.com

10. Institutional arrangements

10.1 Structure
To successfully deliver the key elements outlined in this report, an institutional
structure can be envisaged. It could consist of the following bodies:

1. A governing body that meets at periodic intervals to review implementation and

consider and adopt necessary decisions and annexes to further the work of the
agreement. The governing body is facilitated by a bureau that needs to
represent all five UN regions, but could also consist of ex-officio members.
2. A secretariat that assists the governing body in carrying out its functions. The
Secretariat could be hosted by an existing intergovernmental organization.
3. Subsidiary bodies can be established to assist the governing body, through
expert research and recommendations, as deemed appropriate. This could
include, inert alia, a subsidiary scientific committee to assess status and
impacts of plastic pollution, as well as, a subsidiary technical and economic
advisory committee to help develop and elaborate sustainability criteria for
plastic products and other necessary technical response guidance.

The membership of the governing body is limited to governments that have ratified
or acceded to the agreement. The scientific community would participate through
the subsidiary scientific and technical bodies. The relationship to relevant external
scientific bodies can also be defined in the agreement. For example, the UNFCCC
COP has called on the Subsidiary Body for Scientific and Technological Advice
(SBSTA) to seek advice from the IPCC, which has led to incorporating some of its
findings to the agreement, including the IPCC guidelines for greenhouse gas
inventories.

Industry experts and civil society would have roles in the subsidiary technical and
economic advisory committee, if nominated by parties to serve on them. In addition,
they may act in parallel cooperation with the parties through international industry
bodies responsible for establishing technical standards for plastics and the products
incorporating them, and through civil society bodies that inform consumers as to the
sustainable management products.

108
10.2 Rules of Procedure
When States first form an intergovernmental negotiating committee (INC) to
negotiate a new agreement, one of the first items on the agenda is to adopt rules of
procedure (RoP) for the conduct of meetings during the negotiations. If the
negotiations lead to an MEA, the latter typically provides that the first session of
the governing body adopts by consensus its own RoP. Subject to rules in the
agreement itself, the RoP will define, inter alia, the frequency of meetings of the
governing body, structure of the bureau and voting rules.

10.3 Coordination
The evaluation of the effectiveness of existing international frameworks delivered
for UNEA-3 highlights the absence of a “global institution with the mandate to
coordinate current efforts” as a major gap for governing marine plastic pollution
(UNEP, 2017). The development of a new agreement could provide a valuable
opportunity to enhance coordination among relevant MEAs and other initiatives to
maximize policy coherence. Ideally, the institutions established under the agreement
could fill the governance void and connect the work of other relevant institutions and
initiatives. To this end, the need for coordination could be outlined in the agreement
and detailed after its adoption.

10.3.1 Synergies with MEAs

This report has referred to various MEAs and other instruments that govern specific
areas of plastic pollution. The development of synergistic relationships between
institutions established under these MEAs within the existing plastics governance
landscape would promote a coherent and comprehensive approach to combat
plastic pollution. At the international level, programmatic synergies could be pursued
by developing bilateral memorandums of understandings (MoU) between relevant
MEA secretariats to outline clearer divisions of labour. The proposed agreement
could require that the parties seek such programmatic synergies and that the
secretariat report on them to the governing body.

At the national level, immediate gains can be made through improved

communication, coordination and collaboration between relevant national MEA focal
points. Inter-ministerial committees could be established to oversee national
implementation by regularly convening national MEA focal points and other relevant
stakeholder. The synergistic implementation of NPMPs could be achieved by the
integration of convention-specific targets, objectives and commitments into the
NPMPs. However, these are discretionary matters for national governance and need
not be prescribed in the agreement.

10.3.2 Industry and civil society partnerships

During the past decade, there has been a phenomenal proliferation of multi-

109
stakeholder partnerships and other voluntary initiatives aiming to tackle plastic
pollution. The surge in partnerships and initiatives is positive, but their non-
hierarchical nature has not enabled a coordinated and effective response (Biermann
et al., 2009). The proposed agreement could serve stakeholders by providing them
with a forum parallel to the institutional arrangements under the agreement to
collaborate with governments and with each other within a structured framework.

In 2019, UNEA-4 decided to establish a multi-stakeholder platform within UNEP to

facilitate cooperation and coordination by serving as a forum for, inter alia, sharing
31
experiences, coordinating actions and raising global awareness. The modalities of
the multi-stakeholder platform are currently being discussed. The proposed
agreement could seek to engage with stakeholders and the private sector,
potentially through the multi-stakeholder platform. This forum could catalyse and
facilitate operational ventures and serve as an information hub or clearinghouse.

31. Resolution 4/6 (para 3)

110
 Annex 1.
Possible elements and actions to
consider in preparation of
NPMPs.

Elements Actions Examples

Targets Specify one or more high-level targets. The strategic goals

provide guidance for enabling to address all areas of the life
cycle:
• Elimination of problematic and avoidable plastic products
• Sustainable management of essential plastics
• Sustainable waste management
• Chemicals hazard reduction

Scope Outline the scope of the plan. The following areas can be
considered in defining the scope:
• Materials and substances: are plastic polymers and
chemical additives in focus?
• Scales: are both macroplastics and microplastics covered?
• Sources: are land-based and sea-based sources included?
• Pathways and sinks: which environmental compartments
are targeted?
• Measures: what areas of life cycle of plastics are in focus?

Preparatory process Describe the preparatory process for the NPMP. The
following measures can be considered in this context:
• Develop a cross-sectoral coordination mechanism to
prepare and implement the plan
• Prepare a national profile to identify strengths and
challenges
• Review existing legislation for its effectiveness and
identify gaps

Elements Actions Examples

Life cycle measures Production • Operation Clean Sweep is a voluntary international

• Limit the use of virgin material, in particular fossil-based initiative of the plastics industry that aims to prevent the
raw materials, by decoupling plastic production from fossil loss of plastic pellets, flakes and powder through good
feedstocks. housekeeping and containment practices by all parts of the
• Explore options for replacing fossil-based plastics with plastics industry (GESMAP, 2016). OSPAR is currently
more sustainable alternative raw materials. Bio-based exploring options to strengthen and expand on Operation
feedstocks derived from biological materials (e.g. cellulosic Clean Sweep.
fibers, organic wastes) provide a viable option to replace
fossil-based feedstocks, given possible negative impacts on
food security and biodiversity are minimized. A full life cycle
assessment is needed before introduction of alternative
materials to ensure their sustainability.
• Promote sustainable design of plastic pellets, powders
and flakes to enhance recyclability and safety, including by
prohibiting the use of harmful polymers.
• Incorporate measures within domestic regulations
contained in Operation Clean Sweep and additional
measures under development by OSPAR in this regard.
• Set minimum inclusion targets for recycled content in
pellet production.

111
Manufacturing • In India, the Plastic Waste (Management and Handling)
• Design products to facilitate reuse, recycling and, to a Rules 2011 phase out the manufacture and use of non-
lesser degree, repurposing, can enhance end-markets for recyclable, multi-layered plastics (Madhya Pradesh Pollution
plastic products and improve the economic feasibility of Control Board, 2016). Some states in India have separately
collection. banned the manufacture and use of specific types of
• Develop polices to support sustainable management of plastic.
plastics, including setting up requirements on packaging to
reduce generation of waste, recycling and reduction targets,
increasing use of reuse models and incorporation of market-
based instruments to support the design and production of
recyclable products.

Consumption • In 2017, Costa Rica announced a national strategy to

• Instigate bans or reduction targets on problematic and phase-out all forms of single-use plastics, including bags,
avoidable plastic products for which environmentally bottles, cutlery, straws, Styrofoam and stirrers by 2021 and
sustainable alternatives exist on the market, including replace them with alternatives that biodegrade within six
products made of oxo-degradable plastic. NPMPs should months (UNEP, 2018).
provide flexibility to determine products to be targeted for • 91 countries have some type of ban or restriction on the
reduction, elimination or replacement, including products manufacture or production, importation, and retail
used in the fishing sector. distribution of plastic bags (UNEP, 2018). Africa stands out
• Develop simple product labelling schemes to guide as the continent where the largest number of countries (34)
consumers in recycling options and product recycled have instituted bans or restrictions.
content. Such schemes can support responsible consumer
choices that shift industry manufacturing practices through
consumer demand. Examples include product recyclability,
recycled content, producer advanced recycling fees,
consumer deposit fee, polymer content.
• Create strategies to target plastic-intensive sectors
(construction, agriculture and tourism, etc.) and
problematic consumer product groups (food and drink
packaging, cosmetics and personal care products, and
textiles and clothing, etc.).
• Set up policies on sustainable public procurement to
create demand for recycled plastics.

Waste management • In 2020, China released a plan to, substantially reduce the
• Increase collection, sorting, recycling, recovery and amount of plastic waste in landfills of key cities, establish a
environmentally sound disposal capacity of plastics to complete plastics management system and make progress
prevent leakage. in the development of alternative products, by 2025.
• Create viable end-markets for recycled and renewable
plastics, such as through recycled content standards,
voluntary commitments, minimum requirements and
sustainable public procurement.
• Design and adopt context-suited MBIs to incentivize
collection by civil society (e.g. drop-off locations for bottles
or fishing gear) and the private sector; sorting in household
and commercial settings; use of existing transport services
(reverse logistics, backloading); and avoidance of landfilling
or illegal dumping.
• Design and adopt MBIs to financially subsidize waste
management services and certification schemes.
• Develop recycling systems to deal with all waste plastics
following the waste hierarchy prioritizing material recovery
through mechanical recycling and chemical recycling. When
no other viable alternatives exist waste-to-energy solutions
can be considered. Landfilling is the last option that should
be avoided.

112
Elements Actions Examples

Chemical additives • Bisphenol A (BPA) is used in the manufacturing of

• Instigate bans and restrictions on hazardous chemical polycarbonate plastics materials, such as baby bottles, but
additives. studies have shown it to be an endocrine disruptor
• Eliminate the release of chemicals of concern in products prompting many countries in Asia, Europe and North
during intended use through sustainable product design (e.g. America to ban or restrict the production and sale of
BPA, flame retardants). products containing BPA (UNEP, 2019).
• Recover chemical constituents in recycling to ensure safety • Phthalates are a group of plasticizers with softening and
of secondary raw materials and products. elastic effects used commonly in many consumer products,
• Increase transparency and traceability of the use of but their use has been limited in some applications in several
chemical additives in plastic products enabling the tracking countries as concerns have arisen of their possible endocrine
of their presence across the value chain. disrupting properties in humans (UNEP, 2019).

