Solving ocean crises by unifying and empowering global communities!sm
With the help of donors like you, OpenOceans Global is developing solutions to save our ocean.
With the help of donors like you, OpenOceans Global is developing solutions to save our ocean.
Title search: ✖
|
New Report Provides Global Criteria to Address Problematic, Unnecessary, and Avoidable Plastic Products
Press Release: OpenOceans Global launching citizen science app to map coastlines pervasively fouled by plastic
|
Plastic Treaty Update: Negotiations devolve into either/or narratives
Kuta Beach, Bali, Indonesia. Image credit: Shutterstock/Maxim Blinkov As the third round of negotiations for the United Nations international plastic treaty ended in Nairobi, Kenya, on November 19, 2023, outgoing negotiation chair Gustavo Adolfo Meza-Cuadra Velasquez said: “Much remains to be done both in narrowing down our differences and in developing technical work to inform our negotiations.” On the day the negotiations began, November 13, 2023, CSIRO’s Deborah Lau published an article in PHYS.ORG describing the mutual benefits of the treaty. She said, “Regulatory tools such as multilateral agreements have three primary benefits:"
Either/or Narratives EmergeThose benefits have not yet been fully embraced by the companies and countries with the largest economic interests in the plastic supply chain. Instead, several either/or narratives have emerged. OpenOceans Global believes that an "either/or" position needs to shift to an “and” position.
According to the Associated Press, two additional key elements emerged from the treaty negotiations that are potentially problematic:
Diverse Perspectives AboundThe many and diverse perspectives of the negotiating interests complicate the challenge of completing the treaty negotiations. Some oil companies want to change the focus of the treaty away from the entire lifecycle of plastic to waste management. Additionally, as with the climate treaty, they want national voluntary measures instead of global measures. Other industry representatives argue for the benefits of plastics, like its use in piping and as materials for lightweight electric cars, while also seeing the treaty as part of a move away from fossil-based production. Leaders from the vinyl and expanded polystyrene (EPS) industries have expressed opposition against restricting, capping production, or reducing plastic availability and say they will defend every aspect of their supply chains. Other companies have a broader view. Consumer product makers like Mars Inc., Coca-Cola Co., and Nestle, which are part of the Business Coalition for a Global Plastics Treaty, believe the agreement should eliminate plastics that are hard to recycle, cut back on fossil-based plastics, or limit some production. One coalition member favors restrictions on plastic production “because the expected growth of virgin resin could make it difficult to reach the treaty's objectives.” A Greenpeace representative said, “You cannot solve the plastic pollution crisis if you do not massively cut plastic production.” A WWF International representative was in alignment. He said, "The negotiators must be guided not by what the least ambitious countries are prepared to accept, but by the urgency of the plastic pollution crisis.” How to Bring the Treaty Home: We Must ChangeIn the end, all parties agree the common goal is the elimination of plastic pollution in the environment and from reaching the ocean. How to get there is the challenge. The plastic negotiations host, Kenyan President William Ruto, had perhaps the best perspective on the problem. "We must change the way we consume, the way we produce, and how we dispose of our waste. Change is inevitable. This instrument [treaty] that we are working on is the first domino in that change. Let us bring it home," he said. ResourcesThis Deeper Dive was developed in part from a review of the following resources:
|
