Achieving sustainable production and consumption of virgin plastic polymers

Abstract

The United Nations Environment Assembly (UNEA) recently adopted a resolution with a mandate to negotiate a new international legally binding instrument (a treaty) on plastic pollution. The mandate includes the need to ‘prevent’ as well as ‘reduce’ and ‘eliminate’ plastic pollution through a ‘comprehensive approach that addresses the full life cycle of plastic’. Unsustainable production and consumption of virgin (primary) plastic polymers represents the single greatest threat to preventing plastic pollution and risks undermining the incoming treaty. However, current discussions on a global plastics treaty overlook upstream measures that address virgin plastic production and consumption, focusing instead on midstream and downstream measures on product design and waste management. This article presents the justification for and benefits of a stepwise approach for controlling virgin plastic production and consumption internationally, inspired by the Montreal Protocol on Substances that Deplete the Ozone Layer;

Full text

Achieving sustainable
production and consumption of
virgin plastic polymers
Tim Grabiel*, Tom Gammage, Clare Perry and Christina Dixon
Environmental Investigation Agency (EIA), Ocean and Climate Programmes, London, United Kingdom
The United Nations Environment Assembly (UNEA) recently adopted a
resolution with a mandate to negotiate a new international legally binding
instrument (a treaty) on plastic pollution. The mandate includes the need to
‘prevent’as well as ‘reduce’and ‘eliminate’plastic pollution through a
‘comprehensive approach that addresses the full life cycle of plastic’.
Unsustainable production and consumption of virgin (primary) plastic
polymers represents the single greatest threat to preventing plastic pollution
and risks undermining the incoming treaty. However, current discussions on a
global plastics treaty overlook upstream measures that address virgin plastic
production and consumption, focusing instead on midstream and downstream
measures on product design and waste management. This article presents the
justification for and benefits of a stepwise approach for controlling virgin plastic
production and consumption internationally, inspired by the Montreal Protocol
on Substances that Deplete the Ozone Layer;
KEYWORDS
plastics, treaty, virgin, production, montreal protocol, prevention, pollution
1 Introduction
Virgin - also referred to as primary -plastic production and consumption are
increasingly recognised as having reached unsustainable levels (Lau et al., 2020;
Cabernard et al., 2022;Ford et al., 2022;Bergmann et al., 2022). Countries are
inundated by an acute overabundance of inexpensive virgin plastics, undermining
secondary markets for recycled material and investments in collection and recycling
infrastructure (Bauer et al., 2020;Simon et al., 2021). As pressure mounts on the oil and
gas industry in the context of a serious climate change response, fossil fuel companies are
relying on plastics as the major growth industry (International Energy Agency, 2018;Yale
Environment 360, 2019).
The petrochemicals used to produce virgin plastic polymers and other products
account for 8% and 14% of total primary demand for gas and oil, respectively, and will
soon become the world’s biggest driver of oil demand, ahead of trucks, aviation and
shipping (International Energy Agency, 2018). The result is a system where inexpensive
Frontiers in Marine Science frontiersin.org01
OPEN ACCESS
EDITED BY
Heng-Xiang Li,
Chinese Academy of Sciences
(CAS), China
REVIEWED BY
Katharine Owens,
University of Hartford, United States
Stephen Oliver Andersen,
Institute for Governance & Sustainable
Development, United States
*CORRESPONDENCE
Tim Grabiel
timgrabiel@eia-international.org
SPECIALTY SECTION
This article was submitted to
Marine Pollution,
a section of the journal
Frontiers in Marine Science
RECEIVED 29 June 2022
ACCEPTED 15 August 2022
PUBLISHED 02 September 2022
CITATION
Grabiel T, Gammage T, Perry C and
Dixon C (2022) Achieving sustainable
production and consumption of virgin
plastic polymers.
Front. Mar. Sci. 9:981439.
doi: 10.3389/fmars.2022.981439
COPYRIGHT
© 2022 Grabiel, Gammage, Perry and
Dixon. This is an open-access article
distributed under the terms of the
Creative Commons Attribution License
(CC BY). The use, distribution or
reproduction in other forums is
permitted, provided the original
author(s) and the copyright owner(s)
are credited and that the original
publication in this journal is cited, in
accordance with accepted academic
practice. No use, distribution or
reproduction is permitted which does
not comply with these terms.
