Hopes Fade as Plastic Treaty Negotiations Collapse Without Agreement

Negotiators have once again walked away from Geneva without a deal on the Global Plastics Treaty. After two weeks of tense discussions, the summit closed without delivering the long-awaited agreement to curb plastic pollution. Environmental groups voiced frustration at the lack of progress but also noted that there was little value in pushing through a weak, watered-down treaty.

The Global Plastics Treaty has been in development since 2022 and was initially intended to be finalised by the end of 2024. That deadline has slipped repeatedly. Earlier sessions broke down because of time pressure and unresolved disputes over how global targets should be set and how progress should be measured.

This month’s meeting brought negotiators back to Geneva for ten days of additional talks. At first, the mood was cautiously optimistic. With fewer procedural squabbles, discussions moved more quickly than in previous rounds, when arguments over the agenda consumed days before any real work began.

But the early momentum did not last. As the negotiations deepened, so did the divisions. On one side were the so-called high-ambition nations, pressing for binding targets tied to clear timelines and insisting that any solemn treaty must also address the root cause of the crisis: the sheer volume of new plastics being produced each year. On the other side were countries with primary petrochemical interests, far less willing to accept limits on production.

More than 100 nations lined up behind proposals for ambitious regulation. Over 120 argued that the treaty must explicitly address human health, given the mounting evidence of plastics’ impact on both people and ecosystems. Those positions were blocked by powerful opponents, including the United States, Saudi Arabia, and Indonesia.

GAIA Africa’s Merissa Naidoo, whose team is campaigning against incineration as a means of waste management across the continent, said:

“If this does not make crystal clear that this treaty process is broken, what will?

“The Chair’s [Ambassador Luis Vayas Valdivieso] disrespect and disregard for civil society and many Member State delegations, who were forced to wait for hours just to be abruptly dismissed in a matter of seconds, was not just an insult–  it was a strategy to exhaust ambitious Member States into submission.”

Confirmation of collapse

Nations were unable to agree on a final treaty at Friday morning’s plenary. NGOs, including WWF, had urged high-ambition nations to walk away with no deal rather than a “compromised” version that was “not fit for purpose”.

“No treaty is better than a bad treaty,” stated GAIA.

WWF’s global plastics policy lead Zaynab Sadan said: “The failure of states to find agreement in Geneva is bitterly disappointing. This outcome is neither what communities, scientists, businesses and civil society demanded nor what our leaders promised.

“But what we saw in Geneva was an overwhelming majority of states from all corners of the world expressing willingness and alignment for an effective treaty to end plastic pollution. That provides hope for the future.”

The UN Environment Programme’s executive director, Inger Andersen, said: “This has been a hard-fought 10 days against the backdrop of geopolitical complexities, economic challenges, and multilateral strains. However, one thing remains clear: despite these complexities, all countries clearly want to remain at the table.”

The road ahead

The final session told its own story. Delegates gathered on Thursday evening, expecting to conclude by seven. Hours passed. Midnight came and went. It was only after dark that they were told the closing plenary had been postponed to Friday morning. By then, frustration filled the room.

Greenpeace’s head of delegation in Geneva, Graham Forbes, said: “The inability to reach an agreement in Geneva must be a wake-up call for the world. Ending plastic pollution means confronting fossil fuel interests head-on.

“The vast majority of governments want a strong agreement, yet a handful of bad actors were allowed to use the process to drive such ambition into the ground. We cannot continue to do the same thing and expect a different result. The time for hesitation is over.“

World Plastic Council chair Benny Mermans said: “We deeply regret that UN member states were unable to reach an agreement to end plastic pollution in Geneva, but remain optimistic that a deal is possible.

“I would urge negotiators to focus on what unites us – building waste management capacity and the circular model we all aspire to – and to steer away from contentious issues that threaten the historic opportunity to reach an agreement to end plastic pollution.”

Plastic Europe’s managing director, Virginia Jessens, said: “Plastic pollution is a global – not regional – challenge, and we urge all UN member states to resume multilateral efforts as soon as possible.

Two days earlier, a draft text had already sparked concern. It stripped out language calling for a reduction in plastics that are prone to leaking into the environment, are challenging to recycle, or disrupt circular systems. It also weakened a mechanism that would have allowed the treaty to adapt over time as new scientific knowledge and challenges emerged. Additionally, it softened key recommendations, making them voluntary rather than mandatory. Even bans on harmful chemicals and measures to improve product design were downgraded to optional steps.

In the aftermath, WWF and other NGOs demanded a rethink. They argued that the structure of the talks needs reform before the next round. Introducing majority voting rules, whether simple or two-thirds, could break the current gridlock and make a strong treaty more realistic. They also called for more frequent meetings between official negotiating sessions to maintain momentum.

Industry groups had their message. Representatives of petrochemicals and packaging companies urged governments to narrow their ambitions. They want future talks to focus on delivering only the basics: binding agreements on waste management and voluntary guidelines for production itself.

The battle over plastics is far from over, but with time running out, the question is whether governments will choose bold action or retreat into half-measures.

“We hear and share society’s concerns and are disappointed by the inability to agree on a legally binding global agreement on plastics pollution in Geneva. Nevertheless, we would like to recognise the tireless work of the Chair and UN member states’ negotiating teams. We applaud the decision and political will to continue negotiations and build much-needed global consensus and enabling policy frameworks.”

A date for additional talks has not yet been set.

Chair Ambassador Luis Vayas Valdivieso said, “Failing to reach the goal we set for ourselves may bring sadness, even frustration. Yet it should not lead to discouragement. On the contrary, it should spur us to regain our energy, renew our commitments, and unite our aspirations. 

“It has not happened yet in Geneva, but I do not doubt that the day will come when the international community will unite its will and join hands to protect our environment and safeguard the health of our people.”