Science of the Total Environment 752 (2021) 141772

Contents lists available at ScienceDirect

Science of the Total Environment

journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/scitotenv

Review

Single-use plastics: Production, usage, disposal, and adverse impacts

Yuan Chen a,b, Abhishek Kumar Awasthi a, Fan Wei a, Quanyin Tan a, Jinhui Li a,c,⁎
a
School of Environment, Tsinghua University, Beijing, 100084, China
b
Key Laboratory of Cleaner Production and Integrated Resource Utilization of China National Light Industry, Beijing Technology and Business University, Beijing 100048, China
c
Basel Convention Regional Centre for Asia and the Pacific, Beijing 100084, China

H I G H L I G H T S G R A P H I C A L A B S T R A C T

• SUPs doubled as the amount in 2000,

with packaging is the highest portion
(40%).
• Landfilling accounts for >40% and is pres-
ently the dominant disposal method.
• SUP wastes leaking into the environment
have visible adverse impacts on ecology.
• Multi-solution strategies are the most ef-
fective way to stop SUP pollution.

a r t i c l e i n f o a b s t r a c t

Article history: Single-use plastics (SUPs), invented for the modern “throwaway society,” are intended to be used only once. They
Received 29 May 2020 are being increasingly produced and used globally, most notably as packaging or consumables, such as SUP shop-
Received in revised form 5 August 2020 ping bags or disposable tableware. We discuss how most SUPs are landfilled or incinerated, which causes pollu-
Accepted 16 August 2020
tion, consumes valuable land, and squanders limited natural resources. Only relatively small amounts are
Available online 19 August 2020
currently recycled, a hindrance to the concept of a circular economy. Moreover, SUP litter aggregation in the nat-
Editor: Daniel CW Tsang ural environment is a major concern. This article briefly reviews SUP contamination in various environmental
media including soil, rivers, lakes and oceans around the world. In the face of mounting evidence regarding the
Keywords: threat posed to plant growth, soil invertebrates and other land animals, (sea) birds, and marine ecosystems,
Single-use plastics there is a growing push to minimize SUPs. Regulatory tools and voluntary actions to reduce SUP usage have
Production been put forward, with some suggestions for minimizing SUP waste.
Consumption © 2020 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.
Environmental and ecological impact
Intervention and actions

Contents

1. Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2
2. SUP production, usage and disposal. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2
2.1. SUP production . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2
2.1.1. Global plastic manufacturing . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2
2.1.2. Chemicals in SUPs . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2
2.2. SUP product usage . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3
2.2.1. China . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3

⁎ Corresponding author at: School of Environment, Tsinghua University, Beijing 100084, China.
E-mail address: jinhui@tsinghua.edu.cn (J. Li).

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.scitotenv.2020.141772
0048-9697/© 2020 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.
2 Y. Chen et al. / Science of the Total Environment 752 (2021) 141772

2.2.2. USA . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3
2.2.3. Europe . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4
2.2.4. Other countries . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5
2.3. Disposal . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6
2.3.1. Landfilling . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6
2.3.2. Incineration . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6
2.3.3. Recycling . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6
2.3.4. Thermal cracking . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6
2.3.5. Carbonization . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6
3. Environmental and ecological impacts from SUPs. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6
3.1. Environmental impacts . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7
3.1.1. Impacts on soil . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7
3.1.2. Rivers and lakes . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8
3.1.3. Oceans . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9
3.2. Ecological impacts . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9
3.2.1. Plant growth. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9
3.2.2. Invertebrate animals in soil . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9
3.2.3. Birds . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10
3.2.4. Marine species . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10
4. Some possible interventions to take, to reduce SUPs . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10
5. Conclusions and implications . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11
Declaration of competing interest . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12
Acknowledgements . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12
Appendix A. Supplementary data . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12
References. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12

1. Introduction The focus of this article is to present an overview of the status of

There are more than 300 types of plastics produced, of which some
60 kinds are the most popular. Plastics can be divided into general plas-
tics and engineering plastics, according to their utilization (Yuan, 2009).
Polyethylene (PE), polypropylene (PP), polyvinyl chloride (PVC), poly-
styrene (PS), polyurethane (PU) and phenolic resin are the main general
plastics, with PP and PE as the polymers most commonly used in every-
day plastic products, especially disposable products, such as plastic
packaging and disposable water bottles (Giacovelli et al., 2018;
Kankanige and Babel, 2020). These kinds of plastics are intended to be
used only once, and are known as single-use plastics (SUPs). They are
also used as mulching film and greenhouse materials, especially in de-
veloping countries. The United Nations Environment Program (UNEP)
report suggests that the bulk of modern plastic production has shifted
from durable plastics to SUPs (Giacovelli et al., 2018), with packaging
being the dominant type (Ksenia et al., 2019). Increasing demand for
SUPs has contributed to the global plastic production rate, reaching
~360 million metric tonnes in 2018 (PlasticsEurope, 2019), of which
SUP products came to 50% of the total production (PlasticOceans, 2020).
Plastics are made from oil, and it has been predicted that the produc-
tion of 380 billion plastic bags and wraps yearly in the U.S. consumes 1.6
billion liters of oil (Marcia, 2016). However, after being used once, most
SUPs are disposed of in landfills or incinerated, causing the loss of valu-
able resources, and what's more, waste SUP litter is accumulating in the
oceans, rivers and soils (Boucher et al., 2019; Law et al., 2010;
Briassoulis et al., 2015; Wang et al., 2018a, 2018b) causing adverse im-
pacts on the environment (Cartraud et al., 2019; Rizzi et al., 2019), as
has been highlighted by national governments (Wang et al., 2018a,
2018b) and multilateral environmental agreements (UNEP, 2014,
2016, 2017, 2019a).
SUPs have also proved to degrade slowly and fragment into small
pieces with diameters less than 5 mm, known as secondary
microplastics (MPs), via UV irradiation, heat, or mechanical stress
(Rillig, 2012; Schöpel and Stamminger, 2019). Because MPs are more
easily dispersed and more difficult to capture than larger plastics,
there has been a continuous rise in MP contamination (Thompson
et al., 2004). Recently, much of the research has suggested the existence
of MPs in freshwater lakes and rivers (Ivleva et al., 2017; Karthik et al.,
2018; McCormick et al., 2016; Wu et al., 2019), and MPs have even
been found in drinking water (Schymanski et al., 2018).
global SUP production as well as to identify environmental impacts
from mismanaged SUPs. In addition, actions reducing SUP products
are summarized.
2. SUP production, usage and disposal
2.1. SUP production
2.1.1. Global plastic manufacturing
Since the 1950s, global plastic production has grown by an average
9% per year. From a base of 1.7 million metric tonnes in 1950 (Geyer
et al., 2017), worldwide production reached ~360 million metric tonnes
in 2018 (PlasticsEurope, 2019). The MacArthur Foundation predicts that
production will double again over the next two decades (Elias, 2018)
(Fig. 1).
SUP polymers are the largest segment of general plastics
manufactured in many places around the world. The production
amounts are reported to be half the total plastic amount, with SUP pack-
aging comprising the highest portion—40% of SUP products (Advisors
et al., 2019). It was also reported that more than a quarter (26%) of
these plastics are manufactured in Northeast Asia, followed by North
America (21%), the Middle East (17%), and Europe (16%), the largest
use of such plastic is for packaging (36%) (Fig. 2a). It was estimated
that plastic packaging consumption increases with per capita income,
with the U.S. at ~96 kg per capita and China at ~61 kg per capita (Fig. 2b).
2.1.2. Chemicals in SUPs
In order to increase the plasticity of resin molecules, to make the
plastic more flexible and easy to process, plasticizers such as phthalates
or phthalic acid esters (hereafter referred to as “PAEs”) are widely used
in SUP products, and have been detected in tableware, plastic bags, and
food containers (Chen et al., 2013; Huo et al., 2017; Zhang et al., 2012).
PAEs in plastic containers can be transferred to the packaged food or to
the natural environment and then enter the public food chain. PAEs
have been detected in four popular beverages—soda, lemonade, cola,
and mineral water—bottled in plastic containers sold in local markets
in Turkey (Ustun et al., 2015). Dimethyl phthalate (DMP), diethyl
phthalate (DEP), benzyl butyl phthalate (BBP), and diethylhexyl phthal-
ate (DEHP) were also detected in plastic bottled water in Saudi markets,
stored at different temperatures (AI-Saleh et al., 2011).
 Y. Chen et al. / Science of the Total Environment 752 (2021) 141772
Fig. 1. Global plastic and SUP production growth trends.
(Sources: Geyer et al., 2017, updated with the analysis method from Advisors et al., 2019).
The frequently used chemicals found in SUPs are listed in Table 1.
PAEs are the most commonly used, and consequently are the dominant
pollutants associated with SUPs used by the food industry in China
(Chen et al., 2018). Medical suppliers, such as extension lines, drip
chambers and bags were detected with high concentration of PAEs
(Gimeno et al., 2014), and even the baby diapers and sanitary pad
(Park et al., 2019). The highest content has been reported in food pack-
aging (>20,000 mg/kg DEHP). Even the lowest reported content
(7.2 mg/kg) exceeds official Chinese standards (5 mg/kg). In addition
to plasticizers, chemical compounds such as antioxidants, heat stabi-
lizers, etc., are found in plastic polymers used for packaging, and they
can migrate during heat treatment and storage (Bhunia et al., 2013).
For example, acetic acid, which can cause acute toxicity in mice at
3530 mg/kg (Sun et al., 2001), has been recorded at 11,658 mg/kg
(Zhao et al., 2018). Another chemical, n-hexane, has also been reported
to exceed standard limits by ~5 times (Zhao et al., 2018). Although
perfluorinated compounds (PFCs) and heavy metals have been detected
in some SUPs used as food containers (He et al., 2016), little data have
been published on this problem. Moreover, reported PFC concentrations
are considered safe according to standards issued by the Shanghai
Association of Food Contact Materials (2018) in China, and under EU
regulations (EU, 2011).
2.2. SUP product usage
SUP products are mainly made of PE for films, bags, houseware etc.;
PP for food packaging, microwave containers, pipes etc.; polyethylene
terephthalate (PET) for water bottles; PVC for pipes, cable shields, pack-
aging, etc.; PS for packaging, toys, building materials, electrical and elec-
tronic products, etc.; PU for fillers in furniture and building insulation;
and phenolic resins for printed circuit boards used for electrical and
electronic products. This research took SUP products made from these
seven types of polymers as objectives for the survey.
2.2.1. China
According to statistics provided by the China Plastics Industry, 73.3
million tonnes (Mt), 77.2 Mt., 75.2 Mt., 60.4 Mt. and 81.8 Mt. of plastic
products were manufactured in 2015, 2016, 2017, 2018 and 2019,
3
respectively, in which engineering plastics constituted 4.25 Mt., 4.86
Mt., 5.29 Mt., 5.59 Mt., and 5.90 Mt. After deducting the engineering
plastics, the amounts of general plastics with different kinds of SUPs
are shown in (Fig. 3a). The amounts of SUP products are similar, about
7.0 Mt. each year. The “Annual report of analysis on the economic oper-
ation of the plastics processing industry,” the most authoritative publi-
cation for reporting plastic data, divides SUP products into film, foam,
plastic for daily use and “other,” with the former three products making
up 32% (Fig. 3b). Diaper and sanitary napkin production amounts, sepa-
rated from others based on our survey data from the industry,
accounted for 5.7%—about 4 Mt. per year.
As the world's largest agricultural producer, China has used plastic
film as mulching for crops; the amount used has increased approxi-
mately five-fold over the last decade. In this study, plastic film
accounted for 20.6% of the total amount of plastic—about 13.9 Mt.,
with agricultural film accounting for 1.4 Mt. on average. The land area
mulched is estimated to be 18.4 million ha, 20.3 million ha and 23.4 mil-
lion ha in 2016, 2020 and 2025, respectively (Yan et al., 2014), indicat-
ing that agricultural film amounts will keep increasing if there are no
regulations to control them.
2.2.2. USA
Among SUPs, plastic shopping bags/containers and packaging are
the two categories that have attracted attention from the U.S. federal
government. It has been reported that 80% of grocery bags and more
than one-third of the entire plastic packaging production is for short-
term use by U.S. consumers (Li and Zhao, 2017; Wagner, 2017). Plastic
shopping bags include mainly low-density polyethylene (LDPE). In
2014, about 103.465 billion SUP shopping bags were used. And because
of their very low recycling rate, these plastic bags persist as a major
source of litter (Wagner, 2017). Residents in coastal areas are the first
to be directly exposed to the effects of marine plastic contamination.
Consequently, numerous coastal cities or municipalities have already
banned plastic bags. Currently, 18 states/territories have already
banned plastic bags or approved plastic bag fees (Li and Zhao, 2017).
In the U.S., popular SUP polymers include PET for water and soft
drink bottles; high-density polyethylene (HDPE) plastic containers for
milk and water jugs; and PVC, PS, and PP for LDPE film products and
4 Y. Chen et al. / Science of the Total Environment 752 (2021) 141772

