...
...
Next Story

New dimensions to high stakes plastics negotiations

This article is authored by Kartik Ashta, international law and sustainability expert, Geneva.

Published on: Aug 01, 2025 03:23 PM IST
Advertisement

Negotiators will arrive in Geneva on August 5 to continue, and hopefully, conclude negotiations on the first global treaty to address the issues posed by plastics. This meeting is an extension of the negotiations in Busan last December, where countries were unable to agree on a final text. Recent non-binding opinions by both the International Court of Justice (ICJ) and the Inter-American Court of Human Rights (IACtHR) on the connection between the climate crisis--of which plastic pollution is a major

PREMIUMPlastics (Pixabay)
Plastics (Pixabay)

Negotiators will arrive in Geneva on August 5 to continue, and hopefully, conclude negotiations on the first global treaty to address the issues posed by plastics. This meeting is an extension of the negotiations in Busan last December, where countries were unable to agree on a final text. Recent non-binding opinions by both the International Court of Justice (ICJ) and the Inter-American Court of Human Rights (IACtHR) on the connection between the climate crisis--of which plastic pollution is a major contributor--human rights, and State responsibility, have added new dimensions to what are likely to be fraught negotiations. While these judgements can be a catalyst for consensus to address the issue of plastic pollution, the treaty and its negotiations continue to face issues that have plagued environmental treaties of the past--disagreements over form, and access to finance and technology, have contributed to countries’ inability to come to an agreement on what the treaty should look like.

PREMIUMPlastics (Pixabay)
Plastics (Pixabay)

Plastic is an essential component of the economy, with $1.2 trillion global plastics trade, and is manufactured from fossil fuels, the major contributor to greenhouse gas emissions. They are used everywhere, from packaging, to industrial applications, sports, agriculture and defence. The industry is also capital intensive, driving employment and investment, making plastics a driver of industrialisation. Around 450 million tonnes of plastic are produced every year, and this number is expected to triple by 2060. At the same time, the deleterious effects from unchecked manufacture are pervasive. Microplastics have been found in the human body, and plastic pollution has been documented in remote areas like Mount Everest. Additionally, several nations face labour protection concerns due to unsafe working conditions, exposing workers, especially children, to accidents and injury. Given the central role of plastics in the economy, and the risks they pose, a global treaty to address plastic pollution is necessary.

The United Nations Environment Assembly launched negotiations for a global plastics treaty in 2022. However, several issues of disagreement have resulted in almost three years of gridlock. The primary point of concern exists between two specific groups--the ‘Like-Minded Group’ consisting of producers of oil and gas and manufacturers of plastic, such as Russia, Saudi Arabia, and China, which supports a focus on waste management and recycling to address plastic pollution, and the High Ambition Coalition (HAC), comprising countries that support a lifecycle approach and caps on plastic production. However, this dichotomy is not the only obstacle towards concluding a robust treaty. Concerns which have plagued previous environmental treaties, impact these negotiations as well. Chief among these is the consistent shortfall of funding provided by developed nations to various climate agreements, such as the Paris Climate Agreement, and the Convention on Biodiversity. Second is the issue of transfer of technology and capacity, with concerns around protection of intellectual property taking precedence, rather than prioritising environmental protection. Third, plastic production and manufacture has largely been outsourced by the developed world to emerging markets, relocating emissions, but also creating large economies and labour forces dependent on this industry. A treaty that fails to address these concerns is likely to be a non-starter.

The opinions of the ICJ and the IACtHR can create the path towards consensus. The ICJ’s opinion has opened the door for climate litigation and grounds for attribution of responsibility to states for their actions that contribute to the climate crisis, including actions which include an increase in fossil fuel production or consumption, such as manufacturing of plastics. A recognition of the duty of countries to prevent harm gives the HAC a stronger footing to demand a focus on the entire value chain of plastic production, and not just waste management processes. Concurrently, the legal pronouncements reinforce the principle of common but differentiated responsibilities--a key component of environmental treaty making and a core part of the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC), requiring developed countries to show their commitment to combating change by increasing financial contributions and assistance through technology transfer and capacity building. These commitments are no longer just voluntary actions of good faith, but responsibilities of States who have been the larger contributors to climate change. Furthermore, the principles put forward by the opinions focus on a just transition. This can accelerate discussions around a time-bound reduction in plastic manufacture, giving members of the Like-Minded Group time to retrain their workforce, diversify industry, and ensure adequate alternatives for workers involved.

Historically, the negotiations around addressing global plastic pollution were political in nature. The opinions have now defined a concrete legal framework within which negotiations can take place. However, this framework must be interpreted and applied in a manner that works for all parties. Because plastic pollution crosses borders, a global effort is needed to address the issues that plastics pose. These legal developments provide negotiators with a potential mechanism to break the existing deadlock.

This article is authored by Kartik Ashta, international law and sustainability expert, Geneva.

All Access.
One Subscription.

Get 360° coverage—from daily headlines
to 100 year archives.

E-Paper
Full
Archives
Full Access to
HT App & Website
Games
 
SHARE THIS ARTICLE ON
Hindustantimes wants to start sending you push notifications. Click allow to subscribe