Life cycle thinking in plastics design

Abstract 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).

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
Review of European Comparative & International Environmental Law
Published
2026-05-22
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1111/reel.70059
Primary Topic
Microplastics and Plastic Pollution
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
0.00

Funders

Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

Life cycle thinking in plastics design

Laurel Besco, Eva R. van der Marel
Review of European Comparative & International Environmental Law
Microplastics and Plastic Pollution
article

Life cycle thinking in plastics design

Laurel Besco, Eva R. van der Marel
article en

Abstract

Abstract 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).

Review of European Comparative & International Environmental Law
University of Toronto (CA), Centre for Arctic Gas Hydrate, Environment and Climate (NO), UiT The Arctic University of Norway (NO)
Social Sciences and Humanities Research Council of Canada
Responsible consumption and production
Openalex Percentile: Top 11%
Microplastics and Plastic Pollution
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.

Life cycle thinking in plastics design — Laurel Besco, Eva R. van der Marel · Review of European Comparative & International Environmental Law (2026) | TGRS Research Map | TGRS