Little Progress for the International Effort to End Plastic Pollution
By Jessica Boswell
Jessica Boswell is a recent graduate of the University of California, Santa Barbara, and an intern with the International Marine Mammal Project. While pursuing her Bachelor’s degree in Environmental Studies, she co-founded the UCSB Environmental Law Club and worked as a research assistant studying community ecology on the Palmyra Atoll. With aspirations to attend law school in the near future, Jessica hopes to become a dedicated advocate for marine animals.
The fourth round of negotiations for the United Nations Plastics Treaty ended in disappointment for environmental advocates, who were hoping for substantial progress towards a stronger treaty to curb the escalating crisis of plastic pollution.
Convening in Ottawa, Canada, just one day after Earth Day, the fourth meeting of the Intergovernmental Negotiating Committee (INC-4) began on a high note, with environmental advocates excited at the possibility of major progress. Environmental organizations, including Plastic Pollution Coalition (PPC), our sister project within Earth Island Institute, worked tirelessly throughout the week to advocate for limits on plastic production, emphasizing the inadequacy of waste and design management in thwarting the growing crisis.
However, their efforts were stonewalled again by plastic industry representatives, who spent their time at the negotiating table offering false information about the nature of the problem and the solutions required to solve it.
Alarmingly, this round of negotiations saw a 37% increase in the number of fossil fuel, plastic, and petrochemical industry representatives compared to the previous session. They outnumbered both the Scientists’ Coalition for An Effective Plastic Treaty and the Indigenous Peoples Caucus by a factor of 3 to 1 and 7 to 1, respectively. Their presence was also not limited to the walls of the negotiating sessions – there were pro-plastic advertisements plastered around the city despite opposition by environmentalists, who have continually demanded stronger conflict-of-interest policies to prevent such practices.
Negotiators also failed to incorporate more restrictions on plastic fishing gear. Prior to INC-4, the International Marine Mammal Project (IMMP) of Earth Island Institute sent a letter to treaty delegates urging them to implement treaty provisions regarding day-to-day use of fishing gear, rather than simply focusing on discarded gear. IMMP laid out several possible provisions such as time and area closures and bans on particularly problematic fishing gear, to no avail.
The updated treaty guidelines still contain weak language and focus almost exclusively on discarded fishing gear. While discarded fishing gear is a real problem, the treaty language ignores the damage done when plastic fishing gear, such as drift gill nets, entangle and drown dolphins, whales, sharks, sea turtles, rays, and other non-target species. Many types of plastic fishing gear, such as plastic gill nets, are indiscriminate.
A fur seal is carrying plastic netting around his neck. He will die unless the netting is removed. Often, such nets will cut into the neck of the seal, making it hard for rescuers to remove.
INC-4 was also unsuccessful in creating treaty provisions to guarantee compliance by member states. Such mechanisms are crucial to any international environmental treaty, and without them, environmental advocates are left to wonder whether this treaty will be at all effective in addressing the crisis.
On a positive note, there was a strong presence of indigenous and frontline community representatives at the negotiations. This is essential, because these groups are among those most harmed by plastic pollution. Thanks to the information and experiences shared by these groups, there seemed to be an increased awareness among some negotiators about how plastics disproportionately harm the health of the most underserved communities. PPC has joined such communities in advocating for limits on plastic production to address pollution and injustice. However, Indigenous and frontline groups still experienced significant barriers to full, equitable participation in INC-4, a major hurdle yet to be overcome.
Some nations, including Perú, Rwanda, and the Pacific Island States, acknowledged the demands of these communities and proposed an intersessional committee to research options for reducing production before the final session in November. However, too many nations remain steadfast in their loyalty to the fossil fuel industry, and no such committee was agreed upon.
Intersessional research groups will continue to work on the treaty over the next six months, before convening once more for, what is scheduled to be, the final negotiating session in Busan, Republic of Korea, at the end of November. It was ultimately decided that the groups would focus on financial mechanisms to support the treaty and possible approaches to evaluating plastic products and their associated chemicals.
Although these areas of research are important, the lack of focus on reducing production, addressing justice, and enforcement of treaty provisions may signal that the fifth and final negotiating session will, yet again, fail to establish the kind of treaty provisions necessary to combat the growing plastic crisis.
“The opportunity to deliver one of the most significant global agreements in history remains on the table,” stated Jen Fela, Plastic Pollution Coalition Vice President of Programs and Communications, who attended INC-4, but time is running out. The fossil fuel industry is spending millions to promote a false narrative that waste management and product design will be enough to solve this crisis. But what is truly needed is a strict limit on the production of plastics.
WHAT YOU CAN DO
Plastic Pollution Coalition emphasizes the importance of making every voice heard: signing global and national petitions and sending letters to delegates could turn the tide before the final negotiating session. Although the outcome of the INC-4 session was less than desirable, there is still hope that member states will reconsider their loyalties to the fossil fuel industry and guarantee the health of their communities by committing to a plastic-free future.
Find more information on the treaty and the plastic problem here.
Read the IMMP report The Plastics Plague: Marine Mammals and Our Oceans in Peril here.