The softening of the Geneva text may hamper that circular economy. There is no more mention of a technical standard for “refillability” – that is, plastic packaging or containers being refilled after cleaning or other processing rather than simply discarded. The ban on oxo-degradable plastics is also removed, as are quantified targets for reuse rates, making promoting the circular economy more of a principle than a measurable goal.
Producer-responsibility systems are now optional rather than required. Although funding mechanisms will continue to “support the circular economy”, priority is no longer given to reuse projects, which may mean waste plastics become more likely to be recycled or burned for power or heat.
The Geneva text also removes the requirement for businesses to disclose the chemical components of their products, and national progress reports have become voluntary. These changes challenge the safety, oversight and transparency of the reuse system. The shift from one global approach to different national programmes means reduction at source becomes optional, and global efforts may become focused on improving downstream recycling.
For China, the weakening of the text brings two challenges. First, exporters will need to deal with multiple national standards, increasing compliance costs. Second, changes to the funding mechanisms makes availability of international funding uncertain; this may delay the roll-out of reusable packaging or infrastructure such as community cleaning stations.
Sustainable solutions
Reuse is one of the most effective and sustainable solutions to the plastic pollution crisis, and China has made a lot of progress on the circular economy and reuse, with various policies and laws in place.
The 14th Five Year Plan for the Circular Economy, for example, has targets for resource reuse rates. While the Method for Use and Reporting of Commercial Single-use Plastics requires firms to report how much plastic they use, laying a foundation for reuse.
Businesses are also seeking out solutions that include reuse. For example, e-commerce site Cainiao stated that by reusing cardboard boxes and introducing reusable plastic boxes it reduced carbon emissions from its warehouses by over 32,000 tonnes in 2024. Meanwhile, SF Express, a delivery firm, packs goods in reusable boxes in 119 cities. There are 1.3 million of the boxes in circulation and they have been used 20.6 million times.
After years of restrictions, consumers are now more accepting of the need to reuse plastic products. According to a survey we carried out at Plastics Free China, while the reuse of food containers is not popular, most other reuse scenarios see approval rates of over 50 per cent, with 66 per cent of respondents being willing to pay a premium for reusable packaging.
I think government support and a coordinating mechanism are needed for reuse to scale up. Government policy could be used to reduce initial costs for companies, with a shared recycling system, which would raise the market competitiveness of reusable packaging.
The transition needs full participation across society. Companies should explore new business models and share their experiences. Consumers need to build new and greener habits. And everyone needs to raise levels of awareness and acceptance of reuse.
The thought-provoking sculpture outside the European headquarters of the UN in Geneva showed us the thinker and the child atop a mountain of plastic waste, warning us of our duties to the planet and to future generations.
This article was originally published on Dialogue Earth under a Creative Commons licence.