December 3, 2024 16:03

A week of intense, largely closed-door negotiations failed to produce an international agreement on a binding treaty to reduce plastic pollution. The fifth session of the Intergovernmental Negotiating Committee (INC-5), held recently in Busan, South Korea, concluded with general statements of intent and a postponement to a follow-up meeting (INC-5.2) scheduled for next year.

The session brought together more than 3,300 delegates, including representatives from over 170 nations and observers from more than 440 organizations. Discussions focused on two documents drafted by INC Chair Ambassador Luis Vayas Valdivieso, which will serve as the foundation for the next round of talks.

While some progress was made on elements like ecodesign and waste management—welcomed by the plastics industry—many environmental groups expressed disappointment with the lack of a meaningful agreement. Activists accused a small number of states of blocking stricter measures, such as a global reduction in plastic production.

“It’s disheartening to walk away from INC-5 without a meaningful treaty in hand,” said Erin Simon of the WWF. “When member states unanimously agreed to deliver a treaty the planet needs by 2024, the world believed them. Now, the price for inaction is far greater than wasted time. It puts both planetary and human health on the line and sets us up for a scenario where ambition could diminish over time.”

Key divisions remain over the treaty’s scope, limits on plastic production, and the handling of hazardous chemicals, preventing negotiators from finalizing a draft.

Virginia Janssens, managing director of Plastics Europe, acknowledged the progress made at Busan: “Although we were hoping for an ambitious and implementable legally binding agreement, we believe that progress has still been made in Busan. We believe the agreement needs measures promoting sustainable production and consumption, effective waste management, and reporting frameworks that enable a just transition to a circular economy—one in which end-of-life plastic is considered a circular feedstock and commodity with real value rather than waste that is littered, landfilled, and incinerated.”

Chris Jahn, representing the Global Partners for Plastics Circularity (GPPC), emphasized the need for further deliberation to achieve an inclusive and practical treaty. He reiterated the importance of focusing on waste management and transitioning to a circular economy where end-of-life plastics are treated as resources, not waste.

© Polimerica -  Reproduction prohibited, all rights reserved