Major sticking points and difficulties

There remains much ground to cover in resolving the following issues:

1. Scope of the agreement

Fundamentally, the scope of the treaty remains contentious. Some countries advocate for a broad scope that addresses the entire lifecycle of plastics (including curbs on production), while others prefer to focus solely on tackling plastic waste. This divergence in views has led to significant delays in the negotiations. The High Ambition Coalition (including the UK) seeks a comprehensive approach, while a “like-minded” group, including China, Saudi Arabia and Russia, prefers a more limited scope.

2. Primary plastic polymers

Discussions on limiting production of primary plastic polymers have proven to be particularly divisive. Some delegations support mandatory limits on production of virgin plastic, while others advocate for voluntary measures only. A number of delegations argue that restricting production would exceed the terms of reference for the treaty. UNEA Resolution 5/14 specified a treaty on plastic pollution, albeit one that is based on a comprehensive approach that addresses the full lifecycle of plastic. It called for a treaty to promote:

• Sustainable production and consumption of plastics through, among other things, product design and environmentally sound waste management, including through resource efficiency and circular economy approaches; and
• National and international cooperative measures to reduce plastic pollution in the marine environment, including existing plastic pollution.

Promoting sustainable production is arguably very different from placing limits on overall total volumes of plastic production. This is an area where countries whose economy (and businesses) are part of the plastics value chain may be diametrically opposed to those who perhaps mainly suffer the negatives of plastic littering beaches and other aspects of their natural environment.

3. Chemicals and polymers of concern

Countries appear to be wide apart on how to address the use of chemicals and polymers of concern. Some delegations propose inclusion of globally agreed measures to regulate the use of these chemicals, while others would prefer the measures to be determined nationally by each party. It has been suggested there should be a prescriptive list of chemicals banned for incorporation into plastics, but reactions to this approach are mixed, with some countries arguing it goes beyond the treaty mandate. Others see such a list as essential for effective regulation.

4. Single-use plastics and microplastics

The regulation of single-use plastics and the use of microplastics is another contentious area. Again, while some countries support adoption of a global list of plastic products that are subject to a ban or phase-out, others call for nationally determined measures. There is no uniform understanding amongst countries regarding which are “problematic” and “avoidable” plastic products that should be subject to such measures.

Likelihood of a deal

It is hard to be optimistic on the prospect of negotiations clinching a deal by year-end 2024:

• The current working draft is a compilation of comments, most of which remain in square brackets, with little having been settled to date; and
  The deep divisions on key issues, such as the scope of the agreement and the regulation of primary plastic polymers, pose substantial challenges.

It is helpful that a legal working group will be on hand at INC-5 tasked with ensuring the drafting is coherent, but the success of INC-5 will largely depend on the ability of delegates to find common ground on the major issues.

What next if no deal is agreed?

Ideally, UN members will come to together to renew the mandate for a further round of talks.

In the meantime, we expect to see individual national efforts to combat plastic pollution with divergent approaches that will struggle to achieve significant headway in the global context of the problem. That said, national and voluntary actions have had notable local successes (such as reducing plastic bag use very significantly (in the UK) or ensuring return of plastic drinks bottles (in Germany and the Nordic countries)).

Conclusion

If a worthwhile agreement is reached at INC-5, it will be a remarkable achievement in the relatively short time since UNEA Resolution 5/14 was adopted on 7 March 2022.

With global supply chains moving huge volumes of plastic goods (and packaging) around the planet every day, and plastic litter being spread uncontrollably by the wind and ocean currents, addressing plastic pollution requires a multilateral approach as it is a fundamentally transboundary problem.