8 Ways the EU Can Strengthen Plastic Pollution Legislation

In a decisive move that should help reduce microplastic pollution in Europe, the European Parliament in late April advanced legislation to curb pollution from plastic pellets—tiny particles that are the building blocks of the plastic manufacturing industry. Plastic pellets are the third-largest source of microplastic pollution in the European Union and are made from chemicals produced during oil or gas refining. Microplastics are particles less than 5mm in size.

The draft legislation now advances to the European Council for the 27 EU Member States to review before the European Commission, Parliament, and Council negotiate the final package.

Plastic pellets spill into the environment at all stages of the value chain, including during shipping at sea. This chronic leakage can impact fisheries, agriculture and tourism—for example, by contaminating marine habitats, which can lead to the ingestion of pellets by fish and other marine life and, ultimately, plastic entering the human food chain. In agriculture, microplastic pollution can affect crop quality and soil health, reducing crop yields. In tourism, polluted beaches and coastal areas can deter visitors, harming local economies dependent on clean environments. Pellets can easily be mistaken for food by marine organisms, leading to ingestion that causes physical harm and potentially toxic effects.

The Member States of the EU now have a chance to improve this legislation during negotiations. Here are eight provisions they should include to help reach the goal of cutting microplastic pollution by 30% by 2030:

1. Expand definitions of pellets and carriers

Because all forms of pellets can leak into the environment regardless of their size or shape, the EU must broaden its definition of plastic pellets—which currently doesn’t include plastic flakes, dust and powders—to ensure that no type of pellet evades control. Pellets are transported all around the world via different means (railway, shipping, road), and all of them contribute to chronic pellet loss. The definition of “carriers”—the vehicles that transport pellets—should therefore be expanded to include all transport modes, especially maritime, because ships are more prone than other forms of transport to significant spill incidents.

2. Include specific measures for maritime transport of pellets

And because maritime accidents represent a significant and often overlooked source of pellet spills, lawmakers must strengthen the legislation to guard against spills at sea. Specifically, they should mandate the implementation of specific measures outlined by the International Maritime Organization. This includes clear labeling and notification protocols for containers carrying plastic pellets, enhanced packaging requirements to withstand the rigors of maritime transport, and strict stowage guidelines to ensure that containers are secured below deck or in sheltered locations whenever possible. Additionally, lawmakers should advocate for the classification of plastic pellets as harmful substances or dangerous goods under the International Maritime Dangerous Goods Code. Numerous shipping accidents have spilled large amounts of plastic pellets into the ocean in recent years, leading to extensive environmental and economic damage. These include the MSC Zoe spill on the beaches of Brittany, France, in 2019; the spill from an unknown carrier along the Brittany beaches in January 2023; the spill from MV Trans Carrier along the coasts of Denmark, Norway and Sweden in 2020; and the cargo loss of the Bedeko in Portugal, which reached the coast of Galicia in Spain in December 2023.

3. Mandate risk assessment procedures and enhance obligations for industry

All facilities handling pellets and those involved in their transport must be required to develop and maintain detailed risk assessment plans (RAPs) for each installation and transport mode, focusing on prevention, containment and cleanup of plastic pellet pollution. These RAPs must require that actors handling plastic pellets follow stringent procedures, such as using sealed packaging that is tear- and impact-resistant and will not degrade in the ocean if it falls overboard.

4. Require third-party certification

All operators—regardless of their size or how many plastic pellets they handle—must undergo an independently audited certification process to ensure compliance with containment, prevention and cleanup requirements. Small and micro-sized companies should be given more time for initial certification. Afterward, recertification should occur every three years with annual internal audits, which are essential for assessing pellet loss prevention. These audit reports should include documented risk assessments, recorded incidents and remedial measures, previous audit results, operational activities, records, visual inspections, and spot checks of sites and transport mediums.

5. Restrict exemptions to third-party certification

No operators should be automatically exempted from certification and other regulatory provisions just because they are registered under alternative management and compliance schemes such as the Eco-Management and Audit Scheme or the International Standards Organization. Each scheme offers different criteria and systems of evaluation of a company’s environmental management. The more schemes that are exempted, the more fragmented the verification of compliance will become for Member States, which in turn would weaken the overall effectiveness of the legal framework and create additional red tape for national administrations. Combining certification and audit processes is feasible only if prevention, containment and cleanup of sites is required.

6. Establish comprehensive incident reporting and restoration protocols

The legislation must include incident reporting systems that compel operators to immediately address and mitigate environmental damage from pellet spills. Because these spills can cause significant damage to ecosystems—including harming wildlife and spreading pollutants in rivers, streams or forests—it is critical that operators not only report spills but also restore affected ecosystems and cover pellet cleanup costs so that local governments do not bear these costs. In addition, affected individuals and neighbouring communities must have the right to obtain compensation from operators in case of infringement of the legislation.

7. Strengthen non-compliance measures and penalties

A study from Flinders University in Australia shows that plastic pollution affects not only individual animals but also entire food webs. Hence, the new pellet legislation must introduce stringent penalties aligned with the polluter-pays principle to hold operators accountable for preventing and cleaning up environmental damage, enhancing ecosystem restoration and protecting local communities from pollution. Additionally, such a strengthened complaint-handling process would ensure that valid complaints lead to immediate and effective remedial actions.

8. Make training mandatory

The new legislation should require that all operators and all personnel involved in the handling of plastic pellets be trained in best practices, spill management and compliance with the rules.

EU lawmakers have an opportunity to transform this proposed legislation from a promising start into a robust framework that effectively tackles plastic pellet pollution. Achieving the 30% reduction goal by 2030 requires not only ambition but also comprehensive and enforceable measures. With these eight enhancements, the EU government can help to ensure a healthier environment and a safer future for all.

Selene Álvarez Peña works on The Pew Charitable Trusts’ preventing ocean plastics project. Sarah Baulch leads the technical team with Pew’s preventing ocean plastics project. Natacha Tullis leads Pew’s efforts to advance European Union legislation to curb microplastic pollution.