Revealing the source

of the single-use
plastics crisis
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
Minderoo Foundation
Established by Dr Andrew Forrest AO and Nicola Forrest AO in
2001, Minderoo Foundation is proudly Australian, and one of Asia
Pacific’s largest philanthropic organisations, with AU$2 billion
committed to a range of global initiatives.
The Plastic Waste Makers Index is a project of Minderoo’s No
Plastic Waste initiative, which aims to create a world without plastic
pollution – a truly circular plastics economy, where fossil fuels are
no longer used to produce plastics. A critical step towards this goal
is to bring greater transparency to the plastics supply chain – to
better understand its material and financial flows, its environmental
impacts, the commitments its companies have made to
sustainability, and the effectiveness of government policies.
This report offers an unprecedented glimpse into the small
number of petrochemicals companies, and their financial backers,
generating almost all single-use plastic waste globally. We hope
that this data will inform better decision-making – by industry,
policy-makers, investors and the public.

••
Cover Image:
Plastic waste pollution which
leads to environmental
problems. Photo credit:
zeljkosantrac via Getty Images.

Copyright © 2021. The Minderoo Foundation Pty Ltd.

All rights reserved.
 Acknowledgements 3

Analytical partners Authors, Minderoo Foundation

Neural Alpha is a sustainable fintech start-up solving Dominic Charles
the biggest challenges in sustainability and finance using Laurent Kimman
innovative, connected data technologies. For this report, Nakul Saran
it supported the analysis of customs data to track single-
use plastic material flows.
Contributors
Planet Tracker is a non-profit financial think tank aligning
capital markets with planetary boundaries. For this report, Mark Barnaba
it supported the analysis of equity ownership of polymer Deputy Chairman and Lead Independent Director,
producers. Fortescue Metals Group
Profundo is an independent not-for-profit company which Sam Fankhauser
aims to make a practical contribution to a sustainable world Professor of Climate Economics and Policy,
and social justice with profound and fact-based research University of Oxford and Grantham Research Institute
and advice. For this report, it supported the analysis of on Climate Change, London School of Economics
financing of polymer producers. Toby Gardner
Wood Mackenzie is an energy research consultancy Senior Research Fellow, Stockholm Environment Institute
that empowers strategic decision-making in global & Director, Trase
natural resources with quality data, analysis and advice. Steve Jenkins
For this report, it supported the analyses of single-use VP Consulting, Wood Mackenzie
plastics material flows and of capacity expansion for
polymer production. Robin Millington
CEO, Planet Tracker
Ambuj Sagar
Limited assurance Founding Head of Public Policy at the Indian Institute
Minderoo Foundation engaged KPMG to perform a limited of Technology Delhi
assurance engagement with respect to its preparation of the
John Willis
“Results in detail” as presented in this report, in accordance
Director of Research, Planet Tracker
with the Plastic Waste Makers Index: Basis of Preparation
(which can be found at www.minderoo.org/plastic-waste-
makers-index/findings/methodology/). KPMG’s primary Editor, Minderoo Foundation
deliverable for the engagement was a limited assurance
report that is available at www.minderoo.org/plastic-waste- Shanta Barley
makers-index/downloads/. The engagement was performed
in accordance with Australian Standard on Assurance
Engagements ASAE 3000 Assurance Engagements Other
Production, Minderoo Foundation
than Audits or Reviews of Historical Financial Information Tina Mash
issued by the AUASB.
As part of the engagement, KPMG performed procedures Acknowledgements
to test that the calculation methodology is appropriately
described in the Basis of Preparation, that the data sourced We also thank our colleagues Matt Bolt, Simon Clarke,
and key assumptions used in the methodology were clearly Niki Comparti, Fiona David, Shaun Devitt, Margot Dons,
identified and supported by source documentation, and the Anthony Flannery, Alyssa Lane, Fabien Laurier, and
calculations were performed with mathematical accuracy David Ohana for their valuable contributions and support.
and in accordance with the methodology. Given the We would like to thank Martin Stuchtey and the team at
pioneering nature of the analysis, KPMG has not assured SYSTEMIQ Ltd. for their collaboration and analytical support
the methodology itself, only the accuracy of its application. across our transparency initiative.
KPMG does not undertake any responsibility arising in any
way from reliance placed by a third party on their report.
4 The Plastic Waste Makers Index

Disclaimer
The Plastic Waste Makers Index is authored by The Minderoo
Foundation Pty Ltd as trustee for The Minderoo Foundation Trust
ABN 24 819 440 618 (Minderoo Foundation). The Plastic Waste
Makers Index is a pioneering analysis. Minderoo Foundation is of
the opinion, based on its research, that the rankings contained in
the report are true and correct. Whilst Minderoo Foundation has
exercised care and diligence in the preparation of this report and
relied on information from public sources it believes to be reliable,
neither Minderoo Foundation, nor any of its directors, officers,
employees or agents make any representations or give any
warranties, nor accept any liability, in connection with this report
including as to the suitability for any purpose of any of its contents.
The Plastic Waste Makers Index is published by Minderoo
Productions Limited (Minderoo Productions). The opinions
expressed in the report are the views of its author Minderoo
Foundation and neither Minderoo Productions nor any of its
directors, officers, employees or agents make any representations
or give any warranties, nor accept any liability, in connection with
the report including as to the suitability for any purpose of any of
its contents.
Minderoo Foundation would like to thank the organisations that
contributed to the report for their constructive input. Contribution
to this report, or any part of it, should not be deemed to indicate
any kind of partnership or agency between the contributors and
either Minderoo Foundation or Minderoo Productions, nor an
endorsement of its conclusions or recommendations. Individuals
and organisations listed in the Contributors section above support
the general direction of this report, but do not necessarily agree
with every individual conclusion or recommendation.
To quote this paper, please use the following reference:
Charles D, Kimman L, & Saran N 2021, The Plastic Waste Makers
Index, Minderoo Foundation.

Digital resources
Visit www.plasticwastemakersindex.org to explore the data
behind this report
Contents 5

CONTENTS
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS 2
FOREWORD 6
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY 10
INTRODUCTION 18
OUR APPROACH 24
OUR INSIGHTS 30
WHERE TO NEXT? 44
RESULTS IN DETAIL 48
METHOD IN DETAIL 68
GLOSSARY 80
ENDNOTES 83
6 The Plastic Waste Makers Index

FOREWORD
Former Vice President,
United States of America
Al Gore

The trajectories of the climate crisis and the plastic waste That’s why the Plastic Waste Makers Index, prepared by
crisis are strikingly similar – and increasingly intertwined. the Minderoo Foundation and its partners, comes at such a
For generations, we’ve treated our atmosphere like an open critical time. As awareness of the toll of plastic pollution has
sewer, constantly pumping massive amounts of greenhouse grown, the petrochemical industry has told us it’s our own
gas emissions into the air each day. Similarly, we are treating fault and has directed attention toward behavior change
the ocean like a liquid landfill left to accumulate at least eight from end-users of these products – rather than addressing
million metric tons of plastic waste each year. the problem at its source!
Scientists, environmentalists, and watchdogs sounded the But with comprehensive new data and analysis on the
alarm on the climate crisis for decades, providing ever-more producers, funders, and enablers of our global plastic
detailed data on its causes and eventual impacts. Fossil addiction, this groundbreaking analysis gives us the
fuel polluters tried to obscure the catastrophic damage tools we need to limit plastic waste pollution and
and existential risk they were causing and tried to evade measure our progress. While the scale of the problem
responsibility for their contribution to the problem – but can seem overwhelming, this report shows that fewer
eventually the data caught up with them. than 100 companies are the ultimate source of these
harmful products.
Two of the biggest markets for fossil fuel companies –
electricity generation and transportation – are undergoing Tracing the root causes of the plastic waste crisis empowers
rapid decarbonization, and it is no coincidence that fossil fuel us to help solve it. Just as disclosure of greenhouse gas
companies are now scrambling to massively expand their emissions was the first step towards creating global targets
third market – petrochemicals – three-quarters of which is for reductions, disclosure of funding for and production
the production of plastic. They see it as a potential life raft to of single-use plastic is necessary to turn the tide on this
help them stay afloat, and they’re telling investors that there’s escalating problem. With the Plastic Waste Makers Index as
lots of money to be made in ramping up the amount of plastic an essential baseline, policy-makers, industry and financial
in the world. Since most plastic is made from oil and gas – services companies can craft the steps necessary to move
especially fracked gas – the production and consumption us toward a sustainable future.
of plastic are becoming a significant driver of the climate
Former Vice President Al Gore is the cofounder and
crisis, already producing greenhouse gas emissions on the
chairman of Generation Investment Management,
same scale as a large country and causing the emission
and the founder and chairman of The Climate Reality
of other harmful toxins from plastics facilities into nearby
Project, a nonprofit devoted to solving the climate crisis.
communities – disproportionately harming people of color
and those in low-income neighborhoods. Moreover, the
plastic waste that results – particularly from single-use
plastics – is piling up in landfills, along roadsides, and in
rivers that carry vast amounts into the ocean.
Foreword 7

••
Plastic waste washed up on a beach in the Dominican
Republic. Photo credit: Dustan Woodhouse via Unsplash.
8 The Plastic Waste Makers Index

THE COST OF
SINGLE-USE PLAST

ENORM
••
Trash island in the Caribbean.
Photo credit: Caroline Power
 Executive Summary 9

TIC WASTE IS

MOUS
10 The Plastic Waste Makers Index

EXECUTIVE
SUMMARY

••
Collection of blue plastic bottles pressed ready for
recycling. Photo credit: Kemter via Getty Images
Executive Summary 11

Single-use plastics – the cheap plastic

goods we use once and then throw away
– epitomise the plastics crisis. Today, single-
use plastics account for over a third of
plastics produced every year, with 98 per
cent manufactured from fossil fuels.

Unsurprisingly, single-use plastics also account for the majority of plastic

thrown away the world over: more than 130 million metric tons in 2019 –
almost all of which is burned, buried in landfill, or discarded directly into
the environment.
The cost of single-use plastic waste is enormous. Of all the plastics,
they are the most likely to end up in our ocean, where they account for
almost all visible pollution, in the range of five to 13 million metric tons
each year.1,2,3 Once there, single-use plastics eventually break down
into tiny particles that impact wildlife health – and the ocean’s ability to
store carbon.4 Single-use plastics contain chemical additives such as
plasticisers that have been found in humans and are linked to a range
of reproductive health problems.5 And if growth in single-use plastic
production continues at current rates, they could account for five to
10 per cent of the world’s greenhouse gas emissions by 2050.6
Despite these threats, the plastics industry has been allowed to operate
with minimal regulation and transparency for decades. Government
policies, where they exist, tend to focus on the vast number of companies
that sell finished plastic products. Relatively little attention has been paid
to the smaller number of businesses at the base of the supply chain that
make “polymers” – the building blocks of all plastics – almost exclusively
from fossil fuels.
These companies are the source of the single-use plastic crisis: their
production of new “virgin” polymers from oil, gas and coal feedstocks
perpetuates the take-make-waste dynamic of the plastics economy.
The economies of scale for fossil-fuel-based production are undermining
transition to a “circular” plastic economy, with negative impacts on waste
collection rates, on end-of-life management and on rates of plastic
pollution. The focus needs to be on producing recycled polymers from
plastic waste, on re-use model and on alternative substitute materials.
Part of the problem is that we can’t manage what we can’t measure.
In this report, we identify for the first time the companies that produce
from fossil fuels the five primary polymers that generate the vast majority
of single-use plastic waste globally (“virgin single-use plastic polymer
producers”) – and which investors and banks are funding them. We also
assess which companies are making real efforts to create a circular
plastics economy, and estimate how virgin polymer production
is expected to grow or decline in the future.
12 The Plastic Waste Makers Index

THE FIVE
In 2019, just 20 polymer producers accounted for more than half

1
of all single-use plastic waste generated globally – and the top 100

MAJOR
accounted for 90 per cent.
ExxonMobil and Dow – both based in the USA – and China-based Sinopec,
top the list, with these three companies together accounting for 16 per

FINDINGS cent of global single-use plastic waste.* Of approximately 300 polymer

producers operating globally, a small fraction hold the fate of the world’s

OF OUR
plastic crisis in their hands: their choice, to continue to produce virgin
polymers rather than recycled polymers, will have massive repercussions on
how much waste is collected, managed and leaks into the environment.

REPORT
ARE: Major global investors and banks are enabling the single-use

2
plastics crisis.
Twenty institutional asset managers – led by US companies Vanguard
Group, BlackRock and Capital Group – hold over US$300 billion worth of
shares in the parent companies of these polymer producers, of which an
estimated US$10 billion comes from the production of virgin polymers for
single-use plastics. Twenty of the world’s largest banks, including Barclays,
HSBC and Bank of America, are estimated to have lent almost US$30 billion
for the production of these polymers since 2011.

There has been a collective industry failure to transition away

3
from fossil-fuel-based feedstocks.
The 100 largest polymer producers all continue to rely almost exclusively
on “virgin” (fossil-fuel-based) feedstocks. In 2019, production of recycled
polymers from plastic waste – a “circular” model – accounted for no more
than two per cent of total output. Over 50 of these companies received
an “E” grade – the lowest possible – when assessed for circularity,
indicating a complete lack of policies, commitments or targets. A further
26 companies, including ExxonMobil and Taiwan’s Formosa Plastics
Corporation, received a “D-” due to their lack of clear targets/timelines.

*Updated 22/11/2021
 Executive Summary 13

4
Planned expansion of virgin polymer production capacity threatens
to overwhelm hopes of a circular plastics economy.
In the next five years, global capacity to produce virgin polymers for
single-use plastics could grow by over 30 per cent – and by as much as
400 per cent for individual companies. An environmental catastrophe
beckons: much of the resulting single-use plastic waste will end up as
pollution in developing countries with poor waste management systems.
The projected rate of growth in the supply of these virgin polymers is in line
with the historical rate of growth in demand for single-use plastics – which
will likely keep new, circular models of production and re-use “out of the
money” without regulatory stimulus.

5
Single-use plastic waste is an entrenched geopolitical problem.
Transitioning away from the take-make-waste model of single-use plastics
will take more than corporate leadership and “enlightened” capital markets:
it will require immense political will. This is underscored by the high degree
of state ownership in these polymer producers – an estimated 30 per
cent of the sector, by value, is state-owned, with Saudi Arabia, China, and
the United Arab Emirates the top three. In addition, it will likely require
concerted action on the international political stage to resolve deep-rooted
regional imbalances and inequities. High income countries are typically
supplying low and lower-middle income countries with significant volumes
of polymer; and while this latter group of countries generates far less single-
use plastic waste per person, the reverse is true in terms of mismanaged
waste and plastic pollution.
14 The Plastic Waste Makers Index

ExxonMobil
Top 20 polymer ExxonMobil
Sinopec
Sinopec
Dow
producers Dow
Indorama Ventures
generating single- Indorama
SaudiVentures
Aramco
use plastic waste: Saudi Aramco
PetroChina
PetroChina
The Plastic Waste LyondellBasell
LyondellBasell
Reliance Industries
Makers Index.** Reliance Industries
Braskem
See results in detail Braskem
Alpek SA de CV
Alpek SA de CV
for the top 100. Borealis
Borealis
Lotte Chemical
Lotte Chemical
INEOS
INEOS
Total
Total
Jiangsu Hailun Petrochemical
Jiangsu
Far Hailun
EasternPetrochemical
New Century
Far Eastern
Formosa PlasticsNew Century
Corporation
Formosa
China EnergyPlastics Corporation
Investment Group
China Energy Investment GroupPTT
PTT
China Resources
China Resources
0 1 2 3 4 5 6
0 1 2 3 4 5 6
2019, MMT of single-use plastic waste generated *

Top 20 Vanguard Group

BlackRock
institutional Capital Group
asset managers State Street
investing in Fidelity Management & Research
Credit Suisse Group
single-use Dimensional Fund Advisors
plastic waste Geode Capital Management
Northern Trust
JPMorgan Chase
Bank of New York Mellon
Bangkok Bank
Credit Agricole Group
Invesco
UBS Group
Charles Schwab Investment Advisory
TIAA Board of Overseers
Sumitomo Mitsui Trust Holdings
Morgan Stanley
Bank of America
0.0 0.5 1.0 1.5 2.0 2.5
Total value of shareholder’s equity adjusted for share of business from in-scope polymer production, *
US$BN (on 6 January 2021)

Top 20 banks Barclays

HSBC
financing single- Bank of America
use plastic waste Citigroup
JPMorgan Chase
Mitsubishi UFJ Financial
SMBC Group
Mizuho Financial
UniCredit
BNP Paribas
Crédit Agricole
ING Group
Société Générale
Deutsche Bank
Scotiabank
Credit Suisse
Toronto-Dominion Bank
Industrial and Commercial Bank of China
Royal Bank of Canada
NatWest
0.0 0.5 1.0 1.5 2.0 2.5 3.0 3.5
Total value of loans adjusted for share of business from in-scope polymer production, *
US$BN (from Jan 2011 to Dec 2020)

*Data covered by KPMG assurance

** Updated 22/11/2021
 Executive Summary 15

Recommendations

This report has major implications for the main stakeholders

in the single-use plastics crisis:
• Polymer producers
• Investors and banks
• Policy-makers
• Other companies in the supply chain

POLYMER PRODUCERS INVESTORS AND BANKS

Polymer producers represent an extraordinary leverage Institutional asset managers and global banks are providing
opportunity in the fight against plastic pollution, as the billions of dollars to companies that produce polymers from
“gatekeepers” of plastic production – particularly because fossil fuels – as much as 100 times more than they provide
they are relatively few in number. As policy-makers and to companies trying to shift to a circular economy. This
investors recognise this fact, the disruptions and risks facing asymmetry urgently needs to be reversed. Investors and
these companies will only grow. Polymer producers wishing banks should:
to maintain a competitive advantage should: • Disclose the level of lending and investment in virgin
• Disclose levels of virgin versus recycled polymer versus recycled polymer production and the associated
production and their associated single-use plastic generation of single-use plastic waste.
waste “footprint”. The estimates presented here are Shareholders and customers have a right to know if their
only as good as our data. Polymer producers should use money is being invested or lent to entities whose products
our methodology to estimate – and then disclose – their have negative impacts on people and the planet – a
contribution to single-use plastic waste as a material measure of single-use plastic waste must be included in
business risk. annual environmental, social and governance reporting.
• Quit paying lip service to sustainability and seize • Commit to funding a circular plastics economy.
the opportunity to re-tool. Adopt policies and targets that shift capital away from
Set real, quantifiable and time-bound commitments virgin polymer production and towards companies
to reduce reliance on fossil fuel feedstocks and shift using recycled plastic waste as feedstock. Phase out
to circular recycled polymers. entirely investing in and financing new virgin single-use
• Commit to using circularity measurement and plastic capacity.
reporting tools. • Use measures of circularity to inform capital allocation
One example is the Circulytics initiative from the Ellen decisions and shareholder action. Active fund
MacArthur Foundation, which supports a company’s managers should be using circularity as a screening
transition towards the circular economy, and reveals the criteria for investments in polymer producers. Passive
extent to which a company has achieved circularity across fund managers can use the same tools to take action at
its entire operations.7 shareholder meetings and exert influence over boards
and management. Banks should link lending to circular
business outcomes.
16 The Plastic Waste Makers Index

POLICY-MAKERS OTHER COMPANIES

Solving the single-use plastic problem will take more than the IN THE SUPPLY CHAIN
actions of progressive polymer producers or the influence of While not the focus of the analyses in this report, other
capital markets. It will also require policy-makers to display companies in the single-use plastics supply chain share
great political will and practical action. Policymakers should: responsibility for ensuring the promise of a circular plastic
• Target policies at polymer producers. economy becomes a reality. Converters of plastic polymers,
With the knowledge of which companies are at the source packaged goods brands, and retailers should:
of the single-use plastic waste crisis, policy-makers can • Convert voluntary commitments to use more recycled
now draft effective regulatory responses, such as policies single-use plastics into firm market signals.
that require recycled polymer production from plastic Long-term forward contracts for recycled polymers and
waste feedstocks, and therefore incentivise greater waste products will create the stability needed for investment in
collection; or economic incentives that accelerate the recycling infrastructure. Contracts should also account for
transition from virgin to recycled polymers, such as a levy the full cost of collecting, sorting and recycling waste, and
on virgin production.
accept the price premium over virgin polymer and plastics.
• Accelerate a global treaty on plastic pollution. • Design for recyclability.
A Montreal Protocol or Paris Agreement-style treaty Users of plastic have a responsibility to ensure their
may be the only way to bring an end to plastic pollution products are easy to recycle. This means phasing out
worldwide. The treaty must address the problem at its many hard-to-recycle multi-material single-use plastics,
source, with targets for the phasing out of fossil-fuel-based as well as the use of problematic performance – or
polymers and encouraging the development of a circular appearance-enhancing additives. Creating common
plastics economy. standards for recycled material quality, specifications and
• Require full disclosure from producers and users authentication will also improve the efficiency of waste
of single-use plastics in order to better monitor the management and recycling systems.
supply chain. • Reducing unnecessary single-use plastics.
Insist on “single-use plastic footprint” being a mandatory This is perhaps the most significant means to reduce
reporting metric – as per the equivalents that are rapidly
single-use plastic waste in the short-term. Opportunities
becoming mandatory in carbon accounting.8 include: re-designing packaging and single-use products
to use lower volumes of plastic; scaling innovative re-use
models; and using substitute materials.
 Executive Summary 17

••
Most of the top producers own facilities in
multiple countries and trade internationally
– contributing to plastic pollution globally.
Photo credit: zorazhuang via Getty Images.
18 The Plastic Waste Makers Index

INTRODUCTION

••
Plastic trash and garbage
underwater off Cebu Island,
Philippines. Photo credit: Brent
Durand via Getty Images.
Introduction 19

Many single-use plastics – face masks,

medical equipment, shopping bags,
coffee cups and cling film – are everyday
“essentials” in our lives. They prolong both
our lives and the shelf-life of the consumer
economy, and their rise has been nothing
short of phenomenal – with production
doubling since 2005 alone, and expected
to increase by a further third between 2020
and 2025. Today, they are the most common
type of plastic produced, consuming over
a third of all polymers – the building blocks
of plastics – made every year.