TYPE Policy Brief
PUBLISHED 02 September 2022
DOI 10.3389/fmars.2022.981439

virgin plastic is used freely and inefficiently, with unfavourable
economics for most recycling, leading to a stark discrepancy
between how much plastic is produced and how much is
recycled. At the end of 2017, of all plastic waste ever
produced, only 10% has been recycled; 14% was incinerated
andafurther76%endedupinlandfills or the natural
environment (Geyer, 2020).
Policymakers increasingly draw the connection between
eliminating plastic pollution and promoting a circular
economy for plastics (European Commission, 2018). The two
are inextricably linked. The recent adoption of UNEA
Resolution 5/14 entitled ‘End Plastic Pollution: Towards an
international legally binding instrument’will convene an
Intergovernmental Negotiating Committee (INC) to negotiate
a new legally binding instrument to end plastic pollution in all
environments (herein termed ‘the treaty’). The resolution
expressly recognises the need for ‘circular economy
approaches’, taking a ‘comprehensive approach that addresses
the full life cycle of plastic’, in persuit of ‘sustainable production
and consumption of plastics’(United Nations Environment
Assembly [UNEA], 2022). Yet current trends in virgin plastic
production and consumption are forecast to overwhelm all
efforts to improve waste management, widening the
discrepancy even further (Organization for Economic
Cooperation and Development [OECD], 2022b). Based on a
2016 baseline, annual virgin plastic production is set to double
by 2040 and increase to 1.1 billion tonnes in 2050 (Lau et al.,
2020;Geyer, 2020). Already, production of virgin plastic
polymers and their conversion from fossil fuels are responsible
for 90% of the plastic life cycle’s carbon footprint (Organization
for Economic Cooperation and Development [OECD], 2022a).
Because virgin plastic polymers are raw materials, products,
and pollutants with a few hundred companies dominating
production (Charles et al., 2021), a situation similar to ozone-
depleting substances (ODS), there are clear learnings for the
global community seeking to end plastic pollution in the
approach taken by the Montreal Protocol on Substances that
Deplete the Ozone Layer (Raubenheimer and McIlgorm, 2017;
Andersen et al., 2021). The Protocol is widely considered to be
the most successful multilateral environmental agreement
(MEA) of all time (Gonzalez et al., 2015;Liu et al. 2016).
This paper reviews how measures under the Montreal
Protocol could be adapted to virgin plastic polymers and, in so
doing, provides an upstream global regulatory framework that
addresses plastic pollution.
2 Policy considerations
2.1 Defining the lifecycle –where should
intervention begin?
The need for a ‘full life cycle approach’is explicitly
mentioned in both preambular and operative sections in
UNEA Resolution 5/14. However, no commonly agreed
definition of the plastics life cycle exists. While it is obvious
that the life cycle ends with plastic waste or its presence in the
environment as pollution, it is less clear where it should begin.
This presents policymakers with the challenge of defining it for
the purpose of the treaty.
Adopted in 2013, the Minamata Convention on Mercury
‘addresses mercury throughout its life cycle from its mining to its
management as waste’(United Nations Environment
Programme [UNEP], 2013). This approach identifies the full
life cycle as beginning at the resource extraction phase. However,
no other global policy instrument regulates any aspect of the
mercury life cycle, and while related, the situation with plastics is
much more nuanced. For instance, 99% of plastics are derived
from fossil fuels (Nielsen et al., 2020), meaning the juristiction
and competencies of the UN Framework Convention on Climate
Change (UNFCCC) must also be considered alongside the
possibility of a future fossil fuel non-proliferation treaty
(Newell and Simms, 2020). As such, the life cycle of plastic
needs to consider the life cycle of oil and gas to identify the
minimum point at which intervention must begin.
1
The lifecycle of oil and gas is typically divided into three stages
based on functions and operations: upstream, midstream and
downstream. Upstream involves the extraction and gathering of
fossil resources; midstream involves the transportation of the fossil
resources, including through pipelines, and downstream includes
processing into petrochemicals (Al-Janabi, 2020). In this context,
plastic does not yet exist.
