UN push on treaty to curb spiralling plastic menace
'We are facing a global crisis,' Ecuadoran diplomat Luis Vayas Valdivieso said at the start of 10 days of negotiations.
'Plastic pollution is damaging ecosystems, polluting our oceans and rivers, threatening biodiversity, harming human health, and unfairly impacting the most vulnerable,' he said.
'The urgency is real, the evidence is clear, and the responsibility is on us.'
Three years of negotiations hit the wall in Busan, South Korea in December when oil-producing states blocked a consensus.
Key figures steering the negotiations at this new attempt said they were not expecting an easy ride this time, but insisted a deal remained within reach.
'There's been extensive diplomacy from Busan till now,' UN Environment Programme executive director Inger Andersen said.
UNEP is hosting the talks, and Andersen said conversations between different regions and interest groups had generated momentum. 'Most countries, actually, that I have spoken with have said: 'We're coming to Geneva to strike the deal'.
'Will it be easy? No. Will it be straightforward? No. Is there a pathway for a deal? Absolutely.'
Plastic pollution is so ubiquitous that microplastics have been found on the highest mountain peaks, in the deepest ocean trench and scattered throughout almost every part of the human body.
In 2022, countries agreed they would find a way to address the crisis by the end of 2024.
However, the supposedly final negotiations on a legally-binding instrument on plastic pollution, including in the seas, flopped in Busan.
One group of countries sought an ambitious deal to limit production and phase out harmful chemicals.
But a clutch of mostly oil-producing nations rejected production limits and wanted to focus on treating waste.
Valdivieso insisted that an effective, fair and ambitious agreement was within reach.
'Our paths and positions might differ; our destination is the same,' he said on Monday.
'We are all here because we believe in a shared cause: a world free of plastic pollution.'
More than 600 non-governmental organisations are in Geneva. NGOs and civil society have access to the discussions tackling the thorniest points, such as banning certain chemicals and capping production.
'To solve the plastic pollution crisis, we have to stop making so much plastic,' Greenpeace delegation chief Graham Forbes said.
The group and its allies want a treaty 'that cuts plastic production, eliminates toxic chemicals, and provides the financing that's going to be required to transition to a fossil fuel, plastic-free future', he said.
'The fossil fuel industry is here in force,' he noted, adding: 'We cannot let a few countries determine humanity's future when it comes to plastic pollution.'
More than 400 million tonnes of plastic are produced globally each year, half of which is for single-use items.
While 15 per cent of plastic waste is collected for recycling, only nine per cent is actually recycled.
Nearly half, 46 per cent, ends up in landfills, while 17 per cent is incinerated and 22 per cent is mismanaged and becomes litter.
But Matthew Kastner, spokesman for the American Chemistry Council, said the plastics industry and its products were 'vital to public health', notably through medical devices, surgical masks, child safety seats, helmets and pipes delivering clean water. — AFP
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Muscat Daily
8 hours ago
- Muscat Daily
Oman supports UN effort for treaty on plastic pollution control
Muscat – Oman is participating in high-level United Nations negotiations in Geneva aimed at framing a legally binding global treaty to tackle plastic pollution, including in marine environments. The sultanate's delegation – led by Environment Authority – is attending the second part of the fifth session of the Intergovernmental Negotiating Committee (INC) from August 5 to 14. Involving nearly 180 countries, the talks are being held under the UN Environment Programme (UNEP) to develop a treaty to end the plastic pollution crisis. The negotiations are expected to shape a comprehensive agreement that addresses the entire life cycle of plastics, from design and production to disposal. 'The world wants and indeed needs a plastic conventional treaty because the crisis is getting out of hand – and people are frankly outraged,' said Inger Andersen, Executive Director of UNEP. She noted that plastic pollution has become widespread, affecting oceans, ecosystems and even human health. 'We know that plastic is in our nature, in our oceans and yes, even in our bodies. What is sure is that no one wants to live with the plastic pollution.' A 22-page draft document prepared by the INC, containing 32 articles, will serve as the basis for negotiations. The text outlines measures to promote plastic circularity, prevent leakage into the environment, and regulate production and waste management. 'Some countries will have to deal with reduction, others with mechanical recycling and others with alternatives,' Inger said. 'Let's see how we can get to this through the negotiations. I think there's a lot of good faith in the working group right now.' UNEP has warned that without coordinated global action, plastic waste is projected to triple by 2060, posing significant environmental and public health risks. The Geneva talks represent a critical step towards reaching a final agreement, with countries expected to work through the text article by article. If adopted, the treaty would be the first global legal instrument to comprehensively address plastic pollution.
