Delegates pave the way at INC4 for final drafts on plastic pollution amid differences

The fourth session of the United Nations Intergovernmental Negotiating Committee (INC4) began in Ottawa, Canada, on April 23, 2024, with approximately 4,000 delegates from 196 countries worldwide attending the meeting and deliberating issues around controlling plastic pollution. The objective of this week-long meeting was to develop an international legally binding instrument on all forms including air, water, and soil, of plastic pollution. The INC4 negotiations are scheduled to end on April 29, 2024.

This session aims to advance negotiations to enable the committee to finalize the draft resolution for approval at the fifth as the last session, scheduled to take place in Busan, Korea in November 2024, before implementation of the legally binding instrument in 2025. The ongoing penultimate stage of the negotiations follows three earlier rounds of deliberations which started with its first version (INC1) in Punta del Este in November 2022, the second (INC2) in Paris in June 2023, and the third version (INC3) in Nairobi in November 2023.

Polymerupdate thanks Plastindia Foundation, a member of World Plastic Council through Global Plastic Alliance, for providing access to the drafts of individual countries or group of countries, associations, and Organizations. This assistance greatly aided in preparing the article.

Schedule of United Nations Intergovernmental Negotiating Committee (INC) on Plastic Pollution meeting
Sessions	Place	Date
First – INC 1	Punta del Este, Uruguay	November 28 – December 2, 2022
Second - INC 2	Paris, France	May 29 – June 2, 2023
Third - INC 3	Nairobi, Kenya	November 13 – 19, 2023
Fourth - INC 4	Ottawa, Canada	April 23-29, 2024
Fifth - INC 5*	Busan, Korea	November 25 – December 1, 2024

Sources: United Nations, and Polymerupdate Research; *Schedule

The United Nations organized the Plenary Session on the first day of INC4. Several countries issued statements on behalf of regional groups for the rest of the world to understand the hardships being faced by them. Some of these country-wise statements are captured herehunder:

Argentina
Argentina stressed defining the key terms for clarity on commitments and respecting common but differentiated responsibilities principle. The South American country led to ensure no unnecessary trade barriers based on science and felt the need for financial mechanism and technology transfer on favourable terms.

Bangladesh
Bangladesh said that the downstream countries receive plastic pollution from upstream nations. Hence, the supplier of plastic pollution must consider special circumstances of downstream developing countries to control the menace.

Brazil
Brazil supported the treaty with all countries/sectors on board. The country focussed on problematic polymers/chemicals and products that harm health/environment and felt the need for financial mechanism to provide resources/technology to developing countries. The largest and easternmost country in South and Latin America called for protecting and empowering workers in the plastic value chain.

Chile
Chile supported the Chair's proposed contact group structure for discussions, believing enough time has been given since the December text submission. Also, the Western South American country suggested beginning substantive discussions on specific elements straightaway to ensure the desired legally binding instrument outcome at INC4.

China
China called for respecting national autonomy and differentiating development stages. Country Asian country highlighted to promote precise and rational objectives and requested the Chair to find transitional solutions that should be acceptable to all.

Cuba
Cuba called on INC4 members to be realistic and understand the countries' specificities. The country sought to clarify essential terms like "problematic/avoidable plastics" and the need for a dedicated implementation fund.

European Union
The European Union welcomed the revised draft as the basis to finalize the treaty by the end of 2024 and supported the proposed working modalities of contact/sub-groups. The supranational political and economic union of 27 member states called for proportional time allocation to all parts of the text, and expected agreement on intersessional work and legal drafting group. The European Union also emphasized the need for political momentum and potential ministerial involvement.

The European Union supported the Chair's approach for the division of work between contact groups and sub-groups, and the nominated co-chairs/facilitators. The Group saw value in an initial discussion on potential streamlining and comparing options, allowing all members to give their views on the draft text.

Ghana (on behalf of African Group)
Ghana thanked Canada and the United Nations Secretariat for preparating INC4. The West African country represented the entire African Group for supporting sustainable consumption, and circular economy approaches. The vibrant and diverse country emphasized waste prevention, and environmentally sound management and called for a new dedicated multilateral fund for implementation. Ghana also supported capacity building, technology transfer, and private sector engagement.

