End Plastics
On the Ground in Geneva: 7 In-Depth Insights from the Final Push of the Global Plastics Treaty
August 25, 2025
As the Intergovernmental Negotiating Committee, INC-5.2, draws to a close in Geneva, Switzerland, hopes for a breakthrough have dimmed.
The session, intended to finalize a legally binding global plastics treaty, has ended without agreement, with negotiations marred by bitter divisions between countries pushing for ambitious measures to curb plastic production and those seeking to limit the treaty’s scope to mitigate plastic pollution and waste management.
The latest draft fails to include production caps or strong chemical controls, instead leaning heavily on voluntary commitments and recycling, which is a stance decried by over 100 “high ambition” nations as dangerously inadequate. Fossil fuel–aligned states, backed by a heavy industry presence, resisted upstream limits, reflecting a widening gap between scientific urgency and political will.
Geneva, in turn, has become a vivid illustration of both the intractability of global environmental diplomacy and the stakes for ecosystems, human health, and economies.
From fossil fuel and plastic lobbyists crowding negotiation halls to civil society staging bold acts of protest, the dynamics inside and outside the Palais des Nations reveal the forces shaping the treaty’s fate. Below are seven critical developments that capture the stakes, the players, and the pivotal decisions that could define the world’s response to the plastics crisis for decades to come.
1. Aminah Taariq-Sidibe: EARTHDAY.ORG’s Observer In the Eye of the Storm
Aminah, EARTHDAY.ORG’s Manager of the End Plastics Initiative was stationed at the Palais des Nations, serving as our organization’s on-site observer to track real-time developments at this historic moment. This session is the culmination of a multi-year process, building upon five prior negotiation rounds, from Punta del Este (INC-1) through Busan (INC-5.1), now converging in Geneva for what could be the decisive stage of talks. From her vantage point inside the UN complex, Aminah witnessed the tension between the procedural grind and the high-stakes urgency hanging over the room.
Outside the halls, the “Thinker’s Burden” sculpture by Benjamin Von Wong greets delegates and visitors alike. A six-meter figure inspired by Rodin’s The Thinker sits atop Mother Earth, surrounded by a DNA helix and gradually being engulfed by real plastic waste over the course of the negotiations, serving as a haunting reminder of the mounting burden of delay and inaction.
Plastics, microplastics and their additive chemicals are linked to human infertility, heart disease, cancers, Alzheimer’s, Parkinson’s and more. Yet the plastic industry is fighting every step of the way to take accountability and to limit human exposure.
2. The Fossil Fuel and Plastic Lobby Vastly Outnumbered Public Interest Voices
Lobbyists from fossil fuel, petrochemical, and plastics sectors — numbering over 234 — dominated Geneva. They outnumber scientists, Indigenous delegates, and even the entire European Union (EU) delegation, with 19 embedded directly within national delegations.
This creates a corporate capture of the treaty process, as these lobbyists often push for weaker language and voluntary commitments that protect industry profits.
Industry representatives have been particularly active in contact groups dealing with financial mechanisms and national action plan language, which are areas where a single watered-down clause can dramatically blunt the treaty’s enforcement potential.
The imbalance has alarmed advocates, who say the voices of those most impacted by plastic pollution, such as coastal communities, waste pickers, and Global South nations, are being drowned out.
3. Critical Omissions: No Production Caps & No Chemical Controls
The Chair’s draft, released on August 13, strips away two of the most important upstream measures: binding plastic production caps and controls on toxic plastic chemicals of concern. Instead, it prioritizes end-of-pipe measures like recycling, which we know has failed to address the plastic problem for over 50 years, ‘redesign’, and voluntary waste management schemes.
This framing mirrors the preferred position of the petrochemical plastic producers and major oil-exporting nations, which see plastic production as a critical growth market.
The absence of production caps ignores scientific consensus that curbing virgin plastic output is the single most effective way to reduce plastic pollution and safeguard human health. Omitting controls on harmful plastic additive chemicals, many of which are linked to cancer, endocrine disruption, and developmental harm, undermines the treaty’s ability to safeguard public health.
4. High Ambition Coalition Pushes for Lifecycle Mandates
More than 100 countries, including the European Union (EU), Canada, Colombia, and several small island developing states, are pressing for a treaty that tackles plastics across their entire lifecycle. This means not only waste management, but also limiting plastic production, banning harmful chemicals, and holding producers, ultimately the polluters, truly accountable.
These nations have repeatedly invoked the “triple planetary crisis” of climate change, biodiversity loss, and pollution, framing plastics as a cross-cutting threat. They are also calling for a robust financial mechanism to support developing countries in implementing treaty obligations.
EU delegates have stressed that without upstream measures, plastic production could triple by 2060, locking in decades of additional pollution.
5. Creative, Disruptive Activism Gains Momentum Outside the Halls
While negotiators debate commas and clauses inside, activists outside are making their own kind of history. Greenpeace scaled UN buildings to unfurl banners calling for “Cut Plastic Production Now.” The evolving “Thinker’s Burden” sculpture has drawn daily media attention, as it accumulates more plastic waste each day. Swiss oceanic activists handed out bars of soap engraved with the words “No Dirty Tricks” to protest industry interference.
These actions are timed to coincide with key moments in the negotiations, ensuring delegates feel public pressure in real time. Civil society groups have also coordinated press conferences to counter industry talking points and provide journalists with alternative, ambition-focused narratives.
6. On the Last Day Talks Hung by a Thread
By Day 4, negotiators faced over 370 unresolved brackets in the draft text, which was a sign of deep division. Contentious issues included definitions of “problematic and avoidable plastics,” the scope of national action plans, and whether measures would be mandatory or voluntary.
Certain procedural maneuvers, like reopening already-agreed text or shifting contentious issues to future “technical expert groups,” was used to dilute ambition without outright rejecting proposals. Observers described the mood as tense and fatigued, with some delegates openly questioning whether a meaningful agreement was still possible within the deadline.
7. “This Is Not a Treaty”
One of the most forceful rebukes of the Chair’s draft, declared that this “is not a treaty” but rather “a collection of voluntary national measures” that won’t make any difference in tackling the escalating plastics crisis.They argued that without binding global targets, chemical bans, and accountability mechanisms, the agreement will be little more than a symbolic gesture.
This criticism was echoed by many NGOs and members of the High Ambition Coalition, who see the current text as a capitulation to industry interests. They warned that the credibility of the entire INC process, and the hope of a plastic-free future, hangs in the balance.
Geneva Is At a Crossroads and Your Voice Still Matters
The decisions in Geneva will define not just negotiation history—but the future of plastic governance itself. The evidence, science, and on-the-ground reporting are clear: only bold, legally binding, full-lifecycle protections will do.
You can take action now by signing the Global Plastics Treaty petition to support an enforceable, production-to-disposal framework. You can also urge lawmakers to defend the EPA, vital for bringing any treaty home with force. Geneva is the moment. Let’s rise.
This article is available for republishing on your website, newsletter, magazine, newspaper, or blog. The accompanying imagery is also cleared for use. Please ensure that the author’s name and their affiliation with EARTHDAY.ORG are credited. Kindly inform us if you republish so we can acknowledge, tag, or repost your content. You may notify us via email at [email protected] or [email protected]. Want more articles? Follow us on substack.
