Global Plastics Treaty Talks Resume in Geneva: Is This the World’s Last Chance to Act?

Campaigners say industry lobbyists must be banned from the talks to secure a meaningful outcome.

Talks to finalize a Global Plastics Treaty resumed in Geneva on Tuesday, 5 August, as negotiators seek to overcome the deadlock that stalled progress last year.

Over the next two weeks, national delegations must reach a consensus on several critical issues to establish a legally binding international agreement to tackle plastic pollution.

This marks the second part of the fifth session of the Intergovernmental Negotiating Committee (INC-5.2), following the breakdown of negotiations in Busan, South Korea, in December 2023.

With global awareness of the plastic crisis—and its devastating environmental and health impacts—continuing to grow, momentum is building for a treaty that meets the scale of the challenge.

At the UN Ocean Conference last month, ministers and representatives from over 95 countries signed a declaration known as the “Nice Wake-Up Call,” outlining key steps needed for a meaningful outcome. Chief among their demands: a full lifecycle approach to plastics, including mandatory limits on plastic production and the phasing out of toxic chemicals.

Earlier this week, more than 60 leading scientists from around the world also called on governments to adopt ambitious, enforceable measures in Geneva.

“This is not just a call for action—this is the scientific community bearing witness,”
— Professor Steve Fletcher, Director, Revolution Plastics Institute, and Editor-in-Chief of Cambridge Prisms: Plastics.

“We’ve watched the evidence pile up for decades. This treaty is a test of whether the world is prepared to govern plastics in a way that reflects the scale and urgency of the crisis.”

Meanwhile, a Greenpeace report published this week highlights how the negotiations face stiff opposition from industry lobbying and countries lacking ambition.

What Do Scientists Say Is Needed to Solve the Plastics Crisis?

Experts argue that the stakes at INC-5.2 couldn’t be higher. This is the world’s best—and possibly last—opportunity to secure a binding agreement that addresses plastic pollution across its entire lifecycle.

Some major petroleum-producing nations want the treaty to focus solely on plastic waste, avoiding limits on production. But scientists insist that meaningful action must include capping and reducing plastic production and safeguarding human health.

Nano- and microplastics have been found in every part of the human body, from brain tissue to breastmilk.

“There is clear and growing evidence that plastic poses serious risks to human health. Yet the treaty’s approach to health protection still hangs in the balance,”
— Dr. Cressida Bowyer, Deputy Director, Revolution Plastics Institute, University of Portsmouth.

The treaty, she argues, must explicitly address human health impacts in its core obligations.

Experts are also calling for the inclusion of trade policy in the treaty. Nearly 99% of plastics are derived from fossil fuels, and their production and distribution rely on global trade networks.

“To be effective, the treaty must address the real-world architecture of the plastics economy, where trade is the connective tissue,”
— Professor Maria Ivanova, Northeastern University, USA.

“Trade must be reimagined as a tool for transformation. If it’s part of the crisis, it must also be part of the cure.”

To build what she describes as a “structurally sound and environmentally ambitious treaty,” Prof. Ivanova and others argue that corporate lobbying and greenwashing must be kept away from the negotiating process.

Are Plastic Companies Blocking Action?

According to the Center for International Environmental Law (CIEL), 220 fossil fuel lobbyists attended the Busan negotiations in December—making them the largest single delegation, even outnumbering the EU and its member states combined. They tripled the number of delegates from the Scientists’ Coalition for an Effective Plastics Treaty.

A new Greenpeace UK report reveals how major petrochemical companies have systematically lobbied to prevent reductions in plastic production, while reaping enormous profits from its expansion. Since the treaty process began in November 2022, companies including Dow, ExxonMobil, BASF, Chevron Phillips, Shell, SABIC, and INEOS have reportedly sent 70 lobbyists to negotiations.

Greenpeace says these lobbyists are pushing “false solutions” like chemical recycling, which distract from the need to limit production.

Outside the negotiation halls, these companies are accelerating production. According to Greenpeace, seven petrochemical giants have produced enough plastic since treaty talks began to fill 6.3 million garbage trucks—equivalent to five and a half trucks every minute.

“Our research shows that those with the most to lose from meaningful regulation are working hardest to obstruct it,”
— Anna Diski, Report Author and Senior Plastics Campaigner, Greenpeace UK.

“We can’t allow corporations that profit from plastic pollution to write the rules. Otherwise, we’ll end up with a toothless treaty.”

“It’s time to ban lobbyists from the talks and for UN Member States to stand firm and support a strong treaty.”

“The scientific consensus is clear,” adds Professor Fletcher.
“The only question is whether governments will respond.
This treaty could be transformative—but only if it avoids the traps of voluntary commitments and techno-fixes.
This is the world’s last chance to act boldly.”

Support Dawat Media Center

If there were ever a time to join us, it is now. Every contribution, however big or small, powers our journalism and sustains our future. Support the Dawat Media Center from as little as $/€10 – it only takes a minute. If you can, please consider supporting us with a regular amount each month. Thank you
DNB Bank AC # 0530 2294668
Account for international payments: NO15 0530 2294 668
Vipps: #557320

  Donate Here