Policies and Corporate Responses to the Plastic Pollution Crisis

Yumi Park ()
Additional contact information
Yumi Park: Korea Institute for Industrial Economics and Trade, Postal: Sejong National Research Complex, Korea Institute for Industrial Economics and Trade, 370 Sicheong Dae-ro C-dong 8-12F 30147, Republic of Korea, http://www.kiet.re.kr

No 22-10, Industrial Economic Review from Korea Institute for Industrial Economics and Trade

Abstract: The International Energy Agency (IEA) estimated in May 2020 that as fossil fuel consumption in the transportation sector drops, petrochemicals will explain the majority of future increases in oil demand, accounting for 33 percent of overall growth by 2030 and nearly half by 2050. The announcement in October 2020 that Aramco, the world’s largest oil company, will refit its refinery in Yanbu, Saudi Arabia for petrochemical production supports this forecast. However, climate crisis research group Carbon Tracker stated in a report titled The Future’s Not in Plastics that while oversupply — as exemplified by the expansion at Aramco’s Yanbu facility — hurts profitability, the oil-based plastic industry will suffer from the spread and tightening of regulations designed to combat the plastic pollution crisis. According to BP’s 2019 energy forecast, regulations such as bans on the use of disposable plastics could significantly reduce the demand for oil, which is the key component of most plastics. The European Union Board of Directors resolved last year to accept new contributions from member states in proportion to the amount of non-recyclable plastic waste created to meet future expenditures. If a Carbon Border Adjustment Mechanism (CBAM) is implemented, the future of polymers that are heavily reliant on fossil fuels could become even more uncertain. This article examines the causes of the plastic pollution crisis, which provided the impetus for the enforcement of policies impacting plastic demand, as well as the approaches used by the EU, China, the United States, and South Korea to deal with the crisis. It also examines contemporary responses by businesses and the implications carried for policy.

Keywords: plastics; pollution; petrochemicals; petrochemical industry; plastic pollution; industrial policy; carbon border adjustment mechanism; CBAM; environmental policy (search for similar items in EconPapers)
JEL-codes: L65 Q53 (search for similar items in EconPapers)
Pages: 15 pages
Date: 2022-06-01
New Economics Papers: this item is included in nep-ene, nep-env and nep-res
References: Add references at CitEc
Citations:

Downloads: (external link)
https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=4190762 Full text (application/pdf)

Related works:
This item may be available elsewhere in EconPapers: Search for items with the same title.

Export reference: BibTeX RIS (EndNote, ProCite, RefMan) HTML/Text

Persistent link: https://EconPapers.repec.org/RePEc:ris:kieter:2022_010

Access Statistics for this paper

More papers in Industrial Economic Review from Korea Institute for Industrial Economics and Trade Sejong National Research Complex, Korea Institute for Industrial Economics and Trade, 370 Sicheong Dae-ro C-dong 8-12F 30147, Republic of Korea. Contact information at EDIRC.
Bibliographic data for series maintained by Aaron Crossen ().