The world’s intensifying battle against plastic pollution faced a sobering setback in Busan as international negotiations for a global plastics treaty concluded without an agreement. The fifth session of the Intergovernmental Negotiating Committee to develop an international legally binding instrument on plastic pollution, including in the marine environment (INC-5), took place from 25 November to 1 December 2024 in Busan, Republic of Korea.
Representatives from over 170 nations gathered in late November with hopes of formulating a robust plan to tackle the spiralling plastic waste crisis. However, the talks ended amidst entrenched divisions, delaying a resolution many consider critical to the planet’s future.
Diverging Visions
At the heart of the negotiations lay a chasm between two factions: the “high-ambition” coalition of over 100 countries advocating for legally binding limits on plastic production and oil-producing nations, along with some developing states, who resisted such measures. “The objective of this treaty is to end plastic pollution, not plastic itself,” declared Kuwait’s negotiator, encapsulating the resistance to production caps from nations heavily reliant on the oil and petrochemical industries.
Plastic production, which has soared from two million tonnes in 1950 to over 400 million tonnes annually today, is projected to double by 2040. This trajectory threatens to exacerbate environmental degradation and could constitute 15% of global carbon emissions by mid-century.
Frustration and Resolve
The failure to produce a treaty text has drawn sharp criticism. Campaigners decried the lack of progress, with Sean Savett, a spokesperson for the U.S. National Security Council, lamenting how “a small group of countries and producers stood in the way of progress to protect their profits.” Such sentiments echoed a broader frustration with corporations that continue to prioritise recycled plastics over more sustainable, reusable alternatives. Coca-Cola, for instance, recently abandoned its commitment to 25% reusable packaging by 2030, drawing accusations of “greenwashing” from activists.
Despite the disappointment, some observers are cautiously optimistic. Sr. Patty Johnson, attending on behalf of the Sisters of St. Joseph of Carondelet, remarked, “I had a general sense that everyone agreed this is a once-in-a-generation opportunity. The challenge lies in how ambition is defined.”
The Path Forward
The incomplete negotiations underscore the complexity of addressing a problem deeply intertwined with global economics, environmental health, and corporate interests. Plastic’s lifecycle, from production to waste management, remains contentious. While some nations champion comprehensive measures encompassing production, use, and disposal, others favour a narrower focus on waste management and recycling.
Adding to the challenge, microplastics and their effects on health and ecosystems intensify the urgency for action. Research linking microplastics to severe health risks, including heart attacks and strokes, has only amplified calls for decisive intervention.
Still, progress, albeit incremental, has been made. Key elements of a treaty framework, such as a financial mechanism to support implementation (which could involve a global fund for plastic pollution reduction) and criteria for regulating specific polymers (which could include setting limits on the use of certain types of plastic), are taking shape. Negotiators are expected to reconvene in 2025 to build on these foundations.
Reimagining Solutions
A shift in the narrative around plastics is essential to achieve meaningful change. Von Hernandez of Break Free from Plastic encapsulated the issue, criticising corporations for perpetuating single-use culture: “Recycled single-use items still pollute the environment. The focus must be on reuse and reduction at the source.”
Incentivising innovation in alternative materials, expanding reusable systems, and integrating scientific research into policymaking could pave the way for more sustainable practices. However, bridging the gap between nations’ varied economic dependencies and environmental goals will require exceptional diplomacy and commitment.
A Global Imperative
Plastic pollution transcends borders, washing up on remote island shores and infiltrating the deepest ocean trenches. While the Busan talks fell short of expectations, they underscored the shared recognition that a global solution is imperative. “We have not yet reached the summit of our efforts,” affirmed Luis Vayas, Ecuador’s vice minister of foreign affairs and negotiations chair. His words reflect the determination of many to persist despite the obstacles.
The road to a global plastics treaty may be fraught with challenges, but it remains a journey worth taking. The stakes — ecological integrity, public health, and the sustainability of our planet — demand nothing less than a collective and unwavering resolve.