Microplastics • As of July 2018, eight countries have established legally

The agreement could promote a step-by-step approach of binding bans of microbeads through national laws or
minimizing microplastic releases: regulations, but many other countries are in process
• Restrict the use of intentionally added microplastics, instigating bans (UNEP, 2018).
including cosmetics, personal care products, pesticides etc. • The European Chemicals Agency has submitted a
• Introduce polices to reduce secondary microplastics, restriction proposal that covers 90% of intentionally added
resulting from abrasion of plastic products during use, microplastics including 400 items with the potential to
focusing on major sources of releases. This could include, reduce releases by 400,000 tonnes over 20 years (EU,
inter alia, the introduction of labelling and specific 2019a).
requirements for tires and minimum requirements on the
release of microfibers from textiles.
• Improve filtration of microplastics form the wastewater
treatment systems using best available treatment
technologies. Given that wastewater treatment is in its
infancy in many low- and middle-income countries, the
justification for introducing more effective filtration systems
in terms of cost-benefit must take into consideration the
social and economic context of the municipality or country.

Removal • In 2019, the EU adopted the Directive on the reduction of

• Support plastic litter removal programmes targeting the impact of certain plastics products that expands EPR
hotspots, including rivers, waterways, coastal areas, oceans schemes by applying it to tobacco filters and fishing gear to
and land. cover the cost of cleaning up litter (EU, 2019b).

Elements Actions Examples

Sectoral measures Building and construction sector

• Identify plastics used in construction and recover plastics
when buildings are demolished. Expand stormwater
management to prevent plastics reaching the marine
environment.

Agriculture
• Restrict the use of wastewater treatment sludge as
fertilizer.
• Recycle plastic packages used for fertilizers and pesticides.
• Develop and use bio-based and fully biodegradable mulch.

Textile and clothing

• Phase out microfiber releases, improve clothing design,
collection, reprocessing and recycling.

Supporting Public awareness

measures • Develop public awareness and outreach campaigns to
support educational programmes for consumer behavior
change.

Education
• Develop educational programmes targeting behavior
change in specific sectors and audiences.
• Develop educational curricula in primary and secondary
education.

113
Science and Research
knowledge building • Set up multidisciplinary research progarmmes.
• Investigate the physical and chemical traits, life cycle,
transport, quantity, and accumulation rate.
• Investigate environmental, economic and social impacts,
including human health.
• Develop sustainable solutions, materials and technologies
to replace plastics, reduce the risk of discharges and remove
plastics.

Monitoring
• Harmonize methodologies with international standards.
• Develop monitoring progarmmes to assess prevalence of
plastics in the environment.

Financial measures Market-based measures • The Kenya plastic action plan consists of a three-year plan
• Promote EPR to encourage design for reuse and recycling, to set up an EPR scheme aiming to operationalize a
while taking care of end-of-life products by setting up producer responsibility organization financed by producers
collection and recycling systems. to collect and manage the end-of-life of all streams of
• Introduce deposit-refund systems for bottles, containers plastics on their behalf (Kenya Association of
and cans. Manufacturers, 2019).
• Use taxes and fees e.g. tax on disposable plastic
packaging.
• Reform the subsidy system to favor use of beneficial
subsidies and eliminate harmful subsidies.
• Incentivize the organization of informal waste collectors
and sorters.

Domestic budget
• Allocate resources for plastic pollution in budgeting
processes and development planning.

International cooperation
• Provide financial and capacity support to low- and middle-
income countries.

Measuring progress Reporting

• Report on implementation, including preparation of
NPMPs and international sustainability criteria.
• Carry out inventories of sources, pathways and sinks of
plastic litter.
•Carry out inventories of production levels of plastics as
well as levels of recycling, incineration and landfilling.

114
Annex 2.
Application of the design for
recyclability standards

A primary goal of developing international sustainability criteria is to assist

countries in determining nationally relevant design-for-recyclability standards in
order to regulate what products are placed on their markets. Such regulation can
make use of standards for recyclability to first reduce, remove or redesign avoidable,
problematic and other plastic products placed on domestic markets that do not
meet these standards, thus enabling governments to reduce plastic consumption
and minimize the burden of waste management. Governments can use global
sustainability criteria to ensure products are designed to promote durability,
reparability, recyclability and reusability. To this end, design standards affect the
selection of feedstock, production and manufacturing, product use and end-of-use
management.

This is achieved through applying international sustainability criteria at the national

level by using suitable regulatory policies and market-based instruments. Countries
would need the flexibility to choose how these policies are implemented and could
adopt such policies within voluntary, co-regulatory or mandatory frameworks. Such
national strategies can be supported by global guidelines and roadmaps.

International sustainability criteria could cover, inter alia, the following product
features:

• Physical features
• Reusability and repairability of products
• Recyclability of products (e.g. number of resins, layering, labels, inks, glues,
microplastics) considering domestic circumstances (collection, sorting,
recycling)
• Rate of leakage, including abrasion that produces secondary microplastics
(tyres, textiles, artificial turf, etc.)
• Inclusion of post-consumer resin (PCR) - recycled content
• Chemical features
• Use of non-toxic chemical additives
• Rate of leakage of additives during intended use

By regulating the type and design of products placed on the market, the amount of
residual waste generated can be minimised. In addition, the value of the residual
waste that is generated can be increased, improving the likelihood of the waste
being collected for reuse, repurposing or recycling. This is supported by recent
research suggesting that plastic with low residual value is prone to leak into the
environment because it does not incentivize collection.

115
Low, medium and high residual value applications and polymer can be defined as
follows:

• Low value: applications and polymer with a low recycling potential in a given
market
• Medium value: polymer with a recycling potential but associated with an
application which is not easily collected nor recycled
• High value: application and polymer that is easily collected and recycled in a
given market

The report provides further research supporting a possible matrix for the rate of
release into the marine environment under a given approach. Table 20 highlights
these findings (Quantis & EA, 2020).

Table 20: Matrix estimating release rates of plastics to the environment.

Low residual Medium residual High residual

Release rate
value value value

Small Size Ocean & Freshwater 40% 25% 15%

/(<5cm) Terrestrial 60% 75% 15%

Medium Size Ocean & Freshwater 25% 15% 10%

/(5-25cm) Terrestrial 75% 85% 5%

Large Size Ocean & Freshwater 5% 5% 1%

(>25cm) Terrestrial 95% 95% 1%

Figure 10 illustrates how the global agreement can nurture the development of
international sustainability objectives, sustainability criteria and design for
recyclability standards, which can assist in regulating domestics markets. This, in
turn, can simply sorting and improve recycling profitability, while also facilitating
compliance with relevant regulations.

116
Figure 10: Overview of the role of international sustainability objectives and criteria.

Examples of design standards

Recyclability provides an illustrative case study of the application of sustainability
criteria to meet a strategic goal, e.g. sustainable management of essential plastics.
The criteria for designing plastic products that are recyclable can be elaborated in
standards, guidelines and codes of practice. Product-related international standards
at the global level are primarily the ISO/IEC Guide 59 Code of good practice for
standardization. See also Annex F Checklist with criteria for eco-design in the
OSPAR scoping study on best practices for the design and recycling of fishing gear
(OSPAR, 2020).

Criteria for recyclability in a new agreement might address the processes and inputs
of a product with regards to: 1) virgin material; and 2) recycled materials. Quality
standards and technical specifications would match the product and processes
within both categories. Reporting standards and methods of tracking would be
required for compliance monitoring and tracking of substances of concern.

Where recycled material replaces virgin material, design standards could include the
32
development of quality standards for:

• sorted plastic waste

• recycled plastics
• food contact materials
• inclusion of substances of concern, including legacy substances.

There have been repeated calls for global standards to guide production of plastic
products. The purpose is to establish design standards that can allow for innovation
to minimize the environmental burden during production, use and end of life phases.
Design standards can stimulate industry innovation and drive markets towards

32. EU Strategy for plastics in circular economy-staff document

117
more sustainable products, particularly when supported by policy (OECD, 2019).

There are a number of standards-setting bodies that have developed a number of

tools that could provide a basis for developing international sustainability objectives,
sustainability criteria design standards. These include, but are not limited to, those
standards set in the European context by CEN, CENELEC and ETSI, as well those
developed by the International Organization for Standardization, namely:

• ISO 9001, Quality management systems – Requirements

• ISO 14001, Environmental management systems – Requirements with guidance
for use
• ISO 14020:2000, Environmental labels and declarations – General principles
• ISO 14021:2016, Environmental labels and declarations – Self-declared
environmental claims (Type II environmental labelling)
• ISO 14031, Environmental management – Environmental performance
evaluation – Guidelines
• ISO 14040, Environmental management – Life cycle assessment – Principles and
framework
• ISO 14044, Environmental management – Life cycle assessment – Requirements
and guidelines
• ISO 14064 (all parts), Greenhouse gases
• ISO 14067, Greenhouse gases – Carbon footprint of products – Requirements
and guidelines for quantification
• ISO 26000:2010, Guidance on social responsibility
• ISO Guide 64, Guide for addressing environmental issues in product standards

Efforts are already underway by a number of organisations to assess (OECD, 2018b)

and develop design guidelines specific to plastics. These include the Ellen MacArthur
33
Foundation, Association of Plastics Recyclers (APR) and RECOUP , which together
with the British Plastics Federation (BPF), has released a Recyclability by
34
Design guide . In South Africa, the PET Plastic Recycling Company (PETCO)
released a guide for packaging design targeting the PET manufacturing sector. All
guidelines aim to ensure an adequate quality for recycled materials.

A definition of ‘recyclable’ was developed by the APR and Plastics Recyclers Europe
(PRE) and is supported by Petcore Europe. As per the agreed definition, four
35
conditions must be met before plastics can be considered recyclable. These are:

1. The product must be made with a plastic that is collected for recycling, has
market value and/or is supported by a legislatively mandated program.
2. The product must be sorted and aggregated into defined streams for recycling
processes.
3. The product can be processed and reclaimed/recycled with commercial recycling
processes.
4. The recycled plastic becomes a raw material that is used in the production of
new products.

APR includes in the definition of recyclability the percentage of the community that

33. http://www.recoup.org/
34. See https://www.bpf.co.uk/eco-design.aspx
35. RecyClass. https://recyclass.eu/recyclass/definition/#

118
has access to a collection system that accepts the item.

In addition to defining recyclability, APR have developed freely available guidelines

36
and testing protocols for different resins and physical features of products. These
provide a rating of a product based on four categories:

1. APR Design Guide® Preferred – The design features of the product are readily
accepted at sorting facilities and recyclers. The product is likely to pass through
the recycling process into the most appropriate material stream with the
potential of producing a high-quality material.
2. Detrimental to Recycling – The product has features that present known
challenges to the yield of a sorting or recycling facility, its productivity or final
quality produced.
3. Renders Package Non-recyclable per APR Definition – The product has features
that have a significant adverse technical impact on a sorting or recycling
facility’s yield, productivity or final quality produced. The majority of facilities
cannot remove these features sufficiently in order to generate marketable end-
products.
4. Requires Testing – The product is still to be tested as per an APR testing
protocol.