(a) Regional distribution of SUPs production in 2014

plastic packaging Consumption per capita per year

100

80

60

40

20

0
the U.S. Canada Mexico Brazil Japan China Middle India Western Great Australia
East Europe Britain
Country

(b) Plastic packaging annual consumption per capita in selected countries/regions

Fig. 2. SUPs production and consumption in different regions and typical countries.
(Source: (Giacovelli et al., 2018), (PlasticsEurope, 2016) and (Citi, 2018)).

other containers and packaging. The U.S. EPA estimates that 14.7 Mt. of The plastic film sector is mainly focused on the production and con-
plastic containers and other packaging wastes were generated in 2015. sumption of SUP bags and agricultural plastics. Statistics show that aver-
Plastic containers and packaging also make up a major portion of total age consumption of SUP bags was 176 bags per person in 2010, which
municipal solid waste generation (29.7%) (USEPA, 2018). equates to ~100 billion plastic bags (Auken, 2015). Of the ~2.2 Mt. of ag-
ricultural plastic produced in 2017, LDPE accounted for 1.3 Mt. (59%),
more than double the amount in 2013 (Briassoulis et al., 2013). The
2.2.3. Europe European Commission, Parliament, and Council have passed a “Single
European countries have focused on the challenges posed by plastic Use Plastics Directive” with targets of: (1) a maximum average of 90
packaging and plastic film products, which have a markedly low recov- SUP bags consumed/person/year by the end of 2019 (a decrease of
ery rate compared to other materials (Andreoni et al., 2015). Plastic 49% compared to 2010); and (2) a maximum average of 40 bags con-
packaging makes up the biggest portion (39.9%) of total plastic genera- sumed per person per year by the end of 2025 (73% reduction from
tion. While the agricultural sector represents only a small percentage of 2010 levels). This directive is the second law in EU history that aims
the total plastic demand (3.4%), its management is still of concern to actively prevent SUP use. The directive must be reflected in the
owing to its environmental impact (PlasticsEurope, 2018).
 Y. Chen et al. / Science of the Total Environment 752 (2021) 141772 5

Table 1
Chemicals in selected SUP products.

Plastic product (polymer) Hazardous chemical content mg/kg Standard Limit Detection protocol/method Reference
(mg/kg)

Tableware (PP, PS,PET,PE) (i) acetic acid (11658), (ii) n-hexane (274), (iii) DEHP (5.22–227.92), (i) 30, (ii) 60, GB 18006.1–2009 (Zhao
(iv) DBP (5.03–19.51) (iii) 5, (iv) 5 et al.,
2018)
(1)Plastic bags, (2)PVC bags,(3)PVC (1)ΣDEHP, DEP, BBP, DBP, DnOP, DMP(6568) 5 Gas chromatograph with a (Chen
films, (4)plastic cups, (5)plastic (2)ΣDEHP, DEP, BBP, DBP, DnOP, DMP(3.205) DB-5 capillary column et al.,
bowls, (6)plastic bottles (3)ΣDEHP, DEP, BBP, DBP, DnOP, DMP(3.059) 2018)
(4)ΣDEHP, DEP, BBP, DBP, DnOP, DMP(2.926)
(5)ΣDEHP, DEP, BBP, DBP, DnOP, DMP(5.667)
(6)ΣDEHP, DEP, BBP, DBP, DnOP, DMP(4.354)
Sanitary pad& Diapers (release Sanitary pad: DBP (0.052–7.82), DEHP (0.0055–0.197), VOC (nd- 0.0001 Liquid Chromatography/Mass (Park
amount) 5.471 × 10−3); Diapers: DBP (0.0134–1,0.6097), DEHP Spectrometry/Mass et al.,
(0.0126–0.0628), VOC (nd- 0.397 × 10−3) Spectrometry for PAEs; 2019)
Gas chromatograph for VOC
Medical extension lines, drip chambers DiDP, DINCH, DiNP>1000, 20 for DiDP, Gas chromatography and mass (Gimeno
and bags. DEHP<85 DINCH, DiNP; 2 spectrometry et al.,
for DEHP 2014)
Fast food container (PP, PS, GPPS, PE DEHP(65.6) 5 GB/T 21928–2008 (Huo
film) et al.,
2017)
Bag (PE,HDPE, PE film) DEP (nd-10.3), DIBP (nd −6.4), DBP (nd −7.2), DEHP (nd −34.3) 5 GB/T 21928–2008 (Huo
et al.,
2017)
Food packaging (PVC) DEHP(nd-21,455), DBP(nd −86) 5 GB/T 21928–2008 (Chen
et al.,
2013)
Food Packaging (PET, HDPE, PE,PP,PS, DBP (22. 89–267.6), DEHP (nd-899.8) 5 High Performance Liquid (Zhang
PVDC, PES) Chromatographic method et al.,
(HPLC) 2012)

NOTE: not detected (nd).

national laws of all countries who are EU member states by 2021, when
the directive enters force (Auken, 2015).
A study conducted by the Waste and Resources Action Programme
(WRAP) suggests that plastic films account for approximately 34% of
the entire plastic packaging waste stream, amounting to 414,000 t of
plastic packaging entering the U.K. market every year. In addition, over-
all U.K. plastic consumption is rising, with packaging accounting for the
bulk of this increase (WRAP, 2016). (Scholars estimate plastic consump-
tion by observing the content of municipal solid waste.) Such analysis
indicates plastic accounts for approximately 50% of the entire recyclable
waste stream.
2.2.4. Other countries
South Africa disposes of about 8 billion waste plastic bags each year.
Due to its relatively long coastline, the country has historically contrib-
uted a disproportionally high amount of plastic contamination to the
oceans, worldwide (O'Brien and Thondhlana, 2019). To reduce this en-
vironmental impact, South Africa introduced a plastic bag levy policy in
2003. According to this policy, both consumers and retailers must pay
(consumers 17 and retailers 15 South African cents/bag) for plastic
bag consumption (Hasson and Leiman, 2007), while Adam et al.
(2020) presented comprehensive information about policies for reduc-
ing SUP in West Africa. Out of 16 countries where SUP bans have been

(a)SUP products production amount (b) Average portion of different SUPs

Fig. 3. SUP products manufactured in China in the most recent five years (average portion of each kind).
(Source: CPPIA, 2016–2020 combined with field survey).
6 Y. Chen et al. / Science of the Total Environment 752 (2021) 141772
introduced, 11 have covered mainly plastic grocery bags. Only one
country has established a market-based instrument, while the remain-
ing 4 countries have set up no policies at all. The enforced bans include
heavy fines for violations. But at the same time, the study also suggested
that there is a serious limitation to these bans; too short a notification
time (<1 year) between ban introduction and implementation; no na-
tional information/education campaigns were conducted, to help the
public know about and understand the importance of the ban.
It is estimated by the Federation of Indian Chambers of Commerce
and Industry (2017) that annual per capita consumption of plastics in
India is 11 kg, and the plastic waste generated in the year 2017–2018
was 661 kt (CPCB, 2018). The major sources of household plastic wastes
are plastic packaging (accounting for 37%), bags, wraps and sacks (29%),
PET bottles (16%), and other plastic containers (13%) (Padgelwar et al.,
2019).
2.3. Disposal
Reuse, recycling, incineration and landfill are the common ways to
manage plastic waste. The latter three are the most common, with
landfilling making up the largest share. It was reported that in 2015
79% of plastic waste was either landfilled or dumped, or ended up as lit-
ter in the environment, with only 9% being recycled and 12% incinerated
(Geyer et al., 2017). The World Economic Forum (2016) reported that
only a small portion (14%) of packaging waste is recycled, and more
than 80% is disposed of or dumped as litter, of which 40% is landfilled,
14% incinerated and 32% released to the natural environment. The U.S.
EPA found that 16.8% of plastic containers and packaging waste was
combusted for energy recovery, and 68.6% landfilled (USEPA, 2018).
In Europe, approximately 27.1 Mt. of waste plastic was collected in
2016; 8.43 Mt. (31.1%) was recycled and 11.27 Mt. (41.6%) subjected
to energy recovery methods. Just over a quarter (27.3%) ended up in
landfills (PlasticsEurope, 2018). In Switzerland and Norway (non-EU
countries), 11% of PP plastic waste was recycled, 44% incinerated with
energy recovery and 45% landfilled. With the exception of silicone and
bubble wrap, for PE, 100% landfilling is assumed (Gallego-Schmid
et al., 2018).
2.3.1. Landfilling
Landfilling consumes scarce and sometimes valuable land, and
squanders limited resources (Breyer et al., 2017; Canopoli et al., 2020).
Historically, landfilling has been one of the most common methods for
the disposal of waste plastic, and it remains so in many places around
the world (Singh and Sharma, 2016). In the U.S., ~137.7 Mt. of MSW
(with plastics accounting for 19% of the total) was landfilled in 2015
(USEPA, 2018). In Europe, the proportion of plastic waste in municipal
solid waste is significantly higher (27.3%) (PlasticsEurope, 2018).
European policies addressing plastic waste have a strong orientation
toward diverting waste from landfills, and as a result, landfilling has
been significantly reduced over the past decade (Mrkajić et al., 2018;
PlasticsEurope, 2015). In fact, in Serbia, a public utility company em-
ploys workers to extract recyclables from landfills in Belgrade and
Novi Sad (Mrkajić et al., 2018). It is clear, therefore, that although
landfilling is the most common method for managing SUP waste, it
can and should be avoided, due to sustainability concerns.
2.3.2. Incineration
Incineration is another waste management practice, and waste ma-
terials that are combusted include organic substances. In 2015, it was
reported that 16% of MSW incinerated in the U.S. was composed of plas-
tic (USEPA, 2018). Combustion transforms waste materials into heat,
flue gas and ash. Studies on the calorific value of different polymer
types have reported values of 43.3–46.5 MJ/kg for PE, 46.5 MJ/kg for
PP, and 41.9 MJ/kg for PS; these compare with values of 45.2 MJ/kg for
gas oil and 42.3 MJ/kg for petroleum, showing that some plastics have
comparable, or even higher, calorific values than common fossil fuels.
Incineration also achieves a waste volume reduction of 90–99%
(Thanh et al., 2011). However, because of the potential release of toxic
chemicals, such as volatile organic compounds and dioxins, in the
course of incineration, costly treatment equipment is required, making
it unfeasible to introduce environmental controls on incineration on a
large scale, particularly in developing countries.
2.3.3. Recycling
Recycling converts waste into valuable new products. As a recog-
nized part of the circular economy concept, recycling is encouraged
worldwide. Successful recycling continues to face challenges, however,
for a number of reasons, including difficulty in handling waste streams
(USEPA, 2017). SUP waste, for example, usually enters the general mu-
nicipal solid waste stream without sorting, often clogging the sorting
equipment. In the U.S., paper waste comprises 67% of all recycled mate-
rials in the municipal solid waste stream, and plastics comprise only 4%.
The U.S. EPA has estimated that the recycling rate in 2015 was ~30% for
both PET bottles and jars (890 thousand tonnes) and HDPE bottles (230
thousand tonnes) (USEPA, 2018). In Europe, waste reduction and
recycling have long been a priority, and many policies have been
enacted (Mrkajić et al., 2018). In the U.K., the National Packaging
Waste Database shows that approximately 891 thousand tonnes of
plastic packaging was recycled in 2015, an increase of more than 50%
since 2009, according to the Plastics Market Situation Report (WRAP,
2016).
2.3.4. Thermal cracking
The thermal cracking of plastic wastes decomposes the plastic poly-
mers thoroughly to a low molar mass state, obtaining products with
high use value. The mechanism and products of thermal cracking can
vary greatly for different types of plastics. Thermal cracking can be di-
vided into high-temperature cracking (carried out at 600–900 °C) and
low-temperature catalytic cracking (carried out at a lower temperature
of less than 450 °C). In addition to obtaining traditional liquid fuels,
thermal cracking can also recover monomers through gasification
(Janajreh et al., 2020; Jeong et al., 2020) and liquefaction (Kasar and
Ahmaruzzaman, 2018).
Thermal cracking has broad application potential in plastic reutiliza-
tion. It has great economic benefits. It can be used for processing mixed
plastics, such as mixed polypropylene and polyethylene products. Its
main disadvantages are high investment costs and strict technical re-
quirements for operation.
2.3.5. Carbonization
In view of the high carbon content in plastics, carbonization has be-
come an emerging direction for waste plastics reutilization. This is a
thermal treatment process converting polymer precursors into carbon
materials, such as amorphous carbon (porous carbon, activated carbon,
etc.) and graphite carbon (carbon nanofibers, graphene, etc.) at a high
temperature. Carbonization in a broader sense, which is more fre-
quently used, refers to a 2-step process composed of pyrolysis and car-
bonization (Inagaki et al., 2010). The reaction can proceed under
different conditions of oxygen content, pressure and catalyst usage.
Compared with other plastic waste disposal methods, carbonization
has considerable advantages in resource recovery and environmental
protection. Complex pre-treatments not required, and it is suitable for
most plastics (Chen et al., 2020). In addition, the carbonized products
are valuable and controllable. Carbonization would be a feasible method
of realizing the reutilization of mixed plastic wastes. However, research
on carbon recovery and the large-scale practice of plastic waste carbon-
ization still need to be improved.
3. Environmental and ecological impacts from SUPs
SUP waste scattered throughout urban and rural environments
blocks storm drains and sewage systems, causing potential flooding
 Y. Chen et al. / Science of the Total Environment 752 (2021) 141772
(Piccardo et al., 2020). Numerous cases of injuries and death to animals
caused by the ingestion of plastics, both on land and in water, have been
reported (Cartraud et al., 2019; Markic et al., 2018; Verlis et al., 2018). In
agricultural areas, plastic waste, including mulching film residue, inter-
feres with the movement of water and air through soils. This can de-
crease farmland productivity, preventing plants from absorbing
nutrients (Yan et al., 2014). Lakes, rivers and oceans have been seriously
polluted with SUP wastes (Boucher et al., 2019; Law et al., 2010). Haz-
ardous chemicals released from SUP waste have contaminated environ-
mental media and wild life, and have potential adverse impacts on
human and animal health (Fig. 4).
Besides the SUP wastes themselves, the popular plastic additives re-
leased from SUP wastes (for example PAEs, commonly used as plasti-
cizers in products made up of SUPs) have been detected in many
kinds of environmental media (Table 2) (Mo et al., 2009; Paluselli
et al., 2019) and are a serious concern. Data for the Western Pacific,
the North Sea, and the Arctic Ocean show a maximum concentration
of ∑PAEs <100 ng/L water. It has been demonstrated by the authors
that leaching from MPs is a potential source of PAEs, and there is some
evidence of a relationship with the presence of plastic wastes. PAE con-
centrations vary seasonally, and the total concentrations of PAEs in
water are lower during the water drawdown period than during the
water impoundment period. The same is true for sediment (Lin et al.,
2018).
Meanwhile, different kinds of PAEs have appeared in different re-
gions, at variable concentrations. With respect to DEHP, DBP, di-n-
butyl phthalate (DNBP), DIBP, and DEP, these substances frequently
occur at higher concentrations relative to other PAE substances. Accord-
ing to researchers, much heavier contamination has been found in the
Bohai Sea, the Yellow Sea and Changjiang Estuary (Zhang et al., 2018a,
2018b), than in other waterbodies with the same plastic sources
(Paluselli et al., 2018) such as the Yangtze River (He et al., 2011a,
2011b) and the Qiantang River (Sun et al., 2013). However, contamina-
tion levels are similar to those in water sources distributed in other na-
tions, as well as in the Jiulong Estuary (Li et al., 2017; Xie et al., 2007a,
2007b; Xie et al., 2005; Zhang et al., 2019). When PAE concentrations
in sediment are analyzed, they occur at similar levels (Liu et al., 2014).
PAEs may cause a negative impact to aquatic biodiversity and subse-
quently to natural ecosystems (Zhang et al., 2018a). He et al. (2013) re-
ported acute toxicity levels for BBP, DMP, dibutyl phthalate (DBP) as
Fig. 4. Outline diagram of the impacts of SUPs: (a) Source of SUPs; (b) Improper handling of collected SUPs; such as take-out SUPs; (c) Open disposal of SUPs; (d) In developing countries
large quantities of SUP waste are openly disposed of; (e) SUP waste reaches nearby plants; (f–i) SUP pollutants may cause impacts on natural ecosystems and public health via various
routes/pathways; (j) There is a need for proper action for controlling SUP pollution and other associated risks.
7
well as DEP for diverse aquatic species as 0.21–5.3, 29–337, 0.35–6.29,
and 10.3–131 mg/L, respectively. In this context, some PAEs, such as
DMP, DEP, dioctyl phthalate (DOP), DBP, Diisobutyl phthalate (DIBP)
and BBP, have been placed on the top-priority pollutant lists of several
countries, due to their genotoxic as well as eco-toxic attributes
(Ventrice et al., 2013).
3.1. Environmental impacts
There are two main commonly considered sources of SUP wastes:
land-based and river/lake/sea-based sources. Land-based sources in-
clude industries, tourism, recreational activities, households,
mismanaged mulching film waste, insufficiently treated sewage, and
unprotected landfills. River/lake/sea-based sources include fisheries,
commercial and recreational shipping, and runoff. Although scattered
plastic film fragments can float in the air for short periods of time,
they are eventually buried in the soil or float on the surface and then
sink to the bottom of rivers, lakes, or seas, and ultimately cause adverse
impacts on the environment.
3.1.1. Impacts on soil
SUP bags and agricultural mulching film residue are a major source
of soil pollution (Fig. 4). Plastic mulching film has been well known
for significantly increasing crop production and revenues by retaining
soil moisture, and as a result conserving water resources (Briassoulis
et al., 2013; Dong et al., 2019; Zhu et al., 2018). The issue of mulching
waste, however, has only recently emerged. The lack of management
measures has caused large volumes of film to accumulate in fields,
and these are resistant to degradation, causing agronomic and environ-
mental problems (Briassoulis et al., 2015). PE mulch film is a one of the
main sources of SUP pollution in soils. Pollution levels of soils contami-
nated with film residue can be divided into three categories: mild
(80–100 kg/ha), moderate (100−200) kg/ha, and heavy (>200 kg/ha)
(Chen et al., 2016). Zhang et al. (2016) reported that 60.7% of surveyed
sites in Turpan, Xinjiang, China, had mulch residue levels greater than
the national standard for film residue (75 kg/ha), and the highest con-
centration reached 502.2 kg/ha. Wang et al. (2018a, 2018b) revealed
that plastic film residue in soil leads to decreased water use efficiency,
weak biomass accumulation, and decreased nutrient uptake by cotton
plants, with a consequent reduction in yield.
8 Y. Chen et al. / Science of the Total Environment 752 (2021) 141772

