National Guidance for Plastic Pollution Hotspotting and Shaping Action Introduction to the methodology i Authors: Julien Boucher1; Melissa Zgola2; Xun Liao2; Anna Kounina2; Guillaume Billard1; Paola Paruta1; Alexandre Bouchet1 1 EA – Shaping Environmental Action 2 Quantis International Reviewers: Aldo Ometto (University of São Paulo), Avantika Shastri, Chris Zurbrügg (Eawag), Costas Velis (University of Leeds), Josh Cottom (University of Leeds), Peter Ryan (University of Cape Town), Philippa Notten (The Green House), Sarah Archer (Zero Waste Scotland), Steffen Blume (GIZ), Tessa Goverse (United Nations Environment Programme), Yuki Hamilton Onda Kabe (Braskem) This publication is supervised by the United Nations Environment Programme (UNEP)’s Life Cycle Initiative and the Consumption and Production Unit (Economy Division): Feng Wang, Llorenç Milà i Canals, Sandra Averous, Ran Xie, Elisa Tonda; and International Union for Conservation of Nature (IUCN): Lea Dubois, Janaka de Silva. This report was developed with the financial support from the contribution from Norway to UNEP. Recommended citation: United Nations Environment Programme (2020). National guidance for plastic pollution hotspotting and shaping action - Introduction report. Boucher J.,; M. Zgola, et al. United Nations Environment Programme. Nairobi, Kenya. Design and layout: Anna Mortreux | Anagram Cover design: Anna Mortreux| Anagram Printed by: UNESCO Copyright © United Nations Environment Programme, 2020 This publication may be reproduced in whole or in part and in any form for educational or non-profit purposes without special permission from the copyright holder, provided acknowledgement of the source is made. The United Nations Environment Programme would appreciate receiving a copy of any publication that uses this publication as a source. No use of this publication may be made for resale or for any other commercial purpose whatsoever without prior permission in writing from the United Nations Environment Programme. Disclaimer The designations employed and the presentation of the material in this publication do not imply the expression of any opinion whatsoever on the part of the United Nations Environment Programme concerning the legal status of any country, territory, city or area or of its authorities, or concerning delimitation of its frontiers or boundaries. Moreover, the views expressed do not necessarily represent the decision or the stated policy of the United Nations Environment Programme, nor does citing of trade names or commercial processes constitute endorsement. ISBN No: 978-92-807-3793-6 Job No: DTI/2291/PA National Guidance for Plastic Pollution Hotspotting and Shaping Action Introduction to the methodology FOREWORD Plastic pollution is a key environmental challenge that has received significant public attention in recent years. While it is often attributed to a “take-make-dispose” economic model, plastic leakage is a complex issue with multiple sources and actors involved. Addressing this challenge requires all stakeholders joining forces to intervene at various levels. Resolution No. 6 on marine plastic litter and microplastics adopted at the Fourth Session of the UN Environment Assembly in 2019 highlighted the importance of a harmonised methodology to measure plastic flows and leakage along the value chain. However, countries and cities are still faced with a key knowledge gap in understanding the magnitude of the challenge and in need of tools to address the root sources of the problem. Co-developed by the United Nations Environment Programme (UNEP) and the International Union for Conservation of Nature (IUCN), the National Guidance for Plastic Pollution Hotspotting and Shaping Action contributes to filling this gap. The Guidance provides a methodological framework and practical tools applicable at different geographical scales. The Guidance also goes one step beyond the quantification and qualification of plastic pollution. It also offers an effective interface between science-based assessments and policy making. The basis of the Guidance starts with mapping plastic leakage and its impacts across the values chain by collecting and analysing relevant data on plastic production, consumption, waste management and disposal, and prioritise hotspots. The Guidance enables governments in collaboration with key stakeholders to identify and implement corresponding interventions and instruments to address the prioritised hotspots. Once decision-makers are equipped with credible knowledge on their status using the Guidance, they can set targets, agree and implement actions, and monitor progress. The recent COVID-19 pandemic reminds us once more that we are living in a fast-changing world where emergencies and sustainability challenges are closely linked with the health of our environment and human wellbeing. This Guidance allows users to locate the most relevant hotspots in evolving circumstances in such emergencies and with updated data and analysis, help define solutions to meet new and pressing needs of a country or city. The methodology also enables the tracking of plastic consumption in various sectors such as healthcare, agriculture and food, logistics and transport, as well as in households, in order to develop corresponding solutions to reduce the adverse impacts. We anticipate that governments, industries and other relevant stakeholders will find this Guidance useful in shaping national and local strategies to close the plastic tap and improve circularity. Building upon this Guidance, UNEP and IUCN are committed to further enhance the harmonisation of methodology at global level jointly with partners and stakeholders, while simultaneously supporting the collection and sharing of data that addresses national and local priorities. We look forward to engaging with all of you in our common fight against plastic pollution. Ligia Noronha Stewart Maginnis Director, Economy Division Global Director of the Nature-based Solutions Group United Nations Environment Programme International Union for Conservation of Nature 3 TABLE OF CONTENTS Foreword 3 Executive Summary 6 Technical summary 7 1. Introduction 10 1.1 Background 10 1.2 Overall goal of the Guidance 10 1.3 Objectives and added value of the Guidance 11 2. The structure of the guidance 12 2.1 Three overarching questions as the backbone of the workflow 12 2.2 The nine technical and strategic modules 13 3. Where to act? Identification of HOTSPOTS 15 3.1 The hotspotting rationale and process 15 3.2 The five categories of hotspots 16 3.2.1 Polymer, application and sector hotspots 16 3.2.2 Regional hotspots 19 3.2.3 Waste management hotspots 21 3.4 Formulation of actionable hotspots 22 3.5 Hotspotting quality assessment 24 4. What to do? Prioritisation of INTERVENTIONS 26 4.1 Match hotspots with generic interventions 26 4.2 Specify and balance the interventions 28 4.3 Prioritise the interventions 29 5. How to do it? Converging on INSTRUMENTS 30 5.1 Match interventions and instruments 30 5.2 Specify instruments 31 5.3 Prioritise the instruments 32 6. Description of the Modules, Tools and Project organisation 33 6.1 Description of the modules and tools available 33 6.2 How to set up a project at national, sub-national or local level? 38 Glossary 41 References 45 5 NATIONAL GUIDANCE FOR PLASTIC POLLUTION HOTSPOTTING AND SHAPING ACTION EXECUTIVE SUMMARY The attention on plastic pollution has intensified in will need to be comprehensive, consistent, comparable recent years among national governments and the and credible, based on a methodology which harmonises global community. The ‘National Guidance for Plastic existing data, tools and resources. The Guidance takes a Pollution Hotspotting and Shaping Action’ (hereinafter holistic approach, covering major types of plastic poly- referred to as ‘the Guidance’) aims to provide a structure mers and products, as well as their leakage and impacts for the methods of identifying plastic leakage ‘hotspots’, along the full value chain. The Guidance is action oriented finding their impacts along the entire plastic value and supports the users with a reproducible workflow, with chain, and then prioritising actions once these hotspots a set of tools and templates for data collection, analysis, are identified. The Guidance sprung from our desire to diagnosis, planning and implementation. address the challenge to define an effective strategy to address plastic pollution, in a systemic way. It is aimed The United Nations Environment Programme (UNEP), at enabling countries, regions, or cities to take and use the International Union for Conservation of Nature this structure, or framework, in their own environments. (IUCN), and the Life Cycle Initiative have co-developed the Guidance: a harmonised methodological framework Currently, a number of organisations and initiatives to be applied in the real world. are looking to develop methodologies and approaches to assess the flow and leakage of plastics. They seek This Guidance will contribute to the achievement of to address the complexity of the plastics value chain; Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs), in particular the unquantified magnitudes of impacts on the envi- SDG 12 which focuses on ensuring sustainable con- ronment, including marine ecosystems. There is a clear sumption and production patterns, and SDG 14 which need for a better understanding of the origins of major aims to conserve and sustainably use the services of plastic leakages as well as for more accurate knowledge the oceans, seas and marine resources. The Guidance on which actions will make the biggest impact. The will also contribute to the implementation of the reso- Guidance attempts to address that need. lutions adopted at the fourth session of United Nations Environment Assembly (UNEA4) in March 2019, including Countries, regions and cities will benefit from this more but not limited to the resolution on achieving sustainable harmonised quantification of plastic leakage and impact, consumption and production (UNEP/EA.4/Res.1), the allowing them to establish a baseline for benchmarking resolution on marine plastic litter and microplastics and tracking the progress of interventions. As demon- (UNEP/EA.4/Res.6) and the resolution on addressing strated in the Guidance, the assessment and tracking single-use plastic products pollution (UNEP/EA.4/Res.9). ADDED VALUE OF THE GUIDANCE Addresses all types of plastic leakage, including: HOLISTIC Mismanaged waste (single use, packaging, others) Primary microplastics from abrasion (tyres, textiles, others) and intentionally used (cosmetics) Accidentally lost plastics (fishing nets, primary pellets) All plastic polymer and products (macroplastics and microplastics), and relevant sectors Helps key stakeholders to develop a systemic approach for solving the plastic SYSTEMIC pollution On one hand, the granularity allows to target specific polymers or plastic applications On the other hand, the life cycle perspective enables to encompass the full plastic value chain ACTIONABLE Guides the user through a reproducible workflow including data-collection, diagnostic, planning and implementation tools Provides a clear structure to engage multiple stakeholders in a complex process Helps prioritise the data-collection effort on what is really relevant for turning the tide on plastic pollution 6 Technical summary TECHNICAL SUMMARY The attention on plastic pollution has intensified in Actions to address hotspots are considered in terms of recent years among national governments and the interventions and instruments. global community. It remains a challenge to define an effective strategy to address plastic pollution in a sys- Interventions are tangible actions that can be taken to temic way, due to the complexity of the plastics value mitigate hotspots and are to be prioritised and designed chain and the unquantified magnitudes of impacts on to address the most influential hotspots in the plastic the environment, including marine ecosystems. value chain. There is a clear need for a better understanding of the Instruments are the ways an intervention may be practi- origins of major leaks of plastics as well as for more cally implemented through specific regulatory, financial accurate knowledge on which actions will make the or informative measures, in light of context factors such biggest impact. Currently, a number of organisations as country dynamics and existing measures. As an illus- and initiatives are looking to develop methodologies and trative example, a country may identify “mismanaged approaches to assess the flow and leakage of plastics. polyethylene bottles” as one of its hotspots. A relevant Stakeholders at national, sub-national and local levels intervention may be an increase in bottle collection rate. could benefit from a more harmonised quantification of A relevant instrument may be to instate a bottle return plastic leakage and impact, to establish a baseline for deposit scheme. benchmarking and tracking progress of interventions. Such assessment and tracking will need to be consis- tent, comparable and credible, based on a methodology Structure of the Guidance which harmonises existing tools and resources. The Guidance is structured around nine individual mod- ules, each with a set of supporting tools. The United Nations Environment Programme (UNEP), the International Union for Conservation of Nature These modules and tools facilitate a replicable workflow (IUCN), and the Life Cycle Initiative have co-developed that has been structured in three stages corresponding a harmonised methodological framework: the ‘National to three overarching questions: Guidance for Plastic Pollution Hotspotting and Shaping Action’ (hereinafter referred to as ‘the Guidance’). The 1 WHERE TO ACT? Guidance enables users at national, sub-national or local levels to prioritise actions through the identification of 2 WHAT TO DO? hotspots on plastic leakage and impacts along the full plastic value chain. 3 HOW TO DO IT? Key definitions These questions serve as a backbone for the Guidance, Some key terms used throughout the Guidance are with the answers provided in the form of Hotspots defined below: (referring to the “Where to act?” question), Interventions (referring to the “What to do?” question), and Instruments Hotspots refer to the most relevant plastic polymers, (referring to the “How to do it?” question). applications, industrial sectors, regions or waste man- agement stages causing the leakage of plastics into The workflow can also be viewed in terms of its technical the environment (including land, air, water and marine component (modules T1 toT6) and strategic component environment), as well as associated impacts, through (modules S1 to S3), which require contribution from the life cycle of plastic products. both technical experts and decision makers. 