Hostname: page-component-78c5997874-m6dg7 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-19T05:41:35.894Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Conceptualizing the Transnational Regulation of Plastics: Moving Towards a Preventative and Just Agenda for Plastics

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  02 September 2021

Hope Johnson ,
Zoe Nay ,
Rowena Maguire ,
Leonie Barner ,
Alice Payne  and
Manuela Taboada
Hope Johnson
Affiliation:
School of Law, Queensland University of Technology, Brisbane, QLD (Australia). Email: [email protected].
Zoe Nay
Affiliation:
School of Law, Queensland University of Technology, Brisbane, QLD (Australia). Email: [email protected].
Rowena Maguire
Affiliation:
School of Law, Queensland University of Technology, Brisbane, QLD (Australia). Email: [email protected].
Leonie Barner
Affiliation:
Faculty of Science, Queensland University of Technology, Brisbane, QLD (Australia). Email: [email protected].
Alice Payne
Affiliation:
School of Design, Queensland University of Technology, Kelvin Grove, QLD (Australia). Email: [email protected].
Manuela Taboada
Affiliation:
School of Design, Queensland University of Technology, Kelvin Grove, QLD (Australia). Email: [email protected].
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

This article categorizes and evaluates how regulatory regimes conceptualize plastics, and how such conceptualizations affect the production, consumption, and disposal of plastics. Taking a doctrinal and policy-oriented approach, it identifies four ‘frames’ – that is, four distinct and coherent sets of meanings attributed to plastics within transnational regulation – namely, plastics as waste to be managed; a material to be prevented; a good (or waste) to be traded freely; and inputs or outputs in production-consumption systems. Based on this analysis, three significant deficiencies in the transnational regulation of plastics are identified: the failure to frame plastics in terms of environmental justice and human rights issues; insufficient focus on plastics prevention (rather than management); and the role of law in reinforcing its production and consumption.

Keywords

International plastics regulationTransnational environmental regulationPlastics
Type
Article
Information
Transnational Environmental Law , Volume 11 , Issue 2 , July 2022 , pp. 325 - 355
Copyright
Copyright © The Author(s), 2021. Published by Cambridge University Press

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

Footnotes

We are grateful to the Queensland University of Technology's Centre for a Waste-Free World for funding.

References

1 See, e.g., Ahmed, T. et al. , ‘Biodegradation of Plastics: Current Scenario and Future Prospects for Environmental Safety’ (2018) 25(8) Environmental Science and Pollution Research, pp. 7287–98CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed.

2 Secretariat of the Basel Convention on Controlling Transboundary Movements of Hazardous Wastes and Their Disposal, ‘Overview of Plastic Waste, Marine Plastics Litter and Microplastics’, 2019, available at: http://www.basel.int/Implementation/Plasticwastes/Overview/tabid/6068/Default.aspx.

3 H. Ritchie, ‘FAQs on Plastics’, Our World in Data, 2 Sept. 2018, available at: https://ourworldindata.org/faq-on-plastics.

4 C. Muffett et al., ‘Plastic & Climate: The Hidden Costs of a Plastic Planet’, Center for International Environmental Law et al., May 2019, p. 7, available at: https://www.ciel.org/wp-content/uploads/2019/05/Plastic-and-Climate-FINAL-2019.pdf.

5 Nazareth, M. et al. , ‘Commercial Plastics Claiming Biodegradable Status: Is this also Accurate for Marine Environments?’ (2019) 366(1) Journal of Hazardous Materials, pp. 714–22CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed.

6 Garcia, J.M. & Robertson, M.L., ‘The Future of Plastics Recycling’ (2017) 358(6365) Science, pp. 870–2CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed, at 870.

7 R. Geyer, J.R. Jambeck & K.L. Law, ‘Production, Use, and Fate of All Plastics Ever Made’ (2017) 3(7) Science Advances, online article e1700782, available at: https://advances.sciencemag.org/content/3/7/e1700782.

8 For systematic reviews of the empirical research see Bowen, W., ‘An Analytical Review of Environmental Justice Research: What Do We Really Know?’ (2002) 29(1) Environmental Management, pp. 3–15CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed; Mohai, P., Pellow, D. & Roberts, J.T., ‘Environmental Justice’ (2009) 34(1) Annual Review of Environment and Resources, pp. 405–30CrossRefGoogle Scholar. Note that the methods and quality of empirical evidence of environmental injustice varies and the generalizability of the findings is contested; see, e.g., Martuzzi, M., Mitis, F. & Forastiere, F., ‘Inequalities, Inequities, Environmental Justice in Waste Management and Health’ (2010) 20(1) European Journal of Public Health, pp. 21–6CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed.

9 Gonzalez, C.G., ‘Environmental Justice, Human Rights, and the Global South’ (2015) 13(1) Santa Clara Journal of International Law, pp. 151–95Google Scholar. While noting that far richer categorizations of north-south exist, we use the term ‘global south’ to refer to low-income and middle-income countries, and the term ‘global north’ to refer to high-income countries.

10 Kirk, E.A. & Popattanachai, N., ‘Marine Plastics: Fragmentation, Effectiveness and Legitimacy in International Lawmaking’ (2018) 27(3) Review of European, Comparative & International Environmental Law, pp. 222–33CrossRefGoogle Scholar; Raubenheimer, K. & McIlgorm, A., ‘Is the Montreal Protocol a Model that Can Help Solve the Global Marine Plastic Debris Problem?’ (2017) 81(1) Marine Policy, pp. 322–9CrossRefGoogle Scholar; Raubenheimer, K., McIlgorm, A. & Oral, N., ‘Towards an Improved International Framework to Govern the Life Cycle of Plastics’ (2018) 27(3) Review of European, Comparative & International Environmental Law, pp. 210–21CrossRefGoogle Scholar; Raubenheimer, K. & McIlgorm, A., ‘Can a Global Fund Help Solve the Global Marine Plastic Debris Problem?’ (2018) 5(1) Journal of Ocean and Coastal Economics, pp. 1–27CrossRefGoogle Scholar; Borrelle, S.B. et al. , ‘Opinion: Why We Need an International Agreement on Marine Plastic Pollution’ (2017) 114(38) Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America, pp. 9994–7CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed; Tessnow-von Wysocki, I. & Le Billon, P., ‘Plastics at Sea: Treaty Design for a Global Solution to Marine Plastic Pollution’ (2019) 100(1) Environmental Science & Policy, pp. 94–104CrossRefGoogle Scholar; Dauvergne, P., ‘Why Is the Global Governance of Plastic Failing the Oceans?’ (2018) 51(1) Global Environmental Change, pp. 22–31CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