Product certification
Certification schemes can provide transparency on the recyclability of products.
Such schemes should be based on the agreed international design standards
developed under the new global agreement in order to ‘be credible and ensure
consistency across sectors’ (OECD, 2019). Methods for determining certification
must be standardised and preferably outsourced to independent certifying bodies.
37
The ISO 14020 series on environmental labels and declarations can also play a role.

Certification is required for the following processes, at a minimum:

1. Products: Compliance with design standards (physical features, including

leakage and abrasion).
2. Materials: Transparency of post-consumer resin (PCR) - recycled content.
3. Chemicals: Compliance with use of non-toxic chemical additives.

The linkages between design standards and product certification are illustrated in
Figure 11, highlighting the need to improve the quality of collected material as a
feedstock for recycling facilities.

36. Association of Plastics Recyclers (APR) https://plasticsrecycling.org/apr-design-guide/apr-design-guide-home

37. https://www.iso.org/standard/34425.html. See also https://www.iisd.org/business/markets/
eco_label_iso14020.aspx for more.

119
Figure 11: Linking design standards and guidelines to product certification.

Compliance with sustainability objectives, criteria and

standards
The design guides developed by APR and others can be used to certify products into
agreed categories, as illustrated by the four APR categories of preferred,
detrimental, non-recyclable and not tested.

For some product categories, an industry self-certification process may be

appropriate, whereas others may require authorised institutions to perform
certification tests paid for by the producer. The former may apply to products that
are likely to fall within the preferred category, with random checks by authorised
testing institutions and non-governmental organizations (NGOs).

Examples exist of changes in product design based on environmentally sound end-

of-life treatment of packaging. Toothpaste tubes are traditionally produced using
multiple layers of plastic and aluminium, rendering them unrecyclable. Colgate has
designed a tube using multiple layers of a single resin, HDPE (high-density
polyethylene) (resin #2), that meets Colgate’s criteria of allowing consumers to
comfortably squeeze out all toothpaste, while protecting integrity of product and
meet high-speed production demands. The tube was recognised by APR for its
38
recyclability. APR has also recently certified three shrink films for PET bottles and a
39
number of label inks.

Product certification that is based on international design standards can assist in

standardising the methods of determining hazard classification of chemicals and
waste. Countries may classify such wastes differently due to inconsistent
classification methods, resulting in variations in the management of wastes that
contain substances of concern (OECD, 2019).

38. https://www.plasticstoday.com/packaging/colgate-s-fully-recyclable-toothpaste-tube-first-receive-apr-
recognition/115992632861006
39. https://resource-recycling.com/plastics/2020/03/25/pet-bottle-label-innovations-achieve-apr-recognition/

120
Preliminary work has begun on determining methods for calculating leakage from
corporate value chains for both macro- and microplastics. The Plastic Leak
40
Project has published standardised guidelines, providing a method to calculate and
report estimated leakage at each life cycle stage and at both product and corporate
levels. A number of methods for determining plastic leakage (footprint), including
microplastics, have also been developed and which have been assessed by the
International Union for Conservation of Nature (IUCN, 2019). These guidelines could
provide a starting point for developing harmonised certification standards,
particularly for plastic pollution resulting from abrasion of microplastics.

Transparency of post-consumer recycled content (PCR)

While preventive measures that promote the phasing out of plastics and hazardous
substances are important, there will likely always be a need to trace recycled content
in order to establish compliance with declarations, labelling and reporting. Tracing
the use of recycled content through the value chain presents challenges. It is not
always possible to identify the chemical content within a final product that comes
from virgin feedstocks versus recycled feedstocks. Chemical recycling (also referred
to as advanced recycling) provides some opportunities to apply one of the chain of
custody models known as mass balancing and important work has begun to
investigate these options (Ellen Macarthur Foundation, 2019). As per the American
Chemistry Council (ACC), “the flow of molecules through the advanced recycling
process and back into the production of plastics, chemicals and fuels should be
tracked from start to finish in order to certify recycled content in end products.”
Core principles have also been suggested by the ACC, as well as enabling principles.
41
The latter are listed by the ACC as:

• Broad global adoption of a small number of harmonized standards preferred.

• Certification process and standards are compatible with applicable regulatory
and compliance requirements utilizing clear global definitions.
• Transparent public certification standard and certification methodology.
• Standard developers who are independent from certifying organizations
preferred.
• Inclusive approach to standard development; balance engagement of
stakeholders and internal standard consistency for standards organization.
• Standard can be linked to other certification elements that are verifiable if
claimed including: greenhouse gas emissions, sustainable supply chain, LCA,
labor, and human rights.
• Standard does not accommodate the creation of a separate market for the sale
and transfer of credit certificates outside of their direct use within product
value chains.
• Flexibility to adopt future technology innovations in standard.

40. See https://quantis-intl.com/metrics/initiatives/plastic-leak-project/ for more. The strategic committee for

the Plastic Leak Project includes IUCN, the Life Cycle Initiative, the United Nations Environment Programme,
and the World Business Council For Sustainable Development. The advisory board includes, among others,
experts from CIRAIG, European Commission Joint Research Centre, Massachusetts Institute of Technology,
National Geographic Society and WWF.
41. https://www.americanchemistry.com/Media/PressReleasesTranscripts/ACC-news-releases/Mass-Balance-
Certification-Principles-Will-Support-Plastic-Recycling-Growth-and-Accelerate-Advanced-Recycling-
Development.html

121
Further to this, APR has devised a Post-consumer Resin (PCR) Certification Program
to endorse companies that provide third-party certification of PCR. The objective is
to assist in ensuring the PCR certification processes is “reliable, consistent, and
accessible by both producers and users of recycled plastic resins.” To achieve this,
APR’s PCR Certification Program is reported to include the following three
42
components:

• Endorsement of third-party qualified companies to conduct certifications,

providing APR members with the “confidence that endorsed certification
companies adhere to a clear, consistent definition of PCR that aligns with the
ISO 14021:2016 definition”.
• Use of APR endorsed companies by Plastic Reclaimers to conduct certification.
• Recognition by APR of members that are awarded certification.

Compliance with standards for use of non-toxic chemical

additives
The number of chemicals added to plastic resins is substantial. Similar challenges
and solutions are presented as for the certification of PCR. Examples of MEAs that
regulate the use of chemicals at the global level include the Montreal Protocol and
the Stockholm Convention. Both these instruments apply to plastics in different
ways and may provide options for consideration or expansion in a new global
agreement to manage plastics (Raubenheimer & McIlgorm, 2017; 2018). The
Stockholm Convention specifies that environmentally sound disposal of wastes
containing chemicals regulated by the Convention does not include recovery,
recycling, reclamation, direct reuse or alternative uses (Article 6.d(iii)).

This concept could be expanded in the new agreement to ensure only chemicals
allowed under the new agreement may be included in products recycled, etc, with
testing processes developed to promote adherence with standards developed under
the agreement for use of non-toxic chemicals.

In addition, the London Protocol provides a model that may be considered in the new
agreement, in which all substances regulated by the Protocol are banned from being
dumped in the oceans unless they are explicitly specified in a ‘white list’ of
substances allowed to be dumped, subject to a permit from relevant authorities. A
new agreement for plastics could simplify certification processes by developing a
white list of chemical groups that are considered safe to include in plastic products,
as well as manufacturing and recycling processes. Authorised independent certifiers
would need to verify this content and transparent processes agreed at the global
level providing and assessing such claims. Such processes would be similar for PCR
certifications discussed in the next section.

42. https://plasticsrecycling.org/pcr-certification/overview-application

122
Annex 3.
Examples of regulatory measures
to manage domestic markets

Regulatory measures to manage domestic markets

Regulatory measures are fundamental to achieving environmentally sound
management of plastics, not just as waste but across the life cycle of plastic
products. Such measures can encourage supply and demand of recycled plastics, as
well as promote positive behaviour and penalise unfavourable activities.

Environmentally sound management of plastics can be greatly enhanced by

designing markets based on the following objectives:

1. Eliminating avoidable and problematic products and chemicals

2. Increasing supply and quality of recyclable material to end-markets
3. Increasing demand to recycled materials.

By providing a stable economic environment through a suite of regulatory measures,

investor confidence in waste management services can be boosted and behaviour
can be stimulated within production, manufacturing and consumption phases of the
plastics life cycle. Importantly, by promoting the supply of recyclable materials on
the market, regulatory measures that promote the demand for recycled materials
can assist in driving investment security by enhancing long-term end-markets for
plastic waste that is collected, sorted and recycled appropriately.

Examples of regulatory measures that increase supply of recycled materials on the

market include:

• 100% of packaging is recyclable or reusable, and

• ban of recyclable plastics being disposed in landfill or used in waste-to-energy
facilities.

Examples of regulatory measures that increase demand for recycled materials

include:

• mandatory recycled content for manufacturers, and

• public procurement policies will drive demand for the recycled materials.

Policy interventions that drive recycling rates for plastic waste can include (OECD,
2018a):

• Drive supply of material, increase economies of scale, reduce costs and increase
resilience through setting of statutory targets for recycling, banning plastics
from landfill and adopting EPR regulation.
• Mandate requirement for recycled content to create demand.
• Use public sector procurement policies to create demand for recycled content
• Set targets (including using EPR) for recycling thermosets to drive supply.

123
 • Obligate monomer manufacturers to buy back recycled plastics
• Ban or reduce problematic and hazardous additives in primary plastics.
• Mandate labelling for biodegradable plastics and improve associated standards.
• Introduce mandatory data reporting mechanisms for plastics recycling.
• Ban use of plastics in energy-to-waste facilities.
• Enforcement action to reduce illegal dumping.
• Enforcement action to reduce illegal waste trafficking.
• Standardise waste collection systems to increase economies of scale and reduce
costs.
• Regulation and enforcement to ensure consistent environmental standards in
global markets

Regulatory measures should aim to increase the quantity of recyclable materials on

the market, replacing non-recyclable materials for products where alternatives to
plastics are not feasible. In addition, the quality of the recyclable material must also
be improved. This can be achieved through regulating the products placed on the
markets, but also through reducing contamination of plastic wastes within the
waste stream. Regulatory measures, such as separate collection of organic wastes,
can further support improvements to the recycling rate.

Table 21: Table of possible national measures across the life cycle of plastics.

