Global Plastics Treaty: From Ottawa to Busan

CCB • May 13, 2024

On April 30, 2024, the fourth meeting of the Intergovernmental Negotiating Committee (INC-4) for a global agreement to end plastic pollution concluded in Ottawa, Canada. The event brought together over 2,500 participants from governments, academia, civil society organizations, private sector entities, UN agencies, and international organizations. Coalition Clean Baltic reflects on its participation alongside many other civil society organizations.


Meeting Dynamics


The INC's work was organized into two primary contact groups. The first group addressed introductory elements (Part I: preamble, objectives, principles, scope, and just transition) and substantive provisions (Part II). The second group focused on Part III (Means of Implementation), Part IV (Implementation Measures), Part V (Institutional Arrangements), and Part VI (Final Provisions). These contact groups were further divided into sub-groups to discuss specific elements and provisions.


Countries agreed to advance intersessional work on financial mechanisms, plastic products, chemicals of concern, product design, reusability, and recyclability. However, discussions on primary plastic polymers were excluded from this mandate. Member states decided to include observers in this intersessional work and established a legal drafting group to review the text and provide recommendations to the plenary.


Peru and Rwanda emerged as champions by proposing intersessional work aimed at reducing global use of primary plastic polymers by 40% from 2025 levels by 2040. This proposal received strong support from several countries, including Malawi, the Philippines, and Fiji. In addition, the Bridge to Busan Declaration on Plastic Polymers was launched to garner support for addressing primary plastic polymers in the treaty text, building momentum for the fifth and final round of negotiations in Busan, Republic of Korea, later this year. However, this declaration is non-legally binding and does not address fossil fuel extraction.

Outcomes of INC-4


The main outcomes of INC-4 were:

  • Transitioning from a zero draft, which was a collection of inputs from member states, to a first draft "owned" by the INC, allowing for line-by-line negotiations.
  • Securing intersessional work on regulating chemicals and products.
  • Agreeing to establish a legal group to translate the draft text into appropriate legal language, starting from INC-5.


Reflections


Significant work remains. The transition from a zero draft with 69 pages to a first draft, approximately ten to eleven pages shorter but with over 3,000 brackets of text, marks progress but highlights the extensive negotiations still needed. The first draft, unlike the zero draft, is created and maintained by the INC, enabling more detailed negotiations. However, it still lacks the structure typical of a treaty.


We welcome the decision to conduct intersessional work on chemicals, products, and the financial mechanism. The INC decided to have an open-ended expert meeting between INC-4 and INC-5, but the participation of observers will be limited. It is disappointing that intersessional work will not address the overproduction of plastic, and there is concern about the ongoing focus on plastic recycling, given the increasing evidence that recycling plastic spreads toxic chemicals.


Despite not securing intersessional work on primary plastic polymers, provisions related to polymer production remain in the draft treaty. This is despite efforts by several countries to exclude these provisions from the future agreement's scope.


What Next


With high-ambition issues seemingly off the table, it remains to be seen whether delegates can agree on common ambition levels for other elements or if this will become a "plastics pollution treaty à la carte." Even if a global mandate on key provisions is still possible, some crucial elements may only be included as voluntary options, if at all.


Nonetheless, the treaty could lay the foundations for strengthening ambition levels in the future, especially through the governing body's work to implement and further international collaboration on plastic pollution. The treaty's eventual ambition level does not prevent countries from adopting stronger measures in their national action plans. With more clarity on the treaty's potential post-INC-5, participants and observers can remain hopeful about the power of multilateralism to end plastic pollution.

CCB Recommendations


We urge countries to:

  1. Recognize that more plastic production leads to more plastic pollution. Ending plastic pollution is impossible without curbing plastic production.
  2. Implement the treaty's health objectives by eliminating hazardous chemicals used in plastic production.
  3. Ensure a toxics-free circularity by preventing hazardous chemicals in recycled plastics. Promoting the recycling of plastics with hazardous chemicals will increase exposures and undermine the treaty's health objectives.


Background

As plastic pollution becomes increasingly visible on land and in waterways, calls to address the mounting plastic waste crisis have grown worldwide. Of the approximately 10 billion tonnes of plastic produced since the 1950s, over 8 billion tonnes are now waste, with 10-15 million tonnes leaking into the marine environment each year. This figure is expected to more than triple by 2050.

