Comparing CurrentPlastic Waste Policies inCanada and China

A POLICY BRIEF BY BCCIC CLIMATE CHANGE

July 2020

Savannah TuckNaomi Lam

Policy Brief

CC-20/01-1167Work Plan 2020-1223.4

Ingrained in every lifestyle, plastics are ubiquitous for theirconvenience and practical use. The longevity of plastic waste,however, is a growing environmental concern that needs to beaddressed. This report focuses on the management of plasticwaste and compares the different policies implemented in Chinaand Canada. In China, new streamline policies include restrictingimported waste from foreign countries and establishing a rigoroustimeline tackling plastic waste domestically. In Canada, severalpolicy statements and pieces of legislation address plastic waste,such as a ban on single-use plastics and a growing stage for acircular economy approach. A comparison between governancestructures and its effect on implementing plastic wastemanagement is also presented in this report, considering thepotential pitfalls of China’s centralized autocratic system and thedisjunction in Canada’s democratic federalist structure. Finally, werecommend that Canada expand its efforts by ratifying acomprehensive piece of legislation on plastic waste across allprovinces, improve domestic recycling facilities and better involvecitizens in developing environmental policies.

The British Columbia Council for International Cooperation (BCCIC) is a network of civilsociety organizations and individuals moving toward a better world based in British Columbia,Canada. Its youth-led climate change branch focuses on providing sound and evidence-basedpolicy recommendations to all levels of governments while representing the interests ofCanadian youth at climate negotiations worldwide.

For more information on BCCIC or this publication, go to: bccic.ca or contact us:

Unit 322 – 268 Keefer St., Vancouver, BC, V6A 1X5Phone: 604.899.4475

BCCIC is supported by the Government of Canada and philanthropic partners. All intellectualcontent including omissions and errors remains the responsibility and property of the BCCouncil for International Cooperation.

Comparing Current Plastic Waste Policies in Canada and ChinaJuly 2020 | Policy Brief

AUTHORS

Savannah Tuck, Policy Analyst, Waste Management, BCCIC Climate ChangeNaomi Lam, Policy Analyst, Waste Management, BCCIC Climate Change

EDITORS

Brennan Strandberg-Salmon, Coordinator of Policy & Research, BCCIC Climate ChangeNicolas Gaulin, Executive Coordinator, BCCIC Climate Change

RECOMMENDED CITATION

Tuck, Savannah and Naomi Lam (2020): Comparing Current Plastic Waste Policies in Canada andChina; Strandberg-Salmon Brennan And Nicolas Gaulin (ed.); British Columbia Council forInternational Cooperation, Vancouver, BC, Canada. 25P.

Executive Summary 1

Introduction 2

China and Plastic Waste 4

China’s New Policy on Plastic Waste Management 5

Canada’s Plastic Pollution Strategies 7

Federal Level Policies 8

BC’s Plastic Action Plan 11

Impact of Governance Structures on the Rollout of PlasticWaste Policies 13

Political Challenges from Interest Groups 17

Recommendations 19

Conclusion 22

Bibliography 23

Authors 25

Table of Contents

We would like to acknowledge that our work takes place on thetraditional, ancestral, and unceded territories of the xʷməθkʷəy̓əm(Musqueam), sḵwx ̱wú7mesh (Squamish), sel ̓íl ̓witulh (Tsleil-Waututh)and sc ̓əwaθən məsteyəxʷ (Tsawwassen) nations.

We make this acknowledgement to pay our profound respect to the hosts of this land,for their stewardship for time immemorial, and to remind ourselves of the history andtheir present-day implications to our society as a whole.

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

Plastics have become part of every Canadian’slifestyle. As a result, the proper managementof plastic waste and recyclables is increasinglyimportant in order to halt their potentialenvironmental impacts.

Plastics have become part of every Canadian’s lifestyle, whether it is in the form of a plastic bag, thepackaging for a bag of chips, or the polyester in our clothes. Yet, its short use time and forgotten after-life has proved to be incredibly harmful to our environment. As a result, the proper management ofplastic waste and recyclables is increasingly important in order to halt their potential environmentaleffects. This report first details the current policies and actions introduced by Canada and China.Secondly, it considers the differences in governance structures between these two countries bycomparing and contrasting how they approach the issue of plastic waste. Finally, it utilizes the newfoundunderstanding of Canadian and Chinese policies to further make recommendations to better Canada’scurrent efforts.

● Once the largest importer of plastic waste, China has introduced strict measures like the Green Fencepolicy and the National Sword policy to require higher quality plastic recyclables from importers and tocontrol the overflow of waste in their facilities;

● China has made domestic efforts in tackling plastic waste, announcing the Direction on FurtherStrengthening the Control of Plastic Waste, which sets a timeline from 2020 to 2025 to meet specificimprovements towards managing plastic waste;

● Canada has adopted a range of policy statements and pieces of legislation that set out the ways in whichthe federal government is aiming to ban plastic pollution;

● The province of B.C. has taken matters into their own hands to establish the CleanBC initiative whichincludes a Plastics Action Plan aiming to advance plastic waste policies;

● In a democratic governance system like Canada, its reliance on voter popularity in the election cyclemakes short-term results more desirable than long term ones, proving difficulty in advancingenvironmental issues. Additionally, the split in federalist governance must come together to endorse acomprehensive policy;

● China’s centralized government system has identified plastic waste as an issue and authorized the swiftfabrication of policies to tackle it. Yet, its authoritarian regime may also indicate the suppressing ofinformation and opinions from civil society upon implementation of such policies.

COMPARING CURRENT PLASTIC WASTE POLICIES IN CANADA AND CHINA 1

Since their introduction to mainstream society after WorldWar II, plastics have become ubiquitous in day-to-day life.While plastics serve the needs of consumers and producersalike, their production and irresponsible disposal comes ata major environmental cost. Plastics rely on the extractionof fossil fuels.

