What to Expect at Plastics INC-5

What is the state of the planet’s plastic pollution problem? 

Plastic pollution is a scourge on the world. Since the 1950s, we have accumulated over 10 billion tons of plastic waste. Plastic is found from the highest peaks of the world to the very depths of the Ocean.  

We have found plastic particles in human breast milk, in the placenta of humans, in human blood, and most recently in the human brain. The problem with this is that the chemicals in plastic, which we now know are forever chemicals, have leaked into the environment and they're leaking into the human body. These chemicals have been proven to be endocrine disruptors. They disrupt the development of humans in the birth process, normal functions of the human body, and the natural environment around us.  

The problem is massive. The problem is everywhere. Plastic is literally in the rain that falls into the ground. So, it does not matter what type of diet one eats, you are going to ingest plastic one way or the other.  

This is obviously a huge problem the world needs to deal with. 

What is the treaty process that countries are working through to tackle plastic pollution? 

In March 2022, countries came together under the United Nations Environment Assembly to adopt Resolution 5/14. This was an historic resolution calling on States to band together to end plastic pollution everywhere, including in the marine environment. This resolution set up the Intergovernmental Negotiating Committee (INC) and created a deadline of 2024 to work out a treaty to end plastic pollution. 
 
We have had four committee meetings to negotiate the new treaty. The final meeting is going to be in Busan, Korea at the end of November 2024. The hope is that at this point, delegates will be able to adopt a treaty... but everything is still up in the air. 

What is the dispute between countries on tackling “upstream plastics” versus “downstream plastics”? 

The original resolution called on delegates to look at the entire lifecycle of plastic. This has created several interpretations over the course of the negotiations.  

Some countries are extremely interested in addressing upstream plastic, which means plastic right from a point of production. In other words, tackling the production and manufacture of plastic products and all the chemicals of concern that go into these products, plus all elements of plastic design. Nearly all countries are interested in looking at downstream plastic – tackling plastic waste, issues of extended producer responsibility, and looking at what to do with existing plastic waste aka legacy plastic. What do we do? What is the world to do with the mounds of plastic all over the environment. 

What was the state of the draft treaty text at the end of INC-4?

At the end of INC-4 in Ottawa, delegates produced a compiled text with 1,500 hundred brackets, which is text that has not been negotiated or agreed to. So, it originally appeared they would have just seven days at INC-5 to do the impossible: to resolve these 1500 brackets and produce text that could be adopted as a treaty.  

Faced with the impossibility of this task, the chair of the INC process, Luis Vayas from Ecuador, came up with a new process. During the months following INC-4, he has sat down with heads of delegation to work on a new document — what is known within the negotiating circle as a non-paper.  

Within this non paper, he has suggested elements where there is sufficient convergence among States that this text can likely go forward into the new treaty. He has also highlighted the elements that require further discussion — elements that are completely unresolved among States. 

He has included in his non-paper a set of final provisions drawn from the language of other multilateral agreements. And finally, the non-paper identifies elements that would benefit from additional work after INC-5. So, from the time the treaty is adopted to the time the first Conference of the Parties convenes under the new treaty, there will be additional work required for a number of important elements. 
 
If States choose to use the non-paper as the basis of their negotiations at INC-5, they may be able to cross the finish line. It is important to note: this non-paper does not include any text related to plastic production, neither does it include text related to trade. These two elements would be important to set a high ambition treaty.  

How can we understand the options for ambition this treaty could adopt? 

Think of it as a hierarchy of measures to deal with upstream plastics. The highest ambition treaty would have tackled production levels. The next highest would have set a list of products and chemicals of concern to be controlled. And lower than that, a treaty that tackles the design of plastic products. 
 
No country has objected to dealing with plastic pollution. That's why the resolution that established these talks was so successful — all the countries coalesced around the fact that we need to deal with plastic pollution. Plastic pollution does not look good. It's an eyesore. It's something that should have been incredibly low hanging fruit.  

At the moment, what counts for plastic waste is still something that needs to be defined. At which point does plastic become waste? Does plastic become waste at the point of its production? Where quite a lot of plastic, quite a lot of waste is created in the attrition of nurdles during transportation, but also in the amount of emissions produced to make virgin plastic in the first place. Does plastic become waste only at the point of its discard by the end user? That is something that States have yet to fully engage in. We'll see how it goes.  

Finance is usually a defining issue in environmental negotiations. How is it turning up in the plastics pollution INC process? 

Finance is a hot potato issue. Parties disagree on who is supposed to pay to deal with plastic waste and how that money is supposed to flow. 

Developing countries have called for a new, independent financial mechanism funded by developed countries that would enable them to access financing for the implementation of the treaty in their countries. However, many developed countries favor using the Global Environment Facility (GEF) as a financial mechanism for this treaty. The GEF already has a funding window for chemicals. Or States could decide to have both options, like under the Minamata Convention on Mercury. 

There have been calls for industry to play a bigger part in financing the implementation of this new treaty. Some of these calls have been related to extended producer responsibility. If the treaty comes up with a strong clause or strong article on extended producer responsibility — where industry is made to pay for cases of waste or cases of poor design or cases of forever chemicals in plastic — then there may indeed be a fund established that industry will pay into for the implementation of the convention or the new treaty. 

How involved is industry in these negotiations? 

Industry has been very involved in these talks with a strong voice throughout. And under different banners — the oil and gas industry as well as various plastic manufacturers have been represented at these talks. Some NGOs, some activists have been very much alive to the fact that industry involvement in the development of this treaty could be seen as a conflict of interest. 

Hopefully a meaningful treaty will come out of plastic pollution INC-5 in Busan. What message do you think the talks need to send to the world? 

The science on plastic is still developing. There's still a lot we do not know about what plastic is and how it impacts our bodies and the ecosystems we depend on. This treaty will need to send a strong signal to the scientific community to explore these questions and deliver answers.

And it will need to send a signal to citizens around the world that this miracle invention of plastic may not be all it was made out to be.