[[link removed]]

CORPORATE GREED AND NATIONAL INTERESTS TORPEDOED THE UN PLASTICS
TREATY  
[[link removed]]


 

Dr. Norbert Stute, Klaus Moegling, and Rachael Mellor
August 19, 2025
Common Dreams
[[link removed]]

*
[[link removed]]
*
[[link removed]]
*
*
[[link removed]]

_ The latest round of negations show just how difficult it is to
enforce humanitarian and ecological objectives which go against the
interests of the oil industry and oil-producing countries. _

The sculpture "The Thinker's Burden" by Benjamin Von Wong is
displayed outside the United Nations plastics treaty negotiations in
Geneva., Florian Fussstetter/UNEP/Flickr/CC BY-NC-SA 4.0

 

A legally binding Global Plastics Treaty
[[link removed]]
was first proposed in March 2022 when 175 nations signed a resolution
at the United Nations Environment Assembly committing to draft the
treaty. Negotiations have, however, been stalled by disagreements for
years.

This treaty was seen as our greatest chance to address the plastics
crisis on a global scale across its entire lifecycle, from production
to disposal. In August 2025, at the Intergovernmental Negotiating
Committee (INC)-5.2, 184 countries negotiated the details of the
agreement in Geneva, resulting in an outcome that many have labelled a
failure.

The Plastics Crisis

Plastic was once hailed as a great invention, but is now increasingly
seen as a considerable risk to human health, the environment, and the
economy. In a 2016 report, the World Economic Forum found that, at
current rates, it is predicted that without a solution, "_O__ceans
will contain more plastic than fish by 2050."_

Plastics production has increased twentyfold since 1964, and now 360
million metric tons of plastic waste is created every single year.
Just 9% of this is recycled effectively. One-third will end up in
fragile ecosystems such as the world's oceans. Plastic production is
set to triple by 2060.

There are about 16,000 different plastic chemicals, the effects of
which are still largely unexplored; this includes per- and
polyfluoroalkyl substances (PFAS
[[link removed]]) and other forever chemicals
[[link removed]]. Toxic chemicals
now pose one of the greatest threats to humanity, alongside the
climate crisis, species extinction, and nuclear weapons.

As with the fossil fuels industry, big tobacco, and the arms trade,
profits are privatized, but the burden is carried socially.

There are already five marine regions which are completely
contaminated with plastic and can no longer support life. The most
infamous is the Great Pacific Garbage Patch in the North Pacific,
which is twice the size of Texas.

Plastic is now considered a health risk with an estimated cost of up
to $1.5 trillion
[[link removed]]
per year. Plastic is inhaled from the air and consumed in food and
drinks. Tiny microplastic
[[link removed]]
particles have been found in human blood, brains, intestines, and
placentas, which can cause cancer, heart attacks, and strokes. Once
they have entered the environment, microplastics cannot ever be
removed.

The vast majority of synthetic plastics are derived from crude oil,
natural gas, or coal. The transition away from fossil fuels in the
energy sector has led many fossil fuel companies to shift their
attention to the plastics industry, building new manufacturing sites
and ramping up production. Plastics play a significant role in the
climate crisis [[link removed]] and are
responsible for 5% of global greenhouse gas emissions—twice as much
as global air traffic.

Mismanagement of plastic waste results in the vast majority of it
being discarded, burned, or relocated to poorer regions of the world,
where it is released back into the environment and ultimately finds
its way into our oceans.

UN Plastics Treaty Conferences

 

An installation of wasted materials turned into art by Tan Zi Xi is
shown. (Photo by Choo Yut Shing/Flickr/CC BY-NC-SA 2.0)

There have so far been six rounds of talks organized by the UN
Environment Programme (UNEP [[link removed]]), none of which
have resulted in a consensus. The previous session of the
Intergovernmental Negotiating Committee (INC-5.1
[[link removed]])
in Busan, South Korea was unable to overcome opposition to an
international plastics treaty and adjourned until the next year.

The main points of contention were the inclusion of mandatory caps on
plastic production and the use of toxic chemicals in processing.