Regulatory measures Market-based measures

Production Ban on single-use plastics Virgin material tax

Ban on manufacturing, distribution and import of defined Taxes imposed on either resin manufacturers, packaging
problematic and unnecessary single-use plastic. The policy is manufacturers, brand-owners and importers on production or
usually directive in nature at the national level and administered plastic packaging elements which are either difficult-to-recycle
or enforced at the city level or contain undesirable content

Decentralized repurpose and reuse Anti-littering and anti-dumping levies

Transforming plastic waste or unwanted plastic products into Taxes and fines imposed on serious litterers with the aim of
new materials or products preventing, eliminating and reducing of illegal dumping and
littering

Sustainable conversion and offtake markets

Incentives in the form of subsidies, tax exemptions for intake of
low-value, non-recyclable plastic to stimulate their sustainable
end-of-life treatment markets

Manu- Eco-design standards Taxes and levies on single-use plastics

facturing Policy measures setting plastic packaging material and design Taxes and/or levies imposed on manufacturers, retailers or
standards to improve recyclability and minimize overall consumers for use of specific types of single-use plastic
environmental footprint elements, including but not limited to, plastic bags, straws, cups
and polystyrene food packaging

Recycling content standards

Requiring a certain level of recycled material to be used in plastic
applications. Potential incentives or penalties could be levied on
the producers and importers of plastic products to meet their
recycled content levels

Ban on primary microplastics

Prohibition on the use of plastic fragments or particles less than
5mm in size (pre-production plastic pellets not included), which
are purposefully manufactured for uses in cosmetic products and
toiletries, vector drugs and air-blasting technologies

124
Con- Eco-labelling standards Advanced Disposal Fees
sumption Standards or guidelines imposed on packaging product labelling Non-refundable fees levied on individual products at the point of
in order to inform consumers on packaging content and/or purchase. The fee is inbuilt in the pricing of the product based on
proper disposal methods, with the goal to eventually drive more estimated costs of collection and treatment
environmentally friendly consumer-behavior

Preferential procurement
Mandates on public sector organizations for supporting or
procuring repurposed plastic in their procurement contracts for
products and services

Disposal Takeback obligations Deposit return scheme

Mandatory obligations on producer brands to take back their Refundable fee levied on an individual product at the point of
products from end-users at the end of the product’s useful life purchase. The entire fee, or a portion of it, is refundable when
the used product is returned to the point of sale or at a specified
drop-off site

Source segregation Packaging material fees

Rules to govern quality of garbage collection at the household or Producers pay fees depending on the amount of packaging
institutional level, which mandates or incentivizes waste stream material put on the market or their plastic recycling/recovery
separation at the source of generation targets. Pooled fees are used to fund packaging waste
management activities through a producer responsibility
organization (PRO)

Municipal collection points and MRFs Plastic credits system

Requirements to set up dedicated collection points or recovery Producers meet their obligations by purchasing recycling
facilities by municipalities at a sub-district or city level where certificates issued by accredited re-processors or recyclers based
waste can be separated for further recycling or treatment on the amount of plastic waste recycled

Regulations on waste import Incentives for recycling industry

Policies governing waste shipment into the country with the aim Financial instruments such as credits, deductions, tax
of prohibiting the import of solid waste or post-consumer exemptions, as well as shortened depreciation lifetime, are
recyclables designed to stimulate growth of the plastic recycling industry

Sanitary landfills Landfill taxes

Policy instrument to provide legal basis and funding for Taxes charged by national governments to private or public
construction, operation and maintenance of sanitary landfills landfill operators to help drive waste away from landfill towards
and the conversion of existing open and uncontrolled dump sites preferable disposal alternatives, such as composting, recycling,
into sanitary landfills and reuse

Pay as you throw

A policy instrument, typically used at the local level, whereby
households are charged a fee for waste collection. These could be
a flat monthly fee, an amount based on the frequency of waste
collection, or an amount calculated per the measure of the
generated waste (e.g., weight, number of bins, etc.)

Funding Municipal bonds

Debt instruments issued by the local or national government to
finance capital expenditure for waste management (e.g.,
construction of recycling plants, MRFs, etc.) that are usually
exempt from national and local taxes

Government grants and funds

Special funds established by the national government for solid
waste management, which are used to provide grants, subsidies
or special interest loans to municipalities, private sector and
NGOs to scale waste management initiatives

Research and development incentives

Financial incentives, like tax cuts or rebates on R&D expenses,
designed to encourage innovation and development of resource-
efficient materials and cutting-edge treatment technologies

125
Social Informal sector inclusion
inclusion Set of rules, such as workforce mandates, service fees, work permissions and health insurance, allowing for official recognition and
inclusion of independent waste collectors into the formal waste management chain

Table 21 reflects suggestions from the Ocean Conservancy’s “Plastics Policy

Playbook” (Ocean Conservancy, 2019), and regrouped for the purposes of this study

126
Annex 4.
List of relevant UNEA articles

Introduction
• Recognizes that the presence of plastic litter and microplastics in the marine
environment is a rapidly increasing serious issue of global concern that needs an
urgent global response taking into account a product life cycle approach, and
acknowledging that the levels and sources of marine plastic litter and
microplastics, and the resources available to tackle the issue, can vary between
regions, and that measures need to be taken and adapted as appropriate to
local, national and regional situations (UNEA Res. 2/11 para 1).
• Consider the feasibility and effectiveness of a potential international legally
binding agreement on marine litter and microplastics (Draft outcome document
of AHEG2 meeting, para 4, Governance).

Guiding elements
• Resolution 2/11 adopted at the second UNEA meeting called for “an urgent
global response taking into account a product life cycle approach” to the issue
that takes into account the varying resources available and highlighting that
measures “measures need to be taken and adapted as appropriate to local,
national and regional situations”. (UNEA Res. 2/11, para 1)
• Resolution 3/11 adopted at the third meeting of UNEA noted the “important role
of key sectors such as plastics producers, retailers and the consumer goods
industry, as well as importers, packaging firms and transport firms, to
contribute to the reduction of marine litter, including microplastics, arising from
their products and activities.” The resolution called for sectors to disclose the
resulting impacts across the life cycle of their products, to adopt innovative
approaches including the use of extended producer responsibility schemes.
(UNEA Res. 3/7, para 6)
• Resolution 4/6 adopted at the fourth UNEA meeting stressed the need for
sustainable consumption and production patterns to be adopted across the life
cycle of plastics, also raising the need for environmentally sound waste
management, resource efficiency and adherence to the 3R waste hierarchy.
(UNEA Res. 4/6, intro)
• The need for a life cycle and resource efficiency approach to addressing the
problem is again agreed in Resolution 4/6 adopted at the fourth UNEA meeting.
This should build on existing initiatives and instruments, and be “supported by
and grounded in science, international cooperation and multi-stakeholder
engagement” (UNEA Res. 4/6, para 1).

Vision
• A new global agreement should include an overall vision that aligns with the

127
 goal agreed in Resolution 3/7 and adopted at the third UNEA meeting in
December 2017. This resolution, adopted by consensus, “stresses the
importance of long-term elimination of discharge of litter and microplastics to
the oceans and of avoiding detriment to marine ecosystems and the human
activities dependent on them from marine litter and microplastics. (UNEA Res.
3/7, para 1)

Principles and approaches

Precautionary approach

• Stresses the importance of the precautionary approach according to which lack

of full scientific certainty should not be used for postponing cost-effective
measures to prevent environmental degradation, where there are threats of
serious or irreversible damage. (UNEA Res. 2/11 para 7)

Prevention

• Stresses that prevention and environmentally sound management of waste are

keys to long-term success in combating marine pollution, including marine
plastic debris and microplastics, calls on Member States to establish and
implement necessary policies, regulatory frameworks and measures consistent
with the waste hierarchy, and in this context stresses the importance of
providing capacity-building and that Member States should consider financial
assistance to developing countries, least developed countries and in particular
small island developing States for the realization of these objectives. (UNEA
Res. 2/11 para 7)

• Underlining that preventive action through waste minimization and

environmentally sound waste management should be given the highest priority
and that that is especially important in geographical areas with the largest
sources of marine plastic litter and recognizing that technology and effective
measures already exist that may provide cost-effective, environmentally sound
and locally and regionally adapted solutions. (UNEA Res. 3/7, intro)

• Stressing also the importance of the prevention and reduction of marine litter,
including plastic litter and microplastics, from both land and sea-based sources,
for the 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development and the Sustainable
Development Goals. (UNEA Res. 4/6, intro)

Polluter pays

• Recognizes the need to identify transport and distribution pathways and

hotspots of marine litter, to cooperate regionally and internationally to clean up
such hotspots where appropriate, and to develop environmentally sound
systems and methods for removal and sound disposal of marine litter; stresses
that removal is urgent in areas where it poses an immediate threat to sensitive
marine and coastal ecosystems or marine-based livelihoods or local societies;
and recognizes that removal actions should, as far as possible, be risk-based
and cost-effective, following best available techniques and environmental

128
 practices and the polluter pays approach. (UNEA Res. 2/11, para 12)

Best available techniques, best environmental practice

• Recognizes the need to identify transport and distribution pathways and

hotspots of marine litter, to cooperate regionally and internationally to clean up
such hotspots where appropriate, and to develop environmentally sound
systems and methods for removal and sound disposal of marine litter; stresses
that removal is urgent in areas where it poses an immediate threat to sensitive
marine and coastal ecosystems or marine-based livelihoods or local societies;
and recognizes that removal actions should, as far as possible, be risk-based
and cost-effective, following best available techniques and environmental
practices and the polluter pays approach. (UNEA Res. 2/11, para 12)

• Underlines the need for the sharing of knowledge and experience on the best
available techniques and environmental practices for reducing littering from the
fishing industry and aquaculture, and for implementation of pilot projects where
appropriate, including in respect of deposit schemes, voluntary agreements and
recovery, in particular through prevention and, reduction, reuse and recycling
(the “three Rs”) (UNEA Res. 2/11 para 15).

Waste management
• Waste management is a fundamental component of a circular approach to
addressing marine plastic litter and microplastics. The importance of
environmentally sound management of plastic wastes has been stressed in
numerous forums, particularly under the Basel Convention. The need for
including marine litter and microplastics in local, national and regional waste
management plans was agreed in UNEA Res. 3/7 (para 4d). Wastewater
treatment was also highlighted, being a pathway for microplastics into the
marine environment.
• Stresses that prevention and environmentally sound management of waste are
keys to long-term success in combating marine pollution, including marine
plastic debris and microplastics, calls on Member States to establish and
implement necessary policies, regulatory frameworks and measures consistent
with the waste hierarchy, and in this context stresses the importance of
providing capacity-building and that Member States should consider financial
assistance to developing countries, least developed countries and in particular
small island developing States for the realization of these objectives. (UNEA
Res. 2/11, para 7).