But there’s a catch. Single-use plastics are also the hardest plastics
to collect, sort and recycle: global recycling rates have been stuck at
just 10 to 15 per cent for over thirty years. In fact, we estimate that over
130 million metric tons of single-use plastics were thrown away in 2019
(Figure 1) – of which roughly 35 per cent were burned, 31 per cent buried
in managed landfills, and 19 per cent dumped directly on land or into the
ocean as pollution.9
Single-use plastics are also a growing source of greenhouse gas
emissions. Some 98 per cent are produced from fossil fuel, or “virgin”
feedstock.10 If current trends in plastic production and use continue,
emissions from single-use plastics are likely to triple, accounting for five
to 10 per cent of global greenhouse gas emissions by 2050.11 Many oil and
gas companies are planning to “ride out” decarbonisation in the transport
and energy sectors by redirecting fossil fuels into plastics.
Human health impacts are beginning to be understood and are emerging
as a major threat. Single-use plastics break down into microplastics
which have then been found in cancers.12 Much smaller nanoplastics also
form, but reliable measurement techniques are urgently needed to see
whether they cross barriers into organs and cells, as well as breach the
blood-brain barrier.13 Single-use plastics contain chemical additives such
as plasticisers that have been found in humans and are linked to a range
of reproductive health issues. And when plastic waste is burned in an
uncontrolled manner – for heat or fuel, for example – as roughly half of all
burned plastic is, it poses a risk to vulnerable communities in developing
countries.14,15
20 The Plastic Waste Makers Index

Figure 1
Single-use plastic product categories, million metric tons, 2019

FOOD BOTTLES, RETAIL BAGS, OTHERS, POLYMERS NOT IN SCOPE

25 million metric tons 16 million metric tons 16 million metric tons

FOOD PACKAGING, SHEET PACKAGING,

15 million metric tons 15 million metric tons

FILM PACKAGING,
18 million metric tons
NON-FOOD BOTTLES, INDUSTRIAL
5 million metric tons BAGS
3 million metric
tons
TRASH BAGS,
15 million metric tons

LAMINATED CAPS AND CUPS AND

PACKAGING, CLOSURES, CONTAINERS,
3 million metric 2 million 1 million metric
tons metric tons tons

PHARMACEUTICALS,
COSMETICS, AND TOILETRIES,
1 million metric tons

••
Consumption of many single-use plastics has increased
during the Covid-19 pandemic – with plastic pollution
likely to have worsened as a result. An aerial photo of
floating plastic and styrofoam trash polluting a corner
of Siak River, Pekanbaru in Indonesia. Photo credit:
Afrianto Silalahi/Barcroft Media via Getty Images.
 Introduction 21

What is driving
the single-use
plastic waste crisis?

Four factors are at play: 3. Lax regulation:

The costs of waste management and plastic pollution
1. Relentless product proliferation: are escalating globally, yet single-use plastic producers,
Use of single-use plastics has increased exponentially over brands and retailers remain financially “off the hook”.
the last 30 years, driven by innovation of new packaging Many policy-makers have started to experiment with
formats and single-use plastic products, resulting in producer pays policies, which hold companies that
substantial levels of unnecessary plastics. produce and use plastic products accountable for their
2. Cheap fossil fuel feedstocks: disposal – but few of these schemes exist in developing
It continues to be far cheaper to produce single-use countries, where they are most needed.16
plastics from fossil fuels than from “green” feedstocks, i.e., 4. Widespread mismanagement of single-use plastic waste:
recycled plastic waste. Consider the cost of door-to-door In high income countries, waste management
collecting, sorting and recycling of household plastic waste infrastructure has mostly proved sufficiently mature and
versus the economies of scale enjoyed by virgin polymer well-funded to deal with the accelerating accumulation
producers with ready access to fossil fuels via purpose- of single-use plastic waste, mainly by burying or burning
built pipelines. As a result, the single-use plastics we throw it – although the growth in exports of plastic waste from
away have little to no value because there is no demand for the EU, USA and Japan (particularly prior to China’s ban
them. And without a commercial incentive to collect waste, on imports from 2016) is an indicator of a system reaching
collection rates are largely dependent on the availability its limits. In low and lower middle income countries,
of public funding. where the required infrastructure is often absent and
underfunded, single-use plastic consumption is creating
an environmental disaster.17
22 The Plastic Waste Makers Index

The solution

Solving the single-use plastic crisis is the shared At the root of the problem are the companies that continue
responsibility of both businesses and policy-makers. to produce new polymers made from fossil fuels. Industry
It will require halting growth in demand for single-use needs to transition from this linear model of production
plastics (e.g., reducing unnecessary plastics like single- to a circular model: where recycled polymer production
use straws and bags); designing products to be reused stimulates functioning commodity markets for single-use
or recycled; and properly funding waste management plastic waste; where there is a strong commercial incentive
systems. The solutions will need to include and improve the to collect all the plastics we throw away; and where,
working conditions of the millions of people who already ultimately, we eliminate plastic pollution.
play a pivotal role in the economy, informally collecting
The purpose of this first report is to shine a light on these
and trading plastic waste in developing countries. And
poorly-regulated companies, and trace the route by
they will also need to consider the greenhouse emissions
which they generate the world’s single-use plastic waste.
of single-use plastics across their life-cycle, and mitigate
The companies that control this “tap” of new plastics
contributions to climate change – e.g., by switching to
production are the source of the problem – and must
sustainable bio-based feedstocks.
become part of the solution. This effort is intended to serve
as a bridge to industry and an invitation to collaborate on
future editions. We call on them to support the urgent need
for radical transparency and the transition to a circular
plastics economy.

Solving the single-

use plastic crisis
is the shared
responsibility of
both businesses
and policy-makers.
 Introduction 23

••
The purpose of this report is to trace the route
by which polymer production generates the
world’s single-use plastic waste. Photo credit:
Meinrad Riedo via Getty Images.
24 The Plastic Waste Makers Index

OUR
APPROACH

••
Shredded bits of polypropene
plastic. Most single-use plastics
end up as mixed waste with little to
no commodity value. Photo credit:
Santiago Urquijo via Getty Images.
Our Approach 25

Who produces the

polymers forming single-
use plastics and how
much ends up as waste?

To answer this question we built a model of global single-use plastic

material flows from polymer production to waste generation.
Our analysis included only virgin polymers given they accounted for
more than 98 per cent of all production in 2019, our baseline year for
data. In future editions, we expect to include recycled and bio-based
polymers as production of these increases in scale.
First, we identified approximately 1,200 production facilities globally
that produce the five main polymers that account for almost 90
per cent of all single-use plastics: polypropylene (PP); high-density
polyethylene (HDPE); low-density polyethylene (LDPE); linear low-
density polyethylene (LLDPE); and polyethylene terephthalate (PET).
We then estimated the volume of plastic polymer produced in 2019 at
each facility (Step 1; Figure 2). These facilities are owned and operated
by approximately 300 distinct companies. Both the facilities and the
production estimates were provided by Wood Mackenzie, an energy
research consultancy.
We then tracked how the polymers leaving each facility were traded
globally using data from UN Comtrade as well as over 500,000 customs
bills of lading – a document that accompanies all shipped goods (Step 2).
Within each country of destination, we also modelled what proportion of
polymers were converted into single-use plastics versus non-single-use
products, based on installed capacity of different conversion processors
(e.g., sheet extrusion and roto-moulding), using data provided by Wood
Mackenzie (Step 3).
Finally, we estimated the volume of single-use plastics traded in bulk
(i.e., raw packaging materials) (Step 4), and within finished/packaged
goods themselves (Step 5) – and simulated those trade flows through
to the consumption and disposal stage. We used both UN Comtrade
and World Bank data for these steps. This results in an estimate of every
polymer producer’s contribution to single-use plastic waste in every
country (Step 6).
We emphasise that our analysis ends at the generation of single-use
plastic waste. With few exceptions, there is currently an absence of
reported data on the material flows of single-use plastics after they
have been discarded and become waste – whether they go to landfill,
are burned, or enter the ocean as pollution. This means that, for now,
our analysis is unable to quantify the link between polymer producers
and plastic pollution.
26 The Plastic Waste Makers Index

Figure 2
Our six-step approach to linking polymer producers
to single-use plastic waste generation.

STEP 1 STEP 2 STEP 3 STEP 4 STEP 5 STEP 6

Trade in Trade of
MATERIAL Single-use
Polymer Polymer Polymer single-use single-use
FLOW plastics
production trade conversion plastics plastics in
MSW*
in bulk finished goods

KEY Who produces What are the How are polymers How are the What mass of What is the mass of
QUESTIONS polymers that form trading patterns converted relevant categories single-use plastic single-use plastic
single-use plastic, between polymer into single-use of bulk packaging in finished goods in municipal solid
where and how producers and plastic product traded? is traded and waste (MSW) and
much? countries? categories? what are the trade what is its source?
patterns?

McKinsey
Export Genius Wood Mackenzie Global Institute
KEY DATA Result
Wood Mackenzie UN Comtrade
SOURCE World Bank of this analysis
UN Comtrade American World International
Chemistry Council Trade Solution

IN-SCOPE
MASS,
million metric
~200 ~90 ~110 ~40 ~25 ~110
tons

*MSW stands for Municipal Solid Waste.

••
Major global investors and
banks are enabling single-
use plastics production
and pollution. Photo credit:
d3sign via Getty Images.
 Our Approach 27

Who funds these polymer

producers and is effectively
enabling the single-use
plastic waste crisis?

SHAREHOLDERS BANKS
To identify who owns the polymer producers identified above, Banks play a crucial role in the financing of single-use plastic
we sourced shareholder data for public companies from polymer production plants. Credit provided in the form of
Bloomberg and for private companies from Orbis. We classified short-and long-term loans provides working capital and
shareholders into three classes: institutional asset managers expansion capital, ensuring that plants are both constructed
(e.g., pension funds, mutual funds, insurance companies), state and operational. Underwriting share and bond issuances is
owners, and private individuals or institutions. also a vital support provided by banks, offering access to
capital markets and guarantees that deals will be successful.
Next, we estimated the value of the shareholders’ equity.
In almost all cases, production of polymers used for single- To identify which banks are providing loans and underwriting
use plastics represents only part of a company’s activities. facilities, we sourced data on the banking sector’s financing
We wanted to estimate only the value attributable to single- of the top 50 polymer producers over a 10-year timeline,
use plastic polymer production – versus other diversified from January 2011 to December 2020, from Bloomberg,
businesses not directly related to generating single-use Refinitiv and IJGlobal. To estimate the financing specifically
plastic waste – and therefore adjusted the total value of the attributable to single-use plastic production, we adjusted the
equity accordingly. total value of financing accordingly.
We omitted bond holdings from the analysis due to looser
regulatory requirements to report bond ownership, which
make identification of bondholders more challenging.
28 The Plastic Waste Makers Index

Who are the leaders

and laggards in the
move to circularity?

To gauge how much progress the top polymer producers

have made towards sustainability, we used a set of
indicators of circular business practices – adapted from
Ellen MacArthur Foundation’s Circulytics survey – to
develop a ratings framework (A-E, with E being the lowest
score) and assessed the performance of the top 100
companies based on data in their public reports.18
Indicators included: the percentage of polymer output
that comes from recycled plastic waste or bio-based
feedstocks; the percentage of products that are recycled;
inclusion of circularity in corporate strategy and targets;
and engagement with suppliers and customers to create
sustainable supply chains.

What is the near-

term outlook for
production of single-
use plastics from
virgin polymers?

Finally, we estimated growth in virgin polymer production

globally by 2025, based on data provided by Wood
Mackenzie on expected growth in single-use plastic polymer
capacity at an asset level. Only projects that were currently
operational and/or deemed likely to occur were included.
For a detailed method regarding any of the above,
see Method in detail.
Our Approach 29

••
Close to 85 per cent of all single-use
plastics is produced from just five polymers
- PP, PET, LLDPE, HDPE and LDPE. Shown
here is the manufacture of plastic bags
which are commonly made from LDPE.
Photo credit: firemanYU via Getty Images.
30 The Plastic Waste Makers Index

OUR
INSIGHTS
 Our Insights 31

INSIGHT
1
Just 20 polymers
producers accounted for
more than half of all single-
use plastic waste generated
globally in 2019.

The single-use plastics crisis can be linked to a relatively small number

of companies, with 20 polymer producers accounting for an estimated
55 per cent of waste globally – and the top 100 accounting for over 90
per cent. Two integrated oil and gas companies, US-based ExxonMobil
and China-owned Sinopec, rank first and second, respectively, with
the largest chemicals company in the world, US-based Dow, at number
three.* Together, we estimate these three companies alone generate
around 16 per cent of global single-use plastic waste.
Eleven of the top 20 polymer producers are based in Asia (five in
China), with a further four in Europe, three in North America, one in Latin
America, and one in the Middle East. Most of the producers own facilities
in multiple countries and all trade internationally, thus contributing to
plastic waste (and pollution) globally.
Four of the top 20 companies produce exclusively PET, a polymer which
is mainly used to make bottles and other rigid plastics (Figure 3). These
companies likely generate less plastic pollution than their peers, as rigid
plastics have higher rates of collection and recycling than lower-value,
flexible plastics.

••
Sites like this petrochemical plant,
capable of producing 150,000 metric
tons of plastic polymer per year, are
found all over the world. Photo credit:
Bim via Getty Images. *Updated 22/11/2021
32 The Plastic Waste Makers Index

Figure 3
Top 20 polymer producers generating single-use plastic
waste, 2019, million metric tons**

ExxonMobil
Sinopec
Dow
Indorama Ventures
Saudi Aramco
PetroChina
LyondellBasell
Reliance Industries
Braskem
Alpek SA de CV
Borealis
Lotte Chemical
INEOS
Total
Jiangsu Hailun Petrochemical
Far Eastern New Century
Formosa Plastics
China Energy Investment Group
PTT
China Resources
0 1 2 3 4 5 6
Flexible formats Rigid formats *Data covered by KPMG assurance

Implications
• Of approximately 300 single-use plastic polymer producers • Given the clear link between virgin polymer production
operating globally, a small fraction hold the fate of the and the escalating single-use plastic crisis, it is incumbent
world’s plastic crisis in their hands: their choice, to continue on companies at the base of the supply chain to disclose
to produce virgin polymers rather than recycled polymers, their contribution to the problem – to publish their single-
will have massive repercussions on how much waste is use plastic “footprints” as part of their material business
collected, managed and leaks into the environment. risk analysis.
• Today, regulation is largely aimed at the tens of thousands • We have produced a methodology that allows polymer
of companies that sell finished goods using single-use producers to estimate the amount of single-use plastic
plastics. A more effective solution would be to tackle the waste they account for – but the calculation is only as
waste plastic crisis via the polymer producers at the base good as the data. The next step is for the entire industry to
of the supply chain, which are relatively few in number. commit to full data transparency. Assuming a groundswell
Improvements at this stage would cascade through the in policies that ban, tax, or extract levies to pay for the
supply chain, with a disproportionate impact on circularity costs of single-use plastics, companies that take the lead
and plastic pollution. in this space will ultimately be rewarded.

**Updated 22/11/2021
 Our Insights 33

2
INSIGHT

Major global investors

and banks are enabling
the single-use plastic crisis.

