The Next Step in Global Plastics Policy: INC-5’s Lessons and Opportunities

As I reflect on the outcomes of the recent fifth round of negotiations (INC-5), which was initially expected to be the final meeting in the journey toward a global plastics treaty, it’s clear that the forces shaping these talks remain divided. While INC-5 did not produce a final agreement, the opposing forces and competing ideas on the table were starkly evident.

If INC-5 had truly been the concluding session, it likely would have resulted in a weak, voluntary treaty that garnered broad support but lacked any real impact. The danger of rushing a decision would have been an agreement that appeased everyone but ultimately failed to address the scale of the plastics crisis. But rather than seeing this as a setback, I choose to be optimistic—this still represents an opportunity to do better.

An ambitious global treaty that enforces strong, binding regulations across the full lifecycle of plastics remains possible. This treaty should restrict or phase out problematic and avoidable plastic products while keeping virgin plastic production at sustainable levels. It would set global standards for the entire plastics industry – one that’s legally binding and built on the principle of long-term environmental sustainability.

The Root of the Resistance: Production Caps

The heart of the matter lies in when production caps will be addressed at the negotiation table. Countries with the largest plastic production capacities – most notably those with heavy ties to the fossil fuel industry – are reluctant to embrace production cuts. They have substantial political and economic power, supported by oil wealth and strong lobbying efforts.

This is why 5 rounds of negotiations still haven’t resulted in an agreement. Their solution? They claim the problem lies with insufficient recycling infrastructure, and if we fix that, we can solve the plastic pollution crisis. While recycling is indeed part of the solution, it’s not enough on its own. Data from a recent WBCSD report show that effective eco-design and recycling are critical, but they will fall short unless we also address upstream production and the sheer volume of plastic being created.

The Case for an Ambitious Treaty

An ambitious, legally binding treaty offers a real opportunity to prevent plastic waste from ever being created. It’s about finding a balance between the pre-industrial era and the technological advancements we have today. The goal should be to produce only what is truly necessary and create a new economy – one that is circular, focusing on reuse, recycling, repair, repurposing, and composting systems.

However, this shift toward circularity is viewed as too risky by the petro-states. It requires innovation, investment, and the political will to disrupt the status quo. And for these countries, that’s not an attractive proposition. The Russian delegation, for example, echoed the talking points of the fossil fuel industry, arguing that production doesn’t directly contribute to pollution and claiming that cutting production would lead to food insecurity and hinder economic development.

What’s even more revealing, and frankly tragicomic, is how “sustainability” is understood differently depending on who you ask. I’ve personally experienced this divide in my recent job. As reported by the New York Times, for some members of the Saudi delegation at INC-5 in Busan, “sustainability” means ensuring the continued demand for oil (!). This highlights the extreme alignment between petro-states and certain vested interests—an alignment that we must confront head-on if we want to make meaningful progress.

A Beacon of Hope: Rising Support for Stronger Action

Despite the resistance, there is hope. An increasing number of coalitions – comprising governments, businesses, and citizens – are rallying behind an ambitious treaty that includes production caps. For example, the Business Coalition for a Global Plastics Treaty brings together businesses and financial institutions committed to supporting a legally binding, effective treaty that includes production reduction. The High Ambition Coalition is another group of countries advocating for the restraint of plastic consumption and production at sustainable levels. Additionally, the Bridge to Busan initiative seeks to amplify calls for greater ambition in the plastics treaty negotiations.

At the closing plenary, 94 countries part of the Bridge to Busan Initiative issued a statement calling for a “legally binding obligation to phase out the most harmful plastic products and chemicals of concern.” This collective declaration, alongside the countries supporting it, offers a glimmer of hope for future rounds of negotiations.

While the date and location for INC-5.2 (or potentially INC-6) remain uncertain, it’s clear that the petro-states aren’t in a rush to reach an agreement. Iran and Saudi Arabia, for example, suggested that members shouldn’t reconvene until the middle of next year. In the meantime, the coalition of ambitious countries and NGOs continues to build momentum and strengthen its case.

Onward to the Next Meeting

Though the path forward remains challenging, the conversation is far from over. The growing coalition of countries pushing for an ambitious treaty is gaining strength, and there’s still time to craft a deal that addresses the root causes of the plastic pollution crisis. The next round of negotiations will be pivotal, but the optimism and determination shared by many stakeholders will continue to drive us forward. Onward to the next meeting!