Search Climate Insights Directory

The global chemicals industry, a $4.7 trillion sector responsible for 4% of global greenhouse gas emissions, requires urgent innovation to decouple from fossil fuels. RMI and Third Derivative identify three primary innovation pathways: 'Make Less' (circular economy and materials substitution), 'Make Better' (electrification and process efficiency), and 'Make New' (defossilized production using CO2 conversion and biomass). Despite the potential, the sector is undercapitalized, with only 3% of climate tech venture capital directed toward chemicals and plastics over the last five years. Key barriers to scaling include high capital costs, feedstock availability, and a 60% drop in global clean industry investment in 2024. The report emphasizes the role of strategic partnerships with incumbents, non-dilutive funding, and low-carbon certifications in accelerating the commercialization of these technologies.

The author reflects on the participation of youth at the INC-5.2 global plastics negotiations, specifically citing the involvement of the Children and Youth Major Group and their comprehensive demands for a treaty based on a full lifecycle approach to plastics, binding production targets, and intergenerational equity.

The document analyzes how the global plastics economy, valued at $1.1 trillion in 2023, necessitates international trade cooperation to end plastic pollution. It explores four key areas: proposed treaty obligations (such as restrictions on chemicals of concern and waste trade), safeguards against disguised protectionism, the socio-economic costs of implementation for governments and MSMEs, and the treaty's relationship with other international instruments like the WTO and various Multilateral Environmental Agreements (MEAs).

The document examines how the proposed international treaty on plastic pollution intersects with global trade, focusing on the transformation of supply chains, the risk of disguised protectionism, and the implementation costs for developing nations. It highlights that the global plastics trade was valued at $1.1 trillion in 2023, with over 78% of plastics traded internationally. The briefing analyzes four key areas: proposed treaty obligations (such as restrictions on chemicals of concern and waste trade), the use of non-discrimination language to prevent arbitrary trade barriers, the fiscal and technical challenges for parties—particularly MSMEs in developing countries—to meet new standards, and the treaty's relationship with other international agreements like the WTO and various Multilateral Environmental Agreements (MEAs). It concludes that trade-related measures under MEAs have historically been compatible with WTO rules.

The document argues that plastic pollution constitutes a public health crisis, with adverse effects occurring across the entire life cycle of plastics. It proposes three options for the treaty's structure: an integrated approach, a standalone article on health, or a combination of both. The briefing details how specific articles of the treaty could be used to eliminate harmful chemicals, improve product design, and support vulnerable populations, such as informal waste workers and fence-line communities.

The document argues for the inclusion of human health protection as a primary objective of the future international treaty on plastic pollution. It proposes an integrated approach covering the full life cycle of plastics and suggests the use of a dedicated article on human health to facilitate international cooperation and complement other treaty provisions.

The document highlights the critical nature of the INC-5.2 negotiations in Geneva, emphasizing the need for a treaty that includes plastic production caps, addresses toxic chemicals, and establishes robust financial mechanisms. It warns against the influence of fossil fuel lobbyists, the risks of consensus-based decision-making that could lead to gridlock, and the danger of postponing key decisions to future Conferences of the Parties (COPs).

The European plastic industry is facing a structural decline characterized by falling production and facility closures due to overcapacity and weak demand. While the industry blames EU regulations for a loss of competitiveness, the document argues that reducing production is the most sensible economic approach. It urges the EU to use its leadership role in the Global Plastics Treaty negotiations to advocate for primary plastic production limits and a managed phasedown to sustainable levels, while avoiding new petrochemical buildouts.

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 document outlines the global effort to create a legally binding treaty to end plastic pollution. It details the environmental and health risks of plastics, the history of the UN-led INC process, and the contentious treaty elements currently under debate, such as production caps and chemicals of concern. It also identifies the divergent positions of major plastic producers, high-ambition coalitions, and developing nations, while suggesting synergies with existing international conventions.

ClientEarth advocates for a shift from 'paper commitments' to legal action to address the ocean crisis. The briefing prioritises the enforcement of existing frameworks, such as the UN Convention on the Law of the Sea (UNCLOS) and the Kunming-Montreal Global Biodiversity Framework (GBF), to protect marine biodiversity and combat climate change. It specifically calls for the elimination of harmful fisheries subsidies, the banning of bottom trawling in marine protected areas (MPAs), and the ratification of the BBNJ Agreement to protect the high seas. The document also highlights the need for a 'Protection Principle' that makes ocean conservation the default norm and outlines specific legal priorities for the EU, Mediterranean, China, and the UK.