Twenty institutional asset managers hold shares worth Banks

almost US$300 billion in the parent companies of the
polymer producers identified – of which we estimate US$10 More than 500 banks lent an estimated US$50 billion for
billion is invested in production of the virgin polymers that production of virgin polymers between 2011 and 2020, and
generate almost all single use plastic waste globally. Since underwrote bond and equity issuances worth more than
2011, we estimate that 20 of the world’s largest banks US$30 billion over the same 10-year period. Our analysis
lent more than US$30 billion for the production of these also shows that more than half of the financing of this
polymers. The actions of just a few funders could exert polymer production is provided by just 20 major banks.
significant influence on the single-use plastic waste problem. UK-based Barclays tops the list, despite being ranked
18th globally in terms of assets,19 suggesting that it has a
disproportionate business exposure to single-use plastic
Investors waste generation (Figure 5). Barclays has provided a large
The top three investors are US-based. Vanguard, BlackRock, amount of loans to both private (Borealis, INEOS) and public
and Capital Group, have an estimated US$6 billion invested (LyondellBasell, ExxonMobil) polymer producers. UK-based
in single use plastic waste generation, through shareholdings HSBC also ranks in the top five.
worth over US$150 billion in the parent companies of these Three of the top five banks on the list are US-based –
polymer producers (Figure 4). JPMorgan Chase, Citibank and Bank of America – as are
While Vanguard and BlackRock’s investments are mainly US investment banks Goldman Sachs and Morgan Stanley.
held passive funds, which are designed to mirror the Together with their importance as investors, our analysis
performance of stock market indices (e.g., S&P500), Capital suggests that the US is an important source of funding for the
Group’s investments are actively managed, i.e., the fund single-use plastic crisis. Remaining banks on the top 20 list are
manager selects specific stocks looking for the best returns. based in Europe (8), Japan (3), Canada (1) and Thailand (1).
Passive fund managers will need to rely on corporate We note that the estimated value of loans provided by
governance oversight and voting power to pressure banks is significantly larger than the value of institutional
companies to reduce their role in single-use plastic waste asset manager investments. This is largely due to the
generation. Active fund managers, in contrast, can screen fact that banks lend to both publicly-listed and private
out specific stocks based on sustainability criteria. Actions companies, unlike institutional investors, which only fund the
taken by these three US investment giants will resonate former: collectively, privately-controlled polymer producers
across the whole plastics industry. currently generate more single-use plastic waste than
publicly-listed ones.
34 The Plastic Waste Makers Index

Figure 4
Top 20 institutional asset managers investing in single-use
plastic polymer producers. Total value of shareholder’s
equity adjusted for share of business from in-scope polymer
production, US$BN (on 6 January 2021)

Vanguard Group
BlackRock
Capital Group
State Street
Fidelity Management & Research
Credit Suisse Group
Dimensional Fund Advisors
Geode Capital Management
Northern Trust
JPMorgan Chase
Bank of New York Mellon
Bangkok Bank
Credit Agricole Group
Invesco
UBS Group
Charles Schwab Investment Advisory
TIAA Board of Overseers
Sumitomo Mitsui Trust Holdings
Morgan Stanley
Bank of America
0.0 0.5 1.0 1.5 2.0 2.5
US$BN *Data covered by KPMG assurance

Figure 5

Top 20 banks providing lending to and underwriting

equity and bond issuances for single-use plastic
polymer production. Total value of loans and
underwriting adjusted for share of business from in-scope
polymer production, Jan 2011 to Dec 2020 (US$BN)

Barclays
Citigroup
JPMorgan Chase
HSBC
Bank of America
Mitsubishi UFJ Financial
Mizuho Financial
Deutsche Bank
SMBC Group
UniCredit
BNP Paribas
Crédit Agricole
Société Générale
Goldman Sachs
Morgan Stanley
ING Group
Credit Suisse
Scotiabank
Bangkok Bank
Raiffeisen Bank International
0 1 2 3 4 5 6
US$BN Loans US$BN Underwriting *Data covered by KPMG assurance
 Our Insights 35

Implications
Financial institutions must enable the circular plastics Financial institutions that fail to make this transition
economy rather than accelerate the environmental successfully and continue to invest in fossil-fuel-based
catastrophe of plastic waste. To remain competitive, as polymer producers face numerous risks:
regulatory and consumer behaviour continues to shift in • Financial
many regions of the world, investors and banks should: Potential for lower returns on investment as progressive
regulation impacts industry revenue growth (e.g., bans
• Calculate their exposure to single-use plastic waste –
on single-use plastic products); extended producer
using the methodology presented here, for example
responsibility schemes lead to increased costs; and capital
– and disclose it.
expenditure in new virgin polymer production results in
• Include targets to radically reduce investment and/or over-capacity. For banks, there is risk of “stranded” assets
financing of single-use plastic waste in their environmental, and defaults on loans.
social and governance policies.
• Reputational
• Phase out or stop altogether investments in and/or Growing shareholder, regulatory and societal expectations
financing of new virgin plastic production capacity. to move capital away from public companies with poor
environmental, social and governance records. Clients
The employees of these institutions should also generate
have a right to see how their money is being invested and a
internal debates to reflect on their institution’s contribution
right to choose for it not to be invested in enabling plastic
to plastic waste, asking themselves how they can use their
pollution, but this is only possible if exposure to plastic is
strong influence as employees to help the bank or asset
part of screening criteria and this information is disclosed.
manager become a better institution and eliminate plastic
waste-making. • Legal
Fiduciary duties to manage risk appropriately; statutory
duties to incorporate environmental, social and governance
considerations into capital allocations decisions; and
various disclosure obligations regarding the environmental
impacts of specific financial products and institutions
as a whole.
 36 The Plastic Waste Makers Index

3
INSIGHT

There has been a collective

industry failure to transition
away from fossil-fuel-based
feedstocks.

Our analysis shows that polymer producers remain almost Some of the top 100 polymer producers have large-scale
exclusively reliant on virgin feedstocks: not a single company projects underway to increase their use of recycled
among the largest 100 polymer producers procures more feedstocks, which are taken into account by the analysis
than two per cent of its feedstock from recycled or bio- (see case study on pages 38-39).
based materials. These overwhelmingly disappointing
The two companies that received the best grade – Thailand-
results demonstrate that the industry is barely at the start
based Indorama Ventures and Taiwan-based Far Eastern
of its journey to circularity.
New Century, which both scored a “C” – performed better
Fifty-four companies received an “E” grade for circularity than their peers due to the predominance of PET in their
– the lowest grade possible – including four of the top 20 products (a more widely recycled plastic), as well as having
polymer producers: Saudi Aramco, PetroChina, China clear circularity policies, commitments and targets, and
Energy Investment Group and Jiangsu Hailun Petrochemical. evidence of engagement with customers and suppliers to
These 54 companies have made zero progress towards create a more sustainable supply chain.20, 21
circularity, i.e., they lack any policies, commitments or targets Polymer producers headquartered in China and the Middle
to replace fossil fuel feedstocks with sustainable alternatives East typically scored lower than their peers, indicating looser
(Figure 6). disclosure and reporting requirements and commensurately
A further 26 companies, including ExxonMobil and Taiwan’s less focus on circularity in these regions.
Formosa Plastics Corporation, received a “D-” grade.
This means that while there may be some policies or
commitments to reduce fossil-fuel derived plastics, there are
no clear targets or timelines – no evidence that the company
has actioned the commitments.

••
Despite many polymer producers having
sustainability statements and goals,
54 out of 100 companies in this study
received an “E” grade for circularity – the
lowest grade possible. Photo credit:
Bloomberg Creative via Getty Images.
 Our Insights 37

Figure 6
Overall circularity scores for the top 100 polymer producers,
and the top 20 in their respective cohort. A score of ‘A’
implies a fully circular business model, whereas an ‘E’ score
indicates a company has made no commitments or progress in
reducing fossil-fuel derived plastic.

60

50

40
Number of
companies
30

20

10

0
E D- D C- C B A
Saudi Aramco ExxonMobil Reliance Dow Indorama
Industries Ventures
PetroChina Sinopec LyondellBasell
INEOS Far Eastern New
China Energy Formosa Borealis Century
Top 20 polymer producers
Investment Plastics Total
of single-use plastic Braskem
Group Corporation

Jiangsu Hailun Lotte Chemical PPT

Petrochemical Alpek SA de CV

Nova Chemicals

*Data covered by KPMG assurance

Implications
• The transition to a circular plastics economy is moving at
glacial speed among polymer producers, yet these very
same companies are key to solving the single-use plastic
waste crisis. This is likely due to the sector having been
relatively shielded from the consumer and regulatory
backlash against plastic pollution – which has been focused
mainly on the “downstream users” of single-use plastics:
packaged goods brands and retailers.
• Polymer producers must commit to using recycled plastic
waste and other sustainable feedstocks – and set a clear
and unambiguous end-date for no “new” plastics from
fossil fuels. But we need more than good intentions and
commitments – there must be action, and companies must
publish their performance against their targets.
• A common reporting framework is urgently needed to
monitor and evaluate progress towards circular plastics
production – for example, Ellen MacArthur Foundation’s
Circulytics reporting tool.
38 The Plastic Waste Makers Index

POLYMER PRODUCERS HAVE BEGUN

TO RESPOND WITH DEFINITIVE PROJECTS
THAT POINT TOWARDS A CIRCULAR
FUTURE FOR SINGLE-USE PLASTICS

Some of the largest polymer producers are now moving into 1. The Borealis group of companies includes two mechanical
investing and scaling new recycling technologies. Whilst recycling companies, mtm plastics in Germany (since
this section contains a subset of possible examples, these 2016) and Ecoplast in Austria (since 2018). In 2021, Borealis
examples are indicative of progress towards the use of commenced a new project for a chemical recycling unit
affordable recycled plastics to replace virgin feedstocks via to be established in Stenungsund, Sweden, with project
innovation and incentivised regulations. partner Stena Recycling. Provided a successful feasibility
study and final investment decision, operations are
In recent years, Europe has introduced some of the most
expected to begin in 2024. By 2025, Borealis aims to have
progressive policies globally to tackle single-use plastic
increased the output of its recycled plastic to 350,000
waste. The 2019 EU Single-Use Plastic Directive, for
metric tons per year.22
example, requires all PET bottles to contain 25 per cent
recycled polymer by 2025 and all plastic bottles to contain 2. Dow, in 2021, announced a partnership with chemical
30 per cent recycled content by 2030. Policies have recycler Mura Technology to support the scale-up and
been further strengthened in the 2021 EU Green Deal and purchase of plastic waste-derived feedstocks, including
coronavirus pandemic recovery package. multilayer packaging, from their development in Teesside,
UK, with the first 20,000 metric tons per year line expected
This regulatory climate has resulted in Europe emerging as a to be operational in 2022 and grow to 80,000 metric tons
case study for the possibility of a circular plastics economy. per year within a few years. Dow will use these materials to
We observe concrete examples of genuinely closed-loop develop new, virgin-grade plastic.23
recycling projects – where plastic waste is recycled back into
3. ExxonMobil is collaborating with Plastic Energy on an
new polymers capable of performing the same applications
advanced recycling project in Notre Dame de Gravenchon,
– being built at commercial scale by several of the world’s
France, that will convert post-consumer plastic waste
largest polymer producers.
into raw materials for the manufacturing of virgin-quality
While collectively these projects add up to only a fraction of polymers. The project is expected to have initial capacity of
current polymer production in Europe, they offer glimpses 25,000 metric tons of plastic waste per year.24
of an alternative, sustainable future for single-use plastics 4. Indorama Ventures plans to invest US$1.5 billion to grow its
economy. The shared challenge now – for industry, financial global rPET capacity to 750,000 metric tons of by 2025.
institutions and governments – is to direct the necessary They announced, in 2020, a new recycling plant in Verdun,
resources, investment and attention to ensure these nascent France, which, along with recent acquisitions in Poland, will
projects are scaled and replicated, and goals are made far work with their existing PET flake production facilities in
more ambitious. Europe. The new facility will provide washed and shredded
Australia, China, Indonesia and the United States, are among post-consumer bottles as PET flake feedstock to produce
the growing number of countries signaling intent to create the rPET resin that is suitable for food contact use.25
right regulatory frameworks that will transform the single-use 5. INEOS has partnered with recycling and waste management
plastics economy into being sustainable and circular. company, Viridor, in a project that will produce a range of
high-specification polymers with up to 50 per cent or more
Other policy-makers are behind the curve and urgent work
post-consumer recycled content. INEOS will be supplied
is required to create greater incentives for recycled polymer
with recovered polymer from Viridor’s post-consumer
production. In India, for example, closed-loop recycling for
polymers recycling plant near Bristol, UK. This follows an
food-grade single-use plastics is currently prohibited –
announcement that INEOS and Plastic Energy are to build
stalling investment from polymer producers focused on the
a new pyrolysis-based chemical recycling plant to come
domestic Indian market such as Reliance Industries, GAIL
on stream at the end of 2023. The plant will input around
India and the Indian Oil Corporation
30,000 metric tons per year of mixed and multi-layer
plastics as part of 2025 target to Incorporate at least 325
kilotons per year of recycled material into products.26
 Our Insights 39

6. LyondellBasell has a goal of producing and marketing two 8. Sinopec has invested in LanzaTech with a focus on
metric tonnes of recycled and renewable-based polymers promoting direct production of chemicals from alternative
annually by 2030. The company is taking a multi-pronged circular feedstocks. In 2020, LanzaTech announced the
approach that includes the formation of a mechanical production of the first cosmetics packaging made from
recycling joint venture with Suez called Quality Circular industrial carbon emissions with Clichy, France-based,
Polymers. LyondellBasell is also developing a proprietary L’Oréal.29
advanced recycling technology called MoReTec. This 9. Total has committed to produce 30 per cent recycled
technology aims to return post-consumer plastic waste to polymers by 2030. One of the first petrochemical
its molecular form for use as a feedstock for new plastic companies to make such a commitment. Total announced
materials. LyondellBasell is also producing new polymer the creation of a strategic partnership with chemical
material using renewable-based feedstocks including recycler Plastic Energy, in 2020, for the development of
used cooking oil.27 the first chemical recycling project in Grandpuits, France.
7. SABIC, in which Saudi Aramco is 70 per cent shareholder, This plant, with a capacity of 15,000 metric tons per year,
along with partner Plastic Energy, has started construction is expected to become operational in early 2023. Total has
on a commercial unit to significantly upscale production of also announced a partnership with PureCycle aimed at
certified circular polymers derived from used plastic, which extending their plant capacity into Europe.30
will be based in Geleen, the Netherlands and is expected
to become operational in the second half of 2022. The
partnership has previously demonstrated a closed-loop
operating model whereby plastic packaging from UK-based
retailer, Tesco, is retuned to stores, recycled and used by
suppliers for new product packaging.28

1 Borealis

2 Dow

5 INEOS
7 Saudi Aramco
4 Indorama Ventures
3 ExxonMobil
8 Sinopec 6 LyondellBasell

9 Total
 40 The Plastic Waste Makers Index

4
INSIGHT

Planned expansion of
“virgin” polymer capacity
threatens to overwhelm
hopes of a circular plastics
economy.

Producers of the five primary single-use plastic polymers Outside of China, the majority of high-growth producers are
plan to increase capacity by 30 per cent – an additional 70 integrated oil and gas companies whose operations extend
million metric tons – in the next five years, with 60 per cent “upstream” into fossil fuel exploration and production –
of that growth driven by just twenty polymer producers. This doubling down on plastics as their “soft landing” as energy
represents an annualised growth rate of approximately five and fuel markets decarbonise.31 In China, by contrast,
per cent per year until 2025, in line with historical growth in (petro)chemicals companies, which focus only on the
demand for single-use plastics from 2005-19. conversion of fossil fuels into products such as plastic
polymers, are predominant.
The three companies projected to create the most additional
capacity by 2025 are Sinopec (36 per cent growth), Our analyses suggest that, by 2025, the world will have
ExxonMobil (+35 per cent) and PetroChina (+38 per cent), generated – as waste –at least one trillion extra 1-litre drink
however even higher growth rates are predicted for Russian- bottles and caps, one trillion extra bags and one trillion extra
owned SIBUR (+240 per cent) and Indian HPCL-Mittal metres of kitchen film.
Energy Ltd (+343 per cent; Figure 7).
The business case for the growth in single-use plastic
Chinese producers account for almost half of all virgin polymer production rests on projections that demand
capacity expansion plans – presumably to reduce reliance will rise in developing economies. But waste collection
on imported polymers. China is the largest importer of and recycling infrastructure in these economies is often
polymers for production of single-use plastics globally, immature: “business as usual” increases in single-use plastic
at more than 20 million metric tons in 2019. Russian and consumption will overwhelm their infrastructure, with the
Middle Eastern companies contribute the next largest share vast majority ending up as pollution on land and in the ocean.
of growth – likely seeking to exploit abundant reserves of
economically-advantaged natural gas feedstock to serve
export markets.
 Our Insights 41

Figure 7
Top 20 polymer producers adding virgin polymer
capacity 2020-2025

Sinopec 36%
ExxonMobil 35%
PetroChina 38%
SIBUR 240%
Rongsheng Group 170%
Jiangsu Hailun Petrochemical 95%
Oriental Energy 225%
HPCL-Mittal Energy 343%
Zhejiang Satellite 424%
Shell 147%
Saudi Aramco 15%
Zhejiang Wankai 96%
Siam Cement Group 42%
Formosa Plastics 28%
Borealis 17%
LyondellBasell 9%
Grand Resource 303%
Zhejiang Hengyi Group 116%
Oman Oil Refineries & Petroleum 269%
Nizhnekamskneftekhim 400%
0 1 2 3 4 5
Per cent
million metric tons
growth vs 2019
Integrated oil and gas (Petro)chemical only

Implications
• The ultimate light on the hill is no new single-use plastics
from virgin polymers and production of safe sustainable
plastics, but a more immediate objective must be to stop
the growth in virgin polymer production.
• The business models of (petro)chemicals companies are
less intricately bound up in the exploration, production and
refining of fossil fuels compared to integrated oil and gas
companies. In theory, at least, they should be more agnostic
to types of feedstock, and they have an opportunity to
show real environmental leadership by differentiating
themselves from integrated oil and gas companies and
ending expansion of virgin polymer production.
• If growth in demand for single-use plastics fails to keep
up with growth in production, over-supply will result –
a scenario that could be lethal for the transition to a
sustainable circular plastics economy. Virgin polymer
prices will likely be depressed, and consequently
maintain, or even increase, their economic advantage
over recycled polymers. Efforts to bring innovative
substitute materials and re-use models to market at
scale will also be commercially challenged – and greater
intervention from policymakers will be required.

••
Plastic polymer production impacts both planet and people
in every step of the life-cycle from manufacture, to use and
disposal. Photo credit: Douglas Sacha via Getty Images.
 42 The Plastic Waste Makers Index

••
Roughly half of all single-use plastic
polymers are produced for export.

5
State-owned enterprises are among
the largest exporters. Photo credit:
Owngarden via Getty Images.
INSIGHT

Single-use plastics
are an entrenched
geopolitical problem.