7 NATIONAL GUIDANCE FOR PLASTIC POLLUTION HOTSPOTTING AND SHAPING ACTION STAGE 1: explicit way considering stakeholders’ knowledge of Hotspots | WHERE TO ACT? the local policy and socio-economic context. This stage consists of three steps: data collection (modules T1 and T2), leakage and impact modelling (modules T3 to STAGE 2: T6), and hotspots prioritisation (module S1). Interventions | WHAT TO DO? The Guidance proposes a wealth of potential interven- 1. Data collection (T1-T2): obtaining data and informa- tions based on extensive research and consultations tion to better understand the plastic value chain at (see e.g. Wang et al., 2019), as well as a process to the production, consumption and disposal stages identify the current intervention gap, identify new of plastic products, as well as the waste manage- interventions and prioritise actions. Be it at a national, ment system. This step prepares data inputs and sub-national or local level, module S2 allows to focus information for the quantitative analysis at national, on relevant interventions and to tackle the full value sub-national or local level for hotspot identification in chain in a systemic way, including the sources, the use, modules T3-T6. and/or the end-of-life of the plastics. 2. Leakage and impact modelling (T3-T6): analysing the key sources of leakage and the associated potential STAGE 3: impacts for both macroplastics and microplastics. Instruments | HOW TO DO IT? Based on the data collected in T1-T2, modules T3-T6 Through this last stage within module S3, the Guidance yield a list of hotspots under five hotspot categories: offers insight on key strategies for stakeholder engage- polymer, application, industrial sector, regional, and ment and identification of appropriate regulatory, finan- waste management hotspots. cial or informative measures to successfully implement the planned interventions. 3. Prioritisation of hotspots (S1): engaging stakeholders to prioritise and formulate hotspots in a strategic and SCHEMATIC OF THE GUIDANCE: WORKFLOW, KEY ACTIVITIES AND MAIN DELIVERABLES DATA COLLECTION MODELLING Modelling polymer/application/ T3 sector hotspots T 1 Inventory of plastic flows TECHNICAL STREAM T4 Identifying waste management hotspots Characterisation of waste T5 Modelling regional hotpots T2 management T6 Assessing impacts 1 HOTSPOTS STAKEHOLDER ENGAGEMENT AND PRIORITISATION Where to act? S1 Actionable hotspots formulation 2 STRATEGIC STREAM STAKEHOLDER ENGAGEMENT AND PRIORITISATION INTERVENTIONS What to do ? S2 Intervention identification 3 INSTRUMENTS STAKEHOLDER ENGAGEMENT AND PRIORITISATION How to do it ? S3 Instrument alignment 8 Technical summary Users of the Guidance as practical tools to guide the user in the project. Three types of tools are proposed: (1) Input tools with The primary users of the Guidance are governments. They can use the results of the analysis to design, data collection templates and generic data libraries, plan and implement policy instruments and actions to (2) Assessment tools to carry out the necessary reduce plastic pollution. The Guidance is designed to modelling and calculations, and (3) Output tools that be used primarily at national level, but the approach generate graphs with results and support the user in can be adapted to accommodate policy makers at drawing conclusions. sub-national and local levels , as well as stakeholders The modules, spreadsheets and templates are subject from the private sector, academia, and NGOs. to change over time to accommodate improvements To apply the Guidance three teams are needed: and enrichments to the methodology, improved from the learnings of pilot projects and further applications in Æ A coordinator team to manage and coordinate the countries. The development of this Guidance has been project; it typically consists of regional agencies, carried out through a comprehensive desktop study of governmental bodies and a NGOs. existing methodologies and tools, consultation from Æ A technical team to specialise in the research and stakeholders and experts, and preliminary pilot testing. analytical aspects; it typically consists of research The latest version of the modules and tools will be institutes, universities, consultancy firms and experts made available on the website of the Life Cycle Initiative from the above mentioned institutions. (https://plastichotspotting.lifecycleinitiative.org/). Æ An enabler group of relevant stakeholders to pro- vide decision-making support to the Technical and Structure of the Introduction Coordinator teams. It should typically include mem- to the Guidance (this document) bers from the government, NGOs, representatives of This introductory document presents a high-level the private sector, local plastic industry and waste overview of the “National guidance for plastic pollution management associations. hotspotting and shaping action”. It provides the reader with an overview of the nine modules. The report is Three separate documents relate structured as follows: to the Guidance SECTION 1 The Guidance consists of three documents: introduces the knowledge gaps to address plastic pollution, and provides context for and objectives 1. Introduction to the Guidance (this document): This of the Guidance. document presents an overview of the methodolog- ical framework, its structure and workflow, serving as SECTION 2 provides an overview of the Guidance with its structure a manual and quick reference for users. and workflow. 2. Modules: The nine modules (T1-T6 and S1-S3) pro- SECTION 3 vide detailed scoping and definitions, data collection explains the key elements of the hotspot analysis. instructions, and modelling approaches on the three overarching questions addressed by the methodolog- SECTION 4 focuses on the prioritisation of interventions. ical framework (i.e. “Where to act?”, “What to do?”, and “How to do it?”). They are designed to provide techni- SECTION 5 cal experts with thorough explanation of the detailed introduces the process for developing instruments. modelling steps, mathematical formulas and param- SECTION 6 eters of the methodology. The modules are provided offers practical tips for applying the Guidance in the format of Microsoft PowerPoint documents. at the national, sub-national or local level. 3. Data-collection and modelling spreadsheets and SECTION 7 templates: These spreadsheets and templates serve consists of a glossary of the key terms used. 9 NATIONAL GUIDANCE FOR PLASTIC POLLUTION HOTSPOTTING AND SHAPING ACTION INTRODUCTION 1.1 Background However, gaps in addressing plastic pollution still exist in knowledge, policy, technology, awareness and financ- Addressing plastic pollution is an urgent need, consider- ing (UNEP, 2019). In terms of knowledge, specific gaps ing the rising level of plastics ending up in the environ- subsist regarding stocks, flows and pathways of plastic ment (i.e. the “leakage”) and the effects on ecosystems into the environment, while the biggest gap of knowl- as well as on human health (i.e. the “impacts”). There is edge concerns the impacts resulting from the leaked no single solution to plastic pollution. Plastic pollution plastic (Boucher et al., 2019). and related solutions to address this issue can be pro- filed as follow: Many governments, NGOs and private entities have either expressed interest and committed to act or have taken dif- 1. NUANCED ferent types of action, from eco-design efforts, to bans or solutions to this problem will beach-cleanups. A methodology to help prioritise actions By plastic leakage require multifaceted efforts and identify potential burden shifting from one problem to we refer to a quantity and collaboration among another would support decision makers to target the most of plastic entering stakeholders across the value effective actions. In this regard, UNEP, IUCN and the Life chain, including both upstream Cycle Initiative have partnered to develop this ‘National the oceans as well as and downstream. Guidance for Plastic Pollution Hotspotting and Shaping other environmental Action’, which aims to address this knowledge and solution compartments 2. SPECIFIC gap by identifying hotspots and shaping corresponding (e.g. rivers, soil, air). plastic is used in different forms actions built on the existing knowledge and available data. (polymers) and for many differ- ent applications1 with different 1.2 Overall goal of the Guidance leakage rates and impacts. The Guidance aims to provide a publicly available and By plastic impact harmonised methodological framework to facilitate the 3. CONTEXTUALISED we refer to a prioritisation of solutions. Stakeholders at national, sub-na- plastic pollution is a locality-spe- tional and local levels will be equipped with a prioritisation potential effect the cific issue. Topography, climate tool to identify key hotspots and drive sound actions to leaked plastic may conditions, local regulations, “close the plastic tap”2. It will allow consistent national have on ecosystems infrastructure in place and and sub-national baselines on marine plastics and plastic and/or human health. cultural behaviours are all key waste to be developed, for the monitoring and evaluation determinants of plastic leakage of interventions. and associated impacts. The Guidance is built on existing efforts to develop method- Plastic pollution is transboundary and cross-cutting, and ologies for mapping and quantifying plastic flows, leakage it requires systemic solutions covering policy, technol- and impacts, including the UNEP publication (UNEP, 2018), ogy, management, financing, knowledge and research, the recent IUCN publication (Boucher et al., 2019) and the awareness raising and behaviour change (UNEP, 2019). Given the growing awareness on plastics pollution and the urgency to address it, stakeholders across govern- The Guidance introduces a clear ments, the private sector, civil society and academia need to act quickly but effectively, often with only limited and simple science-based workflow resources available. to support the development of key interventions and instruments at the national, 1. Applications are products or packaging items that contain plastic. sub-national or local levels, to help 2. The expression “close the plastic tap” is used here to refer to alleviating the leakage, analogous to turn off a leaking faucet. turning the tide on plastic pollution. 10 Introduction Plastic Leak Project (PLP, 2019). This Guidance also builds 1.3  bjectives and added value O upon preliminary work for the assessment of plastic leak- of the Guidance age at national or supply chain levels, such as the PiPro Sea project3 for data collection, other IUCN projects and The Guidance leverages existing materials, resources reports4 , and the Plastic Leak Project5. and learned experiences to bridge knowledge gaps and ultimately contributes to preventing leakage of plastics Alongside the methodological development at the model- to the environment and subsequent impacts. ling level, the Guidance is also tested in several countries and geographies during 2019 and 2020, including Cyprus, More specifically, the Guidance provides a methodolog- Kenya, Mauritius, Menorca (Spain), Mozambique, South ical framework to answer three questions intended to Africa, Thailand, and Vietnam. The process of data collec- remediate plastic pollution: tion, stakeholder interviews and engagement at the local level provides rich and first-hand experience, for the further 1. WHERE TO ACT? improvement of the Guidance. Æ Identify which type of leakage and impact is predom- inant along the plastic value chain (see section 3.2.1) The primary users of the Guidance are public and private stakeholders at national level, but the approach can be Æ Identify where the leakage is occurring at national, adapted to accommodate sub-national and local users. sub-national and local levels (see section 3.2.2) This Guidance will contribute to the achievement of Æ Identify what is the key driver of the leakage along the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs), in particular waste management system (see section 3.2.3) SDG 12 which focuses on ensuring sustainable con- sumption and production patterns, and SDG 14 which 2. WHAT TO DO? aims to conserve and sustainably use the services of marine resources. The Guidance will also contribute to the Æ Prioritise interventions and assess their influence on implementation of the resolutions adopted at the fourth reducing plastic leakage and impacts, while also con- session of United Nations Environment Assembly (UNEA4) sidering potential environmental or socio-economic in March 2019, including but not limited to the resolution trade-offs (see section 4) on achieving sustainable consumption and production (UNEP/EA.4/Res.1), the resolution on marine plastic litter 3. HOW TO DO IT? and microplastics (UNEP/EA.4/Res.6) and the resolution Æ Implement relevant interventions via effective instru- on addressing single-use plastic products pollution (UNEP/ ments (see section 5) EA.4/Res.9). Key added value of the Guidance is summarised in Figure 1. FIGURE 1 ADDED VALUE OF THE GUIDANCE Addresses all types of plastic leakage, including: HOLISTIC Mismanaged waste (single use, packaging, others) Primary microplastics from abrasion (tyres, textiles, others) and intentionally used (cosmetics) Accidentally lost plastics (fishing nets, primary pellets) All plastic polymer and products (macroplastics and microplastics), and relevant sectors SYSTEMIC Helps key stakeholders to develop a systemic approach for solving the plastic pollution On one hand, the granularity allows to target specific polymers or plastic applications On the other hand, the life cycle perspective enables to encompass the full plastic value chain ACTIONABLE Guides the user through a reproducible workflow including data-collection, diagnostic, planning and implementation tools Provides a clear structure to engage multiple stakeholders in a complex process Helps prioritise the data-collection effort on what is really relevant for turning the tide on plastic pollution 3. Pioneer project SEA (PiPro SEA): PiPro SEA is a cross value chain 4. https://www.iucn.org/theme/marine-and-polar/our-work/ collaboration led by Nestlé and facilitated by the Ellen MacArthur close-plastic-tap-programme Foundations. PiPro SEA aimed to develop a standardised approach 5. https://quantis-intl.com/metrics/initiatives/plastic-leak-project/ for quantifying plastic packaging flows throughout the plastic value chain within a specific geography in the form of an Assessment Framework (AF). The AF was piloted in Indonesia and in India. 