11 Bradshaw, C., ‘Waste Law and the Value of Food’ (2018) 30(2) Journal of Environmental Law, pp. 311–31Google Scholar; Bradshaw, C., ‘England's Fresh Approach to Food Waste: Problem Frames in the Resources and Waste Strategy’ (2020) 40(2) Legal Studies, pp. 321–43CrossRefGoogle Scholar; Barsalou, O. & Picard, M.H., ‘International Environmental Law in an Era of Globalized Waste’ (2018) 17(3) Chinese Journal of International Law, pp. 887–906CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

12 See, e.g., E. Papargyropoulou et al., ‘The Food Waste Hierarchy as a Framework for the Management of Food Surplus and Food Waste’ (2014) 76(1) Journal of Cleaner Production, pp. 106–15; J. Hultman & H. Corvellec, ‘The European Waste Hierarchy: From the Sociomateriality of Waste to a Politics of Consumption’ (2012) 44(1) Environment and Planning A, pp. 2413–27; L. Levidow & S. Raman, ‘Sociotechnical Imaginaries of Low-Carbon Waste-Energy Futures: UK Techno-Market Fixes Displacing Public Accountability’ (2020) 50(4) Social Studies of Science, pp. 609–41.

13 See L. Bhullar et al., ‘Introduction: Designing Law and Policy Towards Managing Plastics in a Circular Economy’ (2019) 15(2) Law, Environment and Development Journal, pp. 90–2, and the related submissions to this special issue.

14 The ‘What's the problem represented to be?’ is an application of discourse analysis for policy developed by Carol Bacchi. It is an approach to analyzing discourse in law and policy based on Foucault's work on ‘problematizations’; see, e.g., M. Foucault, ‘The Subject and Power’ (1982) 8(4) Critical Inquiry, pp. 777–95. The analytical approach focuses, inter alia, on the proposed solution contained in law, policy and related discursive spaces to reveal the perceived problem and its causes. International instruments such as treaties contain implicit representations of the alleged problem and solution; see, e.g., C. Bacchi, ‘Introducing the “What's the Problem Represented To Be?” Approach’, in A. Bletsas & C. Beasley (eds), Engaging with Carol Bacchi: Strategic Interventions and Exchanges (The University of Adelaide Press, 2012), pp. 21–4; W.M. Reisman, S. Wiessner & A. Willard, ‘The New Haven School: A Brief Introduction’ (2007) 32(2) Yale Journal of International Law, pp. 575–82.

15 See, e.g., S. Barles, ‘History of Waste Management and the Social and Cultural Representations of Waste’, in M. Agnoletti & S. Neri Serneri (eds), The Basic Environmental History (Springer, 2014), pp. 199–226; V. Gidwani & R.N. Reddy, ‘The Afterlives of “Waste”: Notes from India for a Minor History of Capitalist Surplus’ (2011) 43(5) Antipode, pp. 1625–58.

16 Basel (Switzerland), 22 Mar. 1989, in force 5 May 1992, available at: http://www.basel.int.

17 E.g., Directive 2008/98/EC on Waste and Repealing Certain Directives [2008] OJ L 312/3, Art. 3(9). See also P. Allan, ‘Australian Waste Definitions: Defining Waste Related Terms by Jurisdiction in Australia’, Australian Government, Department of Sustainability, Environment, Water, Population and Communities, 28 May 2012, available at: https://www.environment.gov.au/system/files/resources/f3403579-8378-418d-8410-6578749189c6/files/australian-waste-definitions.pdf.

18 Cambridge Dictionary, ‘Dispose of Something’, available at: https://dictionary.cambridge.org/dictionary/english/dispose-of-something.

19 A similar observation regarding dual meanings is found in Barsalou & Picard, n. 11 above.

20 S. Thomas, ‘Waste, Marginal Property Practices and the Circular Economy’ (2020) 12(3) Journal of Property, Planning and Environmental Law, pp. 203–18.

21 D.G. Wilson, ‘A Brief History of Solid-Waste Management’ (1976) 9(2) International Journal of Environmental Studies, pp. 123–9; R.O. Toftner & R.M. Clark, Intergovernmental Approaches to Solid Waste Management (US Solid Waste Management Office, 1971).

22 Basel Convention, n. 16 above, Art. 2(2).

23 Much of the literature around the history of waste management focuses on the United States (US). A useful review, which engages with countries in both the global north and the global south, is R. Chandrappa & D.B. Das, Solid Waste Management: Principles and Practice (Springer, 2012), pp. 10–7.

24 This shift can be seen in institutional policy documents; see, e.g., Barles, n. 15 above. See also D. Zhu et al., Improving Municipal Solid Waste Management in India: A Sourcebook for Policymakers and Practitioners (World Bank, 2007).

25 J. Bernstein, Social Assessment and Public Participations in Municipal Solid Waste Management (World Bank, 2004); J. Anschütz, J. IJgosse & A. Scheinberg, Putting Integrated Sustainable Waste Management into Practice Using the ISWM Assessment Methodology: ISWM Methodology as Applied in the UWEP Plus Programme (2001–2003) (Urban Waste Expertise Programme, 2004).

26 I.D. Williams, ‘Forty Years of the Waste Hierarchy’ (2015) 40(1) Waste Management, pp. 1–2.

27 J.L. Price & J.B. Joseph, ‘Demand Management – A Basis for Waste Policy: A Critical Review of the Applicability of the Waste Hierarchy in Terms of Achieving Sustainable Waste Management’ (2000) 8(2) Sustainable Development, pp. 96–105.

28 See, e.g., Z. Kovacic, R. Strand & T. Völker, The Circular Economy in Europe: Critical Perspectives on Policies and Imaginaries (Routledge, 2019), p. 1 (providing an overview of various constructions of the circular economy).

29 Stockholm (Sweden), 22 May 2001, in force 17 May 2004, available at: http://www.pops.int.

30 E.g., Arts 1(4) and 207 of the UN Convention on the Law of the Sea, Montego Bay (Jamaica), 10 Dec. 1982, in force 16 Nov. 1994, available at: http://www.un.org/depts/los/convention_agreements/convention_overview_convention.htm; United Nations Environment Programme (UNEP), ‘Global Programme of Action for the Protection of the Marine Environment from Land-based Activities’, 5 Dec. 1995, UN Doc. UNEP(OCA)/LBA/IG.27; UNEP, ‘Report of the Second Intergovernmental Review Meeting on the Implementation of the Global Programme of Action for the Protection of the Marine Environment from Land-based Activities’, 26 Jan. 2012, UN Doc. UNEP/GPA/IGR.2/7, Annex ‘Manilla Declaration on Furthering the Implementation of the Global Programme of Action for the Protection of the Marine Environment from Land-based Activities’.

