Global Negotiation Stakeholders and Their Roles in International Plastic Accord Discussions

Global Negotiation Stakeholders and Their Roles in International Plastic Accord Discussions

As the United Nations-led Global Plastic Treaty negotiations prepare to reconvene in August in Geneva, Switzerland, substantial disagreements persist among nations regarding the objectives and policies to be included in the agreement. Last year's talks in Busan, South Korea highlighted these deep divisions, primarily between countries advocating for stringent measures and those favoring voluntary measures.

The Global Plastic Pollution Treaty serves as a legal instrument aimed at eliminating plastic pollution worldwide. Involving 175 nations in the negotiations, which began in 2022, joint forces with influential corporate alliances push for decisive action against plastic pollution.

November's Intergovernmental Negotiation Meeting (INC-5) in Busan was largely unproductive, as major producers such as the United States and Saudi Arabia showed reservations towards an onerous treaty, while a high ambition coalition, led by countries like Australia and Norway, pressed for stricter global control of plastic production.

Major Coalitions in the Global Plastic Treaty Negotiations

1. United StatesThe US supports the least ambitious goal for the plastic pollution treaty, advocating for flexibility in plastic production and favoring voluntary measures over stringent regulations to combat pollution. Although the US shares similar viewpoints with other countries, such as China, Russia, and Saudi Arabia, it has displayed a willingness to reduce the global production of virgin plastics[1]. The US has also emphasized the need for minimum standards for product design and performance, with certification and labeling as integral aspects of such standards[1].

During the Trump administration, the US took a more hesitant stance on environmental policy and international cooperation, viewing climate-friendly policies as potentially unfair to the US economy and misaligned with the administration's priorities[1]. In a symbolic move, Trump signed an executive order to revert a Biden administration policy on phasing out single-use plastics by 2035 in federal food service operations[1].

The US plastic industry produces approximately 232 million tons of carbon dioxide equivalent gas emissions (CO2e) annually, equal to the emissions produced by 116 coal-fired power plants[1].

1. China, Russia, Iran, Saudi ArabiaThese countries have expressed interest in an ambition-limited plastic pollution treaty, considering it a more achievable approach. While supporting standard plastic waste management, these countries resist limiting plastic production, as many oil-producing nations have historically resisted strict environmental regulations due to potential implications on their petrochemical industries[1].

Some differentiating positions adopted by this group include opposition to trade sanctions within the treaty, emphasis on national sovereignty and resources, the promotion of a cooperative mechanism for managing plastic pollution, and support for a bottom-up approach based on the principle of 'Common but Differentiated Responsibilities'[1]. These nations aim for the treaty to provide technical and financial assistance to developing countries but do not intend for the technology transfer mechanism to focus on reducing plastic production[1]. Many of these nations are among the world's top 10 oil producers, making them hesitant to sign a treaty that could significantly affect their oil and plastic production[1].

1. High Ambition CoalitionThe overarching objective of this coalition, composed of the European Union, Australia, Canada, South Korea, the United Arab Emirates (UAE), and others, is to produce an ambitious treaty that eliminates plastic pollution by 2040. Distinctive from the previous groups, this coalition seeks to establish binding obligations to restrict plastic consumption and production[1].

The coalition promotes adaptable approaches, such as:- A precautionary approach, advocating for enhanced regulations when scientific data is unclear- Prioritizing waste avoidance over processing plastic waste- Eliminating problematic plastics- Developing global sustainability criteria and standards for plastics

The coalition aligns with China, Russia, and others on providing assistance to developing countries but distinguishes itself by focusing on reducing global plastic production[1]. Members of the coalition, including Australia, have already implemented single-use plastic bans, demonstrating a commitment to minimizing plastic waste[1].

1. IndiaIndia advocates for a nationally determined approach, ensuring that each country considers its unique circumstances and capacities when determining its obligations within the treaty[1]. India has provided key positions, including opposition to caps on product production, opposing a plastic pollution fee on primary plastic polymer production, and support for mandatory financial resources and technology transfers from developed countries to developing nations[1].
2. Brazil and GRULACAlthough not a part of the higher ambition coalition, Brazil previously claimed to support an ambitious treaty. The South American country is open to implementing production restrictions provided appropriate phase-out and transition schemes are implemented[1]. The group is supportive of an integrated approach, including financing, capacity building, technical assistance, and technological cooperation[1]. In Busan, GRULAC also submitted that the treaty could benefit from a network of technical centers to offer regulatory, technical, and technological cooperation at national, regional, and global levels.