Each stage of production is responsible for high levels ofgreenhouse gas emissions, threatening our ability to meetglobal climate targets. Plastic products have a high carbonfootprint, and improper disposal can have negativeconsequences on the environment and society. Plasticpollution negatively impacts water, soil, and air sources.Plastic waste accumulation in oceans emit methane gas,and microplastics limit the ocean’s ability of carbonsequestration.¹ Potential harm is caused to the functioningof ecosystems, biodiversity, and the habitat of organisms.

Further, plastic pollution may have detrimental impacts onhuman health via the unintentional ingestion ofmicroplastics. Consequently, policy measures to reduce oreradicate the impact of plastic pollution have been a keycomponent of climate action plans.

¹ Center for International EnvironmentalLaw, Plastic and Climate: The Hidden Costsof a Plastic Planet, 3.

Introduction

COMPARING CURRENT PLASTIC WASTE POLICIES IN CANADA AND CHINA 2

With plastic pollution becoming a central concern ofinternational organizations and governments around theworld, it is clear that leadership and ambitious, explicitaction is needed to curtail the negative environmentalimpacts.

China’s National Development and Reform Commission andMinistry of Ecology and Environment statement, Direction onFurther Strengthening the Control of Plastic Waste, promotesan aggressive and comprehensive strategy to combatplastic pollution within a relatively short time frame.

Compared to the Chinese strategy, the Canadian approachto tackling plastic pollution is not as streamlined, withCanada’s division of powers making it more difficult for thefederal government to implement a single, comprehensivestrategy on plastic pollution. While many municipalities andprovincial governments across Canada have taken localaction against plastic pollution, the Canadian governmenthas indicated its desire to assume a leadership role incontrolling plastic pollution through various strategies andstatements.

This report aims to outline a comparison of Canada andChina’s policies, while identifying the factors that impede orfacilitate the realization of each country’s plastic pollutiongoals.

By Nick Fewings | Unsplash

COMPARING CURRENT PLASTIC WASTE POLICIES IN CANADA AND CHINA 3

For decades China has been the largest importer of plasticwaste, where recycled materials are processed into newproducts for export. In 2013, China disrupted the recycledplastics market with the announcement of its Green Fencepolicy. Green Fence was instituted to increase the quality ofraw materials entering the country by integrating measuresto curtail the number of contaminated recyclables andwaste.² Inspections of imported materials were introduced,with shippers whose waste did not meet China’s standardshaving their licenses revoked.

In 2017, China went further with the announcement of theNational Sword Policy, which banned the import of certainsolid wastes. Taking effect in 2018, National Sword putcontamination limits on recyclable material.³ The NationalSword Policy impacted the Asia region tremendously.Countries such as Malaysia, Vietnam, Thailand, and Indiawho also import plastic waste, became inundated withimports. These countries introduced import bans as ameans to control the overflow of plastics to their facilities.

Research conducted by Greenpeace shows that Canada andother high-income countries diverted its plastic exportsfrom China to Malaysia after the announcement of theban.⁴ Greenpeace uncovered Canadian trash connected toan unregulated Malaysian facility, underscoring the burdenWestern plastic waste has on the Southeast Asian region.Unregulated facilities include sites of illegal burning anddumping. Open air burning and dumping is hazardous tothe environment, causes water and air pollution, and islikely the root of many health conditions of populationswithin these regions.⁵

The increase of plastic waste bans from Southeast Asiancountries created a logjam of recycling in the internationalrecycling system. Recyclables began accumulating infacilities, and with some Western countries unable to meetthe guidelines set out by China, countries began landfillingrecyclables. China’s restrictions on plastic waste importshave exposed how Western countries possess insufficient

COMPARING CURRENT PLASTIC WASTE POLICIES IN CANADA AND CHINA 4

China andPlastic Waste

² Editorial Staff, “From Green Fence to red alert:A China timeline,” Resource Recycling, lastupdated April 8, 2020.

³ Kevin Pink, “What is the National Sword?,”Centre for Eco Technology, last updated May 8,2018.

⁴ Philippa Duchastel de Montrouge, “MediaBriefing: Canada’s Plastic Waste Export TrendsFollowing China's Import Ban,” GreenpeaceCanada, January 10, 2019

⁵ Ibid.

COMPARING CURRENT PLASTIC WASTE POLICIES IN CANADA AND CHINA 5

⁶ Adapted from BCCIC translation of TheNational Development and ReformCommission and the Ministry of Ecology andEnvironment of the People’s Republic ofChina’s statement, Direction on FurtherStrengthening the Control of Plastic Waste.

By 2025:

Establish a managementsystem for the production,distribution, consumption,recycling, and disposal ofplastic products;

Form a multidisciplinary co-governance system;

Improve the developmentand application of alternativeproducts;

Amount of plastic waste inkey municipalities will besignificantly reduced, andplastic pollution effectivelycontrolled.

By 2020:

China hopes to take the leadin banning and restricting theproduction, sale, andconsumption of some plasticproducts in some regions andareas of the country.

By 2022:

Significantly reduce theconsumption of single-useplastics;

Promote alternative products;

Increase the amount ofplastic waste reutilization andwaste-to-energy practices;

Encourage scalablereductions in prominentplastic use sectors such as e-commerce, courier delivery,and food takeaway.

infrastructure to process their own plastic waste. Further,China’s bans on plastic imports has highlighted thedeficiencies in the global recycling system.