Our analysis of plastic polymer supply chains reveals the Implications

truly global nature of the problem – and illustrates that
any solution will need to take into account four complex No single country can solve this crisis alone. We believe
geopolitical issues: that a legally-binding international instrument – a Montreal
Protocol or Paris Agreement for plastic pollution – must be
1. High levels of state ownership. Our analysis of equity
part of the solution.32 Such a treaty would be uniquely placed
holdings in these polymer producers reveals that more
to handle the competing interests of state actors and the
than 30 per cent of the sector’s shareholdings by value
asymmetrical nature of single-use plastic production and
are held by state or sovereign actors, primarily in China
consumption, and to avoid trade/tariff wars.
and the Middle East (Figure 8). And we estimate that the
total equity value of this specific industry sub-sector – the More than two-thirds of UN member states have publicly
production of virgin polymers generating single-use plastic expressed a willingness to consider a global treaty, but
waste – is more than US$60 billion. progress is slow: international plastic pollution agreements
2. The single-use plastic trade is international and high- are now where climate change agreements were in 1992.
intensity. Roughly half of all the five polymers in the scope Waiting a further 20 years for an effective agreement would
of our analysis (more than 90 million metric tons (MMT)) spell disaster for the environment and our health.33,34
were exported in 2019. The top five exporting countries Ideally, the treaty would adopt a life-cycle approach to the
are Saudi Arabia (14 MMT), United States (11 MMT), South single-use plastic crisis, covering both the reduction and
Korea (7 MMT), Belgium (6 MMT) and Germany (4 MMT). phase-out of new virgin plastic production and improved
3. Global trade imbalances in which countries produce/ collection and recycling.35 Targets should also include
profit versus import/pay for waste management. phased commitments to minimum recycled content in
With the exception of India, all low and lower-middle- plastic polymers destined for single-use applications,
income countries are heavy net importers of single-use that ratchet up over time.
plastic polymers. Flooded with cheap virgin polymers
– predominantly from high-income countries and a
few middle-income petrostates – these countries are
struggling to manage plastic waste and efforts to transition
to a circular economy are being undermined.
4. Striking differences in national rates of single-use
plastic waste generation. Our analysis of volumes of
single-use plastic waste generated in over 100 countries
indicates that the average person generates just over 15 kg
of single-use plastic waste per year (Figure 9). Some of the
highest rates (more than 50 kg per person per year) occur
in Australia and the US. In contrast, the average person
in China – the largest producer of single-use plastic by
volume – produces 18 kg of single-use plastic waste per
year; in India that figure is as low as four kg per year.
 Our Insights 43

Figure 8
Equity ownership of top 200 polymer producers,
by investor class. Total value of shareholder’s equity adjusted
for share of business from in-scope polymer production,
US$BN (on 6 January 2021)

Kingdom of Saudi Arabia 31 *

Emirate of Abu Dhabi
People's Republic of China
State of Qatar
Republic of India
US$27 billion (44%) Federation of Malaysia
Private institutions King Maha Vajiralongkorn
or individuals Kingdom of Norway
Kingdom of Thailand
US$20 billion (32%) Republic of Korea
State owners Government of Japan
Republic of Azerbaijan
Shaanxi Provincial State-owned Assets
Supervision and Administration Commission
State of Kuwait
US$15 billion (24%) Republic of Colombia
Institutional asset Islamic Republic of Iran
managers Government of Oman
Arab Republic of Egypt
Republic of Belarus
Republic of Uzbekistan
0 1 2 3 4 5

*Result excluded from the comparison of ownership by investor class (given the very large market
capitalisation of Saudi Aramco – approximately US$2 trillion – of which Kingdom of Saudi Arabia
is approximately 90 per cent owner).
*Data covered by KPMG assurance

Figure 9
Top 20 countries generating single-use plastic waste,
ranked by per capita consumption

Australia
United States
South Korea
United Kingdom
Japan
France
Saudi Arabia
Spain
Canada
Italy
Germany
Vietnam
Thailand
China
Mexico
Russian Federation
Turkey
Brazil
Indonesia
India
30 25 20 15 10 5 0 0 10 20 30 40 50 60

Single-use plastic waste generation (2019, million metric tons) Single-use plastic waste generation per capita (2019, kilograms)

*Data covered by KPMG assurance

44 The Plastic Waste Makers Index

WHERE
TO NEXT?
Where to next? 45

A lack of disclosure requirements for

producers of single-use plastics has
created an accountability gap that neither
rewards pioneer companies nor encourages
positive practices. It also means many
policy-makers lack visibility of material
and financial flows through the single-use
plastic supply chain, preventing effective
policies from being created and enforced.

Minderoo Foundation and its partners acquired multiple industry and

trade datasets to understand the single-use plastic supply chain.
We carried out months of painstaking investigation to connect single-
use plastic waste back to polymer producers. Data from 2019 is the
benchmark year zero, but we will update these analyses in the years
to come. The unprecedented level of transparency created by this
first report must draw a deep line in sand. There is no longer plausible
deniability about the sources of single-use plastic waste.
We call on polymer producers to support our efforts, building on our
method and providing estimates of their “single-use plastic waste
footprint” using internal data. We reserve the right to improve our
analysis by liaising with group Chief Financial Officers and their
auditors, and will undertake to update the results should there be
material changes arising from better understanding of verified data.
Companies should also embrace other voluntary reporting initiatives
that have emerged recently, such as the Global Commitment for the New
Plastics Economy, an initiative from the Ellen MacArthur Foundation, in
collaboration with the UN Environment Program. Currently, a desultory
two of the 100 companies (Borealis and Indorama) are signatories.

••
Plastic is a daily part of life for
humans, and sadly for many
marine species too, including this
Goby fish who is using a plastic
bottle as a nest. Photo credit:
_548901005677 via Getty Images.
46 The Plastic Waste Makers Index

Regulated reporting requirements for companies that are

producing (and using) single-use plastics trail far behind
those of carbon emissions – and are not commensurate
with the high level of risk posed. Reporting needs to be
made mandatory, and we support the development of
international reporting and accounting standards.36
In the interim, we hope that the results and methodologies
presented here will be used to inform decision-making by
the plastics industry, financial institutions and policy-makers
with respect to single-use plastic waste generation, mitigation
and reduction. We believe the results and methodologies
can serve as an important tool as they (1) allow comparison
of results across companies, countries and regions; (2) are
repeatable (annually); (3) allow trends to be monitored; and
(4) can, in time, be combined with data on waste management
and end-of-life material flows as they become available.
We urgently need polymer producers to turn all their
expertise and investment away from producing fossil-fuel-
based products and towards using plastic waste as feedstock
for recycled polymers. We need to see banks and investors
re-direct their capital in support of circular production. We
need to see policy-makers set domestic and international
policies that remove the economic advantage of virgin
polymers and support circular models of single-use plastic
production. And, finally, we need to see other companies in
the single-use plastic supply chain – converters, brands and
retailers – commit to designing and sourcing circular plastics
for the long-term.

••
Piles of separated recyclables inside waste facility in
Slovenia. Photo credit: AzmanL via Getty Images.
Where to next? 47
48 The Plastic Waste Makers Index

RESULTS
IN DETAIL

••
Blue polymer granules.
Photo credit: Luka Svetic /
EyeEm via Getty Images.
 Results in detail 49

100
TOP

Polymer producers
generating single-use
plastic waste: The Plastic
Waste Makers Index*

Rank Polymer producer No. of assets Estimated Estimated contribution Total contribution
producing production to single-use plastic waste to single-use plastic
in-scope of in-scope (MMT, 2019) waste (MMT, 2019)
polymers polymers
(MMT, 2019) Flexible Rigid
formats formats

1 ExxonMobil 55 11.2 4.7 1.2 5.9

2 Sinopec 81 11.5 4.3 1.3 5.6
3 Dow 54 9.3 4.7 0.9 5.6
4 Indorama Ventures 26 5.1 0.2 4.5 4.6
5 Saudi Aramco 56 9.5 3.2 1.1 4.3
6 PetroChina 59 8.8 3.3 0.8 4.0
7 LyondellBasell 69 9.3 2.1 1.8 3.9
8 Reliance Industries 26 5.5 1.8 1.3 3.1
9 Braskem 40 6.7 1.9 1.1 3.0
10 Alpek SA de CV 12 2.5 0.0 2.3 2.3
11 Borealis 29 5.0 1.5 0.7 2.2
12 Lotte Chemical 26 4.1 1.1 1.0 2.1
13 INEOS 27 4.8 1.0 1.0 2.0
14 Total 33 4.5 1.0 0.9 1.9
15 Jiangsu Hailun Petrochemical 1 1.7 0.0 1.6 1.6
16 Far Eastern New Century 7 1.6 0.0 1.6 1.6
17 Formosa Plastics Corporation 22 3.6 1.0 0.6 1.6
18 China Energy Investment Group 12 3.4 1.2 0.3 1.5
19 PTT 17 3.1 1.1 0.3 1.5
20 China Resources 4 1.4 0.0 1.3 1.3
21 Nova Chemicals Corporation 8 1.9 1.0 0.2 1.2
22 Siam Cement Group 20 2.4 0.9 0.3 1.1
23 Phillips 66 22 2.4 0.6 0.5 1.0
24 Zhejiang Wankai 1 1.0 0.0 1.0 1.0
25 Sumitomo Chemical 23 2.0 0.7 0.3 1.0
26 Jiangyin Chengxing Industrial Group 1 1.0 0.0 0.9 0.9
27 Chevron Corporation 23 2.2 0.5 0.4 0.9
28 Hanwha Chemical 16 1.6 0.7 0.2 0.9
29 China Coal 12 1.8 0.7 0.1 0.8
50 The Plastic Waste Makers Index

Rank Polymer producer No. of assets Estimated Estimated contribution Total contribution
producing production to single-use plastic waste to single-use plastic
in-scope of in-scope (MMT, 2019) waste (MMT, 2019)
polymers polymers
(MMT, 2019) Flexible Rigid
formats formats

30 Rongsheng Group 4 1.2 0.2 0.7 0.8

31 Mitsubishi Chemical Corporation 20 1.7 0.5 0.4 0.8
32 SIBUR 13 1.3 0.4 0.4 0.8
33 Abu Dhabi National Oil Company 10 1.9 0.6 0.2 0.8
34 GAIL India 14 1.6 0.6 0.1 0.7
35 LG Chem 7 1.4 0.5 0.2 0.7
36 Westlake Chemical Corporation 10 1.0 0.5 0.1 0.6
37 Mitsui Chemicals 17 1.1 0.2 0.4 0.6
38 Sasol 5 1.2 0.5 0.1 0.6
39 Zhejiang Hengyi Group 2 0.6 0.0 0.6 0.6
40 Eni 8 1.0 0.5 0.1 0.6
41 Yanchang Group 7 1.5 0.4 0.1 0.6
42 Repsol 12 1.1 0.4 0.2 0.6
43 Indian Oil Corporation 6 1.2 0.5 0.1 0.6
44 Nan Ya Plastics Coporation 2 0.5 0.0 0.5 0.5
45 SK Innovation Co 10 1.1 0.4 0.1 0.5
46 Oil and Natural Gas Corporation 6 1.2 0.4 0.1 0.5
47 Octal 1 0.6 0.0 0.5 0.5
48 JBF Industries 2 0.5 0.0 0.5 0.5
49 MOL Hungarian Oil and Gas 7 1.1 0.3 0.2 0.5
50 Bakhtar Petrochemical 6 1.0 0.4 0.1 0.5
51 Shell 14 1.0 0.3 0.1 0.4
52 Neo Group 1 0.4 0.0 0.4 0.4
53 Haldia Petrochemicals Ltd 5 0.9 0.3 0.1 0.4
54 China National Offshore Oil Corporation 6 0.8 0.3 0.1 0.4
55 Tasnee 4 0.9 0.3 0.1 0.4
56 Eastern Petrochemical Company 4 0.7 0.3 0.0 0.4
57 Qatar Petroleum 14 0.6 0.3 0.1 0.4
58 Shinkong 2 0.4 0.0 0.4 0.4
59 Sahara International Petrochemical 4 0.8 0.2 0.1 0.3
60 Formosa Chemicals & Fibre Corporation 4 0.6 0.1 0.2 0.3
61 Korea Petrochemical Industrial 6 0.9 0.2 0.1 0.3
62 Gatron Industries 1 0.4 0.0 0.3 0.3
63 Equate Petrochemical Company 5 0.6 0.1 0.2 0.3
64 Baofeng 6 0.7 0.2 0.1 0.3
65 National Petrochemical Company 3 1.0 0.2 0.1 0.3
(Saudi Arabia)
66 PT Chandra Asri Petrochemical 8 0.6 0.2 0.1 0.3
67 PKN Orlen 6 0.8 0.1 0.2 0.3
68 Dhunseri Petrochem 2 0.3 0.0 0.3 0.3
69 Bazan Group 4 0.7 0.2 0.1 0.3
70 Daelim Group 7 0.7 0.2 0.1 0.3
71 KAP Industrial Holdings 3 0.5 0.0 0.2 0.3
72 Petroleos Mexicanos 7 0.5 0.2 0.1 0.3
73 Pucheng Clean Energy 3 0.6 0.2 0.1 0.3
74 Qa0tar Petrochemical Company 4 0.4 0.2 0.0 0.3
75 TK Chemical 1 0.3 0.0 0.3 0.3
 Results in detail 51

Rank Polymer producer No. of assets Estimated Estimated contribution Total contribution
producing production to single-use plastic waste to single-use plastic
in-scope of in-scope (MMT, 2019) waste (MMT, 2019)
polymers polymers
(MMT, 2019) Flexible Rigid
formats formats

76 Saudi Kayan 3 0.7 0.2 0.1 0.3

77 Oriental Energy 2 0.7 0.2 0.1 0.3
78 Jam Petrochemical Company 4 0.7 0.2 0.1 0.3
79 Nizhnekamskneftekhim 3 0.4 0.2 0.0 0.3
80 Prime Polymer 2 0.4 0.3 0.0 0.3
81 Yansab 3 0.6 0.2 0.0 0.3
82 Petronas 5 0.5 0.2 0.1 0.2
83 Amir Kabir Petrochemical Company 4 0.5 0.2 0.0 0.2
84 State Oil Company of Azerbaijan Republic 7 0.5 0.2 0.1 0.2
85 Henan Coal Chemical Industry Group 1 0.2 0.0 0.2 0.2
86 Fude Energy 2 0.6 0.2 0.1 0.2
87 USI Group 5 0.4 0.2 0.0 0.2
88 Ecopetrol 3 0.5 0.1 0.1 0.2
89 Idemitsu Kosan 11 0.5 0.1 0.1 0.2
90 Kazanorgsintez 5 0.6 0.2 0.1 0.2
91 HPCL-Mittal Energy Ltd 1 0.5 0.2 0.0 0.2
92 Pan Asia PET Resin 1 0.2 0.0 0.2 0.2
93 Koksan 1 0.2 0.0 0.2 0.2
94 Novapet 1 0.2 0.0 0.2 0.2
95 Xingxing 2 0.5 0.1 0.1 0.2
96 Sanyuan 2 0.5 0.1 0.1 0.2
97 North Huajin 4 0.6 0.1 0.1 0.2
98 Shahid Tondgooian Petrochemical 4 0.2 0.0 0.2 0.2
99 Dragon Special Resin 1 0.2 0.0 0.2 0.2
100 Advanced Petrochemical 2 0.5 0.1 0.1 0.2

* Corrigendum: 22/11/2021
There was an error in the list of Top 100 Polymer producers generating single-use
plastic waste: The Plastic Waste Makers Index which has been corrected.
Air Liquide S.A. which previously appeared as no. 60 of the Top 100 Polymer producers
generating single use plastic waste, is not a producer of polymers bound for single-use
plastic and has confirmed to us they do not own the assets producing polymers bound
for single-use plastics that had been attributed to them.  Air Liquide has been removed
from the list and the list has been updated accordingly.
Minderoo and the authors extend their thanks to Air Liquide for bringing this matter to
their attention and apologise for any inconvenience caused.
52 The Plastic Waste Makers Index

100
TOP

Equity owners of
polymer producers

Rank Owner of equity in companies Location Investor type Number of Estimated Estimated
producing polymers for single- companies total value of value adjusted
use plastic applications invested shareholdings for share
(US$BN) of business
from in-scope
polymer
production
(US$BN)
1 Kingdom of Saudi Arabia Saudi Arabia State Owner 23 1,896.4 31.0
2 People's Republic of China China State Owner 28 192.2 6.0
3 Emirate of Abu Dhabi UAE State Owner 8 N/A 4.5
4 Ambani Family India Private Institution or Individual 1 65.8 2.5
5 Vanguard Group United States Institutional Asset Manager 97 68.9 2.2
6 Canopus International Thailand Private Institution or Individual 1 4.7 2.2
7 BlackRock United States Institutional Asset Manager 88 65.9 1.9
8 Capital Group United States Institutional Asset Manager 19 28.9 1.8
9 Mr James Arthur Ratcliffe Monaco Private Institution or Individual 1 N/A 1.8
10 East Step International Holdings Hong Kong Private Institution or Individual 1 9.1 1.6
11 Zhejiang Rongsheng Holding China Private Institution or Individual 1 18.5 1.3
Group
12 State of Qatar Qatar State Owner 5 5.2 1.3
13 Republic of India India State Owner 8 42.3 1.2
14 State Street United States Institutional Asset Manager 91 30.9 1.0
15 Access Industries United States Private Institution or Individual 1 6.9 1.0
16 Magna Resources Corp Singapore Private Institution or Individual 1 5.7 0.9
17 Chang Gung Medical Foundation Taiwan Private Institution or Individual 3 7.5 0.8
18 TTWF United States Private Institution or Individual 1 7.8 0.7
19 Federation of Malaysia Malaysia State Owner 6 11.6 0.7
20 PPH Polymer Products Holdings Cyprus Private Institution or Individual 1 N/A 0.6
21 King Maha Vajiralongkorn Thailand State Owner 2 6.4 0.6
22 Mr Andrew Christopher Currie Monaco Private Institution or Individual 1 N/A 0.6
23 Mr John Reece Monaco Private Institution or Individual 1 N/A 0.5
24 FMR United States Institutional Asset Manager 81 16.4 0.5
25 Mr Leonid Viktorovich Mikhelson N/A Private Institution or Individual 1 N/A 0.5
26 Kingdom of Norway Norway State Owner 71 20.2 0.5
27 Credit Suisse Group Switzerland Institutional Asset Manager 64 3.9 0.4
28 Kingdom of Thailand Thailand State Owner 4 27.1 0.4
29 Republic of Korea South Korea State Owner 16 12.5 0.4
30 Lotte Holdings Japan Private Institution or Individual 1 2.6 0.4
31 Government of Japan Japan State Owner 72 14.9 0.4
32 Stock Exchange of Thailand Thailand Private Institution or Individual 5 4.5 0.4
 Results in detail 53

Rank Owner of equity in companies Location Investor type Number of Estimated Estimated
producing polymers for single- companies total value of value adjusted
use plastic applications invested shareholdings for share
(US$BN) of business
from in-scope
polymer
production
(US$BN)
33 Republic of Azerbaijan Azerbaijan State Owner 2 0.9 0.4
34 "Shaanxi Provincial State-owned China State Owner 1 N/A 0.4
Assets
Supervision And Administration
Commission"
35 Taif AO Russia Private Institution or Individual 2 1.6 0.4
36 Yan An Shi Guo Zi Wei N/A Private Institution or Individual 1 N/A 0.3
37 Saudi Industrial Investment Saudi Arabia Private Institution or Individual 1 2.1 0.3
38 Kieppe Patrimonial Brazil Private Institution or Individual 1 1.4 0.3
39 State of Kuwait Kuwait State Owner 5 0.1 0.3
40 Pangestu Family Indonesia Private Institution or Individual 1 1.8 0.3
41 Republic of Colombia Colombia State Owner 1 24.4 0.3
42 "Jiang Yin Cheng Xing Shi Ye Ji N/A Private Institution or Individual 1 N/A 0.3
Tuan You Xian Gong Si Gong Hui
Wei Yuan Hui"
43 General Organization For Social Saudi Arabia Private Institution or Individual 3 1.8 0.3
Insurance
44 Chin's International Investment N/A Private Institution or Individual 3 2.4 0.3
45 Dimensional Fund Advisors United States Institutional Asset Manager 89 7.7 0.3
46 Islamic Republic of Iran Iran State Owner 6 N/A 0.3
47 National Bank Trust Russia Private Institution or Individual 1 N/A 0.3
48 Geode Capital Management United States Institutional Asset Manager 58 7.6 0.3
49 Genhero Limited N/A Private Institution or Individual 1 N/A 0.2
50 Mr Gennadii Nikolaevich N/A Private Institution or Individual 1 N/A 0.2
Timchenko
51 Government of Oman Oman State Owner 1 N/A 0.2
52 Mr Asim Kokoglu N/A Private Institution or Individual 1 N/A 0.2
53 Kavosh Sanat Sepid Company N/A Private Institution or Individual 1 N/A 0.2
54 Northern Trust Corp United States Institutional Asset Manager 60 7.5 0.2
55 Wan Shun International Investment N/A Private Institution or Individual 3 1.8 0.2
56 JPMorgan Chase United States Institutional Asset Manager 70 9.9 0.2
57 Bank of New York Mellon United States Institutional Asset Manager 66 6.9 0.2
58 Lianyungang Bochuang N/A Private Institution or Individual 1 N/A 0.2
Investment
59 Arab Republic of Egypt Egypt State Owner 3 N/A 0.2
60 Bangkok Bank Thailand Institutional Asset Manager 4 1.0 0.2
61 Cristian Lay N/A Private Institution or Individual 1 N/A 0.2
62 Dang Yanbao N/A Private Institution or Individual 1 1.1 0.2
63 Credit Agricole Group France Institutional Asset Manager 66 12.9 0.2
64 Republic of Belarus Belarus State Owner 2 N/A 0.2
65 Jia Dou Guo Ji You Xian Gong Si N/A Private Institution or Individual 1 N/A 0.2
66 Mr Jian Chang Zhao N/A Private Institution or Individual 1 N/A 0.2
67 Invesco United States Institutional Asset Manager 83 5.5 0.2
68 UBS Group Switzerland Institutional Asset Manager 73 6.4 0.2
69 Charles Schwab Investment United States Institutional Asset Manager 79 5.6 0.2
Advisory
70 Republic of Uzbekistan Uzbekistan State Owner 1 N/A 0.2
71 TIAA Board of Overseers United States Institutional Asset Manager 64 4.5 0.2
54 The Plastic Waste Makers Index