31 Basel Convention, n. 16 above, Arts 17, 18, Annexes II, VIII and IX.

32 Ibid., Art 4.1(a), Annexes II, VII and IX.

33 Ibid., Arts 4.1(c), 6.

34 Ibid., Art 4.7(a)–(c).

35 It did, however, include hazardous plastics or plastics otherwise identified in domestic law as hazardous.

36 See, e.g., S. Buranyi, ‘The Plastic Backlash: What's Behind our Sudden Rage – And Will it Make a Difference?’, The Guardian, 13 Nov. 2018, available at: https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2018/nov/13/the-plastic-backlash-whats-behind-our-sudden-rage-and-will-it-make-a-difference.

37 See, e.g., Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD), Improving Markets for Recycled Plastics: Trends, Prospects and Policy Responses (OECD, 2018).

38 C.R. Bening, J.T. Pruess & N.U. Blum, ‘Towards a Circular Plastics Economy: Interacting Barriers and Contested Solutions for Flexible Packaging Recycling’ (2021) 302 Journal of Cleaner Production online article 126966, pp. 1–19, available at: https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S0959652621011859.

39 L. Widawsky, ‘In My Backyard: How Enabling Hazardous Waste Trade to Developing Nations Can Improve the Basel Convention's Ability to Achieve Environmental Justice’ (2008) 38(2) Environmental Law, pp. 577–625.

40 Barsalou & Picard, n. 11 above, p. 890.

41 See, e.g., K. Lin, ‘Why Plastic Pollution Is an Environmental Justice Issue’, Greenpeace, 23 Apr. 2019, available at: https://www.greenpeace.org/international/story/21792/plastic-waste-environmental-justice.

42 UNEP, Single-Use Plastics: A Roadmap for Sustainability (UNEP, 2018), p. 4.

43 A. Brooks, S. Wang & J. Jambeck, ‘The Chinese Import Ban and its Impact on Global Plastic Waste Trade’ (2018) 4(6) Science Advances, pp. 1–7, at 2.

44 UN Comtrade, ‘United Nations Statistics Division: Commodity Trade Statistics Database’, 2018, available at: https://comtrade.un.org/db/default.aspx. https://comtrade.un.org.

45 World Trade Organization (WTO), Committee on Trade and the Environment, ‘Communication on Trade in Plastics, Sustainability and Development by the United Nations Conference on Trade and Development (UNCTAD)’, 10 June 2020, JOB/TE/63, p. 5.

46 See, e.g., J. Goldstein, ‘A Pyrrhic Victory? The Limits to the Successful Crackdown on Informal-Sector Plastics Recycling in Wenan County, China’ (2017) 43(1) Modern China, pp. 3–35.

47 WTO, Committee on Technical Barriers to Trade, ‘Notification’, 18 July 2017, G/TBT/N/CHN/1211; Chinese Ministry of Environmental Protection, ‘Announcement of Releasing the Catalogues of Imported Wastes Management’, Announcement No. 39, 2017; 2018 Legislative Plan of the National People's Congress Standing Committee, 27 Apr. 2018; Identification Standards for Solid Wastes: General Rules, GB 34330-2017.

48 WTO, n. 45 above, p. 6.

49 See C. Zhao et al., ‘The Evolutionary Trend and Impact of Global Plastic Waste Trade Network’ (2021) 13 Sustainability online article 3663, pp. 1–19, available at: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/13/7/3662; K.R. Vanapalli et al., ‘Challenges and Strategies for Effective Plastic Waste Management during and post COVID-19 Pandemic’ (2021) 750 Science of the Total Environment online article 141514, pp. 1–10, available at: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7399665.

50 L. Hook & J. Reed, ‘The $280b Crisis Sparked by China Calling Time on Taking in “Foreign Trash”’, Financial Review, 31 Oct. 2018, available at: https://www.afr.com/politics/the-280-billion-crisis-caused-when-china-called-time-on-foreign-trash-20181031-h17cfw.

51 P. Wongruang, ‘Special Report: Alarm Raised as Thailand Drowns in Plastic Trash’, The Nation: Thailand, 5 May 2018, available at: https://www.nationthailand.com/national/30344702; see also OECD, ‘Improving Plastics Management: Trends, Policy Responses, and the Role of International Co-operation and Trade’, OECD Environment Policy Paper No. 12, Sept. 2018, available at: https://www.oecd-ilibrary.org/environment/improving-plastics-management_c5f7c448-en.

52 WTO, n. 45 above, p. 6.

53 Vanapalli et al., n. 49 above; Zhao et al., n. 49 above.

54 Vanapalli et al., n. 49 above, pp. 5–6; see also, D. Konov, ‘COVID-19 Is Forcing Us to Rethink Our Plastic Problem’, World Economic Forum, 5 May 2020, available at: https://www.weforum.org/agenda/2020/05/covid-19-is-forcing-us-to-rethink-our-plastic-problem.

55 See J. Hamilton, ‘Environmental Equity and the Siting of Hazardous Waste Facilities in OECD Countries: Evidence and Policies’, in H. Folmer & T. Tietenberg (eds), The International Yearbook of Environmental and Resource Economics 2005/2006: A Survey of Current Issues (Edward Elgar, 2005), pp. 97–156; see also M. Craft & B. Clary, ‘Citizen Participation and the Nimby Syndrome: Public Response to Radioactive Waste Disposal’ (1991) 44(2) The Western Political Quarterly, pp. 299–328.

56 See B. Cotta, ‘What Goes Around, Comes Around? Access and Allocation Problems in Global North–South Waste Trade’ (2020) 20(1) International Environmental Agreements: Politics, Law and Economics, pp. 255–69.

57 D. Harvey, A Brief History of Neoliberalism (Oxford University Press, 2005); P. McMichael, ‘Global Development and the Corporate Food Regime’, in F. Buttel & P. McMichael (eds), New Directions in the Sociology of Global Development (Emerald, 2005), pp. 265–99.

58 K. Nkrumah, Neo-colonialism: The Last Stage of Imperialism (International, 1965).

59 See Gonzalez, n. 9 above; D. Faber, Capitalizing on Environmental Injustice: The Polluter-Industrial Complex in the Age of Globalization (Rowman & Littlefield, 2008).

