Experts remain hopeful after latest round of Global Plastics Treaty negotiations

A team from the University attended two weeks of discussions by delegates from across the world at INC-5.2
INC-5.2 Global Plastics Treaty talks
Researchers from the University of Plymouth have returned from 10 days of discussions at the latest round of talks towards a Global Plastics Treaty.
INC-5.2, the resumed session of the UN Environment Programme’s Intergovernmental Negotiating Committee, was the latest gathering in the effort to negotiate an international, legally binding treaty to end plastic pollution.
Although an agreement was ultimately not reached and the talks were adjourned, the committee has agreed to resume negotiations at a future date to be announced.
A number of researchers from the University attended the discussions in Geneva, Switzerland, as they have with previous meetings in France, Kenya, Canada, and the Republic of Korea.
Together with fellow coordinators, Trisia Farrelly and Bethanie Carney Almroth, Professor Richard Thompson OBE FRS led a delegation of 58 members of the Scientists' Coalition for an Effective Plastics Treaty – an international network of 450 independent scientists spanning 65 countries worldwide.
The delegation also included a number of researchers affiliated with the University: Dr Max Kelly , Lucy Howarth-Forster , Professor Sabine Pahl (Honorary Professor in Plymouth, also working at the University of Vienna), and Dr Winnie Courtene-Jones (Visiting Researcher in Plymouth and working at Bangor University).
Professor Sabine Pahl, Professor Richard Thompson, Dr Max Kelly and Dr Winnie Courtene-Jones at INC-5.2
Professor Thompson, Head of the International Marine Litter Research Unit and a co-coordinator of the Scientists’ Coalition for an Effective Plastics Treaty, spent time in Geneva meeting delegates from all over the world, discussing the most effective ways for scientific evidence to be translated into the global actions needed to address plastic pollution and the ways to reach a consensus on that among the more than 170 nations present.

After returning to Plymouth, he said:

"It is obviously disappointing that those around the table couldn’t reach agreement following ten days of negotiations. However, as someone who has spent the past three decades looking at the issue of plastic pollution, I feel it’s better to have no agreement than global support for something which may have been diluted to such an extent as to render it meaningless."

There are well over 100 nations supporting the principles of an ambitious treaty to end plastic pollution. In addition, some are undecided and getting the best available scientific evidence to inform their decisions has been a key part of my work over the last week. There are also some nations with lower ambition, and this I think is mainly because they fear the treaty could bring economic costs for their countries – for example, those countries who are major producers of oil and gas, which is the carbon source for plastic production.

We need to be clear this is not a treaty to end plastic production, but a treaty to end plastic pollution. The treaty needs to set in place development of criteria to ensure that only plastic products which bring an essential use to society are produced and that such products are safer and more sustainable than at present.
This will require development of international criteria together with standards, testing and labelling, to provide a level playing field to support innovation and facilitate international trade in safer and more sustainable products.

Plastic pollution contaminates our planet from the poles to the equator and from our deepest oceans to our highest mountain. Microplastics are in the air we breathe, the water we drink and the food we eat. Pollution occurs along the entire lifecycle of plastics and negatively affects economies, wildlife and human health, with exposure starting in the womb and continuing throughout life. And plastic production is set to triple over the next few decades so, unless we take action, the problem will escalate.

The science clearly indicates the need for an internationally binding treaty to end plastic pollution. One thing that struck me is that some nations have stringent health and safety regulations in their own country, but do not support such standards being applied internationally via the treaty. One can only speculate as to the reasons for this, but the United Nations was established to facilitate cooperation among nations to tackle challenges such as plastic pollution.
We can only hope that for the sake of the planet and future generations, negotiators take a more collaborative approach at the next round of negotiations.

Having attended dozens of meetings and met hundreds of negotiators and representatives from industry and civil society organisations as part of the INC process, my feeling after INC-5.2 is that the willingness to reduce the global threats posed by plastic pollution is stronger than ever.

The precise nature of any future agreement and its implementation is what’s still to be agreed, and this is a rapidly evolving space. At the last round of negotiations in 2024, for example, the United States supported ambition and what can be achieved by multilateralism. However, less than a year later, all of that has evaporated and the same policy negotiators are taking a different stance, so it’s too early to say how negotiations will unfold going forward.

Richard Thompson OBE FRSProfessor Richard Thompson OBE FRS
Head of the International Marine Litter Research Unit

Professor Richard Thompson speaks during a press conference at INC-5.2 organised by the Scientists’ Coalition for an Effective Plastics Treaty
Professor Richard Thompson with the Chile delegation at INC-5.2
INC-5.2 sculpture
 

Read more about our marine litter research and activities

More related news

INC-5.2 Global Plastics Treaty talks
United Nations

Supporting the Global Plastics Treaty

Plastic litter washed up on beach with tree

International Marine Litter Research Unit

Lighthouse made of data and connections. Getty Images 868075408

Public policy influence

 

Students choose Plymouth for courses related to the sea. Find out why:

Lecture on a beach on the Portugal field course