The Chinese import ban and its impact on global plastic waste trade

Brooks, Amy L.; Wang, Shunli; Jambeck, Jenna

doi:10.1126/sciadv.aat0131

Cited by 685 publications

(446 citation statements)

References 8 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

429

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…Plastics, for example, are subsumed under fossil energy carriers or critical metals (European Commission 2010) under metal ores and metals. Tracing changes in these flows requires additional data, which can be obtained from more detailed material flow analysis (Nuss and Blengini 2018;Brooks et al 2018) and should be integrated consistently into the proposed framework. The mass-based indicators deliver a robust data basis that is extendable with more in-depth assessments of individual materials, but also with social, economic, and environmental indicators.…”

Section: Broadening the Scope Of Circular Economy Monitoringmentioning

confidence: 99%

Measuring Progress towards a Circular Economy: A Monitoring Framework for Economy‐wide Material Loop Closing in the EU28

Mayer

Haas

Wiedenhofer

et al. 2018

J of Industrial Ecology

236

108

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Summary The concept of a circular economy (CE) is gaining increasing attention from policy makers, industry, and academia. There is a rapidly evolving debate on definitions, limitations, the contribution to a wider sustainability agenda, and a need for indicators to assess the effectiveness of circular economy measures at larger scales. Herein, we present a framework for a comprehensive and economy‐wide biophysical assessment of a CE, utilizing and systematically linking official statistics on resource extraction and use and waste flows in a mass‐balanced approach. This framework builds on the widely applied framework of economy‐wide material flow accounting and expands it by integrating waste flows, recycling, and downcycled materials. We propose a comprehensive set of indicators that measure the scale and circularity of total material and waste flows and their socioeconomic and ecological loop closing. We applied this framework in the context of monitoring efforts for a CE in the European Union (EU28) for the year 2014. We found that 7.4 gigatons (Gt) of materials were processed in the EU and only 0.71 Gt of them were secondary materials. The derived input socioeconomic cycling rate of materials was therefore 9.6%. Further, of the 4.8 Gt of interim output flows, 14.8% were recycled or downcycled. Based on these findings and our first efforts in assessing sensitivity of the framework, a number of improvements are deemed necessary: improved reporting of wastes, explicit modeling of societal in‐use stocks, introduction of criteria for ecological cycling, and disaggregated mass‐based indicators to evaluate environmental impacts of different materials and circularity initiatives.

show abstract

Section: Broadening the Scope Of Circular Economy Monitoringmentioning

confidence: 99%

Measuring Progress towards a Circular Economy: A Monitoring Framework for Economy‐wide Material Loop Closing in the EU28

Mayer

Haas

Wiedenhofer

et al. 2018

J of Industrial Ecology

236

108

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…The ban has caused major upsets for communities that had collected and segregated low grade plastics (RIC #3-7), which include EPS, and now have to pay to have these materials recycled or have chosen to instead, dispose of this material. As noted by Brooks, Wang, and Jambeck (2018), "89% of historical exports of plastic waste consist of polymer groups often used in SUP food packaging…".…”

Section: No Economically Viable Market For Recycled Epsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Policy Instruments to Reduce Consumption of Expanded Polystyrene Food Service Ware in the Usa

Wagner

2020

Detritus

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

There is global recognition that waste plastic is a ubiquitous pollutant in the built and natural environments. A component of plastic litter and debris is single-use, expanded polystyrene (EPS) food service ware. Reducing the consumption of EPS food service ware is challenging because reuse is not feasible, recycling is not economically viable, and composting is not possible. In the absence of national action to reduce EPS in the USA, local governments have taken the lead on enacting ordinances to eliminate or reduce EPS food service ware. This paper examined the variety of policy instruments that can or have been used by local governments in the USA to reduce EPS food service ware. Because of the inabilities to reuse, recycle, and/or compost EPS, the most frequently used policy instrument has been a ban. As of December 2019, there were 249 local bans in the USA covering 12.85% of the nation's population: of these bans, 9.6% were partial bans restricting distribution only on government and public property, 65.9% were narrow bans that ban distribution by restaurants and food providers, 8.8% were full bans that include the narrow ban and also ban using EPS food packaging by grocery stores, and 15.7% adopted an expanded ban that includes the full ban and also baned other single-use plastic food ware related items including the selling or distributing of EPS coolers and single-use plastic utensils, straws, stirrers, lids, cups, plates, and containers.

show abstract

“…The U.S. plastic waste stream informed by Jambeck et al (), Brooks, Wang, and Jambeck (), EPA (), Lebreton et al (), and Penca (2018). Illustrated by Erin Cinkant…”

Section: Single‐use Plastics Fishing Nets and The United States: Thementioning

confidence: 99%

“…The waste generated by single‐use plastics also becomes part of the global economy. The United States is second in the world of countries exporting plastic waste and has exported 26.7 MMT to the global market between 1988 and 2016 (12.4% of global exports; Brooks et al, ). China is the only country that produces more than the United States and despite having 1 billion more people in their population, China produced only ~35% more plastic waste than the United States in 2010 (60 MMT compared to 38 MMT in the United States; calculated from Jambeck et al, , https://ourworldindata.org).…”

Section: Single‐use Plastics Fishing Nets and The United States: Thementioning

confidence: 99%

“…China is the only country that produces more than the United States and despite having 1 billion more people in their population, China produced only ~35% more plastic waste than the United States in 2010 (60 MMT compared to 38 MMT in the United States; calculated from Jambeck et al, , https://ourworldindata.org). China previously imported plastic waste to make products out of recycled plastics, but as of 2017 has permanently banned non‐industrial plastic waste from being imported (Brooks et al, ). Until recently, plastics put into the domestic recycling stream within the United States were often sent to China for recycling; the United States sent 56% of plastic waste to China between 1988 and 2016, most of which was single‐use plastic food packaging (Brooks et al, ).…”

Section: Single‐use Plastics Fishing Nets and The United States: Thementioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

The United States requires effective federal policy to reduce marine plastic pollution

Iverson

2019

Conservat Sci and Prac

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The amount of plastic entering the ocean is expected to increase by an order of magnitude by 2025. Marine plastic pollution threatens biodiversity through entanglement, ingestion, and chemical exposure. The United States is in the top 20 of 192 coastal countries with mismanaged waste entering the ocean. This paper addresses U.S. policies regarding single‐use plastics and fishing nets, two major sources of plastic pollution. Currently, the United States does not have a federal ban on most single‐use plastics or on synthetic gillnets. This paper recommends a federal ban on single‐use plastics, alternative material for fishing nets and/or increased regulations, more research into the ecological and policy considerations of plastic pollution, continuing cleanup efforts and learning from policy challenges faced by other countries. The United States can look to the recent European Plastics Strategy as a leading example of large‐scale policy initiatives to reduce marine plastic pollution.

show abstract

The Chinese import ban and its impact on global plastic waste trade

Abstract: For decades China imported much of the world’s plastic waste; but a recent import ban requires new ideas and systemic change.

Cited by 685 publications

References 8 publications

Measuring Progress towards a Circular Economy: A Monitoring Framework for Economy‐wide Material Loop Closing in the EU28

Measuring Progress towards a Circular Economy: A Monitoring Framework for Economy‐wide Material Loop Closing in the EU28

Policy Instruments to Reduce Consumption of Expanded Polystyrene Food Service Ware in the Usa

The United States requires effective federal policy to reduce marine plastic pollution

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About