11 NATIONAL GUIDANCE FOR PLASTIC POLLUTION HOTSPOTTING AND SHAPING ACTION THE STRUCTURE OF THE GUIDANCE 2.1 Three overarching questions as the backbone of the workflow As stated in section 1.3, the Guidance aims to support stake- These questions serve as a backbone for the holders at national, sub-national and local levels to answer Guidance, with the answers provided in the form of three overarching questions related to plastic pollution: HOTSPOTS (referring to the “Where to act?” question), INTERVENTIONS (referring to the “What to do?” ques-  WHERE TO ACT? tion), and INSTRUMENTS (referring to the “How to do it?” question).  WHAT TO DO? The relationship among these three components is  HOW TO DO IT? shown in Figure 2. FIGURE 2: Relationship between hotspots, interventions and instruments EXAMPLES A component of the system that Low recycling rate for directly or indirectly contributes to the flexible packaging 1 magnitude of plastic leakage and/or HOTSPOTS Single-use plastic bags its impacts. It can be a component of the system, a type of product/polymer Low waste collection rate or a region within the country in rural areas Implement better eco- An action that can be taken to design + chemical recycling 2 mitigate the leakage from a given INTERVENTIONS Reduce plastic bag use in hotspot or reduce its impacts the country Increase waste collection Develop funding mechanism through EPR scheme 3 A practical way to implement the INSTRUMENTS Ban on plastic bags / introduce intervention and enable progress re-usable alternative Help local waste pickers to create a revenue stream At the heart of the methodology is the identification of conscious decisions (Boucher et al., 2018). Based on relevant and beneficial interventions that are supported these principles, this Guidance therefore addresses not and will be implemented by stakeholders. Such interven- only the technical aspects of the problem, but also the tions are identified based on the key hotspots identified strategic and organisational steps needed to develop at a national, sub-national or local level. And to carry out and converge on an actionable plan to tackle the most an intervention, appropriate and actionable instruments relevant hotspots identified. must be identified. The identification of hotspots is intended to be a stan- Following this logic, the tools provided to the users are dardised and replicable process. Given similar data organised in a series of nine modules that are divided in inputs, the technical modules - even when used by a technical stream (modules T1 to T6) and a strategic different users - should generate a highly similar set of stream (modules S1 to S3), as illustrated in Figure 3. potential hotspots. The approach is designed with a user-centric lens, i.e. The process of identifying interventions is intended to it aims to provide relevant information and motivation be more subjective, which will be conducted through to relevant stakeholders to make environmentally stakeholder consultation and validation. The Guidance 12 The structure of the guidance FIGURE 3: The three key stages of the Guidance (Hotspots/Interventions/Instruments), comprised of nine modules split into technical and strategic streams DATA COLLECTION MODELLING Modelling polymer/application/ T3 sector hotspots T 1 Inventory of plastic flows TECHNICAL STREAM T4 Identifying waste management hotspots Characterisation of waste T5 Modelling regional hotpots T2 management T6 Assessing impacts 1 HOTSPOTS STAKEHOLDER ENGAGEMENT AND PRIORITISATION Where to act? S1 Actionable hotspots formulation 2 STRATEGIC STREAM STAKEHOLDER ENGAGEMENT AND PRIORITISATION INTERVENTIONS What to do ? S2 Intervention identification 3 INSTRUMENTS STAKEHOLDER ENGAGEMENT AND PRIORITISATION How to do it ? S3 Instrument alignment and its modules provide a list of non-exhaustive and potential interven- A hotspot is defined as a tions by default, corresponding to broad categories of leakage and/or component of the system that impacts. However, the final decision on which interventions to focus on rests with the user of the Guidance and relevant stakeholders. directly or indirectly contributes to plastic leakage and its The evaluation and selection of appropriate instruments and the develop- associated impacts, and that ment of an action plan are organised as a decision-making process by a group of public and private sector stakeholders, with consideration of coun- can be acted upon to mitigate try-specific dynamics. Over time, the methodology can be used to establish this leakage. a baseline, set targets and regularly assess progress and achievement. An intervention is defined as 2.2 The nine technical and strategic modules a tangible action that can be taken to mitigate the leakage To help users answer the three overarching questions, the Guidance consists of a series of modules with logical connections, each of them from a given hotspot or reduce including a coherent set of tools (templates and spreadsheets) and its impacts. tutorials (slide decks). An instrument is defined as The application of these modules is to be carried out by three teams: a practical way to implement a Technical Team specialised in research and analytical aspects; an intervention and enable a Coordinator Team to manage the project and guide the other teams; progress through specific and an Enabler Group of relevant stakeholders to provide crucial input and advice to the technical and coordinator teams. More guidance on regulatory, financial or these teams is provided in section 6. informative measures. 13 NATIONAL GUIDANCE FOR PLASTIC POLLUTION HOTSPOTTING AND SHAPING ACTION The logic underpinning the Guidance ensures that each This modular approach will allow in the future to update module contributes to providing information to the other the Guidance as a better understanding of the assess- modules, hence building a consistent thread of informa- ment of plastic leakage and impacts becomes available tion along the workflow. Key inputs and outputs for each and the list of interventions is enriched. Each module module are illustrated in Figure 4. can be updated or improved without altering the whole logic and value of the Guidance. FIGURE 4: Key inputs and outputs per module INPUTS OUTPUTS Data collected on plastic sources INVENTORY Targeted plastic flows to be used T1 T3 and applications OF PLASTIC FLOWS for leakage calculation T4 T5 T6 Data collected on solid waste and CHARACTERISATION Waste management metrics to be T2 T3 waste-water management OF WASTE used for leakage calculation MANAGEMENT T4 T5 T6 Quantitative plastic flows and MODELLING List of potential polymer/application/ T1 T3 S1 waste management data POLYMER/ sector hotspots to be used for T2 APPLICATION/ actionable hotspots formulation SECTOR HOTSPOTS Additional application hotspots Regional waste collection T5 T6 identified and mismanagement rates Quantitative information from IDENTIFICATION List of waste management hotspots T1 T4 S1 polymer/application/sector hotspots OF WASTE to be used for actionable hotspots T2 and field visits MANAGEMENT formulation HOTSPOTS T3 Qualitative inputs for the definition T5 of archetypes Waste collection and mismanaged rates MODELLING Map of the leakage with definition T1 T5 S1 REGIONAL of archetypes T2 HOTPOTS Qualitative inputs for the definition of archetypes List of regional hotspots to be used T3 for actionable hotspots formulation T4 List of key applications for further ASSESSING IMPACTS Identification of additional T1 T6 T3 prioritisation application hotspots T2 Hotspots from technical modules ACTIONABLE Actionable hotspots formulated T3 S1 S2 HOTSPOT as a sentence combining information T4 FORMULATION from the five technical hotspot categories T5 List of actionable hotspots INTERVENTION Key interventions clustered S1 S2 S3 IDENTIFICATION by category List of key interventions by category INSTRUMENT KEY INTERVENTIONS WITH S2 S3 ALIGNMENT IMPLEMENTATION INSTRUMENTS 14 Where to act? Identification of HOTSPOTS WHERE TO ACT? IDENTIFICATION OF HOTSPOTS 3.1 The hotspotting rationale and process Hotspots are identified through the data-collection and modelling phases of the Guidance, by way of six technical modules (T1 to T6), and prioritised by applying strategic module 1 (S1) as illustrated in Figure 5. Hotspot identification is a core element of the Guidance WHAT IS LEAKING and the most technical part of the workflow. A hotspot is AND/OR CAUSING IMPACTS? regarded as a component of the system that directly or (i.e., which polymer and/or application) indirectly contributes to plastic leakage and its associ- ated impacts, and that can be acted upon to mitigate this WHERE IS IT LEAKING? leakage. A hotspot can either be a geographic location (i.e., in which location or from which in the country or an element of the plastic value chain. industrial sector) Identifying hotspots provides the answer to the question WHY IS IT LEAKING? “Where to act?”. In the context of plastic leakage, this (i.e., what aspect of our technosphere6 question can be split in three sub-questions: is in disrepair) FIGURE 5: Hotspots categorisation in this Guidance WHERE WHY is it leaking? is it leaking? WASTE MANAGEMENT Hotspots REGIONAL Hotspots T4 S1 WHAT ACTIONABLE T5 WHERE HOTSPOTS T3 FORMULATION PLASTIC WHY POLYMER Hotspots SECTOR T3 Hotspots T5 T3 PLASTIC APPLICATION Hotspots WHAT is leaking and/or causing impacts? 6. Technosphere is considered the part of the environment built by and for humans. 15 NATIONAL GUIDANCE FOR PLASTIC POLLUTION HOTSPOTTING AND SHAPING ACTION Comprehensive answers to these three questions are level, by way of technical module T3. This quantitative essential to generate actionable information and to analysis covers common polymers (PP, PET, PS, PVC, identify relevant interventions and instruments. HDPE, LDPE, polyester and synthetic rubber) and clus- ters other polymer types in a category labelled “other”. Firstly, results for each hotspot category are generated by This polymer hotspot information could typically inform aggregating available data and modelling where relevant and help prioritise the improvement of the waste collec- information is missing to yield potential hotspots. For each tion and management at a national, sub-national or local hotspot type, the prioritisation is based on criteria con- level, including recycling strategies. sidering leakage magnitude and potential environmental impacts. Prioritisation allows to focus on the most relevant Application hotspots - The plastic application hotspot hotspots/interventions/instruments. category accounts for plastic applications that are most likely to increase plastic leakage into oceans or other Secondly, the five categories provide a systemic view of environmental compartments and/or are suspected plastic leakage and associated impacts to identify key of generating environmental or human health impacts hotspots at a national, sub-national or local level. When from the leakage. Plastic application refers to a product working at national level, it is encouraged to increase the or packaging partially or completely made of plastic. granularity of the analysis by defining several archetypes Common examples of applications include straws, to reflect different contexts potentially calling for differ- grocery bags, beverage bottles, and fishing nets. An ent solutions. An archetype is defined as a category of inventory of plastic applications is defined in module T1, areas within the country where the waste generation rate and their associated leakage is calculated in module T3. and the waste management infrastructure are considered For application hotspots, a qualitative assessment of homogeneous. Urban areas, rural areas and coastal areas the potential environmental impacts is also proposed, could be considered examples of archetypes. as described in module T6. The outputs of the applica- Lastly, a final step of reformulation is necessary to yield tion hotspots are intended to raise awareness among a list of explicit and actionable hotspots that can be decision makers, producers, retailers and final users easily communicated. on uses that are most prone to leakage, as well as to flag specific applications that are suspected of causing The following sections delve deeper into each step of environmental impacts (e.g., loss of marine biodiversity the hotspotting process. Section 3.2 introduces each generated through entanglement or suffocation in hotspot category by describing how modules are used marine environment). This application hotspot infor- to build hotspot information; section 3.3 explains how mation could typically help prioritise regulations and archetypes are defined, and eventually section 3.4 incentives on specific products (e.g. the ban on specific specifies the approach to come up with reformulated plastic applications, or the implementation of deposit actionable hotspots. schemes). Sector hotspots - The sector hotspot category accounts 3.2 The five categories of hotspots for industrial sectors with the highest contribution to plastic leakage, either in absolute quantity or relative to In this section, hotspot categories are described further, the plastic waste generated within the sector. The sector by classification of the hotspot as either a plastic mass hotspot supplements the polymer and application balance assessment (polymer, application and sector hotspots with several attributes: hotspot) (section 3.2.1), a geographic assessment (regional hotspots) (section 3.2.2), or a qualitative 1. It does not only account for the leakage in the form of assessment of waste management practices (waste macroplastics but also in the form of microplastics; management hotspots) (section 3.2.3). 2. It provides by sector a split between short lasting 3.2.1 Polymer, application and sector (< 1-year lifetime) and long lasting (> 1 year lifetime) hotspots products embedding or made of plastic; What key information are we looking for? 3. It also encompasses industrial waste management, Polymer, application and sector hotspots intend to answer to complement the information about household the question “what is leaking and/or causing impacts?”