Global hotspots in the fight against plastic pollution

1. Positioning of the Plastics Convention

In September 2021, Peru and Rwanda joined more than 30 countries to submit a proposal for an International Legally Binding Instrument on Plastic Pollution to the United Nations Environment Assembly, proposing the launch of an Intergovernmental Negotiating Committee (INC) to form an international legally binding instrument from the perspective of the whole life cycle management of plastics. in October 2021, Japan submitted a proposal for an International Legal Instrument on Marine Plastic Pollution, proposing to In January 2022, India submitted a proposal for a Framework for Addressing Pollution from Plastic Products, including Single-Use Plastic Products, which proposes to focus the issue of plastic pollution on an approach in which autonomous action by member countries is the main focus, complemented by voluntary action by the international community. The topic was discussed in detail at the Fifth United Nations Environment Assembly. Although the conference finally adopted the decision to start INC under the strong insistence of dozens of countries and regions such as the EU, but the purpose and focus of the convention will still be the focus of subsequent discussions.

2. Determination of the nature of the plastics convention

The Fifth UN Environment Assembly discussed the nature of the proposed convention, i.e., there was a lively discussion on the legally binding aspects of the convention. Whether the new convention should be mandatory and legally binding, or whether it should be a voluntary measure like the Paris Agreement, or both.

Russia opposed the U.S. proposal that the INC consider "with legally-binding and non-binding commitments" when developing a legally binding international instrument. The EU prefers to replace "commitments" with "provisions" and is supported by the US, Brazil and Chile. Peru suggested using the agreed language of the Minamata Convention on Mercury, which "could include legally binding and non-legally binding provisions," and received majority support. This was supported by a majority of countries. Although there is broad agreement among member states on the principle of legally binding and non-legally binding provisions in the new convention, the arrangement of the mechanisms is indeed another focus of future negotiations.

3. Determination of the scope of the plastics convention

With regard to the purpose and scope of the new plastics convention, AOSIS and the African Group, with the support of the European Union, proposed that the intergovernmental negotiating committee develop an instrument on "plastic pollution, including in the marine environment. There was also a preference to let the INC decide its own scope and to delete "including in the marine environment". In the end, the Working Group agreed that the INC would develop a legally binding international instrument on plastic pollution, including in the marine environment, which would include binding and voluntary approaches, taking into account the principles of the Rio Declaration, and would be based on a comprehensive life-cycle approach to address The plastic issue.