This article investigates how legal frameworks integrate life cycle considerations in plastics design, highlighting implications for sustainability.
This article aims to contribute to the ongoing scholarly reflection on the intersection between law and (plastics) production. It builds on the importance of ‘design’ for a more sustainable plastics economy by examining the role of law in bringing life cycle considerations into the design phase. It uses examples of legal instruments from two jurisdictions, Canada and the European Union (EU), because of their demonstrated leadership in regulating product life cycles, categorising them according to whether they ‘require’ life cycle considerations to be taken into account in the design phase or whether they ‘enable’ this through the generation and sharing of relevant life cycle information across the supply chain. Overall, the article concludes that plastics design measures have focussed more on prescribing certain design choices (e.g., content requirements, product prohibitions) than requiring ‘smart’ redesign by industry; and that existing ‘enabling’ measures are not sufficiently ambitious (e.g., polymers having thus far been excluded from REACH registration).
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Besco et al. (2026) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: