This year’s World Environment Day (5 June 2025) comes with growing urgency. Under the theme #BeatPlasticPollution, the UN-led campaign is calling for coordinated, systemic action to tackle one of the most pervasive environmental threats of our time: plastic pollution.
The world produced 400 million tonnes of plastic waste in 2024, much of it single-use and unrecycled. If current trends continue, global plastic waste could reach one billion tonnes annually by 2060, according to the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD)—far beyond the capacity of current waste systems.
If recent studies are to be believed, plastic pollution now touches every corner of the planet—from the Mariana Trench to microplastics in breast milk and drinking water. These particles, released throughout plastic’s lifecycle, have become a persistent pollutant, with still-uncertain consequences for human and ecological health.
Against this backdrop, governments will reconvene in Geneva this August for INC-5.2, the resumed UN negotiations for a legally binding global plastics treaty. With the final agreement still unresolved after last year’s failed talks in Busan, the stakes are high.
As UNEP’s Elisa Tonda notes, the crisis is solvable—but only through bold, fast, and collaborative action. “International cooperation is critical,” she said. “Plastic pollution is a global challenge. But it’s also a solvable one.”
For the UK’s waste sector, this is a moment to influence how global ambition becomes practical, national change.
The Case for Urgency
Between 2000 and 2019, plastic production output doubled, and current projections suggest that by 2060, annual plastic waste could reach one billion tonnes—with nearly half landfilled, incinerated, or leaking into the environment. Recycling remains low: only 9% of plastic waste is currently recycled globally.
This is a lifecycle crisis. Plastic production and disposal contributed over 3% of global greenhouse gas emissions in 2020, and emissions are rising with expanded petrochemical production. Every stage—from fossil fuel extraction to end-of-life—feeds the triple planetary crisis: climate change, biodiversity loss, and pollution.
For waste professionals, the practical implications are becoming impossible to ignore:
- Sorting and processing challenges are intensifying as products become more complex, blending multiple polymers, additives, coatings, and chemical treatments that confound conventional systems.
- Contamination rates in recycling streams are rising due to the poor design of many single-use items, undermining material quality and market value.
- Meanwhile, outdated infrastructure and inconsistent policy frameworks are hampering efforts to build circular solutions at scale.
As Rob Delink, senior economist at the OECD, put it: “If we don’t close the tap of producing more plastics, waste management systems might be overstretched. In Dutch, we have a saying: it’s like mopping with the tap open.”
Waste systems alone cannot stem the tide. Without upstream reform—reduced plastic production, better product design, harmonised regulation, and robust EPR mechanisms—waste professionals are being asked to clean up a crisis they didn’t create, with tools that were never designed for the task.
Delayed Policy, Big Promises
Despite being a founding member of the High Ambition Coalition to End Plastic Pollution, the UK has so far fallen behind in turning commitment into action.
Key reforms such as Extended Producer Responsibility (EPR) and a national Deposit Return Scheme (DRS)—both mandated in the Environment Act 2021—have been repeatedly delayed, with implementation now postponed until at least 2027.
These delays stand in stark contrast to the pace of change seen elsewhere. Belgium’s EPR system, in place since 1994, has achieved recycling rates consistently above EU averages through legally mandated recovery targets, producer levies based on material type, and a non-profit coordinating body (Fost Plus) that oversees collection and recycling nationwide. It is backed by “pay-as-you-throw” incentives and sustained public communication campaigns to encourage participation.
Similarly, Latvia’s DRS, launched in 2022, achieved rapid success through a centralised operator model combining beverage manufacturers, retailers, and recyclers. Within a year, it was operational across the country.
“The government cannot continue to procrastinate on progress – the longer we wait, the higher the price to our environment.”
Ongoing data collection allowed the system to expand quickly—incorporating higher-ABV beverage containers after they were identified as frequent litter items. The scheme has already significantly reduced littering rates for covered materials.
By contrast, the UK’s delays are compounded by a stagnation in recycling performance, undermining both environmental outcomes and public confidence. According to OECD data, the UK’s recycling rate has plateaued in recent years, with plastic packaging recycling remaining stubbornly below 50%, despite years of consultations and pilot schemes.
The risk is that without decisive leadership, the UK will miss the opportunity to align domestic policy with the forthcoming global plastics treaty, and find itself scrambling to comply once binding obligations are in place.
As highlighted in recent commentary by Common Seas: “The government cannot continue to procrastinate on progress – the longer we wait, the higher the price to our environment.”
World Environment Day and the INC-5.2 negotiations offer a moment to reframe the conversation. Rather than viewing international action as a future compliance burden, the UK should see it as an opportunity to lead, shape, and prepare—just as Belgium and Latvia have done, with tangible results.
From End-of-Pipe to Systemic Change
A core message from the UNEP #BeatPlasticPollution campaign and ongoing treaty negotiations is that downstream waste management alone cannot solve the plastic crisis.
For decades, the sector has carried the burden of collecting, sorting, and attempting to recycle the growing volume of plastic waste, yet less than 10% of all plastic ever made has been recycled.
As Prof. David Greenfield, incoming CIWM President, notes in an editorial published in the Telegraph and Business & Industry today: “90% of products are thrown away within six months of purchase. While awareness of circularity is growing, critical barriers persist from a financial, infrastructural and knowledge perspective.”