Rank Owner of equity in companies Location Investor type Number of Estimated Estimated
producing polymers for single- companies total value of value adjusted
use plastic applications invested shareholdings for share
(US$BN) of business
from in-scope
polymer
production
(US$BN)
72 Grupo Inversor Petroquimica Spain Private Institution or Individual 1 N/A 0.2
73 Sumitomo Mitsui Trust Holdings Japan Institutional Asset Manager 71 5.8 0.2
74 Morgan Stanley United States Institutional Asset Manager 59 3.8 0.1
75 Plastipak Holdings N/A Private Institution or Individual 1 N/A 0.1
76 SIXB Cyrpus Private Institution or Individual 1 N/A 0.1
77 SOIHL Cyprus Investment Limited Cyprus Private Institution or Individual 1 N/A 0.1
78 Nx Shengda Rungfeng N/A Private Institution or Individual 1 0.8 0.1
79 Li Shuirong N/A Private Institution or Individual 1 1.9 0.1
80 Bank of America United States Institutional Asset Manager 20 5.6 0.1
81 California Public Employees' United States Institutional Asset Manager 63 3.8 0.1
Retirement System
82 Wellington Management Group United States Institutional Asset Manager 29 5.1 0.1
83 Mittal Investments India Private Institution or Individual 1 N/A 0.1
84 Republic of Italy Italy State Owner 3 11.8 0.1
85 Samarjit Enterprises India Private Institution or Individual 1 3.4 0.1
86 Prudential Britain Institutional Asset Manager 68 2.4 0.1
87 Dodge & Cox United States Institutional Asset Manager 7 3.1 0.1
88 Wellington Marketing N/A Private Institution or Individual 1 N/A 0.1
89 Gresham Banque Privee Britain Private Institution or Individual 72 N/A 0.1
90 Republic of Tatarstan Russia State Owner 1 0.4 0.1
91 Justice Shares Broker Iran Private Institution or Individual 3 N/A 0.1
92 Franklin Resources United States Institutional Asset Manager 80 7.0 0.1
93 Federative Republic Of Brazil Brazil State Owner 1 0.5 0.1
94 Civil Pension Fund Investment Iran Institutional Asset Manager 3 N/A 0.1
95 Xi'an Innovative Energy Investment N/A Private Institution or Individual 1 N/A 0.1
Management
96 Huan Yang You Xian Gong Si N/A Private Institution or Individual 1 N/A 0.1
97 Hua Li Cai Wu You Xian Gong Si N/A Private Institution or Individual 1 N/A 0.1
98 Republic of Austria Austria State Owner 1 N/A 0.1
99 Mitsubishi UFJ Financial Group Japan Institutional Asset Manager 77 N/A 0.1
100 DWS Investment Germany Institutional Asset Manager 69 N/A 0.1
 Results in detail 55

100
TOP

Banks financing
polymer producers

Rank Bank Headquarters Number of Number of Total value Estimated value of loans and underwriting adjusted
lending and companies of loans and for share of business from in-scope polymer
under- lending and underwriting production, US$BN (from Jan 2011 to Dec 2020)
writing underwriting (US$BN)
deals (2011
Loans Equity Bonds Total
to 2020)
under- under-
writing writing
1 Barclays United Kingdom 477 23 68.3 3.1 0.7 1.5 5.4
2 JPMorgan Chase United States 636 28 90.5 2.7 0.3 2.0 5.0
3 Citigroup United States 746 32 96.7 2.8 0.4 1.9 5.1
4 Bank of America United States 561 27 73.3 2.9 0.1 1.2 4.2
5 HSBC United Kingdom 600 36 68.5 3.1 0.2 1.4 4.7
6 Mitsubishi UFJ Japan 599 32 54.3 2.1 0.0 0.8 2.9
Financial
7 Deutsche Bank Germany 340 23 41.7 1.0 0.3 0.9 2.2
8 Mizuho Financial Japan 571 33 49.1 1.5 0.0 0.7 2.3
9 SMBC Group Japan 495 32 47.4 1.5 0.0 0.6 2.2
10 Goldman Sachs United States 320 22 37.5 0.5 0.4 0.7 1.6
11 UniCredit Italy 173 14 17.3 1.1 0.1 1.0 2.1
12 BNP Paribas France 445 29 42.5 1.0 0.0 0.7 1.7
13 Credit Suisse Switzerland 167 15 17.9 0.8 0.2 0.3 1.3
14 Morgan Stanley United States 377 22 40.9 0.3 0.3 1.0 1.6
15 Crédit Agricole France 322 25 27.3 1.0 0.0 0.6 1.7
16 Société Générale France 321 24 31.5 1.0 0.0 0.6 1.6
17 ING Group Netherlands 178 22 11.5 1.0 - 0.3 1.3
18 NatWest United Kingdom 163 22 15.4 0.5 0.0 0.1 0.7
19 UBS Switzerland 117 21 13.7 0.3 0.1 0.3 0.7
20 Bangkok Bank Thailand 65 5 5.2 0.4 0.1 0.4 0.9
21 Lloyds Banking United Kingdom 79 7 7.9 0.4 - 0.2 0.6
Group
22 Raiffeisen Bank Austria 63 4 3.4 0.5 0.0 0.4 0.9
International
23 Santander Spain 143 14 15.0 0.3 0.0 0.5 0.8
24 Siam Commercial Thailand 65 5 6.5 0.3 0.0 0.5 0.8
Bank
25 Industrial and China 203 20 19.2 0.6 - 0.2 0.8
Commercial Bank of
China
26 Shanghai Pudong China 73 7 8.9 0.4 - 0.5 0.8
Development Bank
56 The Plastic Waste Makers Index

Rank Bank Headquarters Number of Number of Total value Estimated value of loans and underwriting adjusted
lending and companies of loans and for share of business from in-scope polymer
under- lending and underwriting production, US$BN (from Jan 2011 to Dec 2020)
writing underwriting (US$BN)
deals (2011
Loans Equity Bonds Total
to 2020)
under- under-
writing writing
27 Erste Group Austria 65 3 3.1 0.4 0.0 0.4 0.8
28 Wells Fargo United States 310 14 15.1 0.5 0.0 0.3 0.8
29 Scotiabank Canada 206 16 10.8 0.8 0.0 0.2 1.1
30 Krung Thai Bank Thailand 65 4 5.7 0.3 0.0 0.4 0.7
31 Commerzbank Germany 98 11 5.8 0.4 0.0 0.3 0.7
32 Standard Chartered United Kingdom 279 22 19.5 0.3 - 0.2 0.6
33 Bank of China China 273 23 23.4 0.3 0.0 0.3 0.6
34 BNDES Brazil 6 2 2.0 0.5 - - 0.5
35 ANZ Australia 118 16 8.7 0.4 - 0.1 0.5
36 Bank of New York United States 51 6 4.1 0.4 - 0.0 0.4
Mellon
37 Taiwan Financial Taiwan 85 9 2.4 0.5 - -0.0 0.5
Holding
38 Kasikornbank Thailand 55 4 3.6 0.0 0.0 0.4 0.5
39 Yuanta Financial Taiwan 73 6 2.1 0.0 0.0 0.4 0.5
40 Intesa Sanpaolo Italy 117 15 9.0 0.3 - 0.1 0.4
41 Royal Bank of Canada 159 10 16.6 0.5 0.0 0.2 0.8
Canada
42 Regions Financial United States 23 6 1.8 0.4 - 0.0 0.4
43 Toronto-Dominion Canada 70 7 5.6 0.7 0.0 0.1 0.8
Bank
44 European Luxembourg 9 5 3.3 0.4 - 0.0 0.4
Investment Bank
45 Landesbank Baden- Germany 21 2 1.7 0.2 - 0.2 0.4
Württemberg
(LBBW)
46 State Bank of India India 162 6 14.0 0.3 0.0 0.0 0.3
47 Mega Financial Taiwan 88 10 2.4 0.3 - 0.1 0.4
48 PNC Financial United States 89 9 4.0 0.4 0.0 0.0 0.4
Services
49 KDB Financial South Korea 77 12 3.3 0.2 - 0.1 0.3
Group
50 Sberbank Russia 8 1 2.1 0.3 - 0.0 0.3
51 First Abu Dhabi United Arab 112 9 11.2 0.3 0.0 0.0 0.3
Bank Emirates
52 China Minsheng China 63 7 11.1 0.1 - 0.2 0.3
Banking
53 Nordea Finland 17 5 1.2 0.3 - -0.0 0.3
54 JBIC Japan 14 8 12.3 0.3 - - 0.3
55 Masterlink Taiwan 38 2 1.2 - 0.1 0.2 0.3
Securities
56 Itaú Unibanco Brazil 8 2 1.2 0.0 - 0.2 0.3
57 China Construction China 119 11 10.5 0.1 - 0.1 0.3
Bank
58 Export Development Canada 52 9 4.5 0.5 - -0.0 0.5
Canada
59 World Bank United States 15 3 0.7 0.2 - - 0.2
60 Northern Trust United States 16 5 4.7 0.2 - - 0.2
 Results in detail 57

Rank Bank Headquarters Number of Number of Total value Estimated value of loans and underwriting adjusted
lending and companies of loans and for share of business from in-scope polymer
under- lending and underwriting production, US$BN (from Jan 2011 to Dec 2020)
writing underwriting (US$BN)
deals (2011
Loans Equity Bonds Total
to 2020)
under- under-
writing writing
61 BMO Financial Canada 33 8 1.9 0.1 0.0 0.0 0.1
Group
62 Taiwan Cooperative Taiwan 65 11 1.4 0.2 - 0.0 0.2
Financial
63 DZ Bank Germany 35 7 1.8 0.2 - 0.1 0.3
64 DBS Singapore 134 12 7.0 0.2 0.0 0.0 0.2
65 Banco Bilbao Spain 99 18 6.8 0.2 0.0 0.1 0.2
Vizcaya Argentaria
(BBVA)
66 Hua Nan Financial Taiwan 76 9 1.6 0.2 - 0.0 0.2
67 Gazprombank Russia 7 1 1.4 - 0.2 0.1 0.2
68 China Development Taiwan 60 4 1.0 0.0 - 0.2 0.2
Financial Holding
69 Fubon Financial Taiwan 54 7 1.3 0.1 - 0.1 0.2
70 Agricultural Bank of China 103 8 13.1 0.0 - 0.2 0.2
China
71 Sumitomo Mitsui Japan 84 11 5.2 0.2 - - 0.2
Trust
72 CTBC Financial Taiwan 46 8 1.2 0.2 - 0.0 0.2
Holding
73 Nomura Japan 63 10 4.3 0.0 0.0 0.1 0.2
74 China International China 68 6 8.1 - - 0.2 0.2
Capital Corporation
75 CITIC China 129 7 10.0 0.0 0.0 0.1 0.2
76 Korea Investment South Korea 80 5 3.2 - 0.0 0.2 0.2
Holdings
77 NongHyup Financial South Korea 119 5 5.9 0.0 0.0 0.1 0.2
78 Axis Bank India 50 7 4.9 0.0 0.0 0.1 0.2
79 Chang Hwa Taiwan 42 10 0.9 0.2 - - 0.2
Commercial Bank
80 Guosen Securities China 24 4 2.7 - 0.2 0.0 0.2
81 Taishin Financial Taiwan 24 4 0.8 0.1 0.0 0.1 0.2
Group
82 United Overseas Singapore 86 11 4.9 0.1 0.0 0.0 0.1
Bank
83 Bradesco Brazil 14 1 0.7 0.1 - 0.0 0.1
84 KfW Germany 22 8 2.8 0.2 - 0.0 0.2
85 Banco do Brasil Brazil 13 1 0.6 0.1 - 0.0 0.1
86 Industrial Bank China 64 5 9.4 0.0 - 0.1 0.1
Company
87 BPCE Group France 72 12 6.4 0.1 0.0 0.0 0.1
88 Norinchukin Bank Japan 41 8 3.0 0.1 - 0.0 0.1
89 DNB Norway 61 9 4.2 0.1 0.0 0.0 0.1
90 China Merchants China 128 6 9.3 0.0 - 0.1 0.1
Group
91 KB Financial Group South Korea 96 5 3.2 0.0 0.0 0.1 0.1
92 China Development China 31 5 4.8 0.1 - 0.1 0.1
Bank
93 Korea Eximbank South Korea 31 9 2.9 0.1 - - 0.1
94 Riyad Bank Saudi Arabia 43 4 5.0 0.1 0.0 0.0 0.1
58 The Plastic Waste Makers Index

Rank Bank Headquarters Number of Number of Total value Estimated value of loans and underwriting adjusted
lending and companies of loans and for share of business from in-scope polymer
under- lending and underwriting production, US$BN (from Jan 2011 to Dec 2020)
writing underwriting (US$BN)
deals (2011
Loans Equity Bonds Total
to 2020)
under- under-
writing writing
95 ICICI Bank India 84 6 3.6 0.0 0.0 0.1 0.1
96 Far Eastern Taiwan 27 3 0.5 0.0 - 0.1 0.1
International Bank
97 Capital Securities China 27 2 0.5 - - 0.1 0.1
98 HDFC Bank India 25 3 3.2 - 0.0 0.1 0.1
99 CSC Financial China 79 6 6.3 - - 0.1 0.1
100 Public Investment Saudi Arabia 4 2 5.2 0.1 - - 0.1
Fund
 Results in detail 59

100
TOP

Circularity
scores

Rank Largest 100 of Overall Enablers Outcome Indicators

in-scope polymer score score score
Strategy Targets Infra- Supplier Customer Per cent Per cent
producers ranked
structure engage- engage- recycled outflow
by circularity A to E
ment ment inflows not
scores
recycled
1 Indorama Ventures C A- D- A A B B- B E D
2 Far Eastern New C B D- A B B C B E C-
Century
3 Dow C- B E A B C B- B E E
4 LyondellBasell C- B E B B C B- B E E
5 Braskem C- B E A B C C B E E
6 Borealis C- A- E A A- B B- B E E
7 PTT C- B E A B- B- C B E E
8 Alpek SA de CV C- B- D- A D B C- C E D
9 Nova Chemicals C- B E A C B C B E E
Corporation
10 Repsol C- B E A B- B B- B E D-
11 Mitsui Chemical C- B- E A D- B- C- B E D-
12 Reliance Industries D C E C C- B C- B- E D-
13 INEOS D C E D B C C- C- E E
14 Total D B- E C B- B- C- B E E
15 Siam Cement D B- E B B B- C D E E
Group
16 LG Chem D C E A B C C- E E E
17 SIBUR D C E B C C- C- B E E
18 Shell D C- E C C C C- D E E
19 Eni D C E C E B- C B E E
20 KAP Industrial D C D- D E B B- B E D
Holdings
21 Sinopec D- C- E C C C- D D- E E
22 Lotte Chemical D- D- E E E C D D- E D-
23 Formosa Plastics D- D E D E C D D- E E
Corporation
24 Chevron D- D E C D C D E E E
Corporation
25 Sumitomo D- D E D D- D C E E E
Chemical
26 Abu Dhabi National D- C- E A E D- C D- E E
Oil Company
27 Mitsubishi D- C- E C E B C- D E D-
Chemical
Corporation
60 The Plastic Waste Makers Index

Rank Largest 100 of Overall Enablers Outcome Indicators

in-scope polymer score score score
Strategy Targets Infra- Supplier Customer Per cent Per cent
producers ranked
structure engage- engage- recycled outflow
by circularity A to E
ment ment inflows not
scores
recycled
28 China Resources D- E D D E E E E E C
29 MOL Hungarian Oil D- D E C E B- C- E E D-
& Gas
30 Westlake Chemical D- C- E E E B C- B- E E
Corporation
31 Jiangyin Chengxing D- E D E E E E D- E C
Industrial Group
32 Tasnee D- D E E E B D D- E E
33 PKN Orlen D- D- E D D- D E D- E D-
34 Equate D- D E C E B- D D- E D-
Petrochemical
Company
35 Octal D- D E B E B- E E E E
36 Zhejiang Hengyi D- E D D E D- E E E C
Group
37 Nan Ya D- D D- B E B- E E E D
38 Idemitsu Kosan D- D- E C E C- D- E E E
39 Petronas D- D E C D- C- C- E E E
40 Hyosung D- D- E E E B E D E E
Corporation
41 Neo Group D- D D- D E B E D- E C-
42 USI Group D- D- E C E C- E D- E E
43 ExxonMobil D- D E E E C D- B E E
44 Jiangsu Hailun D- E D E E E E E E C
Petrochemical
45 Zhejiang Wankai D- E D E E E E E E C
46 Phillips 66 D- D E D C- C- D E E E
47 Saudi Aramco E E E E E C E E E E
48 PetroChina E E E E E E E E E E
49 China Energy E E E E E E E E E E
Investment Group
Co. Ltd
50 China Coal E E E E E E E E E E
51 Hanwha Chemical E E E D E D E E E E
52 GAIL India E E E E E D- E D- E E
53 Yanchang Group E E E E E E E E E E
54 Rongsheng Group E E D- E E D- E E E C-
55 Sasol E E E E E E C E E E
56 Indian Oil E E E D E D E E E E
Corporation
57 Oil & Natural Gas E E E D E D- E D- E E
Corporation
58 SK Innovation Co E D- E C E D E D- E E
59 Bakhtar E E E E E E E E E E
Petrochemical
60 National E E E E E E E E E E
Petrochemical
Company (Saudi
Arabia)
61 Haldia E E E D E E E E E E
Petrochemicals Ltd
62 KPIC Corporation E E E E E E E E E E
 Results in detail 61

