This perspective explains why the lack of regulation around bioplastics remains a hurdle for the successful development and implementation of a legally binding agreement (the Global Plastics Treaty) by the United Nations Environment Assembly to curb plastic pollution by 2024. For example, bioplastics have been marketed to consumers as the panacea solution to our plastic waste crisis. Of the >400 million tonnes of plastics produced each year, <1% are bioplastics, but the market value of bioplastics is expected to grow. The rapid growth of the environmentally ‘sustainable’ plastic market has resulted in an overwhelming variety of products with different properties and labels, which has led to widespread public confusion, particularly about disposal guidelines. The umbrella term of ‘bioplastics’ describes plastics that can be fully or partially sourced from biological matter, unlike conventional petroleum-based plastics. Within this family of plastics, products can be ‘biodegradable’, ‘oxo-biodegradable’ and ‘compostable’ depending on their chemical composition and the external conditions required at disposal (end-of-life). However, cases of petroleum-based biodegradable plastics have been referred to as bioplastics, which is inaccurate. Overall, this lack of regulation remains a hurdle for the successful development and implementation of the Global Plastics Treaty.

Science shows mounting global health risks associated with plastics life cycle pollution. Leveraging evidence and streamlining research to inform policy is critical to safeguarding people and planet. We conducted an electronic survey questionnaire, between 16th April and 16th August 2024, amongst United Nations government delegates developing the Global Plastics Treaty. We explored (1) perceptions and prioritisation of human health evidence, (2) preferred plastic pollution mitigation strategies, and (3) priorities for health research. Responses were collected in Qualtrics and analysed using summary statistics, the Fisher’s Exact Test, and thematically mapped to the Policy Cycle Framework. We received 27 survey responses, balanced by gender and career stage, including 23 countries and all World Bank country income classifications and regions, but greater representation from high-income and European countries. Human health was the highest-ranking concern related to plastics risks (Sum of rank scores (SRS) = 54). Most delegates expressed strong conviction in evidence of risks associated with plastics chemicals, polymers, products, microplastics and broader life cycle emissions. Reducing plastics production (SRS = 53) and eliminating chemicals, polymers and products of concern (SRS = 53) were prioritised, even amongst those affiliated with waste management departments or less convinced of health risks. We found the least regard for recycling as a strategy to protect health (SRS = 4–5) and eliminating open burning was the most prioritised downstream measure (SRS = 15). Generating quantitative, causal data on risks across plastics life cycles, identifying emerging health hazards, defining criteria, safe lists and substitutes for chemicals, polymers and products were government delegate priorities for research, alongside tools to track policy impacts on health and greater bilateral communication between scientists and delegations. Health risks of all forms of plastic pollution were a concern for most delegates responding to our survey. We identified key priorities for policy-driven research to strengthen the science-policy interface and support evidence-based plastics policy that protects human health.

National Action Plans (NAPs) are a possible implementation measure for the Global Plastics Treaty, through a NAP-based approach. Their effectiveness in other international agreements is contested, and their current format allows for weak, voluntary measures with limited accountability. By analysing stakeholder and country submissions to the Intergovernmental Negotiating Committee (INC) secretariat ahead of INC-2 negotiations in Paris, June 2023, conducting a literature review, and interviewing key actors, this study aims to determine the support that governments and stakeholders have for a NAP-based approach in the Treaty, and identify the key enablers needed to ensure that NAP-based approaches, if adopted in the Treaty, are effective. Results indicate that by INC-2, more than 85% of countries supported a NAP-based approach, suggesting a high chance of this approach being selected as the means of implementation of the Treaty. However, interviewees and literature reviews indicate that NAPs in their current form are not likely to be effective at delivering ambitious Treaty targets. Six key enablers to improve the effectiveness of plastics NAPs are identified. These enablers should be integrated into any plastics NAPs both independently, and as potential requirements of the Treaty to ensure that NAP-based approaches are effective and have the impact intended.

