The fifth UN Intergovernmental Negotiating Committee (INC-5) meeting that intended to yield a legally binding global treaty in Busan, South Korea, was meant to be the final one, but as countries remained far apart on the basic scope of a treaty and could only agree to postpone key decisions and resume talks at a later date.
More than 100 nations wanted a cap on plastic production, while a handful of oil producing countries were prepared only to target plastic waste. The most divisive issues included capping plastic production, managing plastic products and chemicals of concern, and financing to help developing countries implement the treaty.
An option proposed by Panama, backed by more than 100 countries, would have created a path for a global plastic production reduction target, while another proposal did not include production caps.
A small number of petro-chemical producing nations, such as Saudi Arabia, strongly opposed efforts to reduce plastic production and tried to use procedural tactics to delay the negotiations.
“It is clear that there is still persisting divergence,” said Inger Andersen, executive director of the UN Environment Program.
“A treaty that… only relies on voluntary measures would not be acceptable,” said Juliet Kabera, director general of Rwanda’s Environment Management Authority.
Had the divisions been overcome, the treaty would have been one of the most significant deals relating to environmental protection since the 2015 Paris Agreement.
Plastic production is on track to triple by 2050, even as microplastics have been found in the air, fresh produce, and even in human breast milk.
The inability to sign a legally binding global treaty is certainly disheartening, but it shouldn’t stop Filipinos, who are among the world’s biggest contributors to plastic pollution, from acting on their own. Because we generate so much plastic waste, there are so many things we can still do. And if we are successful in gaining ground, we could even show the world how it can be done.*