60 See Bowen, n. 8 above; Mohai, Pellow & Roberts, n. 8 above; Martuzzi, Mitis & Forastiere, n. 8 above.

61 A.I. Baptista & A. Perovich, U.S. Municipal Solid Waste Incinerators: An Industry in Decline (Tishman Environment and Design Center, 2019).

62 OECD, n. 51 above, p. 8.

63 Ibid., p. 8.

64 Martuzzi, Mitis & Forastiere, n. 8 above; A.K. Ziraba, T.N. Haregu & B. Mberu, ‘A Review and Framework for Understanding the Potential Impact of Poor Solid Waste Management on Health in Developing Countries’ (2016) 74(55) Archives of Public Health, pp. 1–11.

65 See, e.g., A. Mattiello et al., ‘Health Effects Associated with the Disposal of Solid Waste in Landfills and Incinerators in Populations Living in Surrounding Areas: A Systematic Review’ (2013) 58(5) International Journal of Public Health, pp. 725–35; M. Mustafa et al., ‘Volatile Compounds Emission and Health Risk Assessment during Composting of Organic Fraction of Municipal Solid Waste’ (2017) 327(1) Journal of Hazardous Materials, pp. 35–43.

66 U. Natarajan, ‘Third World Approaches to International Law (TWAIL) and the Environment’, in A. Philippopoulos-Mihalopoulos & V. Brooks (eds), Research Methods in Environmental Law (Edward Elgar, 2017), pp. 207–36; Q. Du, ‘Public Participation and the Challenges of Environmental Justice in China’, in J. Ebbesson & P. Okowa (eds), Environmental Law and Justice in Context (Cambridge University Press, 2009), pp. 139–57.

67 H. Johnson et al., ‘Justice for Pollution Victims in China and Australia’ (2015) 18(1) The Australasian Journal of Natural Resources Law and Policy, pp. 77–104; V. Blok, ‘From Participation to Interruption: Toward an Ethics of Stakeholder Engagement, Participation and Partnership in Corporate Social Responsibility and Responsible Innovation’, in R. von Schomberg & J. Hankins (eds), Handbook of Responsible Innovation: A Global Resource (Edward Elgar, 2019), pp. 243–58; J. Edelman, ‘Why Do We Have Rules of Procedural Fairness?’, University of Melbourne Colloquium, 4 Sept. 2015; M. Kirby, ‘Environmental and Planning Law in the Age of Human Rights and Climate Change’ (2019) 36(3) Environment and Planning Law Journal, pp. 181–96, at 184–5.

68 Barsalou & Picard, n. 11 above, p. 890.

69 See, e.g., R. Messner, C. Richards & H. Johnson, ‘The “Prevention Paradox”: Food Waste Prevention and the Quandary of Systemic Surplus Production’ (2020) 37(3) Agriculture and Human Values, pp. 805–17.

70 Bradshaw (2020), n. 11 above, p. 329.

71 F. Vancini, Strategic Waste Prevention: OECD Reference Manual (OECD, 2000); Directive 2008/98/EC, n. 17 above. See also S. Van Ewijka & J.A. Stegemann, ‘Limitations of the Waste Hierarchy for Achieving Absolute Reductions in Material Throughput’ (2016) 132(1) Journal of Cleaner Production, pp. 122–8.

72 As discussed in Levidow & Raman, n. 12 above. See also A. Bartl, ‘Moving from Recycling to Waste Prevention: A Review of Barriers and Enables’ (2014) 32(9) Waste Management & Research, pp. 3–18.

73 K. Ragaert, L. Delva & K. Van Geem, ‘Mechanical and Chemical Recycling of Solid Plastic Waste’ (2017) 69(1) Waste Management, pp. 24–58.

74 R. Geyer et al., ‘Common Misconceptions about Recycling’ (2016) 20(5) Journal of Industrial Ecology, pp. 1010–7.

75 B. Ma et al., ‘Recycle More, Waste More? When Recycling Efforts Increase Resource Consumption’ (2019) 206(1) Journal of Cleaner Production, pp. 870–7; J.R. Catlin & Y. Wang, ‘Recycling Gone Bad: When the Option to Recycle Increases Resource Consumption’ (2013) 23(1) Journal of Consumer Psychology, pp. 122–7; J. Polimeni et al., The Jevons Paradox and the Myth of Resource Efficiency Improvements (Earthscan, 2008).

76 D.R. Cooper & T.G. Gutowski, ‘The Environmental Impacts of Reuse: A Review’ (2017) 21(1) Journal of Industrial Ecology, pp. 38–56.

77 S.J. Lade et al., ‘Human Impacts on Planetary Boundaries Amplified by Earth System Interactions’ (2020) 3(1) Nature Sustainability, pp. 119–28.

78 J. Rockström & K. Noone, ‘Planetary Boundaries: Exploring the Safe Operating Space for Humanity’ (2009) 14(2) Ecology & Society online article 32, available at: https://www.ecologyandsociety.org/vol14/iss2/art32; P. Villarrubia-Gómez, S.E. Cornell & J. Fabres, ‘Marine Plastic Pollution as a Planetary Boundary Threat: The Drifting Piece in the Sustainability Puzzle’ (2018) 96(1) Marine Policy, pp. 213–20.

79 W. Steffan et al., ‘Planetary Boundaries: Guiding Human Development on a Changing Planet’ (2015) 347(6223) Science online article 1259855, pp. 1–10, available at: https://science.sciencemag.org/content/sci/347/6223/1259855.full.pdf.

80 Villarrubia-Gómez, Cornell & Fabres, n. 78 above.

81 OECD, ‘Waste Prevention’, available at: http://www.oecd.org/environment/waste/wasteprevention.htm.

82 Messner, Richards, & Johnson, n. 69 above.

83 Directive 2008/98/EC, n. 17 above.

84 P. Hutner, A. Thorenz & A. Tuma, ‘Waste Prevention in Communities: A Comprehensive Survey Analyzing Status Quo, Potentials, Barriers and Measures’ (2017) 141(1) Journal of Cleaner Production, pp. 837–51.

85 Ibid; H. Corvellec, ‘A Performative Definition of Waste Prevention’ (2016) 52(1) Waste Management, pp. 3–13; A. Tencati et al., ‘Prevention Policies Addressing Packaging and Packaging Waste: Some Emerging Trends’ (2016) 56(1) Waste Management, pp. 35–45; K.O. Zacho & M.A. Mosgaard, ‘Understanding The Role of Waste Prevention in Local Waste Management: A Literature Review’ (2016) 34(10) Waste Management & Research, pp. 980–94.

