- Appendix 1: The United Nations Sustainable Development Goals
- Appendix 2: Examples of plastics/waste resources on the Science Learning Hub
- Appendix 3: Current labelling and categorisation approaches for plastics used in Aotearoa New Zealand
- Appendix 4: Modern landfill operational standards
- Appendix 5: Life cycle assessment (LCA)
- Appendix 6: Plastics research projects in Aotearoa New Zealand
- Appendix 7: Tools to support enactment of Māori knowledge systems in environment
- Appendix 8: Import data
- Appendix 9: Imported synthetic textiles
- Appendix 10: Export data
- Appendix 11: Material flows analysis of PET bottles
- Appendix 12: Rural waste
- Appendix 13: Non-municipal landfill
- Appendix 14: Best practice data collection for plastics
|6Rs||Rethink, refuse, reduce, reuse, recycle and recover|
|AANZFTA||ASEAN-Australia-New Zealand free trade agreement|
|APCO||Australian Packaging Covenant Organisation|
|APEC||Asia Pacific Economic Cooperation|
|APR||Association of Plastic Recyclers|
|ARL||Australasian Recycling Label|
|ASEAN||Association of Southeast Asian Nations|
|ASTM||American Society for Testing and Materials|
|BOP||Bay of Plenty|
|BRANZ||Building Research Association of New Zealand|
|CCAMLR||Convention for the Conservation of Antarctic Marine Living Resources|
|CDS||Container Deposit Scheme (also referred to as Container Return Scheme)|
|CIEL||Center for International Environmental Law|
|CPTPP||Comprehensive and Progressive Agreement for Trans-Pacific Partnership|
|DCC||Dunedin City Council|
|DEFRA||Department for the Environment, Food and Rural Affairs (UK)|
|DoC||Department of Conservation|
|EAS||East Asia Summit|
|ECHA||European Chemical Agency|
|EDCs||Endocrine disrupting chemicals|
|EEZ||Exclusive Economic Zone|
|EMF||Ellen MacArthur Foundation|
|EPA||Environmental Protection Agency|
|ESR||Institute of Environmental Science and Research|
|F.O.R.C.E.||For Our Real Clean Environment|
|FADs||Fish aggregating devices|
|FAO||Food and Agriculture Organisation|
|FMCG||Fast moving consumer goods|
|FTA||Free trade agreement|
|GDP||Gross domestic product|
|GDSN||Global data synchronisation network|
|GESAMP||Group of Experts on the Scientific Aspects of Marine Environmental Protection|
|GLAD||Global LCA Data Access network|
|H&S||Health and safety|
|IOC||Intergovernmental Oceanographic Commission|
|IoT||Internet of Things|
|ISO||International Organization for Standardization|
|KDC||Kaipara District Council|
|KNZB||Keep New Zealand Beautiful|
|LCA||Life cycle assessment|
|LGNZ||Local Government New Zealand|
|MARPOL||International Convention for the Prevention of Pollution from Ships|
|MBIE||Ministry of Business, Innovation and Employment|
|MFAT||Ministry for Foreign Affairs and Trade|
|MPI||Ministry for Primary Industries|
|MRF||Materials Recovery Facility|
|NCEA||National Certificate of Educational Achievement|
|NEMO||New End Market Opportunities|
|NOAA||National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (US)|
|NPEGC||New Plastics Economy Global Commitment|
|NRRT||National Resource Recovery Taskforce|
|NSF||National Science Foundation (US)|
|NSW||New South Wales|
|NWDF||National Waste Data Framework|
|NZ||Aotearoa New Zealand|
|NZD||New Zealand Dollar|
|OECD||Organisation for Economic Cooperation and Development|
|OPMCSA||Office of the Prime Minister’s Chief Science Advisor|
|OPRL||On-Pack Recycling Label (UK)|
|OWLS||Online waste levy system|
|PACER||Pacific Agreement on Closer Economic Relations|
|PCE||Parliamentary Commissioner for the Environment|
|PGF||Provincial Growth Fund|
|POPs||Persistent organic pollutants|
|PREP||Packaging Recyclability Valuation Portal|
|PSS||Product stewardship schemes|
|PURE||Plastic Use Resistance Education|
|R&D||Research and development|
|R&I||Research and innovation|
|REBRI||Resource Efficiency in the Building and Related Industries|
|RECET||Resource Efficiency and Circular Economy Transition|
|RFP||Request for proposal|
|rPET||Recycled polyethylene terephthalate|
|SAPEA||Science Advice for Policy by European Academies|