. waste management. Each of these hotspot categories is described below. The intention of the sector hotspots is to provide indus- Polymers hotspots - The plastic polymer hotspot cate- tries with useful information to help them act together gory accounts for polymers involved in plastic leakage with value chain partners. Sector hotspot category through an assessment of plastic flows at the polymer includes by default ten sectors, but can be complemented 16 Where to act? Identification of HOTSPOTS with additional sectors based on user need and data A default list of the components covered by each of availability. The sectors used by default are: Packaging, the categories cited above is provided in Table 1. This Automotive & Transportation, Construction, Electrical list is non-exhaustive and may change over time. & Electronics, Medical, Fishing, Agriculture, Textiles, Tourism and Others. TABLE 1: Default list of components in each hotspot category HOTSPOT CATEGORY DEFAULT LIST OF COMPONENTS POLYMERS PP, PET, PS, PVC, HDPE, LDPE, Polyester, Synthetic rubber, and Others APPLICATIONS Bags, Bottles, Lids & caps, Crates & boxes, Cups, Cutlery, Straws, Food packaging, Film & packaging containing non-food products, Household/hygienic articles, Fishing nets, and Others7 SECTORS Packaging, Automotive & Transportation, Construction, Electrical & Electronics, Medical, Fishing, Agriculture, Textiles, Tourism, and Others How are hotspots modelled and prioritised? Although polymer, application and sector hotspot cate- they share a common data structure and follow the same gories convey quite different pieces of information, they hotspot prioritisation procedure, which is described rely on the same mass balance approach. Consequently, hereafter. DATA STRUCTURE AND LEAKAGE Waste Import Change in stock CALCULATION For each element of the hotspot category (a specific polymer, application or industrial sector), we establish (thousand tonnes/year) Export of primary and and products Import of products Waste Export a mass balance between plastic inputs and outputs. Generally, inputs include production and imports of Recycling all kinds, while outputs encompass waste generation Properly Import and production of primary disposed and export of all kinds. Outputs also include the Improperly disposed Total quantity of plastics that is leaking in the environment. waste This leakage is derived from the total waste Uncollected generated by first applying a loss rate to assess the quantity of plastic lost along the waste management Leakage system, to which we then apply a release rate in INPUT OUTPUT order to estimate the quantity of plastic leaking to the environment. More details about this calculation COMPONENT COMPONENT process are available in the practical tools supplied within the Guidance and in the PLP guide8. FIRST HOTSPOTTING STAGE BY ABSOLUTE 3 highest QUANTITY OF LEAKAGE thousands tonnes Figure “data structure” p.17 contributors considered as Once plastic material flows are established for all hotspots elements in a hotspot category, results are ranked based on their leakage in absolute quantity. At this stage, the three highest contributors are considered as hotspots9. Type of Polymer 7. This list is indicative and will be adjusted based on the context of the area under study. 8. https://quantis-intl.com/report/the-plastic-leak-project-guidelines/ Figure “first hotspotting stage” p.17 9. This is an arbitrary number chosen to yield a manageable number of hotspots; it can be increased based on user preference. 17 NATIONAL GUIDANCE FOR PLASTIC POLLUTION HOTSPOTTING AND SHAPING ACTION Ratio between SECOND HOTSPOTTING STAGE BY RELATIVE leakage and total AMOUNT OF LEAKAGE waste generated Each element is then evaluated on its relative leakage rate, defined as the ratio between leakage and total waste generated. The three highest 22% 13% contributors in relative terms are also considered as 12% hotspots. thousand tonnes 8% The combination of a ranking based on the leakage in absolute and relative value allows to further prioritise the hotspots: a hotspot ranking among the top three contributors both in absolute AND relative terms should be regarded as crucial. Potential environmental THIRD HOTSPOTTING STAGE BY POTENTIAL impacts identified from IMPACTS module T6 Specifically, for application hotspots, a third prioritisation approach is used to determine if a plastic application is liable to generate severe 22% environmental impacts (e.g., plastic commonly 12% 13% found on beaches and/or prone to entanglement). thousand tonnes Figure “second hotspotting stage” p.18 A symbol is then stamped next to hotspots that 8% are most harmful to the environment. A tool for the assessment of these impacts is provided in module T6. PET 3000 PP 5% POLYESTER 2500 HDPE SYNTHETIC RUBBER Figure “third 2000 hotspotting 9% stage” p.18 LDPE 4% thousand tonnes PS 1500 11% PVC 5% OTHER 1000 9% 3% 9% 7% 500 3 highest leakage contributors OR leakage intensity Highest leakage 0 contributors AND PET PP Polyester LDPE HDPE PS Synthetic Rubber PVC Other leakage intensity Figure “hotspots summary” p.18 HOTSPOTS SUMMARY Hotspots are eventually summarised in a list where they are highlighted by colours in accordance with level of priority. The selected hotspots (highlighted in light or dark pink on the figure) are retained for the next stages of hotspot formulation (module S1) and intervention identification (module S2). 18 Where to act? Identification of HOTSPOTS Visualisation and critical appraisal of hotspot results The final visualisation of hotspot results is illustrated in Figure 6, by taking polymer hotspots as an example. FIGURE 6: Example of visualisation for polymer hotspots results Quality Score 1.5 1 2 3 4 5 INPUT 3000 Waste Import 5% Import of products 2500 Import and production of primary OUTPUT 2000 9% Charge in stock 4% thousand tonnes Waste Export 1500 Export of primary and products 11% Recycling 5% Properly disposed 1000 9% 3% Improperly disposed 9% 7% Uncollected 500 Leakage 3 highest leakage contributors OR 0 PET PP Polyester LDPE HDPE PS Synthetic Rubber PVC Other leakage intensity Highest leakage contributors AND leakage intensity Figure 6, p.19 In addition to providing a clear overview of hotspots 3.2.2 Regional hotspots within a category, the visualisation of results covers What key information are we looking for? information that is useful to understand the char- The regional hotspot category identifies geographical acteristics of plastic value chain be it a polymer, an application or plastic originating from a specific indus- areas with the highest leakage potential within a country. trial sector. Furthermore, a “hotspot quality score” is The regional hotspots identification, which is performed indicated to evaluate the reliability of hotspot analysis in module T5, relies on Geographic Information System prior to identifying appropriate interventions. A hotspot (GIS) tools and depends on several variables including quality score below 3 indicates that hotspot results population density, waste generation rates, waste collec- are robust enough to support decisions about relevant tion rates, share of plastic in the waste stream, distance interventions, while a hotspot quality score above 3 to shore and main rivers, catchment run-off, as well as suggests the data sources or the modelling approach topographic patterns, location of touristic areas, informal used to generate the results may require improvements settlements, dumpsites and fishing harbours when avail- prior to any meaningful decision on interventions. More able. The aim of this category is to provide governments details on the scoring methodology are provided in with valuable geographical information on plastic leakage Section 3.5. in terms of locality or watershed of origin. In the example given in Figure 6, PP and LDPE are con- sidered crucial hotspots since they rank among the top How are hotspots modelled and prioritised? three leakage contributors in terms of absolute value The regional hotspots are prioritised based on leakage and relative leakage rate, while HDPE and Polyester are intensity and are represented on a map. The hotspots considered hotspots with regards to their contribution to are a combination of critical variables including surface leakage in either absolute or relative terms. In this case, runoff intensity in a watershed, population density inside the hotspot quality score, which is above 3, indicates districts or localities and their distance to shore, that that data sources or modelling require improvements ultimately form archetypes. The hotspots are prioritised prior to any decision on possible interventions. based on the leakage quantity. 19 NATIONAL GUIDANCE FOR PLASTIC POLLUTION HOTSPOTTING AND SHAPING ACTION Visualisation and critical appraisal of hotspot results Figure 7 illustrates the final visualisation for regional hotspots. The hotspots are displayed with a colour intensity scheme as a function of leakage quantity. FIGURE 7: Example of regional hotspots visualisation Quality Score 2.6 1 2 3 4 5 FIGURE 8: Example of waste management hotspot representation SOURCE WASTE Plastic waste per capita Share of plastic in waste Plastic waste import Plastic waste export GENERATION generation stream WASTE Segregation of Segregation of Segregation by the Public infrastructure SEGREGATION compostable waste recyclable plastics informal sector availability COLLECTION WASTE Formal collection of Formal collection of Value of recycled Value of non-recycled COLLECTION municipal waste industrial waste plastics plastics LEAKAGE WHILE WAITING FOR Design of waste bins Frequency of collection Climatic conditions Other (e.g. animals) COLLECTION WASTE RELATED Littering driven by Littering due to a lack of Frequency of illegal Frequency of fly-tipping BEHAVIOURS cultural habits public waste bins burning WASTE Share of waste in Share of waste in MANAGEMENT Informal recycling Recycling capacity dumpsites landfills INFRASTRUCTURE END-OF-LIFE Negative contribution to the leakage POST-LEAKAGE Frequency of city Frequency of waterway Frequency of coastal Frequency of other clean- MANAGEMENT cleaning and sweeping cleaning clean-up up activities Neutral contribution Positive contribution WASTE WATER Management of run-off Waste water treatment Waste water collection Fate of WWTP sludges MANAGEMENT waters efficiency Not assessed 20 Fig 8, p.20 Where to act? Identification of HOTSPOTS A hotspot quality score is also applied to this category The waste management hotspot identification intends of hotspots to determine if the results can be used to to illustrate the key drivers of the leakage and answer prioritise interventions. Once it is established that the the question “why is it leaking?”. results are consistent with the actual situation, a list of the localities contributing the most to plastic leakage How are hotspots modelled and prioritised? can be derived from regional hotspots to yield targeted Waste management hotspots are identified throughout interventions in those localities. the technical modules and also from the experience of the practitioner on the field. The intention of the waste 3.2.3 Waste management hotspots management hotspots is to provide a clear overview of What key information are we looking for? what can be improved along the waste management The waste management hotspot category aims at system to reduce or avoid plastic leakage. identifying elements within the waste management and infrastructure chain that have critical influence on Visualisation and critical appraisal of hotspots results plastic leakage. These elements can fall into different The hotspots are represented in a matrix as shown in sections of the waste management system including Figure 8, with each individual box corresponding to one waste generation, waste segregation, waste collection, element of the waste management system. The determi- waste management behaviours, waste management nation of whether each box constitutes a hotspot can be infrastructure, post leakage management and waste based on a quantitative or qualitative assessment. Each water management. They may contribute positively (i.e., element (one box of the matrix) is considered as a hotspot a component of the waste management system that if it is identified as contributing to the leakage. For exam- given the context mainly contributes to mitigating the ple, an element of the waste management (e.g. plastic per plastic leakage and impacts), negatively (i.e., a compo- capita consumption) is considered as a hotspot when its nent of the waste management system that given the corresponding metric value goes beyond a specific thresh- context mainly contributes to worsening the plastic old, be it qualitative or quantitative (e.g. average plastic per leakage), or neutrally. capita consumption for countries of similar income level). FIGURE 9: Example of representation of the hotspots for different archetypes Rural area WASTE Plastic waste per capita Share of plastic in waste Plastic waste import Plastic waste export GENERATION generation stream WASTE Segregation of Segregation of Segregation by the Public infrastructure SEGREGATION compostable waste recyclable plastics informal sector availability WASTE Formal collection of Formal collection of Value of recycled Value of non-recycled COLLECTION municipal waste industrial waste plastics plastics LEAKAGE WHILE WAITING FOR Design of waste bins Frequency of collection Climatic conditions Other (e.g. animals) COLLECTION WASTE RELATED Littering driven by Littering due to a lack of Frequency of illegal Frequency of fly-tipping BEHAVIOURS cultural habits public waste bins burning WASTE Share of waste in Share of waste in MANAGEMENT Informal recycling Recycling capacity dumpsites landfills INFRASTRUCTURE Main city POST-LEAKAGE Frequency of city Frequency of waterway Frequency of coastal Frequency of other clean- MANAGEMENT cleaning and sweeping cleaning clean-up up activities WASTE WATER Management of run-off Waste water treatment Waste water collection Fate of WWTP sludges MANAGEMENT waters efficiency Area Urban area surrounding main cities WASTE Plastic waste per capita Share of plastic in waste Plastic waste import Plastic waste export GENERATION generation stream WASTE Segregation of Segregation of Segregation by the Public infrastructure SEGREGATION compostable waste recyclable plastics informal sector availability Other urban WASTE Formal collection of Formal collection of Value of recycled Value of non-recycled COLLECTION municipal waste industrial waste plastics plastics LEAKAGE WHILE WAITING FOR Design of waste bins Frequency of collection Climatic conditions Other (e.g. animals) areas COLLECTION WASTE RELATED Littering driven by Littering due to a lack of Frequency of illegal Frequency of fly-tipping BEHAVIOURS cultural habits public waste bins burning WASTE Share of waste in Share of waste in Rural area 1 MANAGEMENT Informal recycling Recycling capacity dumpsites landfills INFRASTRUCTURE POST-LEAKAGE Frequency of city Frequency of waterway Frequency of coastal Frequency of other clean- MANAGEMENT cleaning and sweeping cleaning clean-up up activities Rural area 2 WASTE WATER Management of run-off Waste water treatment Waste water collection Fate of WWTP sludges MANAGEMENT waters efficiency Harbour area Fishing WASTE GENERATION Plastic waste import Plastic waste export Plastic waste per capita generation Share of plastic in waste stream harbours WASTE Segregation of Segregation of Segregation by the Public infrastructure SEGREGATION compostable waste recyclable plastics informal sector availability WASTE Formal collection of Formal collection of Value of recycled Value of non-recycled COLLECTION municipal waste industrial