By;

Abhishek VS
 Introduction
 Why should the EU act?
 Policy tools to reduce SUP’s
 Actions taken by Member States
 EU Plastic Strategy
 Marine Strategy Frame Work Directive
 Waste Frame Work Directive
 Conclusion
 References
 Single-use plastic items are those designed
to be used once and then thrown away.
or
 On-the-go plastic items are those consumed
while on the move in public spaces, rather
than in the home or at cafes and restaurants
 Other
plastics SUP top 10 items
7% 86%
Fishing related SUP
27% 50%

Non-plastic
16%
Remaining SUP
items 14%

• 70% covered of all marine litter: top 10 SUP (43%) + fishing gear (27%)
• Source:
1. Joint Research Center - European Regional Seas Conventions
2. Marine Strategy Framework Directive
 Policy tools Features

Regulatory Ban Prohibition of a particular Type or

instruments combination of single-use plastics
(including plastic bags, foamed plastic
products, etc.). The ban can be total or
partial (for those of certain specifications,
e.g. plastic bags

Economic Levy on Levy paid by suppliers of plastic bags

instruments suppliers (domestic producers or importers). For such
a tax to be effective in inducing behavioural
change, it should be fully passed on from
suppliers to retailers, enticing the latter to
(i) charge consumers for plastic bags or (ii)
offer a rebate/reward to consumers who do
not ask for plastic bags, promoting the use
of reusable ones.
 Policy tools Features

Economic Levy on Levy to be paid by the retailer when

instruments retailers purchasing plastic bags. The retailers are
not obligated to convey the tax to the
consumers.

Levy on Charge on each bag sold at the point of

consumers sale; standard price defined by law

Combination of Ban and Combination of ban and levy (for instance

regulatory and levy a ban on thin plastic bags and a levy on
economic thicker ones)
instruments
• Significant reduction of littering while
creating economic opportunities and
protecting the environment
• Curb the negative economic and
environmental impacts arising from littering
of single use plastics and from abandoned
fishing gear
• Restrictions only target the plastic content, not the product itself
• Only products with readily alternatives (single & multi use):
 Cotton bud sticks
 Cutlery
 Plates
 Straws
 Beverage stirrers
 Sticks for balloons

• Product design requirement for the top littered item (single-use

beverage containers): plastic caps and lids must remain attached
during use
• Significant reduction of consumption of on-the-go products:


• Food containers
• Cups for beverages

• Member States choose the appropriate measures

• Consumption reduction targets
• Economic instruments
• Increase the availability of alternatives e.g. re-usable
 Labelling
 Balloons
 Other products that are inappropriately disposed of through the
sewers: wet wipes
 Education campaigns by Member States for all products not
subject
 to market bans

 Separate collection

 90% separate collection target by 2025 for plastic beverage bottles

(inter alia by Deposit Refund Systems and targets for EPR)
• Single-use plastic products (that are not subject to market ban)
and fishing gear

• Financial responsibility of producers

 - collection and subsequent treatment of waste
 (existing obligation for packaging)
 - clean-up of litter
 - awareness raising (existing obligation for packaging)

• Consistent and building on the minimum requirements for EPR

schemes as in the Waste Framework Directive

• Member States to establish specific EPR scheme objectives,

including the level of ambition for clean-up activities
• Evaluation of the Directive after 6 years

• Report to the Commission on the feasibility to :

o Review the list of SUPs in the Annex

o Set quantitative consumption reduction targets for food

containers and beverage cups

o Lift marketing restrictions where alternatives are possible with

biodegradable plastic that fully addresses the concerns of
biodegradability in the marine environment
In the period 2015-2035, the implementation of the waste package will
deliver at least:
 Increasing employment in the waste sector: adding more than 100
000 jobs by 2035

 Cost-efficient waste management with financial savings

amounting to 5 billion euro

 A total of 20 billion euro worth of benefits to society

 Contributing to combatting climate change by avoiding 300

million tonnes of CO2 emission
 This review of current EU market-based strategies and policies to
minimize single-use plastics provides important information and
highlights gaps for decision and policy makers.

 While measures to reduce plastic bag pollution have long been

established, many countries still lack any implementation
strategies.

 Likewise measures taken to mitigate microbead pollution are

relatively new and are restricted to just a few countries.

 Policies have been developed across MS to ban primarily the use

and sale of, but also the manufacturing of microbeads.

 Measures to reduce plastic bag pollution have included bans

(including both full and partial) and levies

 Education campaigns will likely help to further reduce plastic

pollution caused by microbeads and plastic bags at source.
 Donald J. Reish, P. S. (2018). Effects of Pollution on Marine Organisms. Water
Environment Federation, 1100-1115.
 EU. (2010). COMMUNICATION FROM THE COMMISSION TO THE EUROPEAN.
Brussels: EU.
 F. Galgani, G. H. (2013). Marine litter within the European Marine Strategy
Framework Directive. ICES Journal of Marine Science, 1055-1064.
 FRANK, V. (2007). THE EUROPEAN COMMUNITY AND MARINE ENVIRONMENTAL
PROTECTION IN THE INTERNATIONAL LAW OF THE SEA. The Netherlands:
MARTINUS NIJHOFF PUBLISHERS.
 Gutow, M. B. (2015). Marine Anthropogenic Litter. London: Springer International
Publishing.
 Henderson, J. R. (2001). A Pre- and Post-MARPOL Annex V Summary of Hawaiian
Monk Seal Entanglements and Marine Debris Accumulation in the Northwestern
Hawaiian Islands, 1982–1998. Marine Pollution Bulletin, 584-589.
 Jenna R. Jambeck, R. G. (2015). Plastic waste inputs from land into the ocean.
Science, 768-771.
 Kocasoy, G. (1989). The relationship between coastal tourism, sea pollution and
public health: A case study from Turkey. Springer Link, 245-251.
 Potters, D. G. (2013). Marine Pollution. bookboon.
 Thom, R. C. (2009). Plastics, the environment and human health: current
consensus and future trends. Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society,
2153-2166.
 Zalasiewicz, J. (2016). The geological cycle of plastics and their use as a
stratigraphic indicator of the Anthropocene. Anthropocene, 4-17.
 Collignon, A., Hecq, J. H., Galgani, F., Voisin, P.,
Collard, F. & Goffart, A. 2012 Neustonic microplastic
and zooplankton in the North Western Mediterranean
Sea. Marine Pollution Bulletin 64, 861-864.
 MSFD GES Technical Subgroup on Marine Litter. 2011
Marine Litter Technical Recommendations for the
Implementation of MSFD Requirements.
Luxembourg:: Joint Research Centre – Institute for
Environment and Sustainability.
 Hidalgo-Ruz, V., Gutow, L., Thompson, R. C. & Thiel,
M. 2012 Microplastics in the Marine Environment: A
Review of the Methods Used for Identification and
Quantification. Environmental Science & Technology
46, 3060-3075.