Oil and gas-producing countries such as Saudi Arabia
[[link removed]], Russia, Iran, Egypt,
Kuwait, and the USA have been stalling progress, as they oppose
production targets and prefer to focus on waste management. The UNEP
conferences have been swarmed by fossil fuel lobbyists who have been
very much part of the pressure groups blocking a strong deal.

The INC-5.2 [[link removed]]
took place in Geneva from 5-15 August 2025. Representatives from 184
countries and numerous national and international nongovernmental
organisations (NGOs) took part under the auspices of the United
Nations. It was the largest round of international negotiations since
the Paris Climate Agreement
[[link removed]]
in 2015 and the UN Biodiversity Summits
[[link removed]].

Outcome of the Plastics Treaty Talks (INC-5.2)

 

The UNEP INC-5.2 Plenary is shown. (Photo by Alejandro Laguna
Lopez/UNEP/Flickr/CC BY-NC-SA 4.0)

The talks formally closed on August 15 without a deal—a historic
opportunity missed. Two days before the decision was made, chairman
Luis Vayas Valdivieso presented a proposal that was deemed
unsatisfactory by the conference delegates. The draft
[[link removed]]
practically dropped all measures to reduce plastic production and
referred mainly to the handling of plastic waste that has already
entered the environment.

The conference was extended by one day, which left just hours to find
a compromise. A revised draft
[[link removed]]
was submitted by the chair at the last hour. It was also deemed not
fit for discussion by high-ambition countries as it omitted the key
concepts of reducing plastic production, regulating chemicals of
concern, and creating a fund to tackle plastic injustice in the Global
South.

Forming a coalition of the willing, which excludes states blocking the
deal, will enable countries that want a strong plastics treaty to
fulfil their mandate without obstacles and move forward together.

The main obstacle to securing a strong deal was the UN's requirement
for consensus in decision-making. For years, delegations have been
urging a reform to a democratic voting system, allowing drafts to be
approved with a two-thirds majority. Most governments support a strong
treaty. The consensus process bows to low-ambition countries, who are
backed by powerful corporations intent on blocking real solutions.

Colombia's delegate, Sebastián Rodríguez, blasted the talks, stating
that "_t__he negotiations were consistently blocked by a small number
of states who simply don't want an agreement." _Even French President
Emmanuel Macron [[link removed]]
stepped in to call for a successful conclusion in the interest of
future generations.

There is currently no confirmed date or venue for the next round of
negotiations.

High Ambition Coalition—Supporters of a Strong Plastics Treaty

Co-headed by Norway and Rwanda, a group of like-minded countries have
formed The High Ambition Coalition
[[link removed]] made up of many European
countries, including the UK, Germany, and France, many small island
nations, Japan, many Latin American countries, and even the UAE.

Their common goal is to end plastic pollution by 2040 and implement a
strong plastics treaty which is both legally binding and effectively
monitored. In preparation for the INC-5.2, the coalition drafted the
Nice Wake-up Call
[[link removed]]
in June 2025.

Their three primary objectives are:

* Restrain plastic production and consumption to sustainable levels;
* Introduce a circular economy for plastics; and
* Implement environmentally sound management of plastic waste
globally.

Solutions for the Plastics Crisis

Civil society organizations such as the Scientists' Coalition for an
Effective Plastic Treaty, Business Coalition for a Plastics Treaty,
Break Free From Plastic, Greenpeace
[[link removed]], WWF, IPEN, the Center
for International Environmental Law, GAIA, Environmental Justice
Foundation, and groups of Indigenous peoples are calling for:

* Regulations which significantly limit production for producers by
at least 40%;
* A plastic tax on plastic products;
* Annual financing of $240 billion by 2040 to establish a global
waste management system—far less than the costs of doing nothing;
* Implementing a polluter pays principle;
* Banning single-use plastics, which make up half of plastic use and
two-thirds of short-lived plastic waste;
* The integration of the plastics crisis into school curricula to
help instil correct behaviors regarding plastic use and disposal; and
* Reuse, refill, and bottle return initiatives to enable efficient
recycling.

Plastic credits
[[link removed]]
and carbon offset schemes are not a viable solution. They merely
enable uninhibited plastic production under the guise of offsetting
emissions elsewhere. The incineration of plastic must also be
minimized as a method of plastic disposal, as it adds even further
carbon to our atmosphere.

