Industry, brace for change: Momentum builds behind Global Plastics Treaty

Plastics treaty negotiations: summary

• New chair Cordano revitalises stalled global plastics treaty negotiation momentum
• Major brands frustrated by fragmented regulations limiting harmonised global packaging progress
• Stakeholders say clear roadmap essential for advancing effective multilateral treaty outcomes
• Countries continue discussions while individual policies create uncoordinated regulatory patchworks
• Legally binding treaty seen accelerating scalable solutions supporting circular economy

Six months have passed since “hard fought” negotiations to agree a legally binding treaty on plastics pollution ground to a halt.

But now, there’s fresh grounds for optimism, with the election of a new chair of the plastics treaty negotiations. This month, Julio Cordano, diplomat and director of environment, climate change and oceans at the Ministry of Foreign Affairs of Chile, takes the helm. And with this move comes continued commitment from countries to move forward with a global pact.

What happened to the Global Plastics Treaty?

After years in the making and 10 days of negotiations, it was a big disappointment for the Intergovernmental Negotiating Committee (INC) – the treaty negotiating body – when a Global Plastics Treaty text failed to be agreed.

Many big-name industry players were also left reeling, having long sought a catch-all global packaging law. Nestlé, PepsiCo and Unilever were among those left frustrated. The absence of harmonised regulations across the full lifecycle of plastics means there’s still no even playing field when it comes to limiting virgin plastic use and boosting packaging recyclability.

Voluntary efforts are not enough, stressed Nestlé’s global public affairs lead for packaging and sustainability, Jodie Roussell, at the time. From her perspective, the current fragmented regulatory landscape makes for increased costs and complexity for business.

How a new chair brings hope for global packaging regulations

But failed negotiations never meant the end of a Global Plastics Treaty, and the INC pledged to resume negotiations at an unspecified date in the future. Still, no date has been set, but stakeholders say the new chair appointment sends a strong signal: the INC process is ongoing, countries remain committed, and there is unequivocal recognition that plastic pollution is a global problem that requires global solutions.

Cordano’s appointment comes three months after the previous chair’s resignation. Ambassador Luis Vayas Valdivieso of Ecuador had been criticised by some – including Zero Waste Europe – for “catering to the lowest common denominator”. His resignation was said to create a “leadership vacuum during a pivotal moment” in the treaty process.

The new appointment now demonstrates that the INC process can move forward, particularly where there is clarity of direction. That’s Ambrogio Miserocchi’s take, plastics policy lead at the Ellen MacArthur Foundation – which works alongside WWF to convene the Business Coalition for a Global Plastics Treaty. “It also underlines continued commitment from countries to make the process work.”

The Global Plastics Treaty process must evolve

What last year’s negotiation struggles taught stakeholders is that parts of the process need reworking. There’s a recognition that certain elements are no longer fit for purpose, suggests Ellen MacArthur’s Miserocchi.

“Member states took time to reflect on what didn’t work, and equally, on what did. That pause for reflection matters in multilateral negotiations on this scale.”

While it’s too early to understand exactly how Cordano’s appointment will shape the next phase, it’s become obvious that a clear roadmap, made up of milestones and next steps, is a non-negotiable if a meaningful agreement is to be reached as soon as possible.

This shouldn’t be interpreted as a “restart”, stresses Miserocchi. “What we have now is an opportunity to reflect on what didn’t work, learn from it, and apply those lessons going forward.”

Global plastics talks: what industry can expect next

Whatever the results of future negotiations, industry will be impacted. Food and drink packaging is an integral component of brand footprints, and stricter laws could hit brands’ bottom lines. Laxer rules, on the other hand, could do the opposite – but with potentially more damaging impacts on the environment.

Industry needs answers, and time to prepare for any new packaging law. So in the short term, what can manufacturers expect from the next stage in the treaty process?

In the coming months, countries will continue discussions among themselves, explains Ellen MacArthur’s Miserocchi. This will occur alongside a clearer articulation of how informal and formal processes will interact.

It should also be noted that just because a global agreement hasn’t been reached, progress hasn’t stopped completely. Individual countries continue to develop national policies, and manufacturers need to keep a watchful eye on those developments unfolding.

But the issue is that without global alignment, such policies are uncoordinated. “That raises a key question,” says Miserocchi. “How much of a buffer do we have, to deliver coordinated global action, before we see a growing patchwork of disconnected regulatory approaches?”

Why a Global Plastics Treaty matters

Indeed, time is running out. And the ultimate objective remains unchanged: to reach an “ambitious and effective” agreement.

“The next phase will be critical,” says Ellen MacArthur’s plastics lead. “A roadmap is needed, and governments must remain united in ambition if we are to land a treaty capable of delivering positive economic, social and environmental outcomes.”

Fragmented, voluntary measures have long been in place, but they’re not bringing change at the pace and scale required, we’re told. It’s the hope of a global agreement, with coherence, certainty and scale, that ensures action of plastic pollution has the greatest impact.

Miserocchi’s stance is crystal clear: An international legally binding instrument on plastic pollution remains our greatest opportunity to drastically accelerate the adoption of solutions that work, at scale, and move us towards a circular economy.

And for manufacturers seeking a level regulatory playing field, lower costs for improved packaging, and progress on carbon goals, that can only be a positive step forward.