Global Plastic Policy Reviews

Generic selectors
Exact matches only
Search in title
Search in content
Post Type Selectors

When referring to any of the results of our analysis and/or its concept and design, please cite us accordingly:
Global Plastics Policy Centre (2025) March A., Salam, S., Evans, T., Hilton, J., Fletcher, S. (editors). Global Plastics Policy Review. Revolution Plastics Institute, University of Portsmouth.

25 Year Environment Plan (United Kingdom)

View the policy document
Contribution to reducing plastic pollution:
Effectiveness of meeting own objectives:
Strength of evidence: Moderate Available Evidence
Reviewed under framework: Yes

The 25 Year Environment Plan, published in 2018, set out the UK Government’s long term ambitions for improving the environment in England. Its ten goals included minimising waste, using resources more sustainably and efficiently, and managing pressures from chemicals and climate change. The plan had sufficient evidence to review under the framework.

For plastics specifically, the Plan committed to eliminating avoidable plastic waste by the end of 2042 and proposed measures including action on single use plastics, extending charges for plastic carrier bags, improving recycling and supporting innovation in alternative materials and packaging. The Plan has played an important role in setting the direction for subsequent plastics policy. Measures developed following its publication include restrictions on selected single use plastic products and the Plastic Packaging Tax. It also prompted investment in plastics research, innovation and waste management, including funding announced for plastics research and development, recycling and approaches to reducing litter (Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs, 2019; Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs, 2020). These measures indicate progress in translating some of the Plan’s commitments into policy and investment. However, because these interventions were subsequently introduced through separate policies and programmes, their outcomes cannot be attributed directly to the 25 Year Environment Plan.

Progress against the Plan has been monitored through annual reports and an Outcome Indicator Framework. The framework provides a relatively comprehensive basis for tracking environmental change, including indicators relevant to resource use, waste, recycling and waste crime. However, data are not available or updated consistently across all indicators, which limits assessment of progress in some areas (Brummitt & Araujo, 2024). The long time horizons attached to several objectives also make it difficult to assess delivery against the Plan’s ultimate goals at this stage.

Evidence of progress on reducing plastics and waste is mixed. Household recycling rates increased following publication of the Plan, while residual waste sent to landfill declined compared with earlier levels. However, these trends began before 2018 and cannot confidently be attributed to the Plan. Some developments have also moved waste between treatment routes rather than preventing it, with increased incineration accompanying reductions in landfill (Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs, 2021). Measures addressing litter and waste crime have been introduced, including funding for local authorities to tackle fly tipping, but there is limited evidence that the Plan itself has directly reduced unmanaged plastic waste (Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs, 2023).

Regarding implementation, although the Plan established long term ambitions, many of its outcomes depend on subsequent regulation, investment and action across government. Reviews have criticised the pace at which commitments have been translated into delivery and identified weaknesses in accountability and measurable progress (Wildlife and Countryside Link, 2019; Prior, 2023; Harvey, 2023). Assessment by the Office for Environmental Protection reported in 2023 found that progress was insufficient across the environmental targets it assessed, with 14 considered clearly off track and insufficient evidence available to assess the remaining nine (Prior, 2023; Harvey, 2023). As a result, the 25 Year Environment Plan has been more significant as a strategic framework for plastics policy than as a direct intervention against plastic pollution. It helped establish political commitments that were subsequently translated into measures targeting single use plastics, recycled content, recycling and waste management. However, evidence of direct reductions in plastic pollution attributable to the Plan remains limited. Its experience demonstrates that long term environmental strategies need to be supported by specific and measurable interventions, sustained investment, clear accountability and consistent monitoring if strategic commitments are to translate into demonstrable environmental outcomes.

(Reviewed in Aug 2026, uploaded in Sept 2026)

Year:

  • 2018

Instrument type:

Voluntary or legally binding:

Scale:

Implementation context:

Point in plastic cycle:

Policy Type:

Help us to refine our reports

We are confident in our research, however, not all evidence is made publicly available which may affect the outcome of the reviews. Let us know if you have research or evidence that can contribute to our analysis, or a policy you think would be valuable to review!

Get in touch

Our methods

Through an analytical framework, we've reviewed over 100 plastic policies. These reviews determine the effectiveness of policies in reducing plastic pollution and we offer recommendations in light of this evidence, to enhance future policy making. You can find out more about our methods on our methods page.

Methods

Guidance

In light of our findings, we've created targeted guidance for Policy Makers, Citizens and Businesses.

Think we've missed something?

We are confident in our research, however, not all evidence is made publicly available which may affect the outcome of the reviews. Let us know if you have research or evidence that can contribute to our analysis, or a policy you think would be valuable to review!

Submit a policy or evidence