As a material, plastic comes into existence upon
polymerisation - a process of reacting monomers (e.g.
ethylene) together to form polymer chains (see Figure 1). For
this reason, while consideration should also be given to how best
to address issues associated with the extraction of raw materials
and sourcing of feedstocks for plastic production, including
linkages to other conventions, polymerisation is squarely
within the scope of the treaty. This is the beginning of plastic
as a material –with the lifecycle thereafter divided into
four stages:
i. upstream, i.e. production of virgin plastic polymers;
ii. midstream, i.e. product design and use;
iii. downstream, i.e. plastic waste management and
treatment (De Silva et al., 2021);
iv. leakage, i.e. plastic in the environment.
Such an approach also ensures scope at least covers plastics
when they come into existence as materials, and coincides with
1 This article focusses on fossil-based plastics that comprise ~99% of
virgin production. However, the ~1% synthesised from bio-based
feedstock (so-called ‘bioplastics’) also require inclusion within the scope
of upstream controls.
Grabiel et al. 10.3389/fmars.2022.981439
Frontiers in Marine Science frontiersin.org02

when plastic first enters the environment as a pollutant in the
form of spilled pellets, flakes and powders (Karlsson et al., 2018).
Using this definition also follows the approach taken in the
Montreal Protocol, whose control measures begin at the point at
which ODS are produced (De Sombre, 2000).
It also clearly delineates the scope of measures to be taken in
relation to the UNFCCC, which addresses greenhouse gas
emissions associated with the oil and gas industry and is
mandated to address the negative externalities related to
climate change (see Figure 1), though this should not preclude
negotiators considering measures further upstream.
2.2 Policy to prevent pollution
UNEA Resolution 5/14 mentions the need to ‘prevent’as
well as ‘reduce’and ‘eliminate’plastic pollution (United Nations
Environment Assembly [UNEA], 2022), which will not be
achieved with mid- and downstream measures alone (Simon
et al., 2021). Around 90% of all plastic waste ever produced was
used just once (Geyer, 2020), demonstrating the necessity of
upstream controls on virgin production to support mid- and
downstream measures.
The Montreal Protocol controls harmful chemicals through
limits at the production level and on the amount of
‘consumption’in products and equipment, rather than
downstream post-consumption, which has been the most
significant driver of the successful ODS phase-outs. This
success inspired authors such as Raubenheimer and McIlgorm
(2017) to propose the use of the Protocol as a model to regulate
land-based sources of marine plastic debris, and Andersen et al.
(2021) to propose narrowing the exemptions for feedstocks used
to produce plastics, which they estimate has the potential to
reduce up to around 6% of total plastics production. It therefore
follows that upstream measures regulating the production and
consumption of virgin plastic polymers are also needed to
effectively prevent plastic pollution, with the Montreal
Protocol representing an appropriate lens through which to
design and conceptualise them (Simon et al, 2021;Bergmann
et al., 2022).
Furthermore, the Montreal Protocol was designed from the
beginning as a flexible and adaptable “start-and-strengthen”
instrument (Gonzalez et al., 2015). At its inception, there were
still many uncertainties and unknowns relating to both ODS
pollution impact and alternatives, requiring policymakers to
base precautionary policies on the information and alternatives
that were available (De Sombre, 2000). While there are far fewer
uncertainties in the context of plastic pollution, many remain,
and enduring success is likely to be achieved through the gradual
strengthening of controls over time as new information and
alternatives become available (Kaniaru et al., 2007;Andersen
et al., 2021;Simon et al., 2021). Such an approach would also
provide an enabling environment for industry innovation that
will take place as demand for alternatives rise.
Parties should therefore strongly consider tackling plastic
pollution through controls on virgin plastic production and
consumption, via a start-and-strengthen approach. Throughout
the INC and beyond, this could be operationalised in two distinct
phases - fact-finding and policymaking.
3 Recommended measures
3.1 Phase I –fact-finding
3.1.1 Controlled substances
Article 2 of the Montreal Protocol identifies the control
measures to be imposed on the production and consumption of
controlled substances, which are listed in Annexes A, B, C, E and
F. In the context of plastics, Parties must first identify the
substances (polymers) to be controlled. Plastic polymers can
be broadly placed into two categories: thermosets, which cannot
be remelted and remolded (~20%); and thermoplastics, which
can be melted and remolded (~80%) (Shieh et al., 2020).
Industry further classifies thermoplastics into three main
categories: (i) standard, used in common applications (~90%
FIGURE 1
A diagram displaying the life cycle of fossil fuels (oil, gas, and coal) in relation to the life cycle of plastics. Polymerisation is the point at which
plastics become materials and the minimum stage at which intervention under the incoming treaty needs to begin. However, this should not
preclude negotiators from considering measures associated with the extraction of raw materials and sourcing of feedstocks for plastic
production and its interlinkages to other conventions.
