The clock is ticking for UN to figure out how to end plastic pollution

With a challenging round of negotiations ahead, the pressure is on for countries to agree on an international treaty to end plastic pollution, observers warn. In 2022, the United Nations Environment Assembly adopted a resolution mandating member states to draft a global instrument to end plastic pollution by 2040. To do so, delegates have five rounds of negotiations, with the aim to adopt the treaty by the end of 2024. The UNEA resolution calls for an instrument “which could include both binding and voluntary approaches, based on a comprehensive approach that addresses the full life cycle of plastic.” As delegates prepare to meet up for a fourth round of negotiations in Ottawa, Canada, in late April, five months since the third round took place in Nairobi, Kenya, they have a lot on their plates to have a draft ready by the end of the year. “The last negotiations were definitely a disappointment,” David Azoulay, director of environmental health at the Center for International Environmental Law, said. “It doesn't mean that this was useless or that we didn't make any form of progress, but we left Nairobi in a place where negotiations were more complicated and possibly less advanced than what we arrived with.” In Nairobi, Luis Vayas Valdivieso, the ambassador of Ecuador to the United Kingdom, was elected chair of the next rounds of negotiations. Gustavo Meza-Cuadra, a Peruvian diplomat and former foreign minister, chaired the first three rounds of negotiations. He is optimistic about the meetings in Ottawa — but is also aware of the significant amount of work remaining. “It is key that we arrive in Ottawa knowing very well in advance how things are going to be structured,” Meza-Cuadra told Devex. Delegations need “to be very well-prepared to come with practical, also technical, views about how we can advance these discussions in order to have a text at the end of the year. It's difficult and challenging, but it's possible,” he added. Yet many people left Nairobi feeling the same way as Azoulay did. Delegates had a first version, also referred to as a zero draft, to work on, but debates and divisions over language left delegates with a near-unworkable text at the end of the meetings. As a result, many people felt that negotiations had moved backward. “What we saw in Nairobi was sort of obfuscation and some games being played,” Graham Forbes, global plastics project leader at Greenpeace USA, told Devex. “We've gone from a relatively straightforward 30-40 page framework that could have been transformed and negotiated into a legal agreement and now we have an unruly, over 100 pages of different proposals for how to deal with the problem,” he explained. For Meza-Cuadra, the long text is a natural result of negotiators trying to insert as many options and views as possible in the text, that will, hopefully, be narrowed down in Ottawa. For others, however, this is a tactic from a small group of ill-intentioned nations wanting to see negotiations derail, and maybe even fail. The low vs. high ambition coalitions Nairobi saw the world growing more and more divided between two camps. The Global Coalition for Plastic Sustainability, informally called the “low ambition coalition,” is a group of countries composed of oil-reliant economies such as Saudi Arabia, Russia, and Iran that wants the treaty to focus on ways to recycle plastic, with countries determining their own targets. In contrast, the self-declared “high ambition coalition” is a group of over 60 countries, led by Rwanda and Norway, which wants to see a cap on plastic production. For many observers, the formalization of a coalition by oil-reliant economies and their new approach to negotiations was a way of stalling progress on the treaty. “What they've done almost all the way through INC-3 [the third session of the Intergovernmental Negotiating Committee] is use process issues as a way to prevent countries having a negotiation around the substance,” Forbes said, by “using the rule of procedures, with strategic interventions managed to keep us again from talking substance for the most of the meeting.” “Ottawa will be extremely important because we are approaching … the end of the process.” --— Gustavo Meza-Cuadra, chair of the first three rounds of negotiations on a global plastics treaty Meza-Cuadra said he believes most countries negotiated in good faith in Nairobi, but he acknowledges that there is a gap in ambition and approaches between parties, especially when it comes to the life cycle of plastic. “Some countries would prefer that the text will concentrate on how to manage waste, recycling, and all that,” he said, “But the aspect of design, production is the views of the countries that would like to limit production … and so it is these views that we need to agree on." Ottawa will, for many, be instrumental in getting closer to the final text and reaching a document of a reasonable length. The treaty has to be adopted by consensus, which is an accomplishment that still seems far away for many involved in the talks. Greenpeace’s Forbes believes that the government of Canada and the new Ecuadorian chair can contribute to this goal by making sure meetings are well organized but also that the most controversial issue surrounding the negotiation — plastic production — is addressed head-on. “We need to see a much better run meeting in Ottawa,” he said, adding that high-ambition coalition countries, which includes Canada, need to “show more ambition.” Canada’s ministry of environment did not answer multiple requests for interviews. Private sector lobbying Another distracting factor in the negotiations is the omnipresence of plastic manufacturers, another loud advocate for plastic recycling rather than ending plastic pollution. Stewart Harris, senior director of global plastics policy at the American Chemistry Council, a lobby group that advocates “to drive responsible policy, and bridge the gap between the business of chemistry and policy,” said in a written statement that “Members of our delegation represent leading plastic producers from around the globe, which make, design, collect, and remake plastic products. Working together as constructive stakeholders can help improve outcomes in the global effort to eliminate additional plastic pollution.” For Forbes, the private sector has “infiltrated” the negotiations to “[continue] to put forward the illusion of plastic recycling and chemical refining [as] the updated version of a decade's old lie that you can sort of recycle your way out of this crisis.” On the private sector issue, for former negotiations chair Meza-Cuadra, “The bottom line is it’s a member states negotiations,” but he also insisted that including a diversity of voices both from the industry and civil society helps in having a holistic approach and a more comprehensive treaty. For observers, the impact private-sector lobbyists have on the negotiations is hard to underestimate. For example, Washington’s position during these negotiations has evolved, but remains quite focused on national implementation and, just like its low-ambition colleagues, on addressing the life cycle of plastic rather than binding limits on production. “The U.S. positions are in fact, interestingly, a very good mirror and alignment of … the positions of the petrochemical industry,” CIEL’s Azoulay said. The U.S. is not part of any formal coalition. However, according to Forbes, the U.S. may have become more open to talk about global goals, not just national ones, due to pressure from constituents and a fast-approaching presidential election. While hopes are high, the task ahead is a difficult one. Meza-Cuadra, who will attend the next round of negotiations as a delegate, keeps an eye on the prize and reminds himself of the potential impact a final treaty could have on the world and climate change. “I think it will be [a] landmark treaty which will be a real contribution to the environmental health,” he said. “For Ottawa, there will be huge participation not only of the states, but all the stakeholders, and I think Ottawa will be extremely important because we are approaching … the end of the process.”