waste plastics plastics LEAKAGE WHILE WAITING FOR Design of waste bins Frequency of collection Climatic conditions Other (e.g. animals) COLLECTION WASTE RELATED Littering driven by Littering due to a lack of Frequency of illegal Frequency of fly-tipping BEHAVIOURS cultural habits public waste bins burning WASTE Share of waste in Share of waste in MANAGEMENT Informal recycling Recycling capacity dumpsites landfills INFRASTRUCTURE POST-LEAKAGE Frequency of city Frequency of waterway Frequency of coastal Frequency of other clean- MANAGEMENT cleaning and sweeping cleaning clean-up up activities WASTE WATER Management of run-off Waste water treatment Waste water collection Fate of WWTP sludges MANAGEMENT waters efficiency Fig 9, p.21 21 NATIONAL GUIDANCE FOR PLASTIC POLLUTION HOTSPOTTING AND SHAPING ACTION 3.3 DEFINITION OF ARCHETYPES As plastic use, waste generation rates and waste man- Once actionable hotspots have been formulated and agement practices can vary widely within a country, it named, they are numbered and organised into a table is highly recommended to increase the granularity of (see example in Table 2) the analysis and define archetypes. Each archetype is then summarised within a dashboard which includes a Actionable hotspots are then clustered into a framework concise representation of the results from each hotspot to characterise whether the hotspot is generic or specific, category. At this stage, hotspots are highlighted accord- and identify the key driver along the plastic value chain ing to their contribution (either in absolute or relative (at source, collection or end-of-life stage). The clustering terms) to leakage. logic is presented in Figure 11. Figure 9 shows a representation of this archetype anal- ysis presenting a summary of the different hotspots for different archetypes. This archetype view is the last stage of the technical An archetype is an area within the stream, displaying the information generated across the five plastic hotspot categories in a synthesised way. country where the plastic use, the However, information at this stage is not yet easily action- waste generation rate and the waste able since results are scattered across different graphs management infrastructure are and figures without clear connection from one hotspot considered homogeneous type to the other. The following section, hotspot formula- tion, is intended to make the hotspot list more actionable. 3.4 F  ormulation of actionable hotspots Actionable hotspots formulation corresponds to the first FIGURE 10: stage of the strategic stream (module S1) as it relies on Describing and naming of an actionable user interpretation of the hotspots in the 5 categories hotspot identified in modules T3 to T6. The list of actionable hotspots should provide a comprehensive view of the hotspots across the plastic value chain and within the country. It is highly encouraged to proceed to this formu- WHAT lation stage in an iterative way by engaging stakeholders is leaking and/or WHERE causing impacts? is it leaking? from the enabler group to eventually reach a consensus. The objective is to provide a limited number of actionable hotspots (between approximately 10 and 30), which then can be used to feed the intervention identification process. Small plastic items of all sorts Each actionable hotspot should consist of one simple are littered in the whole country sentence clarifying what type of plastic is concerned due to cultural behaviours (e.g., a polymer type or an application), where the leakage is expected to come from (either in terms of a and the lack of garbage bins geographical region or from different industrial sectors) and why the leakage happens, by pinpointing possible key drivers across the waste management system. WHY Figure 10 illustrates how an actionable hotspot name is it leaking? is compiled based on that information, highlighting with a colour code the core elements of the sentence. The question of what is leaking can include information on the magnitude of leakage and the environmental impacts associated with this leakage. 10. https://www.ecoinvent.org/files/2014_-_muller_et_al_-_ijlca_-_pedigree_approach_in_ecoinvent_3.pdf 22 Where to act? Identification of HOTSPOTS TABLE 2: Excerpt of table listing actionable hotspots # Actionable hotspot 1 PP and Polyester are the most used and wasted polymers in the country, and are not recycled 2 LDPE is consumed in high quantity by households in the country, while the recycling capacity for this polymer is dedicated to imported and industrial LDPE only 3 Plastic bag is widely used in the country as a result of the take-away culture and lack of recycling for this type of application FIGURE 11: Clustering of actionable hotspots WHAT/WHERE GENERIC SPECIFIC # (Concerns all plastic types (Concerns specific plastic and all regions) types or regions) WHY SOURCE 1 (production/trade) COLLECTION 2 (pre/post leakage) END OF LIFE 3 (treatment/recycling) 23 NATIONAL GUIDANCE FOR PLASTIC POLLUTION HOTSPOTTING AND SHAPING ACTION 3.5 Hotspotting quality assessment improved. This quality assessment concerns both the data-collection phase (T1-T2) as well as the modelling In order to draw conclusions from the identified plastic of leakage and impact hotspots (T3-T6), and is based leakage hotspots and eventually suggest meaningful on a pedigree approach inspired by Life cycle invento- interventions to national authorities, it is crucial to ensure ries databases10. that hotspot results are robust, reliable and actionable. This approach uses a combination of multiple criteria This section provides guidance to support a quality which are specifically applied at different process assessment procedure and help the user define if the stages, including data collection, modelling of individual data quality is sufficient to support the needed con- metrics and aggregation of these metrics within the clusions and to precisely identify which data must be hotspot graph, as illustrated in Figure 12. FIGURE 12: Overview of the quality assessment procedure RAW DATA  MODELLING  FINAL METRIC  HOTSPOT Reliability Geographic correlation Redundancy Temporal correlation Granularity (polymer/application/sector) Pedigree Matrix Calculation (metric score) of the hotspot score Based on a pedigree matrix (Figure 13), a first set of Each of these criteria is rated from 1 to 5; 1 meaning that criteria applied at different levels determines an uncer- the data is of high quality regarding this specific criterion, tainty score when converting raw data into final metrics, and 5 suggesting that the data is of very poor quality. called the metric score. These criteria include: The redundancy criterion, which assesses if data for a Æ Reliability – relates to the level of trust one can have given final metric can be obtained via distinct calcula- in the data source, based on acquisition methods and tion routes and remain coherent, is eventually combined verification procedures used to obtain the data. with the previously established metric score to yield a Æ Temporal correlation – represents the difference hotspot quality score. A score below 3 implies that the between the year of study and the year of obtained data. hotspot results are reliable enough to derive meaning- Æ Geographic correlation – represents the geographical ful interventions towards plastic leakage abatement. discrepancies between the area of study and the Otherwise, a hotspot score equal to or above 3 signals obtained data. the need to improve the hotspot model either by col- Æ Granularity – relates to differences in granularity lecting better data or by using a different modelling between data needed and the obtained data. approach. The hotspot quality scores are used to ascer- tain which data require further investigation on the field, and eventually engage stakeholders with clear requests on data improvement. 24 Where to act? Identification of HOTSPOTS FIGURE 13: Detailed pedigree matrix 1 2 3 4 5 BEST GOOD AVERAGE BAD WORST RELIABILITY Verified (e.g. peer- Verified data based Unverified data Documented Undocumented reviewed or highly on calculation, from measurement estimate estimate trustable source) multiple sources or calculation and/ data based on showing coherent or from single measurements, values source multiple sources showing coherent values TEMPORAL Less than 3 years of Adapted to the year Adapted to the Not adapted to the Not adapted CORRELATION difference with date of reference based year of reference year of reference to the year of study on clear population based on unclear (< 10 years old of reference or GDP correlation population or GDP data) (> 10 years old correlation data) GEOGRAPHICAL Data is complete Data extrapolated Data extrapolated Data extrapolated Data from CORRELATION and representative to the area of study to the area of to the area of unknown of the area of study based on weighted study assuming study in spite of area or with average (multiple homogeneous un-homogeneous very different archetypes) conditions conditions conditions GRANULARITY Data is complete Modelling based Modelling based Modelling Modelling and representative on allocation rules on allocation based on global based on of the polymer/ (comprehensive rules (non average estimates application/sector and specific) comprehensive or of interest unspecific) 25 NATIONAL GUIDANCE FOR PLASTIC POLLUTION HOTSPOTTING AND SHAPING ACTION WHAT TO DO? PRIORITISATION OF INTERVENTIONS Interventions are tangible actions that can be taken to reduce plastic leakage or its impacts. By tangible, we mean that interventions are actions that directly affect physical flows in the system (mainly related to material flows and/ or infrastructure). As a consequence, the outcomes of interventions should be easily measurable; this has to be kept in mind when framing and phrasing interventions. MATCH SPECIFY PRIORITISE INPUT OUTPUT 1 2 3 Prioritise interventions (from S1) Match hotspots with based on leakage (from S2) Design additional mitigation potential and List of interventions from specific interventions List of a generic list potential unintended actionable consequences prioritised hotspots interventions Prioritisation of interventions is based on a three-step among plastic users; from polymer manufacturing process. to post-leakage clean-up. To reduce plastic leakage and remediate the environment, a blend of interven- (1) Match the hotspots with interventions by selecting tions along the value chain will be needed to address relevant interventions from a repository of generic hotspots with a holistic approach. For this reason, the interventions gathered from previous works and key interventions identified within the methodology are literature review. presented in six main categories. (2) Specify the interventions to the national context The categories of interventions are summarised in by refining the existing interventions and designing Figure 14. They follow a 6Rs structure that encapsulate new ones when needed. the entire plastic value chain and can be divided into: (3) Prioritise the interventions based on a two dimen- Æ Interventions at product manufacturing and use sion map picturing on one axis their plastic leakage phases, aiming at Re-designing products through mitigation potential, and on the other axis the eco-design to reduce or substitute the amount of presence/absence of any suspected unintended embedded plastic and Reducing the quantities of consequences. plastic used through lifestyle change and shifting from single-use to reuse model; 4.1  atch hotspots with generic M Æ Interventions on waste infrastructure and manage- interventions ment, mainly aiming at Recuperating plastic waste The Guidance provides a repository of common interven- through improved collection systems, Renovating tions based on experience from previous work, literature waste infrastructures by refurbishing existing facilities review and learnings from the piloting of the Guidance in or building new ones and increasing Recycling through several countries. This preliminary list of interventions better product design that facilitates disassembly; aims at facilitating the brainstorming phase of the stra- tegic workshop on defining key areas of interventions Æ Interventions at the post-leakage stage, mainly connected to actionable hotspots. aiming at Removing plastic from the environment through clean-up operations. A core philosophy underpinning the Guidance is that potential interventions may target all relevant stages The repository of interventions is then enriched with of the value chain and need actions from relevant new interventions when the context calls for different stakeholders: from producer to retailer and consumer; actions to address specific hotspots. This procedure is from what is provided to consumers to lifestyle changes described in section 4.2. 