Rank Largest 100 of Overall Enablers Outcome Indicators

in-scope polymer score score score
Strategy Targets Infra- Supplier Customer Per cent Per cent
producers ranked
structure engage- engage- recycled outflow
by circularity A to E
ment ment inflows not
scores
recycled
63 China Nation E E E E E E E E E E
Offshore Oil
Corporation
64 Sahara E E E E E D- E E E E
International
Petrochemical
65 Jam Petrochemical E E E E E E E E E E
Company
66 Eastern E E E E E E E E E E
Petrochemical
Company
67 Bazan Group E E E E E E E E E E
68 Oriental Energy E E E E E D- E E E E
69 Saudi Kayan E E E E E E E E E E
70 Ningxia Baofeng E E E E D- D E E E E
Group
71 Daelim Group E E E E E E E E E E
72 Kazanorgsintez E E E E E E E E E E
73 North Huajin E E E E E E E E E E
74 Pucheng Clean E E E D E E E E E E
Energy
75 Formosa Chemical E E E E E E E E E D-
& Fibre Corporation
76 Qatar Petroleum E E E E E E E D- E E
77 Yansab E E E E E E E E E E
78 Fude Energy E E E E E E E E E E
79 PT Chandra Asri E D- E D E D E D- E E
Petrochemical
80 JBF E E D- E E E E E E C-
81 Xingxing E E E E E E E E E E
82 Sanyuan E E E E E E E E E E
83 Amir Kabir E E E E E E E E E E
Petrochemical
Company
84 Petroleos E E E E E E E E E E
Mexicanos
85 Ecopetrol S.A. E E E E E E E E E E
86 State Oil Company E E E E E E E E E E
of Azerbaijan
Republic
87 Advanced E E E E E E E E E E
Petrochemical
88 HPCL-Mittal E E E E E E E E E E
Energy Ltd
89 Marun E E E E E E E E E E
Petrochemical
Company
90 National E E E E E E E E E E
Petrochemical
Company (Iran)
91 Nizhnekams- E E E E E D- D E E E
kneftekhim
92 Qatar E E E E E E E D- E E
Petrochemical
Company
62 The Plastic Waste Makers Index

Rank Largest 100 of Overall Enablers Outcome Indicators

in-scope polymer score score score
Strategy Targets Infra- Supplier Customer Per cent Per cent
producers ranked
structure engage- engage- recycled outflow
by circularity A to E
ment ment inflows not
scores
recycled
93 Luqing Group E E E E E E E E E E
94 Pinnacle Polymers E E E E E E E E E E
Company
95 Mesaieed E E E E E E E E E E
Petrochemical
Holding Company
96 Lukoil E E E E E E E E E E
97 Petro Rabigh E E E E E D- E E E E
98 LCY Chemical E E E D E E E E E E
Corp.
99 Jiutai Energy E E E E E E E E E E
100 Datang Group E E E E E E E E E E
 In-scope Polymer Production and Trade Conversion Single-use plastic bulk Trade of single-use Single-use plastic
packaging trade plastic finished goods waste generation
Rank Country Domestic Exports Imports Net Volume of Converted single-use Bulk packaging Finished goods Net Single-use
TOP
production (MMT) (MMT) polymer out-of- plastic volume (MMT) trade (MMT) trade (MMT) single-use plastic
(MMT) produc- scope plastic waste
+ – = tion
– applica-
= – + – + = waste generation
Total Rigid Flexible Exports Imports Exports Imports per capita
(MMT) tion (MMT) format format generat- (kg per
ion (MMT) person)

1 Singapore 4.1 4.1 0.3 0.3 0.2 0.1 0.0 0.1 0.1 0.4 0.4 0.4 0.4 76
2 Australia 0.5 0.1 0.4 0.8 0.5 0.4 0.2 0.2 0.1 0.8 0.1 0.4 1.5 59
100
3 Oman 0.9 0.6 0.1 0.4 0.1 0.3 0.2 0.1 - - 0.0 0.1 0.3 56
4 Netherlands 2.7 2.7 1.5 1.5 1.2 0.3 0.1 0.2 1.2 1.4 0.5 0.9 0.9 55
5 Belgium 3.5 3.5 3.4 3.4 2.7 0.8 0.4 0.4 1.0 1.1 0.9 0.6 0.6 55
6 Israel 0.5 0.3 0.5 0.8 0.4 0.4 0.2 0.2 0.1 0.2 0.1 0.1 0.5 55
7 Hong Kong - - 0.0 0.0 - 0.0 0.0 - 0.0 0.4 - - 0.4 55
8 Switzerland - - 0.3 0.3 0.2 0.1 0.1 0.0 0.5 0.4 0.1 0.5 0.5 53
9 United States 28.8 10.7 4.6 22.7 9.2 13.6 7.6 5.9 2.4 4.1 2.0 4.0 17.2 53
10 United Arab 3.9 3.4 0.9 1.3 1.0 0.3 0.2 0.2 0.0 0.1 0.2 0.4 0.5 52
Emirates
Results in detail

11 Chile 0.1 0.1 0.5 0.5 0.2 0.3 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.6 0.0 0.1 0.9 51
12 South Korea 10.4 6.6 0.5 4.3 1.9 2.4 1.1 1.3 1.1 1.2 0.7 0.5 2.3 44
13 United 1.2 0.8 1.5 1.9 0.8 1.2 0.6 0.5 0.4 1.9 0.9 1.2 2.9 44
Kingdom
14 Kuwait 0.9 0.7 0.1 0.4 0.3 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.1 0.0 0.1 0.2 40
plastic waste generation

15 New Zealand - - 0.2 0.2 0.1 0.1 0.0 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.0 0.1 0.2 39
16 Ireland - - 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.0 0.0 0.1 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.2 39
17 Finland 0.5 0.4 0.3 0.4 0.2 0.2 0.1 0.2 0.1 0.0 0.1 0.1 0.2 38
18 Japan 5.3 0.8 1.7 6.1 2.6 3.6 2.1 1.5 0.6 1.8 0.9 0.9 4.7 37
19 France 2.7 2.3 2.2 2.6 1.1 1.5 0.9 0.5 1.1 1.9 1.1 1.1 2.3 36
20 Slovenia - - 0.2 0.2 0.1 0.1 0.0 0.0 0.1 0.1 0.0 0.1 0.1 35
21 Saudi Arabia 15.4 13.8 0.4 2.0 0.9 1.1 0.5 0.5 0.3 0.2 0.0 0.2 1.2 35
22 Czech 0.5 0.4 0.8 0.8 0.5 0.3 0.2 0.1 0.4 0.6 0.4 0.2 0.4 35
Countries by per capita single-use

Republic
23 Spain 2.3 2.0 1.7 2.0 0.8 1.2 0.6 0.6 0.8 1.2 0.7 0.6 1.6 34
24 Canada 4.0 3.6 1.5 1.8 0.9 1.0 0.4 0.6 0.9 1.1 0.7 0.8 1.3 34
25 Denmark - - 0.3 0.3 0.2 0.1 0.1 0.0 0.2 0.2 0.1 0.2 0.2 33
26 Sweden 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.6 0.3 0.3 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.3 0.2 0.3 32
27 Austria 0.8 0.7 0.5 0.7 0.3 0.3 0.1 0.2 0.5 0.5 0.3 0.3 0.3 32
28 Norway 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 27
63
 Single-use plastic bulk Trade of single-use Single-use plastic
64

In-scope Polymer Production and Trade Conversion packaging trade plastic finished goods waste generation
Rank Country Domestic Exports Imports Net Volume of Converted single-use Bulk packaging Finished goods Net Single-use
production (MMT) (MMT) polymer out-of- plastic volume (MMT) trade (MMT) trade (MMT) single-use plastic
(MMT) produc- scope plastic waste
+ – = – = – + – + = generation
tion applica- Total Rigid Flexible Exports Imports Exports Imports waste
per capita
(MMT) tion (MMT) format format generat- (kg per
ion (MMT) person)

29 Uruguay - - 0.1 0.1 0.0 0.1 0.1 0.0 - 0.0 - - 0.1 25

30 Portugal 0.2 0.2 0.7 0.8 0.3 0.5 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.2 0.2 0.1 0.3 25
31 Italy 1.4 1.1 3.7 4.0 1.7 2.4 1.1 1.3 2.0 1.3 1.0 0.7 1.4 23
32 Poland 0.9 0.7 1.5 1.7 0.7 1.0 0.5 0.5 1.1 1.1 0.5 0.4 0.9 23
33 Greece 0.3 0.2 0.4 0.5 0.2 0.3 0.1 0.2 0.2 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.3 23
34 Costa Rica - - 0.1 0.1 0.0 0.1 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.1 - - 0.1 23
35 Germany 5.1 4.3 3.7 4.4 2.1 2.3 1.3 1.0 3.4 3.3 2.2 1.8 1.8 22
36 Latvia - - 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 - 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 22
37 Croatia - - 0.2 0.2 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.0 0.1 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.1 21
38 Slovakia 0.4 0.3 0.3 0.3 0.2 0.2 0.1 0.1 0.2 0.2 0.1 0.1 0.1 21
39 Lithuania 0.6 0.5 0.1 0.3 0.1 0.2 0.1 0.0 0.1 0.0 0.1 0.0 0.1 21
The Plastic Waste Makers Index

40 Hungary 0.7 0.5 0.3 0.5 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.1 0.3 0.2 0.1 0.2 0.2 20
41 Qatar 2.1 2.0 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.0 0.0 0.0 - 0.0 0.0 0.1 0.1 20
42 Vietnam 0.9 0.6 3.1 3.4 1.8 1.6 0.7 0.9 0.2 0.6 0.4 0.2 1.9 20
43 El Salvador - - 0.2 0.2 0.0 0.1 0.1 0.0 - 0.0 - - 0.1 19
44 Thailand 7.0 4.3 0.9 3.6 1.7 1.9 0.7 1.1 0.9 0.5 0.4 0.2 1.3 18
45 China 51.4 3.6 20.9 68.8 34.2 34.5 11.5 23.1 7.9 1.2 3.9 1.5 25.4 18
46 Lebanon - - 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.0 0.0 - 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.1 17
47 Belarus 0.2 0.1 0.3 0.3 0.2 0.2 0.1 0.1 - - - - 0.2 17
48 Mexico 2.5 1.0 2.5 4.0 1.7 2.3 1.2 1.1 1.5 1.4 0.5 0.6 2.2 17
49 Taiwan 3.7 2.7 0.6 1.6 0.6 0.9 0.4 0.5 0.9 0.3 - - 0.4 17
50 Russian 3.6 0.7 1.2 4.1 1.9 2.1 1.0 1.1 0.3 0.5 0.4 0.3 2.3 16
Federation
51 Malaysia 1.7 1.3 1.8 2.1 1.0 1.1 0.3 0.8 1.3 0.7 0.3 0.2 0.5 16
52 Trinidad and - - 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 - 0.0 - - 0.0 15
Tobago
53 Turkey 1.0 0.3 3.6 4.4 2.2 2.2 0.8 1.3 0.8 0.3 0.6 0.2 1.2 15
54 Peru - - 0.7 0.7 0.3 0.4 0.2 0.2 - 0.0 0.0 0.1 0.5 15
55 Romania 0.1 0.1 0.4 0.4 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.1 0.1 0.2 0.1 0.1 0.3 15
56 Panama - - 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.1 0.1 15
57 Argentina 1.0 0.4 0.5 1.1 0.5 0.6 0.3 0.3 - 0.0 0.0 0.1 0.7 15
 In-scope Polymer Production and Trade Conversion Single-use plastic bulk Trade of single-use Single-use plastic
packaging trade plastic finished goods waste generation
Rank Country Domestic Exports Imports Net Volume of Converted single-use Bulk packaging Finished goods Net Single-use
production (MMT) (MMT) polymer out-of- plastic volume (MMT) trade (MMT) trade (MMT) single-use plastic
(MMT) produc- scope plastic waste
+ – = – = – + – + = generation
tion applica- Total Rigid Flexible Exports Imports Exports Imports waste
per capita
(MMT) tion (MMT) format format generat- (kg per
ion (MMT) person)

58 Brazil 4.9 1.4 1.4 4.9 2.2 2.7 1.0 1.6 0.2 0.2 0.1 0.2 2.8 13
59 South Africa 1.3 0.6 0.4 1.2 0.5 0.6 0.3 0.3 0.1 0.2 0.0 0.1 0.8 13
60 Iran 5.0 2.9 0.0 2.2 1.2 1.0 0.4 0.6 - 0.0 0.0 0.1 1.0 13
61 Georgia - - 0.1 0.1 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 - - - - 0.0 12
62 Paraguay - - 0.1 0.1 0.0 0.1 0.1 0.0 - 0.0 - - 0.1 12
63 Bahrain - - 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 - 0.0 - - 0.0 12
64 Bulgaria 0.0 0.0 0.3 0.3 0.1 0.2 0.1 0.1 0.2 0.1 0.0 0.1 0.1 12
65 Serbia 0.2 0.1 0.2 0.2 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 - - - - 0.1 12
66 Morocco - - 0.5 0.5 0.2 0.2 0.1 0.1 0.0 0.2 0.1 0.1 0.4 11
67 Cyprus - - 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 - - - - 0.0 11
Results in detail

68 Colombia 0.5 0.3 0.7 0.9 0.5 0.5 0.2 0.3 0.1 0.1 0.0 0.1 0.5 11
69 Dominican - - 0.2 0.2 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.0 0.0 0.0 - - 0.1 10
Republic
70 Mauritius - - 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 - - - - 0.0 10
71 Estonia - - 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 - - - - 0.0 10
72 Ukraine 0.1 0.1 0.5 0.5 0.2 0.3 0.2 0.1 0.0 0.1 0.0 0.1 0.4 10
73 Philippines 0.6 0.1 0.6 1.1 0.6 0.5 0.2 0.3 0.1 0.5 0.1 0.2 1.0 9
74 Algeria - - 0.7 0.7 0.3 0.3 0.2 0.1 0.0 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.4 9
75 Tunisia - - 0.2 0.2 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.0 - 0.0 - - 0.1 9
76 Egypt 1.3 0.8 1.2 1.7 0.8 0.9 0.3 0.6 0.2 0.2 0.0 0.1 0.9 9
77 Kazakhstan 0.0 0.0 0.2 0.3 0.2 0.1 0.1 0.0 - - 0.0 0.1 0.2 9
78 Ecuador - - 0.3 0.3 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 - 0.0 - - 0.1 9
79 Indonesia 1.9 0.4 2.6 4.1 1.8 2.3 0.9 1.4 0.4 0.5 0.3 0.2 2.3 9
80 Guatemala - - 0.3 0.3 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 - - - - 0.1 8
81 Turkmenistan 0.2 0.1 0.0 0.1 0.1 0.0 0.0 0.0 - - - - 0.0 8
82 Bosnia and - - 0.1 0.1 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 - - - - 0.0 8
Herzegovina
83 Iraq - - 0.1 0.1 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.2 0.0 0.1 0.3 7
84 Ghana - - 0.2 0.2 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.0 0.1 - - 0.2 7
85 Jordan - - 0.2 0.2 0.1 0.1 0.0 0.0 - - - - 0.1 7
65
 Single-use plastic bulk Trade of single-use Single-use plastic
66

In-scope Polymer Production and Trade Conversion packaging trade plastic finished goods waste generation
Rank Country Domestic Exports Imports Net Volume of Converted single-use Bulk packaging Finished goods Net Single-use
production (MMT) (MMT) polymer out-of- plastic volume (MMT) trade (MMT) trade (MMT) single-use plastic
(MMT) produc- scope plastic waste
+ – = tion
– applica-
= – + – + = waste generation
Total Rigid Flexible Exports Imports Exports Imports per capita
(MMT) tion (MMT) format format generat- (kg per
ion (MMT) person)

86 Libya 0.0 - 0.0 0.1 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 - 0.0 - - 0.0 6
87 Azerbaijan 0.3 0.2 0.0 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.0 0.0 - - - - 0.1 5
88 Honduras - - 0.1 0.1 0.0 0.1 0.0 0.0 - 0.0 - - 0.1 5
89 Myanmar - - 0.4 0.4 0.2 0.2 0.1 0.1 0.0 0.1 0.0 0.0 0.3 5
90 Cambodia - - 0.1 0.1 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.1 - - 0.1 5
91 Kenya - - 0.4 0.4 0.2 0.2 0.1 0.1 - - - - 0.2 5
92 Uzbekistan 0.6 0.4 0.1 0.3 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 - - - - 0.1 5
93 Mongolia - - 0.0 0.0 - 0.0 0.0 - - 0.0 - - 0.0 4
94 India 11.8 2.3 2.9 12.3 5.9 6.4 2.1 4.3 0.9 0.5 0.6 0.2 5.6 4
95 Cote d'Ivoire - - 0.2 0.2 0.1 0.1 0.0 0.1 - - - - 0.1 4
96 Sri Lanka - - 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.0 0.0 - 0.0 - - 0.1 4
The Plastic Waste Makers Index

97 Pakistan 0.4 0.2 1.1 1.3 0.6 0.7 0.3 0.4 0.0 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.7 4
98 Nigeria 0.5 0.1 0.6 1.1 0.5 0.5 0.2 0.3 0.0 0.1 0.0 0.1 0.7 4
99 Venezuela 0.2 - 0.0 0.2 0.1 0.1 0.0 0.1 - 0.0 - - 0.1 3
100 Kyrgyzstan - - 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 - - - - 0.0 3
Togo - - 0.1 0.1 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 - - - - 0.0 3
Armenia - - 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 - - - - 0.0 3
Swaziland - - 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 - - - - 0.0 3
Yemen - - 0.1 0.1 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 - 0.1 - - 0.1 3
Cuba - - 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 - - - - 0.0 3
Kosovo - - 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 - - - - 0.0 2
Bolivia - - 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.0 0.0 0.0 - - - - 0.0 2
Albania - - 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 - - - - 0.0 2
Namibia - - 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 - - - - 0.0 2
Tanzania - - 0.2 0.2 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.0 - - - - 0.1 2
Nepal - - 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.0 0.0 - - - - 0.1 2
Bangladesh - - 0.8 0.8 0.5 0.3 0.0 0.3 0.0 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.3 2
Mozambique - - 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.0 0.0 - - - - 0.1 2
Senegal - - 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 - - - - 0.0 2
Botswana - - 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 - - - - 0.0 2
 In-scope Polymer Production and Trade Conversion Single-use plastic bulk Trade of single-use Single-use plastic
packaging trade plastic finished goods waste generation
Rank Country Domestic Exports Imports Net Volume of Converted single-use Bulk packaging Finished goods Net Single-use
production (MMT) (MMT) polymer out-of- plastic volume (MMT) trade (MMT) trade (MMT) single-use plastic
(MMT) produc- scope plastic waste
+ – = – = – + – + = generation
tion applica- Total Rigid Flexible Exports Imports Exports Imports waste
per capita
(MMT) tion (MMT) format format generat- (kg per
ion (MMT) person)

Laos - - 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 - - - - 0.0 2

Zambia - - 0.1 0.1 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 - - - - 0.0 1
Sudan 0.0 - 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 - - 0.1 1
Haiti - - 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 - 0.0 - - 0.0 1
Cameroon - - 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 - 0.0 - - 0.0 1
Syria - - 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 - - - - 0.0 1
Zimbabwe - - 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 - - - - 0.0 1
Angola - - 0.1 0.1 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 - - - - 0.0 1
Congo - - 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 - - - - 0.0 1
Jamaica - - 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 - 0.0 - - 0.0 1
Results in detail

Ethiopia - - 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.0 0.0 - - - - 0.1 1

Tajikistan - - 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 - - - - - 0.0 1
Guinea - - 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 - - - - 0.0 1
Nicaragua - - 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 - 0.0 - - 0.0 1
Malawi - - 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 - - - - 0.0 1
Sierra Leone - - 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 - - - - 0.0 1
Uganda - - 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 - - - - 0.0 0
Afghanistan - - 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 - - - - 0.0 0
Madagascar - - 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 - 0.0 - - 0.0 0
Moldova - - 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 - - - - 0.0 0
Liberia - - 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 - 0.0 - - 0.0 0
Benin - - 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 - - - - - 0.0 0
Mauritania - - 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 - - - - - 0.0 0
67
68 The Plastic Waste Makers Index

METHOD
IN DETAIL

••
Polypropylene being manufactured.
Commonly used to make yogurt
cups and disposable hot drink cups.
Photo credit: Stewart Cohen.
Method in detail 69

In this section, we set out the methods

and data sources used to address the
following questions:
1. Who are the top 100 single-use
plastic polymer producers, and
how much single-use plastic waste
do they ultimately generate,
and where?
2. Who are the top 100 investors and
banks funding single-use plastic
polymer production?
3. How much progress have the top
100 polymer companies made
towards circularity?
Further detail is included in the Basis of Preparation which can be
found at www.minderoo.org/plastic-waste-makers-index/findings/
methodology/.
 70 The Plastic Waste Makers Index

1
QUESTION

Who are the top 100 single-

use plastic polymer producers,
and how much single-use
plastic waste do they ultimately
generate, and where?

