Philippines urges companies to fund plastic waste management.

The Philippines generates an estimated 1.7 million metric tons of post-consumer plastic waste every year, a figure that places the country among the world’s top ocean plastic polluters. To put that in perspective, roughly a third of that waste ends up in landfills and dumpsites, while another 35 percent is discarded on open land, according to the World Bank. The scale of the problem has pushed the government to adopt a regulatory approach that shifts the financial burden from taxpayers and local governments to the companies that produce the packaging in the first place.

The mechanism designed to make this work is the Extended Producer Responsibility (EPR) Act of 2022, the first law in Southeast Asia to impose penalties on companies over plastic waste. It requires large businesses to take financial and operational responsibility for the plastic packaging they put into the market. The law hit its 2023 target for plastic waste removal, and by 2025 the Department of Environment and Natural Resources (DENR) reported exceeding its 40 percent recovery goal, registering a national diversion rate of 56 percent. That translated to over 246 million kilograms of plastic waste diverted through the programs of more than 1,000 registered obliged enterprises. For context on how youth-led initiatives complement these regulatory efforts, you can read about young Filipino leaders taking on pollution at the community level.

How the EPR Law Shifts Responsibility to Producers

The core idea behind the EPR law is straightforward: companies that manufacture or import plastic packaging must manage the waste that their products generate after consumers are done with them. Instead of leaving the cleanup to cash-strapped local governments or informal waste pickers, the law obliges large enterprises to fund collection, sorting, recycling, or co-processing of an amount of plastic equivalent to what they sell. The obligation started at 20 percent of their plastic packaging footprint and will rise to a ceiling of 80 percent by 2028.

The law covers a broad range of plastics, including flexible types that are commercially unviable for recycling and often go uncollected. Notably, it does not ban any plastics — including the ubiquitous single-use sachets that are deeply embedded in the Philippine retail economy. Instead, it forces companies to pay for the end-of-life management of those materials. This approach acknowledges that low-income consumers rely on small, affordable sachets, but it also means the burden of dealing with the resulting waste falls squarely on the producers.

Why Flexible Plastics Remain the Biggest Challenge

Flexible plastics — the thin films, pouches, and sachets that dominate Philippine packaging — are the most difficult category to manage. The country’s heavy reliance on these materials is tied to rapid urbanization and a large low-income population that buys products in small, affordable portions. A World Bank study cited by the UNDP estimates that the Philippines uses 163 million pieces of sachets each day. Most recycling centers are set up to handle rigid plastics like PET bottles, which can be exchanged for cash. Flexible plastics, by contrast, have little to no scrap value and require specialized processing.

The economic loss is substantial. The same World Bank study found that up to USD 890 million worth of recyclable plastic waste is lost to the local economy annually. That figure represents material that could have been recovered and reprocessed but instead ends up in landfills, waterways, or the ocean. Food-grade plastic recycling remains particularly limited, meaning that even when flexible plastics are collected, they are often downcycled into lower-value products or used as fuel in cement kilns through co-processing.

Of the plastic waste recycled, upcycled, and co-processed in 2025, more than 56 percent was flexible plastics, according to the DENR. That figure is encouraging because it shows that collection systems are beginning to capture these materials, but it also underscores how dominant flexible packaging is in the waste stream. The challenge is not just collecting it — it’s finding economically viable end markets for the recovered material. For a deeper look at how the broader waste crisis affects land and communities, see our coverage of the Philippines’ waste crisis and its impact on land.

What Gets Missed in the EPR Conversation

Most discussions about the EPR law focus on compliance rates and tonnage recovered, but several nuances deserve closer attention. The first is that the law does not ban any plastics, including single-use sachets. This means the fundamental driver of plastic waste — the sheer volume of low-value, multi-layer packaging entering the market — remains unchanged. The EPR system manages the waste after it is created but does not reduce the amount of packaging produced in the first place.

→ Scroll right to see all columns

A second overlooked dimension is the role of plastic credits. Companies that cannot physically collect and recycle their plastic waste can purchase credits from organizations like PCX Markets, which offers local credits priced from around USD 100 for collection and co-processing of mixed plastics to over USD 500 for collection and recycling of ocean-bound PET plastic. Snack producer Mondelez, for example, has opted to offset 100 percent of its plastic footprint through credits. While credits provide a funding mechanism for waste management, critics argue they allow companies to pay their way out of redesigning packaging or reducing plastic use. The credits do allow for co-processing — where plastic waste is used as fuel in cement kilns — but cannot be claimed against plastic that is landfilled.

