The Promising New Laws That Can Help Cut Plastic Pollution

As plastic waste clogs rivers, harms marine life, and poses risks to human health, leaders from various countries, communities, and progressive companies are seeking solutions to combat plastic pollution.

Despite years of discussions aimed at establishing a global treaty on plastic waste, negotiations have stalled, with sessions held last summer and late last year concluding in deadlock and frustration.

However, while international initiatives lag, a growing movement is surging at the subnational level, with U.S. states and Canadian provinces implementing Extended Producer Responsibility (EPR) programs to hold companies accountable for the plastic packaging they introduce into the market.

"For far too long, the burden and cost of waste management has been placed on local governments, consumers, and citizens," stated Nick Mallos, vice president of conservation, ocean plastics, for the environmental group Ocean Conservancy, during a panel discussion at Newsweek's Powering Ahead event last Thursday, coinciding with Climate Week NYC.

An EPR shifts that dynamic and "really flips it on its head," Mallos noted. "It makes producers of products and materials accountable for financing the systems and recovering their materials."

Seven states have adopted some form of EPR: California, Colorado, Maine, Maryland, Minnesota, Oregon, and Washington. Each state has its own approach, but all implement mechanisms requiring companies to pay based on the type and quantity of packaging materials sold in that state. The revenue generated is directed toward enhancing waste collection, recycling, and public outreach and education.

Over time, Mallos asserted, an EPR system will create economic incentives to minimize waste, encouraging businesses to adopt less harmful packaging practices.

"It genuinely supports those who produce durable and recyclable circular products," Mallos added.

Sam Baker is the executive director of Recycle BC, the first full EPR organization in North America. British Columbia launched its EPR program and provides recycling services to nearly all households in the province. Last year, the organization successfully recycled over 80 percent of the packaging materials that entered the market, encompassing paper, cardboard, metal, and glass. (British Columbia also has a return deposit program for drink containers that recaptures some bottles and cans, Baker explained.)

"Everyone contributes. If you introduce packaging and paper into the province, you're contributing to the system," Baker said. "That collective commitment strengthens the system overall, enabling us to address all types of packaging and paper."

Approximately 45 percent of plastic materials were collected last year, and more than 90 percent of those were recycled, he reported. In contrast, less than 10 percent of plastic waste in the U.S. is recycled, with around 75 percent ending up in landfills.

In a prior year, the regional government for Vancouver, B.C., acquired land in anticipation of expanding landfill capacity. This year, however, the government opted to sell that land as the landfill will no longer be necessary.

With over a decade of experience with EPR programs, Recycle BC has become a model for other provinces and states developing or considering their programs. Baker shared insights on how EPRs have evolved and what future developments might arise as the concept gains traction.

Baker highlighted that EPR has enabled the province to assess waste management at a systemic level, allowing for more informed investment decisions in waste collection. Recycle BC employs a tiered fee system that charges more for packaging types that are harder to recycle. This eco-modulated fee structure is being adopted in California, Colorado, and Oregon to encourage the use of recyclable or less toxic packaging, according to the Circular Action Alliance.

On its own, Baker acknowledged, British Columbia lacked the purchasing power to send a strong market signal to industry. Now, with many regions in Canada and U.S. states implementing EPRs—including California, the world's fourth largest economy—companies producing plastic packaging are paying closer attention.

"Now they're really considering how to cut their costs," Baker said. "We've been working as much upstream with producers and organizations to streamline and standardize as we have downstream to refine our collection system."

Household goods company SC Johnson is collaborating with state governments to develop EPR programs and has taken a leadership role within the corporate sector by advocating for policies to tackle plastic waste.

"Regulation is inevitable in my view; it's just a matter of when," SC Johnson CEO Fisk Johnson told Newsweek. Johnson perceives the swift adoption of state EPRs as a catalyst for potential federal legislation, as each state program operates under differing definitions and rules.

"Navigating various state laws for labeling or product design becomes exceedingly complex. This will ultimately increase costs," Johnson remarked. "The more cost-effective solution is to establish federal EPR regulations."

While the current political climate in Washington may not favor immediate legislation, Johnson remains hopeful about the possibility of an EPR bill emerging in the next few years, largely due to consumer demand for action on plastic waste.

"A significant majority of consumers already view plastic as a pressing human and planetary health issue," Johnson concluded. "People are likely to gravitate toward products and companies actively addressing this problem rather than those merely delaying action."