|SBN||Sustainable Business Network|
|SDGs||Sustainable Development Goals|
|SMEs||Small to medium enterprises|
|SPREP||Secretariat of the Pacific Regional Environmental Programme|
|SPRFMO||South Pacific Regional Fisheries Management Organisation|
|SWAP||Solid Waste Analysis Protocol|
|UNEA||United Nations Environment Assembly|
|UNEP||United Nations Environment Programme|
|US||United States (of America)|
|WCPFC||Western and Central Pacific Fisheries Commission|
|WINZ||Work and Income New Zealand|
|WMA||Waste Minimisation Act (2008)|
|WMF||Waste Minimisation Fund|
|WMMP||Waste Management and Minimisation Plan|
|WRAP||Waste and Resources Action Programme|
|WTO||World Trade Organization|
Appendix 1: The United Nations Sustainable Development Goals
The following table highlights a series of targets from the UN Sustainable Development Goals (UNSDGs) relevant to plastics that informed Rethinking Plastics, and the Aotearoa New Zealand’s initiatives and challenges related to these, as outlined in New Zealand’s first Voluntary National Review.
|Goal||Relevant targets||NZ review: stated challenges||NZ review: stated initiatives||Comments|
|Goal 6: Ensure access to water and sanitation for all||Target 6.3: By 2030, improve water quality by reducing pollution, eliminating dumping and minimizing release of hazardous chemicals and materials, halving the proportion of untreated wastewater and substantially increasing recycling and safe reuse globally||Reducing sources of pollution||Reducing sources of pollution||While preventing flow of plastic packaging to waterways can be achieved, more than 85% of the microplastics in our waterways are from tyres, paint, clothing and other textiles. This is challenging to deal with on a global scale.|
|Goal 9: Build resilient infrastructure, promote sustainable industrialisation and foster innovation||Target 9.4: By 2030, upgrade infrastructure and retrofit industries to make them sustainable, with increased resource-use efficiency and greater adoption of clean and environmentally sound technologies and industrial processes, with all countries taking action in accordance with their respective capabilities||Lack of visibility and certainty in the pipeline of infrastructure projects that are likely to occur in the future|
Expenditure and number of people engaged in research and innovation below comparable international averages
|Developing a 30 year infrastructure strategy|
Lifting spending on R&D to 2% of GDP by 2027
Implementing an R&D Tax Incentive
Provincial Growth Fund to support regional development
|Goal 11: Make cities inclusive, safe, resilient and sustainable||Target 11.6: By 2030, reduce the adverse per capita environmental impact of cities, including by paying special attention to air quality and municipal and other waste management.||Balancing making cities inclusive, safe, resilient and sustainable against accommodating population growth, managing urban expansion, and preserving the natural environment|
Mitigating hazards and risks from natural disasters
|Focus on strategy to reduce waste sent to landfill, via circular economy thinking||Could build on circular cities concepts|
|Goal 12: Ensure sustainable consumption and production patterns||Target 12.3: By 2030, halve per capita global food waste at the retail and consumer levels and reduce food losses along production and supply chains, including post-harvest losses|
Target 12.4: By 2020, achieve the environmentally sound management of chemicals and all wastes throughout their life cycle, in accordance with agreed international frameworks, and significantly reduce their release to air, water and soil in order to minimize their adverse impacts on human health and the environment.
Target 12.5: By 2030, substantially reduce waste generation through prevention, reduction, recycling and reuse.
Target 12.6: Encourage companies, especially large and transnational companies, to adopt sustainable practices and to integrate sustainability information into their reporting cycle.
