Analysis of the Revised Zero Draft of the Plastics Treaty

This policy brief by the Center for International Environmental Law (CIEL) provides a detailed analysis and commentary on the Revised Zero Draft of the international plastics treaty. It evaluates various options for the treaty's structure and obligations, advocating for legally binding mandates ('shall' instead of 'should'), a full life-cycle approach to plastic pollution, and the inclusion of human rights and health dimensions. CIEL emphasizes the necessity of controlling primary plastic polymer production and eliminating hazardous chemicals to achieve the treaty's objective of ending plastic pollution.

• CIEL argues that the distinction between 'shall' and 'should' is critical for the treaty's effectiveness, as 'shall' creates a legal obligation while 'should' indicates a voluntary recommendation. They assert that all substantive obligations must be legally binding, specific, and measurable.
• The analysis identifies critical omissions in the Revised Zero Draft, specifically the lack of defined tasks for the governing body and the absence of procedures for amending the treaty and its annexes, which is necessary for a 'start and strengthen' approach.
• CIEL contends that the preamble fails to recognize that current levels of plastic production and consumption are unsustainable and are the primary source of pollution. They also note the absence of specific mentions of human rights and frontline communities.
• Regarding the treaty's objective, CIEL supports framing that prioritizes the protection of human health and the environment. They warn against using the term 'additional plastic pollution,' as it wrongly implies that existing pollution levels are acceptable.
• CIEL advises against including a 'laundry list' of principles in a standalone article, suggesting instead that human rights and environmental principles be operationalized directly throughout the treaty's substantive text.
• The analysis argues that controlling the production of primary plastic polymers is essential to ending plastic pollution, stating that demand-side measures alone are insufficient. CIEL recommends a global production reduction target and a ban on expanding production capacity.
• CIEL emphasizes the need to detoxify the plastics life cycle by prohibiting or eliminating hazardous chemicals and polymers. They advocate for a 'grouping approach' to prevent 'regrettable substitutions' where one harmful chemical is replaced by another similar substance.
• The brief supports the elimination of problematic and avoidable plastic products, including single-use plastics and intentionally added microplastics, viewing the latter as a 'low hanging fruit' for elimination.
• CIEL recommends that the treaty mandate the removal of subsidies for primary plastic polymer production, suggesting a roadmap to phase out existing incentives and a ban on granting new ones.
• The analysis advocates for a comprehensive trade regulation system, including export permits and prior informed consent, to prevent the treaty's goals from being undermined by trade with non-Party States.
• CIEL stresses that transparency is the cornerstone of the treaty. They argue for mandatory disclosures from large and transnational businesses regarding their activities and financial flows related to plastic pollution.
• The brief calls for a 'just transition' that protects workers across the entire plastics life cycle, not just in waste management, and specifically mentions the need to recognize and integrate waste pickers in informal settings.
• CIEL recommends the establishment of a dedicated financial mechanism to support developing countries, particularly Small Island Developing States and least developed countries, to meet their obligations.
• The analysis suggests that the treaty should include a mechanism to prevent the transfer of damage or hazards from one area to another, citing UNCLOS Article 194 as a potential model.

APA

Radvany, R., Azoulay, D., Carlini, G., De Anzizu, H., del Castillo, A., Shah, D., Durán, D., Sky, M. B., & Zendejas, C. G. (2024). Analysis of the Revised Zero Draft of the Plastics Treaty. Center for International Environmental Law. https://www.ciel.org/wp-content/uploads/2024/03/Annotated_Zero_Draft_INC4.pdf

Chicago

Radvany, Rachel, David Azoulay, Giulia Carlini, Helionor De Anzizu, Andrés del Castillo, Dharmesh Shah, Daniela Durán, Melissa Blue Sky, and Carla Garcia Zendejas. Analysis of the Revised Zero Draft of the Plastics Treaty. Center for International Environmental Law, 2024. https://www.ciel.org/wp-content/uploads/2024/03/Annotated_Zero_Draft_INC4.pdf.

Wikipedia

{{cite report |last1=Radvany |first1=Rachel |last2=Azoulay |first2=David |last3=Carlini |first3=Giulia |last4=De Anzizu |first4=Helionor |last5=del Castillo |first5=Andrés |last6=Shah |first6=Dharmesh |last7=Durán |first7=Daniela |last8=Sky |first8=Melissa Blue |last9=Zendejas |first9=Carla Garcia |title=Analysis of the Revised Zero Draft of the Plastics Treaty |publisher=Center for International Environmental Law |date=March 2024 |url=https://www.ciel.org/wp-content/uploads/2024/03/Annotated_Zero_Draft_INC4.pdf |access-date=17 August 2026 |via=Climate Insights Directory}}

BibTeX

@techreport{radvany2024analysis, author = {Radvany, Rachel and Azoulay, David and Carlini, Giulia and De Anzizu, Helionor and del Castillo, Andrés and Shah, Dharmesh and Durán, Daniela and Sky, Melissa Blue and Zendejas, Carla Garcia}, title = {{Analysis of the Revised Zero Draft of the Plastics Treaty}}, institution = {Center for International Environmental Law}, year = {2024}, month = mar, url = {https://www.ciel.org/wp-content/uploads/2024/03/Annotated_Zero_Draft_INC4.pdf}, urldate = {2026-08-17}, note = {Indexed by Climate Insights Directory} }