BUSAN, South Korea – Representatives from 175 countries convened Monday in Busan for the fifth round of negotiations on a landmark global treaty to combat plastic pollution.
However, deep-seated disagreements threaten to derail efforts to finalize the agreement.
Hosted by South Korea, the United Nations’ Intergovernmental Negotiating Committee (INC-5) meeting marks what was initially intended to be the concluding phase of treaty talks.
Yet, lingering disputes—primarily over capping plastic production—leave the timeline for an accord uncertain.
Countries like Saudi Arabia and China, major petrochemical producers, have staunchly resisted attempts to impose limits on plastic production.
In contrast, the United States surprised observers in August by aligning with the High Ambition Coalition—a group including the European Union, Kenya, and Peru—supporting production caps.
However, with Donald Trump now re-elected as U.S. president, doubts have surfaced about whether Washington will maintain its new stance.
During his first term, Trump pulled the U.S. out of several international agreements and prioritized domestic oil and petrochemical production.
A spokesperson for the White House Council on Environmental Quality said the U.S. remains committed to addressing plastic pollution but avoided commenting on production caps specifically.
The stakes for countries like Fiji are especially high. “Despite not producing any plastic, we bear the brunt of its downstream effects,” said Sivendra Michael, Fiji’s climate minister, speaking at COP29 earlier this month.
Microplastic pollution is impacting the Pacific island nation’s fisheries, ecosystems, and public health.
Inger Andersen, executive director of the U.N. Environment Programme, remains optimistic.
Citing a recent G20 communique that calls for a legally binding treaty by the end of 2024, she noted, “If there is a will, I think we will get there.”
While supporting a treaty in principle, petrochemical industry leaders argue that mandatory production caps would stifle innovation and inflate consumer prices.
Instead, they advocate for solutions focused on recycling and reducing waste.
Martin Jung, a senior executive at chemical giant BASF, stressed that the treaty should prioritize pollution mitigation rather than production limits.
Proposals for funding mechanisms, such as a $60-$70 per ton levy on primary polymer production, have also faced industry resistance.
Advocates, including France, Kenya, and Barbados, say such levies could generate $25-$35 billion annually to support developing nations’ climate transitions and plastic waste management.
However, deep-seated disagreements threaten to derail efforts to finalize the agreement.
Hosted by South Korea, the United Nations’ Intergovernmental Negotiating Committee (INC-5) meeting marks what was initially intended to be the concluding phase of treaty talks.
Yet, lingering disputes—primarily over capping plastic production—leave the timeline for an accord uncertain.
Countries like Saudi Arabia and China, major petrochemical producers, have staunchly resisted attempts to impose limits on plastic production.
In contrast, the United States surprised observers in August by aligning with the High Ambition Coalition—a group including the European Union, Kenya, and Peru—supporting production caps.
However, with Donald Trump now re-elected as U.S. president, doubts have surfaced about whether Washington will maintain its new stance.
During his first term, Trump pulled the U.S. out of several international agreements and prioritized domestic oil and petrochemical production.
A spokesperson for the White House Council on Environmental Quality said the U.S. remains committed to addressing plastic pollution but avoided commenting on production caps specifically.
The stakes for countries like Fiji are especially high. “Despite not producing any plastic, we bear the brunt of its downstream effects,” said Sivendra Michael, Fiji’s climate minister, speaking at COP29 earlier this month.
Microplastic pollution is impacting the Pacific island nation’s fisheries, ecosystems, and public health.
Inger Andersen, executive director of the U.N. Environment Programme, remains optimistic.
Citing a recent G20 communique that calls for a legally binding treaty by the end of 2024, she noted, “If there is a will, I think we will get there.”
While supporting a treaty in principle, petrochemical industry leaders argue that mandatory production caps would stifle innovation and inflate consumer prices.
Instead, they advocate for solutions focused on recycling and reducing waste.
Martin Jung, a senior executive at chemical giant BASF, stressed that the treaty should prioritize pollution mitigation rather than production limits.
Proposals for funding mechanisms, such as a $60-$70 per ton levy on primary polymer production, have also faced industry resistance.
Advocates, including France, Kenya, and Barbados, say such levies could generate $25-$35 billion annually to support developing nations’ climate transitions and plastic waste management.
