Building in Flexibility: Key Considerations for the Future Plastics Treaty

The document analyzes various treaty flexibility mechanisms—such as reservations, differentiated timelines, and optional annexes—to recommend an approach for the future plastics treaty that balances broad adoption with environmental effectiveness. It argues against using optional annexes for chemicals of concern, suggesting instead a system of general and specific exemptions similar to those in the Minamata and Stockholm Conventions.

• The author advises against permitting reservations in the plastics treaty because they can undermine the agreement's object and purpose, and other parties have little recourse to remove them once registered.
• Differentiated implementation timelines can be highly effective, as demonstrated by the Montreal Protocol, which achieved universal ratification and a 98 percent global phase-out of ozone-depleting substances compared to 1990 levels.
• Separating countries into different obligation groups, as seen in the 1997 Kyoto Protocol, may lead to limited global progress; the Protocol failed to achieve necessary reductions because committed countries represented only 18 percent of global GHG emissions, while global emissions rose 44 percent from 1997 to 2012.
• Optional annexes or protocols often cause significant delays in entry into force due to the need for further negotiations and ratifications; for example, the Basel Convention's protocol on liability and compensation was adopted in 1999 but has still not reached the 20 ratifications required for entry into force.
• The document argues that placing chemicals of concern in an optional annex would be ineffective and counterproductive for the plastics treaty, as it would negatively impact interconnected provisions on product design, recycling, and waste management.
• The brief recommends a flexibility model based on the Minamata and Stockholm Conventions, utilizing a combination of general exclusions for all parties and specific, time-bound exemptions for individual parties.

APA

Sky, M. B., & del Castillo, A. (2025). Building in Flexibility: Key Considerations for the Future Plastics Treaty. Center for International Environmental Law. https://www.ciel.org/wp-content/uploads/2025/07/Treaty-Flexibility-Mechanisms.pdf

Chicago

Sky, Melissa Blue, and Andrés del Castillo. Building in Flexibility: Key Considerations for the Future Plastics Treaty. Center for International Environmental Law, 2025. https://www.ciel.org/wp-content/uploads/2025/07/Treaty-Flexibility-Mechanisms.pdf.

Wikipedia

{{cite report |last1=Sky |first1=Melissa Blue |last2=del Castillo |first2=Andrés |title=Building in Flexibility: Key Considerations for the Future Plastics Treaty |publisher=Center for International Environmental Law |date=July 2025 |url=https://www.ciel.org/wp-content/uploads/2025/07/Treaty-Flexibility-Mechanisms.pdf |access-date=23 October 2026 |via=Climate Insights Directory}}

BibTeX

@techreport{sky2025building, author = {Sky, Melissa Blue and del Castillo, Andrés}, title = {{Building in Flexibility: Key Considerations for the Future Plastics Treaty}}, institution = {Center for International Environmental Law}, year = {2025}, month = jul, url = {https://www.ciel.org/wp-content/uploads/2025/07/Treaty-Flexibility-Mechanisms.pdf}, urldate = {2026-10-23}, note = {Indexed by Climate Insights Directory} }