Plastic Pollution: FAO Urges One Health Food Safety Action

Plastic Pollution Is Becoming a Cross-System Food Safety Issue

According to the FAO technical brief, plastic pollution should no longer be viewed solely as a waste-management or environmental issue. Plastics are incorporated into numerous stages of modern agrifood production, distribution and consumption, creating multiple opportunities for plastic particles and associated chemicals to circulate between environmental compartments and the food chain.

The publication applies a One Health perspective to illustrate connections among soils, crops, terrestrial and aquatic animals, foods, people and the wider environment. Under this framework, a contamination event or exposure pathway in one part of the system can have consequences elsewhere. Plastic pollution originating outside agriculture can also enter food-production environments through wastewater, runoff, atmospheric deposition, contaminated irrigation water and soil amendments.

GuideView News Editor notes that the significance of the FAO analysis lies in this systems-level framing. Rather than treating food-contact packaging, agricultural plastics, environmental contamination and human exposure as separate questions, the brief considers them as interconnected components of a broader risk landscape.

Millions of Tons of Plastic Are Embedded Across Agrifood Value Chains

FAO identifies plastics as an established input throughout agrifood systems. Agricultural applications include films and mulches, greenhouse coverings, coated fertilizers, silage wraps and other production materials. Further along the value chain, plastics are used in storage containers, processing equipment and food packaging.

The technical brief estimates annual use of approximately 13.4 million tons of agricultural plastics and 37.3 million tons of plastics for food packaging. FAO further projects agricultural plastic use could reach 19 million tons by 2040, while demand for food packaging is projected to increase by 38 percent over the same period.

These figures illustrate why plastic exposure cannot be considered solely a consequence of improper disposal. Significant quantities are intentionally introduced into production and distribution systems because of the functional advantages plastics provide, including durability, flexibility, protection and logistical efficiency. The resulting policy challenge therefore extends from waste collection and recycling to material design, product use, contamination prevention and end-of-life management.

Micro- and Nanoplastics Create Multiple Food Safety Pathways

A central concern identified by the publication is the movement of micro- and nanoplastics through environmental and biological systems. FAO describes four illustrative pathways through which plastic pollution can generate cascading One Health effects:

• Impacts through soils: MNPs can interact with soil structure, microbiota and nutrient and carbon cycling.
• Risks to animals: Plastic particles can affect terrestrial and aquatic environments and can enter animal exposure pathways.
• Human exposure and system feedbacks: People can encounter plastics and associated chemicals through food, food-contact materials and other exposure routes.
• Climate and nature pressures: Plastic pollution can interact with broader environmental pressures, reinforcing the need for integrated policy responses.

In agricultural soils, FAO cites evidence that MNPs can influence soil properties and biological processes. The brief also describes evidence that plants can take up MNPs and plastic-associated chemicals through their roots, including substances such as per- and polyfluoroalkyl substances (PFAS), bisphenols, phthalates and flame retardants. Such uptake can extend into edible plant tissues intended for human or animal consumption.

The implications extend beyond crop production. Microplastics have been detected in more than 1,300 animal species, while terrestrial animal products have also been found to contain microplastics following livestock exposure. FAO identifies these pathways as relevant to food-chain contamination and food safety, while also highlighting potential connections with the spread of antimicrobial resistance.

Plastic Surfaces May Influence Microbial Persistence and AMR Risks

The FAO brief also highlights an emerging microbiological dimension of plastic pollution. MNPs can provide surfaces on which microorganisms colonize and form biofilms. These structures can potentially support microbial persistence in environmental and food-related settings.

The publication further points to the possibility that such conditions may facilitate horizontal gene transfer and contribute to the persistence and spread of pathogens and antimicrobial-resistance genes. FAO presents this as an emerging area of concern rather than a fully resolved risk, underscoring the need for continued research and surveillance.

For food safety authorities, the issue is therefore broader than detecting physical plastic particles in food. Monitoring frameworks may also need to consider the biological communities associated with plastic surfaces and the environmental conditions that influence microbial survival, colonization and genetic exchange.

Human Exposure Extends Beyond the Food Itself

FAO identifies several potential routes of human exposure to plastic-associated substances and particles. These include contaminated foods, migration from food-contact materials, inhalation, dermal contact and occupational exposure. The breadth of these pathways reinforces the One Health argument that food safety cannot be assessed independently of environmental and occupational conditions.

