On the shores of South Korea, as the world grapples with the dire reality of plastic pollution, 177 nations converged at the fifth round of the United Nations negotiations focused on crafting the first-ever international treaty aimed at combatting plastic waste. The negotiations held at the Busan Exhibition and Convention Centre have sparked fervent discussions as delegates work tirelessly to bridge the gaps between differing national priorities and environmental imperatives. With the growing urgency of plastic pollution becoming increasingly evident, the stakes of these talks could not be higher.
Plastic pollution has emerged as one of the most pressing environmental challenges of our time, with scientists estimating upwards of 350 million tonnes of plastic discarded annually. Alarmingly, only about 9% of this plastic gets recycled, leaving vast quantities teetering on the brink of environmental disaster. With the clock ticking, negotiators have until early December to finalize terms of this potentially groundbreaking treaty.
Leading Canadian officials have been vocal advocates for strong commitments to tackle plastic pollution. Throughout the negotiations, they stressed the importance of reaching consensus, voicing concerns over nations advocating for weak, voluntary measures versus those pushing for mandatory commitments. Karen Wirsig, senior program manager on plastics with Environmental Defence, noted the uphill struggle, saying, “All week has been exceedingly frustrating because... the non-ambition countries took the upper hand.”
Canada's involvement is notable as it was instrumental in initiating these discussions, hosting the previous negotiation round earlier this year, and signing resolutions with over 100 nations to advocate for global production targets. Canadian Environment Minister Steven Guilbeault expressed hopes for significant outcomes from the treaty discussions, emphasizing, “Together with our international partners, we will work tirelessly to finalize a strong and effective agreement by the end of this year to end plastic pollution.” Such commitments will be pivotal if nations truly seek to address the vast mesh of issues surrounding plastic production, consumption, and waste.
While ambition swirls among many countries, looming opposition from major oil-producing nations has entrenched itself as one of the key sticking points. Saudi Arabia, Russia, and Iran form the crux of resistance against proposals for reductions on plastic production. These nations largely advocate for narrower goals focused on consumption management and waste, which critics argue undermines the comprehensive measures necessary for significant change.
Simultaneously, the role of the petrochemical industry presents another layer of complexity. Lobbying efforts from major fossil fuel companies have reached record levels—221 representatives from corporations such as ExxonMobil and Dow are set to attend and influence the proceedings. Environmental advocates decried this, asserting, “allowing fossil fuel and petrochemical companies to exert their influence in these negotiations is like letting foxes guard the henhouse.” Observers fear this corporate presence threatens to derail meaningful progress.
Calls for transparency and strict conflict of interest policies echo throughout the talks, as civil society groups voice their concerns over the disproportionate influence of industry lobbyists relative to environmental advocates and scientific stakeholders—particularly from vulnerable communities such as Indigenous peoples. A representative from the Break Free From Plastic movement lamented how too often, powerful corporate interests drown out the important voices calling for substantive, and necessary, environmental protections.
The sentiment extends beyond corporate lobbying, as several nations expressed unease over potential procedural tactics, like invoking Rule 38—allowing decisions to be made by majority vote if consensus cannot be reached. Many countries, particularly small island states threatened by rising sea levels exacerbated by waste mismanagement, stand firmly against utilizing such methods, emphasizing consensus decisions are preferable.
During her opening remarks at the conference, UNEP Executive Director, “We must end plastic pollution before plastic pollution ends us,” echoed the urgency delegates face, supported by the poignant example of letters from Kenyan children pleading for action. The stakes of this treaty extend beyond environmentalism; they touch the very essence of public health, marine biodiversity, and the sustainability of ecosystems worldwide.
While optimism appears to reign among some nations pushing for transformative changes, the next few days are expected to test the resolve and determination of all negotiators. The time for action is now, and with the challenges laid out starkly before them, delegates must rise to the occasion to deliver impactful, measurable solutions to the relentless tide of plastic pollution.
The next steps require not just agreement but action—measures to phase out unnecessary plastics and establish benchmarks for reduction rates worldwide. The world's ecosystems are waiting, the health of oceans and wildlife hangs precariously, and the will of both nations and the public will be put to the ultimate test. With dedicated cooperation and resolve, the Busan negotiations may offer the breakthrough necessary to steer the globe toward sustainable plastic management and deterrents against the looming crisis.