Despite significant efforts by some people and movements to reduce plastic waste, the reality is exactly the opposite. From plastic cups, bags, and tableware to fossil fuels, in 2025, global plastic waste remains an important environmental issue as it affects natural ecosystems. This year’s discussions in Geneva to agree on a treaty to tackle the global plastic pollution crisis ended in nothing. According to the United Nations Environment Programme, without an agreed international resolution, plastic waste is predicted to triple to 1,200 million tons by 2060, which will cause significant damage to the planet and to human health. If the consequences are so drastic, why did the plastic treaty talks collapse, and what is the future of plastic consumption? Check some expert opinions here.
Key Takeaways:
- For 10 days, some 2,600 participants from 183 countries gathered at the United Nations headquarters in Geneva to negotiate a legally binding treaty to fight plastic pollution.
- According to experts, the Geneva negotiations on this treaty collapsed because countries could not bridge a fundamental divide.
- On a positive note, experts state that plastic credit mechanisms, traceability systems, and localized collection networks can have a meaningful impact even without global agreements.
- A credible treaty should therefore combine limits on virgin plastic with an equal investment in alternatives such as bioplastics, algae-based polymers, or advanced composites.
DevelopmentAid: Why did the Geneva plastics treaty negotiations fail, and in the absence of a global agreement, will the world continue with ‘business-as-usual’ plastic production?
“The Geneva negotiations exposed the fundamental fiction underlying global environmental diplomacy: those voluntary commitments can address systemic crises that are driven by the maximization of profit. Countries were decisively split over production limits because plastic manufacturing represents hundreds of billions in petrochemical revenues that no industry willingly abandons. My work across UNEP, GSK, and AU-IBAR reveals a harsh truth: without binding production caps, circular economy initiatives merely optimize waste flows while production volumes continue to expand exponentially. The African Continental Strategy I developed identifies this as the core contradiction – recycling infrastructure is unable to scale faster than virgin plastic production, particularly when oil remains artificially cheap through subsidies. The failure was inevitable because the negotiators treated the symptoms rather than the causes. Developing nations correctly recognized that production limits would disproportionately constrain their industrial growth while wealthy countries maintain existing capacity. Meanwhile, industry opposition to chemical toxicity provisions demonstrates corporate capture of the process. Business-as-usual will continue because the economic incentives remain unchanged. Regional strategies such as Africa’s may slow local impacts but, without addressing upstream production economics, they function as environmental theater rather than a systemic transformation. The mathematics are unforgiving: incremental efficiency gains cannot outpace exponential growth curves.”
“The Geneva negotiations on a global plastics treaty collapsed over a core divide: oil-producing nations insisted on downstream solutions like waste management and recycling, while the High Ambition Coalition countries demanded a full life-cycle approach with production limits, chemical controls, and reuse systems. The deadlock is frustrating, but not surprising. Expecting 183 countries to agree on such a complex treaty in less than two years was always ambitious. Most global environmental agreements take decades. Still, the urgency is undeniable: according to UNEP estimates, 11 million tonnes of plastic leak into our oceans every year, and this is impacting not only the environment but also people’s health, biodiversity, and economic activities. However, even if global diplomacy advances slowly in this polarized era, in my everyday work in the Asia region – one of the most heavily affected by plastic pollution, I can see local and national initiatives multiplying and deepening cross-sectoral collaboration. Many of the stakeholders disappointed by the outcomes of INC 5.2 found renewed motivation to take concrete action. Governments can set policies that reward companies for transforming their models. Businesses – from global multinationals to innovative start-ups – can collaborate on scaling solutions, from reusable systems to advanced sorting and recycling technologies. NGOs play a crucial role in supporting the informal waste sector, which collects most recyclables worldwide. We cannot afford to wait for a perfect treaty. Real change will come from coordinated local and national action through government leadership, corporate innovation, and community engagement. Global diplomacy may be slow, but plastic pollution demands that we act now.”
See also: Plastics treaty talks collapse: Disappointment and division linger
“The Geneva plastics treaty collapsed under the weight of politics and economics. A record 234 fossil fuel and chemical industry lobbyists attended, outnumbering many national delegations and weakening ambitious targets. Producing nations resisted binding caps while developing countries sought financing for waste management which created deadlock over responsibilities. The UN’s consensus-based decision-making, which allows any single state to block progress, proved fatal. Disagreements over toxic chemical regulations further stalled negotiations. This structural weakness, combined with divergent national interests, doomed the talks. Despite this setback, we’re not destined for business-as-usual. Plastics weren’t designed for today’s scale; production has exploded from 2 million tonnes in 1950 to over 300 million annually. However, my East Africa experience reveals potential through circular economy innovations. Plastic credit mechanisms, traceability systems, and localized collection networks demonstrate meaningful impact even without global agreements. While progress will be uneven, these practical solutions offer hope for breaking the pollution cycle.”
“The Geneva plastics-treaty talks collapsed because nations could not reconcile starkly different visions. Over 100 countries demanded binding production cuts and controls on toxic additives, while the petro-states, led by the U.S. and Saudi Arabia, blocked limits, preferring recycling and waste management. Industry lobbying further weakened consensus, and the consensus-based UN process allowed even a handful of opponents to derail progress. But simply capping plastic production may not be enough. Plastics remain vital to health care, infrastructure, and even renewable energy technologies. Without cost-effective substitutes, a ban would risk failure. A credible treaty should therefore combine limits on virgin plastic with equal investment in alternatives – such as bioplastics, algae-based polymers, or advanced composites – backed by quotas, tax breaks, and R&D subsidies. The EU is already subsidizing bioplastic scale-up, while Japan’s circular economy strategy mandates innovation targets. Without both restraint and innovation, business-as-usual will prevail, and global plastic waste could still triple by 2060, with dire consequences for people and planet.”
The global plastic challenge can become a real opportunity for experts in international development to make a change. For candidates with expertise in climate, fundraising, proposal writing, and donor engagement, there are plenty of opportunities in mobilizing resources to tackle this issue. Where can all these opportunities be found? One way is to scroll for weeks or months through dozens of websites. The other, much more effective way is to become an Individual Professional Member of the DevelopmentAid community and find all the relevant openings in one place. DevelopmentAid.org even offers information about short-term consultancies via open tenders and grants for individuals, insights into organizations and donor profiles, salary trends, access to recorded webinars, organization awards, and shortlisted organizations. All these can help candidates target their applications appropriately.