Grabiel et al. 10.3389/fmars.2022.981439
Frontiers in Marine Science frontiersin.org03

of total market share); (ii) engineering, which possess improved
mechanical or thermal properties (~10% of total market share);
and (iii) high-performance, used for exceptional end-use
applications and niche products (<1% of total market share)
(Manas et al., 2008). Parties should clearly set out the polymers
to be controlled under the new agreement in an annex, which
thereafter constitutes the “controlled substances”subject to all
other measures. Updates to the annex to account for new
polymers should be made possible via Decisions by the Parties
without need for further ratification.
3.1.2 Reporting
Article 7 of the Montreal Protocol requires all Parties to
provide statistical data about ODS to the Ozone Secretariat every
year. The Ozone Secretariat uses the data to calculate annual
ODS production and consumption for each Party on an ozone-
depleting potential (ODP) basis. In the context of plastics,
reporting obligations should also allow for the determination
of annual production and consumption of virgin plastic
polymers. Mirroring the MontrealProtocolapproach,
‘production’should refer to the amount of virgin plastic a
country produces, with ‘consumption’referring to the amount
of virgin plastic a country consumes, calculated as production
plus imports minus exports of virgin plastics (Brack, 2003). ‘Use’
would refer to the sector the polymers are used in, such as
packaging, agriculture and fisheries, building and construction,
automotive, electrical and electronic, household, textile, leisure
and sports plus others, including medical and laboratory.
Four key data points should form the basis of reporting
obligations for virgin plastic by polymer type: (i) production; (ii)
imports; (iii) exports; (iv) use. Fortunately, reporting is greatly
facilitated by the relatively few virgin polymer producers,
approximately 300 worldwide in 2019, about 100 of which
account for 90% of all single-use plastics (Charles et al., 2021).
The Parties should work to ensure a harmonised approach toward
reporting, premised on mandatory obligations and clear definitions
and formats with technical and financial assistance made available
for developing countries and economies in transition.
In addition to forming the basis for fact-finding, reporting has
independent value. Virgin plastic production is a key indicator for
understanding progress toward eliminating plastic pollution and
promoting a circular economy for plastics that is protective of
human health (Lau et al., 2020). In other words, scientists and
policymakers are hamstrung in drawing conclusions on the
evolution of plastic pollution in the environment and
effectiveness of measures on product design, use and waste
management and treatment without knowing the quantities and
types of virgin plastic entering the global economy each year.
3.1.3 Licensing systems
As supplies of chlorofluorocarbons (CFCs) and other ODS
were significantly reduced under the Montreal Protocol phase-
out schedules, the continued demand in some countries lead to a
significant illegal trade in the controlled chemicals (Liu et al.
2016). By the mid-1990s, an estimated 20,000 tonnes of ODS
were being traded illegally each year, equivalent to 20% of
legitimate trade, and sophisticated smuggling networks had
appeared (Environmental Investigation Agency [EIA], 2013).
In response to this threat, the Parties agreed to establish cross-
border licensing systems to monitor the flow of ODS and to
prevent ODS from ending up on the black market. Licensing
systems are regulatory schemes whereby a license is granted by
authorities for a company to produce, export or import
controlled substances, supported by a ban on unlicensed
production, exports and imports. Many MEAs require
licensing systems, including the Montreal Protocol as well as
the Basel Convention on the Control of Transboundary
Movements of Hazardous Wastes and Their Disposal. The
objectives for a licensing system for virgin plastics could be to:
(i) assist the collection of information to facilitate compliance
with reporting; (ii) facilitate notification and cross-checking of
reported information; (iii) assist in preventing illegal trade
(Montreal Protocol, 1997).