Waste pickers are recognised as a key stakeholder in the ongoing negotiations towards an international legally binding instrument to end plastic pollution. Up to 34 million waste pickers contribute to recovering close to 60% of recycled post-consumer plastic waste globally. The International Alliance of Waste Pickers (IAWP) has actively engaged in the negotiations to safeguard a just transition for these important but vulnerable and frequently overlooked workers. This article explores how the IAWP has gained prominence in the plastics treaty negotiations through three iterative processes. First, the reiterative naming of “waste pickers” has constituted a symbolic practice and discursive influence that heightened recognition of waste pickers’ role as knowledge and rights holders in a just transition to end plastic pollution. Second, the performative dimension of waste picker advocacy has influenced official and informal events. Third, by engaging in “scale work”, waste pickers have influenced and leveraged their alliances to work towards a just transition across national, regional and international levels. By examining the role and influence of waste pickers in the plastics treaty through the frames of naming, performance and scale, the article contributes to advance the scholarly literature on just transition and grassroots movements in global environmental governance (GEG).

With increased international concern over the pervasive plastic pollution problem, early negotiations to develop a legally binding instrument to end plastic pollution (“the Plastics Treaty”) were supported by 175 member countries toward a sustainable plastics future. Defining features of the plastics treaty by UNEP member countries began in Punta del Este, Uruguay in November 2022 during the first session of the Intergovernmental Negotiating Committee (INC-1). However, INC-1 ended with many unanswered questions regarding the structure, scope, and targets of the treaty. Sixty-seven member countries, including members of the High Coalition Ambition, submitted their objectives, guiding principles, and expectations for the treaty before the INC-2 negotiations while also suggesting measures for its effective implementation. This paper compiles submissions of the 67 member countries and evidence-based policymaking approaches that have been described in peer-reviewed and gray literature following INC-1, but before the INC-2 negotiations in Paris, France in June 2023. Recommendations for developing an effective plastics treaty by most member countries include incorporating the complete life cycle of plastics, promotion of transparency in global trade through uniform labeling measures, capping virgin plastic production, incorporating extended producer responsibility to develop a circular economy, and addressing hazardous chemicals in plastics. Suggested implementation measures include building a multilateral fund, supporting smaller countries with technology transfer, improving local stakeholder engagement, developing subsidiary bodies, and regular national reporting. Encouragingly, many of these national plans were proposed in the Zero Draft document released in September 2023 before INC-3 in Nairobi, Kenya in November 2023 and further developed in the revised draft text which served as the provisional agenda at INC-4 in April 2024 in Ottawa, Canada.

The growing plastic production, the lack of their waste management, and fragmented regulatory responses have increased their abundance in the environment. Plastic pollution has created significant environmental concerns leading to planetary boundary threats. As a result, an increasing number of governments and non-state actors have begun negotiations on a legally binding treaty to cover the full-life-cycle of plastics by 2024. While the negotiations were mandated at the United Nations Environment Assembly 5.2 in March of 2022, how the new agreement would link to existing governance bodies addressing plastic pollution at the global, regional, national and local levels requires careful consideration. This analysis examines the main multi-level governance structures in place to govern plastics while highlighting their principal roles as well as shortcomings and gaps. It then explores ways a new global agreement could complement existing governance structures without imposing and duplicating the work of previous agreements.

To address the global challenge of plastic waste, 175 UN Member States are negotiating a legally binding instrument, the Plastic Treaty, aimed at ending plastic pollution. This ambitious framework, targeting both terrestrial and marine sources, is being developed through Intergovernmental Negotiating Committee meetings scheduled to conclude by 2025. Amidst uncertainties and power dynamics influencing state positions, this research identifies 10 critical, yet unresolved, points within the treaty negotiations (i.e., the scope of the treaty, equity and differentiation, involvement of non-state actors, integration with existing agreements, standards and specifications, trade implications, monitoring and reporting, responsibility and historical contributions, binding vs. non-binding commitments, and financing and technology transfer). The findings suggest potential compromises in the treaty’s environmental provisions, influenced by domestic interests and international power disparities. As negotiations progress, the imperative for cooperation and decisive action against plastic pollution becomes increasingly pressing, challenging member states to prioritize global environmental integrity over national interests.