New Delhi: After a rather disappointing close to the UN Climate Summit (COP29) in Baku with an underwhelming climate finance deal, countries are expected to agree on an international legally binding instrument on plastic pollution, including in seas and oceans by end of this week.
The fifth session of the Intergovernmental Negotiating Committee to develop an international legally binding instrument on plastic pollution, including in the marine environment (INC-5) is being held in Busan, South Korea where 175 parties are expected to negotiate on the text for the agreement. Following public calls for action on plastic pollution, in 2022, the UN Environment Assembly (UNEA) resolved to end plastic pollution by adopting resolution, which established an Intergovernmental Negotiating Committee to work towards a treaty. The INC has met four times since 2022 (INC-1, INC-2, INC-3 and INC-4), managing to overcome initial procedural challenges and initiating text-based negotiations based on a compilation of the draft text of the future agreement.
INC Chair Luis Vayas circulated a non-paper in late October this year that captures common ground among INC members on which they are likely to agree to.
This non-paper has a preamble which lists the reasons for phasing out plastics. It also lists exemptions that may be allowed. And it discusses plastic product design, supply (-this is to do with managing the supply of primary polymers to achieve sustainable levels of production and consumption), emissions, plastic waste management, just transition, finance to aid transition, and implementation and monitoring.
Chair Luis Vayas clarified on Monday that the Non-Paper is entirely bracketed (which means every aspect is up for discussion) , and has been proposed as a “starting point for negotiations”.
“This session is a pivotal opportunity to deal with one of the most pressing environmental problems. Plastic waste is about 80% of all marine pollution, with an estimate of 8 to 10 million MT entering oceans annually. Plastic production soared from 2.3 million tonnes in 1950 to 448 million tonnes 2015. The economic and environmental costs of this are profound. Microplastics impact human organs and are associated with serious health risks including cancers,” said Vayas during a press conference.
India could lead the world towards the development of a global criteria for single-use plastics ban, researchers from Centre for Science and Environment (CSE) who have closely followed the negotiations through the years have said. Naresh Pal Gangwar, Additional Secretary, Ministry of Environment, Forests and Climate Change is India’s lead negotiator on the treaty.
India introduced a resolution in UNEA 4, aimed at “ending single-use plastic product pollution”.
“The country is positioning itself as a leader in efforts to eliminate single-use plastics at both regional and national levels,” said Atin Biswas, programme director, Solid Waste Management and Circular Economy, Centre for Science and Environment in a statement.
In 2019, India developed a criteria-based framework to identify problematic and unnecessary single-use plastic products. A total of 40 single-use plastic products, including carry bags, small plastic bottles, intravenous (saline) bottles and tea bags were evaluated using this criteria-based method – which was then used to phase out 19 single-use plastic items that were banned from production, stocking, distribution, sale, and use from the Indian market.
“The criteria developed by India, guided by its ministry of chemicals and fertilisers, along with support and inputs from other member states advocating for a global criteria-based approach, can serve as a foundation for creating a comprehensive, logical, and science-based global framework for problematic, unnecessary, and avoidable plastic products including single-use plastic products,” Biswas added in a statement on November 23.
Plastic waste has accumulated to over 10 billion tonnes since the 1950s, filling landfills and clogging sewage systems, streams and rivers, ending up in the ocean.
The major point of contentions in the plastics negotiations is around three issues.
The first is downstream versus upstream. The original resolution called on delegates to look at the entire lifecycle of plastic. This has created several interpretations over the course of the negotiations, according to International Institute of Sustainable Development.
Some countries are interested in addressing upstream plastic, which means plastic right from a point of production. But nearly all countries are interested in looking at downstream plastic – tackling plastic waste instead of actually stopping production of plastics.
The second is on the use of chemicals. “There is a clear opening here to list the obvious harmful chemicals and to establish a process for listing those that are yet to be identified. Furthermore, are there specific plastic items that we can live without, those that so often leak into the environment? Are there alternatives to these item,” asked a statement from United Nations Environment Programme.
The third is supply and finance. The UNEA resolution called for sustainable production and consumption of plastics – taking a lifecycle approach. “This obviously takes inspiration from Sustainable Development Goal 12 that addresses sustainable production and consumption. My plea is to use this aspect of the resolution as your guiding star, while recognising that national plans and reporting will offer a critical tool for Parties to ensure adherence to the agreements that you may strike,” said Inger Andersen, Executive director of the United Nations Environment Programme during her speech at the opening plenary on Monday.
“Financing is central to multilateral environmental agreements. We saw how important this issue is to many countries in the just-concluded climate talks. The UNEA resolution clearly provides you with guidance and states that parties should consider the establishment of “a financial mechanism to support implementation of the instrument, including the option of a dedicated multilateral fund”, she added.
WHY IS A GLOBAL PLASTIC PHASE OUT TREATY NEEDED?
To end the global plastic pollution crisis.
1. More plastics and human-made chemicals have been produced than the planet can afford.
2. Waste management can’t solve the crisis, and a coordinated and dramatic reduction in plastic production is needed – only a global treaty can achieve this.
To fight climate change
1. More than 99% of plastic is made from fossil fuels.
2. If plastic’s life cycle were a country, it would be the fifth largest emitter of greenhouse gases in the world.
3. If plastic production continues as planned, by 2050 the accumulation of greenhouse gas emissions from plastic could use 10-13% of our entire remaining carbon budget.
4. By 2100, plastic’s cumulative emissions would exceed well over half of the carbon budget.
To protect health
1. Plastic packaging can contain up to 63 chemicals that scientists have identified as particularly hazardous for human health.
2. Plastic has been found in our food, water, blood, stool, and digestive systems.
Source: Break Free From Plastic (observer in the negotiations)