Table 2
Concentrations of ΣPAEs and dominant PAEs released from SUP wastes accumulated in environmental media.

Location Media sampled PAEs detected with average concentration ΣPAE Attributed PAE source Reference
Concentrationa

Seamount area Water DEHP(5.70 ± 0.56), DBP(5.96 ± 0.88), DOP(1.63 ± 0.02),DDP(4.37 12.13–60.69 Leaching from microplastics (Zhang
of Western ± 0),DMP(2.74 ± 0.56)DEP(1.47 ± 0.15)DiPrP(0.89 ± 0)DPrP(1.30 generated from marine plastic et al.,
Pacific ± 0) litter degradation 2019)
DiBP(5.40 ± 0.82)DPP(1.64 ± 0)DiHP(2.31 ± 0)
BPP(5.42 ± 0.06)DCHP(4.27 ± 0.47)DPhP(1.33 ± 0.29)
Northwestern Water DMP(3.2 ± 2.4), DEP(15.7 ± 12.5), DiBP(102.7 ± 90.5),DnBP(83.2 130.8–1330.7 Leaching from the plastic (Paluselli
Mediterranean ± 75.2),BzBP(3.8 ± 0.7), debris accumulated over the et al.,
Sea (Marseille DEHP(317.2 ± 242.7) seafloor 2018)
Bay)
North Sea Water DBP(1.7), DEHP(2.2),DEP(0.67),DMP(0.2),BBP(0.05) nd-6.6(DBP) Mainly from air–sea exchange (Xie
(German et al.,
Bight) 2005)
Arctic Water DEHP(0.448), DnBP(0.051),DEP(0.138),DMP(0.04), 0.08–5.03 Water generated from PAEs (Xie
BBP(0.008),DiBP(0.022) contaminated snow melting et al.,
2007a, b)
Jiulong River Water DMP(0.08), DEP(0.045), DIBP(3.69), 3.01–26.4 Tourism is one of the main (Li et al.,
estuary DBP(0.53), DEHP(2.74), DINP(0.16) source 2017)
Bohai Sea and Water DMP(3.816), DEP(3.787), DiBP(348.7), DBP(743.4), DMEP(65.322), 462–5640 Industrial sewage discharge (Zhang
Yellow Sea DPP(0.153), BBP(0.677), DNHP(0.03), DCHP(0.224), DEHP(892.2), and human activities et al.,
DnOP(0.19), DiNP(0.187) 2018b)
Yangtze River Water DMP(110.8), DEP(59.86),DiBP(173.1), DBP(192.8),DMEP(86.12), 180.3–2455.2 Industrial waste and sewage (Zhang
Estuary BMPP(15.36), discharge directly or through et al.,
DEEP(2.83),DPP(4.56), BBP(2.53),DNHP(5.17), DBEP(3.4), DCHP river 2018a)
(16.44),DPhP(3.63),
DEHP(241.39), DnOP(5.37),DiNP(21.2)
Yangtze River in Water DEP(<10−211), DBP(<105–286), DEHP(<10–836), DMP(<10–25), 155–1399 Plasticizers waste discharge to (He et al.,
Jiangsu BBP(<10−21), DOP(<10−20) the water which input the 2011a, b)
Province Yangtze River
Pearl River Delta Zhujiang DiBP(3.77 ± 3.44), DEP(0.023 ± 0.008), DMP(0.009 ± 0.004), DnBP 2.94–47.98 Industrial development and (Liu
region River/Sediment (1.51 ± 1.39), DNP(nd), DnOP(0.039 ± 0.034), DEHP(9.52 rapid urbanization et al.,
± 8.15),DCHP(nd), DBEP(nd), HEHP(ND), BBP(0.033 ± 0.033), DnHP 2014)
(ND), DnAP(0.007 ± 0.007), DEEP(0.007 ± 0.008), DMPP(ND), DMGP
(0.063 ± 0.124)
Dongjiang DMP(0.006 ± 0.005), DEP(0.013 ± 0.011), DiBP(0.994 ± 1.127), 0.567–26.84
River/Sediment DnBP(0.344 ± 0.303),
DMGP (0.015 ± 0.01),DMPP(0.002 ± 0.006), DEEP(0.003
± 0.004),DnAP(0.006 ± 0.008), DnHP(nd), BBP(0.005 ± 0.006),
HEHP(nd), DBEP(0.004 ± 0.008), DCHP(nd),DEHP(4.656 ± 5.226),
DNP(0.001 ± 0.004),DnOP(0.024 ± 0.032)
Xijiang DMP(0.001 ± 0.001), DEP(0.004 ± 0.003), DiBP(0.36 ± 0.162), DnBP 0.818–3.612
River/Sediment (0.127 ± 0.056),DMGP (0.01 ± 0.006),DMPP(0.001 ± 0.003), DEEP
(0.003 ± 0.005),DnAP(nd), DnHP(nd), BBP(0.002 ± 0.004), HEHP
(nd), DBEP(0.002 ± 0.004), DCHP(0.001 ± 0.002),DEHP(1.17
± 0.461),
DNP(0.001 ± 0.002),DnOP(0.005 ± 0.006)
Beijiang DMP(0.002 ± 0.001), DEP(0.008 ± 0.006), DiBP(0.299 ± 0.162), 0.812–3.173
River/Sediment DnBP(0.109 ± 0.055),DMGP (0.03 ± 0.006),DMPP(0.001 ± 0.003),
DEEP(0.001 ± 0.001),DnAP(nd), DnHP(nd), BBP(0.003 ± 0.004),
HEHP(nd), DBEP(nd), DCHP(nd),DEHP(0.978 ± 0.509), DNP(0.001
± 0.001),DnOP(0.003 ± 0.005)
Shunde DMP(0.005 ± 0.003), DEP(0.033 ± 0.023), DiBP(0.533 ± 0.249), 1.552–5.687
Tributaries/Sediment DnBP(0.154 ± 0.078),DMGP (0.023 ± 0.01),DMPP(0.001 ± 0.002),
DEEP(0.002 ± 0.002),DnAP(nd), DnHP(nd), BBP(0.003 ± 0.003),
HEHP(nd), DBEP(nd), DCHP(nd),DEHP(2.228 ± 1.087), DNP(0.001
± 0.003),DnOP(0.043 ± 0.054)
Qiantang River Sediment DiBP(0.170), DEP(0.018), DMP(0.053), DnBP(0.113), DNP(0.094), 0.59–6.74 Extensively use of plastic (Sun
DnOP(0.0049), DEHP(1.555),DCHP(0.0014), DBEP(0.0061), HEHP materials is one source et al.,
(0.0014), BBP(0.0018), DnHP(0.0009), DnAP(0.0006), DEEP(0.0014), 2013)
DMPP(0.0019), DMGP (0.0023)

NOTE: not detected (nd) 2-sec-butyl-4,6-dinitrophenol (DnBP), Diisononyl phthalate (DINP), benzylbutyl phthalate (BzBP), dinonyl phthalate (DNP), di-n-octyl phthalate (DnOP),
dicyclohexyl phthalate (DCHP), di(2-n-butoxyethyl) phthalate (DBEP), di (hexyl-2-ethylhexyl) phthalate (HEHP), di-n-hexyl phthalate (DnHP), di-n-mylphthalate (DnAP), di(2-
ethoxyethyl) phthalate (DEEP), di(4-methyl-2-pentyl) phthalate (DMPP), dimethylglycol phthalate (DMGP).
a
Water = ng/L, sediment = μg/g.

