Inhaltsverzeichnis
What is new?
The fifth session of the Intergovernmental Negotiating Committee (INC) on plastic pollution concluded in Busan, South Korea, without delivering a binding international agreement. Delegates from over 170 nations and observers from more than 440 organisations gathered between 25th November and 1st December 2024 to develop a global treaty addressing plastic pollution at INC-5. Despite the complex negotiations, a delayed conclusion was reached, with a revised draft intended to serve as the basis for further discussions in 2025.
A long and difficult process
The negotiations in Busan were marked by intense disputes and recurring delays. Certain nations were accused of deliberately stalling the process, while environmental groups criticized the League of Arab States and other like-minded countries for employing procedural tactics to impede the discussions.
Discussions revolved around the Chair’s draft text, which evolved from an initial non-paper* that had been used as the basis for negotiations. This draft provided a more practical foundation than earlier versions but sparked disagreements.
The negotiations exposed a deep divide: oil-producing nations like Saudi Arabia, Russia, and Iran pushed for voluntary measures, while a coalition of 104 countries, including the EU-states, African and Latin American nations, called for binding reductions in plastic production and bans on harmful substances. Rwanda, representing 85 of the participating nations, reinforced this stance, demanding strict limits on plastic production and the elimination of hazardous chemicals. These opposing positions blocked a final agreement.
The negotiations were organised into four key contact groups focusing on plastic production and chemicals, waste management and environmental impact, financial mechanisms and international collaboration, and implementation and compliance. These groups met regularly – often late into the night – to discuss various proposals.
By the final day, the Chair’s Text had been established as the working document for future negotiations. This document was developed through multiple revisions of the initial non-paper and was finalised based on discussions throughout the week. The process saw substantial debate, with some countries advocating for strong binding commitments, while others pushed for a more flexible approach. Although the final text was considered clearer than previous versions, key elements such as the treaty’s scope remained unresolved, leading to mixed reactions from delegations.
Contentious debates and standpoints
A major debate centred on whether measures should be mandatory or voluntary and whether they should apply globally or at a national level. Many developing countries, aligned with the African Group’s proposal, pushed for financial support mechanisms to aid in the implementation of treaty commitments, particularly in areas related to waste management and capacity-building. Over 80 countries demanded legally binding bans and phase-outs for harmful plastic products and chemicals, though opposition from oil-producing nations stalled negotiations.
While the European Union and 104 countries from Africa, Latin America, and small island nations pushed for reducing global plastic production and banning harmful substances, major oil-producing nations and some developing economies resisted such measures. These opposing positions prevented a final agreement.
Criticism and challenges
The negotiation process itself faced criticism, particularly regarding transparency and participation. Civil society observers were largely excluded, raising concerns that only state representatives could voice their positions. There continued to be accusations of obstruction by ‘unambitious’ countries, which allegedly used delaying tactics such as blocking work between meetings and stalling discussions. The consensus-based nature of the negotiations also allowed a small group of countries to significantly influence or block progress.
Concerns also arose regarding the draft treaty’s content. While it was more structured than previous versions, it lacked specificity on key points, including binding commitments on problematic plastic products and chemicals. Some delegations argued that the latest revisions did not adequately reflect the discussions held in Busan, adding to frustrations.
What lies ahead
Despite the lack of a finalised treaty, there remains cautious optimism. The new Chair’s Text, while incomplete, serves as a basis for future negotiations at INC-5.2 (since this fifth meeting, called INC-5, should have been the last, the name INC-5.2 was chosen for the further meetings on the UN Global Plastics Treaty). However, the timing remains uncertain. Some nations advocate resuming discussions in early 2025, while others, particularly those resistant to stronger measures, push for a later date, potentially in July or August 2025.
Executive Director of the UN Environment Programme Inger Andersen emphasised the progress made, noting that negotiations yielded greater convergence on the treaty’s structure and key elements, despite persistent disagreements. Environmental organisations, including Greenpeace, see the postponement as an opportunity to push for stronger measures rather than rushing into a weak agreement.
Conclusion: A pivotal moment for global plastic policy
While the failure to reach a consensus is a setback, the negotiations have clarified the ambitions of the negotiating states and their differences between those seeking ambitious, binding commitments and those resisting regulation. A weak, non-enforceable treaty would be a failure in addressing the escalating global plastic crisis. However, the ongoing negotiations provide a crucial chance to shape a stronger treaty with meaningful commitments that can effectively combat plastic pollution and its environmental and health impacts.
As INC Chair Ambassador Luis Vayas put it, ‘Ambition takes time to land. We have many of the elements that we need, and Busan has put us firmly on a pathway to success.’ Whether this optimism translates into a meaningful and binding global treaty will depend on the willingness of nations to bridge their differences in the months ahead.
* A non-paper is an unofficial document and can be understood as a working or discussion paper. Although it is not binding, it can promote discussion and serve as a basis for compromise due to the suggestions it contains regarding definitions, measures or mechanisms.