86 Basel Convention, n. 16 above, Preamble (emphasis added).

87 Paris (France), 12 Dec. 2015, in force 4 Nov. 2016, available at: http://unfccc.int/paris_agreement/items/9485.php.

88 Kyoto Protocol to the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change, Kyoto (Japan), 10 Dec. 1997, in force 16 Feb. 2005, available at: http://unfccc.int/kyoto_protocol/items/2830.php.

89 Montreal, QC (Canada), 16 Sept. 1987, in force 1 Jan. 1989 (Montreal Protocol), available at: http://ozone.unep.org/new_site/en/montreal_protocol.php.

90 Raubenheimer & McIlgorm, n. 10 above; N. Simon & M.L. Schulte, Stopping Global Plastic Pollution: The Case for an International Convention (Heinrich Böll Foundation, 2017), pp. 34–5; Tessnow-von Wysocki & Le Billon, n. 10 above.

91 UNEP, ‘Rio Declaration on Environment and Development’, Rio de Janeiro (Brazil), 14 June 1992, UN Doc. A/Conf.151/26, Principle 8.

92 Ibid., Principle 15.

93 Stockholm Declaration on Persistent Organic Pollutants, Stockholm (Sweden), 11 May 2001, in force 17 May 2004, Principle 29, available at: https://treaties.un.org/pages/ViewDetails.aspx?src=TREATY&mtdsg_no=XXVII-15&chapter=27. The principle of preventative action was later incorporated into several international environmental law treaties; see, e.g., Convention on the Prevention of Marine Pollution by Dumping of Wastes and Other Matter, London (United Kingdom (UK)), 13 Nov. 1972, in force 24 Mar. 2006, available at: https://www.imo.org/en/OurWork/Environment/Pages/London-Convention-Protocol.aspx; Convention on Long-range Transboundary Air Pollution, Geneva (Switzerland), 13 Nov. 1979, in force 16 Mar. 1983, available at: https://treaties.un.org/Pages/ViewDetails.aspx?src=TREATY&mtdsg_no=XXVII-1&chapter=27&clang=_en; Vienna Convention for the Protection of the Ozone Layer, Vienna (Austria), 22 Mar. 1985, in force 22 Sept. 1988, available at: https://treaties.un.org/pages/ViewDetails.aspx?src=TREATY&mtdsg_no=XXVII-2&chapter=27&clang=_en. The principle of preventative action has also been applied in a number of international environmental law cases; see, e.g., The North Atlantic Coast Fisheries Case (Great Britain, United States), 7 Sept. 1910, XI Reports of International Arbitral Awards (RIAA), p. 167, at 173; J.B. Moore, History and Digest of the International Arbitrations to which the United States has been a Party (Vol. I, Washington Government Printing Office, 1898), pp. 763–4; Corfu Channel Case (United Kingdom v. Albania), Judgment, 14 Apr. 1949, ICJ Reports (1949), p. 4; Affaire du Lac Lanoux (Espagne, France) (1957), XII RIAA, p. 281.

94 L.A. Duvic-Paoli, The Prevention Principle in International Environmental Law (Cambridge University Press, 2018), pp. 191–4; R. Rayfuse, ‘Principles of International Environmental Law Applicable to Waste Management’, in K.K. Peiry, A. Ziegler & J. Baumgartner (eds), Waste Management and the Green Economy (Edward Elgar, 2016), pp. 11–32, at 21–3.

95 Stockholm Convention, n. 29 above, Art. 3(1).

96 UN, ‘Transforming Our World: The 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development’, 21 Oct. 2015, UN Doc. A/RES/70/1, p. 22 (emphasis added).

97 For an important overview of these negotiations over time see D. Gasper, A. Shah & S. Tankha, ‘The Framing of Sustainable Consumption and Production in SDG 12’ (2019) 10(S1) Global Policy, pp. 83–95.

98 UN Department of Statistics Division, ‘Indicator 12.5.1: National Recycling Rate, Tons of Material Recycled’, 2020, available at: https://unstats.un.org/sdgs/metadata/?Text=&Goal=12&Target.

99 See, e.g., UN Department of Economic and Social Affairs, ‘Shrinking Our Material Footprint is a Global Imperative’, 2020, available at: https://unstats.un.org/sdgs/report/2019/goal-12.

100 See, e.g., M. Bengtsson et al., ‘Transforming Systems of Consumption and Production for Achieving the Sustainable Development Goals: Moving Beyond Efficiency’ (2018) 13(6) Sustainability Science, pp. 1533–47, at 1542.

101 Ibid.

102 That is, mixed hazardous and non-hazardous materials – textiles or food, for instance.

103 These include restrictions on imports, production, sale, and use.

104 J. Clapp & L. Swanston, ‘Doing Away with Plastic Shopping Bags: International Patterns of Norm Emergence and Policy Implementation’ (2009) 18(3) Environmental Politics, pp. 315–32.

105 UNEP, ‘Legal Limits on Single-Use Plastics and Microplastics’, 6 Dec. 2018, p. 3, available at: https://www.unep.org/resources/report/legal-limits-single-use-plastics-and-microplastics.

106 T. Homonoff et al., ‘Skipping the Bag: Assessing the Impact of Chicago's Tax on Disposable Bags’, Wagner School of Public Service, University of Chicago Energy & Environment Lab, Sept. 2018, p. 4, available at: https://wagner.nyu.edu/files/faculty/publications/Homonoff,%20Kao,%20Selman,%20and%20Seybolt%20(2020)_0.pdf; S. Khalil, ‘Australia-Wide Bag Ban Leads to 1.5 Billion Fewer Plastic Bags in the Environment’, News.com.au, 3 Dec. 2018, available at: https://www.news.com.au/lifestyle/real-life/news-life/australiawide-bag-ban-leads-to-15-billion-fewer-plastic-bags-in-the-environment/news-story/678f21eb838fb6706baa370bc3b3ec29.

107 G.O. Thomas et al., ‘The English Plastic Bag Charge Changed Behavior and Increased Support for Other Charges to Reduce Plastic Waste’ (2019) 10(266) Frontiers in Psychology, pp. 1–12.