The chemical dimension is particularly complex. More than 16,000 chemicals have been identified in plastics, according to the publication. Approximately one-quarter are considered hazardous based on characteristics including persistence, bioaccumulation, mobility and/or toxicity. At the same time, 66 percent of known chemicals lack official hazard classifications from regulatory agencies or industry.

FAO also notes that MNPs have been identified in several food groups and in human tissues. Emerging research has suggested possible associations with altered microbiomes, inflammatory and immune responses, tissue damage and reproductive toxicity. However, the publication emphasizes that important uncertainties remain concerning the food safety and health implications of current dietary MNP exposure levels.

One source of uncertainty is the extent to which experimental studies accurately reproduce real-world exposure. Environmentally weathered MNPs can differ from laboratory materials in their physical and chemical characteristics, meaning that evidence generated under controlled conditions may not fully represent the complexity of environmental exposure.

FAO Calls for a One Health Policy Framework

To translate the scientific evidence into policy, the technical brief identifies four broad areas for action. FAO's approach is based on the premise that plastic-related risks cross institutional and regulatory boundaries and therefore require coordination among environmental, agricultural, veterinary, food safety and public health authorities.

1. Establish a shared evidence base across sectors. Comparable data and coordinated research can help authorities understand how plastics and associated chemicals move across interconnected systems.
2. Co-design solutions with affected communities. Policy development should account for the practical conditions faced by producers, workers, communities and other stakeholders.
3. Coordinate policies and international agreements. Because plastic pollution crosses environmental and national boundaries, fragmented approaches can leave gaps between regulatory regimes.
4. Continuously review policies as evidence evolves. Emerging findings on MNPs, associated chemicals and alternative materials require policy frameworks capable of being updated as scientific knowledge changes.

The publication specifically points to national One Health platforms as a potential mechanism for integrating environmental, food safety, veterinary and public health monitoring. Such coordination could also support stronger standards concerning microplastics and plastic-associated chemicals in food, alongside improved monitoring of plastic contamination in soils and water.

Alternative Plastics Require the Same Safety Scrutiny

FAO's analysis also addresses a potential policy complication: replacing conventional plastics does not automatically eliminate environmental or food safety concerns. The brief cautions against assuming that bio-based or biodegradable plastics are inherently safer.

According to the publication, available evidence has not established that these alternative materials are necessarily superior in all relevant environmental dimensions, including toxicity and degradation. Alternative materials can also contain chemicals that raise safety questions. As a result, the substitution of one material for another requires its own toxicological and environmental assessment.

This consideration is particularly important as governments and companies develop circular-economy strategies. FAO calls for food safety safeguards to be incorporated into circular systems so that contaminants are not unintentionally reintroduced into food-contact applications through recycling, reuse or other material-recovery pathways.

The November 2025 Workshop Provided the Policy Context

The technical brief was developed following a November 2025 workshop convened by FAO, the Agriculture, Nutrition, and Health Academy Science–Policy Platform of the London School of Hygiene and Tropical Medicine, and the Catholic University of the Sacred Heart in Italy.

The workshop context is significant because the publication links scientific evidence with policy implementation. Rather than presenting plastic pollution solely as an environmental contamination problem, the resulting analysis considers how scientific findings can inform coordinated action across food systems, environmental management, public health and animal and plant health.

Full-Life-Cycle Prevention Emerges as the Central Policy Message

FAO's overall conclusion is that downstream plastic waste management, while important, is insufficient on its own to address the interconnected risks described in the technical brief. Plastic pollution can originate at multiple stages of production and consumption and can move through environmental pathways before reaching agricultural systems, animals, foods or people.

The publication therefore calls for prevention and reduction of plastic pollution across the full plastics life cycle. The approach combines stronger monitoring, cross-sector coordination, improved scientific evidence and careful evaluation of alternatives. The objective is not simply to reduce visible plastic waste, but to reduce opportunities for particles and associated chemicals to enter interconnected food and environmental systems.

For global agrifood stakeholders, the FAO analysis places One Health at the center of the emerging policy discussion. Its message is that food safety, environmental protection, animal and plant health, chemical safety and plastic management are increasingly overlapping policy domains. As scientific evidence evolves, the effectiveness of future measures will depend on the ability of governments, industry, researchers and affected communities to coordinate across those boundaries.