China’s Policy: Direction on FurtherStrengthening the Control of Plastic Waste

China’s concern with plastic pollution stems from thenegative effect plastic pollution has on the health of theChinese people and the development of the Chinese state.The major goals of Direction on Further Strengthening theControl of Plastic Waste are outlined below:⁶

While the Green Fence and National Sword policies areaimed at curbing imported plastic pollution, Direction onFurther Strengthening the Control of Plastic Wastedemonstrates China’s desire to tackle domestic plasticwaste generation. China is focused on a completeprohibition on the sale and production of certain plasticproducts like plastic bags, disposable tableware, plasticsupplies used by hotels, and packaging by 2020. Thestatement also demonstrates the urgency required tocombat plastic waste by coordinating the state’s actionswithin a five-year timeframe, as well as China’s desire toaugment its domestic recycling system.

The shorter transition period puts pressure on Chineseindustry to develop innovative and sustainable solutions toplastic products, optimize new business models groundedin green supply chains, and practice corporateenvironmental responsibility. This is emphasized by thestrategy’s aim to lead by innovation. As the phases of thepolicy are rolled out, China has the potential to emerge as aleader in the world by banning single-use plastics, whichadd no value to society, while investing in the technologyand infrastructure required for a modern and complexrecycling industry.

Diversified participation and corporate responsibility arealso prioritized within the Chinese strategy. Specifically,government supervision and management will ensureeffective implementation of plastic pollution policies,ecological protection, and enforcement of plastic wasteregulations through strengthened environmental lawenforcement. China’s policy supports the investigation andpunishment of entities that have not adopted plastic wasteregulations. The Chinese government’s enforcementmechanisms and willingness to punish for noncompliancedemonstrate China’s steadfast position towards plasticpollution.

COMPARING CURRENT PLASTIC WASTE POLICIES IN CANADA AND CHINA 6

Lead by innovationand strict localenforcementdemonstrate thePRC’s commitmentto reduce plasticwaste pollution.

Canada’s PlasticPollution StrategiesThere is no single policy in Canada that is targeted towards theeradication of plastic pollution within the state. However, there aremany different policy statements and pieces of legislation that focus onplastic pollution in some form.

“Canadians know first-hand the impacts ofplastic pollution, and are tired of seeing theirbeaches, parks, streets, and shorelines litteredwith plastic waste. We have a responsibility towork with our partners to reduce plasticpollution, protect the environment, and createjobs and grow our economy. We owe it to ourkids to keep the environment clean and safe forgenerations to come.

The Rt. Hon. Justin TrudeauPrime Minister of Canada

COMPARING CURRENT PLASTIC WASTE POLICIES IN CANADA AND CHINA 7

June 2019 Statement by the Government ofCanada declaring a ban on harmful single-useplastics as early as 2021

This includes plastic bags, straws, cutlery, plates, and stirsticks. Additional steps will be taken to reduce pollutionfrom plastic products and packaging. The federalgovernment also seeks to collaborate with the provincesand territories to develop targets and standards forcompanies that manufacture or sell plastic products andpackaging.⁷

Canadian Council of Ministers of theEnvironment (CCME) Strategy on Zero PlasticWaste (2018)

This strategy builds on existing government programs andregulations, voluntary initiatives by industry, environment,and community organizations, and the continuedimplementation of current initiatives such as the Canada-wide Action Plan on Extended Producer Responsibility (2009).The foundational principle of the Strategy on Zero PlasticWaste is a circular economy approach, which seeks toprolong the useful life of plastic products to keep them inthe economy and out of the environment.⁸

The circular economy approach relies on consumereducation, research, regulation, market-based instruments,and innovation throughout the plastic life-cycle.⁹ Measuresand activities to enable buy-in to a circular economyapproach include performance-based approaches (productregulation, extended producer responsibility, distributionbans, standards and performance agreements), marketinstruments (incentives, fees, taxes, deposit returns, directinvestments, public procurement), and voluntary initiatives(industry targets, certification programs, education andawareness, corporate initiatives).¹⁰

COMPARING CURRENT PLASTIC WASTE POLICIES IN CANADA AND CHINA 8

⁷ Justin Trudeau, Prime Minister of Canada,“Canada to ban harmful single-use plastics andhold companies responsible for plastic waste,”News Release, (June 10, 2019).

⁸ Canadian Council of Ministers of theEnvironment, Strategy on Zero Plastic Waste, 4,November 2018.

⁹ Ibid, 4.

¹⁰ Ibid, 10.

Every year,Canadians throwaway over 3 milliontonnes of plasticwaste, representingup to $8 billion peryear in lost valueand wastes valuableresources andenergy.⁷

Oceans Plastics Charter (2018)

The Charter is a partnership between 26 governments and65 businesses and organizations to commit to taking actiontowards a sustainable approach on plastics use. TheCharter prioritizes sustainable design, production and after-use markets, collection, management, and other systemsinfrastructure, sustainable lifestyles and education,research, innovation, and new technologies, and coastaland shoreline action.¹¹ A snapshot of some of the Charter’sgoals include working with industry towards 100% reusable,recyclable, and recoverable plastics by 2030, working withindustry and various levels of government to recover 100%of all plastics by 2040, harmonizing G7 science-basedmonitoring methodologies, and promoting leadership ofyouth and women as promoters of sustainableconsumption and production.¹²

Six Priority Areas for the Canadian Council ofMinisters of the Environment

Canadian Council of Ministers of the Environment Phase 1:Canada-Wide Action Plan on Zero Plastic Waste (2019)identifies six priority action areas for plastic pollution withestimated completion dates focused on product design,single-use plastics, collection systems, recycling capacity,domestic markets:¹³

1. Extended Producer Responsibility (EPR), December 2020

2. Single-Use and Disposable Plastic Products, December2021

3. National Performance Requirements and Standards,December 2020-2022

4. Incentives for Circular Economy, ongoing

5. Infrastructure and Innovation Investments, 2020

6. Public Procurement and Green Operations, December2020-2021

COMPARING CURRENT PLASTIC WASTE POLICIES IN CANADA AND CHINA 9

¹¹ Government of Canada, “Ocean PlasticsCharter,” Canada.ca, last modified May 6 2020.

