Economic policy instruments for plastic waste

Lack of Congruence Between European Citizen Perspectives and Policies on Circular Economy

“…Studies on such topics are indeed prevalent but connect either to existing research domains such as those of waste management and sustainable consumption or a parallel field such as sharing economy. Concerning consumers, particular focus in circular economy is on a number of activities, which are examined in this article:  waste reduction (retaking materials into industrial processes) (Gregson et al 2015;Accenture 2014; World Economic Forum 2014)  incentivised return or deposit and refund systems (similar take-back schemes such as those for used car tires and plastic beverage bottles) (Jurgilevich et al 2016;Hennlock et al 2014; Ellen MacArthur Foundation 2013)  product design (making products better repairable and recyclable) (Andrews 2015; Ellen MacArthur Foundation 2015; World Economic Forum 2014; Ellen MacArthur Foundation 2013)  sustainable food production (material flows in biological processes) (Jurgilevich et al 2016; Ellen MacArthur Foundation 2013)  shared use of products (access over ownership, for instance car-sharing, outcome oriented services) (Hobson and Lynch 2016;Tukker 2015; World Economic Forum 2014) Public policies concerning circular economy echo similar overall targets, motivations and descriptions that are evident in the general concept, and their relationship to consumers is equally positive yet distant. What makes public policies on circular economy of particular interest is that they represent prioritizations of what should be targeted in defined areas.…”

Sustainability Impact Assessment of Increased Plastic Recycling and Future Pathways of Plastic Waste Management in Sweden

“…This rate could be described as remarkable-despite being quite modest compared to other waste materials, e.g., paper-taking into account the fact that Sweden has significant overcapacity and reliance on waste incineration [23,24]. Additionally, Sweden lacks policies specifically targeting the plastic waste stream [25]. Plastic waste is not identified as a priority waste stream in the Swedish Waste Management Plan [26] and in the Swedish Waste Prevention Plan [27], which likely puts actions for improving plastic waste recycling at a lower priority than food waste and textile waste, for instance, which are clearly defined as high priorities in the aforementioned strategic policy documents.…”

“…This scenario assumes as a given the fulfilment of the targets, as presented in Scenario A, and includes considerations for further actions to increase the supply of plastics for recycling. Previous studies have indicated the lack of both supply of waste plastics and demand of recycled plastics [8,25]. Therefore, it is considered important to increase the supply of plastic waste to recyclers which would eventually lead to economies of scale for improving their recycling output.…”

“…Eliminating the alternative option of incineration with energy recovery for recyclable plastic waste, Scenario C requires further expansion of recycling capacity to cope with increased amounts of plastic waste. Recycling operations are much more expensive per unit of treated waste (1 tonne) than incineration [25,53]. However, with increased supply of waste and deployment of technology, treatment cost per unit is expected to lower in the long run [19].…”

“…Central condition of Scenario C is the restriction of incineration of recyclable plastics and the redirection of this waste stream to recycling. This special condition would solve one of the main barriers of plastic recycling in Sweden, the supply of waste plastic to recyclers [8,25]. Banning incineration of recyclable plastics is a way of decreasing the linearity of plastic production and is seen as being fundamental for the entire plastic industry to transition to a circular economy [9].…”