A Dutch approach to single-use plastics is missing

The fact that the European Parliament and the European Council backed the Single-Use Plastics Directive (SUP) in 2019 was a huge success. Although the Directive only bans a few single-use plastic products and does not address single-use products in a broad sense, the importance of the SUP should not be underestimated. Under Article 4, for example, European member states must ensure an ambitious and sustained reduction in a number of common takeaway plastic packaging types. And Article 8 requires producers, among other things, to pay the litter costs for a number of products such as plastic bottles, composite beverage packaging and plastic food containers.

What is special about the SUP is that the solution to plastic pollution is sought at the level of the producer and their products, which is a breath of fresh air after decades of public campaigns that have focused unsuccessfully on consumer behaviour change.

But the SUP also has flaws: it only attempts to tackle single-use products made of plastic, making market shifts to other single-use products likely. The bans under Article 5 of the SUP only apply to a limited number of products, and the litter costs passed on to producers also apply to only a portion of the products found in litter.

When implementing the SUP, the Dutch government can rectify this situation. However, although we already sent our recommendations to the Ministry of Infrastructure and Water Management at the beginning of this year, we see none of this reflected in the Draft Decree published for consultation on 25 June. This is disappointing. The Draft Decree shows a lack of perspective on how production and consumption systems need to become more sustainable, thereby sending a weak signal to the market. The Draft Decree does not attempt to reduce plastic pollution further than the minimum required for every European member state. Together with a coalition of Dutch environmental organisations, we call on the Dutch Government to show more ambition.

The Netherlands Court of Audit

The Netherlands Court of Audit was already critical in 2019, establishing that the Dutch government does not HTML-prioritise policy that focuses on prevention and reuse, even though this is enshrined in the Environmental Management Act. "There are no targets for reducing the production and use of plastics. Current Dutch policy is therefore aimed at a limited part of the plastic chain," according to the Netherlands Court of Audit. Since then, no answer to this has yet been formulated in government policy. Following the Plastic Pact, the Netherlands, together with France, launched a European Plastic Pact, but while France is also committed to stricter regulations with the French law for the circular economy, the Netherlands is lagging behind.

We are missing a Dutch government that does not blame everything on either European rules or voluntary national agreements. There is policy space in between, and this must be utilised much more.