Sustainable consumption and production

• Encourages Governments at all levels to further develop partnerships with
industry and civil society and establish public-private partnerships, including
with regard to environmentally friendly alternatives to plastic packaging and
deposit refund systems; to raise awareness of the sources and negative effects
of and possible measures for reducing marine plastic debris and microplastics;
to promote change in individual and corporate behavior; and to cooperate in the
prevention and clean-up of marine plastic debris; and, in that regard, invites

129
 initiatives for the development of sustainable tourism, including through the
Sustainable Tourism Programme of the 10-Year Framework of Programmes on
Sustainable Consumption and Production Patterns. (UNEA Res. 2/11, para 13).
• Stressing further the importance of more sustainable management of plastics
throughout their life cycle in order to increase sustainable consumption and
production patterns, including but not limited to the circular economy and other
sustainable economic models, and the importance of environmentally sound
waste management, resource efficiency, the “three Rs” (reduce, reuse, recycle),
sustainable materials management, innovation in related technologies, the
environmentally sound clean-up of marine plastic litter, and international
cooperation for effectively preventing pollution from marine litter, including
plastic litter and microplastics. (UNEA Res. 4/6, Intro).
• Raise awareness of the importance of, and encourage, sustainable consumption
and production, in line with Environment Assembly resolution 4/1 on innovative
pathways to achieve sustainable consumption and production, with regard to
products likely to generate marine litter, including plastic litter and
microplastics. (UNEA Res. 4/6, para 6b).

Elimination of problematic and avoidable products

• Acknowledging the challenges of addressing marine plastic pollution in the face
of increasing production and consumption of plastic in products and packaging,
and urging all countries and other stakeholders to make responsible use of
plastic while endeavoring to reduce the unnecessary use of plastic and to
promote research and application of environmentally sound alternatives. (UNEA
Res. 3/7, intro).
• To develop and implement action plans for preventing marine litter and the
discharge of microplastics; encouraging resource efficiency and increasing
collection and recycling rates of plastic waste and re-design and re-use of
products and materials; and avoiding the unnecessary use of plastic and plastic
containing chemicals of particular concern where appropriate. (UNEA Res. 3/7,
para 4c).
• Stresses that prevention and environmentally sound management of waste are
keys to long-term success in combating marine pollution, including marine
plastic debris and microplastics, calls on Member States to establish and
implement necessary policies, regulatory frameworks and measures consistent
with the waste hierarchy, and in this context stresses the importance of
providing capacity-building and that Member States should consider financial
assistance to developing countries, least developed countries and in particular
small island developing States for the realization of these objectives. (UNEA
Res. 2/11, para 7).
• Underlines the need for the sharing of knowledge and experience on the best
available techniques and environmental practices for reducing littering from the
fishing industry and aquaculture, and for implementation of pilot projects where
appropriate, including in respect of deposit schemes, voluntary agreements and
recovery, in particular through prevention and, reduction, reuse and recycling
(the “three Rs”). (UNEA Res. 2/11, para 15).

130
Chemical hazard reduction
• To develop and implement action plans for preventing marine litter and the
discharge of microplastics; encouraging resource efficiency and increasing
collection and recycling rates of plastic waste and re-design and re-use of
products and materials; and avoiding the unnecessary use of plastic and plastic
containing chemicals of particular concern where appropriate. (UNEA Res. 3/7,
para 4c).
• Underlines that, while research already undertaken provides sufficient evidence
of the need for immediate action, more research is needed on marine plastic
debris and microplastics, including associated chemicals, and especially on
environmental and social impacts – including on human health – and on
pathways, fluxes and fate, including fragmentation and degradation rates, in all
marine compartments and especially in water bodies and sediment deposits of
the coastal and open ocean, as well as on impacts on fisheries, aquaculture and
economy; and urges Governments at all levels and Member States in a position
to do so to support such research. (UNEA Res. 2/11, para 20).

Mitigation and removal

• Stressing further the importance of more sustainable management of plastics
throughout their life cycle in order to increase sustainable consumption and
production patterns, including but not limited to the circular economy and other
sustainable economic models, and the importance of environmentally sound
waste management, resource efficiency, the “three Rs” (reduce, reuse, recycle),
sustainable materials management, innovation in related technologies, the
environmentally sound clean-up of marine plastic litter, and international
cooperation for effectively preventing pollution from marine litter, including
plastic litter and microplastics. (UNEA Res. 4/6, Intro).

National Plastic Management Plans

• To develop and implement action plans for preventing marine litter and the
discharge of microplastics; encouraging resource efficiency and increasing
collection and recycling rates of plastic waste and re-design and re-use of
products and materials; and avoiding the unnecessary use of plastic and plastic
containing chemicals of particular concern where appropriate. (UNEA Res. 3/7,
para 4c).
• To include marine litter and microplastics in local, national and regional waste
management plans and in wastewater treatment where appropriate. (UNEA
Res. 3/7 para 4d).

Science and knowledge building

• Requests the ED of UNEP, subject to the availability of resources and benefiting
from the work of existing mechanisms, to immediately strengthen scientific and
technological knowledge with regard to marine litter, including marine plastic
litter and microplastics, through the following activities (UNEA Res 4/6, para 2):

131
 (a) Convening existing relevant science advisory initiatives with input from
Member States, as appropriate, to provide input into the activities outlined
in paragraphs 3 and 7 of the present resolution;

(b) Compiling available scientific and other relevant data and information to
prepare an assessment on sources, pathways and hazards of litter, including
plastic litter and microplastics pollution, and its presence in rivers and
oceans; scientific knowledge about adverse effects on ecosystems and
potential adverse effects on human health; and environmentally sound
technological innovations;

(c) Recommending indicators to harmonize monitoring, reporting and

assessment methodologies, taking into account key sources of marine litter,
including plastic litter and microplastics, in cooperation with relevant
international organizations;

(d) Gathering information with a view to informing policies and action

regarding environmentally sound technological innovations, options and
measures for reducing the risk of discharges of litter, including plastic litter
and microplastics, into the marine environment, taking into account the
whole life cycle of plastics, in support of local, national, regional and global
action.

Funding and capacity building

• Emphasizing that technology transfer on mutually agreed terms and resource
mobilization from all sources are important elements to combating marine litter
and microplastics. (UNEA Res. 3/7, intro).

Industry responsibility
• Recalls its resolution 2/11 on marine plastic litter and microplastics and invites
Member States, in close collaboration with the private sector, to: (a) Reduce the
discharge of microplastics into the marine environment, including, where
possible, through the phasing out of products that contain microplastics; (b)
Foster innovation in product design to reduce secondary microplastics release
from land- and sea-based sources and improve waste management where
needed; (c) Prevent losses of primary microplastics, in particular pre-production
pellets (flakes and powders), to prevent spillage into the environment across the
whole manufacturing and supply chain. (UNEA Res. 4/6, para 4).
• Requests the Executive Director, through the United Nations Environment
Programme’s 10-Year Framework of Programmes on Sustainable Consumption
and Production Patterns, to develop guidelines for the use and production of
plastics in order to inform consumers, including about standards and labels; to
incentivize businesses and retailers to commit themselves to using sustainable
practices and products; and to support governments in promoting the use of
information tools and incentives to foster sustainable consumption and
production. (UNEA Res. 4/6 para 5).
• Notes the important role of key sectors such as plastics producers, retailers and
the consumer goods industry, as well as importers, packaging firms and
transport firms, to contribute to the reduction of marine litter, including

132
 microplastics, arising from their products and activities, as well as to provide
information on the impacts arising from their products throughout their life
cycle, and encourages innovative approaches such as the use of extended
producer responsibility schemes, container deposit schemes and other
initiatives. (UNEA Res. 3/7, para 6).

Measuring progress
• Also encourages the establishment of harmonized international definitions and
terminology concerning the size of, and compatible standards and methods for
the monitoring and assessment of, marine plastic debris and microplastics, as
well as the establishment of and cooperation on cost-effective monitoring,
building as far as possible on ongoing related monitoring programmes and
considering alternative automated and remote sensing technology where
possible and relevant. (UNEA Res. 2/11, para 19).

Institutional elements
• UN Environment Assembly resolutions call for action from the UN system. UNEA
Res. 2/11 (para 14 and 16) highlights the role of FAO in mitigating and cleaning
up abandoned, lost or discarded fishing gear, and IMO in mitigating marine
litter. UNEA Res. 4/6 (para 6) invites UN agencies to contribute to addressing
marine litter through activities such as raising awareness and promoting
environmentally sound management and marine plastic prevention.
• UN Environment Assembly Res. 2/11 (para 5) welcomes the work under the aegis
of the CBD, the International Whaling Commission and the Convention on
Migratory Species (CMS) on impacts of marine debris on marine biological
diversity. Also, the work under the aegis of regional frameworks is welcomed,
including the Convention for the Protection of the Natural Resources and
Environment of the South Pacific Region on pollution from vessels and from
land-based sources.

133
Annex 5.
Principles and approaches to
guide a new global agreement

Integral to the long-term success of the agreement are the principles of Extended
Producer Responsibility, Sustainable Consumption and Production and Social Equity.
These have been agreed in resolutions adopted at UNEA meetings and are
summarized below. Also included are supporting principles and approaches agreed in
various UN resolutions. Together the principles and approaches play a key role in
guiding interpretation of the new agreement to ensure implementation at all levels
is effective in achieving the goals of the agreement.

1. Extended Producer Responsibility

An environmental policy approach in which a producer's responsibility for a product

is extended to the post-consumer stage of a product's life cycle (OECD)

2. Sustainable Consumption and Production

The use of services and related products, which respond to basic needs and bring a
better quality of life while minimizing the use of natural resources and toxic
materials as well as the emissions of waste and pollutants over the life cycle of the
service or product so as not to jeopardize the needs of future generations (UNEP)

3. Polluter Pays Principle

The polluter should bear the cost of measures to reduce pollution according to the
extent of either the damage done to society or the exceeding of an acceptable level
(standard) of pollution (OECD)

4. User Pays Principle

Calls upon the user of a natural resource to bear the cost of running down natural
capital (OECD)

5. Proximity Principle

Treatment and disposal of waste takes place as near as possible to the point of
production as is technically and environmentally possible (Basel Convention
guidelines on waste management)

134
 6. Principle of Self-sufficiency

The principle of self-sufficiency requires that most waste should be treated or

disposed of within the region in which it is produced (European Environment Agency
Glossary)

7. Social Equity

Inter- and intra-generational equity, job protection and creation (particularly

informal sector)

The inclusion and empowerment of waste pickers, along with recognition of their
working conditions and long-term plans to upgrade those conditions, should be
featured in the agreement (Ocean Conservancy, 2015).

8. Principle of Progression

The principle of progression aims at the continued improvement of environmental

legislation on the basis of the most recent scientific knowledge (UN, 2018). The
agreement should acknowledge that parties need to progress successively so that
action at any given point of time reflects the highest level of ambition. To this end,
each successive NPMPs need to represent a progression in relation to the preceding
plan. This also relates to the principle of no regression.

