Absent a Major Course Correction, Ottawa will host a “Polite but Massive Failure.”
NAIROBI — A week of negotiations in Nairobi left all options on the table for a proposed Global Plastic Treaty but fell far short of the progress needed to deliver an ambitious treaty on an equally ambitious timeline. Governments that began the week with a “Zero Draft” of the treaty text and a clear mandate to agree on an active intersessional program of work are leaving eight days later with a “Revised Zero Draft” that has ballooned to 100 plus pages, with no intersessional agenda, and a clear warning that entertaining endless debate by those few who want to block progress at every turn is a recipe for inertia and eventual disaster.
“This week made clear that an overwhelming majority of countries demand an ambitious treaty that covers the full lifecycle of plastics,” said CIEL President Carroll Muffett. “That treaty is still achievable in these talks, but only if negotiators acknowledge and confront the coordinated campaign by fossil fuel and petrochemical exporters to prevent real progress of any kind.”
Alongside exporting countries themselves, INC-3 saw a massive presence in the industries that make plastics and plastic feedstocks. A CIEL analysis revealed that 143 fossil fuel and chemical industry lobbyists registered for the negotiations – including on country delegations.
“The results this week are no accident,” said David Azoulay, Program Director for Environmental Health at CIEL. “Progress on plastics will be impossible if Member States do not confront and address the fundamental reality of industry influence in this process.”
The negotiations also faced calls by the United States to replace concrete global commitments with catchy buzzwords and unenforceable promises – an approach that lowers ambition while ignoring the demands of frontline and fenceline communities in the United States itself.
Faced with endless delays, procedural maneuvering, and ticking clocks, many countries fought to ensure the treaty delivers the production reductions, toxic reductions, and focus on human rights that both science and the negotiating mandate require. But a troubling number of wealthier countries, including members of the 60+ member “High Ambition Coalition to End Plastic Pollution,” suggested a willingness to prioritize short-term consensus over long-term success.
“‘High Ambition’ is not a brand — it’s a commitment,” Azoulay said. “High Ambition countries in the Global North must follow the lead of Rwanda, Uruguay, and Pacific Island states in fighting to ensure ambition is reflected not just in empty political commitments but in the final treaty text.”
The huge list of unresolved issues and the ongoing efforts to obstruct progress threaten to derail negotiations fully when they resume in Ottawa next year unless Members demonstrate the political courage to take back the process.
“It’s clear the present process cannot overcome the coordinated opposition of those who block consensus and progress at every turn,” Muffett said. “Absent a major course correction, Canada will host a polite but massive failure when talks resume in Ottawa next year.”
Additional Quotes from CIEL staff:
Andrés del Castillo, Senior Attorney, said:
“One of the important outcomes of the third round of negotiations was the election of the new chair: the Ecuadorian Luis Vayas. As chair, he will be the captain of the boat and will be responsible for steering the remainder of the process through the adoption of the plastics treaty. Yet the quiet procedural chaos at INC-3 has left him an enormous and unwieldy task, and the question remains: Will the Members give him the tools and the support needed to navigate them all safely to a sound treaty?”
Daniela Duran, Senior Legal Campaigner (Upstream Plastics Treaty), said:
“The wide-open tap of current and projected primary plastic polymer production threatens to dilute any potential solutions within the future plastics treaty. To steer negotiations in the right direction, we urgently need concrete and legally binding provisions to reduce the production of primary plastic polymers. The prospect of necessary and ambitious measures on plastic production is still very much on the table and it is supported by many Member States. But procedural maneuvering by some Member States threatens to obfuscate the fact that plastic polymers are a key part of the life cycle and are at the source of the problem. Equally counterproductive are the calls for every country to set its own voluntary standards for reducing production. As we approach INC-4, it is crucial to redirect ambition onto the right track for a successful outcome.”
Giulia Carlini, Environmental Health Manager and Senior Attorney, said:
“Science shows us that the plastics crisis is deeply entwined with human health. This week, Member States took steps to concretize this in the future treaty by proposing several options for objectives that include the protection of human health. Encouragingly, over 100 Member States came together to support vital, strong intersessional work on chemicals and polymers of concern. But that was not enough to prevent obstructionist countries from stopping intersessional work altogether.Now, we must be vigilant to ensure that the chemicals industry does not weaken ambition. If States are serious about protecting health, they should come to INC-4 ready to translate this objective into clear obligations to ban toxics.”
Delphine Levi Alvares, Global Petrochemicals Campaign Manager, said:
“Once more, member states whose economies rely on fossil fuel extraction and petrochemical production have successfully managed to delay the process and jeopardize the ambition of these negotiations. They were supported in their efforts by a growing number of industry lobbyists. At INC-3, CIEL counted 143 fossil fuel and chemical industry lobbyists registered for the negotiations, including on the delegations of at least six countries. While this is hardly surprising for an industry that is gambling its future on endlessly growing demand for plastics, that gamble — and the industry’s interests — are directly at odds with the global public interest. We cannot end plastic pollution without reducing production, and it is vastly harder to do both with industry in the room — and on government delegations — fighting progress every step of the way. For this treaty to be grounded in human rights and science-informed, rather than fossil fuel interests-driven, the INC and UNEP must enforce a strong conflict of interest policy.”
Yvette Arellano, CIEL Trustee, Founder, and Executive Director Fenceline Watch, said:
“A holistic approach to tackling the existential crisis of plastic is essential. Our communities at the fenceline of plastic production stand in solidarity with those affected from extraction to waste. Our fight for survival is a fight for our future. It is our duty; we refuse to fail.”
Hélionor de Anzizu, Staff Attorney, said:
“For decades, effective Multilateral Environmental Agreements have relied on robust trade measures and compliance mechanisms–which have been widely recognized as completely compatible with international trade rules. Whether safeguarding the ozone layer or preserving endangered species, robust trading and compliance systems have played an essential and pivotal role in the successful implementation of such agreements. In Nairobi, we saw a growing number of States recognize the critical importance of regulating trade and ensuring strong compliance to building a comprehensive Plastics Treaty. The question remains: will they turn these calls into action as we start the hard work of turning the Zero Draft into a treaty.”
Rachel Radvany, Program Associate, Plastics Policy, said:
“Civil society and rights-holders from around the world are engaging in these negotiations to demand a treaty that protects human rights, health, and our environment. Tactics designed to wear us down will not succeed. We know that our human rights, our lives, our communities, and our planet are worth fighting for. We will continue to show up, speak out, and demand strong control measures across the entire life cycle of plastics — starting with reducing the plastics production that drives this crisis. We’re in this for the long haul: we will not back down or go away quietly.”
Dharmesh Shah, Consulting Senior Campaigner, said:
“Civil society organizations remain steadfast in their commitment for an ambitious treaty. But, the overbearing presence of industry in the discussions threatens the very ambition of the process. Civil society will continue to play the role of conscience keepers and strive to realign the moral center of gravity to ensure that they adhere to the spirit of Resolution 5/14. For this to occur, we need the Secretariat to sustain and increase their engagement with civil society before, after, and especially during negotiations.”
###
Media Contact
Cate Bonacini, press@ciel.org, +1-202-742-5847 (desk), +1-510-520-9109 (WhatsApp)