Global Treaty to Curb Plastic Pollution Faces Setback as Negotiations Fail
"Disappointment Abounds": Responses Surface as International Discussions on Plastic Treaty Yield No Agreements for a Second Time
The recent meeting aimed at finalizing a legally binding instrument to curb plastic pollution, held by the Intergovernmental Negotiating Committee (INC-5.2) in Geneva, Switzerland, ended without a deal. The conference, attended by representatives from 184 countries, was the second and final session of the fifth meeting of the INC (August 5-14, 2025).
The negotiations faced a significant hurdle due to disagreements over key provisions such as capping plastic production. Over 100 countries deemed the draft treaty "unambitious" and "inadequate," leading to its rejection [1][3][4].
The proposed treaty failed to cover the full life of plastics and only included voluntary measures. This was a cause for concern for several environmental groups and countries, particularly those from the Global South, who had called for prior notification and consent for all plastic waste exports in the treaty agreement. Their demands, however, were ignored by other member states [6].
Fossil Fuel and Plastics Industries' Influence on Negotiations
Fossil fuel and petrochemical industries have been a significant force in the negotiations, often advocating for strategies that maintain their business model based on plastic production. They have pushed for no caps on virgin plastic production, a move that could potentially triple plastic output by 2050 [2].
Industry advocates have also emphasized recycling and waste management as solutions, despite the current challenges in processing plastic waste, which is only managed effectively in about 9% of cases [2]. Chemical recycling, an expensive and often more polluting method, has been promoted as a core solution [2].
The influence of these industries has been criticized for being a barrier to stronger, more effective regulations. Their lobbying efforts often shift responsibility for pollution onto consumers or governments in the Global South, who are less equipped to manage these issues [2][4].
The U.S. delegation's stance against limiting new plastic production has been a significant obstacle, with some countries and environmental groups questioning whether a comprehensive treaty can be achieved under current circumstances [4].
Calls for a New Negotiation
In light of the failed negotiations, calls for a new negotiation for a legally binding plastics treaty have intensified. Steve Tren, CEO & Founder at the Environmental Justice Foundation, has called for a new negotiation chaired with high ambition and vision [10].
Rico Euripidou, Chemicals and Campaign Support at groundWork South Africa, emphasized the need for mandatory traceability and tracking of chemicals added to plastics and plastics products [5]. David Azoulay, Head of Delegation, Environmental Health Program Director at the Center for International Environmental Law, called the INC-5.2 negotiations an abject failure and suggested a restart of the process [5].
Continued Advocacy Against Imperialistic Systems
Environmental groups and activists have vowed to continue their fight against the influence of fossil fuel and petrochemical industries and imperialistic systems. Alejandra Warren, Executive Director at Plastic Free Future, vowed to continue fighting against imperialistic petrostates and their colonial, oppressive, and capitalistic systems [9].
Dianna Cohen, Co-Founder & CEO at Plastic Pollution Coalition, reaffirmed the movement's commitment to creating a nontoxic and plastic-free world [9]. Pui Yi Wong, Researcher at Basel Action Network (Malaysia), highlighted the issue of plastic waste exports overwhelming domestic waste management systems in low-income countries [7].
The resolution requested the adoption of a legally binding global plastics treaty by the end of 2024 [8]. The negotiations' outcome has sparked renewed determination among environmental activists and advocacy groups to push for a comprehensive and ambitious treaty to address the global plastic pollution crisis.
References:
- PSI
- The Guardian
- UNEP
- Reuters
- Chemical Watch
- The Nation
- Basel Action Network
- Plastic Free Future
- Plastic Pollution Coalition
- Environmental Justice Foundation
- CIEL
- Friends of the Earth International
- Center for Financial Accountability
- The recently concluded meeting aimed at finalizing a legally binding instrument to curb plastic pollution concluded without a deal, as negotiations stalled due to disagreements over key provisions.
- The draft treaty, deemed by over 100 countries as "unambitious" and "inadequate," faced criticism for its lack of coverage of the full lifecycle of plastics and for only including voluntary measures.
- The Fossil Fuel and Plastics Industries have been criticized for exerting significant influence on the negotiations, often advocating for strategies that maintain their business model based on plastic production.
- The influence of these industries has been accused of being a barrier to stronger, more effective regulations, with their lobbying efforts often shifting responsibility for pollution onto consumers or less equipped governments in the Global South.
- Calls for a new negotiation for a legally binding plastics treaty have intensified, with several environmental groups and countries advocating for mandatory traceability and tracking of chemicals added to plastics and plastics products.
- In light of the failed negotiations, environmental groups and activists have vowed to continue their fight against the influence of fossil fuel and petrochemical industries and imperialistic systems, aiming to create a nontoxic and plastic-free world.
