Plastics economy and SIDS

Small states1, and especially SIDS, are particularly vulnerable to the tide of plastics pollution and the more general threat of global warming and climate change. One challenge is that plastics are big business, producing both useful products and inputs to products that are ubiquitous to daily life, but which also contribute to pollution and CO2 emissions. As the core inputs of plastic are by-products from the refining processes of fossil fuels, they are extremely cheap and likely to become more so – meaning the threat to SIDS, who are already struggling at the forefront of global warming, will likely get worse. Furthermore, the challenge posed extends beyond plastic pollution’s immediate impact on fishing waters and tourism resources. It includes the impact of microplastics entering the food chain and their potential toxicity to fish, chemical pollution associated with the plastic life cycle and climate change due to plastics’ carbon footprint.

Global plastics life-cycle trade and SIDS

In early 2021, UNCTAD released a new Plastics Trade database that tracks trade in plastics across its entire life cycle2. Plastics trade was estimated to be worth more than US$1 trillion globally in 2018, with sub-sectors, such as plastic textiles and plastic packaging being worth hundreds of billions of dollars as well -—
– ‒
- –
—-
-—
– ‒
- –
—-
-—
– ‒
- –
—-
-—
– ‒
- –
—-
. This is considerably more than estimated by previous means of measuring plastics trade, such as tallying the products with codes in HS chapter 39, Plastics and articles thereof, which does not include the entire lifecycle of plastic products. The UNCTAD database is still in prototype and is being refined, but expectations are that the true figures are even larger. The findings are important because of the large scale of global trade revealed, the significance of trade in the value chain of plastic, and because trade is so broad and multi-faceted, with virtually all countries involved in some way or another, including SIDS. When broadly defined in the category of SIDS and small states, total plastics exports accounted for about 8 million metric tonnes worth around US$15 billion in 2018. For SIDS included in the analytical grouping, the estimate drops considerably to US$260 million and less than ¼ million metric tonnes, but this is still significant when compared to other merchandise exports from these countries. Moreover, while this estimate includes intermediate and final use plastic products made by SIDS as part of global value chains, as well as plastic packaging and textiles, it still is almost certainly a significant underestimate, as the massive volume of ‘embedded plastics’ in other products is not included.

SIDS’ positioning in the global plastics market is complex, reflecting the heterogeneity and diversity of countries in this category. A few are fossil fuel producers; some are hosts to chemical industries that produce plastic; for many, plastics have been a way to diversify their economies and raise value added. All, however, face the health effects of global warming and polluted water, soil and air from plastics production, consumption and incineration, especially those where recycling and waste management facilities are underdeveloped.

Thus, the narrative surrounding plastics is broadening beyond pollution to also include SIDS’ abilities to create jobs and revenues in other areas that depend on clean ecosystems, such as tourism and fisheries. In addition to the global CO2 costs, the costs to their governments of dealing with plastic refuse in already over-burdened infrastructures are now being factored in. Plastics’ role is being reappraised in SIDS, as elsewhere, amid growing efforts to promote a more circular economy, to reduce single-use plastics and to reduce the production and trade in plastics more generally -—
– ‒
- –
—-
-—
– ‒
- –
—-
-—
– ‒
- –
—-
-—
– ‒
- –
—-
. Governments, citizens and corporations are giving higher priority to the natural environment as a development issue to help achieve the SDGs, and more specifically goals 12 (Responsible consumption and production), 13 (Climate action) and 14 (Life below water) -—
– ‒
- –
—-
-—
– ‒
- –
—-
-—
– ‒
- –
—-
-—
– ‒
- –
—-
. This creates opportunities for small states and SIDS to increase production and enter the market for alternatives to plastic3. For example, producers of alternatives could tap into a global market for plastics textiles and plastic packaging currently worth more than US$260 billion -—
– ‒
- –
—-
-—
– ‒
- –
—-
-—
– ‒
- –
—-
-—
– ‒
- –
—-
. This potential market is directly relevant to SIDS.

Table 1. Exports in selected plastics along the value chain, 2018
(US$ billion and Million Metric Tonnes for global exports, US$ millions and Metric Tonnes for SIDS)
Global exports
(US$ billion and MMT)
SIDS
(US$ million and MT)
Intermediate forms of plastic$168 b
(43 MMT)
$16 m
(5 700 MT)
Intermediate manufactured plastic goods$67 b
(16 MMT)
$9 m
(2 700 MT)
Final manufactured plastic products$422 b
(72 MMT)
$107 m
(27 000 MT)
Plastic textiles$209 b
(29 MMT)
$48 m
(6 300 MT)
Plastic packaging$53 b
(14 MMT)
$43 m
(19 000 MT)
Total plastics exports$1 061 b
(349 MMT)
$259 m
(181 000MT)
Source: Preliminary data from -—
– ‒
- –
—-
-—
– ‒
- –
—-
-—
– ‒
- –
—-
-—
– ‒
- –
—-
.
Note: Volume and value categories do not sum to the total. Total volume is the sum of all plastics traded, which is different from plastics created.

SIDS and plastic trade regulations

SIDS and small states are aware of these threats and, of the 127 measures notified to the WTO that are relevant to plastics, the majority have been notified by developing countries. In particular, two SIDS have already notified nine measures: Mauritius and Seychelles -—
– ‒
- –
—-
-—
– ‒
- –
—-
-—
– ‒
- –
—-
-—
– ‒
- –
—-
. The content of the measures includes mainly bans on the import, sales and manufacture of certain plastic bags (including non-woven polypropylene bags), straws, tableware and kitchenware, as well as plastic and foam boxes. They have been notified as quantitative restrictions under the 1994 GATT and under the WTO TBT.

