Unlock Editor’s Digest for free
Roula Khalaf, editor of the FT, picks her favorite stories in this weekly newsletter.
Negotiations on the first legally binding UN treaty on plastic pollution collapsed in the final phase of discussions, after oil-producing countries led by Saudi Arabia and Russia blocked efforts by 100 countries to limit new production.
The fifth round of talks, which took place this week in Busan, South Korea, will be extended until an unspecified future date, after talks broke down as countries failed to agree on how to deal with the world’s plastic waste crisis.
The deadlock reflects geopolitical tensions in the UN’s multilateral process. It is the third UN forum that has come to a deadlock in the last month.
The UN biodiversity summit in Cali, Colombia, adjourned after an extension, and the UN climate summit in Baku postponed until next year issues related to the transition from fossil fuels.
“We must admit that we have not yet reached the peak of our efforts. Although the peak is now in sight, our journey will only end when we successfully reach our goals,” said Luis Vayas Valdivieso, Ecuador’s chair of the UN Plastics negotiations at the closing plenary session.
Many major global consumer groups, such as Walmart, Unilever and Nestlé, were among more than 200 companies supporting efforts to end the use of single-use plastics and harmful chemicals rather than face the costs of the cleanup.
The Business Coalition for the Global Plastics Agreement said the ambitious outcome seemed closer. “It’s frustrating to see the slow pace of multilateralism, which can be dictated by this very unprogressive minority,” said John Duncan, co-leader of the coalition.
Compared to the Paris Agreement on plastics, in relation to the global climate agreement reached in 2015, the agreement was supposed to fight the pollution crisis from plastic consumption of 60 kg per person per year.
Global demand for this material is expected to nearly double by mid-century, and oil producers will expand production of the petrochemicals used in its production.
The International Energy Agency predicts that petroleum-based plastics feedstock will be the primary driver of oil demand growth in the second half of this decade, as the shift to renewable energy and electrified transportation will reduce oil consumption.
Negotiations on the UN treaty broke down over whether countries should agree to limits on plastic production. A total of 100 countries supported an agreement that would limit the production of new plastics.
The obligation to phase out certain chemicals and products that harm human health and the environment was also supported by 140 countries.
But a minority of oil-producing countries, including Saudi Arabia and Russia, have strongly opposed any targets to limit plastic production.
The chief negotiator from Iran, on behalf of so-called like-minded countries including Saudi Arabia, said that “various contentious elements require additional time and discussions.” The plastic manufacturing sections required “surgical attention . . . in their entirety,” the statement added.
One European negotiator said the Busan talks would have resulted in an agreement had it not been for oil-producing countries blocking progress.
“If it weren’t for Saudi Arabia and Russia, we would have reached an agreement here,” he said. “Quite a bit of progress has been made.”
“If this was not the last planned meeting, this would be considered a great success,” the negotiator added.
The International Council of Chemical Associations, which represents petrochemical producers, lobbied against including targets for plastics production in the final deal.
“It is crucial that this contract remains focused on addressing the primary cause of plastic pollution – mismanaged waste,” said Chris Jahn, the council’s secretary. Reusing, recycling and collecting plastic waste was “a better way to stop pollution”, he argued.
The previous round of negotiations in Ottawa, Canada, resulted in an unwieldy draft with very different positions. Delegates and observers said the current draft was more focused and there was wider support for provisions targeting the plastic supply.
Environmental groups accused the chairman of pandering to oil-producing countries out of desperation to reach a deal on time.
An alliance of 1,000 environmental non-profit groups known as Gaia said that while the draft text kept reductions in plastic production on the table, it was “littered with concessions” to oil producers, such as calling the reduction target “aspirational” and removing controls on toxic chemicals.
“Without decisive action, there is a high probability that the same petrostate minority will continue with its obstructionist tactics and further jeopardize the plastic agreement process,” it said.
Climate capital
Where climate change meets business, markets and politics. Explore the FT’s coverage here.
Curious about FT’s commitment to environmental sustainability? Learn more about our science-based goals here