¹² Ibid.

¹³ Canadian Council of Ministers of theEnvironment, Canada-wide Action Plan on ZeroPlastic Waste Phase 1, June 2019, 7-8.

Photo by Ocean Plastic Charter

Although the Canadian government declared a ban onsome single-use plastics, it does not take effect until 2021.The Canadian Council of Ministers of the EnvironmentPhase 2 will focus on preventing plastic pollution inwaterways, oceans, lakes, advancing science in monitoringthe impacts of plastic pollution, consumer awareness,clean-up, and global action, which will be considered in2020.¹⁴

While Canada aims to engage various stakeholders andindustries to reduce plastic pollution, it is done so throughvoluntary initiatives or EPR programs where plasticpollution responsibility is transferred to corporations andproducers. There are no legislative bans on single-useplastics in effect at the federal level in Canada, thereforethere are no grounds for punishment for industries andcorporations who are plastic polluters. However, a handfulof municipalities are leading the effort on single-use plasticsbans across the country. Further, the Canadian strategypromotes a collaborative model across industry,businesses, and different levels of government where bestpractices and tools can be exchanged in order to achieve itsplastic pollution goals.

COMPARING CURRENT PLASTIC WASTE POLICIES IN CANADA AND CHINA 10

¹³ Canadian Council of Ministers of theEnvironment, Canada-wide Action Plan on ZeroPlastic Waste Phase 1, 3.

By Lucas van Oort | Unsplash

Strong efforts have been made at the provincial level sincethe B.C. government released the CleanBC initiative in 2018.Published in 2019, the Plastics Action Plan is a policyconsultation paper addressing the overwhelming concernfor plastic waste in BC. It proposes four main solutionstowards the Recycling Regulation of the EnvironmentalManagement Act (EMA), which sets guidelines for wastemanagement in BC. Each recommendation is brieflyoutlined in the following section, as described in CleanBC’sPlastics Action Plan: Policy Consultation Paper:¹⁵

01 Bans on Single-Use Packaging

● A preventative measure to reduce the amount of plasticwaste across communities and landfills;

● Packaging includes plastic films (e.g. plastic bags,pouches or wraps) and containers (e.g. bottles, cups,tubs) that are used for food items, consumer goods orcosmetics and personal items;

● In 2020, the City of Vancouver banned plastic straws,foam cups and take-out containers and many other B.C.communities are following suit;

● Two implementation methods are currently beingconsidered:

□ Regulating the supply of identifiable plasticpackaging or banning it all together;

□ Prohibiting the disposal of plastic packaging thatcould otherwise be recycled;

● Important to consider are alternatives to single-usepackaging, and whether such options would beenvironmentally viable. For example, evaluating theproduction cycle of bags made of plastic versus paper.Research has shown that paper bags require four timesmore energy to produce and releases two times moregreenhouse gases - but their ability to bio-degradetrumps the environmental hazards of plastic and thus,are more favourable.

COMPARING CURRENT PLASTIC WASTE POLICIES IN CANADA AND CHINA 11

¹⁵ Ministry of Environment and Climate ChangeStrategy, Plastics Action Plan: PolicyConsultation Paper, 2019.

BC’s PlasticAction Plan

02 More Recycling Options

● B.C.’s Extended Producer Responsibility (EPR) alreadyregulates recycling for packaging and paper products,but an extension to this could be made by includingpackaging-like products (e.g. wrapping paper, sandwichbags) and single-use items (e.g. plastic straws, stirsticks) therefore expanding required types of plasticproducts to be collected.

03 Expanding Plastic Bottle and BeverageContainer Returns

● Building on the current EPR deposit-refund system toencompass all drink containers and standardizing thedeposit amount to 10 cents;

● Milk and milk substitute containers are excluded fromthe deposit-refund system. These products arecurrently considered under the residential packagingand paper products schedule of the RecyclingRegulation;

● With refund amounts currently ranging from 5 to 20cents, it is apparent that some containers are morelikely to be returned than others. By setting a universalrefund for all containers, it is expected that 50 millionmore beverage containers will be brought back;

● Additionally, refunds should be made throughelectronic means other than cash to make it moreefficient for the consumer.

04 Reducing Plastics Overall

● Developing national recycled content performancestandards will ensure that recycled plastics areincorporated and used in the formation of newpackaging or products;

● Putting such standards in place will compliment otherpotential policies and encourage producers to userecycled plastic in their products;

● It has also been found that the reduced usage of virginresources lowers greenhouse gas emissions by 70%.

COMPARING CURRENT PLASTIC WASTE POLICIES IN CANADA AND CHINA 12

While CleanBC hasyet to release newupdates on theprogress of thesepolicies, a reportfollowing thepotentialimplementation isexpected to beissued soon.

Impact of GovernanceStructures on the Rolloutof Plastic Waste Policies

COMPARING CURRENT PLASTIC WASTE POLICIES IN CANADA AND CHINA 13

Although the Canadian government declared a ban onsome single-use plastics, it does not take effect until 2021.The Canadian Council of Ministers of the EnvironmentPhase 2 will focus on preventing plastic pollution inwaterways, oceans, lakes, advancing science in monitoringthe impacts of plastic pollution, consumer awareness,clean-up, and global action, which will be considered in2020.¹⁴

While Canada aims to engage various stakeholders andindustries to reduce plastic pollution, it is done so throughvoluntary initiatives or EPR programs where plasticpollution responsibility is transferred to corporations andproducers. There are no legislative bans on single-useplastics in effect at the federal level in Canada, thereforethere are no grounds for punishment for industries andcorporations who are plastic polluters. However, a handfulof municipalities are leading the effort on single-use plasticsbans across the country. Further, the Canadian strategypromotes a collaborative model across industry,businesses, and different levels of government where bestpractices and tools can be exchanged in order to achieve itsplastic pollution goals.