Observer
8 hours ago
- Observer
The obstacles to UN reform
At the 80th United Nations General Assembly this September, participants will have to confront the escalating development finance crisis that is engulfing the UN system. So far, responses to financial pressures have focused on cutting costs, such as by reducing overhead and improving efficiency. But a lasting solution will require deeper changes, which begins with a fundamental question: What kind of UN does the world need today, and are current funding models fit for purpose? This year, a liquidity crisis created by non-paying or late-paying governments means that the UN faces a shortfall of $2.4 billion in regular UN budget dues, and $2.7 billion in peacekeeping contributions. Moreover, if the UN fails to spend any funds before year's end – say, because they were delivered late – it is required to return them to member states as credits, rather than rolling them over to the following year. Despite plans to cut spending by 30 per cent this year from its 2023 peak, the entire UN system is at risk of insolvency. Compounding the strain, aid cuts are undermining UN programmes, with the consequences being borne disproportionately by the world's most vulnerable people. Shrinking budgets among some of the world's largest donors – the OECD expects a 9-17 per cent year-on-year decline in foreign aid in 2025 – exacerbate these problems. While the scale of the UN's current funding and liquidity crisis is unprecedented, the underlying issues are not new. With its regular budget covering only a fraction of its needs, the UN is highly dependent on ad hoc, voluntary government funding. The UN Development System (UNDS) – comprising 43 funds, agencies and programmes that provide country-level development support and humanitarian assistance – is particularly dependent on voluntary contributions that can be quickly pulled back. Investment in the UNDS fell 16 per cent in 2023 (nearly $9 billion), with 93 per cent of total funding coming from voluntary sources and 7 per cent from assessed membership dues. To meet this crisis, UN Secretary-General António Guterres has launched the UN80 Initiative, which comprises three 'workstreams': finding ways to improve efficiency, reviewing implementation of the UN's mandates, and examining possible structural changes and programme realignments. The findings and proposals of the first two workstreams are supposed to inform thinking on the third. In fact, it is the third workstream that has the greatest transformative potential. If done right, the effort could mark a turning point for both the 'what' and the 'how' of the UN. But success will require the UN to avoid the mistakes of past reform efforts, which have sought to decentralise and improve coordination between agencies but avoided deeper questions about the UN's purpose and financing. As for purpose, the unique value of the UNDS lies in its power to advance and sustain globally agreed norms. Country-level activities that advance norms like gender equality, sustainability, and human rights should be at the top of the list. Fulfilling this function depends on the UNDS's technical competencies, convening power, international credibility and diplomatic relationships. But, importantly, it also rests on access to ample, predictable funding that sustains operations in support of these norms. While assessed contributions can provide this, in practice they currently account for a tiny fraction of total UNDS resources. As a result, cash-starved UNDS funds, agencies and programmes end up accepting contributions attached to narrowly defined projects, which can fragment efforts and reflect the whims and preferences of a handful of major voluntary donors. This effectively turns the UN into a contractor accountable to its paymasters, instead of a trusted adviser to host governments and a global agenda-setter. The UNDS is most effective when staff can steer policy strategically and deliver results where they are needed most, rather than where donors dictate. That is why two successive Funding Compacts called for more core financing for the UN's development activities, and less dependence on earmarked contributions. In return, the UN committed to improving transparency, strengthening reporting and boosting the efficiency of its operations. In 2023, UN agencies met 56 per cent of their Compact targets – more than twice the 24-per cent share met by member states. The inefficiency for which member