Target 12.7: Promote public procurement practices that are sustainable, in accordance with national policies and priorities
Target 12.8: By 2030, ensure that people everywhere have the relevant information and awareness for sustainable development and lifestyles in harmony with nature.
|Waste to levied landfills increased by 20%|
From 2014 to 2017, set to continue
NZ is one of the highest generators of household waste per capita in the OECD
Ensuring we can sustainably manage levels of tourism
|Launch of NZ Plastic Packaging Declaration|
Signing New Plastics Economy Global Commitment
Developing a Plastics Action Plan
Banned sale and manufacture of certain products containing microbeads and single-use plastic shopping bags
Looking at expanding the waste levy
More strategic investment in waste management
Promoting appropriate product stewardship schemes
Work programme in place to upgrade the national database for waste to get a more accurate picture of commercial and industrial waste streams and recycling rates
New Zealand Stock Exchange (NZX) now requires specific reporting on environmental, social and economic sustainability issue in Corporate Governance Code
Tourism Strategy to guide sustainable growth and NZ Tourism Sustainability Commitment
Auckland Council’s vision to be zero waste by 2040 as stated in their Waste Management and Minimisation Plan
|Opportunity to build on rethinking plastics in NZ Tourism Sustainability Commitment
Potential conflict between reducing plastic packaging waste and reducing food waste
Has since consulted on priority products for mandatory product stewardship
|Goal 14: Conserve and sustainably use the oceans, seas and marine resources||Target 14.1: By 2025, prevent and significantly reduce marine pollution of all kinds, in particular from land-based activities, including marine debris and nutrient pollution.||Difficult to assess NZ-specific progress related to ecosystems|
Lack of data on
the scale of polluting activities (for example farming and forestry) make it difficult to assess potential progress on preventing and reducing marine pollution by 2025
|Activities to reduce marine pollution from land-based sources (microbead and plastic bag ban, work programmes on waste)|
Fisheries Change Programme to ensure NZ fisheries continues sustainable practices
Investments in R&I for marine science and tech
Collaborating with Sustainable Coastlines on beach litter monitoring project
|Opportunity to incorporate rethinking plastics into Fisheries Change Programme
Operation Clean Sweep programme by Plastic NZ is an initiative to prevent flow of plastic pellets, flake and powder from entering waterways
Appendix 2: Examples of plastics/waste resources on the Science Learning Hub
- Material world – recycling and biodegradability – Lots of links to various other resources for teachers
- Flight plastics recycling technology – article
- Plastics and recycling – article
- What happens to our plastic bottles – activity
- Environmental benefits of potato plates – article
- DIY plastic recycling plant – activity
- Bioplastics – article
- Plastic – reuse, recycle or rubbish game – activity
- Waste management – article
- Looking at modern landfill systems – activity and lots of related links
- Label the landfill – activity
- Waste – a growing challenge – article/multimedia
- Biodegradability, compostability and bioplastics – article
- Litterati – Citizen Science project
- The litter project – Citizen Science project
- Turning old to new – Connected
- Kiwinet awards – featuring SCION’s Woodforce project
- Composite materials – article
Appendix 3: Current labelling and categorisation approaches for plastics used in Aotearoa New Zealand
|Voluntary use of global identification system for resin type: NZ’s plastic industry uses the ASTM International standard ASTM D7611/D7611M, but this is not a regulated requirement||Important label within the industry|
Widely adopted by NZ plastics manufacturers (in 2009, Plastics NZ developed a resource to guide the voluntary labelling of plastics in NZ)
|Limited in level of detail for plastics outside of the key resin groups (e.g. biodegradable plastics, including compostable plastics, are grouped along with other less common plastics under the resin ID #7 (‘Other’), but the appropriate way to dispose of plastics in ‘other’ may be different)
Does not actually tell people whether a plastic product can or will be recycled
Not well understood by the public
|Voluntary use of ISO standards: There are several ISO (International Organization for Standardization) standards related to plastics that organisations may use for accreditation, identification and marking, and symbols and abbreviated terms||International consistency possible||Doesn’t identify whether a product is recyclable in a certain context
|Use of harmonised trade codes for import and export goods: Raw resin must be categorised according to the Harmonised Trade System trade commodity 39, ‘Plastics and articles thereof’. Some other articles are captured as being made ‘of plastic’ within other commodity codes||Established and used for all imported goods|
|Coding used for import/export data (harmonised trade code) does not capture the amount and types of all plastic imported and exported into the country. While it captures comprehensive data for raw resin, it is limited in how it captures plastic within finished products and packaged goods|
|Industry-led guidance on terminology: To aid consistent use and understanding of terminology, Plastics NZ provided definitions and terms for degradable plastics in 2009. More recently, WasteMINZ developed consumer-facing resources on terminology for compostable, biodegradable and oxo-degradable plastic products and produced best practice guidelines for advertising of compostable products and packaging with Plastics NZ||Detailed and localised||Uptake limited because voluntary
Not all businesses aware of resources
Appendix 4: Modern landfill operational standards
Prior to the development and operation of a modern landfill, a comprehensive Resource Consent Application and Assessment of Environmental Effects needs to be prepared and the proposal is subjected to public consultation and a rigorous publicly notified consent process under the Resource Management Act. The proposal will require numerous consents including, but not limited to, Discharge to Land, to Air and to Water; Industrial Trade Activity; Land Use and Water Take.
