Go to content

4. Results from the workshop

4.1. Workshop in Oslo, February 2024

On February 6th and 7th, technical experts from the statistics agencies, customs offices and environmental agencies in the Nordic countries were invited to a workshop in Oslo. The aim of the workshop was to 1) identify the most important statistical information to include in national inventories and 2) critical knowledge gaps and potential solutions to barriers against improved data collection and quality. Representatives from WWF, OECD, the European Commission, Eurostat, UNITAR and Statistics Norway gave short presentations to the group. This was to highlight global needs for improved data, ongoing work to strengthen product information regarding plastics, and experiences from preliminary analyses of plastic flows globally, in Europe and in the Nordics.

4.2. Important statistical information to include in national inventories

During the workshop the technical experts collaborated in groups to identify the most important statistical information to include in national plastic inventories. The group of technical experts that participated in the workshop were asked to list and prioritise what they saw as the most important statistical information to include in national inventories. Following this, the suggestions underwent a group-wide voting process to determine their perceived importance. The results of the vote were as presented in figure 7.
Figure 7: Most important statistical information fo include in plastic inventories.
Source: Prioritization among the workshop participants (06.02.24)
The elements they highlighted coincided well with the data needs globally as expressed by the WWF and the European Commission; global plastics statistics that enable design of effective policies and data to measure their effects require reliable information about the composition and plastic shares of products that eventually become waste, standards to connect products and waste, and shared information so we know what exported waste consists of and its actual end-of-life fate. Harmonised product and waste codes, statistical definitions and categories are central to achieving that vision.

4.3. Key knowledge gaps

With a clearly defined vision for global plastics statistics, we continued to pinpoint critical knowledge gaps and issues related to data collection and quality that need to be solved to achieve the vision. Participants collaborated in groups to identify the most critical challenges based on their work with various parts of the plastic value chain. Again, the group as a whole voted to prioritise the problems by the importance of solving them. The results of the vote were as presented in figure 8.
Figure 8: Most critical challenges based on their work with various parts of the plastic value chain.
Source: Prioritization among the workshop participants (06.02.24)
These identified main challenges were grouped into nine, clearly defined problems.
  1. Waste exports information need
  2. Waste export control and inspection
  3. Waste export end-of-life fates
  4. Product plastic shares, additives and polymers
  5. Lacking data on large waste sources
  6. Lack of frequently updated data on plastic products and waste
  7. Lack of data to enable closed loop recycling
  8. End of life fates
  9. Double counting semi-finished/finished products
The workshop participants were lead through a dedicated problem-solving exercise to break these main problems into more clearly defined sub-problems, define barriers to solving them along with potential solutions.  

4.3.1 Waste export (information need)

The information on transboundary waste shipments is insufficient and not easily accessible for analysis. This leads to uncertainties on actual waste export for statistical purposes, but it also makes it more difficult to ensure sufficient supervision of waste transports.   
It is hard for exporters to classify plastic waste and plastic containing waste shipments of which most consists of mixed materials, within the limited HS-codes for plastic waste
PE (39151000), PE (39152000), PVC (39153000) and other polymers (39159000).
. While exported products and waste are followed by notification documents,
 these are not digital nor searchable. This makes them unsuited for statistical purposes.
Another issue arises when waste is intentionally or unintentionally misclassified as products
This applies to a variety of problematic products, such as textiles, used fishing-equipment, artificial turf and electronic products.
. While competent staff can reclassify the shipment, this requires thorough inspections.
The key to improved shipment classification is collaboration within the EU, which is partly achieved through new regulation on waste shipments
 and common digital solutions
WSR Central System
. The collaboration should also include guidelines on how to use HS-codes for different waste shipments to ensure comparable and more accurate registrations within the limitations of existing HS-codes. There is a potential for enriching the data within the EU/EEA with content, composition, source, and structural Annex 7 data. Currently, the European Union Joint Research Center (JRC) is drafting harmonized end-of-waste criteria for plastics. The goal is to establish a clearer distinction between products and waste. The new regulation on waste shipments can be supported by legal acts addressing specific categories of concern. The Nordic countries should ensure that Nordic customs authorities can actively participate in consultations to provide insights on current challenges.
Waste export (information need)
Barriers: Insufficient HS codes and searchable accessibility to annex 7 information for statistical and surveillance purposes.
Solution: Amended in new regulation of waste shipment, however it is crucial (for a Nordic custom-authorities working group) to closely follow up the implementation to ensure that common digital solutions enable sufficient searchable information and efficient, structural data.