Studies link unsustainable production and consumption patterns to the exponential growth of plastic pollution, impacting human health and terrestrial and marine ecosystems. Reports in 2022 found plastic particles in human lungs and blood, and a 2021 report found microplastics in human placentas.


***

Article written by Eugeniy Lobanov, CCB Hazardous Substances Working Area Leader

 

Useful resources:

UNEP INC-4 page

IISD Report for INC-4

IPEN Resource page on plastic



Photos by IISD/ENB - Natalia Mroz
By CCB July 2, 2025
The first meeting of the Open-Ended Working Group (OEWG) on the Global Framework on Chemicals (GFC) was held in Punta del Este, Uruguay, from 23–27 June 2025 , bringing together government representatives, intergovernmental and non-governmental organizations, including the Coalition Clean Baltic representative, the private sector, youth, and academia. This marked the first global gathering since the GFC was adopted at the Fifth International Conference on Chemicals Management (ICCM5) in 2023. The primary focus of OEWG-1 was to take stock of progress since ICCM5 and to discuss how best to operationalize the framework’s goals. Participants exchanged views on implementation needs and priorities, as well as preparatory work for the first International conference of GFC , expected in 2026. Advancing Implementation Programmes Across Key Sectors A central discussion point was the development of terms of reference (ToR) for three Implementation Programmes under the GFC. One of these programmes will include sector-specific sub-programmes , aiming to promote safer chemicals management practices in industries such as electronics, textiles, health care, and construction . The intent is to support sector-wide engagement, innovation, and accountability in reducing chemical risks. Delegates also addressed the selection and future treatment of chemical Issues of Concern (IoCs) - substances or groups of substances that require global attention, e.g. lead in paints, highly hazardous pesticides, environmentally persistent pharmaceutical pollutants , and others) . While there was broad support for retaining all currently recognized IoCs, discussions highlighted the need for clear criteria, dedicated workplans, and adequate resourcing to ensure each IoC is actively addressed rather than left unresolved. Financing as a Cornerstone of Effective Implementation Discussions made clear that successful implementation of the GFC will require adequate, sustained, and predictable financial resources . The meeting explored the operation of the GFC Fund , with particular attention to how it might be improved to ensure equitable access to financial resources , especially for low- and middle-income countries. Ideas for a resource mobilization strategy were also shared, with many participants emphasizing the importance of sustained public and private sector contributions. There was significant support for applying the “polluter pays” principle , ensuring that industries contributing to chemical pollution take financial responsibility for managing its impacts. The intersessional work ahead of COP1 will be critical for shaping a robust financing mechanism that matches the framework’s ambition. Global Alliance on Highly Hazardous Pesticides launched A major milestone from the meeting was the launch of the Global Alliance on Highly Hazardous Pesticides (HHPs) . This new initiative aims to promote international collaboration, knowledge exchange, and support for safer alternatives, including agroecological approaches that reduce reliance on harmful substances in agriculture. Regional Perspectives: Implications for the Baltic Sea “ For the Baltic Sea region , chemicals management remains a critical environmental and public health issue ”, commented Eugeniy Lobanov, Leader of the Hazardous Substances Working Area at Coalition Clean Baltic . “ Implementation of the GFC provides an opportunity to reinforce regional actions under the HELCOM Baltic Sea Action Plan , especially concerning the reduction of hazardous substances entering the marine environment, e.g., pharmaceutical pollutants ”. It is important that Baltic Sea countries actively contribute to the GFC’s development and ensure regional priorities are reflected in global strategies. To read summary report of OEWG 1 . *** Article written by Eugeniy Lobanov, CCB Hazardous Substances Working Area Leader Photos by IISD/ENB - Natalia Mroz
By CCB June 17, 2025
On Wednesday, 28 May, the International Council for the Exploration of the Seas (ICES) published its scientific advice for fish stocks in the Baltic Sea . In response, environmental NGOs from around the Baltic Sea region urge the European Commission to propose, and fisheries ministers to adopt, fishing opportunities at levels well below the headline advice to safeguard ecosystem needs and dynamics and allow for rapid recovery of Baltic Sea fish populations.