Islands Push Upstream Action as Plastics Treaty Falls Short of Binding Commitments

AOSIS voices renewed concern as plastics treaty talks fall short of binding commitments, urging upstream action and remediation

The Alliance of Small Island States (AOSIS) has voiced deep concern and disappointment that the current phase of negotiations on a global plastics treaty did not deliver binding commitments that science, justice, and island communities say are urgently needed to end plastic pollution. Palau’s President Surangel Whipps Jr., speaking as Chair of AOSIS, acknowledged the difficulty of the negotiations but stressed that the outcome falls short of what people and the planet require, and pledged that the group will persevere in pursuit of real solutions.

Delegates were faced with an expansive mandate: curb plastic production, redesign products, improve waste management, clean up existing pollution, secure financing, protect health, and build the institutional frameworks and cooperation needed for implementation. After more than three years and six rounds of talks, core disagreements on these elements persisted. SIDS noted the substantial resources they have already committed to the process and urged that the progress achieved in earlier Geneva discussions not be lost. AOSIS emphasized that transparency, cooperation and trust are essential, and that genuine engagement can reveal common ground even among varied viewpoints. Yet time pressure and broader political dynamics, they suggested, helped impede greater progress.

Key statistics underscored the urgency: every year, about 19 to 23 million tonnes of plastic waste leak into aquatic ecosystems, polluting lakes, rivers and seas; without meaningful action, emissions are projected to nearly triple by 2040; and an estimated 75 to 199 million tonnes of plastic already reside in the oceans, creating an ongoing burden for communities and environments.

AOSIS reaffirmed its commitment to the rules-based multilateral system and argued that the treaty must be binding, effective and just. It also stressed the need for mechanisms to address the existing stock of plastic pollution, including in areas beyond national jurisdiction, and highlighted the potential role of a dedicated remediation framework and funding to accelerate cleanup operations. The Maldives, among others, has supported coordinated action involving states, international organizations, and the private sector, with a focus on equitable access to technology and resources for waste removal.

The Pacific bloc, including PSIDS, has consistently pushed for upstream actions—production caps, design standards, and lifecycle considerations—alongside robust financing and clear accountability to ensure vulnerable nations can implement any agreement. Their position is that a lifecycle approach, which treats prevention and design as central to reducing pollution, is essential rather than relying primarily on cleanup. Regional partners such as SPREP and Australia have helped support capacity-building and regional planning as part of these efforts. The High Ambition Coalition remains a reference point for strong global regulations aimed at ending plastic pollution.

With Geneva talks resuming in August for INC-5.2, negotiators are expected to circulate revised drafts and hold regional consultations to balance ambition with practicality. Observers say there is potential for momentum if the second draft can reintroduce strong upstream measures, transparent governance, and credible implementation mechanisms, including a Remediation Fund to mobilize both public and private financing for cleanup and capacity-building in vulnerable states.

What this means for the talks and beyond
– Upstream focus: Attaining binding limits on production and design is seen as critical to preventing new plastic from entering ecosystems, not just managing waste.
– Financing and capacity: A credible, well-funded mechanism will be essential to help countries lacking robust waste-management systems meet obligations.
– Remediation and ABNJ: Agreement on remediation of existing pollution, including in areas beyond national jurisdiction, is viewed as a key component to make progress meaningful and timelike.
– Regional leadership: Pacific and other regional groups will continue to press for concrete commitments that reflect local realities, with regional bodies and partners playing a central role in implementation support.
– Path forward: Negotiators will likely return to revised text, with regional consultations and a Heads of Delegation meeting aimed at producing a second draft before further sessions.

Editorial perspective and practical takeaways
The Pacific states’ stance highlights a broader shift toward upstream measures as indispensable, alongside credible financing and accountability. While the talks have faced setbacks, the prevailing viewpoint is that a future treaty must curb production, address chemicals and lifecycle considerations, and ensure robust funding and governance. If the next draft successfully reinserts lifecycle thinking and credible implementation provisions, it could re-energize negotiations and offer real protections for island communities and their environments.

Summary of context
INC-5.2 discussions are framed by UNEA Resolution 5/14, which calls for a legally binding instrument addressing plastic pollution across its full lifecycle. Victories for the Pacific and other vulnerable regions hinge on securing production controls, a transparent governance framework, and a financing mechanism capable of supporting implementation.

Hopeful takeaway
Despite current disagreements, negotiations acknowledge the necessity of upstream action and sustained international collaboration. A stronger, more ambitious draft that integrates production limits, lifecycle considerations, transparent reporting, and solid financing could mark a meaningful step toward reducing plastic pollution at the source and protecting oceans, health, and livelihoods for present and future generations.

Summary
Negotiations on a global plastics treaty have again not yielded a binding agreement, with Pacific nations and AOSIS pushing hard for upstream controls, lifecycle protections, and dedicated financing. The upcoming Geneva sessions will be pivotal as negotiators seek to reconcile ambition with practicality and deliver a treaty capable of delivering real, long-term protections for vulnerable communities and ecosystems.

Additional notes and practical takeaways
– The outcome will likely hinge on credible upstream limits, a robust Remediation Fund, transparent reporting requirements, and meaningful regional participation in governance and implementation.
– For communities along coastlines and in small island states, practical support—financing, technology transfer, and capacity-building—will be decisive in translating any new commitments into tangible improvements.