If approved, consents will be granted with strict consent conditions relating to the construction and operation of the facility. Detailed designs prepared by Chartered Engineering Consultants in accordance with the application and consent conditions will need to be approved by an specialist independent Peer Review Panel and subsequently by the regulator. During the construction process, the liner (see below) and other construction works will be subjected to rigorous Quality Assurance and Quality Control programmes undertaken by independent specialists. Once these specialists have verified that the liner is constructed in accordance with the consent conditions and specifications, they will prepare a report recommending approval. This report must then be reviewed and approved by the independent Peer Review Panel and subsequently by the Regulator before the Regulator provides approval for the placement of waste.
The purpose of a landfill lining system is to contain any leachate, including microplastics, within the landfill and prevent it from entering the underlying soils or groundwater. It provides an ultra-low permeability containment system on which leachate is collected and removed from the landfill. For a modern landfill, a typical liner system would typically comprise one of the following two systems comprising from top to bottom:
- Type 1 lining system
- Leachate drainage material, with underlying cushion geotextile to protect the geomembrane
- 5 mm HDPE geomembrane
- 600 mm compacted clay with a coefficient of permeability k < 1 x 10⁻ ⁹ m/s.
- Type 2 lining system
- Leachate drainage material, with underlying cushion geotextile to protect the geomembrane
- 5 mm HDPE geomembrane
- Geosynthetic clay liner (GCL)
- 600 mm compacted clay with a coefficient of permeability k < 1 x 10 ⁻ ⁸ m/s.
These two lining systems are considered to be equivalent to each other, and both options are commonly used.
A “fluff layer” of selected waste is placed immediately above the lining system. This layer is usually from the household street collection or otherwise carefully selected waste to contain no large or bulky items and no strong chemical contaminants that may affect the lining or leachate collection system. This offers further protection to the lining system.
All components of the lining system work together to contain leachate within the landfill and prevent leachate seepage until it can be extracted and treated.
Appendix 5: Life cycle assessment
The four phases within the standard life cycle assessment (LCA) method are described and illustrated below.
- Goal and scope definition
- Goal: define why the LCA is being done, for what product, and for what audience.
- Scope: define the system boundary, functional unit, data parameters, target for data quality, impact assessment methods etc. This will depend on the product category rules (see Key Terms).
- Inventory analysis
- Measure the inputs (e.g. materials and energy) and outputs (e.g. carbon dioxide emissions, co-products) within the defined system boundary. These are the environmental loadings for the product across its whole life cycle.
- Impact assessment
- Choose the environmental impact categories (e.g. climate change, acidification, freshwater ecotoxicity) and quantify the equivalent impact for each environmental load (e.g. the climate change impact of carbon dioxide, methane and nitrous oxide).
- Assess the results for completeness, sensitivity and consistency and identify key environmental improvement options.
- Life Cycle Assessment (LCA): a method to evaluate the environmental impacts of a product through its entire lifespan.