Overview of method Single-use plastic material flow model

We track the flow of single-use plastic materials through This analysis was completed between June and November
their lifecycle – from polymer form to finished goods to 2020. For consistency and based on data availability, we
waste – and estimate where they are produced, converted, used data for the calendar year 2019. Given single-use
consumed and disposed. This generates an estimate of plastics are part of the “fast-moving” economy, we make
waste per producer and per country. A similar methodology the simplifying assumption that the total mass of polymers
was conceived by the US EPA in the 1970s (and in use bound for single-use applications produced in the calendar
ever since), but, to our knowledge, has never been applied year were – within the same calendar year – also traded,
on a global scale.37 This “material flow” approach differs converted into packaging and products; traded as packaging
from previous attempts to estimate global plastic waste and consumer products, traded as a constituent of finished
generation. Previous studies have modelled the mass of goods, and disposed of. This is, by definition, a material
plastic in municipal solid waste (MSW-P) by combining flows model and not a stocks model. We therefore make
country-level estimates of total waste generation and no adjustments for existing stocks or build-up of inventory.
estimates of the share of plastic in total waste composition. Neither have we made any adjustments for material losses at
different stages of production, trade and transformation.40

Data sources The analysis consisted of six modules (Figure M1).

Data on production mass by facility and polymer type, and

data on country-level demand by conversion process and
polymer type were provided by Wood Mackenzie; data
on bills of lading for polymer exports were provided by
ExportGenius; data on bilateral polymer trade and trade in
bulk single-use plastic packaging are from UN Comtrade;38
assumptions for trade intensity of single-use plastics in
finished goods came from World Input Output Databases as
analysed by McKinsey Global Institute;39 and data on global
trade flows of consumer goods came from World Integrated
Trade Solution of the World Bank.
 Method in detail 71

••
Accumulation of plastic garbage in a canal leading to the
Buriganga River in Dhaka, Bangladesh. The Buriganga
river is known as one of the most polluted rivers in the
country due to rampant dumping of industrial and human
Figure M1 waste. Photo credit: Rehman Asad via Getty Images.
Our six-step approach to linking polymer producers to
single-use plastic waste generation. MSW stands for
Municipal Solid Waste.

STEP 1 STEP 2 STEP 3 STEP 4 STEP 5 STEP 6

Trade in Trade of
MATERIAL Single-use
Polymer Polymer Polymer single-use single-use
FLOW plastics
production trade conversion plastics plastics in
MSW
in bulk finished goods

KEY Who produces What are the How are polymers How are the What mass of What is the mass of
QUESTIONS polymers that form trading patterns converted relevant categories single-use plastic single-use plastic
single-use plastic, between polymer into single-use of bulk packaging in finished goods in municipal solid
where and how producers and plastic product traded? is traded and waste and what is
much? countries? categories? what are the trade its source?
patterns?

McKinsey
Export Genius Wood Mackenzie Global Institute
KEY DATA Result
Wood Mackenzie UN Comtrade
SOURCE World Bank of this analysis
UN Comtrade American
World International
Chemistry Council
Trade Solution

IN-SCOPE
MASS,
million metric
~200 ~90 ~110 ~40 ~25 ~110
tons
72 The Plastic Waste Makers Index

STEP 1 Production sources

POLYMER PRODUCTION We identified 1,205 production facilities globally, operated
by approximately 300 individual petrochemical producers,
producing just over 200 MMT of “in-scope polymers”.
In-scope polymers By tracking the transformation of single-use plastics from
Single-use plastics can, in theory, be produced from over primary polymers, via conversion processes, into packaging
a dozen polymer families. However, in 2019, we estimate and products, we could estimate the source of single-use
that close to 90 per cent of all single-use plastics by mass plastic waste. We added analysis of where polymers are
were produced from just five polymers: polypropylene (PP), produced, by whom, and in what quantities, to provide
high-density polyethylene (HDPE), low-density polyethylene estimates, not just of the source country of plastic polymer
(LDPE), linear low-density polyethylene (LLDPE), and production, but also the source producer – i.e., specific
polyethylene terephthalate resin (PET) (Figure M2). petrochemical assets and their operators.

Figure M2
Overview of global plastic consumption by industrial sector, 2019.
In-scope polymers and in-scope plastic categories

PACKAGING OTHER TEXTILES BUILDING AND

CONSTRUCTION

Polypropylene

PVC

Polypropylene PET Resin

PU
HDPE
HDPE PVC
PET Fibre
EPS

LLD LLDPE
PE
HDPE LD PET Polystyrene
Polypropylene PA6 LDPE PU
PA Polypropylene PE Fibre PA6 PA66
66
HDPE LDPE ELECTRICAL/ELECTRONIC
LLDPE LDPE Polyst- TRANSPORTATION Polyst-
PA6 yrene yrene
PU PVC ABS PET
EPS PET PA6 Fibre
Film PET Film HDPE ABS
PET PU Polysty- Polypro- Polypro- LLD LDPE
LLDPE Polystyrene PVC Film PA6 PU rene ABS EPS ABS pylene LDPE LLDPE PA66 PU pylene HDPE PA66 PE

PA66 PA66
ABS ABS CONSUMER
AND INSTITUTIONAL

Scope Volumes
(Sector and polymer) (million metric tons, 2019)

Single-use plastics and in-scope polymer 110

+
Single-use plastics and out of scope polymer 20
+
Out of scope sectors, and polymers 246

All sectors and polymers = 376

 Method in detail 73

STEP 2 STEP 3
POLYMER TRADE POLYMER CONVERSION
Close to half of global polymer output (90 MMT) was At the point of conversion – when source polymers are
exported in 2019, with the trade intensity (exports as a share transformed into plastic products – we assumed that
of production) of each polymer ranging from 38 per cent like-polymers from all source companies were mixed
(for PET) to 67 per cent (for LDPE). We used trade data to together. From this point onwards, we also adopted a mass
estimate how the output of individual production facilities balance approach to maintain a link between the source
moved from the point of production to the point at which (of polymers) and the transformed materials as they flow
they were converted, under the assumption that material to end-of-life. That is to say, for each production asset,
flows were segregated in transit. whatever share of total material they account for at any
specific node, an equivalent share of material flows forward
Where the data was available, we used the bills of lading
to every subsequent node. In the absence of evidence to the
(used by customs to document trade) to track exports from
contrary, perfect physical mixing of materials is assumed
specific facilities/companies to the country of import. Where
and a weighted average calculation applied to the output
company-level trade data was not available we used a “mass
based on relative input mass.
balance approach”: we assumed that the exported mass
from any individual production asset followed the weighted
average for each polymer produced and exported in the In-scope applications
country where the asset is located.
The single-use plastics category is defined as packaging
applications and single-use consumer and institutional
products (e.g., diapers, cotton buds): “in-scope
applications”.41 How in-scope polymers are converted into
in- or out-of-scope applications is estimated by matching
individual polymers with the type of conversion process
used. For example, when LDPE polymer goes through the
process of extrusion coating, 100 per cent of this polymer
is assumed to be converted into rigid single-use plastic
packaging (in-scope application). As a counter-example,
when LLDPE polymer goes through the process of
rotomoulding, 100 per cent of this polymer of is assumed
to be converted into non-single-use plastic products
such as plastic tanks, buckets, bins, containers, toys, and
outdoor recreational products and equipment (out-of-
scope applications).
Estimates for the proportion of in-scope polymers converted
into single-use plastics compared with other applications
vary meaningfully by country. This variance is driven by the
different mix of polymer types and the mix of demand from
different conversion process facilities in each country.
These same variables also drive differences in the mix of
rigid versus flexible single-use plastic formats produced.
74 The Plastic Waste Makers Index

STEP 4 STEP 6
BULK SINGLE-USE PLASTIC ESTIMATES OF SINGLE-USE
PACKAGING TRADE PLASTIC IN MUNICPAL
Single-use plastic packaging materials are either processed SOLID WASTE
domestically into finished products (e.g., filled bottles, Finally, models 1-5 result in an estimate of every polymer
wrapped candies) or traded internationally in bulk. Traded producer’s contribution to single-use plastic waste in every
packaging material includes rolls of film or foil, self-adhesive, country, which we aggregate into company-level waste totals
laminated, or reinforced, but also sheets, caps, closures, lids and country-level waste totals.
and stoppers.
We estimated the mass of packaging traded in bulk and
mapped the trade flows using open-access data from UN Confidence levels and uncertainties
Comtrade. From the full list of six-digit Harmonised System Country-level estimates of material mass across production,
trade codes (HS codes) and product descriptors, 16 HS polymer trade, conversion and packaging trade have high
codes were selected as representative of in-scope plastic confidence levels: data sources are credible and triangulated,
packaging categories. These in-scope categories were and calculation methodologies are proven. While confidence
further disaggregated based on their polymer composition intervals have not been calculated, we expect these results to
and format (rigid or flexible). For each of these resulting have a narrow margin of error. Assumptions used to estimated
product sub-categories, a country-to-country trade grid finished goods trade intensity have lower confidence and
was built, covering more than 90 per cent of the traded introduce more uncertainty about the final country-level
mass. We again employed a mass-balance approach to single-use plastic waste estimates, especially for countries
maintain the link back to source polymer production assets. with relatively small populations (less than 10 million).

STEP 5 Confidence levels for estimates of individual polymer

producers waste generation vary depending on the country
TRADE OF SINGLE-USE of conversion and type of polymer. For example, we have

PLASTIC IN FINISHED GOODS high confidence that almost 100 per cent of PET resin
production is converted into in-scope applications in any
As a proxy for the proportion of single-use plastics traded given country. However, for other polymers, the proportion
internationally (versus consumed domestically), we used being converted into in-scope applications varies – between
estimates of trade intensity (gross exports as a percentage 40 and 70 per cent – and we applied the weighted-average
of gross output) from World Input Output Databases, as to every producer in the absence of any other evidence.
analysed by McKinsey Global Institute, for four industry value
chains that use plastic packaging and products (Food and
Beverage, Rubber and Plastic, Computers and Electronics, Comparison with previous studies
Furniture and Other Manufacturing).42 We calculated a In Figure M3, we present country-level results of single-
weighted average trade intensity across these four value use plastic waste generation per capita from our analysis
chains by using estimates of total global trade for each from alongside existing estimates for the USA (from the US
UN Comtrade. Making the assumption that the proportion of Environmental Protection Agency) and the EU (from
plastic packaging is consistent across every value chain, we Eurostat). For comparison, we show both the results of our
calculated that 26 per cent of the total mass of single-use analysis for in-scope polymers only, and also an adjusted
plastic in finished goods is traded internationally. number to reflect the greater contribution to single-use
To model the bilateral trade flows of single-use plastic in plastic waste from all polymers (+15 per cent).
finished products, we built a trade matrix using data from We also present region-level results of generation of total
the World Bank’s World Integrated Trade Solution using their plastic in municipal solid waste alongside estimates from
Consumer Products trade category as a proxy for single-use three other notable studies: from the World Bank,43 from the
plastics, calculating the share of total imports and exports United Nations Environment Program,44 and from Jambeck et
for each country. We again employed a mass-balance al.45 Again, for comparison, we show these regional estimates
approach to maintain the link back to source polymer of single-use plastic waste and also an adjusted number that
production assets, and assumed a weighted average reflects the additional plastics contributing to municipal solid
polymer composition for all traded masses. waste excluded from our analysis (but included in the others),
namely, out-of-scope single-use plastic polymers (+15 per
cent), and out-of-scope plastic applications, primarily textiles
(+50 per cent). We grouped the regions according to gross
domestic product per capita for ease of comparing plastic
waste generation levels.
 Method in detail 75

Figure M3
Triangulation of municipal solid waste (MSW-P) generation
per capita vs. other studies.

Gross domestic product per capita (kgs per day) >US$10,000 US$5,000 <US$5,000

0,26
0,24
0,22
0,20
(kilograms per capital per day)

0,18
0,16
0,14
0,12
0,10
0,08
0,06
0,04
0,02
0,00
USA EU28 North Oceania Japan Greater China Middle Latin Other Africa India
America Europe East America Asia
& The Caribbean

Results of our analysis

Results of our analysis scaled up to include single-use plastics from all polymers
Results of our analysis scaled up to estimate total plastic in MSW third
Eurostat
US Environmental Protection Agency
United Nations Environment Program
Jambeck Research Group
World Bank
 76 The Plastic Waste Makers Index

2
QUESTION

Who are the top 100 investors

and banks funding single-use
plastic polymer production?

The purpose of this analysis is to understand the financial use plastic polymer production as a proxy for share of total
flows associated with single-use plastic production. market capitalisation. For private companies, we used a
market cap-to-revenue multiplier based on the publicly-
traded companies. For both public and private companies,
Ownership analysis: equity holdings we estimated revenue from single-use plastic polymer
(in partnership with PlanetTracker) production by using average prices in 2019, by polymer,
by region, sourced from SPGlobal.
Institutional asset managers (pension funds, mutual funds,
insurance companies), sovereign states, as well as private Finally, we aggregated the value of the equity held by each
individuals and institutions all own shares in companies shareholder across all public and private polymer producers
(equity), making them part-owners of the company. and ranked them by estimated value.
To identify who owns the largest 200 single-use plastic
polymer producers identified in this report – who collectively Financing analysis: loans and
account for more the 95 per cent of global production –
we sourced shareholder data for public companies from
underwriting (in partnership
Bloomberg and for private companies from Orbis. with Profundo)
Next, we estimated the value of the shareholders’ equity. In To identify which banks are providing loans and underwriting
almost all cases, production of polymers used for single-use facilities, we sourced data on the banking sector’s financing
plastics represents only part of a company’s activities. We of the top 50 single-use plastic polymer producers over a
wanted to estimate only the value attributable to single- 10-year timeline, from January 2011 to December 2020,
use plastic polymer production – versus other diversified from Bloomberg, Refinitiv and IJGlobal.
businesses not directly related to generating single-use The share of total attributed to an individual bank, for loan
plastic waste. In general, diversified companies do not amounts syndicated or underwriting of shares or bonds
report results for business units that map perfectly to our facilitated, was estimated according to whether the bank
definition used for this report (i.e., the production of the five was a “lead bookrunner” or “other participant”, using a
in-scope single-use plastic polymers); and even where there weighting calculation developed by Profundo.
is consistency at the reported level, there is no public market
valuation of the relevant business unit. To estimate the value specifically attributable to single-use
plastic production, we adjusted the total value of all financing
To calculate the value of each shareholder’s equity in in the same way as described above for equity holdings.
single-use plastic polymer production, specifically, we
estimated the relative value of the single-use plastic polymer Finally, loans and underwriting made by each bank to all
production business – i.e., for every US$1 of equity value, single-use plastic polymer producers were aggregated,
we estimated what proportion was came from single-use and banks were ranked by total estimated value of
plastic polymer production. For public companies, we financing to the sector as a whole.
estimated the share of total revenues coming from single-
 Method in detail 77

3
QUESTION

How much progress have the

top 100 polymer companies
made towards circularity?

It is important to understand whether and how companies As a result, we have purposefully followed as closely
are responding to the single-use plastic crisis. We therefore as possible the Circulytics design for method, indicators,
conducted an assessment of circularity to measure the definitions and scoring, only adapting the survey for the
extent to which the industry is adopting circular economy limitations of a desk-based exercise and to be relevant
principles and practices. to plastics producers.47
In a circular economy, materials constantly flow around The Circulytics survey contains 50 questions that assess
a ‘closed loop’ system, rather than in and out of a ‘linear’ companies across two categories: Enablers (aspects that
system. In the case of plastic, this means simultaneously allow a company-wide transformation to happen) and
keeping the value of plastics in the economy, without leakage Outcomes (evidence of circular business operations in
into the natural environment. practice). Across Enablers, questions are split into five
sub-categories (Strategy and Planning, People and Skills,
This analysis compared and ranked the efforts of the top 100
Operations, Innovation, and External Engagement). Across
largest producers of single-use plastics in adopting circular
Outcomes, questions are split into six sub-categories
economy principles with a view to encouraging greater
(Products and Materials, Services, Plant, Property, and
commitment, engagement and progress from industry.
Equipment, Water, Energy, and Finance). We selected
questions from each of the sub-categories that represent
Materials and method: Circulytics the range, but that could also be answered with publicly
available sources.
The Ellen MacArthur Foundation (EMF) recently concluded
the pilot phase of a circularity assessment in the form of a Figure M4 presents the seven questions selected, along with
voluntary survey: Circulytics. The pilot was tested during the scoring for each question. Within Enablers, we included
2019 and a more extensive v2.0 of the survey started in five questions from three sub-categories: two from Strategy
October 2020, which reports in August 2021. and Planning; two from External Engagement; and one from
Operations. Questions related to Innovation and People
In recognition of EMF’s extensive efforts, we have not and Skills were omitted as we were unable to assess these
attempted to re-invent a new methodology here. The outside-in. Within Outcomes, we included two questions on
exercise we conducted is complementary to EMF’s survey Products and Materials, which could be assessed “outside-in”.
– the difference being we have undertaken the assessment Questions on the five other themes were omitted.
“outside-in”, i.e., through desk-based research and analysing
companies’ public reports, rather than it being an internal
assessment by companies themselves.
78 The Plastic Waste Makers Index

Figure M4
Questions and scoring for the Circularity Assessment

Questions based on Ellen MacArthur Foundation's Circulytics assessment

1 Is your strategy aligned with becoming more circular?

1. No relevant mentions of circular economy 0%

2. Relevant concept (e.g. materials circulation, new business models that follow the principles of circular economy, not 50%
just resource efficiency) mentioned as part of strategic priorities
3. Circular economy explicitly mentioned as part of strategic priorities 100%

2 Do you have measurable circular economy targets?

1. No targets 0%
2. Targets are being developed either for a relevant concept (e.g. materials circulation) or circular economy explicitly 25%
3. Targets developed on overall organisation level, but are not SMART targets 50%
4. SMART targets developed on organisation level 75%
5. SMART targets developed on organisation level and further down on sub-unit (e.g. business unit or region) level 100%

3 To what extent is suitable infrastructure in place to support a circular business model?

1. No plans in place to reconfigure existing or configure new infrastructure to support a circular business model 0%
2. Existing infrastructure is currently being reviewed to prepare the shift to a circular business model 25%
3. Existing infrastructure has been reviewed and/or new infrastructure are being designed to prepare the shift to a 50%
circular business model
4. Reconfiguration of existing infrastructure or development of new infrastructure have started in order to support a 75%
ENABLERS

circular business model

5. All infrastructure is suitable for circular business models 100%

4 To what extent do you engage with suppliers to increase sourcing based on circular economy principles?

1. No interactions involving circular economy as a topic 0%

2. Ad-hoc interactions involving circular economy as a topic 20%
3. Ad-hoc interactions involving circular economy as a topic AND a plan in development for a programme using circular 40%
economy principles (e.g. codesigning material inputs for products designed along circular economy principles)
4. Ongoing programme with one or more suppliers using circular economy principles 60%
5. Ongoing programme with one or more top 5 suppliers by mass (or by revenue when referring to services) using 80%
circular economy principles
6. Supplier requirements based on circular economy principles, as specified in contracts, are in place with one or more 100%
of the top 5 suppliers by mass (or by revenue when referring to services)

5 To what extent do you engage with customers on advancing circular economy topics?

1. No interactions involving circular economy as a topic 0%

2. Ad-hoc interactions involving circular economy as a topic 25%
3. Ad-hoc interactions involving circular economy as a topic AND a plan in development for an ongoing programme 50%
using circular economy principles (e.g. collaboration in communicating the benefits of products and services based
on circular economy principles)
4. Ongoing programme using circular economy principles with any customer 75%
5. Ongoing programme using circular economy principles with the majority of customers 100%

For materials (renewable and non-renewable) suitable for the technical cycle, what per cent of your materials inflow
OUTCOMES

6 (physical material that comes into your manufacturing processes) is:

•Non-virgin (including reused and recycled products and materials) 0-100%

7 What per cent (by mass) of your total outflow of materials (renewable and non-renewable) suitable for the technical cycle 0-100%
is materials processing waste or by-products that go to landfill or incineration (and are therefore not recirculated)?
 Method in detail 79

Scoring

For the five Enablers indicators, the scoring follows the Data collection and scoring for the circularity assessment
Circulytics rubric. We used publicly available company of the top 100 polymer producers were conducted by
information to arrive at scores, specifically: annual reports, two teams in parallel, but independently: Minderoo and
sustainability reports and company websites. All three SYSTEMIQ. Sources and rationale for scoring were shared
sources of company information were treated as having by both parties. Where there was significant variance in
equal standing. scores by the two teams, either a consensus was agreed, or
the mid-point of the two scores was taken as the final score.
For the Outcomes indicators: company-level estimates of
recycled PET feedstock inputs were provided by Wood All questions were scored out of 100. The five Enablers
Mackenzie (recycled inputs for other polymers were scores were indexed to an overall score out of 50; and the
assumed to be negligible); for recycling rates of material two Outcomes scores were indexed to an overall score
outputs, we combined the waste estimates for each polymer out of 50. Overall Enablers and Outcomes scores were
producer (from the analysis of single-use plastic material added to provide a final score out of 100, equally weighting
flows described above) with country-level data on PET Enablers and Outcomes. Overall numerical scores were then
recycling rates from Wood Mackenzie and from publicly translated to letter scores, as per the Table below. A score of
available sources for other in-scope polymers.48, 49 ‘A’ implies a fully circular business model.