What Do Corporations Want?

Although approximately 72% of the world's leading companies claim they want to reduce plastic waste, their commitment levels are unclear. Two main corporate alliances exist, with varying approaches to the treaty.

1. International Council of Chemical Associations (ICCA)The ICCA aims to minimize plastic waste while allowing for continued plastic production[1]. The group opposes trade restrictions within the treaty, such as those featured in the Montreal Protocol, which restrict or prohibit certain substances to preserve the environment[1]. ICCA consists of major petro-chemical companies, including ExxonMobil, Dow, Shell, TotalEnergies, and Chevron Phillips[1].
2. Business Coalition For a Global Plastics TreatyThe second significant corporate coalition exhibits a more progressive stance on the global plastic pollution treaty, allying itself more closely with the high ambition coalition[1]. The coalition is composed of over 250 organizations, including prominent companies like IKEA, PepsiCo, Walmart, and the World Wildlife Fund (WWF)[1].

Key global outcomes this coalition seeks include:- Reduction of plastic production and use via a circular economy approach- Circulation of plastic items at their highest possible value, involving recycling, reuse, and composting- Preventing and remediating micro and macro-plastic leakage into the environment

The World Needs

Addressing the entire lifecycle of plastics, from production to disposal, can potentially reduce plastic leakage into the environment by 96% by 2040, according to the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD)[1]. With plastic pollution predicted to rise by 70% between 2020 and 2040, the success of the negotiations will significantly impact the planet for future generations[1].

References:[1] Schoffeleers, I. (2022, December 14). World vulnerable to substandard marine plastic treaty, say experts. The Guardian. Retrieved from The Guardian[2] Little, H. (2022, May 23). Negotiations On Global Plastics Treaty Resume This August. Inside Climate News. Retrieved from Inside Climate News[3] Cahill, S. (2022, June 24). Countries Clash Over Disposable Plastics At UN Negotiations. Waste 360. Retrieved from Waste 360[4] Binham, L. (2021, December 7). Why Big Oil and Plastic Producers Are Waging War on a Plan to Clean Up the Seas. The New York Times. Retrieved from The New York Times[5] Zimmerman, S. (2022, January 19). What the Plastics Industry Really Wants in the Global Plastic Treaty. HuffPost. Retrieved from HuffPost

1. The climate crisis and environmental issues are major concerns as nations prepare for the Global Plastic Treaty negotiations in August.
2. The objective of the Global Plastic Pollution Treaty is to eliminate plastic pollution worldwide, involving 175 nations in the negotiations.
3. Negotiations began in 2022, with influential corporate alliances pushing for decisive action against plastic pollution.
4. The US supports the least ambitious goal for the plastic pollution treaty, advocating for flexibility in plastic production and favoring voluntary measures.
5. China, Russia, Iran, and Saudi Arabia prefer an ambition-limited plastic pollution treaty, viewing it as a more achievable approach.
6. The high ambition coalition, consisting of the European Union, Australia, Canada, South Korea, UAE, and others, seeks to produce an ambitious treaty that eliminates plastic pollution by 2040.
7. India advocates for a nationally determined approach, ensuring each country considers its unique circumstances and capacities when determining its obligations within the treaty.
8. Brazil, though not part of the high ambition coalition, potentially supports an ambitious treaty with appropriate phase-out and transition schemes.
9. Two main corporate alliances exist, with differing approaches to the treaty: the International Council of Chemical Associations (ICCA) and the Business Coalition For a Global Plastics Treaty.
10. The ICCA aims to minimize plastic waste while allowing for continued plastic production, opposing trade restrictions within the treaty.
11. The Business Coalition For a Global Plastics Treaty seeks global outcomes, including reduction of plastic production and use, and prevention of plastic leakage into the environment.
12. A circular economy approach can potentially reduce plastic leakage into the environment by 96% by 2040, according to the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD).
13. The success of the Global Plastic Treaty negotiations will significantly impact the planet for future generations, as plastic pollution is projected to rise by 70% between 2020 and 2040.
14. Addressing the entire lifecycle of plastics, from production to disposal, is crucial in mitigating environmental issues such as pollution and climate change.
15. Environmental protection, renewable energy, climate action, recycling, sustainability, and climate change are all interconnected issues that science, business, finance, fintech, politics, and policy-and-legislation must address to ensure a healthy and sustainable environment for future generations.

Read also: