3. Potential criteria for problematic, unnecessary and avoidable plastic products

The global regulation of plastic products can draw inspiration from the identification and management of chemicals of concern under existing MEAs. Examples include ozone-depleting substances and persistent organic pollutants (POPs) regulated under the Montreal Protocol and Stockholm Convention respectively. Part II of the Zero Draft outlines a similar approach for control measures in the plastics instrument. The development of criteria to facilitate listing is proposed for chemicals and polymers of concern under proposed Control Measure 2, as well as criteria for listing problematic and avoidable plastics under proposed Control Measure 3.

This report outlines potential criteria for the classification of products as problematic, unnecessary or avoidable for consideration under the plastics instrument, while acknowledging their linkages to other related criteria. The report is intended to support the development of criteria for products of concern as suggested in Part II, Control Measure 3 of the Zero Draft.

There is a potential for a product to fall under more than one classification when assessing it against the criteria. Consequently, there is a need for a simple decision hierarchy (illustrated in Figure 4) to outline the pathways for determining actions to address problematic, unnecessary and avoidable plastic products.

The criteria outlined below are based on a determination of a product’s function or end-use, and whether it is deemed essential or not. The criteria listed assume life cycle and socio-economic assessments are conducted to help understand environmental fate of substitutes, while accounting for socio-economic impacts of restrictions, including industry concerns, impacts on socio-economically disadvantaged communities, and the informal recycling sector (Nøklebye et al., 2023).

3.1 Potential criteria for problematic plastic products

Problematic plastic products refer to products which have adverse impacts across the life cycle of the products (environmental and human health).

Table 3 outlines potential criteria for determining problematic products, towards nomination for listing under the plastics instrument. The criteria suggested have taken inspiration from existing examples of policies and actions and have been tailored to suit the objectives of the “problematic” grouping specifically.

