A new report published today identifies critical challenges in the Global Plastics Treaty negotiations and sets out practical steps to strengthen the next phase of the process ahead of the next UN negotiation committee meeting on 7 February .
The report, released by the Global Plastics Policy Centre based at the University of Portsmouth's Revolution Plastics Institute , brings together three years of evidence-based research into the UN negotiations towards a global treaty to end plastic pollution. The report concludes that unless the process is reset to rebuild trust, clarify direction and unlock political will, the world risks missing a once-in-a-generation chance to tackle plastic pollution at its source.
The findings come as negotiations towards a legally binding Global Plastics Treaty remain in hiatus, shaped by rising geopolitical tensions, strong industry influence and differences in national priorities. The next meeting of the Intergovernmental Negotiating Committee (INC) to elect the new Chair of the negotiation process, will take place this coming Saturday in Geneva following failure to reach agreement in late 2025 and the resignation of the former Chair.
Unfortunately, the process followed so far has not always facilitated opportunities to find agreement or prevent low ambition countries from blocking progress. Taking stock of lessons learned to date, and clearly identifying the conditions needed to support effective agreement-finding in a challenging geopolitical context is critical at this stage of the process.
Dr Antaya March, Director of the Global Plastics Policy Centre at the University of Portsmouth
"Unfortunately, the process followed so far has not always facilitated opportunities to find agreement or prevent low ambition countries from blocking progress. Taking stock of lessons learned to date, and clearly identifying the conditions needed to support effective agreement-finding in a challenging geopolitical context is critical at this stage of the process," said Dr Antaya March , Director of the Global Plastics Policy Centre.
The research team attended every round of the negotiations and conducted 56 in-depth interviews with participants from governments, UN bodies, civil society, industry and academia, and conducted three focus groups involving 19 participants following the last negotiating meeting. The study captures how negotiations have unfolded in practice, rather than how they appear on paper.
The report finds that the way negotiations are designed and led can determine the extent of their success. Progress depends on interweaving three aspects of work: building shared understanding of the problem and possible solutions; creating space for honest political dialogue; and developing treaty text. Pushing ahead with legal drafting before countries have found enough common ground, the researchers warn, can significantly decrease the effectiveness of international decision-making processes.
To work towards bridging persisting divides, the report sets out a series of practical recommendations. These include finding the common ground that will help to move talks beyond entrenched positions, setting out a clear roadmap to the end of negotiations, strengthening leadership and procedural discipline, and investing actively in rebuilding trust in the negotiations process, its leadership and between countries. High-level political engagement beyond negotiators, will also be essential.
Understanding how decisions are made is just as important as what decisions are made. Well-designed and well-led processes offer the best chance of cooperation in a divided world.
Professor Steve Fletcher, Director of the Revolution Plastics Institute
The study captures experiences of those involved in the process of negotiating a global plastics treaty and demonstrates the value of systematically documenting participants' insights while the process is still unfolding. Bringing together the perspectives of negotiators, observers, and facilitators, provides an evidence base that can inform not only the remaining stages of the plastics treaty process, but also yield vital lessons for the design of future Multilateral Environmental Agreements.
"Our research also shows that these are not just technical negotiations, they are deeply human processes," said Dr March. "Gruelling schedules, limited capacity in smaller delegations and the sheer complexity of the task all shape what is possible at the negotiating table."
Despite the challenges frustrations associated with the negotiations to date, the report stresses that the plastics treaty process has already had lasting transformative impacts, driving new research, raising global awareness and building networks of policymakers and practitioners committed to tackling plastic pollution. This represents a significant achievement.
"Understanding how decisions are made is just as important as what decisions are made," said Professor Steve Fletcher, Director of the Revolution Plastics Institute. "Well-designed and well-led processes offer the best chance of cooperation in a divided world."
The full report is published today by the Global Plastics Policy Centre at the University of Portsmouth.
