From ambition to implementation: delivering the energy transition and industrial transformation in 2026
Insight by Sandra Ghosh, Susanne Lein
News publ. 19. Nov 2024
Since 2022, negotiations have been underway for a global plastic agreement aimed at combating plastic pollution. Despite growing attention, progress has been limited, as many countries reject binding measures. The fifth round of negotiations now faces the challenging task of finalizing an agreement.
In late November 2022, the first session of the Intergovernmental Negotiating Committee to develop an international agreement against plastic pollution began in Punta del Este, Uruguay. This initiative followed the UN Environment Assembly (UNEA 5.2) in Nairobi, which recognized the urgency of the issue and mandated the negotiations. Plastic pollution is a growing global problem that affects both the environment and human health. The goal of the negotiations is to create an agreement that addresses the entire lifecycle of plastics in the combat of plastic pollution.
In recent years, adelphi has been actively working worldwide to combat plastic pollution:
For developing the treaty against plastic pollution, adelphi has outlined three core objectives:
During the second negotiation round, two main groups of states emerged: the "waste faction," which views plastic pollution as a disposal issue, and the "High Ambition Coalition," which also focuses on reducing plastic production. These divisions persisted through the fourth negotiation round, complicating agreements on measures to curb the production of primary plastic polymers. Nonetheless, progress was made in drafting the treaty, with two expert groups established to address financing mechanisms and hazardous chemicals in plastics.
What has changed over the past two years of negotiations?
Awareness of plastic pollution has increased, but the negotiations themselves have seen little change. In Ottawa, conflicts were sharper, and the tone was harsher. Additionally, the number of countries opposing specific regulations has grown.
Have adelphi consult’s core recommendations been incorporated into the treaty?
Unfortunately, no. Proposals to cap and gradually reduce plastic production, as well as the phase-out and banning of harmful additives, remain highly contentious.
Over 20 countries, including influential ones like China, India, Russia, and Saudi Arabia, oppose any measures targeting plastic production. Without their participation, the treaty is unlikely to succeed. Fewer than 50 countries support legally binding global targets, while the majority prefer voluntary national goals. In Ottawa, these disagreements led to intense clashes between proponents and opponents of stricter measures.
Similarly, regulating harmful additives faces resistance. Only ten countries outright reject any regulation, but they include key players like Iran, Russia, and Saudi Arabia. Other influential nations, such as China, India, and the US, support only minimal action.
There is more consensus on global standards for making plastic products environmentally friendly, sustainable, and easier to recycle. Most states support binding global rules rather than recommendations for minimum criteria.
The least controversial aspect is addressing existing plastic pollution, but questions about financing and technology remain unresolved.
What successes can be celebrated?
So far, none. No decisions have been made.
In Ottawa, conflicts between countries advocating for an ambitious treaty and those focusing only on end-of-life plastic measures (e.g., waste management) were too severe. In Busan, challenges are likely, as the current draft text spans over 70 pages and contains 3,500 brackets indicating unresolved issues. States must determine whether the text reflects their perspectives. The negotiating chair's proposal for a simplified text may help, but there are mixed signals about its acceptance. Furthermore, procedural rules have yet to be adopted, complicating decision-making.
If the widely discussed possible outcome—a framework agreement—is achieved, the minimum goal would have been achieved. However, since specific commitments would then require further negotiations, combating plastic pollution would be delayed. This would be extremely worrying in view of extent of this environmental crisis in terms of negative environmental and health impacts.
What are adelphi’s post-INC-5 tasks?
This largely depends on the outcome of INC-5. If negotiations continue, adelphi will remain engaged, for instance, through the PROMAR project supporting the Dominican Republic and Costa Rica. If an actionable treaty is achieved, adelphi would support the development of national plans, reporting, and monitoring.