3.1.4 Baselines
The control measures under Article 2 of the Montreal
Protocol establish a baseline for production and consumption
from which the phase-out schedule is implemented. Such
baselines will also be needed for virgin plastic production and
consumption, by polymer, from which progress could be
monitored. These should be based on average production and
consumption by weight, over a multi-year period to compensate
for annual fluctuations. The selection of the multi-year period
that constitutes the baseline has important implications for
virgin plastic production. A prospective baseline, for example
2025-27, would encourage expansion of virgin plastic
production and consumption up to and through the baseline
years, in direct contrast to the objectives of the treaty. This
occurred prior to the adoption of the Montreal Protocol in 1987,
which resulted in a net increase of aggregate world CFC
production (Auffhammer et al., 2005). Similarly, multiple
countries increased hydrochlorofluorocarbon (HCFC)
consumption in the baseline calculation years prior to the start
of the HCFC phase-out, resulting in artificially inflated baselines
(Environmental Investigation Agency [EIA], 2016). On the other
hand, a historical baseline such as 2019-21 would discourage
expansion of virgin plastic production, serving as a soft freeze
until additional controls can be adopted.
3.2 Phase II –policymaking
In accordance with UNEA resolution 5/14, the objective of
policymaking should be to establish a set of controls to promote
Grabiel et al. 10.3389/fmars.2022.981439
Frontiers in Marine Science frontiersin.org04

a circular economy, protective of human health, taking a
comprehensive life cycle approach to achieve sustainable
production and consumption of plastics (United Nations
Environment Assembly [UNEA], 2022). Such decisions could
be informed through thorough assessment by scientific and
technical bodies, balancing environmental objectives and
feasibility with societal and economic needs (Busch et al., 2021).
3.2.1 Freezes, phase-downs and phase-outs
Following the Montreal Protocol model, Parties should
adopt restrictions on annual production and consumption of
controlled substances (i.e. virgin plastic polymers). This would
likely entail a cap on production and consumption (“freeze”)ata
certain level, such as 100% of an established baseline, followed by
a series of reduction steps (“phase-down”) to lower aggregate
levels of production and consumption over time. Consideration
should be given to schedules for different categories or types of
virgin plastic polymers, as did the Montreal Protocol by first
targeting five particularly potent and widely used CFCs and
halons. For example, less necessary plastics that harbour higher
toxicity and are used widely in applications that tend to end up
as pollution could be targeted first (for example, polyvinyl
chloride), with those used in engineering and high-
performance applications accounted for in the tail of allowable
production and consumption.
Parties should also target for immediate freeze and phase-
out of particularly problematic virgin plastic polymers that are
difficult to recycle, have high concentrations of toxic chemicals
and for which alternatives are readily available, such as polyvinyl
chloride (PVC), polystyrene (PS), polyurethane (PUR) and
polycarbonate (PC), which collectively comprise 30% of total
market share (Rochman et al., 2013). A similar phase-out
schedule should also be considered for chemical families used
as additives, catalysts, or polymerisation aids in plastic
production that are known to be harmful to human health.
This could support the Stockholm Convention on Persistent
Organic Pollutants while also preventing repetitive cycles of
hazardous chemical use (Sharkey et al., 2020;OECD 2018).
3.2.2 Exemptions
The Montreal Protocol has several categories of exemptions,
including global exemptions for certain laboratory or analytical
uses as well as critical-use and essential-use exemptions, which
authorise a specific country to use a specificamountofa
controlled substance for a certain time. Such an approach
could be considered in the case of plastics to allow for
continued use, for example the medical or automotive sectors,
allowing time-limited use of controlled substances considered
essential for society until alternatives are readily available and
commercialised (Andersen et al., 2021). Such exemptions should
also consider critical development issues with direct relevance to
the 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development, such as lack of
access to safe drinking water (Sustainable Development Goal 6).
While plastic pollution is often discussed in the context of
SDG14 –life below water –it also traverses areas of relevance
to SDG 3, 6, 11, 12, 13 and 15, amongst others. This is
exemplified by the deletion of the word ‘marine’in front of
‘plastic pollution’in the final Resolution 5/14 text and inclusion
of a reference to sustainable production and consumption of
plastics (SDG12). As such, the new plastics treaty needs to be
developed, implemented, and embedded within the broader
sustainable development landscape.
3.2.3 Adjustments
Most multilateral environmental agreements allow for
controls to be adjusted and strengthened over time. Under the
Montreal Protocol, an “adjustment”of the phase-down schedule
of any given controlled substance is possible without the need for
a formal amendment, which requires ratification. It is therefore
recommended that a mechanism responsive to the objectives of
the agreement is established for plastics that enables controls to
be gradually strengthened as new scientific, environmental,
technical and economic information becomes available (Busch
et al., 2021;Simon et al., 2021). This approach has worked
exceptionally well in the case of the Montreal Protocol, which
under Article 6 requires an assessment and review of control
measures every four years (Andersen et al., 2021).
