Trade of Plastics (including plastics waste)

3.3 Trade of Plastics (including plastics waste)

3.3.1 Definitions and Scope

1Plastics trade: the import and export of plastics across national borders during a reporting period, recorded by weight (tonnes) and/or value. It spans the full life cycle – plastics in primary forms (e.g., resins and pellets), intermediate and semi-finished forms, finished products made of or containing plastic, and plastic waste and scrap traded for recycling, recovery or disposal.

2Trade statistics should distinguish imports, exports and re-exports, and, as far as possible, separate plastic traded as waste from plastic traded as new product. A key boundary issue is that plastic embedded in other goods – for example, the packaging around imported electronics, or the plastic content of vehicles – is generally not captured by trade codes for plastics; this is discussed further in 5.2.5.

3When developing plastics trade data, several complementary classification systems could be considered to ensure comprehensive coverage and international comparability – the main systems are listed in Table 3.2. Classification systems for trade data.

4Table 3.2. Classification systems for trade data

Classification	Description
Harmonised System (HS)	HS codes form the foundation for plastics trade data collection and analysis. The 6-digit international standard allows for global comparison of plastic trade flows, while country-specific 8- or 10-digit extensions provide greater granularity for specific polymers, products and waste streams. Maintained by the World Customs Organization (WCO).
Standard International Trade Classification (SITC)	The SITC offers an alternative organisation of trade data that focuses on materials and their level of processing rather than product categories.
UNCTAD plastics life cycle classification	Developed by UN Trade and Development (UNCTAD), this classification groups HS codes into five life cycle stages — primary forms, intermediate forms, intermediate manufactured products, final manufactured products, and plastic waste — making it well suited to tracking plastics trade across the full life cycle. Available via the UNCTAD Plastics Data Hub.

3.3.2 Why trade data matters

1For most countries, a large share of the plastics they consume is imported rather than produced domestically, and much of what they discard for recycling is exported. Trade data is therefore essential to completing the national picture: apparent consumption is commonly estimated as production plus imports minus exports. Trade in plastics is large and growing: UN Trade and Development (UNCTAD) estimates it exceeded US$1.1 trillion in 2023, around 5% of global merchandise trade (UNCTAD, 2025). Trade data underpins several uses: estimating apparent consumption, identifying transhipment and re-export hubs, monitoring exports of plastic waste and the leakage risks they create, and reporting against instruments such as the Basel Convention and the global plastics treaty under negotiation.

3.3.3 Methods for generating plastic trade data

1To obtain data on plastics trade, users could consider rolling out one (or several) of the methods in Table 3.3. The methods are grouped by who is most likely to lead or supply the data.

2Government: methods based on official trade and customs systems – for example customs and trade documentation, national trade statistics, and business surveys.
3Private sector: commercial and third-party trade databases that compile and analyse trade data – for example the Observatory of Economic Complexity, ITC Trade Map and World Bank WITS.
4Research and academia: studies by universities and research institutes, such as material flow analysis

5We have also included a cross-cutting section on technological solutions that could be employed by any of the above organisations to improve trade data.