4.3.2. Waste export (control and inspection)

To ensure legal cross-border movement of waste, effective supervision is key. There is enhanced surveillance of shipments, channels and times that are flagged as high-risk. However, customs authorities often indicate that they lack sufficient capacity, knowledge, and tools to ensure that the content of the shipments corresponds to the shipment registrations. Customs authorities believe that more standardization on timing and content for control and inspections within the EEA/EU would ensure sufficiently thorough and consistent inspections.
Actors that intentionally undeclare goods or provide false declarations, may also use unregistered modes of transport that evade customs. An unknown number of such transports may pass through channels that are surveyed, such as passenger ships. To address this, additional measures and effective international cooperation is needed. There is also a potential for collaboration with the private entities that provides the shipments, creating risk profiles and stopping orders for customs based on passenger lists, type and weight of vehicle, and frequency of border-crossings.
Waste export (end-of life fates)
Barriers: Unsatisfying content control of waste shipments out of the EEA/EU
Solution: Partly addressed through the new regulation of waste shipment, however it is crucial (for a Nordic custom-authorities working group) to closely follow up the implementation and ensure that experiences from the frontline and unfortunate deviations are addressed by measures or new underlying legal acts.
Effective supervisions are standardized, unannounced and unpredictable to those being checked. To achieve this, it is essential to have sufficient surveillance capacity. This includes available training for the supervision officers in the frontline to ensure their capability to detect product and waste types, polymers, contamination, and threshold values for classification. Methods and entities should be aligned for reporting illegal exports between the Nordic countries or within the EEA/EU, with jurisdiction for filings within the customs authorities. Radiation scanners, weights, and NIR-scanners (for detecting polymers) could greatly help surveillance officers. Theres is also great potential in AI image recognition and handling of big data. All should be subject to collaboration on EU-level. The Nordic countries should ensure that Nordic customs authorities can actively participate in consultations to provide insights on current challenges.

4.3.3 Product plastic shares, additives, and polymers

A key knowledge gap is that there is insufficient data on product plastic shares, weight, additives, and polymers. This implies that there is a great uncertainty attached to estimated material flows on plastics, and large and unknown variations in which assumptions estimates are built upon. For comparable data we would need the assumptions to be harmonized on an international level. However, data would need to be dynamic over time and regions to ensure that the effect of measures and policy tools are measurable. 
Common standards would make statistical efforts more efficient and statistics more comparable. Securing funding and allocating responsibility are essential for this effort. Reporting schemes and methodologies that address region- and product-specific characteristics at an appropriate level need to be established. These measures collectively contribute to creating an effective management tool.
UNITARs Plastic-KEYs address the problem by defining a common classification system that would make international comparable estimations on plastic put on the marked and plastic waste generated. The key would also help to estimate plastics embedded in different products such as textiles. Additionally, the new product pass, required under the new EU eco-design regulations may provide continuously updated information on materials, polymers, and additives in different products.
Product shares, additives, and polymers
Barriers: Insufficient information and large variations in assumptions on products plastic shares, additives, and polymers.
Solution: Addressed in UNITARs work on Plastic-KEYs on finished products (plastic and plastic containing products), however the Nordic countries can assist in developing the keys in general and Nordic-specific adaptations.
A collaboration between UNITAR, EEA/EU and the Nordic countries could provide valuable synergies that could provide a foundational database and harmonized assumptions that the rest of the world to build upon.
The Nordics should follow closely the work done in UNITAR and identify where additional work on the Nordic level would be needed. The designated collaboration should include statistical agencies and custom authorities to work in close cooperation with UNITAR and the EEA/EU to ensure funding and insights for developing the Plastic-KEYs in general, with also information on additives and Nordic/EU-specific adaptations.

