Global plastic production is growing at a pace that far exceeds the world’s capacity to manage or recycle it. While some plastic products are essential, much of it—particularly single-use items—contributes heavily to pollution and long-term environmental harm. Around 99% of plastics are derived from fossil fuels, making the sector a crucial lifeline for oil and gas industries. The refining and manufacturing of plastics emit billions of tons of greenhouse gases, accounting for over 5% of global emissions in 2019. If current trends continue, virgin plastic output could double or triple by 2050, potentially consuming a quarter of the remaining global carbon budget and undermining climate targets.
Experts confirm that plastic production is rising in nearly every region. Ambrogio Miserocchi of the Ellen MacArthur Foundation notes rapid expansion despite bans and restrictions on single-use plastics in at least 140 countries. The European Union is the only region showing a slight decline in production capacity, but high costs have pushed many producers to relocate manufacturing elsewhere or increase imports. Major growth is occurring in the US, China, South Africa, Brazil, Iran, Saudi Arabia, and Southeast Asian nations such as Malaysia, Vietnam, Thailand, and Indonesia—often through Chinese companies. China alone produces roughly one-third of the world’s plastics.
Attempts to regulate plastic production face significant challenges. Activists argue that reducing output is the only real solution, yet policy efforts have historically focused on waste management measures like recycling, which captures only 9% of plastics. Most ends up in landfills, incinerators, or as microplastics contaminating even the most remote environments. Reduction was a major sticking point in last year’s stalled UN plastic treaty negotiations in Korea and is expected to remain contentious in upcoming talks in Geneva. While over 100 nations supported production caps, a small but influential group—Russia, Saudi Arabia, Iran, and China—blocked the measure.
Corporate influence also plays a critical role in resisting change. Fossil fuel and chemical industry lobbyists formed the largest delegation at the Korea talks, exceeding that of the entire EU. In some cases, corporate representatives were embedded in national delegations, further complicating consensus.
Experts suggest that supply caps are only one approach; reducing demand is equally important. This could involve import restrictions by non-producing nations, particularly in Africa and Asia, which bear disproportionate pollution burdens. Regional treaties among these nations could limit demand and indirectly curb production. Miserocchi points to voluntary industry commitments, such as those by over 1,000 organizations in a global pledge, which collectively claim to have avoided 9.6 million tons of virgin plastics since 2018. The Business Coalition for a Global Plastics Treaty—comprising companies across the plastics supply chain—also supports reduction.
Some countries, like Rwanda and Peru, have proposed specific targets, including a 40% cut in production by 2040. However, data gaps make setting firm global limits challenging. Experts stress that cutting plastic production must be paired with redesigned business models and product innovations to prevent simply replacing plastics with other environmentally damaging materials. The ultimate goal is not just less plastic, but smarter, more sustainable consumption systems.