Table of numerical score to letter score translation

Lower Limit Upper Limit Letter

88.89 100 A

77.78 88.89 A-

66.67 77.78 B

55.56 66.67 B-

44.44 55.56 C

33.33 44.44 C-

22.22 33.33 D

11.11 22.22 D-

0 11.11 E
80 The Plastic Waste Makers Index

GLOSSARY

••
Rubbish pile in trash dump or landfill. Photo
credit: Truong Phuong Tram via Getty Images.
Glossary 81

Bio-based
Made from a renewable material (e.g., corn starch).

Bond
A fixed income financial instrument that represents a loan made by an
investor to a borrower (typically corporate or policy-makers).

Circular economy
An economic system that reuses plastic resources, generating no waste.

Converters
In the context of the plastics supply chain, companies that process
primary polymers into plastic applications (also referred to as the Plastic
Containers and Packaging sector).

EMF
Ellen MacArthur Foundation.

Equity
The value of the shares issued by a company.

Feedstock
The raw material used to make plastic polymers.

GHG
Greenhouse gas, a type of gas that contributes to the greenhouse effect
by absorbing infrared radiation (e.g. carbon dioxide, CO2).

HDPE
High-density polyethylene, a type of plastic polymer.

Kg
Kilogram.

LDPE
Low-density polyethylene, a type of plastic polymer.

LLDPE
Linear low-density polyethylene, a type of plastic polymer.
82 The Plastic Waste Makers Index

Market capitalisation Recycling

The market value of a publicly traded company’s Reprocessing of waste materials into products, materials,
outstanding shares. or substances, either for the original or another purpose,
excluding energy recovery or fuel generation.

MMT
Million metric tons.
rPET
Recycled polyethylene terephthalate.

MSW
Municipal solid waste, or everyday items discarded by the
Underwriting
public. MSW-P is solid plastic waste, mainly single-use in Banks provide underwriting services for loans, and equity
nature. and bond issuances, where they provide a guarantee that
the required capital gets raised (e.g., by buying any remaining
shares or bonds not issued). The institution takes on financial
PET risk for a fee.
Polyethylene terephthalate, a type of plastic polymer.
Virgin plastics
PP Plastic made from polymers that have been newly produced
Polypropylene, a type of plastic polymer. using fossil fuels such as natural gas or crude oil, rather than
made from recycled polymer.

Recyclable
A post-consumer product that can be collected, sorted
and recycled at scale and using proven technologies.
 Endnotes 83

ENDNOTES
1 Jambeck J et al. 2015, ‘Plastic waste inputs from land 7 Ellen MacArthur Foundation 2020, Circulytics –
into the ocean’, Science, vol. 347, no. 6223, pp. 768- measuring circularity. Available from: https://www.
771. Available from: https://science.sciencemag.org/ ellenmacarthurfoundation.org/resources/apply/
content/347/6223/768 [8 January 2021] circulytics-measuring-circularity [8 January 2021]
2 Pew Charitable Trusts and SYSTEMIQ 2020, 8 (For business and governments) Greenhouse Gas
Breaking the Plastic Wave. Available from: https:// Protocol 2020, Calculation Tools. Available from:
www.pewtrusts.org/-/media/assets/2020/10/ https://ghgprotocol.org/calculation-tools [8 January
breakingtheplasticwave_mainreport.pdf [8 January 2021]
2021]
(For financial institutions) Partnership for Carbon
3 Ryberg M et al. 2018, Mapping of global plastics value Accounting Financials 2020, The Global GHG
chain and plastics losses to the environment, United Accounting and Reporting Standard for the Financial
Nations Environment Programme. Available from: Industry (First edition). Available from: https://
https://wedocs.unep.org/handle/20.500.11822/26745 carbonaccountingfinancials.com/files/downloads/
[8 January 2021] PCAF-Global-GHG-Standard.pdf [8 January 2021]
4 Tamara S. Galloway, Matthew Cole & Ceri Lewis 9 Pew Charitable Trusts and SYSTEMIQ 2020,
2017, Interactions of microplastic debris throughout Breaking the Plastic Wave, pp. 25.
the marine ecosystem, Nature Ecology & Evolution,
10 R. Geyer, J.R. Jambeck, and K.L. Law 2017,
p. 116. Available from: https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.
‘Production, Use, and Fate of All Plastics Ever Made’,
gov/28812686/ [8 January 2021]
Science Advances, vol. 3, no. 7. Available: https://
5 Cai H et al. 2015, ‘Human urinary/seminal phthalates dx.doi.org/10.1126/sciadv.1700782. [8 January 2021]
or their metabolite levels and semen quality: A
11 Hamilton L & Feit S 2019, Plastics & Climate,
meta-analysis’, Environmental Research, vol.
Centre for International Environment Law, pp. 15-19.
142, pp. 486-494. Available from: https://www.
Available from: https://www.ciel.org/wp-content/
sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/
uploads/2019/05/Plastic-and-Climate-FINAL-2019.
S0013935115300293?via%3Dihub [8 January 2021]
pdf [8 January 2021]
Zhang H et al. 2020, ‘Association between phthalate
12 Pauly J et al. 1998, ‘Inhaled cellulosic and plastic
exposure and risk of spontaneous pregnancy loss: A
fibers found in human lung tissue’, Cancer
systematic review and meta-analysis’, Environmental
Epidemiology, Biomarkers & Prevention, vol. 7, pp.
Pollution, vol. 267. Available from: https://www.
419-428. Available from: https://cebp.aacrjournals.
sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/
org/content/7/5/419.short [8 January 2021]
S0269749120361340?via%3Dihub [8 January 2021]
Ibrahim Y et al. 2020, ‘Detection of microplastics
Cai W et al. 2019, ‘Association between Phthalate
in human colectomy specimens’, Journal of
Metabolites and Risk of Endometriosis: A Meta-
Gastroenterology and Hepatology Foundation, vol. 5,
Analysis’, International Journal of Environmental
no. 1, pp. 116-121. Available from: https://onlinelibrary.
Research and Public Health, vol. 16, no. 3678.
wiley.com/doi/full/10.1002/jgh3.12457. [8 January
Available from: https://www.mdpi.com/1660-
2021]
4601/16/19/3678/htm [8 January 2021]
13 Gigault J 2018, ‘Current opinion: What is a
Song Y et al. 2015, ‘Endocrine-disrupting chemicals,
nanoplastic?’, Environmental Pollution, vol. 235,
risk of type 2 diabetes, and diabetes-related
pp. 1030-1034. Available from: https://www.
metabolic traits: A systematic review and meta-
sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/
analysis’, Journal of Diabetes, vol. 8, no. 4, pp. 516-
S0269749117337247?via%3Dihub. [8 January 2021]
532. Available from: https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/
doi/abs/10.1111/1753-0407.12325 Vethaak A and Legler J 2021, ‘Microplastics and
human health’, Science, vol. 371, no. 6530, pp. 672-
6 Zheng J & Suh S 2019, ‘Strategies to reduce the
674. Available from: https://science.sciencemag.org/
global carbon footprint of plastics’, Nature Climate
content/371/6530/672.summary. [8 January 2021]
Change, vol. 9, pp. 374-378. Available from: https://
bbia.org.uk/wp-content/uploads/2019/05/Nature- 14 Pew Charitable Trusts and SYSTEMIQ 2020,
Paper-Strategies-to-reduce-the-global-carbon- Breaking the Plastic Wave, pp. 11-12.
footprint-of-plastics-003.pdf [8 January 2021]
15 Azoulay D et al. 2019, Plastic & Health, Centre 25 Indorama Ventures 2020, New recycling capacity
for International Environment Law, pp. 43-49. in France and Poland. Available from: https://
Available from: https://www.ciel.org/wp-content/ www.indoramaventures.com/en/updates/other-
uploads/2019/02/Plastic-and-Health-The-Hidden- release/1648/new-recycling-capacity-in-france-and-
Costs-of-a-Plastic-Planet-February-2019.pdf poland-to-recycle-10-billion-pet-bottles-in-europe-
[8 January 2021] by-2023 [7 May 2021]
16 Ocean Conservancy, Plastics Policy Playbook, pp. 26 INEOS 2019, INEOS and Viridor partnership closes
53-85. Available from: https://oceanconservancy. the loop with new Hybrid Plastics Range available
org/wp-content/uploads/2019/10/Plastics-Policy- across Europe. Available from: http://www.ineos.com/
Playbook-10.17.19.pdf [8 January 2021] news/shared-news/ineos-and-viridor-partnership-
closes-the-loop-with-new-hybrid-plastics-range-
17 Jambeck et al. 2015, ‘Plastic waste inputs’
available-across-europe/;
18 Ellen MacArthur Foundation 2020,
INEOS 2020, INEOS and PLASTIC ENERGY to
Circulytics 2.0. Available from: https://www.
collaborate on new advanced plastic recycling facility.
ellenmacarthurfoundation.org/assets/downloads/
Available from: https://www.ineos.com/news/shared-
circulytics-overview.pdf [8 January 2021]
news/ineos-and-plastic-energy-to-collaborate-on-
19 Z. Ali 2020, The world’s 100 largest banks, 2020, new-advanced-plastic-recycling-facility/ [7 May
S&P Global. Available from: https://www.spglobal. 2021];
com/marketintelligence/en/news-insights/
INEOS 2021, Recycling. Available from: https://www.
latest-news-headlines/the-world-s-100-largest-
ineos.com/sustainability/circular-economy/recycling/
banks-2020-57854079 [8 January 2021]
[7 May 2021]
20 Indorama Ventures 2021, PET. Available from: https://
27 LyondellBasell 2020, LyondellBasell and SUEZ
www.indoramaventures.com/en/our-products/pet
increase plastics recycling capacity. Available from:
[8 January 2021]
https://www.lyondellbasell.com/en/news-events/
21 FENC 2021, Resin. Available from: http://industry.fenc. corporate--financial-news/lyondellbasell-and-suez-
com/fiber_product.aspx?lang=en&id=49 increase-plastics-recycling-capacity/ [7 May 2021]
[8 January 2021]
28 SABIC 2021, SABIC and Plastic Energy set to start
22 mtm plastics 2020, The Upcyclers. Available from: construction of pioneering advanced recycling unit.
https://mtm-plastics.eu/en/hauptnavi/the-company/ Available from: sabic.com/en/news/26247-sabic-
about-us.html [7 May 2021]; and-plastic-energy-set-to-start-construction-of-
pioneering-advanced-recycling-unit [7 May 2021]
Ecoplast 2020, Saving resources for Europe.
Available from https://www.ecoplast.com/ecoplast/ 29 LanzaTech 2021, Sinopec Capital to Invest and
uber-uns/?lang=en [7 May 2021]; Partner with LanzaTech. Available from: https://
www.lanzatech.com/2021/04/16/sinopec-capital-to-
Borealis 2021, Borealis drives collaborative project in
invest-and-partner-with-lanzatech/ [7 May 2021];
Sweden. Available from: https://www.borealisgroup.
com/news/true-to-its-everminds-mind-set-borealis- LanzaTech 2020, LanzaTech, Total and L’Oréal
drives-collaborative-project-in-sweden-to-increase- announce a worldwide premiere. Available from:
supply-of-chemically-recycled-feedstock-for-the- https://www.lanzatech.com/2020/10/27/lanzatech-
manufacture-of-more-circular-base-chemicals-and- total-and-loreal-announce-a-worldwide-premiere-
plastic-products [7 May 2021]; the-production-of-the-first-cosmetic-packaging-
made-from-industrial-carbon-emissions/
Borealis 2020, Sustainability Focus Areas. Available
[7 May 2021]
from: https://www.borealisgroup.com/digital-annual-
report-2020/non-financial-report/sustainability- 30 Plastic Energy 2020, Total And Plastic Energy
focus-areas/circular-economy [7 May 2021] Announce A Strategic Partnership. Available
from: https://plasticenergy.com/total-and-plastic-
23 Dow 2021, Dow and Mura Technology announce
energy-announce-a-strategic-partnership-and-the-
partnership to scale game-changing new
construction-of-the-first-chemical-recycling-plant-
advanced recycling solution for plastics. Available
in-france/ [7 May 2021]
from: https://www.businesswire.com/news/
home/20210422005594/en/ [7 May 2021]
24 ExxonMobil 2021, Plastic Energy Collaborates
with ExxonMobil on Advanced Recycling
Project in France. Available from: https://www.
exxonmobilchemical.com/en/library/library-
detail/84299/advanced_recycling_project_france_
press_release_en [7 May 2021]
31 Cetinkaya E, Liu N, Simons T, and Wallach J 2018, 40 3R Initiative, Environmental Action, South Pole,
Petrochemicals 2030: Reinventing the way to win and Quantis 2020, Guidelines for Leadership in
in a changing industry, McKinsey & Company. Corporate Plastic Accounting, Verra. Available from:
Available from: https://www.mckinsey.com/industries/ https://verra.org/wp-content/uploads/2020/10/
chemicals/our-insights/petrochemicals-2030- Guidelines-for-Leadership-in-Corporate-Plastic-
reinventing-the-way-to-win-in-a-changing-industry Accounting-DRAFT-7-Oct-2020-rev.pdf [8 January
[8 January 2021] 2021]
32 Kirk E 2020, The Montreal Protocol or the Paris 41 American Chemistry Council 2020, Plastics 101,
Agreement as a Model for a Plastics Treaty?, AJIL American Chemistry Council. Available from: https://
Unbound, vol. 114, pp. 212-216. Available from: https:// plastics.americanchemistry.com/Plastics-101/
www.cambridge.org/core/journals/american-journal- [8 January 2021]
of-international-law/article/montreal-protocol-or-the-
paris-agreement-as-a-model-for-a-plastics-treaty/ 42 Lund et al 2019, Globalization in transition
FE177784B84D01620B4CF89CF6357237.
[8 January 2021] 43 Kaza et al. 2018, What a Waste 2.0: A Global Snapshot
of Solid Waste Management to 2050, World Bank.
33 United Nations Environment Programme 2021, Available from: https://openknowledge.worldbank.
Joint Global Statement from Major Groups and org/handle/10986/30317 [8 January 2021]
other Stakeholders for Consideration by the United
Nations Environment Assembly at its Fifth Session, 44 Ryberg M et al. 2018, Mapping of global plastics value
United Nations. Available from: https://enb.iisd.org/ chain
unep/unea5/gmgsf/highlights-and-images-main- 45 Jambeck et al. 2015, ‘Plastic waste inputs’
proceedings-11-february-2021 [11 February 2021]
46 PortfolioEarth 2020, Bankrolling Plastics, pp. 43-45.
34 Borelle et al. 2017, ‘Why we need an international Available from: https://portfolio.earth/wp-content/
agreement on marine plastic pollution’, PNAS, vol. 114, uploads/2021/03/Portfolio-Earth_Bankrolling-
no. 38, pp. 9994-9997. Available from: https://www. Plastics.pdf [8 January 2021]
pnas.org/content/114/38/9994 [8 January 2021]
47 Ellen MacArthur Foundation 2020, Circulytics
35 Raubenheimer K & Urho N 2020, Possible elements method introduction, Ellen MacArthur
of a new global agreement to prevent plastic Foundation. Available from: https://www.
pollution, Nordic Council of Ministers, pp. 14, 45. ellenmacarthurfoundation.org/assets/downloads/
Available from: http://norden.diva-portal.org/smash/ circulytics-method-introduction.pdf [8 January 2021]
record.jsf?pid=diva2%3A1477124&dswid=-8709
48 OECD 2020, Improving Markets for Recycled
[8 January 2021]
Plastics: Trends, Prospects and Policy Responses,
36 World Economic Forum 2020, Measuring Stakeholder OECD. Available from: https://read.oecd-ilibrary.
Capitalism. Available from: https://www.weforum.org/ org/environment/improving-markets-for-recycled-
reports/measuring-stakeholder-capitalism-towards- plastics/summary-of-polymer-specific-data-from-
common-metrics-and-consistent-reporting-of- oecd-questionnaire-responses_9789264301016-20-
sustainable-value-creation [8 January 2021] en#page1 [8 January 2021]
37 Smith F 1975, A Solid Waste Estimation Procedure: 49 Circular Plastics Alliance 2020, Plastic Packaging
Material Flows Approach., U.S. Environmental Collection and Sorting, European Commission, pp.
Protection Agency (SW-147). Available from: 10. Available from: https://ec.europa.eu/docsroom/
https://nepis.epa.gov/Exe/ZyPDF.cgi/2000QPOD. documents/43694 [8 January 2021]
PDF?Dockey=2000QPOD.PDF [8 January 2021]
38 International Trade Centre 2021, Trade statistics for
international business development. Available from:
https://www.intracen.org/itc/market-info-tools/trade-
statistics/ [8 January 2021]
39 Lund et al. 2019, Globalization in transition: The future
of trade and value chains, McKinsey & Company.
Available from: https://www.mckinsey.com/featured-
insights/innovation-and-growth/globalization-in-
transition-the-future-of-trade-and-value-chains
[8 January 2021]
MINDEROO.ORG
PWMI_211126