The time is now for a UN plastic pollution treaty

In December last year, the fifth and final planned round of Intergovernmental Negotiating Committee talks (INC5) to develop a UN global plastics treaty concluded with no deal being struck. So the parties agreed to meet again.

Next week, Ed Shepherd, Unilever’s Senior Global Sustainability Manager, will be at the talks in Geneva – referred to as INC5.2 – as part of a delegation representing the Business Coalition for a Global Plastics Treaty, which Unilever co-chairs. We asked him to explain what will happen during the negotiations and what might be the possible outcome.

How optimistic are you that a global plastics treaty will be agreed at INC5.2?

There’s a lot of work still needed to bridge the gap between government positions, but there’s also growing momentum that this is the final chance to secure a meaningful deal.

Many governments are calling for ambition and are broadly aligned on what the treaty should include. My optimism has grown following the strong political signals we’ve seen recently, from the Stand Up for Ambition statement at INC5 to the Nice Wake Up Call, the latter supported by 95 countries. But to tackle plastic pollution at the scale required, it’s imperative that as many major economies as possible are engaged in shaping and supporting a successful UN agreement.

Finding political agreement between governments and overcoming different points of view is now the primary objective to secure a treaty. Hopefully, we will see senior political leaders – including government ministers – coming to Geneva to help navigate the process of compromise.

While there’s a good chance a meaningful agreement will be struck, the risk of negotiations breaking down remains significant. The current geopolitical disharmony we’re seeing only increases this risk.

Unilever will be in Geneva as part of the Business Coalition delegation to provide advice and support to governments as they work through these complex policy issues.

What’s the position of Unilever and the Business Coalition?

We’re pushing for a plastics treaty with harmonised packaging regulations to move away from the existing disconnected patchwork of policies. Harmonised regulations drive consistency across borders while supporting national ambitions, helping businesses like ours which operate in multiple markets. This will provide much-needed certainty for businesses and investors, improving long-term decision-making and lowering the cost of capital.

We want to scale solutions that tackle plastic pollution, and a treaty with harmonised regulations will make this easier for businesses to do. We believe this is the most cost-effective way to tackle plastic pollution while delivering economic, environmental and social value.

What in particular do we want a plastic treaty to cover?

We’re seeking a treaty that covers the full plastic lifecycle, with mandatory obligations for specific sectors such as packaging, and the ability to tailor to national contexts.

We see a global phase-out list for plastic products and chemicals of concern (known as Article 3) as the cornerstone of an effective treaty alongside mandatory product design criteria (Article 5), and measures to bring virgin plastic production and use to sustainable levels (Article 6).

The topic of sustainable production and consumption has consistently been an area of divergence in government positions. But for Unilever, as a major user of plastic, it’s crystal clear that without measures to bring production and consumption to sustainable levels we’re unlikely to end plastic pollution.

That’s why, in October 2024, the Business Coalition endorsed the Bridge to Busan Declaration, calling on governments to achieve sustainable levels.

Voluntary and fragmented action isn’t enough, and measures determined differently in each country will add barriers and costs for business to implement packaging changes at scale.

How do you determine the value of harmonised regulations?

The Business Coalition recently commissioned a study to model the economic impacts of two regulatory approaches on plastic: one based on harmonised regulations, where countries align on key measures, and another based on fragmented regulations, where each country sets its own rules.

This Economic Rationale study, which focused on select countries – Brazil, China, India, Indonesia, Japan and South Africa – found that harmonised regulations on key elements such as phase-outs, product design and extended producer responsibility (EPR) would bring economic, environmental and social value both globally and at a national level, compared to a fragmented approach.

Globally, harmonised regulations could unlock substantial investment through EPR, driving the expansion of waste management systems and reducing mismanaged waste. Between 2026 and 2040, EPR revenues could reach $576 billion, more than double what would be achieved under more fragmented approaches.

Harmonisation could also lead to a 77% increase in recycled content availability by 2040, while creating jobs across the plastics value chain – especially in emerging economies (in reuse, recycling and waste management sectors). Cleaner environments would further support other industries such as tourism and fishing.

At a national level, the benefits are equally compelling.

Brazil’s recycling rates could be 21% higher under harmonised regulations compared to a fragmented scenario, with mismanaged plastic waste reduced by 1 million tonnes. China could strengthen its position as a global leader in sustainable manufacturing through the growth of the recycling industry and the increased availability of recycled content, predicted to be 80% higher in the harmonisation scenario. And India could save up to $20 billion in clean-up costs by 2040, freeing up resources to upgrade infrastructure and invest in innovation.

What’s your message to negotiators?

There’s unprecedented alignment between governments, businesses and civil society on the core elements which can – and should – underpin an effective treaty.

We welcome the ongoing efforts of countries to engage constructively at both political and technical levels, and encourage all UN member states to work towards an ambitious agreement in Geneva.

Now is the time for ministers to show bold leadership and get the job done.

Read more about the Business Coalition economic rationale study.