Democracies are admired for their values of transparency,accountability, equality, and openness. Democraciesguarantee certain freedoms and principles such as regularelections with broad participation, freedom of the press,free expression of opinion, few barriers to organization, anda representative system that allows policy views to betransmitted from citizens to policymakers.¹⁶ Consequently,when the political and social environment changes, thesevalues allow for adaptive policies. Yet, as plastic pollution isan increasingly salient issue among voters, democraticgovernments must be more responsive and efficient in theirformulation and implementation of plastic waste legislation.Two factors impact a democratic country’s ability to rapidlyimplement policy: timeliness, in terms of changing eventsthat attract media and voter attention, and constitutionalrules of representation that constrain action due to theshort time horizon of the election cycle.¹⁷ As a result, we seedemocratic governments prioritizing present over futureinterests. Growing plastic pollution necessitates action now,and developing a Canada-wide policy will be necessary tomatch the words of the federal government with concreteaction.

In a federal system like Canada, there exists structuralimpediments to efficient policy action, such as the divisionof powers between the federal and provincial governments.With environmental authority spread across different levelsof government and agencies, plastic waste policy solutionsare subject to time lags that aim to avoid restrictions tosocial, civil, and political liberties.¹⁸ Accordingly, plasticwaste bans can be found across municipalities in BritishColumbia, Alberta, Quebec, and Newfoundland, but none atthe federal level.¹⁹ While federalism may impederepresentational efficiency in the central government, itoffers a more diverse source of information on policyproblems and potential solutions across provincial andmunicipal governments.²⁰ Therefore, if the Canadiangovernment is honest in its desire to be a leader incontrolling plastic waste, then it should harmonize currentplastic waste policies that are in effect across various

COMPARING CURRENT PLASTIC WASTE POLICIES IN CANADA AND CHINA 14

¹⁶ Bryan D. Jones, Derek A. Epp, and Frank R.Baumgartner, “Democracy, Authoritarianism,and Policy Punctuations,” International Reviewof Public Policy 1, no. 1 (2019): 10, doi:10.4000/irpp.318.

¹⁷ Nico Stehr, “Exceptional Circumstances: DoesClimate Change Trump Democracy?,” Issues inScience and Technology 31, no. 2 (Winter2016): 40-41.

¹⁸ Bruce Gilley, “AuthoritarianEnvironmentalism and China’s Response toClimate Change,” Environmental Politics 21,no.2 (March 2012): 289,doi:10.1080/09644016.2012.651904.

¹⁹ Plastics Action Centre, Plastic Bans (Canada),[Microsoft Excel Spreadsheet].

²⁰ Bryan D. Jones, Derek A. Epp, and Frank R.Baumgartner, “Democracy, Authoritarianism,and Policy Punctuations,” 17.

We see democraticgovernmentsprioritizing presentover future interestsdue to twoconstraints:timeliness andconstitutional rule.

jurisdictions within Canada. Collaborating with provincialand municipal policymakers will allow various stakeholdersto come together to build a comprehensive policy approachto plastic waste that all levels of government in Canada canendorse.

An authoritarian regime focused on policy stability may beseen as maladaptive to policy change in the face of achanging environment. Autocratic regimes arecharacterized by centralized governance structures, withlimitations on the flow and access of information, andgreater central authority over the economy. Althoughindividual freedoms are restricted in authoritarian regimes,the concentration of state authority in executive institutionsmay allow for the rapid formulation and implementation ofpolicies.²¹ Rapid action is necessary to mitigate andovercome the challenges associated with climate changeand plastic pollution. China’s approach to climate actiondemonstrates an authoritarian environmentalism model.

Authoritarian environmentalism is a public policy modelwhere concentrated executive authority seeks to improveenvironmental outcomes in a few agencies, where publicparticipation is limited to a small group of scientific andtechnocratic elites, resulting in a rapid and comprehensiveresponse with limits on individual freedoms.²²

Direction on Further Strengthening the Control of Plastic Wastehighlights a top-down policy approach, with regulatory and

COMPARING CURRENT PLASTIC WASTE POLICIES IN CANADA AND CHINA 15

²¹ Gilley, “Authoritarian Environmentalism andChina’s Response to Climate Change,” 288.

²² Ibid.

By Nick Fewings | Unsplash

enforcement powers derived from the central state. Policystability in China stems from the institutional structures andcentralization of power within the Chinese CommunistParty. The governance structures and enforcementmechanisms of state domination that exist in China toinduce compliance from businesses, producers, andconsumers make citizens amenable to authoritarianenvironmentalism. The Chinese policy demonstrates thestate’s ability to produce a quick, centralized response thatmobilizes state and social actors. With the development ofstable institutions, sound public policy, and effectiveexecution by a strong administrative apparatus, China hasintroduced the governance structures required to combatplastic pollution in the country. Sound governancestructures are important to effective action on climatechange related problems, so long as there is minimalcorruption.²³

How China’s increased environment of repression underthe Xi regime impacts the roll-out of its plastic pollutionpolicies will be interesting to observe.²⁴ A departure fromthe traditional authoritarian environmentalism model isexpressed in China’s desire to foster capacity building byestablishing a multidisciplinary co-governance structure.This is encouraging, since progress in environmental policyrequires the involvement of non-government interests.²⁵While Direction On Further Strengthening the Control of PlasticWaste indicates that organizational leadership and co-governance will report to the National Development andReform Commission and the Ministry of Ecology andEnvironment, it is unclear if civil society organizations orenvironmental non-government organizations will beincluded in the consultation or implementation stages ofthe new governance system. Finally, the investigation andpunishment of entities that have not adopted plastic wasteregulations leads to uncertainty on the severity ofpunishment, and whether the record of punishment issuppressed to avoid international criticism, or exposed tointimidate non-compliers.