As the most commonly used plastic additives, PAEs are widely dis-
tributed in mulching films in soils, and have been reported in vegeta-
bles, fruits, and grains (Cai et al., 2015; Lü et al., 2018; Mo et al., 2009;
Schecter et al., 2013; Wang et al., 2016). PAEs in different media from
different regions of China are shown in Table 3. Sun et al. (2016) re-
ported that the total concentrations of six kinds of phthalates were in
the range of 0.17–9.37 mg/kg in agricultural soil in the Yangtze River
Delta.
3.1.2. Rivers and lakes
Because of their low relative density, many plastic wastes, particu-
larly films， bags and foams, are easily blown onto rivers from land,
and are buoyant in water. Such wastes in lakes and rivers can thus be
transported to the ocean. Boucher et al., (2019) determined the contri-
butions of different sources of plastic pollution and revealed that plastic
input to a lake basin comes to 173,000 t every year, with plastic usage of
about 135,000 t per year, while packaging is reported as the major
 Y. Chen et al. / Science of the Total Environment 752 (2021) 141772
Table 3
Concentrations of ΣPAEs released from agricultural mulching film in different media in China.
Location Plastic use
Shanxi Province Film mulching
Shouguang City, Shandong province Plastic-shed
Shandong Peninsula Film mulching
Nanjing City, Jiangsu Province Greenhouses
Beijing City Film mulching
Nanjing City, Jiangsu Province Film mulching
ten cities in China Greenhouses
Fujian Province Film mulching
Hangzhou City, Zhejiang Province Greenhouses
Tibet Film mulching (film non-recycled)
contributor of plastic waste (46,769 t/year) in Lake Geneva
(Switzerland & France) (Boucher et al., 2019).
One study revealed that the majority of plastic particles on surface
waters consists of fragments, films, and foams, and that particles are
most abundant in the Laurentian Great Lakes (Eriksen et al., 2013a,
2013b). Plastic pollution on four beaches along the southern and east-
ern shorelines of Lake Huron, Canada, was examined, with 3209 plastic
pieces in total found in an 85-m2 area (2984 pellets, 117 pieces of styro-
foam and 108 fragments). The majority of pieces were located along
strandlines (Zbyszewski and Corcoran, 2011).
3.1.3. Oceans
The destination of the largest amount of SUP waste is the oceans.
SUPs can enter the sea through surface runoff and coastal beach activi-
ties. Additionally, strong rainfall and storm events or earthquakes
followed by tsunamis can wash vast quantities of terrestrial material, in-
cluding plastic debris, into the oceans. It has also been reported that
great amounts of litter from inland activities are carried to the sea by
rivers. There are also sea-based sources such as offshore work, commer-
cial fishing and aquaculture (Bai et al., 2018). Plastic debris is found in
every major ocean, although both the density and the type of plastic de-
bris can differ among areas (Li et al., 2016a, 2016b). Plastic debris tends
to accumulate in sub-tropical ‘convergence zones’ or gyres. Five major
ocean accumulation zones have been identified: two in the Atlantic,
two in the Pacific and one in the Indian Ocean. The five identified
gyres are the North Atlantic, the South Atlantic, the North Pacific, the
South Pacific and the Indian Ocean. Plastic accumulation has also been
reported from semi-enclosed seas—for instance, the Mediterranean,
the Bay of Bengal, and the Gulf of Mexico (Cózar et al., 2017;
Villarrubia-Gómez et al., 2018). In addition, studies (Consoli et al.,
2020; Cózar et al., 2017) have estimated that 95% of the plastics load
in the Arctic is concentrated in the Greenland and Barents Seas.
Researchers have suggested that it takes almost two years for plastic
debris to move from a coastal zone to an oceanic gyre (Wang et al.,
2016a, 2016b, 2016c). Some authors who have studied the North Pacific
Gyre estimate that it holds about 1.1 to 3.6 trillion pieces of plastic
(Wagner, 2019). Average concentrations of plastic debris have been re-
ported as 0.0269 items/m2 (Eriksen et al., 2013a, 2013b), 0.0203 items/
m2 (Law et al., 2010) and 0.3343 items/m2 (Moore et al., 2001) in the
South Pacific Gyre, the North Atlantic Gyre and the North Pacific Gyre,
respectively. Among the microplastics detected, fragments (52%) were
found at the maximum abundance, while films (29%) and spheres
(19%) were lower. In the area of southwestern Luzon, a total concentra-
tion of 0.657 plastic items/m2 was observed.
3.2. Ecological impacts
An environment contaminated with SUP wastes and their degrada-
tion compounds has a direct relation to biological destiny. SUPs and
9
Medium Concentration (mg/kg) Reference
(I) Wheat grains, (II) soil (I)4.1–12.6, (Shi et al., 2019)
(II)1.8–3.5
Vegetable soils 0.76–1.59 (Zhou et al., 2020)
Agricultural soil 1.374–18.81 (Lu et al., 2016)
Soil pepper 0.32–0.97 (Li et al., 2020)
0.20–0.30
Soil, vegetables 0.14–2.13, 0.15–6.94 (Lu et al., 2016)
Vegetable and rice soil 0.15–9.68 (Wang et al., 2013)
(I) Vegetables, (II) soils (I)0.26–2.53, (II)0.95–8.09 (Chen et al., 2017)
Soils 2.1 (Chen et al., 2013)
Soil 1.9–4.36 (Chen et al., 2011)
Soils 5.8 (Chen et al., 2013)
their associated microplastics have caused visible and tangible negative
impacts on the ecological system. For example, plastic bag waste and
mulching film residue pose a risk to the safety of farm products (Shi
et al., 2019; Wang et al., 2018a, 2018b; Yan et al., 2014); and plastic in-
gestion, including (i) primary ingestion (animals eat plastics directly),
(ii) secondary ingestion (animals eat prey that have ingested plastics),
and (iii) incidental ingestion (Markic et al., 2018), can cause serious im-
pacts on animals, particularly marine wildlife (Cadée, 2002; Cartraud
et al., 2019; Hardesty et al., 2015; Pham et al., 2017; Rizzi et al., 2019).
3.2.1. Plant growth
Plastic mulching film residue in soil may lead to reduced nutrient
uptake in plants, and has been observed to cause a reduction in cotton
yields, by 9.6%–13.1% (film concentration of 0–450 kg/hm2) (Wang
et al., 2018). It is well recognized that phthalates released in soil accu-
mulate in plants, and wheat yields have decreased by 22.1% when film
residues are above 360 kg/hm2 (Xie et al., 2007a, 2007b). In another ex-
ample, 9 species of vegetables were planted in 81 types of greenhouses,
using plastic films of different thicknesses, different ages of green-
houses, and different greenhouse heights. The research results indicated
that DEHP was taken up by vegetables at concentrations of
10.14–36.16 mg/kg. Higher concentrations of DEHP were found in veg-
etables planted in newer greenhouses, with higher DEHP contents asso-
ciated with thicker films and lower greenhouse heights (Fu and Du,
2011). Also, higher PAE concentrations have been reported in cereal
crops (wheat and rice) in China as well as the U.S. (Lu et al., 2016;
Schecter et al., 2013). Shi et al. (2019) found that plastic mulching
film residue in soil caused the concentrations of PAEs to significantly in-
crease in soil (1.8–3.5 mg/kg) resulting in the detection of PAEs in the
range of 4.1–12.6 mg/kg in wheat grains.
3.2.2. Invertebrate animals in soil
Animals living in the soil environment have also been investigated
for impacts from plastic residues of mulching film and its degradation
compounds, MPs. Earthworms (Lumbricus terrestris) convey plastic
pieces into their burrows (Zhang et al., 2018a, 2018b, 2018c, 2018d).
It has also been demonstrated that they ingest polyethylene MPs with
sizes <2.8 mm when these are mixed with poplar leaves (Lwanga
et al., 2016, 2017). Earthworms and woodlice have also been reported
to ingest biodegradable plastic pieces (Hodson et al., 2017; Wood and
Zimmer, 2014). Microarthropods such as Folsomia candida and
Proisotoma minuta are reported to be able to move and distribute
microplastic particles in soil and also contribute to the accumulation
of microplastics in the soil food web (Maaß et al., 2017). Collembola
or mites are proven to scrape or chew off plastic pieces which break
the plastic sheets or pieces into microplastics, and also some burrowing
mammals such as gophers and moles could ruminate and transport
plastic pieces and microplastics into the soil.
10 Y. Chen et al. / Science of the Total Environment 752 (2021) 141772
3.2.3. Birds
Studies on the risk of plastic to sea birds date back to the 1960s. En-
tanglement in plastic debris and ingestion of plastic is causing seabird
deaths, with SUPs the most frequent culprit (Table 4) (Avery-Gomm
et al., 2018; Cartraud et al., 2019; Drever et al., 2018; Mallory, 2008;
Saturno et al., 2020; Digka et al., 2020; Ferreira de Barros et al., 2020;
Ibañez et al., 2020) Studies have found that >45% of 367 species of ma-
rine birds have ingested plastics. Moser and Lee (1992) study results
showed that 55% of the birds had ingested plastics. Due to their feeding
modes and diets, procellariiform birds most frequency ingest plastic
particles or fragments.
The northern fulmar (Fulmarus glacialis) was one of first sea birds to
be found to ingest plastic debris. The observed abundance of plastic par-
ticles in the stomachs of North Sea fulmars increased between 1 and 2
particles/per bird in the 1970s to >10 particles/per bird in the 1980s
(van Franeker and Law, 2015). Plastic ingestion by fulmars and white-
chinned petrels have displayed the same characteristics (Mallory,
2008). In addition, nine species of sea birds in the western Indian
Ocean have been sampled. Petrels and shearwaters displayed frequent
plastic ingestion, with plastic fibers being most commonly found
(Cartraud et al., 2019). This ingestion could be explained by the ten-
dency of seabirds to confuse plastic fibers for potential prey (Shaw
and Day, 1994).
In the above context, less attention has been focused on the effect of
plastics on those birds inhabiting freshwater sources (English et al.,
2015; Faure et al., 2015). Nine dead birds (one grey heron, three mute
swans and five mallards) found in habitat close to Lake Geneva were in-
vestigated. Plastic foams and films were found in eight of the birds
(1.7–6.9 particles, 4.8–13.7 mg per bird) (Faure et al., 2015). English
et al. (2015) examined 87 American black ducks, 13 mallards and 48
common eiders of different ages and sexes for plastic ingestion. Plastic
thread, sheets, and fragments were found in all three species, of which
plastic fragments occurred most frequently. Mallards displayed a signif-
icantly higher occurrence (46.1%) than the other two species (black
ducks, 8.9%; common eiders, 2.1%).
3.2.4. Marine species
Marine species are the most vulnerable ones affected by SUP wastes
entering into the oceans. In the last several decades, many publications
reported that in marine wildlife, plastic ingestion levels have increased
(Provencher et al., 2017). Plastic materials, particularly plastic bags, are
frequently reported as ingested by dolphins as well as turtles who may
mistake them for food (Cartraud et al., 2019; Drever et al., 2018; Pham
et al., 2017; Rizzi et al., 2019). A plastic ingestion study of five turtle spe-
cies (loggerhead, green, olive ridley, hawksbill and leatherback) in
southern Brazil found that the occurrence of plastics in these turtles
ranged from 0% to 57%, with green turtles presenting the highest abun-
dance, and PE plastic packaging occurring most frequently (Rizzi et al.,
2019).
Plastic ingestion through marine fish has been evaluated in many
studies (Anastasopoulou et al., 2013; Neves et al., 2015; Rummel et al.,
2016; Markic et al., 2018; Romeo et al., 2015) in recent years because
many species are popular foods for humans. From across four South Pa-
cific locations, the plastic ingestion characteristics of 932 specimens of
34 species of commercial fish were examined. Plastic debris was re-
ported in 33 species, with broken pieces of hard plastic having the
highest occurrence (49%) in benthic and pelagic predators, followed
by plastic fibers (33%) commonly ingested by grazers and omnivores.
Plastic film had the lowest occurrence (18%) (Markic et al., 2018).
A study of Franciscana dolphins accidently caught by Argentinian
fishermen found that 28% had plastic debris in their stomachs. Ingestion
of plastic occurs at a higher frequency in young dolphins than in adults.
Plastic bags were found in >64% of the dolphins examined (Denuncio
et al., 2011). Plastic ingestion by marine invertebrates, such as lobsters,
mussels and lugworms, has been reported to be generally low (Van
Cauwenberghe et al., 2015). Plastic has been encountered in marine
invertebrates in South Africa, with plastic fibers and MPs being the
most common, and plastic bags and ropes occurring only occasionally,
in close proximity to urban areas (Ryan et al., 2016).
4. Some possible interventions to take, to reduce SUPs
To combat the SUP waste pollution problem and ease its impact on
the environment and the ecology, many kinds of interventional actions
have been taken, at the international, national and local levels. As the
leading global environmental authority, UNEP has launched several le-
gally binding resolutions under the MEAs since 2014. Resolutions on
single-use plastic, marine plastic litter, MPs, and the elimination of plas-
tic waste pollution have been issued by the United Nations Environment
Assembly (UNEA) meetings (UNEP, 2019b; Wang et al., 2018a, 2018b),
and the Conference of the Parties to the Basel Convention on the Control
of Transboundary Movements of Hazardous Wastes and Their Disposal
(the Basel Convention) (UNEP, 2019c) are legally binding ones that all
the parties to the MEAs have obligations to fulfill. Accordingly, 127
countries (Fig. 5) have adopted legislation to regulate SUP bags; 91
countries have legislation banning certain plastic products, materials
or production levels; 27 countries have instituted taxes on the produc-
tion of SUP bags; 30 countries charge consumers fees for SUP bags; 63
countries have mandates for producer responsibility (EPR) on SUPs, in-
cluding deposit-refunds, product takeback and recycling targets; and 8
countries have established bans of microbeads through national laws
or regulations.
In the U.S., there are no federal packaging mandates at the national
level, although some of the states and local governments have taken ac-
tion. For instance, SUP bags (California, 2016; Gordon, 2016) and plastic
straws (California, 2018) are banned in many cities in California. India
has committed to phasing out SUPs by 2022 (Michael, 2018), and
other countries in Latin America, the Caribbean, the Asian Pacific, and
Africa are considering options for curbing the use of plastics. Japan
(Hodge, 2019) and the UN Environment Council have announced that
they will put an effort together in order to boost information as well
as know-how for establishing effective measures in response to marine
plastic litter in India and in southeast Asia. Jakarta has officially imple-
mented a ban on SUP bags, which requests shopping centers and super-
markets to provide environmentally friendly shopping bags; the ban
took effect on July 1, 2020. Several bans or strategies on SUP products is-
sued in typical countries from 2016 to date are listed in Table S1. In a
similar context, the Chinese Government introduced a ban on bags thin-
ner than 25 μm in 2008, and a levy on thicker bags; the main purpose
was to reduce the production and consumption of plastic bags in the
country. It was reported by the National Development and Reform Com-
mission in 2013 that in five years, the number of plastic bags used by su-
permarkets and shopping malls was reduced by two-thirds, with the
use of 67 billion bags (1 Mt) avoided. Subsequently, a series of regula-
tions have been issued at both national and local levels (Table S2). A
ban on the import of certain wastes was enacted by China in 2017
(Brooks et al., 2018). Advanced countries have taken actions cutting
waste generation through sustainable practices, and Asian countries
such as Malaysia, Vietnam, and Thailand successively issued bans on
plastic waste imports in 2018. And what's more, both the amended
“Law on the Prevention and Control of Environmental Pollution Caused
by Solid Wastes” and the newly released “Guidelines for Further
Strengthening the Control of Plastic Pollution” highlight SUP waste pol-
lution control (MEE, 2020a, 2020b).
Besides the legislative interventions, there have been some
non-legislative bottom-up intervention actions initiated at the individ-
ual citizen level and midlevel efforts from NGOs or private sectors. Sev-
eral transnational enterprises initiated actions to reduce or end their use
of SUP products. American Airlines, Alaska Airlines, and the Rev. Group
of Germany took action to ban plastic straws in 2018. In the same year,
Ikea, Starbucks and the Lidl supermarket chain committed to phasing
out SUP products within two years. It is estimated that the consumption
 Y. Chen et al. / Science of the Total Environment 752 (2021) 141772 11

