A study published by the Alliance to End Plastic Waste and supported by Roland Berger highlights potential pathways to significantly increase waste collection and plastic recycling rates globally. The Plastic Waste Management Framework lays out a framework with policy levers and actions that can be used to develop national action plans for advancing waste management systems and help effect systems change.
In the meta-analysis, 192 countries were classified into six categories of plastic waste management and recycling maturity based on characteristics such as waste management and recycling infrastructure, legislative framework, and operational models, viz:
-
Category 1 (Undeveloped Systems) consists of countries with no or very basic waste management infrastructure with a plastic recycling rate of up to 5 per cent.
-
Category 2 (Incipient Systems) includes countries with basic waste regulations but limited collection and end-of-life treatment infrastructure. These countries have plastic recycling rates of up to 10 per cent.
-
Category 3 (Developing Systems) refers to countries with functional waste management systems. However, collection, sorting, incineration and recycling are developed only to the extent they are justified by intrinsic economic value, without additional policy levers that drive recycling rates beyond 15 per cent.
-
Category 4 (Functional, Largely Unregulated Systems) comprises countries that have recycling rates approaching 25 per cent motivated by some regulatory pressure.
-
Category 5 (Advanced Systems with Challenges) encompasses countries that can achieve plastic recycling rates of up to 40 percent, although they may still face challenges in specific segments in the value chain.
-
Category 6 (Developed Performing Systems) is the most advanced. Countries in this group achieve recycling rates of more than 40 per cent and demonstrate global best practice that can serve as beacons for other nations.
Through the study, it was found that more than 60 per cent of all countries have underdeveloped or incipient waste systems, recycling less than 8 per cent of plastic waste generated. These Category 1 and 2 countries have the biggest opportunity to end plastic waste leakage into the environment. Typically, the informal “waste picker” sector plays a key role in waste management in these geographies, and should be acknowledged and supported, ensuring their inclusion when planning for the evolution of a country’s waste management system (a “just transition” ). It was also found that effective policy levers to consider for Category 1 and 2 countries include developing waste management legislation, building institutional capacity, and establishing financial obligations from brand owners and waste generators.
The study also highlighted the importance of Extended Producer Responsibility (EPR) as one of the most effective policy instruments for increasing recycling rates overall. Particularly relevant for Category 3, 4, and 5 countries, EPR enforces shared responsibility across the plastic value chain including brands and retailers as well as post-use treatment. Money generated from EPR fees are typically directed towards improving waste management and recycling solutions, ideally harmonised across local geographies to maximise effectiveness. As the maturity of waste management in a country improves, mandatory and eventually eco-modulated EPR schemes should replace voluntary commitments.