26 What to do? Prioritisation of INTERVENTIONS FIGURE 14: Clusterisation of the different categories of interventions RE-DESIGN SUSTAINABLE PRODUCTION Design plastic products with highly recoverable and recyclable materials while improving reusability and repairability, and rethink sustainable business models to minimise risks of plastic leakage PRODUCT MANUFACTURING AND USE REDUCE SUSTAINABLE CONSUMPTION AND LIFESTYLES Reduce demand for & use of problematic or unnecessary plastic materials and products RECUPERATE WASTE COLLECTION SYSTEMS Maximise collection of plastic waste RENOVATE WASTE INFRASTRUCTURE WASTE INFRASTRUCTURE Build capacity to increase efficiency of proper treatment and final disposal AND MANAGEMENT RECYCLE PLASTIC RECYCLING Increase recycling rates through design and infrastructure that facilitate better segregation, collection, disassembly, recycling and recovery REMOVE CLEAN-UP SOLUTIONS POST LEAKAGE Post-leakage cleaning of the environment MANAGEMENT 27 NATIONAL GUIDANCE FOR PLASTIC POLLUTION HOTSPOTTING AND SHAPING ACTION 4.2 Specify and balance the interventions Even though the modelling component of the Guidance supplemented with additional interventions when no (i.e., T3-T6) follows a structured and replicable action from the predefined set of interventions can be approach, the identification of solutions to a highly taken to tackle a specific hotspot. While each hotspot interconnected and systemic issue cannot be auto- requires a dedicated action, a single intervention can mated and user interpretation of the hotpots is needed. mitigate multiple hotspots. For this reason, this stage is part of the strategic stream of the Guidance and should include the involvement While fleshing out the list of interventions, one should of a wide variety of stakeholders within the “enabler aim for a balanced subset of interventions across the group” and by performing iterative brainstorming ses- different categories described in Figure 14. Indeed, sions (refer to section 6). As explained in section 4.1, focusing only on technology-driven solutions would the Guidance facilitates this process by providing a fall short of solving the issue if not followed by sys- list of predefined interventions to help users launch temic and organisational changes. Table 3 illustrates a the brainstorming phase. However, this list must be non-exhaustive list of interventions. TABLE 3: Non-exhaustive list of interventions LEVEL 1 LEVEL 2 LEVEL 3 z Increase compliance with OCS standard (Operation Clean Sweep) SUSTAINABLE z Design for less material use (plastic) PRODUCTION z Design for reuse z Design for lower loss rate (e.g. avoid detachable parts, reduce loss of microfibers) z Reduce littering in urban areas/ rural areas/ SUSTAINABLE at sea (e.g. plastic waste thrown overboard CONSUMPTION by fishermen) AND LIFESTYLES z Reduce demand for and consumption of single-use plastic products/packaging, in particular on-the-go z Increase the frequency of waste collection in areas prone to plastic leakage WASTE z Increase plastic segregation at household COLLECTION level/ in public space (sorting waste bins)/ SYSTEMS in factories/ in sorting stations z Ensure plastics with low recycling value INTERVENTIONS are collected z Increase capacity for proper waste disposal (e.g. sanitary landfills) WASTE z Ensure proper maintenance of waste INFRASTRUCTURE management equipment z Increase the share of treated waste water (e.g. by improve sewer system and WWTP) z Increase recycling capacity for domestic PLASTIC plastic waste RECYCLING z Develop solutions to avoid contamination of plastics to be recycled CLEAN-UP z Retrieve lost fishing gears from the marine SOLUTIONS environment z Clean beaches and/or polluted areas 28 What to do? Prioritisation of INTERVENTIONS 4.3 Prioritise the interventions Once a thorough list of interventions has been identified, environmental or socio-economic trade-offs (e.g., a prioritisation stage is proposed in order to identify the substitution from plastic to another material may most relevant ones. As presented in Figure 15, a simple generate additional environmental impacts such as framework is proposed to prioritise ideas, and further GHG emissions). guidance on this assessment is provided in module S2. It is expected that this approach allows for prioritising a In short, the prioritisation considers two criteria: specific subset of interventions and achieve consensus Æ Mitigation potential: high mitigation potential actions among stakeholders. are those that contribute to meaningful reductions of The next stage of the Guidance is geared toward helping plastic leakage and impacts. stakeholders converge on the most efficient instruments Æ Unintended consequences: highly consequential to implement the prioritised interventions. actions are those most likely to generate unintended FIGURE 15: Framework for the prioritisation of interventions Mitigation potential PRIORITY INTERVENTIONS HIGH plastic leakage mitigation Intervention 1 MEDIUM plastic leakage mitigation Intervention 3 Intervention 2 LOW plastic leakage mitigation Unintended Consequences HIGH MEDIUM LOW with acute with potential with no environmental environmental environmental and socio-economic and socio-economic and socio-economic trade-off trade-off trade-off 29 NATIONAL GUIDANCE FOR PLASTIC POLLUTION HOTSPOTTING AND SHAPING ACTION HOW TO DO IT? CONVERGING ON INSTRUMENTS An instrument is defined as a practical way of implementing an intervention and monitoring progress. This can be achieved through specific regulatory, financial or informative measures.The process of converging on key instru- ments is based on 3 steps: MATCH SPECIFY PRIORITISE INPUT OUTPUT 1 2 3 (from S2) Complement and Prioritise instruments (from S3) Match hotspots with List of contextualise the based on feasibility and List of interventions from instruments for each synergies prioritised a generic list prioritised intervention interventions instruments Final list of the intervention/instrument pairs, connected to the hotspots (1) Match the interventions with instruments by 5.1 Match interventions and instruments selecting relevant instruments from a repository of Once interventions have been identified and prioritised generic instruments gathered from previous works in module S2, the coordinator team may proceed to the and literature review. final stage of the workflow, which is to identify relevant (2) Specify the instruments to the national context by instruments to carry out the interventions. This is a highly refining the existing instruments and designing new strategic step that is intended to be undertaken with a ones when needed. strong engagement from the enabler group. (3) Prioritise the instruments based on a two dimen- Six main categories of instruments are foreseen as sion map picturing on one axis their feasibility and described in Figure 16. on the other axis the potential for synergies (i.e. These categories include action-oriented instruments when one instrument serves multiple interventions such as guiding field data collection for knowledge cre- and harmonises well with instruments already in ation, promoting education and environmental campaigns place). on plastic pollution for awareness raising, building tar- A last stage is then needed to aggregate all information geted training programs for capacity building, developing from priority interventions (module S2) and instruments technological solutions to remove plastic waste from the (module S3) to create a list of prioritised intervention/ environment for technology innovation, introducing taxes instrument pairs that consist of the final outcome of on specific plastic products for economic tools, enforcing the Guidance. bans on specific plastic products for policy tools. 30 How to do it? Converging on INSTRUMENTS FIGURE 16: Six types of instruments KNOWLEDGE CREATION Create knowledge to better assess plastic leakage and impacts AWARENESS RAISING Raise awareness among stakeholders about plastic pollution CAPACITY BUILDING Mobilise resources and skills to tackle effectively plastic leakage INNOVATION Develop innovative technological solutions and/or business models to reduce plastic leakage and impacts ECONOMIC Influence behaviours regarding plastic pollution through economic incentives or disincentives POLICY / REGULATORY Formulate and implement policies and regulations to address effectively plastic pollution 5.2 Specify instruments cannot be automated and user interpretation of the Instruments identified in the first step should be refined interventions is needed. For this reason, this stage and contextualised when needed by re-phrasing and should involve once more a wide variety of stakeholders providing a better description. If needed and when inter- within the “enabler group” by performing iterative brain- ventions are not covered by any existing instrument, storming sessions (refer to section 6). new instruments should be designed. While out of the scope of the Guidance, this process Similarly to the specification of interventions should be complemented with extensive policy analysis (Section 4.2), the identification of appropriate instru- to map existing and already planned instruments to ments to a highly interconnected and systemic issue address plastic pollution. 31 NATIONAL GUIDANCE FOR PLASTIC POLLUTION HOTSPOTTING AND SHAPING ACTION 5.3 Prioritise the instruments Æ Feasibility: technical and socio-economic assess- ment of each instrument should be performed. We do For each intervention proposed in module S2, the core not assert a method to perform the assessment as team (Coordinator Team and Technical Team) will this is beyond the scope of the Guidance. The user identify possible instruments to enable the practical can decide on the method to use based on resources implementation of the action. These ideas will then be available. A by default qualitative assessment with further assessed with the support of the Enabler group. three levels is suggested. Module S3 supports the planning and proposed Æ Synergies: Some instruments may be beneficial to implementation of the selected interventions through multiple interventions, thus creating a positive syner- a guided process intended to help the relevant actors getic effect. This criterion does not only evaluate the to converge on appropriate instruments and eventually number of suggested interventions benefitting from an take actions. instrument, but also assess if the proposed instrument Once a thorough list of instruments has been identi- harmonises well with instruments already in place. fied and each intervention is covered, a prioritisation Based on the analysis carried out in modules S2 and S3, stage is required in order to identify the most relevant respectively yielding the most relevant interventions and ones. As presented in Figure 17, a simple framework is instruments, a list of the most promising pairs of inter- proposed to prioritise ideas, and further guidance on vention/instrument is then derived. This list consists of this assessment is provided in module S3. In short, the the final output of the Guidance and is intended to be prioritisation considers two criteria: communicated to decisions makers with the support of the enabler group. FIGURE 17: Framework for the prioritisation of instruments Synergies PRIORITY INSTRUMENTS HIGH Many interventions are positively affected by the instrument and the latter harmonises Instrument 1 well with pre-existing instruments MEDIUM Many interventions are positively affected by the instrument Instrument 3 Instrument 2 LOW Only few interventions are positively affected by the instrument Feasability LOW MEDIUM HIGH 32 Description of the Modules, Tools and Project organisation DESCRIPTION OF THE MODULES, TOOLS AND PROJECT ORGANISATION 6.1 Description of the modules and tools available The Guidance consists of a set of nine modules, including six technical modules and three strategic modules; modules and tools are accessible through the website of the Life Cycle Initiative (https://plastichotspotting.lifecy- cleinitiative.org/). The modules have a common structure, including: A set of introductive slides are provided to explain the module’s objectives and relation to other modules. Most importantly one slide summarises the key overarching questions of the module and intended output. p.33, image 1 “A set of introductive slides…” Logical workflow diagrams are provided to guide the user through a clear process. p.33, image 2 “Logical workflow diagrams …” 33 NATIONAL GUIDANCE FOR PLASTIC POLLUTION HOTSPOTTING AND SHAPING ACTION Data-collection templates are offered to structure and guide the data- collection process. Different templates are proposed for the different topics covered by the Guidance. Calculation equations and explanatory schemes are presented as the core of the Guidance. p.34, image 2 “Calculations equations …” Spreadsheets are provided as a guide for performing calculation required for hotspotting. p.34, image 3 “Spreadsheets…” 34 Description of the Modules, Tools and Project organisation Also, the Guidance includes three main types of colour coded slides. Core information, logical diagrams, key figures, references to the tools or equations p.35, image 1 “Core information…” Description, definitions and explanation in text format p.35, image 2 “Description, definitions …” Supportive or illustrative information / results or data-sources p.35, image 3 “Supportive or illustrative information …” 35 36 MODULES INPUT TOOLS ASSESMEMENT TOOLS OUTPUT TOOLS T1 INVENTORY OF Fisheries COMTRADE T1.4 PLASTIC FLOWS Inventory T1.1 T1.2 model T1.3 data extraction of data canvas Data sources Raw data A collection and data repository templates Waste CHARACTERISATION gaps T2.1 T2.2 model T2.3 T2 OF WASTE canvas MANAGEMENT MFA modelling T3.3 MODELLING Polymer quality assessment POLYMER/ Fisheries application/ T3 A leakage T3.1 sector MFA & T3.2 APPLICATION/ calculation leakage Polymer/application/ SECTOR HOTSPOTS calculation sector hotspots T3.4 prioritization canvas IDENTIFICATION OF WASTE Waste T4 A management T4.1 MANAGEMENT hotspot canvas Project data B HOTSPOTS repository MODELLING T5 A Waste data by T5.2 Leakage T5.3 GIS modelling T5.4 REGIONAL T5.1 GIS model archetype calculation quality assessment FIGURE 18: connection between modules and tools Figure 18. A detailed description of the tools is available below. HOTPOTS Plastic T6 ASSESSING A application T6.1 IMPACTS impact assessment ACTIONABLE Actionable S1 HOTSPOT T3.4 B hotspot C    NATIONAL GUIDANCE FOR PLASTIC POLLUTION HOTSPOTTING AND SHAPING ACTION FORMULATION formulation calculations. Output tools allow to generate result and graphs, as well as support the user in drawing conclusions. S2 INTERVENTION Interventions library S2.1 Interventions S2.2 Instruments S2.3 IDENTIFICATION template selection prioritisation Final intervention D and instrument pairing S3 INSTRUMENT Interventions library S3.1 Interventions S3.2 Instruments S3.3 11. Input tools include data collection templates and generic data libraries. Assessment tools help carry out the necessary modelling and ALIGNMENT template selection prioritisation be either input tools, assessment tools or output tools.10 The connection between tools and modules is illustrated in Each module includes one or several tools designed to support the user in fulfilling the goal of the module. These can Description of the Modules, Tools and Project organisation TOOL N° TOOL NAME TOOL TYPE OBJECTIVE T1.1 Inventory of data sources Input tool List data sources and identify data gaps on plastic flows and data gaps T1.2 Data collection template Input tool Support data collection on topics related to domestic plastic use and plastic flows T1.3 Fisheries model canvas Input tool Support data collection on topics related to fishing activities T2.1 Inventory of data sources Input tool List data sources and identify data gaps on waste management and data gaps T2.2 Data collection template Input tool Support quantitative data collection on topics related to waste management at country level (waste collection, plastic waste recycling, etc.) T2.3 Waste model canvas Input tool Canvas for guiding interviews with municipalities or waste management organisation (waste collection, plastic waste recycling, etc. ) S2.1 Intervention library template Input tool Provide a default list of interventions as well as empty slots to insert additional interventions relevant for the project. S3.1 Instrument library template Input tool Provide a default list of instruments as well as empty slots to insert additional instruments relevant for the project. T1.4 COMTRADE data extraction Assessment Extract and organise relevant figures from COMTRADE database tool to be used in the modelling process T3.1 Fisheries leakage calculation Assessment Estimate plastic weights