- Product Category Rules (PCR): the LCA requirements for a specific product so that a fair comparison can be made between products in the same category.
- Environmental Product Declaration (EPD): a third-party verified summary of an LCA, registered with a program such as the Australasian EPD programme
- Environmental load: the quantity of an input or output associated with a process (e.g. water use, fossil fuel use, carbon dioxide emission to air, cadmium emission to soil)
- Environmental impacts: categories of impacts with adverse impacts on ecosystems, human health and/or natural resources (e.g. climate change, eutrophication, freshwater toxicity). Environmental loads are assessed for their contribution to these impact categories.
- Functional unit: the unit of analysis for a study.
- Product system: the processes that are involved in supplying the physical product, materials, service, or building being studied in the LCA.
- System boundary: the processes that will be included in the study. Not all studies will include the full life cycle and may limit analysis to a certain part of the product system’s life cycle (e.g. a “cradle-to-gate” study will consider processes from extraction of raw materials through to the point where a product exits the manufacturing facility; a ‘cradle-to-grave’ study will consider processes from extraction of raw materials, through manufacture, distribution, use and on to final waste management.
Functional unit in practice
It is important to evaluate single versus multi-use products in terms of the equivalent services delivered by these alternative options. In LCA studies, this service is quantified as the unit of analysis for a study (called the ‘functional unit’) and is the basis upon which alternative options are compared. Examples of functional units include ‘delivery of 340 ml coffee’ for coffee cups) and ‘shaving the face 100 times’ for a razor. It is also important to remember that many of our products may enter a second life if we pass them onto others once we have finished with them; this avoids the need to manufacture more new products and reduces waste.
There are international standards and guidance for life cycle assessment methodology.
- ISO (International Organization for Standardization) developed two standards for life cycle assessment and one for environmental product declaration
- ISO 14040:2006, Environmental management – Life cycle assessment – Principles and framework, provides a clear overview of the practice, applications and limitations of LCA to a broad range of potential users and stakeholders, including those with a limited knowledge of life cycle assessment.
- ISO 14044:2006, Environmental management – Life cycle assessment – Requirements and guidelines, is designed for the preparation of, conduct of, and critical review of, life cycle inventory analysis. It also provides guidance on the impact assessment phase of LCA and on the interpretation of LCA results, as well as the nature and quality of the data collected.
- ISO 14025:2006 – establishes the principles and specifies the procedures for developing Type III environmental declaration programmes and Type III environmental declarations. It specifically establishes the use of the ISO 14040 series of standards in the development of Type III environmental declaration programmes and Type III environmental declarations.
- The UNEP and SETAC established the ‘Life Cycle Initiative’
- Global Guidance for Life Cycle Impact Assessment Indicators
- The Consumer Goods Forum developed a protocol on sustainable packaging design
- International Environmental Product Declaration (EPD) system
- Developers and researchers
- Life cycle assessment is an active field of research and the practice is constantly being improved. For example, Laurent et al. published methodological guidance for better practice for LCA studies of solid waste management systems.
The ongoing local LCA workstreams in Aotearoa New Zealand include:
- The Life Cycle Association of New Zealand, who have developed best practice environmental impact categories for NZ LCAs
- The New Zealand Life Cycle Management Centre
- The Australasian EPD programme
Local stakeholders include researchers who refine the LCA method and perform academic analyses, consultants and industry associations who provide LCA for businesses, and the groups who commission LCA studies (e.g. industry, government, NGOs).
While it is becoming more commonplace for companies to perform LCA on their product or system in Aotearoa New Zealand, it is often still cost prohibitive, particularly for smaller businesses. New Zealand companies who do an LCA on their product and publish a report on it may be able to achieve certification within the Australasian EPD programme.
 A. Laurent et al., “Review of Lca Studies of Solid Waste Management Systems – Part Ii: Methodological Guidance for a Better Practice,” Waste Management 34, no. 3 (2014).