Also, Table 2 shows how seven SIDS have introduced bans or plans to phase out or reduce the use of single-use plastics, styrofoam products and polystyrene, signalling a clear and rapid response to impacts of plastic pollution.

Table 2. Plastics trade regulatory measures undertaken by SIDS
Country
(year)
Scope and key features of the measures takenNotified to the WTO
Barbados
(2019)
Ban on single-use plastic and plastic bags made with a petroleum-based resin. Exceptions for bags for garbage, medical use, preservation of food and a few other uses.
Fiji
(2017, 2019)
Plastic bag levy. A bill to ban the use and importation of single-use plastics and polystyrene under discussion.
Marshall Islands
(2017)
Ban on single-use plastic carrier bags and on Styrofoam and plastic cups, plates and packages.
Mauritius
(2015)
Ban on the import of plastic bags, including non-woven polypropylene bags.X
Samoa
(2018)
Ban on single-use plastic shopping bags, packing bags and straws.
Seychelles
(2017)
Ban on some plastic items such as plastic bags, styrofoam boxes and some plastic utensils and single-use plastic straws. X
Vanuatu
(2018)
Ban on single-use plastic bags, straws and polystyrene takeaway boxes. Certain exemptions for bags to wrap and carry fish or meat.
Source: -—
– ‒
- –
—-
-—
– ‒
- –
—-
-—
– ‒
- –
—-
-—
– ‒
- –
—-
.

New market opportunities for SIDS – alternatives to plastic

SIDS may benefit from growing interest in ‘sunrise markets’ for alternative and substitute materials that can perform the same or similar functions as plastic, but without its negative health or environmental impacts (see table 3). The global plastics, textiles and packaging categories highlighted in table 1, for example, are worth more than US$260 billion in 2018 and could be a target for producers of alternatives. Many island economies are active in these markets as they already possess the required resources, capacities and expertise. For example, some SIDS already export the following plastics-alternative materials: natural fibres (Mauritius), glass (Barbados and Mauritius), and cardboard and paper (Barbados, Fiji).

Table 3. Illustrative list of potential top plastic substitutes in SIDS, small economies and LDCs
ProductOriginMain uses PropertiesHealth impactEnvironmental impact
GlassSand-basedFood and pharmaceutical products containers, construction materialSolid, fragile, flexible, insulating, microwavable, heavy but tradableVery good insulating material and non-toxic Does not contain chemicals or carbon (only minerals), reusable, very slow degradation by erosion and recyclable
Natural fibres Plant- based (e.g., jute, cotton, coconut, palm)Textiles, packaging, ropes, clothes, furniture, etc. Strong, flexible, light, and fully tradableNon-toxic; production can allow carbon storageReusable, biodegradable and recyclable
Paper and cardboard Cellulose-basedBags, boxes, packaging, decoration, inputs to industrial productsFlexible, light, and fully tradableNon-toxicReusable, biodegradable and recyclable, but increase in use may generate pressure on timber extraction, unless from managed or certified forests or from recycling
Source: Adapted from -—
– ‒
- –
—-
-—
– ‒
- –
—-
-—
– ‒
- –
—-
-—
– ‒
- –
—-
.

SIDS need not stop there. A second route to enter the plastics-alternatives economic space is to build capacities and create products that do not yet exist. This could yield promising new solutions once research has been carried out for new processes and designs for plastic-free or less plastic-intensive packing and business methods that imply direct delivery of products or less use of single-use plastics. Some examples that involve a realistic leap from existing comparative advantage include new forms of cellulose fibres that could be spun into yarns for packaging and fabrics, or into entirely new materials that could be used for packaging to carry liquids, etc. This is already taking place in some other countries. Additionally, increased capacity in solid waste management, including recycling, will still be mostly needed to absorb any plastics that cannot be reduced, substituted or reused.

Plastics alternatives and policy space for SIDS

To this end, it will be critical for SIDS – and indeed for all developing countries – to ensure affordable access to new knowledge processes and raw materials, as well as to recycling and waste management technologies, whether proprietary or not. Making use of flexibility in the TRIPS Agreement, green patent pooling, preferential licenses, technological incentives and technical support to make use of new or mature but effective technologies will be of great importance. Furthermore, making use of soft intellectual property protection categories such as utility models and industrial design protection may be relevant to allow and promote local and low-cost innovation.

Notes
  1. Small states: Countries with a population of 1.5 million people or less.
  2. This research was carried out as part of broader collaboration between UNCTAD and the Graduate Institute of Geneva, with co-financial support from the Swiss Network for International Studies. Raw data collection by Julien Christen. More information can be found at https://www.plasticpolitics.solutions/.
  3. See for example https://www.bbc.com/reel/video/p07l0ftg/how-a-group-of-women-saved-their-island-from-plastic
References
    Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit.
    Donec tincidunt vel mauris a dignissim. Curabitur sodales nunc id vestibulum tempor. Nunc tortor orci, sodales nec eros eget.
    Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit.
    Donec tincidunt vel mauris a dignissim. Curabitur sodales nunc id vestibulum tempor. Nunc tortor orci, sodales nec eros eget.
    Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit.
    Donec tincidunt vel mauris a dignissim. Curabitur sodales nunc id vestibulum tempor. Nunc tortor orci, sodales nec eros eget.
    Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit.
    Donec tincidunt vel mauris a dignissim. Curabitur sodales nunc id vestibulum tempor. Nunc tortor orci, sodales nec eros eget.
    Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit.
    Donec tincidunt vel mauris a dignissim. Curabitur sodales nunc id vestibulum tempor. Nunc tortor orci, sodales nec eros eget.