9. Access to Information

For the purposes of this Convention, information on health and safety of humans
and the environment shall not be regarded as confidential (Stockholm Convention)

135
Annex 6.
The contribution of a new global
agreement to achieving the SDGs

The adoption of a new agreement can help to deliver the 2030 Agenda for
Sustainable Development, in particular Target 14.1 that outlines a commitment for
2025 to “prevent and significantly reduce marine pollution of all kinds, in particular
from land-based activities, including marine debris and nutrient pollution.” Moreover,
elimination of leakage helps achieving many other Sustainable Development Goals
(SDGs), as illustrated in Table 22.

Table 22: Relevance of plastic pollution to the 2030 Agenda and ways a new
agreement can contribute to delivering SDGs.

How the agreement can contribute to

Relevance of plastic pollution to SDGs
SDGs

Poor communities commonly do not have Promotes recycling schemes that provide
access to effective waste management, people living in poverty with additional
resulting in plastic waste polluting the income-generating possibilities, while
surrounding environment. In addition, improving the environmental quality of
waste pickers often face social their surroundings. Integration of waste
marginalization, low living and working pickers in formal waste management
conditions, and are subject to vector- systems can provide improved sanitary
borne diseases (Cruvinel et al., 2020) work environments.

Ghost fishing by derelict fishing gear Prevents leakage by facilitating policies to

results in significant losses of potential prevent loss of fishing gear and promote
food for human consumption (Beaumont removal of abandoned fishing gear from
et al., 2019). Plastic mulching can the ocean, particularly through market-
significantly increase crop yields, but the based instruments. Improve the
accumulation of residual plastic film technology for recovering residual plastic
seriously affects crop yields over time film to protect the environment
(Gao et al., 2019).

Potentially concerning impacts of Helps to reduce adverse health effects by

microplastics include enhanced restricting the use of hazardous additives
inflammatory response, size-related and minimizing microplastic releases. By
toxicity of plastic particles, chemical reducing plastics on the market that are
transfer of adsorbed chemical pollutants, not recyclable and stimulating end-
and disruption of the gut microbiome markets for plastic wastes, the collection
(Wright & Kelly, 2017). In addition, waste rate of plastic of waste will increase,
in the environment can promote water- reducing the risk of water-borne diseases
borne and other diseases, e.g. malaria resulting from uncollected waste.
(Cruvinel et al., 2020; Krystosik et al.,
2020).

Microplastics are commonly released into Helps to design policies to reduce the
waterways and entering drinking water release of microplastics and restrict the
(Koelmans et al., 2019). In addition, Plastic use of plastics bags and other disposable
waste clogs sewers that results in plastic products, minimizing the risk of
stormwater overflows (Clapp & clogging sewers and associated problems.
Swanston, 2009).

136
 Two billion people globally do not have Provides increased value to all plastic
access to adequate waste collection waste, increasing the potential to profit
services (Wilson et al., 2015). from collected waste, enhancing
investment is services and facilities and
providing greater job opportunities in the
waste sector.

44% of plastic waste consists of Promotes sustainable product policies

packaging, which has a short life-span that will foster prevention, reuse and
and often ends up in the environment recyclability helping to minimize waste
(Geyer et al., 2017). Other plastic- streams, increase resource efficiency and
intensive sectors include building and accelerate the development of closed loop
construction, clothing and textiles, systems.
agriculture and transportation.

4% of the world’s oil production is used as Functions as a strong ally in the fight
feedstock to make plastics and a similar against climate change by decoupling
amount is used as energy in the process plastic production from fossil feedstocks
(Thompson et al., 2009). and by promoting recycling to prevent
carbon dioxide emissions from
incineration and methane emissions from
landfilling.

800 species are affected by plastic Prevents leakage of plastics to the

pollution via ingestion or entanglement environment and promotes removal of
resulting in death of one million marine plastics that will prevent entanglement
animals each year (CBD, 2016; Ocean and indigestion of marine animals.
Conservancy, 2019).

The density of microplastics in soil is Reduces terrestrial contamination by

significantly higher than in the ocean with helping to design preventative policies, in
potentially damaging effects on particular minimizing the use of
terrestrial ecosystems (Horton et al., intentionally-added microplastics in
2017). agriculture.

Governments perceive Goal 12 on responsible consumption and production the most

challenging one to implement and it has major performance gaps across regions
(Sachs et al., 2019). The agreement can help to boost implementation of Goal 12
focusing on reducing residual waste and achieving sound management of chemicals
across the life cycle, thus helping to specifically achieve the following targets:

• 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 minimize their adverse impacts on human health and the
environment
• Target 12.5 By 2030, substantially reduce waste generation through prevention,
reduction, recycling and reuse
• Target 12.6 Encourage companies, especially large and transnational companies,
to adopt sustainable practices and to integrate sustainability information into
their reporting cycle

In addition to working towards achievement of the principle of sustainable

consumption and production, reducing residual waste and the use of chemicals of
concern will incorporate the principles of precaution, inter- and intra-generational
equity, conservation of biological diversity and ecological integrity.

137
Annex 7.
Examples of Trade Related
Environmental Measures
(TREMs)

Trade measures have been included in MEAs to assist in achieving the goals of the
agreement, often incentivising states to sign the agreement and thereby preventing
an increase in production within non-signatory states. Trade related environment
43
measures can take the form of trade restrictions, prior informed consent (PIC) ,
licenses/permits for import and export, and requirements for labelling and
packaging. MEAs that have adopted trade related environmental measures include
the Basel Convention, the Rotterdam Convention, the Cartagena Protocol, the
Montreal Protocol, the Convention on International Trade in Endangered Species of
Wild Fauna and Flora (CITES) and the Kyoto Protocol.

Regulating trade in plastic waste

The Basel Convention prohibits party states to export or import hazardous wastes
and other wastes to or from non-party states. Where trade is allowed and where
wastes are considered hazardous under the convention, the exporting state must
provide prior written notification to the competent authority of the importing state
and trade may only take place once prior informed consent has been received from
the importing state (Article 6.3). Prior informed consent must also be received from
any states through which the waste may transit.

Information provided must include, inter alia, the generator of the waste, the
designation and a physical description of the waste, method of disposal and the
disposer of the waste (Annex V.A). Upon receiving the information, the importing
country must respond providing consent (possibly with conditions), denying
permission for the import, or requesting further information (Article 6.2). The
exporting country, upon receipt of written consent, must then confirm a contract is
in place between the exporter and the disposer of the waste, indicating procedures
for the environmentally sound management of the waste (Article 6.3). Should
parties judge that the wastes will not be managed in an environmentally sound
manner, the import or export of that waste should not be permitted (Article 4.1).

Also relating to international trade of waste is the requirement for hazardous and
other wastes that are traded to be packaged and labelled in line with generally
accepted and recognized international rules and standards (Article 4.7(b)). In
addition, a movement document must be included with the shipment from the initial
point of export to the point of disposal (Article 4.7(c)).

43. Prior Informed Consent and Advanced Informed Agreement procedures provide for the regulation of
international exchange of resources or products that could have adverse effects on human health and the
environment. Such exchange may not proceed without the informed agreement or consent of, or contrary to
the decision of, the competent authority in the recipient country. (Source: InforMEA glossary)

138
Trade with non-parties (import or export) is prohibited (Article 4.5) unless bilateral,
multilateral or regional arrangements are in place that at a minimum meet the
provisions of the Basel Convention (Article 4.5).

Regarding plastic waste specifically, amendments to the Basel Convention adopted

44
in May 2019 provide for plastic wastes to be categorized into three groups for
export, two of which require PIC. These categories are

1. Non-hazardous and difficult to recycle plastics (as defined in Annex II) will
require PIC,
2. Hazardous plastics (as defined in Annex VIII) will require PIC, and
3. Non-hazardous and easy to recycle plastics (as defined in Annex IX) are
exempted from PIC.

Plastic wastes that fall under the first two categories will trigger the PIC procedures
described above. These measures will become operational on 1 January 2021.

Regulating trade in plastic products

No international mechanism exists for regulating the global trade of plastics as
products or packaging. National measures have been adopted, such as bans and
differential taxes, usually applied equally to products imported or manufactured
domestically. The Stockholm Convention regulates a limited number POPs that may
be added to plastic products during manufacture.

Examples can be found in existing MEAs that provide trade related environment
measures that allow a country to regulate what products are allowed to be placed
on their domestic market. The mechanisms are based on 1) written notification by
the exporting country and 2) consent from the importing country, similar to the
Basel Convention. These are outlined briefly below. These mechanisms are usually
supported by measures that promote information sharing and for providing
assistance in complying with obligations agreed to.

PIC under the Rotterdam Convention

The Rotterdam Convention aims to prevent harm to human health and the
environment from certain hazardous pesticides and industrial chemicals by
regulating international trade thereof. The convention provides for information to be
made available to importing countries on listed chemicals and pesticides in order
that a country may accept or refuse such trade based on risks and available national
facilities to manage and dispose of the chemicals safely. Chemicals that are given
consent for import must be labelled according to standards.

A decision guidance document is developed for chemicals specified under the

Rotterdam Convention for PIC procedure. This document outlines the regulatory
requirements for prohibition or restriction as per the Convention. Within nine
months, receiving countries must decide if import of the chemical will be allowed,
prohibited or allowed under specific conditions. Such measures must also be applied
in the same manner if produced domestically. Alternately, countries may ask for
additional information (Article 10).

Exporting countries must ensure that those operating under their jurisdiction and

44. BC-14/12: Amendments to Annexes II, VIII and IX to the Basel Convention

139
exporting chemicals covered by the Convention comply with PIC procedures and with
the decisions of each of the importing countries. If a country has not provided
information in response to the decision guidance document developed by the
Secretariat, the exporting country must obtain permission from the importing
country to explicitly allow the movement of such chemicals into their territory
(Article 11). Where a chemical not regulated under the Rotterdam Convention is
prohibited or strictly regulated within an exporting country, particular reporting
requirements must be met by the exporting country (Article 12). Exporting countries
must also provide adequate labelling if chemicals being exported are listed in Annex
III of the convention or within their own territory are prohibited/strictly regulated or
subject to labelling requirements (Article 13).

Advance Informed Agreement under the Cartagena Protocol

The Cartagena Protocol on Biosafety is an implementing agreement to the

Convention on Biological Diversity (CBD). The protocol aims to protect biodiversity
from the risks associated with the introduction of living modified organisms
(genetically modified) while taking into account any risks posed to human health
and, in particular, the transboundary movement of such organisms (Article 1).

Similar to the Rotterdam Convention, the Cartagena Protocol seeks to ensure

importing countries are provided with sufficient information to make appropriate
decisions. This is achieved through the advance informed agreement (AIA)
procedure. Exporting countries are to provide the country of import with information
listed in Annex I. This includes the characteristics of the living modified organism
(LMO), the techniques used to derive the LMO, the intended use and the potential
risks of introducing the LMO into the environment (Article 8). If an LMO has not
been listed by the Parties as being unlikely to cause harm, the first import must
comply with AIA procedures (Article 7). Where LMOs fall under the scope of the
protocol, their transboundary movement must follow packaging and labelling
standards (Article 18).