Third, compliance remains incomplete. As of late 2024, around half of eligible companies had launched EPR programs, with over a thousand more required to register by the end of December or face fines of up to 20 million pesos (USD 343,000) and possible revocation of operating licenses. The DENR has acknowledged that enforcement capacity varies and that digital monitoring systems need improvement. For 2026, the agency has identified priority areas including standardizing audit frameworks, strengthening institutional capacity, and developing incentives for more sustainable packaging design. These measures suggest that the regulatory infrastructure is still catching up with the law’s ambitions. To understand how pollution affects public health more broadly, you can read about the health toll of pollution in the Philippines.

What Companies Need to Do to Comply

For businesses covered by the EPR Act, compliance involves several concrete steps. The law applies to large enterprises — typically those with assets exceeding a certain threshold — that place plastic packaging into the Philippine market. Here is what the process looks like in practice.

Register as an Obliged Enterprise

The first step is registration with the Environmental Management Bureau (EMB). Companies must submit their company details, the volume and type of plastic packaging they put into the market, and their proposed EPR program. The program must outline how the company will meet its recovery target, whether through its own collection and recycling operations, partnerships with accredited waste management providers, or purchase of plastic credits. The EMB maintains a registry of obliged enterprises and tracks compliance.

Calculate Your Plastic Packaging Footprint

Companies need to measure the total weight of plastic packaging they introduce into the market annually. This figure forms the basis of their recovery obligation. For 2025, the required recovery rate was 50 percent, meaning a company that puts 100 metric tons of plastic packaging into the market must ensure that 50 metric tons of plastic waste are collected and properly managed. The obligation rises to 80 percent by 2028. Companies must keep accurate records and submit annual reports to the EMB.

Choose a Compliance Pathway

There are three main ways to meet the obligation. The first is direct action: setting up collection points, partnering with recyclers, or investing in recovery infrastructure. The second is joining a Producer Responsibility Organization (PRO), which pools resources from multiple companies to fund waste management programs at scale. The third is purchasing plastic credits from accredited platforms like PCX Markets. Many companies use a combination of these approaches. The key is that the waste must be verifiably collected and processed — simply paying a fee without documented recovery does not count.

• 1
  Register with the EMB

  Submit company details, packaging data, and proposed EPR program to the Environmental Management Bureau.

• 2
  Measure Your Plastic Footprint

  Calculate the total weight of plastic packaging placed into the market annually to determine your recovery obligation.

• 3
  Implement and Report

  Execute your EPR program through direct action, a PRO, or plastic credits, and submit annual compliance reports to the EMB.

Prepare for Stricter Oversight

The DENR has signaled that enforcement will tighten. Priority areas for 2026 include improvements in digital monitoring systems, capacity-building within institutions, and the standardization of audit frameworks to enhance transparency. Companies should expect more rigorous verification of their reported recovery figures. The development of systems to incentivize more sustainable packaging design also suggests that future compliance may factor in not just the volume of waste recovered but also the recyclability of the packaging itself. For more on how the Philippines is tackling plastic waste at the national level, see our article on the country’s broader battle against plastic pollution.

Frequently Asked Questions About the EPR Law

What This Means for the Future of Plastic Waste in the Philippines

The EPR law represents a significant shift in how the Philippines approaches plastic waste management, moving from a system where cleanup costs were borne by the public to one where producers are financially accountable. The early results — a 56 percent diversion rate and over 246 million kilograms of plastic waste recovered in 2025 — suggest the mechanism can work when companies engage. But the law’s limitations are equally clear: it does not reduce the amount of plastic entering the market, compliance is still incomplete, and the most problematic materials — flexible plastics and sachets — remain in widespread use. The next few years will test whether the combination of regulatory pressure, industry collaboration, and technological innovation can keep pace with the country’s growing waste generation. If this was useful, you might also want to read how pollution is making Filipino cities hotter.

Sources

Land Under Siege: The Philippines’ Waste Crisis — A deeper look at how unmanaged waste affects communities and ecosystems across the country.

Pollution’s Toll: Health Impact in the Philippines — Examines the public health consequences of environmental pollution, including plastic waste.

DENR and partners launch working group to tackle flexible plastic recycling. United Nations Development Programme, 2024.

DENR cites EPR partners as plastic waste recovery hits 56%. Daily Tribune, 2026.

To tackle plastic scourge, Philippines makes companies pay. Philstar, 2024.