Guatemala
Guatemala emphasized ensuring inclusive processes respecting national circumstances/capacities, and providing financial support, technology transfer, the capacity building to developing countries. The Central American country stressed to define key terms and consider human health/environment.

India
India stressed the negotiations to be transparent, and inclusive, and the instrument scope must address ending plastic pollution per UNEA mandate. The highest populated country called for no arbitrary discrimination or trade restrictions, and obligations linked to means of implementation for developing countries.

Indonesia (on behalf of Co-ordinating Body on Seas of East Asia)
Indonesia supported the country-driven, tailored approaches respecting national circumstances, and called for scientific socio-economic assessments, including traditional knowledge. The Southeast Asian country highlighted the need for funding and engagement of all stakeholders for complementing the existing regional mechanisms.

Iran
Iran believes that plastic products are indispensable but mismanagement has led to pollution. The Islamic country said that better waste management and financial/technical assistance to developing countries are the key. Further, Iran reiterated that developed countries should take the lead in a legally binding manner, the developing countries follow voluntarily with access to means of implementation. “There should not be any discrimination against plastic products compared to other materials, and the legal drafting group should not start work before INC5,” it added.

Iraq
Iraq backed statements by Asia-Pacific group, and Arab group, and called to respect state sovereignty over natural resources. The country sought to define toxic impacts without prejudicing developing states.

Kazakhstan
Kazakhstan supported regulations based on Rio principles, and national circumstances, and stressed the need to avoid parallel discussions being all issues important. The country highlighted the draft principles based on Basel/Stockholm conventions.

Kenya
Kenya called for the revised draft to be comprehensive, transitioning quickly to legal text. The principles sought to establish the legal drafting group to develop treaty text, exercise flexibility, and launch areas of agreement first.

Kuwait (on behalf of Like-Minded Delegations)
Kuwait represented Like-Minded Delegations and emphasized principles of CBDR and sustainable development while calling for robust means of implementation for developing countries. The West Asian country highlighted avoiding undue burden on the developing countries and supported complementarity with existing frameworks and avoiding duplication.

Kuwait proposed having a first reading of all elements and options in the main contact group the first. This would allow a comprehensive understanding of parties' preferences and viewpoints and suggested this approach to help narrow down options, foster a fair and transparent process, and ensure every party's voice is heard.

Malawi (on behalf of High Ambition Coalition)
Malawi underscored the need for an ambitious, and comprehensive instrument addressing a full lifecycle while calling for binding rules to restrain plastic production and eliminate problematic plastics/chemicals. The landlocked country in Southeast Africa supported transparency, monitoring, reporting requirements, and emphasized mobilizing finance from all sources for implementation support

Malaysia
Malaysia called for the instrument to be country-driven allowing nationally-determined targets with no blanket restrictions impeding development rights. The Asian country felt to encourage rather than impose controls like on virgin polymer production.

Palestine (on behalf of Asia-Pacific Group)
Palestine reiterated commitments to address plastic pollution and called for an inclusive and consensus-based process while respecting national circumstances. The country also emphasized avoiding duplication with existing conventions and supported comprehensive life-cycle approaches and plastic circularity. Speaking on behalf of the Asia-Pacific Group, the West Asian country highlighted the need for means of implementation such as finance, technology transfer, and capacity building.

Philippines
The Philippines called for addressing plastic pollution holistically throughout its full life cycle and providing means for implementing developing countries. The archipelagic country in Southeast Asia identified hardships in the environmentally-vulnerable countries and established the science-based policy body to democratize scientific knowledge.

Qatar (on behalf of the Gulf Cooperation Council)
Speaking on behalf of the Gulf Cooperation Council or GCC, Qatar supported limiting parallel meetings to ensure equal treatment and called for consensus-based understanding and flexibility. The West Asian country emphasized respecting economic realities and capacities of developing countries and highlighted the importance of scientific research and innovation. Qatar supported waste management, sharing expertise, and avoiding burdens on developing countries. Iran, Brazil, Ukraine, and others also made national statements touching on similar points around principles, scope, means of implementation, and avoiding burdens on developing countries.