The protocol outlines a risk assessment procedure to assist the importing country in
making a decision on whether to allow the import, to place certain conditions on the
import or to request additional information or time (Article 10). LMOs imported for
particular uses are subject to more relaxed procedures. Parties may apply their own
legislation to the import of LMOs and may enter into bilateral, regional or
multilateral agreements if these agreements or national legislation are consistent
with the protocol. Trade with non-Parties is not prohibited but must be consistent
with the objectives of the protocol (Article 24).

140
References

Beaumont, N. J., Aanesen, M., Austen, M. C., Börger, T., Clark, J. R., Cole, M., Hooper,
T., Lindeque, P. K., Pascoe, C. & Wyles, K. J. (2019). Global ecological, social and
economic impacts of marine plastic. Marine Pollution Bulletin 142: 189–195. doi:
10.1016/j.marpolbul.2019.03.022

Biermann, F., Pattberg, P., Van Asselt, H., Zelli, F. (2009). The fragmentation of global
governance architectures: A framework for analysis. Global Environmental Politics 9:
14–40. doi: 10.1162/glep.2009.9.4.14

Birnie, P., Boyle, A., Redgewell, C., (2009). Environmental Law and the Environment,
Third ed. Oxford University Press. B

Bodle, R., Donat, L., Duwe, M. (2016). The Paris Agreement: Analysis, Assessment
and Outlook. Carbon & Climate Law Review 10: 5–22. doi: 10.2307/43860128

Boucher, J., Friot, D. (2017). Primary microplastics in oceans: a global evaluation of

sources. IUCN, Gland, Switzerland. Available online: https://bit.ly/2ZDR7k2

Boucher, J., Dubois, C. Kounina, A. and Puydarrieux, P. (2019). Review of plastic

footprint methodologies: Laying the foundation for the development of a
standardised plastic footprint measurement tool, Gland, Switzerland: IUCN. x +
82pp. Available online: https://bit.ly/34WoyiW

BRS (2019). Report on the activities of the Basel and Stockholm conventions regional
centers. Addendum: Plastic and toxic additives, and the circular economy, The role of
the Basel and Stockholm Conventions. UN Doc. UNEP/CHW.14/INF/29/Add.1.
Available online: https://bit.ly/2ueazVT

Canadian Council of the Ministers of the Environment (2018). Canada-wide action

plan on zero-plastic waste. Available online: https://bit.ly/3hVnFz1

CBD (2016). Marine debris: understanding, preventing and mitigating the significant
adverse impacts on marine and coastal. Secretariat of the Convention on Biological
Diversity. Technical Series No. 83. Available online: https://bit.ly/2DjBbgi

CBD (2020). Zero draft pf the post-2020 global biodiversity framework. Un Doc.
CBD/WG2020/2/3. Available online: https://bit.ly/3dgj8Vk

Chemsec (2020). Chemsec SIN List. Accessed 2 April 2020. https://bit.ly/3bdDUEl

Clapp, J., Swanston, L. (2009). Doing away with plastic shopping bags: International
patterns of norm emergence and policy implementation. Environmental Politics 18:
315–332. doi: 10.1080/09644010902823717

Cruvinel, V. R. N., Zolnikov, T. R., Takashi Obara, M., Oliveira, V. T. L. D., Vianna, E. N.,
Santos, F. S. G. D., Oliveira, K. C. D., Scott, J.A. (2020). Vector-borne diseases in
waste pickers in Brasilia, Brazil. Waste Management 105: 223–232. doi: 10.1016/
j.wasman.2020.02.001

Denkstaff (2011). The impact of plastic packaging on life cycle energy consumption
and greenhouse gas emissions in Europe. Accessed 31 August 2020.
https://denkstatt.eu/publications/

141
de Souza Machado, A. A., Kloas, W., Zarfl, C., Hempel, S., Rillig, M.C. (2018).
Microplastics as an emerging threat to terrestrial ecosystems. Global Change
Biology 24: 1405-1416. doi: 10.1111/gcb.14020.

EASAC (2020). Packaging plastics in the circular economy. EASAC Policy Report 39.
Available online: https://bit.ly/31JUs3N

Ellen Macarthur Foundation (2019). Enabling a circular economy for chemicals with
the mass balance approach. Avaiable online: https://on.basf.com/2EHIqPK

EU (2019a). Annex XV Restriction report. Proposal for a restriction. Substance

name(s): intentionally added microplastics. European Chemicals Agency. Available
online: https://bit.ly/3d1ao3T

EU (2019b). Directive of the European Parliament and the Council on the reduction
of the impact of certain plastics products on the environment. 2018/0172 (COD) LEX
1930. Available online: http://bit.ly/34fvgkZ

Forte, M., Iachetta, G., Tussellino, M., Carotenuto, R., Prisco, M., De Falco, M., ...
Valiante, S. (2016). Polystyrene nanoparticles internalization in human gastric
adenocarcinoma cells. Toxicology in Vitro 31: 126–136. doi: 10.1016/j.tiv.2015.11.006

Fuertes, O; Z., Harries, J. (2019). Next steps under the Paris Agreement and the
Katowice Climate Package. Deutsche Gesellschaft für Internationale
Zusammenarbeit (GIZ) GmbH. Available online: https://bit.ly/3dqrYA3

Galgani, F., Pham, C. K., Reisser, J., eds. (2017). Plastic Pollution. Lausanne: Frontiers.
doi: 10.3389/978-2-88945-330-6

Gallo, F., Fossi, C., Weber, R., Santillo, D., Sousa, J., Ingram, I., Nadal, A., Romano, D.
(2018). Marine litter plastics and microplastics and their toxic chemicals
components: the need for urgent preventive measures. Environmental Sciences
Europe 30: 13. doi: 10.1186/s12302-018-0139-z

Gasperi, J., Wright, S. L., Dris, R., Collard, F., Mandin, C., Guerrouache, M., Langlois,
V., Kelly, F., J., Tassin, B. (2018). Microplastics in air: Are we breathing it in? Current
Opinion in Environment and Health 1: 1–5. doi: 10.1016/j.coesh.2017.10.002

GESAMP (2015). Sources, fate and effects of microplastics in the marine

environment: a global assessment. IMO/FAO/UNESCO-IOC/UNIDO/WMO/IAEA/
UN/UNEP/UNDP Joint Group of Experts on the Scientific Aspects of Marine
Environmental Protection. Rep.Stud. GESAMP No. 90, 96 p. Available online:
https://bit.ly/2SAlxlJ

GESAMP (2016). Sources, fate and effects of microplastics in the marine

environment: part two of a global assessment. IMO/FAO/ UNESCO-IOC/UNIDO/
WMO/IAEA/UN/ UNEP/UNDP Joint Group of Experts on the Scientific Aspects of
Marine Environmental Protection. GESAMP No. 93,220 p. Available online:
https://bit.ly/31L8ceQ

Geyer, R., Jambeck, J. R., Law, K. L. (2017). Production, use, and fate of all plastics
ever made. Science Advances 3, no. 7. doi: 10.1126/sciadv.1700782

Groh K.J., Backhaus, T., Carney-Almroth, B., Gaueke, B., Inostroza, P. A., Lennquist,
A., Leslie, H. A., Maffini, M., Slunge, D., Trasande, L., Warhurst, A. M., Muncke. J.
(2019). Overview of known plastic packaging-associated chemicals and their
hazards. Science of the Total Environment 651: 3253–3268. doi: 10.1016/
j.scitotenv.2018.10.015

142
Horton, A. A., Walton, A., Spurgeon, D. J., Lahive, E., Svendsen, C. (2017).
Microplastics in freshwater and terrestrial environments: Evaluating the current
understanding to identify the knowledge gaps and future research priorities. Science
of the Total Environment 586: 127–141. doi: 10.1016/j.scitotenv.2017.01.19

Huang, J. (2019). A Brief Guide to the Paris Agreement and “Rulebook”. Center for
Climate and Energy Solutions. Available online: https://bit.ly/2WusaIu

Huntington, T. (2019). Marine litter and aquaculture gear. White Paper. Aquaculture
Stewardship Council. Available online: https://bit.ly/2JB6e6E

ISSD (1994). Symposium: Sustainable Consumption. Available online: https://bit.ly/

2BrbXLO

IUCN (2019). Review of plastic footprint methodologies. Laying the foundation for
the development of a standardised plastic footprint measurement tool.Available
online: https://bit.ly/2QICaty

Jambeck, J.R., Geyer, R., Wilcox, C., Siegler, T.R., Perryman, M., Andrady, A., Narayan,
R., Law, K. L. (2015). Plastic waste inputs from land into the ocean. Science 347:
768–771. doi: 10.1126/science.1260352

Kaffine, D., O'Reilly, P., (2015). What Have We Learned About Extended Producer
Responsibility in the Past Decade? A Survey of the Recent EPR Economic Literature.
OECD. Available online: https://bit.ly/2EI9nCW

Kenya Association of Manufacturers (2019). Kenya Plastic Action Plan. Available

online: https://bit.ly/312mzLJ

Koelmans, A. A., Mohamed Nor, N.H., Hermsen, E., Kooi, M., Mintenig, S.M., De
France, J. (2019). Microplastics in freshwaters and drinking water: Critical review
and assessment of data quality. Water Research 155: 410–422. doi: 10.1016/
j.watres.2019.02.054

Krystosik, A., Njoroge, G., Odhiambo, L., Forsyth, J. E., Mutuku, F., LaBeaud, A. D.
(2020). Solid Wastes Provide Breeding Sites, Burrows, and Food for Biological
Disease Vectors, and Urban Zoonotic Reservoirs: A Call to Action for Solutions-
Based Research. Frontiers in Public Health 7. doi: 10.3389/fpubh.2019.00405

Lebreton, L., Slat, B., Ferrari, F., Sainte-Rose, B., Aitken, J., Marthouse, R., Hajbane,
S., Cunsolo, S., Schwarz, A., Levivier, A., Noble, K., Debeljak, P., Maral, H.,
Schoeneisch-Argent, R., Brambini, R. & Reisser, J. (2018). Evidence that the Great
Pacific Garbage Patch is rapidly accumulating plastic. Scientific Reports 8: 4666. doi:
10.1038/s41598-018-22939-w

Lwanga, E. H., Gertsen, H., Gooren, H., Peters, P., Salanki, T., van der Ploeg, M., ...
Geissen, V. (2016). Microplastics in the terrestrial ecosystem: Implications for
Lumbricus terrestris (Oligochaeta, Lumbricidae). Environmental Science &
Technology 50: 2685–2691. doi: 10.1021/acs.est.5b05478

Madhya Pradesh Pollution Control Board (2016). Ministry of Environment, Forest

and Climate Change Notification G.S.R 320(E). Available online: https://bit.ly/
2UloMhw

McIlgorm, A., Raubenheimer, K., McIlgorm, D. E. (2020). Update of 2009 APEC report
on Economic Costs of Marine Debris to APEC Economies. Available online:
https://bit.ly/31KZRaJ

Ministry of Natural Resources and Environment of Vietnam (2020). National action

143
plans for the management of marine plastic litter by 2030. Available online:
https://bit.ly/3dfKqtO

Ministerio do Meio Ambiente, Brasil (2019). Plano de combate ao lixo no mar.