states criticise the UN is thus at least partly the result of their own funding practices. Ultimately, the Compact failed to gain traction among UN member governments because it did not make a sufficiently compelling case for the UN's development role. One lesson of the Compact for the UN80 Initiative's third workstream is that a revitalised vision for the UNDS that member governments can broadly support is a necessary first step for successful reform. As for the financing itself, one solution would be to strengthen and expand the use of assessed contributions by re-examining the formula for allocating fiscal obligations among UN member states. The UN could also extend softer forms of earmarking, like joint and pooled funds; introduce more innovative forms of financing, such as replenishments and levies; and expand the scope for leveraging grant funds to crowd in additional investment. Whatever happens next, one thing should be clear: countries get the UN they fund. Only with a robust and predictable financing framework, guided by a strong consensus on goals, can the UN serve as a credible channel for members' investments in global development. These are the missing pieces of the UN reform jigsaw that must now be quickly found. @Project Syndicate, 2025
Muscat Daily
10 hours ago
- Muscat Daily
Japan marks 80 years since the Hiroshima atomic bombing
Hiroshima, Japan – The Japanese city of Hiroshima held a silent prayer at 8:15am (2315 GMT) on Wednesday. That was the moment when US aircraft Enola Gay dropped the atomic bomb called 'Little Boy' over the Japanese city on August 6, 1945. Hundreds of officials, students and survivors laid flowers at the memorial cenotaph. The ruins of the Genbaku Dome, the only structure left standing in the area where the bomb exploded, were visible in the background – a stark reminder of the horrors that unfolded. Before dawn on Wednesday, survivors and their families came to pray at the peace memorial park as the sun rose over Hiroshima. Hiroshima, a warning of horrors Hiroshima Mayor Kazumi Matsui warned in a speech against the growing acceptance of nuclear weapons and the 'accelerating trend toward military buildup around the world', against the backdrop of Russia's invasion of Ukraine and the conflicts in the Middle East. 'These developments flagrantly disregard the lessons the international community should have learned from the tragedies of history,' he said. Dozens of white doves, a symbol of peace, were released after the mayor's speech. Prime Minister Shigeru Ishiba said it was Japan's mission 'to take the lead … toward a world without nuclear weapons'. Pope Leo XIV said in a statement that 'in our time of mounting global tensions and conflicts', Hiroshima and Nagasaki remained 'living reminders of the profound horrors wrought by nuclear weapons'. The US dropped an atomic bomb on Nagasaki three days after the bombing of Hiroshima. UN Secretary-General Antonio Guterres warned that 'the very weapons that brought such devastation to Hiroshima and Nagasaki are once again being treated as tools of coercion'. The United States, which has never formally apologised for the bombings, was represented by its ambassador to Japan. It was among some 120 countries and regions who sent representatives to the ceremony. By the end of 1945, it's estimated that the death toll from the uranium bomb detonated over Hiroshima was around 140,000 people. The explosion flattened more than two-thirds of the city. A further 74,000 people were killed by the plutonium bomb dropped on Nagasaki. In the years that followed, survivors faced side effects from the radiation such as leukemia or other cancers and chronic diseases. Imperial Japan surrendered on August 15, bringing an end to World War II. The attacks on Japan remain the only time atomic bombs have been used in wartime. Nine countries hold nuclear weapons: the United States, Russia, the United Kingdom, France, China, India, Pakistan, the Democratic People's Republic of Korea (North Korea) and Israel. Russia and the United States together account for nearly 90% of the world's more than 12,000 warheads, according to the Stockholm International Peace Research Institute, better known as SIPRI. On the release of SIPRI's most recent arms report in June, the organisation warned that 'we are now in one of the most dangerous periods in human history'. 'The abyss is beckoning and it is time for the great powers to step back and reflect. Preferably together.' DW