The Road Forward for a Plastics Treaty

 

The decomposition times of marine debris are shown. (Photo by
Zephyrschord/CC BY-SA 4.0)

Just seven countries are responsible for the production of two-thirds
of the four most widely used types of plastic worldwide. China leads
by a wide margin, producing as much plastic as the next six largest
producers. The USA follows in second place, producing more than the
countries in the EU combined. The countries with the highest plastic
consumption per capita are the USA, closely followed by South Korea
and Australia.

The plastics crisis does not respect geographical boundaries; the
whole of humanity must consume and produce less plastic. The
technology and materials for replacing plastic with more ecologically
compatible materials are already a reality. The plastics industry
needs to be refocused and jobs transformed.

As with the fossil fuels industry, big tobacco, and the arms trade,
profits are privatized, but the burden is carried socially. This
strategy is now an institutionalised playbook. Profits must not take
precedence over environmental and health concerns. Lobbyists must be
excluded from negotiations.

This conference shows just how difficult it is to enforce humanitarian
and ecological objectives which go against the interests of the oil
industry and oil-producing countries. The failed deal is a metaphor
for global conflicting interests, a lack of ability to compromise, and
the shortsighted behavior of profiting states and companies.

An eye-opening meta study
[[link removed]]
from 2024 revealed the following:

_We reviewed economic and environmental studies on global plastic
pollution and we estimate the global cost of actions toward zero
plastic pollution in all countries by 2040 to be US$ 18.3-158.4
trillion (cost of a 47% reduction of plastic production included). If
no actions are undertaken, we estimate the cost of damages caused by
plastic pollution from 2016 to 2040 to be US$ 13.7–281.8 trillion.
These ranges suggest it is possible that __the costs of inaction are
significantly higher than those of action__._

How long does humanity want to go on like this?

The High Ambition Coalition should continue to organize, expand its
networking, and initiate the next round of negotiations with a
well-prepared draft. Forming a coalition of the willing, which
excludes states blocking the deal, will enable countries that want a
strong plastics treaty to fulfil their mandate without obstacles and
move forward together.

Individually, we can reduce our purchases and consumption of plastic
and improve our management of plastic waste. Individuals can seek out
alternative products such as those made from natural materials or
bioplastics
[[link removed]],
which are biodegradable.

Environmental education
[[link removed]],
which informs politicians and citizens about the extent and
consequences of plastic waste, is essential. It promotes ecological
commitment, civil society engagement, and informed voting behavior.

Environmental protection can be enforced by legal action. The climate
ruling
[[link removed]]
by the International Court of Justice on July 23, 2025, initiated by
Vanuatu, officially states that the human right to a clean, healthy,
and sustainable environment is protected by law. Legal action can and
should also be taken to reduce plastic production and pollution.

The online platform Better World Info has extensively researched and
documented the Plastics Crisis
[[link removed]]
and the Global Plastics Treaty
[[link removed]].
It provides additional resources and proposed solutions.

===

Dr. Norbert Stute is a physician and the founder and coordinator of
the nonprofit information platform betterworld.info.

===
Prof. Dr. Klaus Moegling is a political scientist, sociologist, and
author of the book "Realignment. A peaceful and sustainably developed
world is (still) possible." Which you can read here:
[link removed]
===
Rachael is a key writer for the nonprofit platform Better World Info,
which focuses on global issues such as peace, human rights,
environment, and social justice. Her articles are also published in
The Transnational and Peace News. Follow her work at
www.betterworld.info [[link removed]] and
@BetterWorldInfo.
===

* Plastics; Pollution; Oceans; United Nations; Corporations;
[[link removed]]

*
[[link removed]]
*
[[link removed]]
*
*
[[link removed]]

 

 

 

INTERPRET THE WORLD AND CHANGE IT

 

 

Submit via web
[[link removed]]

Submit via email
Frequently asked questions
[[link removed]]
Manage subscription
[[link removed]]
Visit xxxxxx.org
[[link removed]]

Twitter [[link removed]]

Facebook [[link removed]]

 




[link removed]

To unsubscribe, click the following link:
[link removed]