108 See, e.g., A. Macintosh et al., ‘Plastic Bag Bans: Lessons from the Australian Capital Territory’ (2020) 154 Resources, Conservation and Recycling online article 104638, pp. 1–12, available at: https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S0921344919305440; B. Bharadwaj, ‘Plastic Bag Ban in Nepal: Enforcement and Effectiveness’, South Asian Network for Development and Environmental Economics (SANDEE), Working Paper No. 111–16, Aug. 2016, available at: http://www.sandeeonline.org/uploads/documents/abstract/1092_ABS_Final_WP_111___Bishal__.pdf.

109 R.L.C. Taylor, ‘Bag Leakage: The Effect of Disposable Carryout Bag Regulations on Unregulated Bags’ (2019) 93(1) Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, pp. 254–71.

110 A.B. Jenks & K.M. Obringer, ‘The Poverty of Plastics Bans: Environmentalism's Win is a Loss for Disabled People’ (2020) 40(1) Critical Social Policy, pp. 151–61.

111 B.P. Resurrección, ‘Persistent Women and Environmental Linkages in Climate Change and Sustainable Development Agendas’ (2013) 40(1) Women's Studies International Forum, pp. 33–43.

112 Z. Wei, H.M. McDonald & C. Coumarelos, ‘Fines: Are Disadvantaged People at a Disadvantage?’, Justice Issues, Paper 27, Feb. 2018, pp. 1–30, available at: http://www.lawfoundation.net.au/ljf/site/articleIDs/D5D375991CE8E1B68525823A000641F4/$file/JI_27_Fines_disadvantaged_people.pdf.

113 See, e.g., V.R.N. Cruvinel et al., ‘Waterborne Diseases in Waste Pickers of Estrutural, Brazil, the Second Largest Open-Air Dumpsite in World’ (2019) 99(1) Waste Management, pp. 71–8. See also International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights, New York, NY (US), 16 Dec. 1966, in force 3 Jan. 1976, Arts 11(1) and 12, available at: https://treaties.un.org/Pages/ViewDetails.aspx?src=TREATY&mtdsg_no=IV-3&chapter=4.

114 UN General Assembly, Human Rights Council, ‘Report of the Special Rapporteur [John H. Knox] on the Issue of Human Rights Obligations relating to the Enjoyment of a Safe, Clean, Healthy and Sustainable Environment’, 24 Jan. 2018, UN Doc. A/HRC/37/59, Annex: Framework Principles on Human Rights and the Environment.

115 E.A. Kirk, ‘The Montreal Protocol or the Paris Agreement as a Model for a Plastics Treaty? Symposium on Global Plastic Pollution’ (2020) 114(1) American Journal of International Law Unbound, pp. 212–6, at 216.

116 As called for by Bengtsson et al., n. 100 above. This could include, for instance, national obligations around valuing care work or reducing the amount of advertising of products to which people are exposed.

117 One recent work has started to fill the gap: D. Barrowclough & C.D. Birkbeck, Transforming the Global Plastics Economy: The Political Economy and Governance of Plastics Production and Pollution (Blavatnik School of Government, University of Oxford, 2020), available at: https://www.econstor.eu/bitstream/10419/224117/1/1701700611.pdf.

118 Marrakesh (Morocco), 15 Apr. 1994, in force 1 Jan. 1995, available at: http://www.wto.org/english/docs_e/legal_e/06-gatt_e.htm.

119 Marrakesh (Morocco), 15 Apr. 1994, in force 1 Jan. 1995, available at: https://www.wto.org/english/docs_e/legal_e/17-tbt_e.htm.

120 European Communities – Measures Affecting Asbestos and Asbestos-Containing Products, WTO Appellate Body Report, WTO Doc. WT/DS135/AB/6, 12 Mar. 2001, paras 74–75.

121 Marrakesh (Morocco), 15 Apr. 1994, in force 1 Jan. 1995, available at: https://www.wto.org/english/docs_e/legal_e/15sps_01_e.htm.

122 WTO Secretariat, ‘Members Discuss How WTO Can Support Efforts to Create a Circular Economy, Tackle Plastic Pollution’, 3 July 2020, available at: https://www.wto.org/english/news_e/news20_e/envir_03jul20_e.htm.

123 N. Ferronato & V. Torretta, ‘Waste Mismanagement in Developing Countries: A Review of Global Issues’ (2019) 16(6) International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health online article 1060, pp. 1–28, available at: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6466021/pdf/ijerph-16-01060.pdf.

124 See, e.g., G. Bishop, D. Styles & P.N.L. Lens, ‘Recycling of European Plastic is a Pathway for Plastic Debris in the Ocean’ (2020) 142(1) Environment International online article 105893, pp. 1–12, available at: https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0160412020318481.

125 WTO, n. 45 above, p. 17.

126 W. Xu et al., ‘Evolution of the Global Polyethylene Waste Trade System’ (2020) 6(1) Ecosystem Health and Sustainability, pp. 1–16.

127 Ibid., p. 10.

128 J. Shi, C. Zhang & W.Q. Chen, ‘The Expansion and Shrinkage of the International Trade Network of Plastic Wastes Affected by China's Waste Management Policies’ (2021) 25(1) Sustainable Production and Consumption, pp. 187–97.

129 H. Ritchie & M. Roser, ‘Plastic Pollution’, Our World in Data, Sept. 2018, available at: https://ourworldindata.org/plastic-pollution.

130 D. Barrowclough, C. Deere Birkbeck & J. Christen, ‘Global Trade in Plastics: Insights from the First Life-Cycle Trade Database’, UN Conference on Trade and Development (UNCTAD) Research Paper No. 53, UNCTAD/SER.RP/2020/12, available at: https://unctad.org/system/files/official-document/ser-rp-2020d12_en.pdf. See also C. Deere Birkbeck, ‘Strengthening International Cooperation to Tackle Plastic Pollution: Options for the WTO’, Graduate Institute Geneva, Global Governance Centre, Jan. 2020, p. 5, available at: https://www.geg.ox.ac.uk/publication/strenghtening-international-cooperation-tackle-plastic-pollution-options-wto.

131 Geyer, Jambeck & Law, n. 7 above; translated to broader audiences by S. Zhang, ‘Half of All Plastic that Has Ever Existed Was Made in the Past 13 Years’, The Atlantic, 20 July 2017, available at: https://www.theatlantic.com/science/archive/2017/07/plastic-age/533955.

132 See, e.g., J.H. Spencer, Globalization and Urbanization: The Global Urban Ecosystem (Rowman & Littlefield, 2014), p. 26, in which the author explains how ‘globalization is urbanization and urbanization constitutes globalization’.