4.3.4. Lacking data on large waste sources

The OECD's Global Plastic Outlook clearly shows the global dominance of packaging as the primary application for plastic use, followed closely by construction products
OECD 2022 – Global Plastic Outlook (2022). Plastic flows were modelled by the OECD using ENV-Linkages; their in-house dynamic computable general equilibrium model. Read more: https://doi.org/10.1787/5jz2qck2b2vd-en.
. This pattern aligns with the findings from Eurostat's material flow analysis in Europe
Interview with Oscar Gomez, February 2024.
. Packaging is subject to relatively heavy regulation and reporting in Europe, benefiting data collection and quality. However, a critical knowledge gap persists concerning plastic use and waste from other significant sources, such as construction and industry.
Participants in discussions identified reliable data for large waste sources as a substantial knowledge gap. The technical experts pinpointed three subproblems: insufficient knowledge on tonnages, waste treatment and waste composition. It was pointed out that while estimates of total volumes exist, uncertainties arise, especially in tonnages for small industries. The group focused on waste composition as the most critical knowledge gap, as knowing what the waste streams contains is critical to know more about the status and potential for improved waste treatment.
A significant barrier to improving knowledge lies in the absence of a harmonized methodology for waste analyses and lacking reporting requirements. Participants emphasized the success of collaborative efforts in addressing similar issues when reporting on municipal waste and recycling rates. A proposed solution involves establishing a Nordic working group to harmonize methodologies for waste analyses, with a specific focus on large waste streams.
Data on large waste sources (industry and construction)
Barrier: Insufficient data on composition, tonnages, and waste treatment due to a lack of common standard for waste analysis method
Solution: Nordic working group with mandate to harmonize method.

4.3.5. Lack of frequently updated data on plastic products and waste

The effort to enhance plastics statistics faces a critical challenge in the lack of detailed and frequently updated national data on plastic products and waste. The participants pointed to a sub-problem of constraints on data collection facing national statistics agencies operating under the European Statistics Code of Practice
European Statistical System Committee (2017) – European Statistics Code of Practice – revised edition 2017. Link: https://ec.europa.eu/eurostat/web/products-catalogues/-/ks-02-18-142
.
The Code necessitates a careful balance between non-excessive burden on respondents and a commitment to quality where statistical authorities systematically and regularly identify strengths and weaknesses to continuously improve process and output quality. To achieve this, statistics offices are encouraged to promote, share, and implement standardized solutions that enhance effectiveness and efficiency in data collection.
While automation and data integrations can streamline reporting for businesses and industries, the group pointed to barriers in the lack of incentives and interest for private companies to build automated data flows with the purpose of strengthening national statistics. Another barrier is that different user groups require different data quality and content. An example was brought up where reporting is done in data format of own choice, also as attachments, leading to time consuming data cleaning for statistics agencies before the information could be used to meet quality requirements for national statistics. This also affects comparability of data.
Lack of frequently updated data on plastic products and waste
Barrier: Insufficient incentives to report on desired format and constraints on data collection in European Statistics Code of Practice
Solution: Reporting requirements and industry initiatives for software integrations and agreeing on standard reporting format
A potential solution involves reporting requirements that are explicit about data format and data types allowed, and that private-public collaboration could help by providing integrations with business systems to eliminate the need for imputing data manually. Emphasizing the use of electronic means for data return, as suggested by the Code of Practice, can significantly improve the efficiency of data collection processes.