Available online: https://bit.ly/2AVLYfn

Ministry of the environment of Indonesia (2017). Indonesia’s plan of action on marine

plastic debris 2017-2025. Available online: https://bit.ly/3elVrLB

Ministry of the Environment of Finland (2019). Reduce and Refuse, Recycle and
Replace – Plastics Roadmap for Finland. Available online: https://bit.ly/2YlgY1d

Milkoreit, M, Haapala, K. (2018). The global stocktake: design lessons for a new
review and ambition mechanism in the international climate regime. International
Environmental Agreements 19: 89–106. doi: 10.1007/s10784-018-9425-x

Miyazaki, J., Kuriyama, Y., Tokumoto, H., Konishi, Y., Nomura, T. (2015). Cytotoxicity
and behavior of polystyrene latex nanoparticles to budding yeast. Colloids and
Surfaces A: Physicochemical and Engineering Aspects 469: 287–293. doi: 10.1016/
j.colsurfa.2015.01.046

NCM (2019). Nordic Ministerial Declaration on the call for a global agreement to
combat marine plastic litter and microplastics adopted on 10th April 2019. Available
online: https://bit.ly/2O7P3LX

Nizzetto, L., Futter, M., Langaas, S. (2016). Are agricultural soils dumps for
microplastics of urban origin? Environmental Science & Technology 50: 10777–10779.
doi: 10.1021/acs.est.6b04140

Ocean Conservancy (2015). Stemming the Tide: Land-based strategies for a plastic-
free ocean. Washington. Available online: https://bit.ly/2tinqZX

Ocean Conservancy (2019). Strategies for a Plastic-Free Ocean. Plastics Policy

Playbook. Available online: https://bit.ly/2QCm30y

OECD (2016). Extended Producer Responsibility: Updated Guidance for Efficient

Waste Management. Paris: OECD Publishing, 2016. Available online: https://bit.ly/
2X8Nt0u

OECD (2018a). Improving Markets for Recycled Plastics: Trends, Prospects and
Policy Responses. Available online: https://bit.ly/3gOPBCG

OECD (2018b). Technical Tools and Approaches in the Design of Sustainable Plastics.
Background paper 2. OECD Global Forum on Environment: Plastics in a Circular
Economy. Available online: https://bit.ly/2EIm5l8

OECD (2019). Policy Approaches to Incentivise Sustainable Plastic Design, OECD

Environment Working Papers No. 149. Available online: https://bit.ly/34Lf5i2

OSPAR (2020). OSPAR scoping study on best practices for the design and recycling
of fishing gear as a means to reduce quantities of fishing gear found as marine litter
in the North-East Atlantic. Available online: https://bit.ly/3bd706V

PAGE (2017). Green Industrial Policy and Trade: A Tool-Box. Available online:
https://bit.ly/2QEBCEK

Quantis & EA (2020). Plastic Leak Project. Methodological Guidelines.

Raubenheimer, K., McIlgorm, A. (2017). Is the Montreal Protocol a model that can
help solve the global marine plastic debris problem? Marine Policy 81: 322–329. doi:
10.1016/j.marpol.2017.04.014

144
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 96: 285-290. doi: 10.1016/j.marpol.2018.01.013

Republic of Indonesia (2015). Indonesia’s action plan on marine plastic debris

2017-2025: Executive Summary. The Government of the Republic of Indonesia.
Available online: https://bit.ly/37nm53U

Richardson, K., Hardesty, B. D., Wilcox, C. (2019). Estimates of fishing gear loss rates
at a global scale: A literature review and meta-analysis. Fish and Fisheries 20:
1218–1231. doi: 10.1111/faf.12407

Röser, F., Widerberg, O., Höhne, N., Day, T. (2020). Ambition in the making: analysing
the preparation and implementation process of the Nationally Determined
Contributions under the Paris Agreement. Climate Policy 20: 415–429. doi: 10.1080/
14693062.2019.1708697

SAICM (2019). Independent Evaluation of the Strategic Approach from 2006 – 2015.
UN Doc. SAICM/IP.3/INF/3. Available online: https://bit.ly/2T1WEhx

Sherrington, C., Darrah, C., Hann, S., Cole, G., Corbin, M. (2016). Plastics in the
marine environment. Eunomia. Available online: https://bit.ly/2Ux4t0y

Sohoni, P., Sumpter, J. P. (1998). Several environmental oestrogens are also anti-
androgens. Journal of Endocrinology 158: 327–339. doi: 10.1677/joe.0.1580327

Schmid, O., Stoeger, T. (2016). Surface area is the biologically most effective dose
metric for acute nanoparticle toxicity in the lung. Journal of Aerosol Science 99:
133–143. doi: 10.1016/j.jaerosc i.2015.12.006

The Recycling Partnership (2020). 2020 State of Curbside Recycling Report.

Available online: https://bit.ly/31HIBmU

Thompson, R. C., Moore, C. J., vom Saal, F. S., Swan, S. H., (2009). Plastics, the
environment and human health: current consensus and future trends. Philosophical
transactions of the Royal Society: 364: 2153–2166. doi: 10.1098/rstb.2009.0053

UN (2018). Gaps in international environmental law and environment-related

instruments: towards a global pact for the environment. Report from the Secretary
General. UN Doc. A/73/419. Available online: https://bit.ly/2Bnovkf

Wilson D., Rodic, L. Modak, P., Soos, R., Rogero, A., Velis. C., Iyer, M., Simonett, O.
(2015). Global Waste Management Outlook. United Nations Environment
Programme. Available online: https://bit.ly/3710VqG

UNEP (2007). Compliance mechanisms under select Multilateral Environmental

Agreements. Available online: https://bit.ly/2x9o2U5

UNEP (2014). UNEP Year Book 2014 Emerging Issues Update: Plastic Debris in the
Ocean. Available online: https://bit.ly/2GePF26

UNEP (2016). Marine plastic debris and microplastics: global lessons and research to
inspire action and guide policy change. Available online: https://bit.ly/37jWUhh

UNEP (2017). Combating marine plastic litter and microplastics: an assessment of

the effectiveness of relevant international, regional and subregional governance
strategies and approaches. UN Doc. UNEP/AHEG/2018/1/INF/3. Available online:
https://bit.ly/2rw3J0a

UNEP (2018). Legal limits on single-se plastics and microplastics: A global review of

145
national policies and regulations. Available online: https://bit.ly/38HgKn6

UNEP (2019). Global Chemicals Outlook II: From Legacies to innovative solutions,
Implementing the 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development. United Nations
Environment Programme. Available online: https://bit.ly/2zdYTZ9

WEF & OECD (2015). Blended finance vol. 1: A primer for development finance and
philanthropic funders. World Economic Forum. Redesigning Development Finance
Initiative: A joint initiative of the World Economic Fouum and the OECD. Available
online: https://bit.ly/32DCNdt

WEF (2020). Radically Reducing Plastic Pollution in Indonesia: A Multi-stakeholder

Action Plan National Plastic Action Partnership. Available online: https://bit.ly/
2BweaFm

Whitacre, D. M. (2014). Reviews of environmental contamination and toxicology, vol.

227. New York, NY: Springer. doi: 10.1007/ 978-3-319-03777-6

Workman, D. (2020). Plastic item exports by country. Accessed 6 March, 2020.

Available online: https://bit.ly/2QEiJ4P

World Bank (2018). “What a Waste: A Global Snapshot of Solid Waste Management
to 2050”. Available online: https://bit.ly/3baOFHI

Wright, S. L., Kelly, F. J. (2017). Plastic and human health: a micro issue?
Environmental Science & Technology 51: 6634–6647. doi: 10.1021/acs.est.7b00423

146
About this publication
Possible elements of a new global agreement to prevent plastic
pollution
Karen Raubenheimer, Niko Urho

ISBN 978-92-893-6737-0 (PDF)

ISBN 978-92-893-6738-7 (ONLINE)
http://dx.doi.org/10.6027/temanord2020-535

TemaNord 2020:535
ISSN 0908-6692

Frontpage photo: Sharon McCutcheon, Unsplash.com

© Nordic Council of Ministers 2020

Disclaimer

This publication was funded by the Nordic Council of Ministers. However, the content
does not necessarily reflect the Nordic Council of Ministers’ views, opinions, attitudes
or recommendations.

Rights and permissions

This work is made available under the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0
International license (CC BY 4.0) https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0.

Translations: If you translate this work, please include the following disclaimer: This
translation was not produced by the Nordic Council of Ministers and should not be
construed as official. The Nordic Council of Ministers cannot be held responsible for
the translation or any errors in it.

Adaptations: If you adapt this work, please include the following disclaimer along
with the attribution: This is an adaptation of an original work by the Nordic Council
of Ministers. Responsibility for the views and opinions expressed in the adaptation
rests solely with its author(s). The views and opinions in this adaptation have not
been approved by the Nordic Council of Ministers.

Third-party content: The Nordic Council of Ministers does not necessarily own every
single part of this work. The Nordic Council of Ministers cannot, therefore, guarantee
that the reuse of third-party content does not infringe the copyright of the third
party. If you wish to reuse any third-party content, you bear the risks associated
with any such rights violations. You are responsible for determining whether there is
a need to obtain permission for the use of third-party content, and if so, for
obtaining the relevant permission from the copyright holder. Examples of third-party
content may include, but are not limited to, tables, figures or images.

Photo rights (further permission required for reuse):

Any queries regarding rights and licences should be addressed to:

147
Nordic Council of Ministers/Publication Unit
Ved Stranden 18
DK-1061 Copenhagen
Denmark
[email protected]

Nordic co-operation

Nordic co-operation is one of the world’s most extensive forms of regional

collaboration, involving Denmark, Finland, Iceland, Norway, Sweden, and the Faroe
Islands, Greenland and Åland.

Nordic co-operation has firm traditions in politics, economics and culture and plays
an important role in European and international forums. The Nordic community
strives for a strong Nordic Region in a strong Europe.

Nordic co-operation promotes regional interests and values in a global world. The
values shared by the Nordic countries help make the region one of the most
innovative and competitive in the world.

The Nordic Council of Ministers

Nordens Hus
Ved Stranden 18
DK-1061 Copenhagen
[email protected]

Read more Nordic publications on www.norden.org/publications

148