COMPARING CURRENT PLASTIC WASTE POLICIES IN CANADA AND CHINA 16

²³ Peter Burnell, “International Support forAction on Climate Change and Democracy:Exploring Complementaries.” Third WorldQuarterly 35, no. 7 (August 2014): 1218,doi:10.1080/01436597.2014.926111.

²⁴ Human Rights Watch, “World Report 2019:China.”

²⁵ Marianne Kneuer, “Who is greener? Climateaction and political regimes: trade-offs fornational and international actors,”Democratization 19, no. 5 (October 2012): 880,doi:10.1080/13510347.2012.709686.

Sound governancestructures areimportant toeffective action onclimate changerelated problems, solong as there isminimal corruption.

Lobbyists and interest groups of petrochemical industrypresent a significant challenge in achieving meaningfulregulation on single-use plastics. Plastics and fossil fuelcorporations are big business in Canada, with plastics resinsand products accounting for 35 billion dollars of sales inCanada.²⁶ The plastics economy is designed to be linear,with products ending up in landfills. A circular economy, asrecommended by many reports on plastic waste andoutlined in strategies of Canadian and provincialgovernments, is not in the interest of petrochemical andfossil fuel corporations, who benefit from the production ofplastics. Further, economic and political interests tied tofossil fuel projects may impede the implementation ofeffective plastic waste policies. However, these corporationscould take the lead by developing secondary markets forplastic waste, and manufacturing plastics from recycledmaterials. In expanding these markets and facilitatingdemand for post-consumer plastics, these corporations willbe able to achieve zero plastic waste goals, while promotinga circular economy approach.

COMPARING CURRENT PLASTIC WASTE POLICIES IN CANADA AND CHINA 17

²⁶ Environment and Climate Change Canada,Economic Study of the Canadian PlasticIndustry, Markets and Waste, 2019, i.

PoliticalChallengesfrom InterestGroups

By Jonathan Chng| Unsplash

Trade organizations such as the Canadian Plastics IndustryAssociation (CPIA) advocate for plastics and defend theindustry against specific product attacks.²⁷ CPIA seesrecycling strategies and improved waste managementpractices as the solution to combatting the issue of plasticpollution, rather than bans on plastics that have been calledon by many climate groups and various levels ofgovernment. Executives of petrochemical corporationspromote the idea that plastic waste is the problem, notplastics. In defence of plastics, these interest groupspromote the benefits of plastics in reducing food waste, alarge contributor of greenhouse gases, and how themanufacturing of alternative products such as paper orglass emit a higher level greenhouse gases than plastics.²⁸

These corporations are correct that waste management andrecycling capabilities need to be expanded in order to dealwith the rise in plastic waste. Yet, this approach allows fossilfuel corporations to continue to move forward with pipelineprojects and the extraction of fossil fuels. Petrochemicalcompanies who take this narrow approach have thepotential to get left behind. Others in the industry like DowChemical have diversified, and taken an alternativeapproach by investing in innovation and clean-up efforts,while encouraging other plastics companies to join them inthe development of collaborative solutions.²⁹

Achieving a zero-waste economy will require collaborationand cooperation among petrochemical corporations andvarious levels of government, therefore, it will be necessaryto develop incentive structures for value recovery andinnovation in product design.

COMPARING CURRENT PLASTIC WASTE POLICIES IN CANADA AND CHINA 18

²⁷ “About CPIA,” CPIA, accessed May 26, 2020.

²⁸ Brittany Gervais, “Alberta industry saysplastics are not the problem, waste is,” St.Albert Today, February 20, 2020.

²⁹ Ibid.

This report focuses on the management of plastic wasteand examines the different policies that have beenimplemented in China and Canada. By thoroughly assessingthe progress made in both countries, we present severalsuggestions that could better plastic waste management inCanada.

Federal legislation on plastic wasteand ratification across all provincesWe recommend that a comprehensive piece of federallegislation be focused on tackling plastic waste and beratified across all provinces.

One of Canada’s major flaws in the handling of plastic wasteis the disjunction between federal and provincial policies.The democratic system coupled with the autonomy offeredto provincial levels of government disrupts the streamlinedprocess that China’s authoritative structure offers. Wepropose that more focus on plastic waste should be madeat the federal level. This means that responsibility is nottransferred to corporations and producers throughvoluntary initiatives or EPR programs, but legislationregulating plastic waste at the federal level is adopted. Asan example, at the provincial level, CleanBC’s initiative hasproduced an Action Plan that governs and restricts the useof plastic at a higher standard, with the promise ofpressuring corporations and further motivating consumersto take climate change seriously.

Further, the Federation of Canadian Municipalities (FCM)recommends that the federal government take a lead inreducing plastic waste by creating a common set ofdefinitions and performance standards for plastic.³⁰Additionally, the FCM recommends the federal governmentadopt a National Plastics Reduction Strategy, which includes

COMPARING CURRENT PLASTIC WASTE POLICIES IN CANADA AND CHINA 19

³⁰ Vicky-May Hamm to Standing Committee onEnvironment and Sustainable Development,Reducing Plastic Pollution, April 26, 2019, 3.

Recommendations

eliminating the use of problematic products and packagingand implementing standards to ensure they are reusable,recyclable or compostable, as well as developing nationalperformance standards for reducing and recycling single-use plastics.³¹

However, the problem lies in the inconsistent policies thatdiffer between provinces. If such a plan is advanced at thefederal level, there is an opportunity for all provinces towork towards mitigating the effects of plastic waste. Thisshould not infringe on provincial authority, as Section 92Aof the Constitution Act 1982 speaks to the provinces’exclusive ability to make laws relating to the development,management, and conservation of non-renewable naturalresources, forestry resources, and electrical energy.³² Sinceplastic waste is not a natural resource, a Canada-widelegislation should have no infringement on the provincialpowers. Further, the Canadian Environmental ManagementAct, 1999 underlines the federal government’s ability toexercise its powers to promote the protection of theenvironment, to prevent environmental degradation, andreinforcing pollution prevention approaches by acting incooperation with governments, establishing nationallyconsistent standards of environmental quality, and takesmeasures with aims of intergovernmental agreements andarrangements to achieve the highest level of environmentalquality throughout Canada.³³ By ensuring this legislation isratified by all provinces, the federal government and theprovinces have the ability to promote a zero plastic wasteagenda, while employing models of collaboration andcooperation encouraged by the Canadian EnvironmentalProtection Act.