133 S. Kaza et al., What a Waste 2.0: A Global Snapshot of Solid Waste Management to 2050 (World Bank, 2018), pp. 20–3.

134 More technical definitions exist in the literature: C.A. Monteiro et al., ‘Ultra-Processed Foods: What They Are and How to Identify Them’ (2019) 22(5) Public Health Nutrition, pp. 936–41.

135 C. Monteiro et al., Ultra-Processed Foods, Diet Quality and Health Using the NOVA Classification System (Food and Agriculture Organization of the UN (FAO), 2019), p. 12.

136 P. Baker, A. Kay & H. Walls, ‘Trade and Investment Liberalization and Asia's Noncommunicable Disease Epidemic: A Synthesis of Data and Existing Literature’ (2014) 10(66) Globalization and Health, pp. 1–20; P. Baker & S. Friel, ‘Food Systems Transformations, Ultra-Processed Food Markets and the Nutrition Transition in Asia’ (2016) 12(1) Globalization and Health online article 80, pp. 1–15, available at: https://globalizationandhealth.biomedcentral.com/articles/10.1186/s12992-016-0223-3.

137 P.P. Machado et al., ‘Price and Convenience: The Influence of Supermarkets on Consumption of Ultra-Processed Foods and Beverages in Brazil’ (2017) 116(1) Appetite, pp. 381–8.

138 S. Friel et al., ‘Monitoring the Impacts of Trade Agreements on Food Environments’ (2013) 14(S1) Obesity Reviews, pp. 120–34.

139 WTO, n. 45 above, p. 21.

140 WTO Secretariat, ‘Standards, Regulations and COVID-19: What Actions Taken by WTO Members’, 4 Dec. 2020, pp. 3–4.

141 WTO, n. 45 above, p. 22.

142 TBT Agreement, n. 119 above, Annex 2, Art. 3.3 (‘Understanding on Rules and Procedures Governing the Settlement of Disputes’). In principle, any act or omission taken by, or otherwise attributable to, the government of a WTO member state is challengeable. Regulatory instruments created by groups of non-state actors would not fall within the meaning of ‘measures’.

143 GATT, n. 118 above, Art. XX(g).

144 United States – Standards for Reformulated and Conventional Gasoline, WTO Appellate Body Report, WTO Doc. WT/DS2/AB/R, 20 May 1996, pp. 18–21; Canada – Measures Affecting Exports of Unprocessed Herring and Salmon, WTO Appellate Body Report, WTO Doc. L/6268-35S/98, 22 Mar. 1988, para. 4.6.

145 Brazil – Measures Affecting Imports of Retreaded Tyres, WTO Panel Report, WTO Doc. WT/DS332/R, 12 June 2007, paras 1, 5.86, 7.111–7.112, 7.390; WTO Appellate Body Report, Brazil: Measures Affecting Imports of Retreaded Tyres, WTO Doc. WT/DS332/AB/R, 3 Dec. 2007, paras 1, 179, 183, 233.

146 WTO Committee on Technical Barriers to Trade, ‘Minutes of the Meeting of 6–7 Mar. 2019’, WTO Doc. G/TBT/M/77, 15 May 2019; WTO Committee on Technical Barriers to Trade, ‘Minutes of the Meeting of 20–21 June 2019’, WTO Doc. G/TBT/M/78, 10 Oct. 2019.

147 WTO Notification, ‘Kingdom of Saudi Arabia: Technical Regulation for Plastic Products Oxo-Biodegradable’, WTO Doc. G/TBT/2/626, 8 Apr. 2019 (statement by the EU to the TBT Committee); WTO Committee on Technical Barriers to Trade, ‘Minutes of the Meeting of 20–21 June 2019’, n. 146 above.

148 Specifically, the regulation applies to plastic bags and single-use plastic tablecloths: WTO Notification, ‘Kingdom of Saudi Arabia: Technical Regulations for Plastic Products Oxo-Biodegradable 03-03-16-156’, WTO Doc. G/TBT/N/SAU/947, 28 July 2016.

149 Directive (EU) 2019/904 on the Reduction of the Impact of Certain Plastic Products on the Environment [2019] OJ L 155/1.

150 WTO Secretariat, ‘Members Start Implementing 2019–2021 Work Plan on Technical Barriers to Trade’, 7 Mar. 2019, available at: https://www.wto.org/english/news_e/news19_e/tbt_07mar19_e.htm.

151 Ibid., para. 6; WTO Notification (2019), n. 147 above; WTO Committee on Technical Barriers to Trade, ‘Minutes of the Meeting of 20–21 June 2019’, n. 146 above.

152 Ibid.

153 TBT Agreement, n. 119 above, Art. 2.2; SPS Agreement, n. 121 above, Art. 2.2.

154 Trinidad and Tobago sought to prohibit all imports of Styrofoam in food services and to require domestic manufacturers to introduce additives to make their products biodegradable.

155 WTO Secretariat, n. 150 above; WTO, Committee on Technical Barriers to Trade, ‘Jamaica – Trade (Plastic Packaging Materials Prohibition) Order 2018’, WTO Doc. G/TBT/W/611, 22 Mar. 2019 (statement by the Dominican Republic to the Committee on Technical Barriers to Trade); The Natural Resources Conservation Authority (Plastic Packaging Materials Prohibition) Order 2018, The Jamaica Gazette – Supplement: Proclamations, Rules and Regulations, Vol. CXLI, No. 145.

156 See, e.g., P. Barlow et al., ‘Trade Challenges at the World Trade Organization to National Noncommunicable Disease Prevention Policies: A Thematic Document Analysis of Trade and Health Policy Space’ (2018) 15(6) PLoS Medicine online article e1002590, pp. 1–18, available at: https://journals.plos.org/plosmedicine/article?id=10.1371/journal.pmed.1002590.

157 WTO Secretariat, n. 122 above.

158 K. Winans, A. Kendall & H. Deng, ‘The History and Current Applications of the Circular Economy Concept’ (2017) 68(1) Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, pp. 825–33.

159 See, e.g., D. Reike, W.J.V. Vermeulen & S. Witjes, ‘The Circular Economy: New or Refurbished as CE 3.0? Exploring Controversies in the Conceptualization of the Circular Economy through a Focus on History and Resource Value Retention Options’ (2018) 135(1) Resources, Conservation and Recycling, pp. 246–64.

160 J. Kirchherr, D. Reike & M. Hekkert, ‘Conceptualizing the Circular Economy: An Analysis of 114 Definitions’ (2017) 127(1) Resources, Conservation and Recycling, pp. 221–32.

