Six takeaways from the INC-5 summit on plastic pollution

The recently concluded Intergovernmental Negotiating Committee (INC-5) in Busan has adjourned without finalising a treaty on plastic pollution, despite hopes for a solution to the growing crisis of plastic waste and ocean pollution.

Here are six key takeaways from the summit:

1. Negotiations to continue in 2025

Despite not reaching enough consensus to form a finalised treaty, the meeting concluded with an agreement to adopt the Chair’s Text as a starting point for negotiations in 2025, dubbed INC-5.2.

INC Chair, Ambassador Luis Vayas Valdivieso, called this a crucial milestone, emphasising that the process requires time to succeed: “Our mandate has always been ambitious. But ambition takes time to land. We have many of the elements that we need, and Busan has put us firmly on a pathway to success.”

Whilst many Member attendees and environmental NGOs have expressed disappointment for the lack of results, the continued talks have not been seen as entirely unsuccessful.

John Marc Simon, Founder of Zero Waste Europe, commented that the framing of the debate and willingness of participants to address the root causes of the issue as notable successes for the meeting: “Today, the framing of the debate has moved to address the whole life cycle of plastics, including the need to regulate production and toxics.”

“I’m disappointed by the speed of change; and yet, I definitely prefer a good treaty that arrives a bit later than a bad treaty today.”

2. Divergence on critical issues persists

While the week saw progress in the effort to limit the production of fossil fuel-based plastics, supported by over 100 countries, the treaty met resistance from oil-producing countries and fossil fuel interests.

A coalition led by Saudi Arabia that included Iran, Russia and other Gulf states opposed capping plastic production, insisting that the treaty should instead focus only on plastic waste management.

Eirik Lindebjerg, Global Plastics Policy Lead at WWF, expressed frustrations at the outcome: “For too long, a small minority of states have held the negotiation process hostage. It is abundantly clear that these countries have no intention of finding a meaningful solution to this crisis and yet they continue to prevent the large majority of states who do.”

Laris de Orbe, Colectiva Malditos Plásticos, added: “We see with anger how the greed of some is determined to block the proposals of courageous countries that want to move toward a better future.”

3. Broad consensus agrees on the need for binding global measures

However, INC-5 discussions saw a majority of Members rally behind ambitious proposals for a binding treaty to phase out harmful plastics and chemicals. Rwanda, representing over 85 nations, called on countries to show their support for a global treaty that extends over plastics’ entire lifecycle at the final INC-5 plenary.

In addition, Mexico, together with 95 countries, stated that they would not accept a treaty without binding global bans and phaseouts on harmful plastic products.

Christina Dixon, Ocean Campaign Lead at Environmental Investigation Agency, commented on the unified approach: “In the face of this obstructionism, large groups of diverse countries led rallying calls for an ambitious treaty. We have won the hearts and minds of the majority of the world and will continue to fight in solidarity with those seeking real solutions to end the harms of plastic pollution."

4. There’s a desperate push to tackle ocean pollution

As INC-5 has wrapped up, many environmental NGOs and civil society groups have amplified their calls for action, advocating for production cuts and systemic reforms.

Discussing the ocean plastic crisis, Ocean Conservancy's Vice President of Conservation, Nicolas Mallos, said: “With over a garbage truck’s worth of plastics entering the ocean each minute, every second counts in addressing the ocean plastic pollution crisis, and we are disappointed that the finalization of the plastics treaty has been delayed.

“At the same time, Ocean Conservancy remains determined to use this extension as an opportunity to continue fighting for a strong and ambitious treaty that rises to the occasion and meets the plastic pollution crisis with the urgency it demands.”

5. The needs of vulnerable communities aren’t being met

Activists have also criticised the treaty’s failure to adequately address frontline and vulnerable communities’ needs.

Matt Paryman, Aotearoa Plastic Pollution Alliance, added: “Indigenous Peoples and our Rights as enshrined in UNDRIP have been consistently violated by the entire INC process. The Chair’s failure to effectively facilitate negotiations for a just and equitable plastics treaty has brought us down a dead-end path, perpetuating harm to the most impacted frontline and fenceline communities, who have been flagrantly excluded throughout negotiations.”

6. An agreement is urgently needed … next time

Although INC-5 fell short of its ambitious goals, the meeting reinforced global awareness and opened the way for continued negotiations. With over 800 million tonnes of plastic produced since governments agreed to establish the treaty, the urgency is undeniable.

The majority of countries have shown their support for a proposal led by Panama for a systematic, adaptive approach which addresses the entire lifecycle of plastics.

Inger Anderson, Executive Director of the UN Environment Programme (UNEP), looked forward to the next stage of negotiations: “At UNEA 5.2, the world promised to tackle plastic pollution. Now, at the next round of talks, the world will have the opportunity to finally make that a reality. An opportunity we cannot afford to miss.”