Innovative production processes could also be considered, reducing costs and improving supplies of raw materials. Concerns around the quality and quantity of recycled plastic have led companies to implement in-house recycling systems. For example, Interface’s ReEntry process allows the company to recycle a higher quantity of post-consumer material while achieving lower contamination rates. The process constitutes a real innovation in the sector, with the lowest embodied energy than any other recycling system in the carpet sector.34 Companies that act first are usually the ones to profit most. Cosmetics company Lush benefits from its campaign asking people to bring back items to recycle by increasing customer foot fall in its stores. Replenish multi-surface cleaner, which is sold in concentrated form for dilution at home, results in 90% less plastic, oil and CO2 emissions than a pre-mixed cleaner. The product has achieved double-digit market share and international reward recognition not simply because of its environmental credentials but because of its innovative design and ability to deliver a quality product at a lower cost.35
REGULATION As concern about the impacts of plastic on the environment and human health grows, so does pressure on policymakers to introduce tougher regulations. Companies that produce or consume large quantities of plastic, but which fail to prepare for tighter controls, are exposed to risks such as lower sales due to restrictions or bans on products and packaging, or chemicals used in their manufacture. For example, there have been concerns over the use of bisphenol A (BPA) used widely in hard, clear plastic commonly found in food and drink containers. Canada was the first country to declare BPA toxic in 2009. From March 2011, the European Commission banned the use of BPA in plastic feeding bottles, followed by the US in 2012.36 There is an increasing range of global and national legislation covering the environmental impacts of waste including plastic. An important focus is preventing damage done by marine litter in the world’s oceans. Historically, marine pollution has been addressed by regulating disposal of waste at sea, for example, with the 1972 Convention on the Prevention of Marine Pollution by Dumping of Waste and other Matter (with its London Protocol) and the 1973 International Convention for the Prevention of Pollution from Ships (Annex V of MARPOL).37 However, these initiatives do not address the impact of plastic litter which enter the sea from land and is said to account for over 80% of plastic waste in the marine environment.5 The Global Programme of Action for the Protection of the Marine Environment from Land-based Activities (GPA) has had marine litter as one of its priority source categories since 1995. The GPA is implemented at the regional level by the Regional Seas Conventions and Action Plans, several of which have Protocols on Land-based sources/activities of pollution.38 More stringent legislation is likely to be introduced at national levels to control land-based sources of plastic pollution. This could affect not only users of plastic but the entire plastic supply chain. In March 2011 the Fifth International Marine Debris Conference (5IMDC), organised by the UNEP and the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, contributed to the development and subsequent finalisation of a global framework strategy to prevent and manage marine litter. The ‘Honolulu Strategy’ identified several areas of focus, including helping develop, strengthen and enact legislation, improving regulatory frameworks, and promoting best practice among industry. Emphasis was also put on market-based mechanisms.39 In 2012, representatives of 64 Governments and the European Commission emphasized the importance of the Honolulu Strategy in the Manila Declaration on Furthering the Implementation of the Global Programme of Action for the Protection of the Marine Environment from Land-based Activities (GPA). They also recommended the establishment of a Global Partnership on Marine Litter (GPML) which was launched in June 2012. UNEP GPA provides the Secretariat. UNEP’s marine litter related activities also feed into the workplan of the UNEP-led Global Partnership on Waste Management. This ensures that marine litter issues, goals and strategies are tied to global efforts to reduce and manage waste. The GPML seeks to protect human health and the global environment by the reduction and management of marine litter as its main goal. In March 2013, the European Commission published a green paper seeking views on how to tackle the problem of plastic waste as part of a review of waste legislation to be completed in 2014.16 Despite a number of European Union (EU) laws directly pertaining to packaging where plastic use is most prominent, there appears to be an ongoing realisation that plastic is underregulated. The commission stated its intention to introduce more legislation in the near future. In a resolution agreed by Parliament in January 2014, members of the European Parliament stressed that plastic waste is damaging the environment due both to weak enforcement of EU legislation on waste and the lack of specific EU laws on plastic waste. Among their aims is to ban the most hazardous plastic and certain types of plastic bags by 2020, and to introduce specific and binding targets for recycling, the economic potential of which is said to be largely unexploited.40
20