Greenpeace activists wave a flag saying "Governments, the world is watching, cut plastic production now" in Busan on November 25, 2024, before the opening of the fifth session of the UN Intergovernmental Negotiating Committee on Plastic Pollution (INC-5). (Photo by ANTHONY WALLACE / AFP) (Photo by ANTHONY WALLACE/AFP via Getty Images)
Plastics are immensely useful in a multitude of technologies and for hygiene and health applications, but “our neglect has transformed them into a monster that now seems uncontrollable”.
This is according to a position paper from the Common Initiative, a think tank that follows global environmental policy. It was released ahead of the final round of international negotiations, known as the fifth Intergovernmental negotiating committee discussions (INC-5) to develop an international legally binding treaty on plastic pollution.
The talks started in Busan, South Korea, on Monday.
In 2022, the United Nations Environment Assembly launched a two-year process to establish a first-of-its-kind global treaty that would address the full lifecycle of plastics from production to disposal.
The urgency of the mandate mirrors the urgency of the problem, the position paper said.
“The INC to develop an international legally binding instrument on plastic pollution has had four meetings so far. INC-5, in Busan, is theoretically supposed to be the last one,” it said, reflecting on the amount of work still needed to develop a robust, meaningful treaty.
“As much as we can understand the usefulness of deadlines for an international process of this scope, this treaty is not about bureaucratic achievements. If there needs to be an INC-6, so be it.”
The production of plastics is “out of control”, it said, citing a report on policy scenarios to end plastic pollution, released by the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD), in October.
It found that global policies addressing the entire plastics lifecycle could reduce plastic leakage into the environment by 96% by 2040.
Without stronger policies, plastics production and use are projected to increase by 70%, from 435 million tonnes (Mt) in 2020 to 736 Mt in 2040, with only 6% of plastics coming from recycled sources, the OECD said.
“In parallel, mismanaged plastic waste, that is plastics that at end of life are dumped, inadequately disposed of or littered, will increase by almost 50% (from 81 Mt annually in 2020 to 119 Mt annually in 2040). Leakage of mismanaged plastics into the environment, including their release into rivers, oceans, and land, will increase by 50%.”
This plastic storm has multiple and tremendous effects on biodiversity, ecosystems and human health, said the Common Initiative in its position paper.
Plastic production also affects the climate. The OECD report found that it could represent 5% of global greenhouse gas emissions in 2040, adding: “Most of it is being emitted to produce materials that will end up in waste.”
The stakes are high for INC-5, with a showdown expected between countries gathered in the High Ambition Coalition to End Plastic Pollution, which is co-chaired by Rwanda and Norway, who want a treaty that covers the entire lifecycle of plastics, and a group of countries led by Saudi Arabia, Iran and the Russian Federation, who want to exclude plastic production from the treaty’s scope.
The oil and gas industry’s interests in plastic production are high, the document noted. “They have stalled progress by constantly bracketing and equivocating, bogging down the treaty in debates over trivial adjectives.
“These tactics obscure real progress, as the core issues surrounding production are pushed aside. This obstructionism creates a smokescreen, enabling them to evade commitments to meaningful change while frustrating those pushing for genuine action.”
A common refrain in opposition to stringent plastics regulation is that it could stifle economic growth, particularly in developing countries. But the think tank argued that this defence is not about protecting economies; rather it is about protecting entrenched interests.
“The notion that developing countries must choose between economic growth and environmental health is a false dichotomy, propped up by those who stand to profit from ongoing production.”
The evidence is clear. “If production remains unchecked, these same developing countries will bear the brunt of plastic pollution’s devastating impacts.”
The INC process presents a “once-in-a-generation” opportunity to establish a global standard for managing the full life-cycle of plastics, it said.
“For INC-5 to be deemed successful, the concerns of civil society, scientists, indigenous peoples and frontline communities must be addressed. These groups have consistently emphasised the need for strong, actionable solutions that reflect the gravity of the crisis.”
The treaty should adopt a comprehensive life-cycle approach, addressing plastic production at its fossil fuel source, with “aggressive measures” to phase down production, particularly in sectors such as packaging that contribute the most to waste.
Regarding chemicals of concern, the organisation said information about the 16 000 chemicals used in plastics, 4 200 of which are hazardous, must be provided to consumers. “Public awareness and accountability are essential.”
On funding mechanisms and waste colonialism, the position paper said the treaty needs to create the financial mechanisms to implement these solutions, especially in supporting developing countries.
“The treaty must prioritise solutions for countries impacted by waste colonialism and protect waste workers, both formal and informal, ensuring equitable and just waste management systems.”
It must also pave the way for a transition to a low-carbon, zero-waste economy focused on reuse, “particularly benefiting marginalised communities disproportionately affected by plastic pollution”.
The world cannot afford to let the treaty fall victim to the same fate as so many other international agreements, of “promises made, targets missed, and public trust eroded” as this would risk condemning future generations to a “planet suffocated by plastic”.
“If negotiations in Busan stall due to the influence of low-ambition actors, a strong proposal for an INC-6 must be put forward. This process must not mirror the failures of past climate or biodiversity negotiations,” it said, adding that the urgency of the plastic crisis demands decisive action and not compromise.