3.2.4 Non-party trade provisions
Provisions on trade by Parties with non-Parties should
prohibit or restrict countries party to the agreement from
trading in controlled substances with countries not party to
the agreement. Article 4 of the Montreal Protocol requires that
Parties ban the import and export of controlled substances from
and to non-Parties. Such an approach has worked to maximise
participation and facilitate compliance. In 2009, the Montreal
Protocol was the first UN treaty to receive universal ratification,
a key contributing factor being the existence of such controls
(Gonzalez et al., 2015).
3.2.5 Assessment panels
Parties to the Protocol are required to base their decisions on
current scientific, environmental, technical, and economic
information. The Scientific Assessment Panel (SAP),
Environmental Effects Assessment Panel (EEAP) and
Technology and Economics Assessment Panel (TEAP) all assess
information to inform and strengthen ODS policy. Since these are
housed within the governing body, their work remains highly
applicable and relevant to the agreement’s objectives. Having such
a high degree of responsiveness allows the Protocol to adapt
quickly to new information in a rapid and responsive manner. A
similar approach could be adopted in the context of plastics,
whereby a dedicated scientific mechanism would be tied directly
with the new instrument. Operative paragraph 3(f) of Resolution
Grabiel et al. 10.3389/fmars.2022.981439
Frontiers in Marine Science frontiersin.org05

5/14 explicitly mentions the need for considering such an
approach during negotiations. If adopted, this would likely
facilitate a start-and-strengthen approach as new information
becomes available by ensuring relevance and responsiveness to
the instrument’s objectives. Such an approach is a necessary
complement to independent science-policy panels, such as the
one that will be established as a result of UNEA Resolution 5/8 for
chemicals, waste and prevention of pollution.
4 Conclusions
UNEA Resolution 5/14 specifically calls for a ‘full lifecycle
approach’to achieve ‘sustainable production and consumption
of plastics.’. As production and consumption of virgin plastic
polymers is widely understood to have reached unsustainable
levels, there are clear lessons from the approach adopted by the
Montreal Protocol.
Upstream (i.e. production) controls are a necessary precursor to
achieving sustainable production and consumption of virgin plastic
polymers, facilitating economic circularity and enabling the
reduction and elimination of plastic pollution. While critical,
midstream and downstream measures will be inadequate if
instituted alone, meaning upstream controls are required as part
of a holistic package of policies to address the plastic pollution crisis.
Effective upstream action will assist consumer goods
companies and retailers to redesign packaging, transition to
alternative product delivery systems such as refillable and
reusable packaging and incentivise innovation in alternatives
to plastics while avoiding regrettable substitutions. It will also
support municipalities and the industry to manage waste in a
responsible and environmentally sound manner through
streamlining waste streams and relieving pressure on
overwhelmed collection and management infrastructure. Such
measures would also tackle up to 90% of the plastic value chain’s
life cycle greenhouse gas emissions, contributing significantly to
global efforts to tackle climate change.
Author contributions
TGr conceived the article. TGr and TGa drafted the article.
CP and CD contributed to content and structure. TGr, TGa, CD
and CP reviewed and edited the article. All authors contributed
to the article and approved the submitted version.
Funding
The human resources required to prepare this article were
made possible through financial support from the Plastic
Solutions Fund and Oak Foundation.
Acknowledgments
We would like to acknowledge colleagues from the Center
for International Environmental Law, the Global Alliance for
Incinerator Alternatives and the Break Free From Plastic (BFFP)
movement for their invaluable support throughout the
conceptualisation and drafting of this article.
Conflict of interest
The authors declare that the research was conducted in the
absence of any commercial or financial relationships that could
be construed as a potential conflict of interest.
Publisher’s note
All claims expressed in this article are solely those of the
authors and do not necessarily represent those of their affiliated
organizations, or those of the publisher, the editors and the
reviewers. Any product that may be evaluated in this article, or
claim that may be made by its manufacturer, is not guaranteed
or endorsed by the publisher.
References
Al-Janabi, Y. T. (2020). “An overview of corrosion in oil and gas industry:
upstream, midstream, and downstream sectors,”in Corrosion inhibitors in the oil
and gas industry,1–39. (Wiley: New York, NY, USA).
