Plastics Production

3.2 Plastics Production

3.2.1 Definitions and scope

1Plastic Production: The total weight of virgin and recycled plastic materials manufactured within a country’s economic territory during a specified reporting period (typically annual). This metric encompasses primary production of plastic pellets, as well as the conversion of these materials into intermediate and finished plastic products by domestic manufacturers.

2To calculate plastic production at the national level, three separate flows should be considered.

• 3

  Plastic in primary forms e.g., pellets or nurdles

• 4

  Semi-finished plastic products and;

• 5

  Plastic in finished products (this could be split between products containing plastics and fully plastic products).

6The main benefit of capturing each of these flows is reduced risk of double-counting of plastics production e.g., plastic nurdles could be reported when first manufactured, and then reported again when they are moulded into semi-finished plastic products, and then reported again once embedded within a finished product.

7Production data can also be split by Industry category, Plastics Polymer type and intended destination of plastic material product – see the disaggregating data subsection below for further details.

8If it is not feasible to split plastics production data, users can focus on calculating aggregated plastic production.

Classification systems

1Classification systems provide standardised frameworks that enable consistent reporting across countries and businesses. Several established systems are particularly relevant for collecting plastic production data, each offering different geographical coverage and levels of detail:

• 2

  PRODCOM (PRODuction COMmunautaire) - the European Union’s system for statistics on industrial production; plastics are covered within its manufacturing categories, and it is most useful for European producers.

• 3

  North American Industry Classification System (NAICS) - classifies businesses in the United States, Canada and Mexico by industry, with plastics manufacturing as a distinct subsector.

• 4

  International Standard Industrial Classification (ISIC) -the United Nations reference classification of economic activities; plastics production falls mainly under Division 20 (chemicals and chemical products) and Division 22 (rubber and plastics products).

• 5

  Central Product Classification (CPC) - the United Nations classification of goods; plastics in primary forms sit in group 347, with semi-manufactures and other plastics products in groups 363, 364 and 369.

6Further detail on classification systems can be found in “Part IV Crosscutting Classification Systems”.

3.2.2 Why production data matters

1Production data establishes the baseline for a country’s plastics profile. As the entry point of the life cycle, it is the denominator against which consumption, waste generation, recycling rates and leakage are later assessed. Where a reliable production figure is missing, downstream estimates rest on weak foundations.

2Reliable production data supports several uses: establishing national baselines and reduction targets; reporting against international obligations, including the global plastics instrument under negotiation and relevant Sustainable Development Goal indicators; identifying the polymers and product categories that dominate the domestic market; and designing policy instruments such as Extended Producer Responsibility (EPR), eco-modulation of fees, and restrictions on specific products.

3.2.3 Methods for generating production data

1To obtain data on plastics production, users could consider rolling out one (or several) of the methods in Table 3.1. The methods are grouped by who is most likely to lead or supply the data, though this may vary between countries.

• 2

  Government: methods that rely on government oversight, funding or regulatory authority – for example extended producer responsibility, environmental permits and reporting, and national production statistics.

• 3

  Private sector: data generated by producers and businesses – for example industry and market-research reports, voluntary producer declarations, digital product passports, retail sales data, and factory sensors.

• 4

  Research and academia: studies by universities and research institutes, such as material flow analysis