Appendix 6: Plastics research projects in Aotearoa New Zealand
Appendix 7: Tools to support enactment of Māori knowledge systems in environment
Existing tools to support enactment of kaitiakitanga operating in the Māori agribusiness sector might be useful for engaging a Māori-centred approach to address plastic impact on the environment. These include:
- Mauri Compass Tool: An environmental assessment tool and framework to understand the mauri (the essential quality and vitality of a being or entity) of a waterbody and interconnected parts of its system. It involves using standardised tests to assess 12 parameters (referred to as compass points), assigning a value for each from 1 to 5. The assessment of tangata whenua, wairua, mahinga kai, and culture can only be assigned by tangata whenua. The others draw on Western science and include: habitat, biodiversity, water biology, water chemistry, tuna growth rates, tuna species, tuna abundance and population and tuna biological health.
- Te Mauri Model Decision Making Framework: The ‘mauri-o-meter’ is a tool that assesses the impact of practices or activities on the mauri of a resource and attributes scores and weightings to each. The wellbeing factors are interconnected and include; mauri of the whānau (family, economic), community (social), hapū (cultural) and ecosystems (environment). The framework supports decision making by integrating quantitative and qualitative data and providing a sustainability assessment.
- Cultural Health Index (CHI): A Māori-led and developed tool to monitor change in a specific environment based on three components: 1) whether the site has traditional significance to tangata whenua (yes/no); 2) a qualitative assessment of the mahinga kai (natural resources) of the site; 3) a stream health index made up of qualitative ordinal rankings. The tool is highly adaptable for different environmental domains.
- Te ao Māori framework for environmental reporting: this scoping document includes a series of measures for environmental monitoring that align with te ao Māori values and would give full voice to the Māori world view for reporting on environmental impacts.
Appendix 8: Import data
Appendix 9: Imported synthetic textiles
Appendix 10: Export data
Appendix 11: Material flow analysis of PET bottles
Appendix 12: Rural waste
Appendix 13: Non-municipal landfill
Non-municipal landfills include cleanfills, industrial fills, construction and demolition fills and farm dumps. Few studies have estimated the composition of waste to class 2-4 landfills. The study reviewing potential impacts of adjustments to the waste levy cites 0% of waste to these landfills being plastic, based on a survey of waste materials to Fulton Hogan operated cleanfills in 2003.
Several studies report tonnages of waste to non-municipal landfill, but few detail landfill composition, including plastic, so it is difficult to know the actual proportion of waste going into these landfills that is plastic.
In 2012, the Ministry for the Environment engaged Tonkin & Taylor Ltd to develop a database of non-municipal solid waste landfills throughout Aotearoa New Zealand. The primary purpose of this database was for estimating greenhouse gas emissions, and a secondary use was to inform review of the waste disposal levy. This study did not report the proportion of waste that was plastic.
The non-municipal solid waste landfill database was retrospective and only captured data until 2012. It is not framework for ongoing data collection. Where data was missing, information was extrapolated. From this database, total tonnes of waste going to non-municipal landfill was back-cast and projected through to 2015, predicting an upward trend. Data is also shown by region.
Appendix 14: Best practice data collection for plastics
To develop a framework and data collection system that will work in Aotearoa New Zealand we should build on international best practice, such as the following examples.
- During the process of developing the National Waste Data Framework, WasteMINZ reviewed international waste data practice
- 2016-17 Australian Plastics Recycling Survey data: This information is collected through a detailed survey of Australian reprocessors, Australian resin manufacturers and importers, and extensive interrogation of Australian Customs data, sourced from the Department of Foreign Affairs and Trade (DFAT)
- Queensland Waste Data System
- Sustainability Victoria waste data portal and calculator
- ACOR 10-point plan #4 re new metrics for waste: “Development of new metrics for waste, recycling and resource recovery activity – beyond tonnes diverted – to include greenhouse gas abatement, energy efficiency, toxicity avoidance, regional development contribution, economic/social capital generation”
- Wales municipal waste management
- US EPA (also here and here)
- WRAP UK: Plastic Packaging Flow Data Report
- UK: National Packaging Waste Database
- The EU has a standard data framework for reporting fate of packaging material but has only single category for plastic
- Netherlands has BAMB framework