Andersen, S. O., Gao, S., Carvalho, S., Ferris, T., Gonzalez, M., Sherman, N. J.,
et al. (2021). Narrowing feedstock exemptions under the Montreal protocol has
multiple environmental benefits. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. 118 (49). doi: 10.1073/
pnas.2022668118
Auffhammer, M., Morzuch, B. J., and Stranlund, J. K. (2005). Production of
chlorofluorocarbons in anticipation of the Montreal protocol. Environ. Resource
Economics 30 (4), 377–391.
Bauer, F., Holmberg, K., Nilsso n, L. J., Palm, E., and Stripple, J. (2020 )
Strategising plastic governance: Policy brief (Lund University). Available at:
https://lucris.lub.lu.se/ws/portalfiles/portal/80538112/Policy_brief_Strategising_
Plastic_Governance.pdf (Accessed 17th March 2022).
Bergmann, M., Almroth, B. C., Brander, S. M., Dey, T., Green, D. S., Gundogdu,
S., et al. (2022). A global plastic treaty must cap production. Science 376 (6592),
469–470. doi: 10.1126/science.abq0082
Brack, D. (2003). Monitoring the Montreal protocol. verification yearbook 2003.
Ed. T. Findlay (London: VERTIC), 209–226.
Busch, P. O., Schulte, M. L., and Simon, N. (2021) Strengthen the global science
and knowledge base to reduce marine plastic pollution (Nordic Council of
Ministers). Available at: https://pub.norden.org/temanord2021-519/
temanord2021-519.pdf (Accessed April 15, 2022).
Cabernard, L., Pfister, S., Oberschelp, C., and Hellweg, S. (2022). Growing
environmental footprint of plastics driven by coal combustion. Nat. Sustainability.
5 (2), 139–148. doi: 10.1038/s41893-021-00807-2
Charles, D., Kimman, L., and Saran, N. (2021) The plastic waste makers index
(Minderoo Foundation) (Accessed April 1, 2022).
Grabiel et al. 10.3389/fmars.2022.981439
Frontiers in Marine Science frontiersin.org06

De Silva, L., Doremus, J., and Taylor, R. (2021). The plastic economy.
environmental defense fund economics discussion paper series. Environmental
Defence Fund (EDF); Economics Discussion Series (EDS).
De Sombre, E. R. (2000). The experience of the Montreal protocol: Particularly
remarkable, and remarkably particular. UCLA J. Environ. Law Policy 19 (49), 49–
81.
Environmental Investigation Agency [EIA] (2013). “Chapter 10 –ozone
depleting substances,”in Transnational organized crime in East Asia and the
pacific - a threat assessment, 113–120. (Vienna: United Nations Office on Drugs
and Crime (UNODC)) Available at: https://www.unodc.org/documents/toc/
Reports/TOCTA-EA-Pacific/TOCTA_EAP_c10.pdf.
Environmental Investigation Agency [EIA] (2016) Averting climate catastrophe.
Available at: https://eia-international.org/wp-content/uploads/EIA-Averting-
Climate-Catastophe-FINAL.pdf.
European Commission (2018) Communication from the commission to the
European parliament, the council, the European economic and social committee
and the committee of regions: A strategy for plastics in a circular economy (Accessed
March 18, 2022).
Ford, H. V., Jones, N. H., Davies, A. J., Godley, B. J., Jambeck, J. R., Napper, I. E.,
et al. (2022). The fundamental links between climate change and marine plastic
pollution. Sci. Total Environ. 806, 150392. doi: 10.1016/j.scitotenv.2021.150392
Geyer, R. (2020). “Chapter 2 - production, use, and fate of synthetic polymers,”
in Plastic waste and recycling: Environmental impact, societal issues, prevention, and
solutions. Ed. T. Letcher (Cambridge MA, USA: Academic Press), 13–32.
Gonzalez, M., Taddonio, K. N., and Sherman, N. J. (2015). The Montreal
protocol: how today’s successes offer a pathway to the future. J. Environ. Stud. Sci. 5
(2), 122–129. doi: 10.1007/s13412-014-0208-6
International Energy Agency (2018) The future of petrochemicals: Towards more
sustainable plastics and fertilizers. Available at: https://www.iea.org/reports/the-
future-of-petrochemicals (Accessed February 15, 2022).
Kaniaru, D., Shende, R., Stone, S., and Zaelke, D. (2007). Strengthening the
Montreal protocol: Insurance against abrupt climate change. Sustain. Dev. Law
Policy 3 (9), 74–76.
