A Global Plastic Waste Crisis: Is a Unified Approach Attainable?

In late May, delegates from 175 countries, along with private stakeholders, will gather in Paris for a global effort to create an international treaty to potentially control plastic production and pollution. Despite the urgency to address the world’s toxic plastic waste crisis, countries remain far apart on what the treaty should cover – reuse, banning certain chemicals, limiting plastics production, and whether it should have mandatory international compliance. The United States and China are recommending a voluntary national approach, while Pacific Island countries and the European Union want to see stricter rules for compliance and more focus on production limits. As the parties, and diverse stakeholders trying to influence the parties, remain far apart on what a treaty should cover, the May-June meeting could at least define the process for reaching a worldwide plastic accord.

The lack of consensus on the treaty further highlights the complexities surrounding environmental treaties, which often require the adoption of ambitious green policies and the balance of diplomatic interests. The world’s track record on environmental agreements is mixed. For instance, the 1987 Montreal protocol, which controlled the production of substances that deplete the ozone layer, relied on mandatory control and is considered the most successful environmental treaty of all time. The voluntary nation-by-nation approach of the 2015 Paris Climate Agreement has so far fallen short of its carbon emission reduction targets. The U.S. government, which is a leading plastic producer and a top exporter of plastic trash, has not been immune to the influence of business interests in determining its volunteer-centric position on plastics.

Recycling and reuse fall short “of what we need to reduce plastic production, which is going to be fundamental to the success of this treaty. We cannot meet our objectives if we keep producing more and more plastic,” says John Hocevar, oceans campaign director at Greenpeace USA. Other groups are making a range of suggestions specific to their causes. For instance, the International Council of Beverage Associations wants a treaty that incentivizes recycling and reuse while the UN’s own Food and Agriculture Organization stressed the need to reduce plastic use in agriculture, fishing, aquaculture, and forestry. The FAO recommended international requirements for recycling and controlling microplastics and suggested policies providing incentives to encourage alternative products and processes.

It is time for countries to set aside diplomatic interests and take urgent action to address the plastic waste crisis. A strong, legally binding international agreement focused on reducing plastic production and pollution is necessary for a sustainable future. This treaty should incentivize recycling and reuse but not rely on those measures alone, as they fall short of what is needed to reduce plastic production. Additionally, the treaty should consider bans on non-recyclable additives that harm human health and the environment, forbidding or restricting some of the most common products that litter the Earth, such as plastic eating utensils and packaging, and implementing mandatory controls on plastics production. We cannot afford to wait any longer to save our planet from the toxic plastic waste crisis.

Plastic Waste.-plasticwaste,globalcrisis,unifiedapproach,environment,recycling,sustainability