Qatar reiterated the commitment to making the meeting a success and implementing the United Nations Environment Assembly (UNEA) resolution which talks about a curb on plastic production. The country wants to build consensus through understanding diverging opinions, and instruments focusing on to recognize the economic realities of all countries. It prioritized alternative economies, and waste management systems during inter-sessional period, while avoiding adding financial burden on developing countries. Qatar also evinced interest on working with all to achieve a legally binding instrument.

Rwanda
Rwanda supported the reduction in plastic production to sustainable levels and highlighted the need for legally binding, time-bound global targets. The central African country is planning to host a diplomatic conference with Peru.

Russia
Russia dedicated the deliberations on finding consensus against politicizing discussions.

Samoa (on behalf of Small Island Developing States or SIDS)
Representing the entire Small Island Developing States or SIDS reiterated the need for an ambitious, effective equitable instrument while calling for regulation of hazardous chemicals/polymers and single-use plastics. The Polynesian Island country supported the remediation of existing marine plastic pollution and emphasized the need for new, additional and predictable finance and means of implementation. The country called for clear mandates to contact/sub-groups to make efficient progress.

Saudi Arabia
Saudi Arabia supported Kuwait's intervention on behalf of the Like-Minded Group and requested sufficient time to go through current options and proposals to hear everyone's opinions. The move was aimed to eliminate options that no one was favoured through this process.

Senegal (on behalf of Civil Society)
Senegal requested adequate time for civil society to speak as well, as they had not planned for national statements within the African Group. The country accepted the Chair's proposal on contact groups and sub-groups and congratulated the nominated co-facilitators. The westernmost country in continental Africa urged moving straight into substantive work, as there has been enough time to review the drafts and suggested hastening the work.

Switzerland
Switzerland thanked the Chair for the detailed organization of work elaborated ahead of INC4 and supported moving swiftly into contact groups to streamline text, before more substantive discussions in sub-groups. The country aimed to understand issues better and work towards finalizing at INC5.

Turkey
Turkey was committed to the ambitious, effective instrument respecting national circumstances and legally drafting group's mandate to be agreed in the plenary session.

Ukraine
Ukraine called for taking measures to protect the environment despite facing the Russian invasion. The eastern European country joined the High Ambition Coalition to end plastic pollution.

United Kingdom
The United Kingdom strongly supported the Chair's proposal on the establishment and mandates of the contact groups, believing it strikes the right balance. Also, the country favoured initial discussions in contact groups to identify areas for streamlining and possible ways forward, facilitating subsequent sub-group discussions. The move was aimed at delivering mandates of recommending streamlined text to the committee.

Uruguay (on behalf of GRULAC)
Speaking on behalf of the Group of Latin America and Caribbean Countries (Grulac), Uruguay supported the United Nations move using revised draft text as the basis for negotiations, a dedicated financial mechanism, and technology transfer, and called for identifying areas of convergence and bridging gaps among members. The South American country emphasized principles like Common But Differentiated Responsibilities and Respective Capabilities (CBDR), human rights, and just transition. Uruguay highlighted the role of existing regional centers and environmental agreements.

Separately, Uruguay felt the need to establish the two contact groups and sub-groups as outlined to use the limited time efficiently. The country is expected to use the revised draft as the basis for negotiations to reduce options over the coming days. Some countries such as Iraq, Iran, and Russia sought clarity on the relationship between contact groups and sub-groups, the order of work, and how outcomes would be handled between the groups. Overall, Uruguay supported the Chair's proposed structure while some had procedural questions about coordination between the various groups.

Vanuatu (on behalf of Pacific SIDS)
In addition to Samoa, Vanuatu also represented Small Island Developing States or SIDS and aligned the regional group with Asia-Pacific statements. The island country of Melanesia supported the proposed working methods and the limiting parallel meetings while calling for inter-cessional work program to meet the mandate. The country also emphasized human health, traditional knowledge, and the best available science.