This is why the transition to a circular plastics economy demands systems change—starting with how products are designed, consumed, and valued across their entire lifecycle.
“90% of products are thrown away within six months of purchase. While awareness of circularity is growing, critical barriers persist from a financial, infrastructural and knowledge perspective.”
According to UNEP and the OECD, a lifecycle approach is essential. This means addressing plastics from design and production through to end-of-life, and it positions the waste and resources sector as a central player in enabling systemic change, not simply as an end-of-pipe service.
To fulfil this role, the sector must engage across the chain:
- Influencing product design, ensuring materials are durable, recyclable, and disassemble.
- Upgrading infrastructure to handle a broader range of polymers and prevent leakage into the environment.
- Supporting reuse systems, helping scale and refine models that reduce reliance on single-use packaging.
UNEP estimates that transitioning to a circular plastic economy could yield $4.5 trillion in global savings by 2040, but only if operational systems are equipped to deliver this shift.
At the Global Reuse Summit 2025, experts highlighted the need to move beyond short-term pilots. As Victoria Baker of Ecosurety said in a recent article for Circular Online: “Single-use systems took decades to become financially efficient. Reuse systems need the same opportunity to grow steadily, build volume area by area, and prove their value in practice.”
As treaty negotiations progress, waste professionals will be expected to provide granular data, enable compliance infrastructure, and advise on policies grounded in operational reality. However, without adequate investment, training, and long-term planning, the sector may struggle to meet these rising demands.
Those who embrace innovation in reuse logistics, data systems, and circular design will be best positioned to lead in the post-treaty landscape. The opportunity ahead is not just to improve waste systems, but to reshape them entirely.
Likely Outcomes and Strategic Implications
When delegates gather in Geneva from 5 to 14 August 2025 for INC-5.2, the resumed fifth session of the Intergovernmental Negotiating Committee, they will do so under growing pressure to finalise the first legally binding global treaty on plastic pollution.
The previous meeting in Busan ended in deadlock, with wide divisions over what the treaty should include: binding production caps, global Extended Producer Responsibility standards, funding mechanisms, and enforcement models remain on the negotiating table.
For the UK’s waste and resources sector, the outcomes of INC-5.2 will have direct operational consequences. While the final treaty text is still in flux, several core areas of alignment are already emerging in international discussions—each of which could shape future policy and industry responsibilities:
- Harmonised Design and Labelling Standards
Countries are increasingly backing mandatory global product design criteria, particularly for packaging. This includes clearer labelling, material standardisation, and design-for-recycling requirements. These measures could reduce contamination in recycling streams but would also require major updates to processing infrastructure and data systems. (Source: UNEP Turning Off the Tap report; OECD Global Plastics Outlook)
- Global EPR Frameworks
The treaty may enshrine baseline expectations for Extended Producer Responsibility—including full cost recovery for post-consumer waste, mandatory reporting, and circular design obligations. For nations like the UK, where EPR remains delayed, a binding treaty could catalyse overdue implementation. (Source: UNEP World Environment Day materials; Common Seas policy analysis)
- Plastic Production Controls
A more ambitious outcome could include caps or phase-down targets on virgin plastic production—especially for single-use and high-leakage products. This would have upstream impacts but could also reshape waste volumes and composition, affecting contractual arrangements, MRF operations, and financial modelling. (Source: UNEP INC-5 background documents; OECD lifecycle impact findings)
- Global Monitoring and Reporting Obligations
A successful treaty is expected to include universal data standards for tracking plastic flows—both upstream and downstream. This would increase the burden on local authorities and contractors to deliver accurate, granular data, likely via digital systems not yet in place across much of the UK sector. (Source: OECD and IUCN commentary on lifecycle tracking; Ecosurety on the role of data in reuse scaling)
While these provisions are still under negotiation, their potential inclusion reflects a broad recognition that the waste and resource sector must evolve from a reactive service model to a proactive, data-driven engine of circularity.
Waste management professionals, local authorities, and contractors should begin preparing now—not just for compliance, but to help shape the national response to the treaty. Those who engage early will be better positioned to influence policy, secure investment, and support scalable solutions grounded in operational reality.
Leading from the Ground Up
As World Environment Day 2025 urges global action under the banner of #BeatPlasticPollution, the waste and resources sector is at a pivotal point. No longer just managing end-of-life materials, it is now a key player in reshaping how plastics are designed, valued, and reused.
The upcoming INC-5.2 negotiations in Geneva are expected to steer global policy toward prevention, transparency, and circularity. But regardless of the treaty’s outcome, it’s clear that traditional systems will not meet future challenges.
The UK has the capability to lead this shift—yet delays to EPR and DRS show that ambition must now be backed by implementation. While global standards are coming, many in the sector are already advancing—trialling reuse, upgrading infrastructure, and pushing for smarter product design.
As UNEP and OECD have emphasised, the cost of inaction is high. Reframing waste systems as investment opportunities—not liabilities—will be key to long-term impact.
The sector’s role is no longer just to manage waste. It is to minimise it and to help build the regenerative systems of tomorrow—starting now.
The post World Environment Day: What a global plastics deal means for UK waste strategy appeared first on Circular Online.