The document highlights how the plastics industry uses tactics like manufacturing doubt and securing privileged access to influence negotiations, noting that over 220 lobbyists attended the INC-5 session. It recommends embedding conflict of interest safeguards directly into the treaty text, including the preamble and science policy bodies, to protect public health and environmental goals from undue economic influence.

The document warns that the plastics and petrochemical industries are using tactics similar to those of the fossil fuel and tobacco industries to influence the Global Plastics Treaty negotiations. It highlights a significant increase in industry lobbyists at the INC-5 session, who outnumber delegations from the European Union, Pacific Islands, and Latin American countries. The brief recommends incorporating conflict-of-interest protections directly into the treaty's preamble, scientific bodies, and articles concerning financial mechanisms and technology transfer to ensure the agreement's effectiveness in protecting public health and the environment.

The Canadian Association of Physicians for the Environment, via the Coalition for Action on Toxics, identifies three priority areas for federal political action: reinforcing the Zero Plastic Waste agenda to end plastic pollution by 2040, expediting the phase-out of PFAS (forever chemicals), and providing long-term funding for the Chemicals Management Plan. The document argues that toxic exposures are a public health and environmental justice issue, noting that 88% of Canadians support increased federal regulatory action under CEPA. It highlights that Indigenous, racialized, disabled, and poor communities, as well as women and gender-diverse people, are disproportionately impacted by these pollutants.

WWF expresses caution regarding plastic crediting, stating it should only be an additional approach to robust plastic waste reduction strategies. The organization opposes the terms "plastic neutral" and "plastic neutrality," arguing they are misleading and do not convey true environmental impact. For crediting to be credible, WWF asserts it must drive investment toward circular systems and comprehensive Extended Producer Responsibility (EPR), adhere to ISEAL standards, and ensure social safeguards, including living wages for waste pickers. The document emphasizes that credits must prove additionality and match the specific polymer and form of the plastic produced by the buyer to prevent the neglect of low-value plastics.

A coalition of Canadian environmental organizations is calling on Minister Terry Duguid to ensure public participation and transparency within the Intergovernmental Negotiating Committee (INC) on Plastic Pollution. The authors argue that the exclusion of civil society, Indigenous Peoples, and independent scientists violates international and domestic obligations, specifically citing the Aarhus Convention and the United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples (UNDRIP). They highlight three specific instances of opacity: the restriction of intersessional expert groups to Member States and a small number of non-transparently appointed experts, the use of closed-door Heads of Delegation meetings to influence the draft treaty text, and the exclusion of observers from substantive discussions during INC-5. The organizations request that Canada advocate for meaningful participation, work with the INC Secretariat and Bureau to ensure inclusion of affected constituencies, and provide funding for Indigenous Peoples' participation.

The Institute for Policy Integrity recommends that the EEA-C ITWG align environmental-economic accounting classifications with practical stakeholder use cases and increase transparency regarding data, code, and methods to encourage business adoption. Specific technical suggestions include expanding Forest accounts to distinguish between native and non-native forests and monoculture versus diverse plantations, adding plastic pollution to Water accounts, and incorporating measures of uncertainty to avoid misleading estimates.

The Transparent 2024 report by WWF International reviews five years of progress among ReSource: Plastic members. Key findings show a collective reduction of 221,000 metric tons of virgin fossil-based plastic relative to baseline years and an increase in recycled content to 14.5% of the aggregate portfolio by 2023. However, the report notes that progress is incremental, with reusable packaging accounting for only 0.8% of the portfolio. Waste management modeling estimates that 16% of the members' plastic footprint is mismanaged globally, with China and India identified as the countries with the highest total tonnage of mismanaged waste. The report concludes that voluntary corporate action is insufficient and advocates for a legally binding global treaty on plastic pollution to mandate standards and drive systemic change.

The document details the disproportionate environmental burdens faced by Latino communities in the U.S. and California, highlighting higher rates of drinking water contamination, increased vulnerability to coastal flooding, and limited access to nature. It advocates for specific legislative bills to address offshore drilling, plastic pollution, and sea-level rise, while noting strong Latino support for ocean protection and public beach access.

The document advocates for the protection of marine ecosystems and the rights of Latino communities to clean water and equitable coastal access. It highlights the disproportionate impact of climate disasters and pollution on Latinos and lists specific legislative bills to address offshore drilling, deep-sea mining, plastic pollution, and NOAA funding.