The focus on recycling shifts responsibility from the producer to the consumer, perpetuating what researchers call the ‘plastic paradox.’ FILE PHOTO: RAJIB RAIHAN
If we take a closer look at the failure of international efforts to combat plastic pollution, exemplified by the Fifth UN Intergovernmental Negotiating Committee (INC-5), one thing stands out: the resistance from oil-producing nations to capping plastic production. According to Eunomia data, China, the US, India, South Korea, and Saudi Arabia were the top five polymer producers in 2023. These nations, heavily invested in the petrochemical industry, consistently prioritise profit over environmental protection. This treaty had the potential to be a game-changer—possibly as impactful as the 2015 Paris Agreement—yet competing economic interests left it on shaky grounds.
Now, a question might arise in one's mind: why? Because plastics are made from fossil fuels, and over the past 15 years, petrochemicals—especially plastics and oil additives—have become a critical pillar of the oil and gas industry's survival. Moreover, the plastics industry is the fastest-growing source of industrial greenhouse gases (GHGs). Groundbreaking research from Carbon Majors shows that just 100 active fossil fuel producers, including ExxonMobil, Shell, BHP Billiton, and Gazprom, are responsible for a staggering 71 percent of industrial GHG emissions since 1988. In 2019 alone, the production and incineration of plastic led to GHG emissions equivalent to those from 189 coal-fired power plants. Over the last 30 years, they have prevented political decisions against climate change, raised scientific doubt, and stopped any development that could regulate production. The alarming part is this: if we don't curb plastic pollution, it could derail efforts to limit global temperature rise to 1.5 degrees Celsius. From oil extraction and plastic production to product use, recycling and disposal, the entire lifecycle of plastics leaves a trail of destruction.
The recycling myth
For decades, we have been told that recycling is the answer to the plastic crisis. But the reality paints a much more depressing picture. The world produces around 430 million metric tonnes of new plastic annually. If we stay on this path, global plastics use is expected to nearly triple by 2060. This linear "take-make-waste" model is unsustainable. A staggering 79 percent of plastic waste accumulates in landfills or the environment, 12 percent is incinerated, and less than 10 percent is recycled. This raises a critical question: why has recycling failed so dramatically?
Plastics are inherently more complex than other recyclable materials, like metal or glass, due to their heterogeneous nature. Each type of plastic contains unique chemical additives—such as colourants, stabilisers and fungicides—that enhance functionality but complicate recycling. Even polyethene terephthalate (PET), one of the most recyclable plastics, degrades in quality with each recycling cycle, accumulating toxins that contaminate new products.
What's more, not all plastics are created equal. PET makes up only about six percent of global plastic production, while other types, like polyethylene (PE) and polypropylene (PP), are recycled even less frequently due to their distinct chemical structures and the presence of additives. These additives, designed to make plastics more durable, flexible and transparent, often combined during the recycling process, further degrading the quality of the material.
A common example is multilayer plastics—composites made from combinations of plastic, aluminium and paper—frequently used in food and medical packaging. These materials are virtually unrecyclable with current technologies, illustrating how design choices can render recycling ineffective from the outset.
Recycling is not just a technical challenge—it's an economic one too. Sorting and processing plastics is labour-intensive and costly. Caps, labels, and differing grades of plastics require meticulous separation, which often costs more than the value of the recycled material itself. The result is a process so complex and expensive that new, high-quality plastics remain more profitable and marketable than recycled alternatives.
Another significant obstacle to effective plastic recycling is the lack of transparency from manufacturers. Many manufacturers keep their chemical formulations proprietary, making it difficult for recyclers to identify and eliminate hazardous substances. This secrecy undermines efforts to create a truly circular recycling system, allowing hazardous substances to remain in circulation.
The path forward
Bangladesh recognised the plastic problem early by banning single-use plastics in 2002 under the Bangladesh Environmental Conservation Act. It later introduced the National 3R Strategy for Waste Management (2010) and Solid Waste Management Rules (2021). However, on paper, these policies seem magnificent, but in practice, they are maleficent. You might ask: why?
These policies failed to utilise the transformative power of corporate accountability through the "polluter pays" principle and Extended Producer Responsibility (EPR) frameworks, which require manufacturers to manage the environmental and social impacts of their products throughout their lifecycles. Besides that, these policies lack clarity, and responsibilities across the supply chain fall through the cracks, leaving implementation is still up in the air. Furthermore, the focus on recycling shifts responsibility from the producer to the consumer, perpetuating what researchers call the "plastic paradox."
To drive real change, the government must enforce stringent policies that hold manufacturers responsible, or progress will remain elusive. Local governments are critical in implementing waste management policies but often lack the funding, technical expertise and accountability frameworks needed to enforce policies effectively. Lack of reliable data further complicates matters. Effective policymaking requires accurate information to guide decisions, and Bangladesh currently lacks a robust system for data collection, dissemination, and analysis, as well as dashboards to track progress. Without accurate and actionable data, even the most well-intentioned policies risk falling flat.
Local governments are uniquely positioned to collect and monitor data on waste generation and recycling rates, but they need the tools and support to perform this role effectively. Empowering municipalities with the necessary resources and authority can bridge the data-policy-implementation gap and drive meaningful change.
The final piece of the puzzle is consumer awareness. Consumers have the power to demand sustainable packaging and avoid or support businesses prioritising the environment. International best practices like Germany's bottle deposit scheme, which boasts a 98 percent return rate for empty packaging, demonstrate how consumer-driven solutions can significantly reduce waste. Adapting such practices in Bangladesh could foster a culture of reuse and refill, cutting plastic waste at its source.
A paradigm shift
The dream of a circular plastic economy—where plastics are endlessly reused and recycled—has morphed into a nightmare. Instead, plastics have spread across the planet like a deadly virus, threatening ecosystems and human health. The plastics industry continues to thrive because the true costs—on health, climate and biodiversity—are shifted onto the public.
Real solutions demand nothing less than a systemic overhaul—from redesigning packaging and improving waste management infrastructure to holding producers accountable. We need a complete transformation in how plastics are produced, used and perceived. Transitioning from a disposable culture to a circular economy requires innovative business models, consumer behaviour shifts, and accountability across the entire supply chain. Bans alone won't work—they haven't in the past, and they won't in the future—unless the entirety of plastics use is strictly monitored and regulated. Without such reforms, resistance will grow, progress will stagnate, and we risk replacing meaningful action with superficial greenwashing.
Uswatun Mahera Khushi is assistant professor of local government and urban development at Jatiya Kabi Kazi Nazrul Islam University.
Md Zahurul Al Mamun is a climate change researcher and analyst.
Views expressed in this article are the author's own.
Follow The Daily Star Opinion on Facebook for the latest opinions, commentaries and analyses by experts and professionals. To contribute your article or letter to The Daily Star Opinion, see our guidelines for submission.
