Global efforts to establish a groundbreaking treaty to address plastic pollution have once again collapsed after 10 days of intense negotiations in Geneva failed to bridge deep divisions. Over 1,000 delegates from at least 180 countries, assembled under the Intergovernmental Negotiating Committee (INC), left the Swiss UN headquarters early on Friday, 15 August, with no agreement and no clear path forward.
The disappointment was widespread. Delegates lamented the inability to reach a treaty on plastic pollution.
“South Africa is disappointed that it was not possible for this session to agree a legally binding treaty and positions remain far apart,” the country’s delegate acknowledged.
Reflecting the mood, Cuba’s representative told the plenary that negotiators had “missed a historic opportunity but we have to keep going and act urgently… The planet, and present and future generations need this treaty.”
The mandate and the deadlock
The talks were billed as the final round in the delivery of a global, legally binding plastics treaty, a process mandated by the United Nations Environment Assembly in 2022. Previous sessions, including a tense meeting in Busan last year, had similarly fallen short of agreement. Despite fatigue, the delegates worked late into the night, hopeful of reaching a consensus.
However, fundamental disagreements defined the outcome. The High Ambition Coalition –comprised of the EU, UK, Canada, and many African and Latin American states – demanded limits on plastic production and controls on toxic substances. The opposing camp of oil-producing nations, known as the Like-Minded Group – including Saudi Arabia, Kuwait, Russia, Iran, and Malaysia – insisted that the treaty should focus on waste management and rejected any caps on production.
An ambition undermined
Ecuador’s Luis Vayas Valdivieso, chairing the negotiations, introduced two draft treaties, but neither garnered consensus. As the session was adjourned using a gavel made from recycled plastic bottle tops, frustration filled the room.
France’s Ecological Transition Minister, Agnes Pannier-Runacher, said she was “enraged because despite the sincere efforts of many and significant advancements… no concrete outcomes have been achieved”.
Colombia’s delegate, Haendel Rodriguez said a deal had been “blocked by a small number of states who did not want an agreement.” Palau’s delegate, on behalf of 39 small island states, lamented,
“It is unjust for [our countries] to face the brunt of yet another global environmental crisis we contribute minimally to.”
The missing pieces in the draft
At the core of the breakdown of negotiations was the latest draft treaty text that was tabled. In a significant concession to opposition from oil-producing states, the draft dropped explicit provisions to cap plastic production and regulate toxic chemicals – key demands from the High Ambition Coalition. Instead, it focused on waste management and voluntary measures, which many nations and advocacy groups viewed as being too weak to address the crisis.
This watered-down approach drew sharp criticism from the European Union, Latin American nations, and civil society, who argued that “no deal is better than a weak deal.” The controversy over the draft’s content crystallized the underlying rift and ultimately made consensus impossible. No immediate plans were made to reconvene, with Vayas calling for further talks in the future.
Cracks in multilateralism
The disappointment resonated beyond the delegates with Christina Dixon of the Environmental Investigation Agency (EIA) noting:
“The final round of negotiations exposed deep geopolitical divides and resistance to confronting the real drivers of plastic pollution… No deal is better than a toothless treaty that locks us into further inaction… The failure to reach agreement is a blow to multilateralism, with devastating long-term consequences.”
Producer interests vs. public good
The coalition of fossil fuel producers, sometimes joined by the United States, successfully opposed binding caps on virgin plastic production, despite nearly 100 countries advocating for such limits to be implemented to fight projected plastic levels tripling by 2060. Swiss lead negotiator Felix Wertli called for a “time-out” to reconsider the process.
Read also: Plastic pollution crisis looms as nations clash over a global plastics treaty
Robin Degron, Director of Plan Bleu, told DevelopmentAid that a global plastics treaty was always “very improbable” and has ultimately failed due to opposition from major plastic-producing and petroleum-exporting countries. He highlighted that strong industry lobbying in the Western world further weakened the chances of reaching a global agreement. According to Degron, the solution lies in focusing on regional conventions, particularly the Barcelona Convention, which can effectively regulate plastics in sensitive areas such as the Mediterranean. He emphasized that “to avoid global failure, we must focus on achieving concrete regional successes where the impact is most urgent.”
Environmental researcher Khalid Suleiman told Development Aid that reaching a global agreement to reduce plastic use was never truly possible from the outset. He explained that “the influence of plastic companies worldwide is far greater than the strategies proposed by states to limit plastic use.” Suleiman stressed that the plastic industry is as important globally as the oil industry, making it extremely difficult to convince companies to scale back production. He added that “without a global solution to reduce emissions and decrease fossil fuel use in industry, achieving a worldwide agreement on cutting plastic production and use remains extremely difficult.”
Cautious optimism amid disappointment
Inger Andersen, Executive Director of the UN Environment Programme (UNEP), which facilitated the negotiations, expressed cautious optimism despite her disappointment with the outcome. She emphasized that meaningful progress had occurred as the talks clarified the opposing positions and the red lines of different parties. “Multilateralism has never been easy,” Andersen told reporters, highlighting that reaching a treaty of this magnitude in two to three years would have been unprecedented. Her comments underscored the complexity of the process while affirming the commitment to continue efforts.
Civil society’s warning
Civil society was unequivocal. Graham Forbes, Greenpeace Head of Delegation and Global Plastics Campaign Lead, stated that:
“The inability to reach an agreement in Geneva must be a wake-up call for the world: ending plastic pollution means confronting fossil fuel interests head on. The vast majority of governments want a strong agreement, yet a handful of bad actors drove ambition into the ground. We cannot continue to do the same and expect different results. The time for hesitation is over… Now is the time for courage and perseverance. We need a strong, legally binding treaty that cuts plastic production, protects health, and ends pollution from extraction to disposal.”