Table 4
SUP ingestion occurs in different species of animals.

Plastic type Wildlife species Location Occurrence frequency Reference

Packaging Chelonia mydas Southwestern Atlantic 82% (Rizzi et al., 2019)

Bags Chelonia mydas Southwestern Atlantic 66.7% (Rizzi et al., 2019)
User plastics L oggerheads (Caretta caretta) North Atlantic 67.6% (Pham et al., 2017)
Plastic sheets Loggerheads (Caretta caretta) North Atlantic 31.1%; (Pham et al., 2017)
User plastics Red Phalaropes North coast of British Columbia, Canada 82.9% (Drever et al., 2018)
Films Tropical shearwaters Western Indian Ocean 79% (Cartraud et al., 2019)
Plastic debris Large pelagic fish (Xiphias gladius, Mediterranean Sea 12.5% (Romeo et al., 2015)
Thunnus thynnus and Thunnus alalunga) 32.4%
12.9%
Plastic Crab Pachygrapsus transversus Ponta Verde Beach, Maceió, Alagoas, 47.4% (Ferreira de Barros et al., 2020)
Northeastern Brazil
Plastic debris Brown Skuas Esperanza/Hope Bay, Antarctic Peninsula 6.33% (incubation stage) (Ibañez et al., 2020)
12.3% (parental care stage))
Plastic Atlantic cod (Gadus morhua) Fogo Island, Newfoundland and Labrador 1.4% (Saturno et al., 2020)
Plastic debris Loggerhead sea turtles Greek coastline 72% (Digka et al., 2020)

of 10 billion plastic straws will be avoided globally each year as a result
of a ban by Starbucks alone. Specific actions are listed in Table S3.
Few studies have evaluated policy and legislative interventions to
reduce plastic pollution, particularly SUP pollution. Although bans or
levies of SUP bags have been encouraged (Xanthos and Walker,
2017), a more effective and longer-lasting reduction in SUP con-
sumption will come about when all of these kinds of interventions
—both legislative interventions and non-legislative interventions—
occur simultaneously and in tandem with each other (Schnurr
et al., 2018). However, the effectiveness of legislative interventions
should continue to be monitored to help shape future policy frames,
to reduce SUP pollution.
5. Conclusions and implications
Increasing consumption demands for SUP products boost the tre-
mendous growth of SUP products and their waste generation; it has
doubled in the most recent two decades. Of SUP products, packaging
dominates, with 40% of the total amount. The collection rate of SUP
wastes is extremely low in both developed countries and less developed
countries, where it is no higher than 30%. Landfilling, energy recovery
and recycling are the most popular ways to dispose of SUP wastes; how-
ever, chemical recycling with thermal cracking, to transform the waste
into oil, and carbonization, are the other two promising ways of
recycling the wastes, under the implementation of a circular economy.
By reducing consumption of SUP with a focus on maximizing the use
of reusable SUP carrier bags in every country, and thereafter the usage
of some substitute, is one of the most effective measures to reduce
SUP wastes.
Mismanaged SUP and its waste cause contamination of soil and
water with an associated negative impact on farmland productivity
and wildlife, as has been widely reported. Land-based discarded SUP
waste is the main source for both soil pollution and river/lake and ulti-
mately ocean pollution. Plastic accumulation in the soil will decrease

Fig. 5. Actions to minimize single-use plastics.

