Global plastic treaty negotiations end with major disagreements
The much-anticipated Busan Intergovernmental Negotiating Committee (INC-5) ended on December 1 with more than 1,400 negotiators from 178 UN member states failing to reach a treaty to address the global plastic pollution crisis, exposing major disagreements between countries and compromises made in the search for consensus.
Serious disagreements: Limiting plastic production?
The most divisive issues included limiting plastic production, managing hazardous chemicals, and financing to help developing countries implement the agreement. More than 100 countries sought to limit plastic production, while oil and petrochemical producers were only willing to manage plastic waste.
Countries such as Rwanda, Mexico and Panama advocated curbing plastic production, developing stronger treaties on plastic production and hazardous chemical regulation, and holding industries accountable.
Countries such as Saudi Arabia and Kuwait formed a like-minded alliance and opposed curbing plastic production. In particular, Saudi Arabia, which relies on the plastics industry, would threaten its economy by curbing plastic production. The alliance's influence on the Chair's text is evident, with the final move to a more watered-down framework. According to data provider Eunomia, China, the United States, India, South Korea and Saudi Arabia are the five major polymer producers in 2023.
The imminent arrival of President-elect Trump in the United States has added uncertainty to the country's policies, as the US delegation has already backed off on several commitments, such as production cuts. The shift in US policy, combined with existing resistance from other countries, casts serious doubts on whether a global plastics treaty can achieve its intended goals in the current political climate.
Positives of the Chair's text
Despite these challenges, the Chair's text, released on December 1, will serve as a basis for further negotiations. The text contains several positive elements, including a strengthened focus on human health and the life cycle of plastics. It provides clear definitions for key terms such as plastic, plastic pollution and plastic waste, providing a basis for consistent interpretation and implementation. In addition, the inclusion of annexes listing banned products and chemicals is an important step towards coordinated global action. The provisions targeting single-use and short-life plastics, as well as the stipulated phase-out schedule, demonstrate a commitment to reducing the most harmful types of plastic pollution.
The text also emphasizes transparency, requiring the reporting of statistics and the publication of a list of exemptions granted to Parties and regional economic integration organizations. These measures are intended to ensure accountability and provide stakeholders with tools to monitor progress. In addition, the document prohibits the open dumping and burning of plastic waste - practices that significantly contribute to environmental degradation and public health hazards.
Another highlight of the text is the clarity of focus areas. It addresses emissions from fishing gear, plastic particles and microplastics from all sources, recognizing that they are major contributors to marine pollution. The inclusion of artisanal and small-scale fishers, as well as alignment with other multilateral environmental agreements, ensures a more integrated approach to addressing these issues. The emphasis on non-toxic reuse systems, the reduction of microplastic emissions and the adherence to the waste hierarchy reflect a broader commitment to sustainable product design and waste management.
