Stockholm (NordSIP) – The fifth meeting of the Intergovernmental Negotiating Committee to develop an international legally binding instrument on plastic pollution, including in the marine environment (INC-5) ended on Sunday 1 December 2024 without an agreement on a final treaty text. INC-5 had been intended as the last in a series of meetings that began 2 years ago in Punta del Esta, Uruguay, with the time dedicated to ironing out the final details of a global plastic treaty to be implemented in 2025. However, after a week of negotiations too many fundamental differences remain, and the parties have therefore agreed to reconvene at a later date.
Although the failure to reach consensus could be seen in negative light, many environmental campaigning organisations have expressed relief that delegates refused to accept a watered-down, potentially ineffective international plastics treaty based on a compromise with plastic and petrochemical producing nations. They also took encouragement from the sheer number of countries willing to back strong measures against plastic pollution.
Production cap and a ban on harmful chemicals
The principal areas of disagreement are the proposals for caps on plastic production and the eradication of harmful chemicals used in plastics. Roughly 100 countries supported a proposal put forward by Panama that included phased reduction in global plastic production, which according to current trends is expected to triple by 2060. Petrochemical producing countries have resisted such moves throughout the INC process by using procedural tactics to delay or subvert the negotiations. The plastics industry has been campaigning for exclusively downstream solutions to plastic pollution, including recycling and better waste management. Many of these solutions rely either on as-yet-unproven technological innovations, or a greater onus on consumers and municipalities to increase recycling rates. Mexico also led a group of 95 countries in stating that they would not accept any agreement that did not include steps to phase out and ban harmful plastic and their related chemical components.
Major raw plastic producing nations such as China, The United States, India, South Korea, and Saudi Arabia have been accused by delegates of systematically obstructing progress and refusing to consider any upstream production-related measures. Eirik Lindebjerg, Global Plastics Policy Lead at the WWF in Oslo, Norway said: “For too long, a small minority of states have held the negotiation process hostage. It is abundantly clear that these countries have no intention of finding a meaningful solution to this crisis and yet they continue to prevent the large majority of states who do. It is unjust that those who bear the greatest burden of plastic pollution are being denied the opportunity to forge a solution among themselves by those profiteering off the unregulated production and consumption of plastic. It is increasingly clear that the majority of states that are committed to securing a meaningful agreement with the necessary binding measures to end plastic pollution must be ready to vote or adopt a treaty-of-the-willing. If INC-5 has shown us anything it’s that we are not going to find the solution we desperately need through more of the same. The crisis demands more. People and wildlife demand more. And it is our governments’ job to deliver.”
Upstream focus welcomed
Nevertheless, despite the ongoing challenges at INC-5 the Scientists’ Coalition for an Effective Plastics Treaty was encouraged by the increased focus on the full lifecycle impacts of plastic pollution, including the use of chemicals of concern. This shift away from the predominantly waste management focused narrative of previous INC events was seen as a very positive development by the coalition of more than 400 independent scientific and technical experts from 60 countries that was set up in response to the perceived misuse of scientific data by plastic producing nations at the outset of the treaty negotiations.
Bethanie Carney Almroth, a Professor of Ecotoxicology at the University of Gothenburg and a member of the coalition expressed renewed hope for the next round of talks: “The science is clear: A treaty that protects human health and the environment needs to address the issues of plastic production and chemicals. If the text is improved by strengthening provisions on plastics production and chemicals of concern, then the treaty will more effectively contribute to end plastics pollution and the harms it causes.”
The draft text agreed at INC-5 remains very broad, with many sections including all the options still on the table. It is hoped that the tough stance taken at INC-5 by the majority of participating nations against the few plastics and petrochemical producing nations will help steer the next round of negotiations towards stronger global measures against the rapidly mounting plastic pollution crisis. The date and venue of INC-5.2 is yet to be determined by the United Nations’ Environment Programme (UNEP).