United Nations responses to pointed remarks
Initially, the United Nations Secretariat issued no specific statement. However, the UN Chair clarified that the contact groups will discuss all elements of the revised draft text at a general level first, paving the way for focused discussions in the sub-groups. The Chair noted that only two parallel meetings will take place at a time and the outcomes from sub-groups will be reported back to contact groups, which will then report to the plenary. The UN Secretariat suggested not to repeat discussions that the already held in sub-groups when reported back to contact groups, while opening room for some further discussions.

While clarifying the European Union remarked that the contact groups will run the initial discussions and sub-groups will report back to their respective contact groups, with the possibility of further discussion in the contact groups. “The two contact groups will work in parallel, but not at the same time as the sub-groups. Only two meetings (contact group or sub-group) will take place in parallel at any given time,” the UN Chair said.

The Chair emphasized the need for targeted, inclusive, efficient, and transparent inter-sessional work between INC4 and INC5, and intended to consult further on proposed modalities and content for this inter-sessional work.

Observers as BRS Secretariat (Basel, Rotterdam, Stockholm Conventions)
BRS (Basel, Rotterdam, Stockholm Conventions) Secretariat observers were also present at INC4 which cumulatively highlighted the urgent need for conventions to collaborate effectively on plastic waste pollution. They stressed the importance of a lifecycle approach as the basis of the existing conventions on hazardous wastes and chemicals and felt the need for the new plastic pollution instrument to build upon the foundation and cooperate with existing MEAs for effective implementation. Later, the session moved to statements from observers - intergovernmental organizations, United Nations entities, and Non-Governmental Organisations (NGOs) focusing on the revised draft text.

International Labour Organization (ILO)
The International Labour Organization (ILO) urged operationalizing actions to advance safety, health, and a just transition explicitly in the treaty. The Organisation affirmed the commitment to collaborate promoting decent work, safety, and health transitions to end plastic pollution.

International Maritime Organization (IMO)
International Maritime Organization (IMO) has been regulating marine litter from ships for 50 years through the prevention of pollution by garbage from ships (popularly known as MARPOL Annex V). IMO prohibits the disposal of all plastics from ships into the sea, including fishing gear. The Organisation adopted strategies, action plans, and recommendations to further address marine plastic litter from ships. ILO affirmed its support implementation through technical cooperation programme and donor-funded projects.

UN Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights
UN Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights called for a human rights-centered plastic treaty as a legal obligation for accountability and stressed to prioritize pollution prevention by capping polymer production and enabling upstream solutions like reuse. The UN Office operationalized the polluter pay principle, equity, capacity building, and mobilize resources. The observers provided important perspectives on labour rights, maritime regulations, and centering human rights in the treaty process.

World Health Organization (WHO)
The World Health Organization (WHO) conveyed concerns from WHO's 194 member states about potential human health impacts from plastics and related chemicals. The Organization called for recognizing these potential risks consistently across relevant provisions, without blanket exemptions for medical/health uses. It proposed including healthcare as a dedicated program or sector-specific approach, leveraging existing expertise.

Central American Integration System (SICA)
At INC4, the Central American Integration System (SICA) highlighted common interests like full lifecycle/circularity, reducing problematic plastics, eco-design, EPR targets etc, and called for considering financing, local capacities, the existing norms for technology transfer. SICA emphasized monitoring implementation, transparency, and global standards/targets.

Global Youth Coalition on Plastic Pollution
Global Youth Coalition on Plastic Pollution called for recognizing differential impacts on population groups like youth, women, indigenous peoples, waste pickers etc. The Coalition highlighted the unfair burden of transboundary plastic waste on SIDS, LDCs, and downstream countries and advocated for co-development of knowledge and just transition towards sustainable economies. Also, the body emphasized focus on the upstream lifecycle and primary plastic production and urged binding control measures, and transparent accountability frameworks on time-bound targets to reduce production.

Conclusion
In summary, while some supported an initial comprehensive reading, others pushed to move directly into substantive negotiations on the draft text elements using the proposed contact group structure.


DILIP KUMAR JHA
Editor
dilip.jha@polymerupdate.com