Search Climate Insights Directory

This briefing by the Center for International Environmental Law (CIEL) outlines the critical issues and stakes surrounding the INC-5.2 negotiations for a global plastics treaty, scheduled for August 5 to 14, 2025, in Geneva, Switzerland.

A statement by the International Institute for Sustainable Development (IISD) regarding the outcome of the fifth session of the Intergovernmental Negotiating Committee (INC-5) in Busan, South Korea, which failed to finalize a global treaty on plastic pollution but established a basis for negotiations to resume in 2025.

A statement by the Center for International Environmental Law (CIEL) outlining the necessary components for an effective global plastics treaty during the INC-5 negotiations in Busan, Republic of Korea, emphasizing the need for production caps and bans on hazardous chemicals.

This briefing by the Center for International Environmental Law (CIEL) provides initial reactions to the third 'non-paper' released on October 29, 2024, by the Chair of the intergovernmental negotiating committee (INC) tasked with developing a global plastics treaty. While CIEL views the non-paper as an adequate structure for negotiations at the upcoming INC-5 meeting in Busan, Republic of Korea, it argues that the current text relies too heavily on voluntary language and lacks essential provisions on production limits, chemicals of concern, and finance, which would result in an ineffective treaty.

The Canadian Association of Physicians for the Environment and a coalition of signatories urge the Canadian Minister of Environment and Climate Change to secure an internationally binding plastics treaty that includes mandatory global and national reductions in virgin plastic production.

Friends of the Earth International issues a statement calling for a legally binding global plastics treaty that addresses the entire lifecycle of plastics, from production to disposal. The organization argues that the treaty must include production limits, confront the influence of the fossil fuel industry, and end 'waste colonialism' where wealthy nations export plastic waste to the Global South.

This policy brief by the Forum on Trade, Environment, & the SDGs (TESS) examines options for international trade-related cooperation to address plastic pollution, specifically focusing on single-use plastics. It analyzes existing national legislative approaches, proposes criteria for identifying problematic plastics, and outlines pathways for collective action through the World Trade Organization (WTO) and the development of a global plastics treaty.

This policy brief by the Center for International Environmental Law argues that the future plastics treaty must address fiscal incentives and subsidies for primary plastic production, including indirect subsidies to fossil fuels, to effectively tackle the plastic pollution crisis.

This document provides a detailed comparison between the draft Rules of Procedure for the intergovernmental negotiating committee (INC) tasked with creating a global legally binding instrument to end plastic pollution (RoPsEPP) and the Rules of Procedure used for the Minamata Convention on mercury (RoPsM). It highlights key modifications in the draft, including expanded membership definitions, provisions for online participation, and changes to the accreditation and participation of non-governmental organizations.

This policy brief examines the global plastic pollution crisis, arguing that current waste-management strategies are insufficient because they focus on the waste stage rather than the production stage. The author discusses the limitations of recycling, the role of the petrochemical industry, and the potential for a new global treaty to address the lifecycle of plastics.

This briefing explores the precautionary principle as a guide for decision-makers to protect the environment, public health, and security in the face of scientific uncertainty. It traces the principle's evolution from national laws in Sweden to its integration into major international treaties and the law of the European Union, while discussing the ongoing tension between environmental safeguarding and economic development.

This report by the Center for International Environmental Law (CIEL) analyzes the Safe Chemicals Act of 2011 (S. 847), a bill introduced by Senator Frank Lautenberg to reform the Toxic Substances Control Act (TSCA). The analysis evaluates whether the bill provides the necessary implementing authority for the United States to ratify the Stockholm Convention on Persistent Organic Pollutants (POPs), the POPs Protocol to the Convention on Long-Range Transboundary Air Pollution (LRTAP POPs Protocol), and the Rotterdam Convention.

This report by the Center for International Environmental Law (CIEL) analyzes the 'Safe Chemicals Act of 2010' (Lautenberg bill) and the 'Toxic Chemicals Safety Act of 2010' (Rush-Waxman discussion draft). It evaluates how these proposed reforms to the Toxic Substances Control Act (TSCA) would provide the implementing authority necessary for the United States to ratify the Stockholm Convention on Persistent Organic Pollutants (POPs), the LRTAP POPs Protocol, and the Rotterdam Convention.

This written testimony by Glenn M. Wiser of the Center for International Environmental Law (CIEL), submitted to the U.S. House of Representatives on March 2, 2006, advocates for legislation to implement the Stockholm Convention on Persistent Organic Pollutants (POPs), the LRTAP POPs Protocol, and the Rotterdam PIC Convention. Wiser compares two proposed bills to amend the Toxic Substances Control Act (TSCA)—H.R. 4800 (Solis bill) and H.R. 4591 (Gillmor bill)—arguing that only the Solis bill adequately implements the health and environmental protection goals of the Stockholm Convention.

This document consists of responses from Glenn Wiser of the Center for International Environmental Law to questions posed by Chairman Paul E. Gillmor of the Subcommittee on Environment and Hazardous Materials. The responses focus on the legal and regulatory framework required for the United States to implement the Stockholm Convention on Persistent Organic Pollutants (POPs), specifically addressing the separation of powers between the Executive and Legislative branches, the nature of treaty control measures, and the potential pitfalls of including cost-benefit balancing or 'sound science' language in implementing legislation.

A coalition of public interest groups, including the Center for International Environmental Law and the World Wildlife Fund, issued a statement on March 8, 2004, rejecting the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency's (EPA) February 25 draft amendments to the Federal Insecticide, Fungicide, and Rodenticide Act (FIFRA). The groups argue the draft fails to adequately implement the Stockholm POPs Convention, the LRTAP POPs Protocol, and the Rotterdam PIC Convention, and they oppose the bill's reliance on cost-benefit analysis over health-based standards.

This policy brief by the Center for International Environmental Law outlines recommendations for ensuring the meaningful and effective involvement of stakeholders during the intergovernmental negotiations for a global treaty to end plastic pollution.

This report by the Center for International Environmental Law analyzes the status of the United States' ratification of the Stockholm Convention on Persistent Organic Pollutants (POPs) and evaluates proposed implementing legislation in the U.S. Congress. It argues that the Solis TSCA bill (H.R. 4800) is the only proposal that aligns with the treaty's health-based standards and supports state-level environmental protections.

A letter from the U.S. Secretary of State to Senator Bill Frist urging the completion of the legislative process to allow the United States to join the Stockholm Convention on Persistent Organic Pollutants (POPs) and other international chemical agreements.

This research paper by Claudia Saladin for the Center for International Environmental Law (CIEL) analyzes the Convention on Access to Information, Public Participation in Decision-Making and Access to Justice in Environmental Matters (the Public Participation Convention) and argues that its transparency and accountability requirements should apply to export credit agencies (ECAs).