Table 3. Potential criteria for determining problematic plastic products

Cluster	Potential criteria	Examples of products	Examples of existing regulations and initiatives
Hazards	The product contains chemicals or polymers of concern Based on a separate set/s of criteria to determine elements of concern developed under the plastics instrument. , including those derived from secondary plastics, or represents a health or environmental hazard.	Artificial turf contains almost 200 possible carcinogenic chemicals (Perkins et al., 2019), including Per- and Polyfluoroalkyl Substances (PFAS).	In the U.S., states such as Massachusetts, California, Connecticut, and Vermont have proposed legislation to prohibit use of PFAS in artificial turf (EWG, 2023). Additionally, the U.S. Plastics Pact is voluntarily addressing the issue of PFAS in artificial turf (Plastics Pact, 2020).
Emissions generation	The product releases nano-, micro- and macroplastics during its production, intended use Microplastic releases could be due to the intentional addition of microplastics or the breakdown/abrasion of macroplastics, fibres and other materials. or end-of-life.	Products containing intentionally added nano- and microplastics, such as microplastics in cosmetics and personal care products.	Addressed through legislation in many countries, including South Korea which banned production and sale of rinse-off cosmetics containing microbeads in July 2017.
		Tyres generate significant microplastics releases due to wear and tear from road friction	New standards in the EU set thresholds for tyre and brake dust from 2025 (European Commission, 2022b).
		Artificial turfs are made from plastic fibres, with granular infill materials consisting of microplastics that are released to the environment.	Granular infill material used on artificial sport surfaces has been banned in the EU and the European Economic Association (EEA) from 2031 (EU, 2023).
	The product releases chemicals of concern Based on a separate set/s of criteria to determine elements of concern, which also address usage of chemicals of concern in products. during its intended use.	Toys and food contact plastics are of particular concern due to high exposure (BRS, 2023).	The EU Food Contacts Plastic Regulation 10/2021 establishes an overall migration limit of 10 mg/dm2 for all plastic substances in contact with food (EU, 2011).
	The product is falsely promoted to be biodegradable under certain conditions.	Oxo-degradable plastic products	The EU single-use plastics (SUP) Directive 2019/904 (EU, 2019a) and the South Australia Single-use and Other Plastic Products (Waste Avoidance) Regulations 2021 (South Australia, 2021) are examples of legislations that ban the use of oxo-degradable plastics. Voluntary initiatives include Plastics Pacts adopted in the U.S. (Plastics Pact, 2020) and Kenya (Plastics Pact, 2023).
	Tendency to be dispersed to the environment due to direct application in nature.	Polymer coated fertilizers are commonly made with thermoplastic resin such as polyolefin, polyvinylidene chloride and copolymers.	The EU Fertilizing Products Regulation 2019/1009 bans polymer coated fertilizers unless they comply with the EU’s biodegradability criteria (EU, 2019b).
		Fishing and farming gear (FAO, 2021).	In 2019, China banned the use of thin plastic mulch (less than 10 microns). The use of thicker mulch is expected to facilitate reuse, collection, and recycling (NDRC, 2019).
Impediment of circularity This could include impeding the circularity of other products.	The product is non-recyclable as per established recyclability criteria. Recyclability criteria could be a subset of sustainability criteria, developed separately under the plastics instrument.	Opaque or pigmented polyethylene terephthalate (PET) bottles (any color other than transparent blue or green).	Addressed through voluntary Plastics Pacts in the U.S. (Plastics Pact, 2020) and Australia, New Zealand and the Pacific Islands (Plastics Pact, 2021).
		Problematic label constructions, including adhesives, inks, materials, such as polyethylene terephthalate glycol (PETG), polyvinyl chloride (PVC), and polylactic acid (PLA).	Addressed through voluntary Plastics Pact in the U.S. (Plastics Pact, 2020).
		Non-PET plastic caps on PET bottles that must be separated during recycling (Plastics News, 2023)	The EU Regulation 2019/2024 requires caps to be attached to bottles, but the polymer is not regulated (EU, 2019b)
	The product has a high likelihood of not being collected and a high likelihood of not being properly disposed of or managed.	All plastic closures that are separable from the primary packaging and are below approximately 50 x 50mm in size.	Addressed through voluntary initiatives, such as by the Plastic Pact for Australia, New Zealand and the Pacific Islands (Plastics Pact, 2021).
		Non-compostable fruit and vegetable stickers and tea and coffee bags can contaminate compost when they are disposed of via food waste collections.	Addressed through voluntary initiatives, including the Plastic Pact in the UK (Plastics Pact, 2018).
	The product does not comply with existing labeling schemes to guide correct end-of-life treatment, (including for easy identification, sorting and separation), impeding circularity and leading to avoidable production of the product. See for example the Australasian Recycling Label (ARL) Program, “an on-pack labelling scheme that is helping consumers to recycle correctly and supporting brand owners and packaging manufacturers to design packaging that is recyclable at end-of-life.” https://apco.org.au/the-australasian-recycling-label	Packaging products with multiple components made of different polymers (e.g. PET tub and plastic film covering).	The EU SUP Directive 2019/904 mandates labels on SUPs to guide consumers on proper waste management, warn against improper disposal, and highlight the environmental impact of plastic littering (EU, 2019a).
Lack of transparency	The product lacks data to determine safety for the environment and human health across the full life cycle.	Environmental and human exposure to elements of concern may take place during product acquisition or use, e.g. PFAS chemicals in containers used for a variety of household consumer, pesticide, fuel, automotive and other industrial products.	The Safe Drinking Water and Toxic Enforcement Act of California (“Proposition 65”) requires businesses to inform residents about exposures to chemicals causing cancer, birth defects or other reproductive harm (California State, 1986).

3.2 Potential criteria for unnecessary plastic products

Unnecessary plastic products refer to products with a function that is not essential because they do not provide significant added value to society.

The aim of determining unnecessary plastic products is to develop measures to foster removing such products from the market without the need to identify non-plastic substitutes or alternate practices that require some form of plastic. The latter would support the goal of reducing production of primary and secondary polymers.

Table 4 outlines potential criteria for determining unnecessary products, towards nomination for listing under the plastics instrument. The criteria suggested have taken inspiration from existing examples of policies and actions and have been tailored to suit the objectives of the “unnecessary” grouping specifically.

Table 4. Potential criteria for determining unnecessary plastic products.