(Source: Excell et al., 2018).
12 Y. Chen et al. / Science of the Total Environment 752 (2021) 141772
water use efficiency, weaken biomass accumulation, hinder nutrient
uptake, etc. SUP wastes in the oceans, generated from either marine ac-
tivities or runoff from land, have caused serious pollution to the Atlantic
and Pacific zones. Potential risks on biodiversity destruction of wildlife
for plastic ingestion have been proved, but future research work must
also take into account measures of actual risk and the probability of ex-
posure to that risk. Most of all, it is essential to lessen the effect of SUP
pollution on beaches, in several countries.
Single-solution strategies cannot stop plastic pollution. Actions must
be focused on land through reducing the use of SUPs, changing con-
sumer behavior, improving SUP waste collection and recycling. It is im-
perative that awareness-raising activities go hand in hand with
government incentive mechanisms. As the largest country to produce
and use plastic products, China plays a key role in the reduction and
elimination of SUP products. Since a ban on the import of certain wastes
was enacted by China in 2017 (Brooks et al., 2018), advanced countries
have taken actions cutting waste generation through sustainable prac-
tices, and Asian countries such as Malaysia, Vietnam, and Thailand suc-
cessively issued bans on plastic waste imports in 2018. And China, with
its one-year demonstration of the “Zero Waste City” concept,
established advanced models for SUP minimization and reduction in
the pilot coastal cities.
Declaration of competing interest
We would like to confirm through this file that there is no conflict of
interest.
Acknowledgements
This work supported by the National Key Research and Development
Program of China (Grant No. 2018YFC1801300) and the Open Research
Fund Program of the Key Laboratory of Cleaner Production and Inte-
grated Resource Utilization of China National Light Industry (NO. CP-
2019-ZD2). The authors would like to acknowledge Dr. David O'Connor
from Tsinghua University and Mr. Craig Boljkovac from Basel Conven-
tion Regional Centre for Asia and the Pacific, Beijing, China, for valuable
comments and suggestions.
Appendix A. Supplementary data
Supplementary data to this article can be found online at https://doi.
org/10.1016/j.scitotenv.2020.141772.
References
Adam, I., Walker, T.R., Bezerra, J.C., Clayton, A., 2020. Policies to reduce single-use plastic
marine pollution in West Africa. Mar. Policy 116, 103928.
Advisors, D., Wit, D.W., Hamilton, A., Scheer, R., Stakes, T., Allan, S., 2019. Solving plastic
pollution through accountability. World Wide Fund For Nature report https://
www.worldwildlife.org/publications/solving-plastic-pollution-through-accountabil-
ity. (Accessed 1 August 2020).
AI-Saleh, I., Shinwari, N., Alsabbaheen, A., 2011. Phthalates residues in plastic bottled wa-
ters. J. Toxicol. Sci. 36 (4), 469–478.
Anastasopoulou, A., Mytilineou, C., Smith, C.J., Papadopoulou, K.N., 2013. Plastic debris
ingested by deep-water fish of the Ionian Sea (Eastern Mediterranean). Deep-Sea Re-
search I 74, 11–13.
Andreoni, V., Saveyn, H.G., Eder, P., 2015. Polyethylene recycling: waste policy scenario
analysis for the EU-27. J. Environ. Manag. 158, 103–110.
Auken, M., 2015. Plastic Bags: New Rules to Dramatically Reduce Use of Environment-
Damaging Bags Get all-clear. The Greens/EFA Group in the European Parliament
https://www.greens-efa.eu/en/article/press/plastic-bags/.
Avery-Gomm, S., Borrelle, S.B., Provencher, J.F., 2018. Linking plastic ingestion research
with marine wildlife conservation. Sci. Total Environ. 637-638, 1492–1495.
Bai, M.Y., Zhu, L.X., An, L.H., Peng, G.Y., Li, D.J., 2018. Estimation and prediction of plastic
waste annual input into the sea from China. Acta Oceanl. Sin. 37 (11), 26–39.
Bhunia, K., Sablani, S.S., Tang, J.M., Rasco, B., 2013. Migration of chemical compounds from
packaging polymers during microwave, conventional heat treatment, and storage.
Compr. Rev. Food Sci. Food Saf. 12, 523–545.
Boucher, J., Faure, F., Pompini, O., Plummer, Z., Wieser, O., Felippe de Alencastro, L., 2019.
(Micro) plastic fluxes and stocks in Lake Geneva basin. TrAC Trend. Anal. Chem. 112,
66–74.
Breyer, S., Mekhitarian, L., Rimez, B., Haut, B., 2017. Production of an alternative fuel by
the co-pyrolysis of landfill recovered plastic wastes and used lubrication oils. Waste
Manag. 60, 363–374.
Briassoulis, D., Babou, E., Hiskakis, M., Scarascia, G., Picuno, P., Guarde, D., Dejean, C., 2013.
Review, mapping and analysis of the agricultural plastic waste generation and con-
solidation in Europe. Waste Manage. Res. 31 (12), 1262–1278.
Briassoulis, D., Babou, E., Hiskakis, M., Kyrikou, I., 2015. Analysis of long-term degradation
behaviour of polyethylene mulching films with pro-oxidants under real cultivation
and soil burial conditions. Environ. Sci. Pollut. R. 22 (4), 2584–2598.
Brooks, A.L., Wang, S.L., Jenna, R.J., 2018. The Chinese import ban and its impact on global
plastic waste trade. Sci. Adv. 4, 1–7.
Cadée, G.C., 2002. Seabirds and floating plastic debris. Mar. Pollut. Bull. 44, 1294–1295.
Cai, Q.Y., Xiao, P.Y., Chen, T., Lu, H., Zhao, H.M., Zeng, Q.Y., Li, Y.W., Li, H., Xiang, L., Mo, C.H.,
2015. Genotypic variation in the uptake, accumulation, and translocation of di-(2-
ethylhexyl) phthalate by twenty cultivars of rice (Oryza sativa L.). Ecotox. Environ.
Safe. 116, 50–58.
California, S.o, 2016. Division 30. Waste management. In: California, S.o (Ed.), Rule Num-
ber [40000-49620], Session Number [42283-42284].
California, S.o, 2018. Division 30. Waste management. In: California, S.o (Ed.), Chapter 5.2.
Single-use Plastic Straws. Rule Number [40000–49620], Session Number [42270-
42271].
Canopoli, L., Coulon, F., Wagland, T.S., 2020. Degradation of excavated polyethylene and
polypropylene waste from landfill. Sci. Total Environ. 689, 134125.
Cartraud, A.E., Le Corre, M., Turquet, J., Tourmetz, J., 2019. Plastic ingestion in seabirds of
the western Indian Ocean. Mar. Pollut. Bull. 140, 308–314.
Chen, Y.S., Luo, Y.M., Zhang, H.B., Song, J., 2011. Preliminary study on PAEs pollution of
greenhouse soil. Acta Pedol. Sin. 48, 516–522 (in Chinese).
Chen, Y.S., Wu, C.F., Zhang, H.B., Lin, Q.Y., Hong, Y.W., Luo, Y.M., 2013. Empirical estima-
tion of pollution load and contamination levels of phthalate esters in agricultural
soils from plastic film mulching in China. Environ. Earth Sci. 70 (1), 239–247.
Chen, Y.Q., Hu, Z.C., Wu, F., Gu, F.W., Xu, H.B., You, Z.Y., Shi, L.L., 2016. An overview about
application of plastic film mulching and anti-pollution. Xinjiang Agr. Mechan. 5, 5–8.
Chen, N., Shuai, W.J., Hao, X.M., Zhang, H.C., Zhou, D.M., Gao, J., 2017. Contamination of
phthalate esters in vegetable agriculture and human cumulative risk assessment.
Pedosphere 27 (3), 439–451.
Chen, W.D., Chi, C.C., Zhou, C., Xia, M., Ronda, C., Shen, X.Y., 2018. Analysis of the influenc-
ing factors of PAEs volatilization from typical plastic products. J. Environ. Sci. 66,
61–70 (China)2018.
Chen, S.L., Liu, Z., Jiang, S.H., Hou, H.Q., 2020. Carbonization: a feasible route for reutiliza-
tion of plastic wastes. Sci. Total Environ. 710, 136250.
Citi, 2018. Rethinking single-use plastics. https://www.citibank.com/commercialbank/in-
sights/assets/docs/2018/rethinking-single-use-plastics.pdf.
Consoli, P., Scotti, G., Romeo, T., Fossi, M.C., Esposito, V., D’Alessandro, M., Battaglia, P.,
Galgani, F., Figurella, F., Hannah Pragnell-Raasch, H., Andaloro, F., 2020. Characteriza-
tion of seafloor litter on Mediterranean shallow coastal waters: dive against Debris®,
a citizen science monitoring approach. Mar. Pollut. Bull. 150, 110763.
Cózar, A., Martí, E., Duarte, M.C., García-de-Lomas, J., Sebille, v.E., Ballatore, J.T., Eguíluz,
M.V., González-Gordillo, I.J., Pedrotti, L.M., Echevarría, F., Troublè, R., Irigoien, X.,
2017. The Arctic Ocean as a dead end for floating plastics in the North Atlantic branch
of the thermohaline circulation. Sci. Adv. 3, 1–8.
CPCB, 2018. Annual Report for the Year 2017–18 on Implementation of Plastic Waste
Management Rules. Ministry of Environment, Forest and Climate Change, Govt. of
India.
CPPIA, 2016–2020. Annual report of analysis on economic operation of plastics processing
industry. Chinese. http://www.cppia.com.cn/.
Denuncio, P., Bastida, R., Dassis, M., Giardino, G., Gerpe, M., Rodriguez, D., 2011. Plastic in-
gestion in Franciscana dolphins, Pontoporia blainvillei (Gervais and d'Orbigny, 1844),
from Argentina. Mar. Pollut. Bull. 62 (8), 1836–1841.
Digka, N., Bray, L., Tsangaris, C., Andreanidou, K., Kasimati, E., Kofidou, E., Komnenou, A.,
Kaberi, H., 2020. Evidence of ingested plastics in stranded loggerhead sea turtles
along the Greek coastline, East Mediterranean Sea. Environ. Pollut. 263, 114596.
Dong, Q., Dang, T., Guo, S., Hao, M., 2019. Effects of mulching measures on soil moisture
and N leaching potential in a spring maize planting system in the southern Loess Pla-
teau. Agr. Water Manage. 213, 803–808.
Drever, M.C., Provencher, J.F., O'Hara, P.D., Wilson, L., Bowes, V., Bergman, C.M., 2018. Are
ocean conditions and plastic debris resulting in a 'double whammy' for marine birds?
Mar. Pollut. Bull. 133, 684–692.
Elias, S.A., 2018. Plastics in the ocean. Encyclopedia of the Anthropocene 1, 133–149.
English, M.D., Robertson, G.J., Avery-Gomm, S., Pirie-Hay, D., Roul, S., Ryan, P.C., Wilhelm,
S.I., Mallory, M.L., 2015. Plastic and metal ingestion in three species of coastal water-
fowl wintering in Atlantic Canada. Mar. Pollut. Bull. 98 (1–2), 349–353.
Eriksen, M., Mason, S., Wilson, S., Box, C., Zellers, A., Edwards, W., Farley, H., Amato, S.,
2013a. Microplastic pollution in the surface waters of the Laurentian Great Lakes.
Mar. Pollut. Bull. 77 (1–2), 177–182.
Eriksen, M., Maximenko, N., Thiel, M., Cummins, A., Lattin, G., Wilson, S., Hafner, J., Zellers,
A., Rifman, S., 2013b. Plastic pollution in the South Pacific subtropical gyre. Mar.
Pollut. Bull. 68 (1–2), 71–76.
EU, 2011. In: Union, C.E (Ed.), Commission Regulation (EU) No 10/2011: On Plastic Mate-
rials and Articles Intended to Come Into Contact With Food (Ammended on January
31, 2019) https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/?uri=CELEX:
32019R0037.
Excell, C., Viña, C.S.-L., Worker, J., Moses, E., 2018. Legal Limits on Single-Use Plastics and
Microplastics: A Global Review of National Laws and Regulations. UN Environment,
pp. 1–118.
 Y. Chen et al. / Science of the Total Environment 752 (2021) 141772
Faure, F., Demars, C., Wieser, O., Kunz, M., de Alencastro, L.F., 2015. Plastic pollution in
Swiss surface waters: nature and concentrations, interaction with pollutants. Envi-
ron. Chem. 12 (5).
Ferreira de Barros, M.S., dos Santos Calado, T.C., Leitão Câmara de Araújo, M. de Sa, 2020.
Plastic ingestion lead to reduced body condition and modified diet patterns in the
rocky shore crab Pachygrapsus transversus (Gibbes, 1850) (Brachyura: Grapsidae).
Mar. Pollut. Bull. 156, 111249.
FICCI, 2017. Knowledge Papaer on Plastic Industry for Infrastructure, in 3rd National Con-
ference on Sustainable Infrastructure with Plastics. Federation of Indian Chambers of
Commerce and Industry.
van Franeker, J.A., Law, K.L., 2015. Seabirds, gyres and global trends in plastic pollution.
Environ. Pollut. 203, 89–96.
Fu, X., Du, Q., 2011. Uptake of di-(2-ethylhexyl) phthalate of vegetables from plastic film
greenhouses. J. Agric. Food Chem. 59 (21), 585–588.
Geyer, R., Jambeck, R.J., Law, L.K., 2017. Production, use, and fate of all plastics ever made.
Sci. Adv. 3, 1–5.
Giacovelli, C., Zamparo, A., Wehrli, A., Alverson, K., 2018. In: Cannon, T. (Ed.), Single-use
Plastic: A Roadmap for Sustainability. UNEP https://www.unenvironment.org/re-
sources/report/single-use-plastics-roadmap-sustainability.
Gimeno, P., Thomas, S., Bousquet, C., Maggio, A.F., Civade, C., Brenier, C., Bonnet, P.A., 2014.
Identification and quantification of 14 phthalates and 5 non-phthalate plasticizers in
PVC medical devices by GC–MS. J. Chromatogr. B 949-950, 99–108.
Gordon, 2016. California Beverage Container Recycling and Litter Reduction Act. Califor-