5Table 3.1. Tools for Generating Data on plastics production

Method	Description	Advantages	Limitations
Government — Regulated producer responsibility schemes, including EPR and take-back schemes. Examples: Japan Containers and Packaging Recycling Association; LUCID (Germany); CITEO (France); UK Government; Central Pollution Control Board EPR Portal (India); Korea Environment Corporation (Republic of Korea); REP Law, Ministry of the Environment (Chile).	Producers are made responsible, usually financially, for the treatment and disposal of the products they place on the market. Data collection occurs through mandatory reporting requirements where producers document the types and quantities of plastic products placed on the market. Governments are responsible for implementing EPR where the scheme is mandatory.	Ensures participation and accountability for data reporting; establishes consistent formats and frameworks; spans multiple product sectors; creates predictable, scheduled reporting periods.	Reporting burden on businesses; reporting accuracy varies significantly with enforcement levels; systems often exclude small producers; requires complex processes to validate submissions; substantial paperwork and compliance costs; often narrowly focused on packaging only, missing other product categories; creates financial incentives to minimise reported quantities; cross-border trade and online marketplaces often create reporting loopholes.
Government — Environmental permits and reporting. Examples: Environment Protection Licence (Sri Lanka); Industrial Emissions Portal / E-PRTR (European Union); EPA Toxics Release Inventory (USA).	Production facilities report material throughput for environmental compliance with permits. Permit data can also be used to determine maximum production potential for specific sites.	Legally mandated reporting; consistent time periods; facility-level granularity; independent verification potential.	Requirements can vary by jurisdiction, which standardisation could address; limited to regulated facilities.
Private sector — Business reports, national production surveys and market research. Examples: American Petroleum Institute (USA); PlasticsEurope, Plastics — the Facts (Europe).	Can collect a variety of data: types and quantities of plastics produced; amounts of raw materials used in plastic production; production capacities and actual output from companies; raw materials sourced from other countries for plastic production.	Can capture both domestic and international operations; can provide polymer-specific data; can link production to specific industrial sectors.	Reporting burden on businesses; potential commercial confidentiality issues; voluntary surveys may have incomplete participation; data quality varies between companies.
Private sector — Voluntary producer declarations, including under a voluntary EPR scheme. Examples: The UK Plastics Pact; Plastics Pact Network (global); Ellen MacArthur Foundation Global Commitment; U.S. Plastics Pact; Australian Packaging Covenant Organisation.	A policy approach where producers voluntarily take action to support the treatment or disposal of the products they place on the market. Data collection occurs through voluntary reporting where producers document the types and quantities of plastic products placed on the market.	Establishes consistent formats and frameworks for data collection; spans multiple product sectors; creates scheduled reporting periods.	Reporting accuracy varies significantly; systems often exclude small producers; requires complex processes to validate submissions; creates substantial paperwork; often narrowly focused on packaging only.
Private sector — Digital product passports. Example: European Union.	A requirement for digital documentation of product composition, uploaded to generate a digital passport. This data could include detailed information on plastic content and polymer types by weight.	Detailed material composition data; standardised digital format; enables product-level tracking.	Still emerging technology; implementation costs for businesses; requires digital infrastructure.
Private sector — Retail sales data. Examples: Euromonitor International; NielsenIQ retail scanner data.	Aggregation of retail sales data to estimate plastic placed on market. Particularly useful for consumer goods and packaging.	Leverages existing business data systems; product-specific information; real-time data potential.	Limited visibility of plastic content; confidentiality constraints; conversion from expenditure to weight or volume is needed and varies significantly by sector and product.
Private sector — Sensors and real-time tracking. Examples: HolyGrail 2.0 / Digital Watermarks Initiative (Europe); industrial IoT and smart-manufacturing sensors.	Implement sensors at production facilities to measure output in real time.	Automated data collection; high temporal resolution; reduced reporting burden.	Implementation costs; limited to equipped facilities; integration with legacy systems; data privacy concerns.
Research and academia — Material flow analysis. Examples: Kawecki et al. (2018), Europe; Ivanovic et al. (2022), Germany, healthcare; Regional Knowledge Centre for Marine Plastic Debris (Thailand, Philippines, Malaysia, Viet Nam); Deshpande et al. (2020), Norway; Department of Climate Change, Energy, the Environment and Water (Australia); Lobelle et al. (2023), Netherlands; Ministry of Environment (Sri Lanka); Geyer et al. (2017), global; OECD Global Plastics Outlook; plastic flows and stocks study (South Africa); probabilistic MFA of commodity plastics (China).	A systematic assessment of the flows and stocks of plastic materials within a defined system boundary over a specified period. Traces plastics from production through consumption to disposal, using input-output analysis and mass balance principles to identify key flows and leakages. Detailed guidance is provided in Part IV.	Comprehensive system perspective; identifies data inconsistencies; combines multiple data sources; highlights knowledge gaps.	Relies on the quality of input data; multiple assumptions required; complex to implement nationally.

3.2.4 Disaggregating production data

1Aggregated production tonnage is a useful headline figure, but disaggregated data shows where plastics originate and which interventions are likely to be most effective. Wherever the underlying sources allow, production data should be broken down along the following dimensions:

• 2Polymer type (e.g., PET, HDPE, LDPE, PP, PS, PVC, PUR), to target specific polymer value chains.
• 3Production flow and form (primary forms, semi-finished products, finished products), following the three flows in 3.2.1 to avoid double-counting.
• 4Virgin versus recycled (secondary) material, to monitor recycled-content targets and circularity.
• 5Industry or application sector (e.g., packaging, construction, automotive, textiles, agriculture, electrical and electronic equipment).
• 6Intended destination and end-market, including domestic use versus export.
• 7Formal versus informal production, where a significant informal manufacturing sector exists.

8Further detail on these categories is provided in the Disaggregating Data section.

3.2.5 Data challenges and a tiered approach to getting started

1Several challenges recur in production-data collection: double-counting as material moves between the three flows; commercial confidentiality, which constrains company-level disclosure; incomplete coverage of small and informal producers; converting sales or expenditure figures into mass; and accounting for imported intermediate goods. No single method resolves all of these; therefore sources should be combined and cross-checked.

2A practical way to begin is to match the method to current data capacity and to strengthen it over time:

• 3

  Basic: estimate aggregated national production from existing industry-association statistics, trade data and reports from a small number of large producers. Appropriate where reporting infrastructure and resources are limited.

• 4

  Intermediate: introduce mandatory or voluntary producer reporting – for example through an EPR or environmental-permit scheme – to capture polymer- and sector-level detail for major producers, supported by national production surveys.

• 5

  Advanced: reconcile production, trade, conversion and waste data in a national material flow analysis, disaggregated by polymer, sector and flow, with routine validation against independent sources.

6Countries can progress through these tiers over time as institutional capacity and data systems develop; at every stage the priority is a transparent, well-documented method that can be repeated and improved.