161 See, e.g., European Commission, ‘European Circular Economy Action Plan’, COM(2020) 98 final, 11 Mar. 2020, available at: https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/?qid=1583933814386&uri=COM:2020:98:FIN; European Commission, ‘A European Strategy for Plastics in a Circular Economy’, COM(2018) 28 final, 15 Jan. 2018, available at: https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/?uri=COM%3A2018%3A28%3AFIN; French Ministry for Ecological and Sustainable Transition, ‘50 mesures pour une économie 100% circulaire’, Apr. 2018, available at: http://temis.documentation.developpement-durable.gouv.fr/document.html?id=Temis-0087997&requestId=0&number=1; German Federal Ministry for the Environment, Nature Conservation, Building and Nuclear Safety (BMUB), ‘German Resource Efficiency Programme II: Programme for the Sustainable Use and Conservation of Natural Resources, 2 Mar. 2016, p. 7; Government of the Netherlands, ‘A Circular Economy in the Netherlands by 2050’, 14 Sept. 2016, available at: https://www.government.nl/documents/policy-notes/2016/09/14/a-circular-economy-in-the-netherlands-by-2050.

162 N. Gregson et al., ‘Interrogating the Circular Economy: The Moral Economy of Resource Recovery in the EU’ (2015) 44(2) Economy and Society, pp. 218–43.

163 F. van Eijk, ‘Barriers and Drivers towards a Circular Economy: Literature Review’, Sustainable Development, Economy and Democracy blog, Mar. 2015, available at: https://sustainabiltyseminar.wordpress.com/2017/10/30/barriers-drivers-towards-a-circular-economy-literature-review.

164 T. Zink & R. Geyer, ‘Circular Economy Rebound’ (2017) 21(3) Journal of Industrial Ecology, pp. 593–602, at 594.

165 S. Vaughan & R. Smith, ‘Estimating Employment Effects of the Circular Economy: Background Note’, International Institute for Sustainable Development, 18 Sept. 2018, p. 10, available at: https://www.iisd.org/publications/estimating-employment-effects-circular-economy.

166 See, e.g., M.C. Friant, W.J.V. Vermeulen & R. Salomone, ‘A Typology of Circular Economy Discourses: Navigating the Diverse Visions of a Contested Paradigm’ (2020) 161 Resources, Conservation and Recycling online article 104917, pp. 1–19, available at: https://www.sciencedirect.com/journal/resources-conservation-and-recycling/vol/161/suppl/C.

167 Murray, A., Skene, K. & Haynes, K., ‘The Circular Economy: An Interdisciplinary Exploration of the Concept and Application in a Global Context’ (2017) 140(3) Journal of Business Ethics, pp. 369–80CrossRefGoogle Scholar, at 376.

168 Winans, Kendall & Deng, n. 158 above, pp. 825–6.

169 P. Noble, ‘Circular Economy and Inclusion of Informal Waste Pickers: Political Economy Perspectives from India and Brazil’, in P. Schroder et al. (eds), The Circular Economy and Global South (Routledge, 2019), pp. 80–97; P. Bebasari, ‘The Role of Women in Upcycling Initiatives in Jakarta, Indonesia: A Case for the Circular Economy in a Developing Country’, in Schroder et al., ibid., pp. 98–115.

170 Zink & Geyer, n. 164 above, p. 595.

171 G. Moraga et al., ‘Circular Economy Indicators: What Do They Measure?’ (2019) 146(1) Resources, Conservation and Recycling, pp. 452–61 (which shows that indicators for CE focus mostly on recycling rates).

172 See, e.g., Mooney, P.H. & Hunt, S.A., ‘Food Security: The Elaboration of Contested Claims to a Consensus Frame’ (2009) 74(4) Rural Sociology, pp. 469–97CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

173 Thomas, n. 20 above; Böhm, F. Valenzuela & S., ‘Against Wasted Politics: A Critique of the Circular Economy’ (2017) 17(1) Ephemera: Theory & Politics in Organization, pp. 23–60Google Scholar.

174 As recommended by Parker, C., Haines, F. & Boehm, L., ‘The Promise of Ecological Regulation: The Case of Intensive Meat’ (2018) 59(1) Jurimetrics, pp. 15–42Google Scholar.

175 Ellen MacArthur Foundation, ‘The Global Commitment 2020 Progress Report’, available at: https://www.newplasticseconomy.org/projects/global-commitment.

176 Group of Seven (G7), ‘Ocean Plastics Charter’ (Annex to the Charlevoix Blueprint for Healthy Oceans, Seas and Resilient Coastal Communities, 2018), available at: https://plasticactioncentre.ca/wp-content/uploads/2019/04/PolicyPDF3.pdf; European Commission, COM(2018) 28 final, n. 161 above; Commonwealth Blue Charter Secretariat, ‘Commonwealth Blue Charter: Shared Values, Shared Ocean’, 2021, available at: https://bluecharter.thecommonwealth.org; UN Department of Economic and Social Affairs, ‘Communities of Ocean Action for Supporting Implementation of SDG 14’, adopted at the High-Level UN Conference to Support the Implementation of Sustainable Develop Goal 14, New York, NY (US), 5 June 2017, available at: https://oceanconference.un.org/coa.

177 Ellen MacArthur Foundation, n. 175 above.

178 Ibid.

179 The Committee on Food Security provides a potential model; see FAO, Committee on World Food Security, ‘CFS Structure’, available at: http://www.fao.org/cfs/about-cfs/cfs-structure/en.

180 Ellen MacArthur Foundation, ‘New Plastics Economy Global Commitment: Commitments, Vision and Definitions, Feb. 2020, Appendix II, Cl. 2.

181 Ibid., Appendix I.

182 Ibid., Appendix II, Cl. 4.2, p. 11.

183 Ibid., Appendix II, Cl. 4.2, p. 11.

184 Ibid., Appendix II, Cl. 4.2, p. 12.

185 This is based on the estimates that the Global Commitment has been agreed to by actors that produce 20% of all plastic packaging produced; see Ellen MacArthur Foundation, n. 175 above.

186 Viera, J.S.C. et al. , ‘On Replacing Single-use Plastic with So-called Biodegradable Ones: The Case with Straws’ (2020) 106(1) Environmental Science & Policy, pp. 177–81CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

187 J. Brock, ‘Set, Miss, Repeat: Big Brands and Plastic Recycling Targets’, Reuters, 5 Oct. 2020, available at: https://www.reuters.com/article/health-coronavirus-plastic-targets-int-idUSKBN26Q1ML.