6Table 3.3. Tools for developing plastic trade data

Method	Description	Key advantages	Limitations
Government — Trade documentation and records. Examples: UK Government; Statistics Canada; Eurostat; Statistics Norway; Statistics NZ; UN Comtrade; UNCTAD Plastics Data Hub; Basel Convention plastic waste trade.	Official documentation systems used to track materials and products across borders, including import/export declarations and waste shipment notices.	Legal mandate for accurate reporting; comprehensive coverage of formal trade; standardised classification systems; regular data collection periods.	May miss informal or illegal trade; aggregation may obscure product details; reporting delays reduce timeliness.
Government — Surveys of businesses. Example: UK Government.	Systematic questionnaires administered to representative samples of businesses to gather data on trade. Further detail in Part IV, Surveys.	Provides direct insights from importers and exporters.	Resource-intensive to administer; subject to reporting biases; requires statistical expertise for proper sampling.
Private sector — Market intelligence from industry associations, market research, academia and NGOs. Examples: Observatory of Economic Complexity; ITC Trade Map; World Bank WITS.	Private sector data collection and analysis focused on commercial aspects of plastic trade, including pricing, competitive intelligence, and supply-demand dynamics.	Captures market dynamics beyond volumes; may include informal or unreported flows; provides pricing and value information; often includes forecasting elements.	Methodological variability; potential commercial bias; sampling issues limit representation; often costly to access comprehensive data.
Research and academia — Material flow analysis. Examples: Houssini et al. (2025), trade-linked MFA; CEPII BACI database.	See Part IV, Material Flow Analysis, for detailed guidance.	—	—
Cross-cutting technology — Digital documentation and reporting systems. Examples: Automated Commercial Environment (ACE), USA; European Commission.	Digital platforms and electronic systems that capture, process and share plastic trade data, replacing paper-based processes with automated information management.	Reduces manual reporting errors; accelerates data collection and analysis; improves accessibility for stakeholders; enables automated validation checks.	The digital divide limits global implementation; requires technical capacity building; initial implementation costs; system compatibility challenges.
Cross-cutting technology — Data integration and analysis (harmonisation systems, cross-border tracking systems). Example: OECD.	Systems and processes designed to combine, standardise and analyse plastic trade data from multiple sources.	Improves data comparability across sources; enables cross-country analysis; standardises diverse data formats; facilitates international cooperation.	Complex implementation requirements; depends on the quality of input data; requires ongoing maintenance; standardisation may reduce specificity.
Cross-cutting technology — Trade flow monitoring (blockchain, RFID, GPS, port monitoring systems).	Digital tracking technologies that provide automated, real-time monitoring of plastic material movements through supply chains and across borders.	Real-time tracking capability; tamper-resistant documentation; detailed chain-of-custody information; automated data collection.	Requires technological infrastructure; implementation costs can be high; limited to participating supply chains; technical expertise requirements.

3.3.4 Disaggregating trade data

1As with production data, disaggregated trade data is far more useful than a single import or export total. Wherever the source data allows, trade flows should be broken down along the following dimensions:

2
Direction of flow: imports, exports, re-exports and net trade.
3
Life cycle category: primary forms, intermediate forms, intermediate manufactured products, final manufactured products, and plastic waste (per the UNCTAD classification).
4
Polymer type, where codes allow (e.g., PET, HDPE, LDPE, PP, PVC).
5
Code granularity: 6-digit international HS lines versus national 8- or 10-digit lines.
6
Partner country or region (origin and destination), to map trade routes and waste-export destinations.
7
Value versus weight, and waste versus non-waste – separating Basel-controlled plastic waste from new product. Mass is needed for material accounting; value supports economic analysis.

8Further detail on these categories is provided in the Disaggregating Data section and in Section 4.2 Crosscutting Classification Systems.

3.3.5 Data challenges and a tiered approach to getting started

1Trade data carries specific challenges. HS Chapter 39 (“plastics and articles thereof”) does not capture all traded plastics: many plastic items sit in other chapters, and plastic embedded in other goods – packaging, vehicles, electronics – is invisible to plastics trade codes. “Mirror” discrepancies arise when a reporter’s recorded exports do not match the partner’s recorded imports. Value and weight are not always both reported; waste can be mis-declared to avoid controls; and confidentiality rules suppress some flows.

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

3
Basic: extract plastics trade (HS Chapter 39, plus key codes in other chapters) from UN Comtrade or a national customs portal, reported as imports, exports and net trade.
4
Intermediate: apply the UNCTAD life cycle classification to capture plastics across all relevant HS codes, reconcile reporter and partner figures using mirror statistics, and use Basel notifications for plastic-waste flows.
5
Advanced: integrate trade with production and waste data in a trade-linked material flow analysis, disaggregated by life cycle stage, polymer and partner, with routine validation against independent sources.

6As with other stages, countries can move up the tiers as capacity grows. Being transparent about which codes, sources and assumptions were used is what makes trade figures comparable over time and across borders.