Thank you for Subscribing to Environmental Business Review Weekly Brief
Environmental Business Review | Wednesday, March 08, 2023
While bans, tariffs, and polluter-pay systems may reduce the growth of plastic usage, they must be implemented carefully and with the local context in mind to avoid unexpected effects.
FREMONT, CA: Bans, taxes, and polluter-pays laws are now the most effective methods available to lawmakers to reduce plastic pollution. Until now, given the massive volume of plastic products used by the world's greatest countries, these three policy instruments will not be able to halt the tide of plastic pollution. The three primary policy levers that will accelerate a planned global convention on plastic garbage are bans on single-use plastic, tariffs on plastic manufacture, and extended producer responsibility (EPR) programmes that hold firms liable for post-consumer waste.
The United Nations-led convention on plastic pollution, which is set to enter into force in 2024, covers 175 nations and has been hailed as the most significant piece of environmental laws since the Paris climate agreement. Even a combination of bans, prices, and EPR regulations, however, will not reduce plastic consumption.
Stay ahead of the industry with exclusive feature stories on the top companies, expert insights and the latest news delivered straight to your inbox. Subscribe today.
Based on the Peak Plastics analysis, the UN treaty will be too weak to bend the plastic consumption curve downward, and only the most actively implemented policies will have any influence on reducing plastic use. Even the most successful of the treaty's suggested solutions, a global ban on superfluous single-use plastic goods such as straws, carrying bags, and utensils, will result in plastic use increasing by about one and a half times current levels by 2050.
Policy measures being considered by treaty negotiators include subsidies to support plastic recycling infrastructure, standards for the amount of recycled content brands use in their products, and labelling laws that require brands to publicly communicate how much-recycled plastic they use in their products.
While bans, tariffs, and polluter-pay systems may decrease the growth of plastic usage, the paper cautions that these policies must be implemented properly with the local context in mind to avoid unexpected effects.
Most nations welcome a ban on powerful, multi-layered sachets, which are responsible for eighty percent of all municipal solid waste leaks into the environment. However, removing simply one sachet should not encourage the development of replacement disposable materials like paper and aluminium, both of which could harm the environment while quickly creating customers in developing nations with access to goods in tiny quantities.
Plastic tariffs should not raise the cost of important medical applications or packaging that extends food storage life for low-income consumers. EPR plans to face the same challenges. Such programmes must connect more easily across systems, which is difficult due to the differences in waste collection rates between rich and impoverished countries. The report's author also proposes that cash recovered from polluters be directed towards pollution-reduction programmes.
The United Nations Convention on Plastic Waste could be the most huge environmental agreement since the Paris Agreement, but it should give polluters less flexibility. The report highlights the incredible challenge of negotiating the treaty, which must cover the entire lifecycle of plastic products in order to be effective.
More in News