Guidelines for Packaging Waste Management in Humanitarian Operations

The Joint Initiative for Sustainable Humanitarian Assistance Packaging Waste Management has prepared these guidelines to emphasize the importance of reducing packaging materials and prioritizing refusal and reduction over recycling due to the challenges of collection and recycling in areas where humanitarian operations take place.

To reduce packaging waste, it is important to choose packaging-free alternatives, advocate for suppliers of packaging materials to reduce packaging, eliminate single-use plastics, optimize the size of the packaging, and enable packaging to be reused or repurposed using innovative designs.

Following the waste-management hierarchy, this document also provides comprehensive guidelines to ensure sound management of packaging waste reuse and repurpose, recycling, and disposal in humanitarian operations.

Our planet is flooded with plastics. While nature, the climate, biodiversity, and human health suffer from the ever-increasing volumes of plastic waste, the fossil fuel industry continues to produce it and to profit from it.

This analysis reveals that the planned trade agreement between the EU and Mercosur (made up of Brazil, Argentina, Paraguay, and Uruguay) will eliminate tariffs for plastics exports from the EU to South America – including tariffs for plastic items whose trade and use are banned in the EU in order to protect the environment and human health, such as single-use plastic cutlery. This stands in stark contrast to ongoing negotiations over a Global Plastics Treaty to significantly reduce plastic production and phase out plastic pollution, as well as to EU legislation aimed at reducing plastic use and avoiding plastic waste. This planned trade agreement is a textbook case of double standards.

Fertilizers and pesticides are interdependent inputs to a destructive food production model that is contributing to catastrophic biodiversity collapse, toxic pollution, and the violation of human rights. But there is an often-overlooked dimension of the threat posed by these agrochemicals: their fossil fuel origins. Synthetic nitrogen fertilizer and pesticides are fossil fuels in another form, making them an underrecognized but significant driver of the climate crisis. Further, the close ties between agrochemicals and fossil fuels mean that industrial food production is vulnerable to the volatility inherent in oil and gas markets, as starkly illustrated by the 2022 market shocks in food, fuel, and fertilizer prices. 

For over a decade, the fossil fuel industry has been betting on petrochemicals (namely, plastics) to maintain profits as the world moves away from oil and gas as fuels. Fossils, Fertilizers, and False Solutions exposes how fossil fuel and fossil fertilizer companies are aligning to pursue a new escape hatch: one that purports to solve the climate challenge of hydrocarbon combustion by using the hydrogen and managing the carbon. 

The fertilizer industry, and the processes it already uses to make its products, hold the keys to this new model. Largely unnoticed by media and civil society watchdogs, oil, gas, and agrochemical companies are partnering on a rapidly growing wave of new projects that would use carbon capture and storage (CCS) to produce fossil gas-based “blue” ammonia (and its “blue” hydrogen precursor), not only as a critical fertilizer input, but as a combustible fuel for transport and energy. Through such approaches, the fertilizer and fossil fuel companies seek to greenwash their polluting business, cash in on generous new subsidies for CCS, and access new markets as “clean energy companies.” 

This report begins by summarizing synthetic fertilizer market trends, describing how chemical fertilizer is tied to fossil fuels through feedstocks, examining the 2022 food and fertilizer market disruptions, and calling attention to the ecological and climate impacts of synthetic fertilizers. It then explores how the fertilizer industry and fossil fuel producers are capitalizing on the climate crisis to open new avenues for profit and production by laundering their emissions through the chemicals and agriculture sector. 

The corporate-controlled, input-reliant model of industrial agriculture is in need of a profound transformation to resilient, regenerative models that enhance food and energy sovereignty so that the ecosystems and communities that depend on them can thrive. The need for such a fundamental transformation is as urgent and as compelling as the global energy transition, the transition away from plastic pollution, and the transition to a world free of toxic chemicals. Those transitions can only be achieved if the common roadblock is removed: a fossil-fueled system that has captured politics and is burning, polluting, and poisoning people and the planet. At a time of surging fossil fuel, fertilizer, and food prices, and with the escalating climate crisis as a backdrop, the case for transitioning away from fossil fertilizer and from fossil fuels altogether has never been clearer.

Today, Canada produces nearly 2.4 million tonnes of plastic packaging waste each year. And that number keeps growing dramatically. Typically, this plastic is used just once, sometimes for minutes. But it lasts for centuries in the environment, where it harms oceans, ecosystems and life itself.

Oceana Canada’s roadmap provides an evidence-based guide to eliminating one-third of our country’s plastic packaging. By implementing the recommended interventions, Canada can prevent the generation of nearly nine million tonnes of single-use plastic by 2040.

The Center for Biological Diversity outlines how the Biden Administration’s fossil fuel approvals threaten to erase the emissions progress projected under the Inflation Reduction Act and other climate policy.

The Center for International Environmental Law (CIEL) has laid out key elements to consider in the context of a treaty to end plastic pollution. These key elements include various aspects of implementation, compliance, and reporting. This document was prepared ahead of INC-3, the third negotiating session of the UN Plastics Treaty.