Improving domestic recycling inorder to limit export wasteWe recommend expanding recycling facilities in Canada andrefining domestic recycling policies to better combat plasticwaste. Through examining China’s efforts and its previous

COMPARING CURRENT PLASTIC WASTE POLICIES IN CANADA AND CHINA 20

³¹ Hamm to Standing Committee onEnvironment and Sustainable Development, 8.

³² Constitution Acts, 1867 to 1982, s.92A.

³³ Canadian Environmental Protection Act,1999, c.33.

role as the largest importer of plastic waste, the effects ofthe Green Fence and National Sword policy exposed thelimitations of waste management in many high-incomecountries including Canada. Prior to these bans andrestrictions, China received 100,618 tonnes of plastic wastefrom Canada in 2015.³⁴ These staggering figuresdemonstrate the dire need for Canada to better process thehigh volumes of plastic waste and restrain from shifting theresponsibility for waste handling to other countries. Basedon B.C.’s Action Plan, several tentative policies showedpromising efforts to improve recycling policies, thoughmore actions should be taken up by Canadian provinces.

Increasing inclusion andinvolvement of citizens indeveloping environmental policiesWe recommend that Canada should take full advantage ofits democratic system by improving communication withthe general public. Given the current concern andawareness for environmental problems from Canadians,additional programs should be introduced to include morevoices in policy making. Forms of “self-regulation,networking and cooperative planning” could beincorporated under the umbrella of environmentalstrategies - which could mobilize more people to expresstheir thoughts on plastic waste policies.³⁵ By doing so, it islikely that more innovative ideas and technologicalinnovations could arise as a means to tackle plastic waste.Existing efforts have been made in Canada by launchingplastic innovation challenges to Canadian enterprises andmobilizing Canadians through community events (i.e. clean-ups, research on plastics and marine litter).³⁶ We call formore engagement overall and a collective approach indealing with the growing plastic waste issue.

COMPARING CURRENT PLASTIC WASTE POLICIES IN CANADA AND CHINA 21

³⁴ Duchastel de Montrouge, “Media Briefing:Canada’s Plastic Waste Export Trends FollowingChina's Import Ban,”

³⁵ Kneuer, “Who is greener? Climate action andpolitical regimes: trade-offs for national andinternational actors,” 880.

³⁶ Government of Canada, “Zero plastic waste:Canada’s actions” Canada.ca, last updatedFebruary 12, 2020.

As concern for the environmental impact of plastic pollutionincreases, more countries are taking action to combatplastic pollution through various climate plans.

Canada wants to be seen as a leader in tackling plasticpollution, yet the democratic model and division of powersthat exist in the federal system make it difficult to introducecomprehensive, nationwide action. The democratic systemis founded on a diversity of voices and civic participation.

If Canada wants to progress in its climate policy, controllingplastic waste is a specific action the government can take.By empowering groups that specialize in plastic pollutionand strengthening local and regional capacities to respondto the plastic waste problem, Canada can foster a collectiveapproach. Many municipalities and provinces have takentheir own lead by enacting plastic waste bans, and theCanadian government should look to existing policies andfoster collaboration amongst the provinces, municipalities,and other voices within the environmental movement toformulate federal legislation to control plastic waste in thecountry.

On the other hand, China’s authoritarian system allows forthe rapid deployment of a plastic waste policy such asDirection On Further Strengthening the Control of Plastic Waste.The efficient policy response and comprehensive nature ofthe Chinese policy statement is admirable, anddemonstrates the urgency required to control plastic waste.However, this is not to say that adopting an authoritarianapproach is the key to achieving zero plastic wastelegislation. Canada can learn from China’s expeditious andwidespread approach to controlling plastic waste, whileChina could see further progress in climate action byadopting an inclusionary model of capacity building andcivic participation similar to Canada.

Conclusion

COMPARING CURRENT PLASTIC WASTE POLICIES IN CANADA AND CHINA 22

Burnell, Peter. “International Support for Action on ClimateChange and Democracy: Exploring Complementaries.” ThirdWorld Quarterly 35, no. 7 (August 2014): 1216-38.doi:10.1080/01436597.2014.926111.

Canadian Council of Ministers of the Environment. Canada-wideAction Plan on Zero Plastic Waste Phase 1. June 2019. https://www.ccme.ca/files/Resources/waste/plastics/1289_CCME%20Canada-wide%20Action%20Plan%20on%20Zero%20Plastic%20Waste_EN_June%2027-19.pdf.

Canadian Council of Ministers of the Environment. Strategy onZero Plastic Waste. November 2018. https://www.ccme.ca/files/Resources/waste/plastics/STRATEGY%20ON%20ZERO%20PLASTIC%20WASTE.pdf.

Canadian Environmental Protection Act, 1999, c.33. https://laws-lois.justice.gc.ca/eng/acts/c-15.31/page-1.html#h-63247.

Center for International Environmental Law. Plastic and Climate:The Hidden Costs of a Plastic Planet. https://www.ciel.org/wp-content/uploads/2019/05/Plastic-and-Climate-FINAL-2019.pdf.

Constitution Acts, 1867 and 1982. https://laws-lois.justice.gc.ca/eng/Const/page-4.html#h-17.

