The growing challenge of plastic waste worldwide, including its impact on vulnerable marine and terrestrial eco- systems, has spurred the quest for viable alternatives to replace plastic as part of a range of solutions to deal with the crisis. This is challenging given some of the inherent flexibility, versatility and low production costs of plastics. Techno-economic factors and evaluation of health and environmental including overall life-cycle impacts will determine whether substitution of plastic would be preferable to other solutions (such as better waste collection and disposal). Particularly problematic plastic pollution sources such as single-use plastic bags and other items are areas where substitution would be highly desirable.

Substitutes for plastic can be broadly categorized into two. Traditional materials are based on naturally occurring polymers of plant and animal origin as well as non-renewable mineral substances found in nature. On the other hand, bio-based polymers are derived from natural polymers, but undergo extensive physical, chemical and abiotic transformations. Many bio-based polymers are only compostable under specific industrial composting conditions and, for this reason, are not a solution in places where such facilities are few or non-existent, particularly in developing countries. Developing countries could, therefore, explore various traditional materials where they may already enjoy inherent production and export-related advantages as substitutes for plastic. Many natural fibres and value-added products, particularly jute, abaca, coir, kenaf and sisal (JACKS fibres), for example, are produced and exported by several developing countries thereby benefiting smallholder farmers. Others include widespread traditional materials that are biodegradable such as bamboo and cotton as well as mineral-based ones such as glass and aluminum that can be easily recycled.

Trade policy initiatives such as lowering tariffs and non-tariff barriers for plastic substitutes such as JACKS fibres could provide incentives for scaling-up their production and deployment. Import tariffs on value-added products are often high in many large developing countries, and hence lowering them could encourage greater South–South trade in plastic substitutes. Such market access initiatives could be pursued unilaterally, bilaterally, regionally, plurilaterally as well as multilaterally under the World Trade Organization (WTO) through liberalization initiatives including as part of a broader environmental goods liberalization package such as an Environmental Goods Agreement (EGA). At the same time, given that many developing countries are also major exporters of conventional plastic materials, consideration should be given to economic and livelihood impacts in these sectors. Addressing fossil-fuel subsidies that keep prices of plastic low would also help in the uptake of substitutes.

Other trade-related supportive initiatives for the scale-up and diffusion of environmental-friendly plastic substitutes include: (i) reviewing and amending the Harmonised System (HS) to enable their greater visibility; (ii) pursuing trade and investment initiatives related to end-of-life management and disposal of both conventional plastics as well as substitutes; (iii) attracting foreign investment in the plastic substitutes sector particularly in developing countries; and (iv) pursuing technical and technology co-operation, assistance and capacity building measures to build supply-side capacities and introducing appropriate regulatory frameworks. All these measures are essential building blocks in the creation of a circular economy.