4.3.6. Lack of data to enable closed loop recycling

Most of today’s recycling of plastic materials is downcycling. High quality recycling requires high quality information, sorting, and recycling technology. Currently we have a restrained willingness to invest in sufficient infrastructure and capacity throughout the value chain to sort out and recycle different polymers, due to lack of predictable and robust framework conditions, leading to an insufficient access to and quality of the feedstock and secondary raw material. There are also issues with unnecessarily low quality of the feedstock due to mixed materials, low levels of sorting, contamination, and lack of design for recyclability of products.
The material flow faces obstacles due to a market that still has significant room for improvement. Strengthening the link between supply and demand should ensure that secondary plastic of right quality can be provided as raw material to manufacturers with corresponding quality requirements. The lack of information on source, use and material characteristics related to different waste streams makes it difficult to secure the value chain where the quality of the feedstock is sufficient.
To improve the prerequisites for a functional market, we need to improve the product design for high quality recycling through guidelines developed through collaboration among actors throughout the value chain. We suggest for a designated taskforce on EU/EEA-level to ensure that the different part of the value-chain may share insight, information, and needs. This collaboration may also assess whether EPR can be a tool for improved closed-loop recycling for bigger industries or other product group. Additionally ensuring the link between feedstock to potential recyclers and potential producers with a need or opportunity for the use of secondary raw materials, should be better linked through EU/EEA-cooperations.
Enabling closed-loop recycling
Barrier: Insufficient information and link between supply and demand. Insufficient access to quality feedstock, infrastructure for sorting and recycle technology.
Solution: Linking feedstock of plastic waste, secondary raw material, and producers. Increasing economic incentives for increased flow throughout the value chain, from waste to recycled material into products designed for recycling.
Regulatory incentives should be in place to ensure that high quality recycling is not treated equally to downcycling. Such incentives could include, for example requirement for mandatory minimum content of recycled plastic, high taxes on fossil fractions sent to incineration, removing barriers and aligning regulatory framework for cooperation between industry and municipal waste, as well as within the EU/EEA borders. The product passes might also be a valuable part of the solution on the information needs for closed loop recycling if information of polymer composition, source and former use are included.

4.3.7. End of life fates

Data on the end-of-life fate of exported waste is notably scarce. However, there is also a general lack of methods and comparable data for the end-of-life fates of plastic waste for non-exported waste. The Global Plastics Outlook indicates that as much as 21% of plastic waste is mismanaged, but in general, data on mismanaged waste are very uncertain. This is true also in the OECD and in the Nordics, where for instance data on littering lacks systematic and comprehensive collection and reporting. 
Workshop participants highlighted two major issues: the widely varying reporting methods on recycling rates and challenges in collecting and ensuring the quality of data on littering. The Nordic countries are now collaborating on harmonized methods for reporting on municipal solid waste, including recycling rates
Nordic council of Ministers (2024) Nordic Project: Streamlined measuring of municipal waste
. The mapping of mismanaged plastic waste, however, faces a clear barrier in financial constraints and methodological challenges. One proposed solution is to enhance reporting on both products put on the market and waste streams. By doing so, the application of material flow analysis principles can estimate the residual plastic leakage from the system, offering a more comprehensive understanding of mismanaged plastic waste.
End of life fates
Barrier: Difficult and expensive to undertake comprehensive and frequent mapping, as well as harmonised recycling rates of different waste streams
Solution: Strengthening reporting on waste to controlled waste treatment. Mismanaged waste can be calculated as residual in the material flow.

4.3.8. Double counting semi-finished/finished products.

Accurately mapping the material flow of plastics in a country poses a challenge due to the potential double-counting of semi-finished and finished products. The categorization of plastic at the product level relies on three overarching categories, derived primarily from the structure of the CN nomenclature:
  • Primary plastics
  • Semi-finished and finished plastic products.
  • Plastic-containing products
However, the total plastic consumption in a country cannot be simply calculated as the sum of these categories. The boundaries between the three categories are often ambiguous. Zhjie Li from Unitar highlighted this complexity, illustrating that if a country produces plastic sheets from primary plastics and then manufactures laptops from those sheets, it results in double-counting when summing up the plastic sheets and plastic embedded in laptops to estimate the plastic consumption.
Double-counting semi-finished/​finished products
Barrier: Lacking guide on common methodology to use CN codes to separate semi-finished and finished products
Solution: 1) Only include either primary plastics or finished products or 2) create an international standard for instance based on the methodology followed by Norway and Denmark
Denmark and Norway have addressed this challenge by categorizing CN codes as follows
39.12 and 13.13 are excluded as they comprise natural polymers or cellulose, not synthetic polymers.
:
  • 39.01.00-39.14.99: Primary plastics
  • 39.15.xx: Waste plastics (not relevant for products)
  • 39.16.00-39.99.99: Semi-finished and finished plastic products
There is a clear need for an international standard to address potential double-counting or guidelines on utilizing the scope in Unitars' plastic KEYS, where only finished products are considered.
Standardization in categorization methods would greatly enhance the accuracy and comparability of plastic material flow assessments on a global scale.
Nordic Council of Ministers I www.norden.org/publications I pub@norden.org