CPIA. “About CPIA.” Accessed May 26, 2020. https://www.plastics.ca/AboutCPIA.

Duchastel de Montrouge, Philippa. “Media Briefing: Canada’sPlastic Waste Export Trends Following China's Import Ban.”Greenpeace Canada. Last updated January 10, 2019. https://www.greenpeace.org/canada/en/qa/6971/media-briefing-canadas-plastic-waste-export-trends-following-chinas-import-ban/.

Editorial Staff. “From Green Fence to red alert: A China timeline.”Resource Recycling. Last updated April 8, 2020. https://resource-recycling.com/recycling/2018/02/13/green-fence-red-alert-china-timeline/.

Environment and Climate Change Canada. Economic Study of theCanadian Plastic Industry, Markets and Waste. 2019. http://

Bibliography

COMPARING CURRENT PLASTIC WASTE POLICIES IN CANADA AND CHINA 23

publications.gc.ca/collections/collection_2019/eccc/En4-366-1-2019-eng.pdf.

Gervais, Brittany. “Alberta industry says plastics are not theproblem, waste is.” St. Albert Today, February 20, 2020.https://www.stalberttoday.ca/local-news/alberta-industry-says-plastics-are-not-the-problem-waste-is-2100335.

Gilley, Bruce. “Authoritarian Environmentalism and China’sResponse to Climate Change.” Environmental Politics 21, no.2(March 2012): 287-307. doi:10.1080/09644016.2012.651904

Government of Canada. “Ocean Plastics Charter.” Canada.ca. Lastmodified May 6, 2020. https://www.canada.ca/en/environment-climate-change/services/managing-reducing-waste/international-commitments/ocean-plastics-charter.html.

Government of Canada. “Zero plastic waste: Canada’s actions.”Canada.ca. February 12, 2020. https://www.canada.ca/en/environment-climate-change/services/managing-reducing-waste/zero-plastic-waste/canada-action.html.

Hamm, Vicki-May to Standing Committee on Environment andSustainable Development. Reducing Plastic Pollution. April 26,2019 https://www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Committee/421/ENVI/Brief/BR10429653/br-external/FederationOfCanadianMunicipalities-e.pdf.

Human Rights Watch. “World Report 2019: China.” https://www.hrw.org/world-report/2019/country-chapters/china-and-tibet.

Jones, Bryan D., Derek A. Epp, and Frank R. Baumgartner.“Democracy, Authoritarianism, and Policy Punctuations.”International Review of Public Policy 1, no. 1 (2019): 7-26.doi:10.4000/irpp.318.

Kneuer, Marianne. “Who is greener? Climate action and politicalregimes: trade-offs for national and international actors.”Democratization 19, no. 5 (October 2012): 865-888.doi:10.1080/13510347.2012.709686.

Ministry of Environment and Climate Change Strategy. Plastics

COMPARING CURRENT PLASTIC WASTE POLICIES IN CANADA AND CHINA 24

Action Plan: Policy Consultation Paper. 2019. https://engage.gov.bc.ca/app/uploads/sites/121/2019/07/CleanBC_PlasticsActionPlan_ConsultationPaper.pdf.

National Development and Reform Commission and the Ministryof Ecology and Environment. Direction on FurtherStrengthening the Control of Plastic Waste. January 20, 2020.Translated by BCCIC.

Plastics Action Centre. Plastic Bans (Canada). [Microsoft ExcelSpreadsheet]. https://plasticactioncentre.ca/directory/list-of-plastic-bans/.

Pink, Kevin. “What is the National Sword?.” Centre for EcoTechnology. Last updated May 8, 2018. https://www.centerforecotechnology.org/what-is-the-national-sword/.

Stehr, Nico. “Exceptional Circumstances: Does Climate ChangeTrump Democracy?” Issues in Science and Technology 31, no.2 (Winter 2016): 37-44. www.jstor.org/stable/24727030.

Trudeau, Justin, Prime Minister of Canada. “Canada to banharmful single-use plastics and hold companies responsiblefor plastic waste.” News Release (June 10, 2019). https://pm.gc.ca/en/news/news-releases/2019/06/10/canada-ban-harmful-single-use-plastics-and-hold-companies-responsible.

Savannah Tuck is an incoming Masters of Public Policy andGlobal Affairs student at the University of British Columbia. She isexcited to explore the interlinkages between climate change,human security, and foreign policy. Savannah is passionate aboutsocial and environmental justice, and seeks to promotesustainability across social, economic, and environmental factors.Savannah is a self-proclaimed history and political nerd, andwishes she was alive for the 1960s counterculture movement. Inher free time, she enjoys spending time with family, friends,reading, and walking her dog, Lyla.

Naomi Lam recently graduated from the University of BritishColumbia, majoring in political science and minoring in humangeography. In her spare time, she likes to bake and talk to herplants.

* This publication uses the Open Sans font, licensed under theApache License, Version 2.0.

Authors

COMPARING CURRENT PLASTIC WASTE POLICIES IN CANADA AND CHINA 25

The British Columbia Council for InternationalCooperation (BCCIC) is a coalition of over 140individuals and civil society organizations thathas engaged in sustainable development andenvironmental issues for 30 years.

BCCIC supports its members in becoming more effectiveagents of change in their sustainable development efforts bydisseminating knowledge gained through collaborativeprojects, building relationships across sectors and networks,and developing the capacity of sustainable developmentpractitioners. BCCIC also represents members’ interests andadvances civil society policy recommendations on municipal,provincial, national, and international issues.

BCCIC receives support from the Government of Canada,provided through Global Affairs Canada, and membershipdues; project funding from the Kenoli Foundation, the PacificInstitute for Climate Solutions (PICS) at the University ofVictoria, the RBC Foundation, and Private Donors.

www.bccic.ca

Creative Commons License

Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives(CC BY-NC-ND 4.0)