Seite - 210 - in Freshwater Microplastics - Emerging Environmental Contaminants?

national discussion of plastics’ negative environmental impacts, especially due to theextensivephysicalpresenceofbags in theenvironment (alsodiscussedbyKhan et al. [29] in thisvolume).Thismeasurewas among thefirst andmost comprehen- sive political acts to control plastic pollution, and it can to a large extent be explainedwith the risk perception drivers. The spreading of plastic bagswas not an environmental risk that the population faced voluntary (driver 1). Since the plasticbagswere further spread throughout theenvironment, it couldbeviewedas an uncontrollable risk (driver 2), perhaps evenwith potential for disasters for the ecosystems affected (driver 4). Since it may appear as there is only very limited societal benefit of the pollution to the end consumer (driver 6), therewere strong incentives to address the pollutionwith political measures. Of course, the use of plasticonasocietal level includesavastamountof technicalandeconomicbenefits to both producers and consumers, and the current waste management practices where the majority of waste plastics is either landfilled or incinerated may be perceivedby some stakeholders as beneficial to the society. InEurope thedebate about theuseof resources,waste handling, and theplastic pollutionhas beenongoing for several years primarilywithin the context ofwaste regulation. The first packaging waste directive (Directive 85/339/EEC) was adopted in the mid-1980s aimed at reducing negative environmental aspects of packagingandpackagingwaste.ThePackagingandPackagingWasteDirectivehas been amended several times since then (1994, 2003, 2004, 2013, and 2015). The 2015 revision resulted in the adoptionofDirective (EU)2015/720on reducing the consumption of lightweight plastic carrier bags [30]. The overall framework for waste-related regulation is in theEUdescribed in theWasteFrameworkDirective (Directive 2008/98/EC) that contains the core principles forwastemanagement in Europe.TheWasteFrameworkDirective is related to several directives that target specificwaste streams such as batteries, electronic and electrical equipment, end- of-life vehicles, sewage sludge, construction and demolition waste, etc.Many of thesewastestreamscontainplastic,andEUefforts to reduceplasticpollution in the waste sector shall therefore be seen on the background of this wide range of directives. In December 2015, the European Commission launched a Circular Economy (CE) package (also discussed in [31]). The CE package includes pro- posed revisions tomanyof thecentralwaste-relateddirectives including theWaste FrameworkDirectiveand thePackagingandPackagingWasteDirective.Acentral element in proposed revisions is common EU-wide 2030 targets for the waste sector. The CE strategy includes five priority areas, one of which is plastic. The commission will in 2017 adopt a strategy on plastic targeting issues such as recyclability, biodegradability, hazardous substances, andmarine litter [32]. Microbeads pose a special and interesting case in regard to risk perception of plasticpollution.Microbeadscontribute toarelativelysmallpercentageof the total plastic production but have becomehighly exposed in themedia, and risk percep- tionofmicroplastic isoftenconnectedtomicrobeads.Severalcampaigns(e.g.,Beat themicrobead [33]) focusonphasingoutmicrobeadsexplicitly.Several initiatives havebeen launched tocall for aphaseoutofmicrobeads. Inonepetition, gathering more than 375,000 signatures called for a ban in the UK [34]. The US state of 210 K.Syberg et al.