nia, State of California (Ed.). Title number [14500-14599], Rule Number [2530].
Hardesty, B.D., Good, T.P., Wilcox, C., 2015. Novel methods, new results and science-based
solutions to tackle marine debris impacts on wildlife. Ocean Coast. Manage. 115, 4–9.
Hasson, R., Leiman, A.M.V., 2007. The economics of plastic bag legislation in South Africa.
S. Afr. J. Econ. 75 (1), 66–83.
He, H., Hu, G.-j., Sun, C., Chen, S.-l., Yang, M.-n., Li, J., Zhao, Y., Wang, H., 2011a. Trace anal-
ysis of persistent toxic substances in the main stream of Jiangsu section of the Yang-
tze River, China. Environ. Sci. Pollut. R. 18 (4), 638–648.
He, H., Hu, G.J., Sun, C., Chen, S.L., Yang, M.N., Li, J., Zhao, Y., Wang, H., 2011b. Trace analysis
of persistent toxic substances in the main stream of Jiangsu section of the Yangtze
River, China. Environ. Sci. Pollut. R. 18 (4), 638–648.
He, W., Qin, N., Kong, X., Liu, W., He, Q., Ouyang, H., Yang, C., Jiang, Y., Wang, Q., Yang, B.,
Xu, F., 2013. Spatio-temporal distributions and the ecological and health risks of
phthalate esters (PAEs) in the surface water of a large, shallow Chinese lake. Sci.
Total Environ. 461-462, 672–680.
He, J., Peng, T., Xie, J., Hu, X., Chang, Q., Chen, H., Pan, C., Li, C., 2016. Determination of 16
perfluorinated alkyl substances in food packaging materials by solid phase
extraction-liquid chromatography-tandem mass spectrometry. Chin. J. Chromatogr.
34 (7), 708–714.
Hodge, A., 2019. Japan and UN Environment announce new cooperation to boost knowl-
edge on marine litter in Southeast Asia and India. https://www.cleanseas.org/impact/
japan-and-un-environment-announce-new-cooperation-boost-knowledge-marine-
litter-southeast (Accessed March 30 2019).
Hodson, M.E., Duffus-Hodson, C.A., Clark, A., Prendergast-Miller, M.T., Thorpe, K.L., 2017.
Plastic bag derived-microplastics as a vector for metal exposure in terrestrial inverte-
brates. Environ. Sci. Technol. 51 (8), 4714–4721.
Huo, J., Yue, Q.L., Li, Z., Zhang, L.S., Chen, J.Y., 2017. Analysis of 16 phthalates compounds in
disposable plastic tableware sold on Chengdu market. Chinese J. Food Hyg. 29 (4),
484.
Ibañez, A.E., Morales, L.M., Torres, D.S., Borghello, P., Haidr, N.S., Montalti, D., 2020. Plastic
ingestion risk is related to the anthropogenic activity and breeding stage in an Ant-
arctic top predator seabird species. Mar. Pollut. Bull. 157, 111351.
Inagaki, M., Park, K.C., Endo, M., 2010. Carbonization under pressure. New Carbon Mater
25, 409–420.
Ivleva, N.P., Wiesheu, A.C., Niessner, R., 2017. Microplastic in aquatic ecosystems. Angew.
Chem.Int. Edit. 56 (7), 1720–1739.
Janajreh, I., Adeyemi, I., Elagroudy, S., 2020. Gasification feasibility of polyethylene, poly-
propylene, polystyrene waste and their mixture: experimental studies and modeling.
Sustain. Energy Technol. Assess. 39, 13.
Jeong, Y.S., Park, K.B., Kim, J.S., 2020. Hydrogen production from steam gasification of
polyethylene using a two-stage gasifier and active carbon. Appl. Energy 262, 10.
Kankanige, D., Babel, S., 2020. Smaller-sized micro-plastics (MPs) contamination in
single-use PET bottled water in Thailand. Sci. Total Environ. 717, 137232.
Karthik, R., Robin, R.S., Purvaja, R., Ganguly, D., Anandavelu, I., Raghuraman, R., Hariharan,
G., Ramakrishna, A., Ramesh, R., 2018. Microplastics along the beaches of southeast
coast of India. Sci. Total Environ. 645, 1388–1399.
Kasar, P., Ahmaruzzaman, M., 2018. Catalytic co-cracking of waste polypropylene and re-
sidual fuel oil. Pet. Sci. Technol. 36 (18), 1455–1462.
Ksenia, J.G., Thomas, B., Bethanie, C.A., Birgit, G., Pedro, A.I., Anna, L., Heather, A.L., Maricel,
M., Daniel, S., Leonardo, T., Warhurst, A.M., Munck, J., 2019. Overview of known plas-
tic packaging-associated chemicals and their hazards. Sci. Total Environ. 651,
3253–3268.
Law, K.L., Morét-Ferguson, S., Maximenko, N.A., Proskurowski, G., Peacock, E.E., Hafner, J.,
Reddy, C.M., 2010. Plastic accumulation in the North Atlantic Subtropical Gyre. Sci-
ence 329, 1185–1188.
Li, Z., Zhao, F., 2017. An analytical hierarchy process-based study on the factors affecting
legislation on plastic bags in the USA. Waste Manag. Res. 35 (8), 795–809.
Li, K.K., Ma, D., Wu, J., 2016a. Distribution of phthalate esters in agricultural soil with plas-
tic film mulching in Shandong Peninsula, East China. Chemosphere 164, 314–321.
Li, W.C., Tse, H.F., Fok, L., 2016b. Plastic waste in the marine environment: a review of
sources, occurrence and effects. Sci. Total Environ. 566-567, 333–349.
13
Li, R., Liang, J., Duan, H., Gong, Z., 2017. Spatial distribution and seasonal variation of
phthalate esters in the Jiulong River estuary, Southeast China. Mar. Pollut. Bull. 122
(1–2), 38–46.
Li, Y., Yan, H.Q., Xiaoqing Li, X.Q., Ge, J., Cheng, J.J., Yu, X.Y., 2020. Presence, distribution
and risk assessment of phthalic acid esters (PAEs) in suburban plastic film pepper-
growing greenhouses with different service life. Ecotoxicol. Environ. Saf. 196, 110551.
Lin, L., Dong, L., Meng, X., Li, Q., Huang, Z., Li, C., Li, R., Yang, W., Crittenden, J., 2018. Dis-
tribution and sources of polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons and phthalic acid esters
in water and surface sediment from the Three Gorges Reservoir. J. Environ. Sci.-
China 69, 271–280.
Liu, H., Cui, K., Zeng, F., Chen, L., Cheng, Y., Li, H., Li, S., Zhou, X., Zhu, F., Ouyang, G., Luan, T.,
Zeng, Z., 2014. Occurrence and distribution of phthalate esters in riverine sediments
from the Pearl River Delta region, South China. Mar. Pollut. Bull. 83 (1), 358–365.
Lu, L., Chen, X., Zhao, H., Mo, C., Li, H., Li, Y., Cai, Q., 2016. Distribution of phthalic acid es-
ters(PAEs) in paddy soil and grains of rice in the Pearl River Delta region and the
health risk assessment. J. Agro-Environ. Sci. 35 (7), 1242–1248.
Lü, H.X., Mo, C.H., Zhao, H.M., Xiang, L., Katsoyiannis, A., Li, Y.W., Cai, Q.Y., Wong, M.H.,
2018. Soil contamination and sources of phthalates and its health risk in China: a re-
view. Environ. Res. 164, 417–429.
Lwanga, H.E., Gertsen, H., Gooren, H., Peters, P., Salanki, T., van der Ploeg, M., Besseling, E.,
Koelmans, A.A., Geissen, V., 2016. Microplastics in the terrestrial ecosystem: implica-
tions for Lumbricus terrestris (Oligochaeta, Lumbricidae). Environ. Sci. Technol. 50
(5), 2685–2691.
Lwanga, H.E., Gertsen, H., Gooren, H., Peters, P., Salanki, T., van der Ploeg, M., Besseling, E.,
Koelmans, A.A., Geissen, V., 2017. Incorporation of microplastics from litter into bur-
rows of Lumbricus terrestris. Environ. Pollut. 220 (Pt A), 523–531.
Maaß, S., Daphi, D., Lehmann, A., Rillig, M.C., 2017. Transport of microplastics by two col-
lembolan species. Environ. Pollut. 225, 456–459.
Mallory, M.L., 2008. Marine plastic debris in northern fulmars from the Canadian high
Arctic. Mar. Pollut. Bull. 56 (8), 1501–1504.
Marcia, A., 2016. Confronting plastic pollution one bag at a time. https://blog.epa.gov/
2016/11/01/confronting-plastic-pollution-one-bag-at-a-time/.
Markic, A., Niemand, C., Bridson, J.H., Mazouni-Gaertner, N., Gaertner, J.C., Eriksen, M.,
Bowen, M., 2018. Double trouble in the South Pacific subtropical gyre: increased plas-
tic ingestion by fish in the oceanic accumulation zone. Mar. Pollut. Bull. 136, 547–564.
McCormick, A.R., Hoellein, T.J., London, M.G., Hittie, J., Scott, J.W., Kelly, J.J., 2016.
Microplastic in surface waters of urban rivers: concentration, sources, and associated
bacterial assemblages. Ecosphere 7 (11).
MEE, 2020. Law on the prevention and control of environment pollution caused by solid
wastes. (in Chinese). http://www.mee.gov.cn/ywgz/fgbz/fl/202004/t20200430_
777580.shtml.
MEE (Ministry of Ecology and Environment of China), 2020. Rules for plastic products aim
to curb urban pollution. http://english.mee.gov.cn/News_service/media_news/
202001/t20200120_760542.shtml (accessed on May 10, 2020).
Michael, B., 2018. India: leading the global charge to beat plastic pollution on World En-
vironment Day. https://www.unenvironment.org/people/erik-solheim/advocacy/
india-leading-global-charge-beat-plastic-pollution-world-environment.
Mo, C.H., Cai, Q.Y., Tang, S.R., Zeng, Q.Y., Wu, Q.T., 2009. Polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons
and phthalic acid esters in vegetables from nine farms of the Pearl River Delta, South
China. Arch. Environ. Con. Tox. 56 (2), 181–189.
Moore, C.J., Moore, S.L., Leecasterà, M.K., Weisbergà, S.B., 2001. A comparison of plastic
and plankton in the North Pacific Central Gyre. Mar. Pollut. Bull. 42 (12), 1297–1300.
Moser, L.M., Lee, D.S., 1992. A fourteen-year survey of plastic ingestion by Western North
Atlantic seabirds. Colon. Waterbird. 15 (1), 83–94.
Mrkajić, V., Stanisavljevic, N., Wang, X., Tomas, L., Haro, P., 2018. Efficiency of packaging
waste management in a European Union candidate country. Resour. Conserv. Recy.
136, 130–141.
Neves, D., Sobral, P., Ferreira, L.J., Pereira, T., 2015. Ingestion of microplastics by commer-
cial fish off the Portuguese coast. Mar. Pollut. Bull. 101, 119–126.
O’Brien, J., Thondhlana, G., 2019. Plastic bag use in South Africa: perceptions, practices and
potential intervention strategies. Waste Manag. 84, 320–328.
Padgelwar, S., Nandan, A., Mishra, A.K., 2019. Plastic Waste Management and Current Sce-
nario in India: A Review. https://doi.org/10.1080/03067319.2019.1686496.
Paluselli, A., Fauvelle, V., Schmidt, N., Galgani, F., Net, S., Sempere, R., 2018. Distribution of
phthalates in Marseille Bay (NW Mediterranean Sea). Sci. Total Environ. 621,
578–587.
Paluselli, A., Fauvelle, V., Galgani, F., Sempere, R., 2019. Phthalate release from plastic frag-
ments and degradation in seawater. Environ. Sci. Technol. 53 (1), 166–175.
Park, C.J., Barakat, R., Ulanov, A., Li, Z., Lin, P.C., Chiu, K., Zhou, S., Perez, P., Lee, J., Flaws, J.,
Ko, C.M.J., 2019. Sanitary pads and diapers contain higher phthalate contents than
those in common commercial plastic products. Reprod. Toxicol. 84, 114–121.
Pham, C.K., Rodriguez, Y., Dauphin, A., Carrico, R., Frias, J., Vandeperre, F., Otero, V., Santos,
M.R., Martins, H.R., Bolten, A.B., Bjorndal, K.A., 2017. Plastic ingestion in oceanic-stage
loggerhead sea turtles (Caretta caretta) off the North Atlantic subtropical gyre. Mar.
Pollut. Bull. 121 (1–2), 222–229.
Piccardo, M., Provenza, F., Grazioli, E., Cavallo, A., Terlizzi, A., Renzi, M., 2020. PET
microplastics toxicity on marine key species is influenced by pH, particle size and
food variations. Sci. Total Environ. 715, 136947.
PlasticOceans (Plastic Oceans International), 2020. The facts “more than 8 million tons of
plastic are dumped in our oceans every year”. https://plasticoceans.org/the-facts/.
Plastics Europe, 2015. Plastics – The Facts 2015: An Analysis of European Plastics Produc-
tion, Demand and Waste Data (Plastics Europe 2015).
PlasticsEurope, 2016. Plastics – The Facts 2016: An Analysis of European Plastics Produc-
tion, Demand and Waste Data. PlasticsEurope.
Plastics Europe, 2018. Plastics – The Facts 2018: An Analysis of European Plastics Produc-
tion, Demand and Waste Data (Plastics Europe 2018).
14 Y. Chen et al. / Science of the Total Environment 752 (2021) 141772
Plastics Europe, 2019. Plastics – The Facts 2019: An Analysis of European Plastics Produc-
tion, Demand and Waste Data (Plastics Europe 2018).
Provencher, J.F., Bond, A.L., Avery-Gomm, S., Borrelle, S.B., Rebolledo, E.L.B., Hammer, S.,
Kuhn, S., Lavers, J.L., Mallory, M.L., Trevail, A., van Franeker, J.A., 2017. Quantifying
ingested debris in marine megafauna: a review and recommendations for standard-
ization. Anal. Methods 9 (9), 1454–1469.
Rillig, M.C., 2012. Microplastic in terrestriale cosystems and the soil? Environ. Sci. Technol.
46 (12), 6453–6454.
Rizzi, M., Rodrigues, F.L., Medeiros, L., Ortega, I., Rodrigues, L., Monteiro, D.S., Kessler, F.,
Proietti, M.C., 2019. Ingestion of plastic marine litter by sea turtles in southern
Brazil: abundance, characteristics and potential selectivity. Mar. Pollut. Bull. 140,
536–548.
Romeo, T., Battaglia, P., Pedà, C., Consoli, P., Andaloro, F., Fossi, M.C., 2015. First evidence of
