Geneva's plastic treaty talks at make-or-break moment for ocean health

GENEVA (AN) — Diplomats will converge in Europe's "peace capital" this week for a pivotal round of negotiations to forge the world’s first legally binding treaty on plastic pollution.

Trillions of dollars in economic impact hang in the balance of the 10-day session, known as INC-5.2, which is scheduled to run from Aug. 5-14 at the United Nations' European headquarters. It is widely viewed as the definitive moment for a global accord that could profoundly reshape international industries, supply chains, and consumer behavior.

The urgency is stark. Without a comprehensive framework, the volume of plastic entering oceans is projected to surge to 37 million metric tons annually by 2040. The cumulative economic damage from plastic pollution, factoring in environmental degradation, health costs, and lost livelihoods, could reach a staggering $281 trillion between 2016 and 2040, according to various estimates.

Jyoti Mathur-Filipp, executive secretary of the Intergovernmental Negotiating Committee that is leading the talks on behalf of the U.N. Environment Program, articulated the gravity of the situation to reporters in Geneva: "We are choking with plastic."

Deep divisions over production caps

The talks follow a contentious Dec. 2024 round in Busan, South Korea, which failed to achieve consensus on key elements but produced a 22-page "chair's text." The draft treaty is fraught with over 370 bracketed disagreements, highlighting the deep ideological and economic rifts among the U.N.'s 193 member nations.

In March 2022, the U.N. Environment Assembly in Nairobi approved a historic resolution seeking to develop an international legally binding instrument on plastic pollution, including in the marine environment.

At the heart of these divisions is the contentious issue of plastic production limits. A "high ambition coalition" of more than 100 nations, including the European Union and Canada, is pushing for upstream interventions – capping total plastic output by addressing design, production, and consumption. The bloc argues that tackling the crisis at its source is non-negotiable.

In opposition, a powerful consortium of major plastic-producing nations, many with strong ties to the oil and gas sectors, staunchly resist global production caps. They advocate for a treaty focused on downstream solutions, such as enhanced waste management, recycling infrastructure, and a "circular economy" model.

The sides explose a fundamental philosophical chasm over whether to tackle the "tap" or the "drain."

The 'big question'

Juan Carlos Monterrey Gómez, Panama's special representative for climate change, told Arete News the treaty must have three crucial elements to succeed: firm production limits, mandatory disclosure of chemical ingredients, and financing for developing nations disproportionately affected by plastic pollution.

A prominent and vocal advocate for a strong and ambitious global plastics treaty, Gomez told a panel discussion on Sunday night that none of the world's major environmental treaties now deal with the entire lifecycle of plastics, but he's hopeful that can soon be corrected.

"We're better off than before Busan," he said at the panel discussion organized by the Gallifrey Foundation and Ocean Vision Legal to preview the upcoming treaty talks. "After Busan, we had a network of 100 countries pushing for what is right."

Campaigners for the organizations hope the Geneva talks can pave the way for a diplomatic conference later this year or in early 2026 to formally adopt a landmark global accord. Christina Dixon, ocean campaign leader for the London-based Environmental Investigation Agency, said the "big question" is whether delegates enact a legally binding treaty that addresses the entire lifecyle of plastic or focuses solely on waste management.

"We're missing a global legal framework to address plastic," she said. "This is the last chance – we don't know what's going to happen if governments can't make an agreement."

Anna von Rebay, founder and CEO of Ocean Vision Legal, said international law requires nations to protect and preserve the marine environment, an obligation that includes preventing, reducing, and controlling plastic waste since "marine pollution is transboundary in nature."

Corporate and financial stakes

Beyond production, negotiators are expected to grapple with crucial technical and procedural sticking points, including legally binding controls on hazardous chemicals in plastic formulations. Other disagreements revolve around decision-making mechanics, with many delegations and NGOs pushing to set aside consensus in favor of majority voting to prevent negotiation gridlock.

A significant financial dimension underpins the discussions, particularly on how to support developing countries and to craft a "just transition" for the millions of informal waste workers globally by integrating them into formal systems through green jobs and social protections. India, for one, has emphasized that the treaty must align with national regulations and contexts.

The pressure on delegates is intense, with expectations that over 70 ministers will join mid-session to help bridge political divides. The corporate world is also weighing in, with nearly 300 companies, including Coca-Cola, Nestlé, PepsiCo, Unilever, and Walmart seeking to influence governments.