A legally binding UN treaty on plastic pollution remains elusive after the sixth round of negotiations, and the path forward is unclear
Familiar underlying issues prevented an agreement from being reached at the sixth round of UN negotiations to create a legally-binding treaty on plastic pollution, and now there is uncertainty about the next steps in the process, Pamela Chasek, executive editor of the Earth Negotiations Bulletin produced by the International Institute for Sustainable Development (IISD), told Argus.
The sixth round of discussions — known as Intergovernmental Negotiating Committee (INC) 5.2 — was already an unscheduled extension of the negotiating process, which was supposed to be completed at INC 5.1 in December last year. No date has yet been set for a resumption, and Chasek noted that "there is no clear path forward" to setting one.
"[The INC] could bring it back to the UN Environment Assembly (UNEA) Bureau and ask for an extension… or they may need a new mandate", she said, "the mandate was extended for this meeting… the UNEA Bureau can agree to extend the mandate again… or say, at this point, this needs to go back to the full assembly, which meets at the beginning of December".
Upstream measures absent
On the second-last day of negotiations, the INC chair circulated a draft text for consideration by delegates, followed by a revised version the following day. Neither proved particularly popular, with Chasek noting "a lot of people felt that the Chair's text did not reflect any of the negotiations that had been going on during the first week and after the release of the first draft text".
Notable in its absence from either draft text was any reference to controls on plastic production, which was present as an option in the chair's text following INC 5.1.
Whether such upstream measures should be included in the scope of the treaty has been an ongoing point of contention throughout negotiations. Upstream measures were supported by the EU, along with a so-called "high ambition coalition" of over 100 countries, but opposed by others including a number of oil- and plastic-producing countries.
Their omission from the draft text may have reflected the chair's view that there was little chance of consensus being reached if they were included, Chasek said. She noted that other environmental treaties have taken an approach of facilitating a weaker agreement that can then be amended and strengthened at a future point, and said that this may have been the chair's intention.
But attempts to include a provision for amendments to be adopted based on a 75pc voting majority "if all efforts at consensus have been exhausted" may also have proved a sticking point, preventing some delegations from backing the text. India — which has opposed upstream measures — called for mandatory consensus on amendments to the document and annexes.
US opposes unilateral approach
The US had appeared open to production limits ahead of INC 5.1, during the final months of the Biden administration. But a release from the State Department following INC 5.2 expressed opposition to "prescriptive top-down regulatory approaches that will stifle innovation and drive consumer inflation across the US economy and all over the world". The State Department said the US supports "an agreement that allows countries to use tailored and cost-effective solutions that will work best in their country".
Reduced support for environmental regulation is in keeping with the approach of the Trump administration, which has — among other things — on climate change. But it is unclear how much effect US rejection of unilateral measures in plastic treaty negotiations will have on the final outcome, given that other countries remained opposed to upstream measures throughout, Chasek said.
Can an agreement be reached?
The scope of the treaty is not the only sticking point in negotiations after INC 5.2. The issue of finance was also discussed at length, and delegates are even yet to agree on the definition of plastic waste, which was another omission from the draft text proposals.
Following negotiations, French ecology minister Agnes Pannier-Runacher expressed frustration. And Plastics Europe managing director Virginia Janssens, while applauding the "political will to continue negotiations", said that "we hear and share society's concerns and are disappointed by the inability to agree on a legally binding global agreement on plastics pollution in Geneva".
Chasek's view is that attempting to finalise a treaty within five sessions was always likely to be challenging. "Too many countries had very different visions for this agreement. Some didn't want it at all and some wanted a really strong agreement to deal with the full life cycle of plastic", she said.
If a path to continue negotiations can be found, then an agreement is still possible. But a strong treaty stretching from production of plastic all the way down to waste management looks less likely with every deadlocked session.