presence of plastic debris in stomach of large pelagic fish in the Mediterranean Sea.
Mar. Pollut. Bull. 95, 358–361.
Rummel, D.C., Löder, G.J.M., Fricke, F.N., Lang, T., Griebeler, E.M., Janke, M., Gerdts, G.,
2016. Plastic ingestion by pelagic and demersal fish from the North Sea and Baltic
Sea. Mar. Pollut. Bull. 102, 134–141.
Ryan, P.G., de Bruyn, P.J., Bester, M.N., 2016. Regional differences in plastic ingestion
among Southern Ocean fur seals and albatrosses. Mar. Pollut. Bull. 104 (1–2),
207–210.
Saturno, J., Liboiron, M., Ammendolia, J., Healey, N., Earles, E., Duman, N., Schoot, I., Morris,
T., Favaro, B., 2020. Occurrence of plastics ingested by Atlantic cod (Gadus morhua)
destined for human consumption (Fogo Island, Newfoundland and Labrador). Mar.
Pollut. Bull. 153, 110993.
Schecter, A., Lorber, M., Guo, Y., Wu, Q., Yun, S.H., Kannan, K., Hommel, M., Imran, N.,
Hynan, L.S., Cheng, D.L., Colacino J.A., L.S., B., 2013. Phthalate concentrations and die-
tary exposure from food purchased in New York State. Environ. Health Persp. (121),
473–479.
Schnurr, R.E.J., Alboiu, V., Chaudhary, M., Corbett, R.A., Quanz, M.E., Sankar, K., Srain, H.S.,
Thavarajah, V., Xanthos, D., Walker, T.R., 2018. Reducing marine pollution from
single-use plastics (SUPs): a review. Mar. Pollut. Bull. 137, 157–171.
Schöpel, B., Stamminger, R., 2019. A comprehensive literature study on microfibres from
washing machines. Tenside Surf. Det. 56 (2), 94–104.
Schymanski, D., Goldbeck, C., Humpf, H.U., Furst, P., 2018. Analysis of microplastics in
water by micro-Raman spectroscopy: release of plastic particles from different pack-
aging into mineral water. Water Res. 129, 154–162.
Shanghai Association of Food Contact Materials, 2018. General Technical Requirements
for Food Service (Internet) Take-out of Food Delivered Bag. T/31SAFCM005-2018
(in Chinese).
Shaw, G.D., Day, R.H., 1994. Colour- and form-dependent loss of plastic micro-debris from
the North Pacific Ocean. Mar. Pollut. Bull. 28 (1), 39–43.
Shi, M., Sun, Y., Wang, Z., He, G., Quan, H., He, H., 2019. Plastic film mulching increased the
accumulation and human health risks of phthalate esters in wheat grains. Environ.
Pollut. 250, 1–7.
Singh, P., Sharma, V.P., 2016. Integrated plastic waste management: environmental and
improved health approaches. Procedia Environ. Sci. 35, 692–700.
Sun, F.P., Song, Y.G., Zhu, X.S., Tang, S.N., Du, j., Qiu, Q.L., Liang, Q.M., Zhao, T., 2001. Estab-
lishment of acetic acid-induced rat gastric ulcer model and histological observation of
the antral mucosa during ulcer healing. J. First Military Med. University 21 (8),
578–581.
Sun, J., Huang, J., Zhang, A., Liu, W., Cheng, W., 2013. Occurrence of phthalate esters in sed-
iments in Qiantang River, China and inference with urbanization and river flow re-
gime. J. Hazard. Mater. 248-249, 142–149.
Sun, J., Pan, L., Zhan, Y., Lu, H., Tsang, D.C., Liu, W., Wang, X., Li, X., Zhu, L., 2016. Contam-
ination of phthalate esters, organochlorine pesticides and polybrominated diphenyl
ethers in agricultural soils from the Yangtze River Delta of China. Sci. Total Environ.
544, 670–676.
Thanh, N.P., Matsui, Y., Fujiwara, T., 2011. Assessment of plastic waste generation and its
potential recycling of household solid waste in Can Tho City, Vietnam. Environ.
Monit. Assess. 175 (1–4), 23–35.
Thompson, R.C., Olsen, Y., Mitchell, R.P., Davis, A., Rowland, S.J., John, A.W.G., McGonigle,
D., Russell, A.E., 2004. Lost at sea: where is all the plastic? Science 304, 838.
UNEP, 2014. In: UNEP (Ed.), Marine Plastic Waste and Microplastics Established by Reso-
lution 1/6, pp. 1–4 UNEP/EA.1/6.
UNEP, 2016. In: UNEP (Ed.), Marine Plastic Debris and Microplastics Established by Reso-
lution 2/11, pp. 1–4 UNEP/EA.2/11.
UNEP, 2017. In: UNEP (Ed.), Marine Plastic Debris and Microplastics Established by Reso-
lution 3/7, pp. 1–4 UNEP/EA.3/7.
UNEP, 2019a. In: UNEP (Ed.), Marine Plastic Litter and Microplastics Established by Reso-
lution 4/7, pp. 1–4 UNEP/EA.4/7. (Environmentally sound management of waste
established by resolution 4/8, in: UNEP (Ed.) UNEP/EA.4/8. pp. 1-3; Addressing
single-use plastic products pollution established by resolution 4/10, in: UNEP (Ed.)
UNEP/EA.4/10. pp. 1-2; Protection of the marine environment from land-based activ-
ities established by resolution 4/12, in: UNEP (Ed.) UNEP/EA.4/12. pp. 1-2).
UNEP, 2019b. In: UNEP (Ed.), Progress in the Work of the Ad Hoc Open-ended Expert
Group on Marine Litter and Microplastics Established by Resolution 3/7, pp. 1–4
UNEP/EA.4/12.
UNEP, 2019c. UNEP/CHW.14/CRP.40: Amendments to Annexes II, VIII and IX to the Basel
Convention.
USEPA, 2017. Trash-free waters: frequently asked questions about plastic recycling and
composting. https://www.epa.gov/trash-free-waters/frequently-asked-questions-
about-plastic-recycling-and-composting.
USEPA, 2018. Advancing Sustainable Materials Management: 2015 Fact Sheet. United
States Environmental Protection Agency https://www.epa.gov/facts-and-figures-
about-materials-waste-and-recycling/advancing-sustainable-materials-management
(accessed on July 10, 2019).
Ustun, I., Sungur, S., Okur, R., Sumbul, A.T., Oktar, S., Yilmaz, N., Gokce, C., 2015. Determi-
nation of phthalates migrating from plastic containers into beverages. Food Anal.
Methods 8, 222–228.
Van Cauwenberghe, L., Claessens, M., Vandegehuchte, M.B., Janssen, C.R., 2015.
Microplastics are taken up by mussels (Mytilus edulis) and lugworms (Arenicola ma-
rina) living in natural habitats. Environ. Pollut. 199, 10–17.
Ventrice, P., Ventrice, D., Russo, E., De Sarro, G., 2013. Phthalates: European regulation,
chemistry, pharmacokinetic and related toxicity. Environ. Toxicol. Phar. 36 (1),
88–96.
Verlis, K.M., Campbell, M.L., Wilson, S.P., 2018. Seabirds and plastics don’t mix: examining
the differences in marine plastic ingestion in wedge-tailed shearwater chicks at near-
shore and offshore locations. Mar. Pollut. Bull. 135, 852–861.
Villarrubia-Gómez, P., Cornell, S.E., Fabres, J., 2018. Marine plastic pollution as a planetary
boundary threat – the drifting piece in the sustainability puzzle. Mar. Policy 96,
213–220.
Wagner, T.P., 2017. Reducing single-use plastic shopping bags in the USA. Waste Manag.
70, 3–12.
Wagner, T.P., 2019. Sustainability and Plastic Waste. Encyclopedia of Food Security and
Sustainability. Elsevier Inc, pp. 588–592.
Wang, J., Luo, Y.M., Ma, W.T., Christiec, P., Li, Z.G., 2013. Soil contamination by phthalate
esters in Chinese intensive vegetable production systems with different modes of
use of plastic film. Environ. Pollut. 189, 265–273.
Wang, J., Tan, Z., Peng, J., Qiu, Q., Li, M., 2016a. The behaviors of microplastics in the ma-
rine environment. Mar. Environ. Res. 113, 7–17.
Wang, J.Y., Kiho, K., Douglas, O., Zhao, Y.H., Bera, A., Lohmann, R., Baker, M.C., 2016b. Part
V assessment of other human activities and the marine environment-Chapter 25. Ma-
rine debris. In: Nations, U (Ed.), First Global Integrated Marine Assessment United
Nations https://www.un.org/Depts/los/global_reporting/WOA_RegProcess.htm
(accessed on April 10, 2019).
Wang, L., Sun, X., Chang, Q., Tao, Y., Wang, L., Dong, J., Lin, Y., Zhang, Y., 2016c. Effect of di-
n-butyl phthalate (DBP) on the fruit quality of cucumber and the health risk. Environ.
Sci. Pollut. R. 23 (23), 298–304.
Wang, J.J., Zheng, L.X., Li, J.H., 2018a. A critical review on the sources and instruments of
marine microplastics and prospects on the relevant management in China. Waste
Manage. Res. 36 (10), 898–911.
Wang, L., Lin, T., Yan, C., He, W., Wang, J., Tang, Q., 2018b. Effects of different film residue
and irrigation quota on nutrient and water use efficiency of cotton under drip irriga-
tion. J. Plant Nutr. Fertitizer 24 (1), 122–133.
Wood, C.T., Zimmer, M., 2014. Can terrestrial isopods (Isopoda: Oniscidea) make use of
biodegradable plastics? Appl. Soil Ecol. 77, 72–79.
World Economic Forum, 2016. The New Plastics Economy: Rethinking the Future of Plas-
tics. World Economic Forum.
WRAP, 2016. Plastics market situation report. http://www.wrap.org.uk/sites/files/wrap/
Plastics_Market_Situation_Report.pdf.
Wu, Y.M., Guo, P.Y., Zhang, X.Y., Zhang, Y.X., Xie, S.T., Deng, J., 2019. Effect of microplastics
exposure on the photosynthesis system of freshwater algae. J. Hazard. Mater. 374,
219–227. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jhazmat.2019.1004.1039.
Xanthos, D., Walker, T.R., 2017. International policies to reduce plastic marine pollution
from single-use plastics (plastic bags and microbeads): a review. Mar. Pollut. Bull.
118, 17–26.
Xie, Z., Ebinghaus, R., Temme, C., Caba, A., Ruck, W., 2005. Atmospheric concentrations
and air–sea exchanges of phthalates in the North Sea (German Bight). Atmos. Envi-
ron. 39 (18), 3209–3219.
Xie, H.E., Li, Y.S., Yang, S.Q., Wang, J.J., Wu, X.F., Wu, Z.X., 2007a. Influence of residual plas-
tic film on soil structure，crop growth and development in fields. J. Agr. Environ. Sci
26 (S1), 153–156.
Xie, Z., Ebinghaus, R., Temme, C., Lohmann, R., Caba, A., Ruck, W., 2007b. Occurrence and
air-sea exchange of phthalates in the arctic. Environ. Sci. Technol. 41 (13),
4555–4560.
Yan, C.R., Liu, E.K., Shu, F., Liu, Q., Liu, S., He, W.Q., 2014. Review of agricultural plastic
mulching and its residual PImution and prevention measures in China. J. Agr. Resour.
Environ. 31 (2), 95–102.
Yuan, N.J., 2009. Plastic. Chapter of Encyclopedia of China (the 2nd edition). Encyclopedia
of China Publishing Hous, ISBN 9787500079583.
Zbyszewski, M., Corcoran, P.L., 2011. Distribution and degradation of fresh water plastic
particles along the beaches of Lake Huron, Canada. Water Air Soil Poll 220 (1–4),
365–372.
Zhang, L., Wu, Q., Liang, J.H., Feng, G.P., Chen, S., 2012. Simultaneous determination of 8
kinds of phthalic acid esters in plastic food packaging materials by high performance
liquid chromatography. Food Sci. 33 (20), 184.
Zhang, D., Liu, H.B., Hu, W.L., Qin, X.H., Ma, X.W., Yan, C.R., Wang, H.Y., 2016. The status
and distribution characteristics of residual mulching film in Xinjiang, China.
J. Integr. Agr. 15 (11), 2639–2646.
Zhang, H., Zhou, Q., Xie, Z., Zhou, Y., Tu, C., Fu, C., Mi, W., Ebinghaus, R., Christie, P., Luo, Y.,
2018a. Occurrences of organophosphorus esters and phthalates in the microplastics
from the coastal beaches in North China. Sci. Total Environ. 616-617, 1505–1512.
Zhang, L., Sintim, H.Y., Bary, A.I., Hayes, D.G., Wadsworth, L.C., Anunciado, M.B., Flury, M.,
2018b. Interaction of Lumbricus terrestris with macroscopic polyethylene and biode-
gradable plastic mulch. Sci. Total Environ. 635, 1600–1608.
Zhang, Z.M., Zhang, H.H., Zhang, J., Wang, Q.W., Yang, G.P., 2018c. Occurrence, distribu-
tion, and ecological risks of phthalate esters in the seawater and sediment of
Changjiang River Estuary and its adjacent area. Sci. Total Environ. 619-620, 93–102.
 Y. Chen et al. / Science of the Total Environment 752 (2021) 141772
Zhang, Z.M., Zhang, H.H., Zou, Y.W., Yang, G.P., 2018d. Distribution and ecotoxicological
state of phthalate esters in the sea-surface microlayer, seawater and sediment of
the Bohai Sea and the Yellow Sea. Environ. Pollut. 240, 235–247.
Zhang, Q., Song, J.M., Li, X.G., Peng, Q.C., Yuan, H.M., Li, N., Duan, L.Q., Ma, J., 2019. Concen-
trations and distribution of phthalate esters in the seamount area of the Tropical
Western Pacific Ocean. Mar. Pollut. Bull. 140, 107–115.
Zhao, J., Liu, H.L., Yi, H.Y., Wu, L.H., Huang, D.W., 2018. Study on the report of disposable
plastic tableware product quality safety risk monitoring and analysis. China Stan-
dardization 351, 163–169.
15
Zhou, B., Zhao, L.X., Wang, Y.B., Sun, Y., Li, X.J., Xu, H.J., Weng, L.P., Pan, Z., Yang, S.D.,
Chang, X.P., Li, X.T., 2020. Spatial distribution of phthalate esters and the associated
response of enzyme activities and microbial community composition in typical
plasticshed vegetable soils in China. Ecotoxicol. Environ. Saf. 195, 110495.
Zhu, Y., Chen, Y.L., Gong, X.F., Peng, Y.N., Wang, Z.Y., Ji, B., 2018. Plastic film mulching im-
proved rhizosphere microbes and yield of rainfed spring wheat. Agric. For. Meteorol.
263, 130–136.