Karlsson, T. M., Arneborg, L., Broström, G., Almroth, B. C., Gipperth, L., and
Hassellöv, M. (2018). The unaccountability case of plastic pellet pollution. Mar.
pollut. Bull. 129 (1), 52–60.
Lau, W. W., Shiran, Y., Bailey, R. M., Cook, E., Stuchtey, M. R., Koskella, J., et al.
(2020). Evaluating scenarios toward zero plastic pollution. Science 369 (6510),
1455–1461. doi: 10.1126/science.aba9475
Liu, N., Somboon, V., and Middleton, C. (2016). Illegal trade in ozone depleting
substances. handbook of transnational environmental crime (Edward Elgar
Publishing: Cheltenham, UK; Northampton, MA, USA), 212–234.
Manas, D., Manas, M., Stanek, M., and Danek, M. (2008). Improvement of
plastic properties. Arch. Materials Sci. Eng. 32 (2), 69–76.
Montreal Protocol (1997) Decision IX/8: Licensing system. ninth meeting of the
parties. Available at: https://ozone.unep.org/treaties/montreal-protocol/meetings/
ninth-meeting-parties/decisions/decision-ix8-licensing-system.
Newell, P., and Simms, A. (2020). Towards a fossil fuel non-proliferation treaty.
Climate Policy. 20 (8), 1043–1054. doi: 10.1080/14693062.2019.1636759
Nielsen, T. D., Hasselbalch, J., Holmberg, K., and Stripple, J. (2020). Politics and
the plastic crisis: A review throughout the plastic life cycle. Wiley Interdiscip.
Reviews: Energy Environ. 9 (1), e360. doi: 10.1002/wene.360
Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development [OECD] (2018)
Considerations and criteria for sustainable plastics from a chemicals perspective
background paper 1 (Copenhagen). Available at: https://www.oecd.org/
chemicalsafety/risk-management/considerations-and-criteria-for-sustainable-
plastics-from-a-chemicals-perspective.pdf (Accessed March 12, 2022).
Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development [OECD] (2022a).
Global plastics outlook: Economic drivers, environmental impacts and policy options
(Paris: OECD Publishing).
Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development [OECD] (2022b).
Global plastics outlook: Policy scenarios to 2060 (Paris: OECD Publishing).
Raubenheimer, K., and McIlgorm, A. (2017). Is the Montreal protocol a model
that can help solve the global marine plastic debris problem? Mar. Policy 81, 322–
329.
Rochman, C. M., Browne, M. A., Halpern, B. S., Hentschel, B. T., Hoh, E.,
Karapanagioti, H. K., et al. (2013). Classify plastic waste as hazardous. Nature 494
(7436), 169–171. doi: 10.1038/494169a
Sharkey, M., Harrad, S., Abdallah, M. A. E., Drage, D. S., and Berresheim, H.
(2020). Phasing-out of legacy brominated flame retardants: The UNEP Stockholm
convention and other legislative action worldwide. Environ. Int. 144 (2020),
106041.
Shieh, P., Zhang, W., Husted, K. E., Kristufek, S. L., Xiong, B., Lundberg, D. J.,
et al. (2020). Cleavable comonomers enable degradable, recyclable thermoset
plastics. Nature 583 (7817), 542–547. doi: 10.1038/s41586-020-2495-2
Simon, N., Raubenheimer, K., Urho, N., Unger, S., Azoulay, D., Farrelly, T., et al.
(2021). A binding global agreement to address the life cycle of plastics. Science 373
(6550), 43–47. doi: 10.1126/science.abi9010
United Nations Environment Assembly [UNEA] (2022) Resolution 5/14, end
plastic pollution: towards an international legally binding instrument (Accessed
April 7, 2022).
United Nations Environment Programme [UNEP] (2013). Minamata
convention on mercury: Texts and annexes (Geneva, Switzerland: UNEP
Chemicals Branch). Available at: https://www.mercuryconvention.org/en/
resources/minamata-convention-mercury-text-and-annexes.
Yale Environment 360 (2019) The plastics pipeline: A surge of new production is
on the way. Available at: https://e360.yale.edu/features/the-plastics-pipeline-a-
surge-of-new-production-is-on-the-way (Accessed June 1, 2022).
Grabiel et al. 10.3389/fmars.2022.981439
Frontiers in Marine Science frontiersin.org07