Global Plastic Conference Talks End Without Agreement Amid Sharp Divisions

The recent United Nations plastic conference in Busan, South Korea, ended without a conclusive agreement, highlighting deep divisions among participating countries. These critical plastic conference talks were intended to finalize a legally binding global treaty aimed at curbing plastic pollution. However, disagreements, particularly on whether to cap plastic production, forced negotiators to postpone key decisions. Over 100 nations, including the EU and Mexico, supported production limits, while a small group of petrochemical-producing countries—such as Saudi Arabia and Russia—focused only on addressing plastic waste, stalling progress.

At the heart of the failed plastic conference agreement was a clash of priorities. The “ambition group” of 85 countries advocated for mandatory reductions in plastic production and a phase-out of hazardous chemicals. In contrast, oil-producing nations resisted any measures targeting production, arguing that the real issue is plastic waste management, not production itself. "There should be no problem with producing plastics if we address pollution," stated Saudi delegate Abdulrahman Al Gwaiz, emphasizing their position.

This deadlock underscores broader concerns about the influence of fossil fuel interests on environmental policy. Industry lobbyists played a significant role at the talks, with more representatives from the plastics sector than from the European Union itself. This raised questions about the effectiveness of global negotiations when powerful economic sectors oppose binding measures. Environmental advocates expressed frustration, warning that delays exacerbate the plastic crisis. Juliet Kabera, representing high-ambition countries, stressed, "Every day of delay intensifies the harm to our ecosystems."

Despite the setback, countries pushing for stronger commitments remain determined. A declaration signed by 85 nations called for legally binding targets to reduce plastic production to sustainable levels. Environmental organizations, including Greenpeace, view this moment as a critical juncture. "We stand at a historic crossroads," said Greenpeace's Graham Forbes, emphasizing the treaty's potential to protect health, biodiversity, and the climate. However, without production caps, critics argue the treaty will lack the impact needed to address the global plastic crisis.

Looking ahead, the next round of plastic conference talks—dubbed INC 5.2—remains unscheduled. Inger Andersen, the UN Environment Programme’s executive director, acknowledged the challenges but remained optimistic. "Significant conversations are needed, but a pathway forward is possible," she stated. As the global community waits for renewed negotiations, the urgency to address plastic pollution continues to grow, with stakeholders worldwide calling for decisive action and binding commitments.