by type of fishing gear and calculate plastic tool leakage from the fishing sector T3.2 Polymer/application/sector Assessment Compute mass balance and plastic leakage for polymer/application/ MFA & leakage calculation tool sector hotspots categories T3.3 MFA modelling quality Assessment Assess the quality of hotspot results based on source reliability assessment tool and modelling criteria T3.4 Hotspot prioritisation Assessment Prioritise hotspots based on absolute leakage quantities as well canvas tool as relative leakage rates T4.1 Waste management Assessment Build a waste management dashboard highlighting components hotspot canvas tool of the waste management system that contributes either positively or negatively to plastic leakage mitigation T5.1 Waste data by archetype Input tool Gather both necessary data to run the GIS model and data to transfer to other modules T5.2 GIS model Assessment Provide the user with a pre-computed GIS model to facilitate the tool generation of relevant maps as an illustration of geographical results T5.3 Leakage calculation Assessment Provide the user with a python script to fast-track leakage calculation for tool all geographical data points T5.4 GIS modelling quality Assessment Assess the quality of hotspot results based on source reliability and assessment tool modelling criteria T6.1 Plastic application impact Assessment Impact assessment of plastic applications, to complement the analysis assessment tool in Module T3 S2.2 Interventions selection Assessment Select relevant interventions for each actionable hotspot defined tool in module S1 S2.3 Interventions prioritisation Assessment Prioritise and visualise key interventions based on the full list tool of interventions S3.2 Instruments selection Assessment Select relevant instruments for priority interventions as defined tool in module S2 S3.3 Instruments prioritisation Assessment Prioritise and visualise key instruments based on the full list of selected tool instruments A Raw data repository Output tool Gather all relevant data from T1 and T2 as an input to the following modules for modelling and assessment B Project data repository Output tool Summarise all hotspots by category resulting from T3 to T6 C Actionable hotspot Output tool Define actionable hotspots in straightforward sentences stating what formulation is leaking, where the leakage occurs, and why the leakage happens D Final intervention/instrument Output tool Final list of paired interventions and instruments, including supporting pairing information and context 37 NATIONAL GUIDANCE FOR PLASTIC POLLUTION HOTSPOTTING AND SHAPING ACTION 6.2 H  ow to set up a project at national, However, it is strongly encouraged to run the method- sub-national or local level? ology as a whole and follow the sequence of modules. As stressed in section 3.2, the hotspotting technical The methodology can be implemented at different levels stream can be accomplished at different levels of data from national, sub-national to local level. In the case granularity, depending on data availability. of sub-national or local level, national data need to be downscaled using per-capita allocation. While setting up a project using this Guidance, key stakeholders and milestones should be considered as The Guidance can be applied in a modular manner if the described respectively in Figure 19 and Figure 20. user wants to focus on specific questions: 1. The Technical team is mainly responsible for data Æ Modules T1 (Plastic Inputs and Outputs) and T2 collection and hotspotting. Data collection can be (Waste management) can be run independently from performed remotely (desktop research and surveys) other modules when only pursuing the goal of inven- or on the field through interviews, workshops and site torying plastic inputs and outputs and/or mapping visits. Hotspotting requires basic skills in Material the waste management pathways. Flow Analysis (MFA), Life Cycle Assessment (LCA) Æ Module T3 (Hotspotting based on mass balanced and Geographic Information System (GIS). The tech- and leakage modelling) can be run independently nical team typically consists of: when only aiming to assess leakage in the forms of Æ Consultants, macroplastics or microplastics for key polymers/ Æ Academics, applications/industries. Æ Experts from regional or governmental agencies. Æ Module T4 (Waste management hotspots) can be 2. The Coordinator team may include the technical used in a stand-alone mode when only attempting team as well as project leaders. Coordinator team to perform a qualitative assessment of the waste members are responsible for managing the project, management in place at a national, sub-national or liaising with external public and private stakeholders, local level. providing the technical team with key resources and contacts. The coordinator team typically consists of: Æ Module T5 (Regional mapping) relies on the infor- Æ Regional agencies, mation gathered in module T3 and is based on GIS Æ NGOs, analysis. Æ Governmental bodies. Æ Module T6 (Assessing impacts) can be run as a com- 3. The Enabler group is comprised of external stake- plement to the application hotspotting performed in holders representing the target country or region module T3. of interest. Such stakeholders may include policy makers, influential public and private decision Æ Module S1 (Hotspot formulation) prioritises and makers, and any others whose participation may formulates actionable hotspots, and relies on user contribute to the successful development and interpretation of the hotspots in the 5 categories implementation of the action plan to be developed identified in modules T3-T5. based on the results from the Guidance piloting. The Æ Modules S2 (Interventions) and S3 (Instruments) can enabler group typically consists of: also be used independently as a guiding structure to Æ Members from the government, identify interventions and instruments, and facilitate Æ NGOs, stakeholder discussion. Æ Representatives of the private sector, Æ Local plastic and waste management associations. 38 Description of the Modules, Tools and Project organisation FIGURE 19: Key teams and stakeholders involved in the project ƒ Represent the interests of the country ENABLER ƒ Policy makers and influential GROUP private sector decision makers ƒ Stakeholders who will implement interventions COORDINATOR ƒ Represent the interest of the project ƒ Provide leadership TEAM in the project ƒ Consultants or technical experts TECHNICAL ƒ Provide mainly the technical expertise for data- TEAM collection, hotspotting, and identification of relevant interventions and instruments FIGURE 20: Key milestones for the project c am gi te tre rs a s l te de am a am str de e d cs re r re nic op an og to ra lu ss ol st egin gi st onc pr oni st ch eh sc oal st ey Te ak M re G K B C MONTH 6 MONTH 8 MONTH 12 T1 & T3- T2 T6 S1 S2 S3 T5 MONTH 1 MONTH 2 t n el ot ts ts ns en io en po od sp g tio ct m lin m m Hot ts n lle ss ve ru ho co se st er e e g as In ta t bl ka In Da na ct a Le pa tio Im Ac 39 NATIONAL GUIDANCE FOR PLASTIC POLLUTION HOTSPOTTING AND SHAPING ACTION To launch a project, five main stages should be followed as described and illustrated below. This proposed project structure has proven successful in the piloting phase but can be adapted by users to best suit their needs and context specificities. The expected time frame for a project from inception to completion is one year. 1. ESTABLISH THE GOAL AND SCOPE OF THE PROJECT Æ Choose the geographical scope Æ Benchmark with other country and regional projects (national, sub-national or local); and identify possible synergies; Æ Establish the level of ambition and resources Æ Conduct strategy and goal setting. (which will determine the workload on data-collection); 2. IDENTIFY KEY STAKEHOLDERS Æ Include formal and informal sector stakeholders, Æ Develop a project plan once the key stakeholders as multi-stakeholder engagement and collaboration are mapped. For additional information, please is key to the success of the project; see modules S1 to S3. Æ Map stakeholders and detail their potential role; 3. CONDUCT THE TECHNICAL STREAM (T1-T6) Æ PREPARE Æ DO y Start with the Technical and Coordinator teams, y Perform data-collection and complete Module T1 organise an inception workshop to introduce (Plastic Inputs and Outputs) and T2 (Waste the project and engage identified key stakeholders management). (i.e., Enabler group members). y Run other technical modules related to leakage and impacts i.e., T3 (polymer/application/sector y Map data-sources, including potentially unknown hotspots), T4 (waste management hotspots), sources. T5 (Regional hotspots) and T6 (Impacts). y Identify key stakeholders to be involved in data- Æ FINALISE collection. If field work will be performed, identify y Summarise results in a report and prepare and hire local experts. a workshop with the Coordinator team to start the strategic stream. 4. BEGIN THE STRATEGIC STREAM (S1 & S2) Æ Organise a first workshop with the Coordinator Æ Organise a second workshop with Enabler group team to prioritise hotspots (S1) and the key areas of members as well as a wide consultation to refine intervention (S2) by leveraging the hotspot-intervention the prioritisation of hotspots as well as the key areas matrix, which will be provided in the supporting of interventions. spreadsheet of S2. 5. CONCLUDE THE STRATEGIC STREAM (S3) Æ Organise a strategic workshop with the Enabler Æ Identify a process to monitor progress through group to discuss and converge on the most efficient key performance indicators (KPIs). Technical instruments to implement the interventions. stream provides a series of metrics (e.g. leakage Consider synergies among possible interventions per application) that can be used to re-assess and conditions needed to enable success. the situation over-time and monitor progress. Other KPIs can be defined by the Coordinator Team Æ Develop an action plan through wide consultation and Coordinator Team of the project. and assign responsibility to relevant stakeholders for its implementation. Identify concrete goals and milestones for each task. 40 Glossary GLOSSARY This glossary is an abbreviated version of a more com- Environmental fate prehensive glossary, and it only includes the relevant The environmental fate of a chemical describes the pro- terms for the Guidance. The comprehensive glossary is portion of chemical that is transferred to the environment, the result of an iterative consultation process that began and the length of time the chemical stays in the various during an expert workshop organised by IUCN in June environmental media. 2018 and continued throughout the development of the current publication. Definitions were reviewed and fine- Source: Suciu, N., et al., 2012. Environmental Fate Models. In: Bilitewski B., Darbra R., Barceló D. (eds) Global Risk-Based tuned through the Plastic Leak Project (2019), incorporat- Management of Chemical Additives II. The Handbook of ing feedback from a panel of more than 30 experts. Environmental Chemistry, vol 23. Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg. https://doi.org/10.1007/698_2012_177 Circular economy A circular economy is a global economic model that aims Environmental footprint to decouple economic growth and development from the A total product environmental footprint is a measure of consumption of finite resources. the pollutant emissions associated with all activities in Source: https://www.ellenmacarthurfoundation.org the product’s life cycle. Products are defined as either goods or services. ISO 14044 defines a footprint as, A circular economy is a proposed alternative to the “metric(s) used to report life cycle assessment results traditional linear economy in which products are made, addressing an area of concern” and defines area of con- used and disposed of at the end of their use. The circular cern as an “aspect of the natural environment, human economy model aims to keep resources in use for as long health or resources of interest to society”. as possible to extract the maximum value from them. This involves recovery and regeneration of products and The direct footprint measures specific impacts created by materials at the end of each product’s life. the firm or any company-owned and company-controlled activities or products. A comprehensive study of all rele- Source: http://www.wrap.org.uk/about-us/about/ wrap-and-circular-economy vant impacts needs the assessment of several impacts, for instance with an LCA. The indirect footprint measures the impact of many other activities related to the company or Circularity product but controlled by third parties. A comprehensive Material circularity is a concept embedded within the environmental assessment is based on a cradle-to-grave circular economy framework. Circularity is not an assess- approach and considers upstream (i.e., suppliers) and ment method but often associated with metrics based on downstream (i.e., customers) activities of a company. the recycling or reuse rates for different materials. Source: https://www.lifecycleinitiative.org/starting-life-cy- cle-thinking/life-cycle-approaches/carbon-footprint/ Dumping International Organisation for Standardisation (2006). Dumping is the deliberate disposal of large quantities of 14044:2006 Environmental management -- Life cycle assess- litter in a particular area, that is not controlled. Dumping ment -- Requirements and guidelines can be the result of the formal or informal collection sector. This could be anything from a single bag of rub- Environmental impact bish to a large sofa to a broken refrigerator. Changes in environmental conditions lead to impacts on Source: http://speedy-waste.co.uk/news/ the social and economic functions of the environment, whats-the-difference-between-littering-and-fly-tipping such as the provision of adequate conditions for health, resources availability, and biodiversity. Impacts often Effect occur in a sequence: for example, GHG emissions cause The effect of a chemical is determined by the sensitivity global warming (i.e., primary effect), which causes an of a species to that chemical, among other factors, and increase in temperature (i.e., secondary effect), leading to is often derived from experimental toxicity data. For a rise of sea level (i.e., tertiary effect), finally leading to example, for human toxicity, it corresponds to the link loss of biodiversity. between the quantity taken in via a given exposure route Source: https://ec.europa.eu/research/evaluations/pdf/ by a population to the adverse effects (or potential risk) archive/other_reports_studies_and_documents/envti- generated by the chemical and the severity of disabilities 0413167enn_002.pdf caused by a disease in terms of affected life years. 