Cluster	Potential Criteria	Examples of products	Examples of regulations and initiatives
Availability or potential for availability of alternate practices that do not require plastic (elimination)	Feasible and safe modified/alternate practices are available or possible that eliminate the need for the plastic product.	Some primary, secondary and tertiary packaging (e.g., packaging for bananas).	Zero-packaging shops have been trialed with success in some countries (Beitzen-Heineke et al., 2017).
		Plastic-coated fertilizers removed by transitioning to agroecology principles Agroecology: Form of agriculture that seeks to transform food and agricultural systems rather than improve current unsustainable practices, using nature-based soil enhancement and pest control measures (FAO, 2018). (as promoted by the United Nations Food and Agricultural Organization (FAO, 2018) and reflected in Target 10 of the Global Biodiversity Framework) that eliminate the need for fertilizer (FAO, 2021).	EU Fertilising Products Regulation 2019/1009 (EU, 2019c) bans plastic-coated fertilizers unless they comply with the European Union’s biodegradability criteria (in force 2026) (FAO, 2021).
		Helium-filled balloons intended for release into the air This may be deemed an action that is not acceptable versus the product itself. at celebrations and memorials replaced by the planting of a tree, flowers or an entire garden (NCM, 2023b).	Western Australia has banned helium-filled balloons intended for release into the air (Western Australia, 2018).
Availability or potential for availability of alternate designs that remove plastic component/s (elimination)	The product has plastic components that can be removed without requiring a replacement or compromising the primary function of the product.	Excessive packaging such as excess headspace increases the volume and weight of plastic used without providing additional function.	Proposed revisions to the EU Packaging and Packaging Waste Directive suggests limiting the empty space ratio in packaging (including space filled with filling material) to a maximum of 40% (European Parliament, 2023).

3.3 Potential criteria for avoidable plastic products

Avoidable plastic products refer to products with a function that is essential, but demand for the product can be reduced through non-plastic substitutes, alternate designs and alternate practices.

The aim of determining avoidable plastic products is to reduce the need to produce such products, in full or in part, irrespective of whether they are manufactured from primary or secondary materials. Reducing their production can be achieved, for example, through alternate practices, such as reuse and refill business models.

Table 3 outlines potential criteria for determining avoidable plastic products towards nomination for listing under the plastics instrument. The criteria suggested have taken inspiration from existing examples of policies and actions and have been tailored to suit the objectives of the “avoidable” grouping specifically.

Table 5. Potential criteria for determining avoidable plastic products.

Cluster	Potential criteria	Examples of products	Examples of regulations and initiatives
Availability or potential for availability of alternate practices that reduce the need for new versions of the product (reduction)	A feasible reuse or refill business model is available or can be developed.	Groceries delivered in reusable packaging, which is picked up at next delivery.	Reuse and refill have been shown to significantly reduce the consumption of packaging material (Hekkert et al., 2000).
	A feasible remanufacture business model exists or can be developed.	Aircraft seat frames remanufactured, adding new cushions, screens and chargers.	Remanufacture of hard to recycle plastic waste is a focus of the Australian Government's budget (DAWE, 2022)
	The lifespan of the product can be extended, e.g. through the right to repair, removing early obsolescence, and the provision of sharing services that also reduce associated waste generation. In some cases, the provision of sharing services (or the “sharing economy”) can shorten a product’s lifespan, generating greater volumes of waste. EPR and other schemes could possibly assist in this regard.	Right to repair (e.g., electronics and wheelchairs).	Right to Repair Legislation (US, 2023).
		Removal of early obsolescence (e.g., electronic, and electrical products).	A proposed EU Directive would ban certain practices related to the early obsolescence of goods (European Council, 2023).
		Provision of sharing services (e.g. communal washing machines, rental scooters, and cars).	The City of Helsingborg provides digital sharing services, including through smart phones (City Council of Helsingborg, 2019).
Availability or potential for availability of non-plastic substitutes that reduce the need for the product (reduction)	The product can be replaced completely with a nature-based product.	Plastics plates replaced with banana leaves.	282 codes for materials and products have been identified in the Harmonized System of Codes (HS), which can act as non-plastic substitutes (UNCTAD, 2023)
	The product can be produced using a non-plastic substitute material.	Plastic plates replaced with bamboo plates.
Availability or potential for availability of alternate design that reduces the need for new versions of the product (reduction)	Options for improved resource efficiency exist or can be developed, including extending the longevity of the product.	Products are redesigned to make them fit-for-purpose for circularity, including the sharing economy, recycling, reuse, repair, etc.	Design features that improve product performance complicate “closing the loop” on plastics, leading to linear life cycle and increased production (OECD, 2019).