We Can’t Miss this Opportunity to End Plastic Pollution

Heading into the fifth and final negotiation session of the Intergovernmental Negotiating Committee (INC-5) in Busan, Korea, the world is on the brink of reaching a legally binding agreement to end plastic pollution.

Major plastics and polymers producers like Dow fully support an agreement that will eliminate plastic pollution and improve climate change mitigation while preserving the enormous benefits of plastic in our society. With demand for plastic on the rise globally and inadequate waste management systems in many countries, driving more sustainable production and addressing the growing problem of plastic waste are urgent priorities.

At the same time, an agreement must avoid the pitfalls of production limits on a material that is both an essential building block across many sectors and vital for achieving our Sustainable Development Goals, including a low-emissions economy, clean water, and food security.

Truly sustainable production goes beyond how much is produced: it includes leveraging alternative and waste plastic feedstocks, creating products for both sustainability and performance, and embracing lower-emissions production.

Returning plastic waste to the circular economy as feedstock – harnessing the energy and chemistry contained within it – is critical to advancing all forms of sustainable production. To achieve our shared ambitions, we’ve got to come together to create a circular economy that changes the way the world makes, uses, recycles, and re-uses plastics.

Without the benefit of a global agreement, $32 billion is already invested by the private sector every year to help develop a circular economy. A supportive, clear, and consistent global policy framework would stimulate additional funding. To make a real difference, any agreement must create and nurture an environment that promotes innovation and investments at scale, including circularity drivers like sustainable design standards, recycled content mandates, national recycling targets, and extended producer responsibility (EPR) in national action plans.

Circularity starts with design. As much as 80% of all product-related environmental impacts are influenced by design decisions, from the volume of materials that go into a product to whether it can easily be washed and reused. A global agreement should drive the adoption of international sector- and application-specific design standards to ensure products can be kept in use for as long as possible—and recycled at end of use. Whether it’s recyclable, metal-free coffee packaging; toothpaste tubes; shrink films; or cable jackets made from recycled material, we are seeing tremendous advances in sustainable design that can change the way plastics are used and managed post-use.

To be most effective, an agreement should also drive demand by setting requirements for the amount of recycled materials used in products. This is a smart policy lever that both triggers an increased volume of plastic waste returning to the production process, and also de-risks investments in circularity by creating a stable market for those materials. Important progress is already being made to accelerate these mandates, including under the Packaging and Packaging Waste Regulation in the European Union and a bipartisan bill in the United States.

Likewise, an agreement can increase the available supply of recycled raw materials by encouraging nations to adopt recycling targets. In Brazil, for example, a National Solid Waste Plan has been established that sets an ambitious goal of increasing recycling rates to 48% by 2040. Plans like this help to stimulate the circular economy.

Progress is happening, but today less than 10% of plastic is recycled globally, and 32% of plastic packaging escapes collection systems. Those statistics reflect the unfortunate reality that existing funding and policy frameworks for the waste management ecosystem are insufficient. The global agreement must change that, including by encouraging nations to adopt well-designed EPR or similar policies as part of their national or sub-national action plans to increase the demand for circular plastic and stimulate even more investments in this chain. Done well, EPR policies lead to more recycled content and higher recycling rates, while promoting a just transition and creating jobs for those collecting waste around the world today.

Momentum and convergence around EPR policies is growing around the world—and for good reason. Belgium has one of the oldest EPR schemes dating back to the 1990s, under which companies that introduce packaged products bear financial responsibility for the product’s end-of-life phase via participation in a Producer Responsibility Organization (PRO) called FostPlus. FostPlus pioneered the use of blue “PMD” bags, allowing households to responsibly dispose of plastic packaging, metal packaging, and drink cartons. FostPlus picks up and manages the collection, sorting, and recycling of the waste. It also makes continual investments to expand the types of waste it collects and recycles. Today Belgium recycles 68% of plastic packaging, outpacing even the EU’s objectives.

Finally, as important as what’s in the agreement is how it is implemented. Nations may share the same outcome-based goals but start from vastly different places. An effective agreement should ensure transparency, accountability and external reporting, while combining requirements with capacity-building opportunities for countries and the funding necessary to support them.

A successful agreement can end the leakage of plastic waste into the environment while preserving the essential benefits of this valuable material to our society, especially while considering social impacts. With concerted collaboration among stakeholders, a circular economy for plastics is within our reach. We want to see a practical, sustainable and implementable agreement, and cannot miss this opportunity to seize it.