41 NATIONAL GUIDANCE FOR PLASTIC POLLUTION HOTSPOTTING AND SHAPING ACTION Chemical exposure The releases are the fractions of the loss that are ulti- A “chemical exposure” can be defined as the measure- mately released into different environmental compart- ment of both the amount of, and the frequency with ments. The following release pathways are considered which, a substance comes into contact with a person or throughout this methodology: the environment. (i) Releases to waterways and oceans represent Various species in an ecosystem can be exposed to the plastics released to rivers, lakes or directly to chemicals through different uptake routes, such as oceans. inhalation of polluted air or ingestion of polluted water. (ii) Releases to soils represent the plastics released to For example, for human toxicity, exposure can be distin- either the soil surface or to deep soil, such as plas- guished between direct intake (e.g., by breathing air and tics leaching from waste dumps to shallow or deep drinking water), indirect intake through bioconcentration soils. processes in animal tissues (e.g., meat, milk and fish) and intake by dermal contact. The fate and exposure of (iii) Releases to terrestrial environment represent the chemicals are generally modelled with multimedia fate plastics released to terrestrial environment other and exposure models. than soils, such as plastics deposited and stored in dumpsites, plastics deposited on buildings or trees, Fly tipping or littered plastic packaging. Fly-tipping is the deliberate disposal of large quanti- (iv) Releases to air represent the plastic released to air, ties of litter in the environment without any specific such as plastic micro-fibers emitted when synthetic location. This could be anything from a single bag textiles are worn. of rubbish to a large sofa to a broken refrigerator (e.g. accumulating on the roadside or remote places). Sources: Boucher, J., Friot, D., 2017. Primary Microplastics in the Oceans: a Global Evaluation of Sources. IUCN Source: http://speedy-waste.co.uk/news/ whats-the-difference-between-littering-and-fly-tipping Life cycle Hotspot Consecutive and interlinked stages of a product system, Either a component of the system that directly or indi- from raw material acquisition or generation from natural rectly contributes to plastic leakage and impact, or that resources to final disposal. can be acted upon to mitigate this leakage or the result- Source: ISO 14040 ing impacts. Life cycle assessment (LCA) Instrument Life cycle assessment (LCA) is an environmental assess- A practical way to implement the intervention and enable ment method based on an inventory of potential flow progress (e.g., regulate, raise awareness) of pollutants entering different compartments of the environment (e.g. air, water, soil) and the assessment of Intervention associated environmental impacts of a product system An action that can be taken to mitigate the leakage from throughout its life cycle. a given hotspot or reduce its impacts. Source: ISO 14040 Leakage, loss and release Littering The generic term leakage is defined here as the combina- Littering is the incorrect disposal of small, one-off items, tion of losses and releases. such as: throwing a cigarette, dropping a crisp packet, or The loss is the quantity of plastics that leaves a properly a drink cup. Most of the time these items end-up on the managed product or waste management system, as the road or side-ways. They may or may not be collected by fraction of materials that is detached from the plastic municipal street cleaning. product during manufacturing, use or transport for micro- Source: http://speedy-waste.co.uk/news/ plastics or as mismanaged waste for macroplastics. We whats-the-difference-between-littering-and-fly-tipping define a properly managed waste management system as a system where no leakage is expected to occur such as recycling, incineration or properly managed sanitary Macroplastic landfills. Losses are specific to various sources and Macroplastics are large plastic waste readily visible and activities (e.g., the processes of losing all types of plas- with dimensions larger than 5 mm, typically plastic pack- tics into the environment through abrasion, weathering aging, plastic infrastructure or fishing nets. or unintentional spills during production, transport, use, Source: Boucher, J., Friot, D., 2017. Primary Microplastics in the maintenance or recycling of products containing plastics, Oceans: a Global Evaluation of Sources. IUCN littered plastic packaging). 42 Glossary Microplastic Plastic detachable part Microplastics are small plastic particulates below 5 mm Any part of the packaging that can be removed to access in size and above 1 mm. Two types of microplastics are the product or that is directly in contact with the product contaminating the world’s oceans: primary and second- such as a lid, a sleeve or a protecting film. ary microplastics. Source: GESAMP 2019 Guidelines for the monitoring & assess- Polymer ment of plastic litter in the ocean Polymers are group of organic, semi-organic, or inorganic chemical substances containing large polymer mole- Nanoplastic cules. These molecules are formed by linking together small molecules, called monomers, by polymerisations The term nanoplastics is still under debate, and some processes (G: polys = many, meros = part). According to authors set the upper size limit at 1000 nm while others the International Union of Pure and Applied Chemistry at 100 nm. Gigault et al. (2018) define nanoplastics as (IUPAC) polymer and macromolecular substance are particles within a size ranging from 1 to 1000 nm result- synonyms. ing from the degradation of industrial plastic objects and can exhibit a colloidal behaviour. Source: Elias, H. G., 2003. An introduction to plastics. Ed. Weiheim. Sources: Lambert, S., Wagner, M., 2016. Characterisation of nanoplastics during the degradation of polystyrene. Chemosphere 145, 265–268. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j. Primary microplastic chemosphere.2015.11.078 Primary microplastics are plastics directly released into the environment in the form of small particulates. They Koelmans A.A., Besseling E., Shim W.J., 2015. may be intentionally added to products such as scrub- Nanoplastics in the Aquatic Environment. Critical Review. In: Bergmann M., Gutow L., Klages M. (eds) bing agents in toiletries and cosmetics (e.g., shower gels) Marine Anthropogenic Litter. Springer, Cham. https://doi. or they may originate from the abrasion of large plastic org/10.1007/978-3-319-16510-3_12 objects during manufacturing, use or maintenance such as the erosion of tyres when driving or of the abrasion of Gigault J, ter Halle A, Baudrimont M, Pascal PY, Gauffre F, Phi synthetic textiles during washing. TL, El Hadri H, Grassl B, Reynaud S (2018) Current opinion: What is a nanoplastic? Environmental Pollution 1-5 Source: Boucher, J., Friot, D., 2017. Primary Microplastics in the Oceans : a Global Evaluation of Sources. IUCN On-the-go vs in-home plastics Recycled plastic On-the-go plastic items are those consumed while on the move in public spaces, whereas in-home plastics are A recycled plastic is a plastic made from recovered and used in houses or at cafes and restaurants. recycled material. The term “secondary” is often used interchangeably with “recycled”. Source: http://www.seas-at-risk.org/images/pdf/publications/ SeasAtRiskSummarysingleUseplasticandthemarine Recycling, upcycling and downcycling environment.compressed.pdf Recycling is when waste materials are converted into new materials for the production of new products. Upcycling Plastic is when materials are recycled to produce a higher value Plastics are commercially-used materials made from or quality product than the original. Downcycling is a monomers and other raw materials chemically reacted recycling process where the value of the recycled material to a macromolecular structure, the polymer, which forms decreases over time, being used in less valued processes, the main structural component of the plastic. with lesser quality material and with changes in inherent The name plastic refers to their easy processability and properties, when compared to its original use. shaping (G: plas-tein = to form, to shape). Plastics are Source: Pires A, Martinho G, Rodrigues S, Gomes MI (2019) usually divided into two groups according to their phys- Sustainable Solid Waste Collection and Management ical or chemical hardening processes: thermoplastic and thermosetting resins (i.e., polymers). Plastics contain Sanitary landfills additives to achieve defined properties. Landfilling is the deliberate disposal of large quanti- Sources: Elias, H. G., 2003. An introduction to plastics. Ed. ties of litter in a particular area, that is controlled (e.g., Weiheim. https://eur-lex.europa.eu/eli/reg/2011/10/oj waste being covered on a daily basis, as well as the bottom of the landfill designed in a way to avoid spills). Landfilling Plastic Application is mainly the result of a formal collection sector. A product or packaging partially or totally made of plastic. 43 NATIONAL GUIDANCE FOR PLASTIC POLLUTION HOTSPOTTING AND SHAPING ACTION Secondary microplastic Supply chain Secondary microplastics originate from the degradation The supply chain of a product includes all its upstream of larger plastic items into smaller plastic fragments activities. This includes the processes involved in its once exposed to the environment. This happens through production and distribution, as well as aspects such as photodegradation and other weathering processes of material type, material sourcing and transport of products mismanaged waste such as discarded plastic bags, or between production stages and from final production to from unintentional losses such as fishing nets. markets. Source: Boucher, J., Friot, D., 2017. Primary Microplastics in the Oceans : a Global Evaluation of Sources. IUCN Take-back scheme A take-back scheme is when firms retrieve products they Single-use plastic manufacture or sell from customers at the products end of life via third parties or contractors in order to recycle, Single-use plastics products include a diverse range of resell, appropriately dispose or renovate them. commonly used fast-moving consumer products that Source: https://www.plasticseurope.org/en/about-plastics/ are discarded after having been used once for the pur- what-are-plastics/large-family pose for which they were provided, are rarely recycled, and are prone to littering. Tyre and road wear particles Source: Council of the European Union (2019) DIRECTIVE Tyre wear particles are generated from the friction (EU) 2019/... OF THE EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT AND between the tyre and the road. This ensures a sufficient OF THE COUNCIL of on the reduction of the impact grip on the road and safety. The particles are therefore not of certain plastic products on the environment. simply rubber pieces from the tyre, but an agglomeration Available at: https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/ EN/TXT/PDF/?uri=CONSIL:ST_5483_2019_ of material from the tyre and the road. They are therefore INIT&qid=1554217975397&from=EN identified as Tyre and Road Wear Particles (TRWP). Source: http://www.etrma.org/uploads/Modules/ SPI code Documentsmanager/20180320-etrma-trwp-plastics-strategy.pdf In 1988 The Society of the Plastics Industry (SPI) cre- ated a coding system that assists recyclers with the Value chain recycling of plastics. Virtually all plastic products have The value chain is the sum of all of the processes involved the recycling symbol. The number inside the triangle in cradle-to-grave activities (such as upstream resource sourcing and production, to downstream marketing, indicates the type of synthetic resin: after-sales services and product end-of-life) by which a company adds value to a product. Virgin plastic A virgin plastic is a plastic made from virgin raw material (i.e., the extraction of crude oil). The term “primary” is often used interchangeably with “virgin”. Waste-to-energy (WtE) Waste-to-energy is a waste treatment technique designed to recover energy from waste. The incineration of waste is taken advantage of to produce heat and/or electricity. 44 REFERENCES Boucher, J., Friot, D., 2017. Primary Microplastics in the Oceans: A Global Evaluation of Sources. IUCN. Boucher, J., Jenny, C., Plummer, Z., Schneider, G., 2018. How to Avoid Pigeonholing the Environmental Manager? Sustainability 10, 2538. https://doi.org/10.3390/su10072538 Boucher, J., Kounina, A., Puydarieux, P., Dubois, C., 2019. Panorama Review of Plastic Footprint Methodologies. IUCN. Essel, R., Engel, L., Carus, M., Ahrens, D.R.H., n.d. Sources of microplastics relevant to marine protection in Germany 48. EUNOMIA, 2016. Plastics in the Marine Environment. Geyer, R., Jambeck, J.R., Law, K.L., 2017. Production, use, and fate of all plastics ever made. Sci. Adv. 3, e1700782. https://doi.org/10.1126/sciadv.1700782 IUCN 2014; https://portals.iucn.org/library/sites/library/files/documents/2014-030.pdf Jambeck, J.R., Geyer, R., Wilcox, C., Siegler, T.R., Perryman, M., Andrady, A., Narayan, R., Law, K.L., 2015. Plastic waste inputs from land into the ocean 4. Lassen, C., Hansen, S.F., Magnusson, K., Hartmann, N.B., Pernille, R.J., Nielsen, T.G., Brinch, A., 2015. Microplastics - Occurrence, effects and sources of releases to the environment in Denmark. Danish Environmental Protection Agency, Copenhagen. Lebreton, L. C., Van der Zwet, J., Damsteeg, J. W., Slat, B., Andrady, A., & Reisser, J., 2017. River plastic emissions to the world’s oceans. Nature communications, 8, 15611. Magnusson, K., Eliasson, K., Fråne, A., Haikonen, K., Hultén, J., Olshammar, M., Stadmark, J., Voisin, A., 2016. Swedish Sources and Pathways for Microplastics to the Marine Environment. IVL Svenska Miljöinstitutet, Stockholm, Sweden. PLP, 2019. Plastic Leak Project. URL (https://quantis-intl.com/metrics/initiatives/plastic-leak-project/) UNEP, 2018a. Addressing marine plastics: A systemic approach - Stocktaking report. Notten, P. United Nations Environment Programme. Nairobi, Kenya. UNEP, 2018b. Mapping of global plastics value chain and plastics losses to the environment (with a focus on marine environment). Ryberg, M., Laurent, A., Hauschild, M. United Nations Environment Programme. Nairobi, Kenya. UNEP, 2019. Addressing marine plastics: A systemic approach - Recommendations for action. Notten, P. United Nations Environment Programme. Nairobi, Kenya. Wang, F., L. Talaue McManus, R. Xie (eds.), 2019. Addressing Marine Plastics: A Roadmap to a Circular Economy. United Nations Environment Programme. For more information, please contact: Economy Division United Nations Environment Programme 1, rue Miollis Building VII 75015 Paris, France Tel: +33 1 44 37 14 50 Fax: +33 1 44 37 14 74 Email: economydivision@unep.org Website: www.unep.org