A strong treaty can end plastic pollution and save lives
Failure to do so is not an option.
Failure to do so is not an option.
Kirsten Schuijt
Director General, WWF International
Published On 22 Nov 2024
Plastic waste from the sand is collected in a sieve at a beach in Chigasaki, Kanagawa Prefecture, Japan, October 21, 2024 [Manami Yamada/Reuters]
Two years ago, global leaders promised to establish a treaty by the end of 2024 that would lay the groundwork to end plastic pollution.
The words used then to describe the treaty, such as “international”, “legally binding” and “addresses the full plastics lifecycle”, suggested a strong global treaty with teeth, one that evoked hope that countries were ready and united to do the utmost.
Since then, and after four divisive rounds of negotiations due to consistent opposition from a small minority of oil-producing countries, language governing the scope and mandate of this treaty has been pared down, with strong measures at risk of being replaced with weak alternatives such as “nationally-determined”, “voluntary”, and “waste management” (rather than the full plastics lifecycle).
This week, as we head into the fifth and final round of negotiations, scepticism about whether negotiators will reach a strong global treaty is understandable. However, we must not give in to those who seek to continue with business as usual. Governments must stand strong and unite to prevent irreversible loss for all, knowing that they have the support of the rest of the world.
We have done this before – the Montreal Protocol on ozone-depleting substances provides us with a shining example of how countries can come together to agree on common global rules that have brought us back from the brink. We must do this again and we must do it now as plastic pollution is rapidly escalating the threats to both nature and humanity.
Failure is not an option when there’s ample proof of plastics’ pervasive danger. Two years ago, just after the world agreed to create the treaty, researchers detected, for the first time, microplastics in human breast milk, potentially poisoning our children.
The more vulnerable among us need our support – not because they cannot help themselves, but because individual actions are insufficient to tackle the issue without the systemic changes needed to end plastic pollution. This is where our leaders need to step up and put in place a strong global treaty that the world not only wants but urgently needs.
The reasons we must take action now are clear, and so are the solutions that an effective treaty must entail.
One, a strong treaty will save lives. Research indicates that the current volume of plastic pollution is projected to increase exponentially, and it is already destroying ecosystems and wildlife populations, prompting climate change and infiltrating our bodies through the air we breathe and the food and water we consume.
To protect human lives and nature from the worst effects of plastic pollution, we need a strong treaty that bans the most harmful plastic products and chemicals. Additionally, a strong treaty is one that establishes global product design requirements so we can ensure the plastics we use are safe and can be effectively recycled.
Two, a strong treaty will help us address some of the current inequalities created and exacerbated by plastic pollution. The world is inundated with plastic pollution, yet its effects are not felt equally. In low-income countries, the lifetime cost of plastic is 10 times higher than in wealthier nations. Even in affluent countries, the plastic pollution toll can be severe and even deadly for some, as seen in Cancer Alley in the United States, an economically distressed area that accounts for a quarter of the country’s petrochemical production. Decades of plastic, petrochemical, and industrial pollution have led to this region having the highest cancer rate in the US.
To counter the crippling inequities in the plastics value chain, a strong treaty must contain robust financial mechanisms to support a just transition, especially in the Global South. This means aligning both private and public financial flows with the treaty’s obligations, while also mobilizing and distributing additional financial resources – especially for implementation in developing countries – to reduce plastic pollution. Furthermore, a treaty like this, through the mechanisms we just discussed, will be capable of halting harmful financial flows that contribute to the crisis.
Lastly, a strong treaty is the only approach that has the potential to deliver on the goal of ending plastic pollution. From scientists and governments to citizens and businesses, there is widespread agreement that the world urgently needs a treaty with global binding obligations. This type of treaty will raise the bar, create a level playing field for all, and mandate a shift away from destructive business-as-usual models towards meaningful systems change.
Securing enduring and impactful global action requires courage and leadership in carving a path that breaks free from harmful and deeply ingrained practices. Our leaders must take responsibility and be accountable for the promise they made two years ago to deliver a strong treaty, one that we need to put our planet on a path to recovery.
The views expressed in this article are the author’s own and do not necessarily reflect Al Jazeera’s editorial stance.
Two years ago, global leaders promised to establish a treaty by the end of 2024 that would lay the groundwork to end plastic pollution.
The words used then to describe the treaty, such as “international”, “legally binding” and “addresses the full plastics lifecycle”, suggested a strong global treaty with teeth, one that evoked hope that countries were ready and united to do the utmost.
Since then, and after four divisive rounds of negotiations due to consistent opposition from a small minority of oil-producing countries, language governing the scope and mandate of this treaty has been pared down, with strong measures at risk of being replaced with weak alternatives such as “nationally-determined”, “voluntary”, and “waste management” (rather than the full plastics lifecycle).
This week, as we head into the fifth and final round of negotiations, scepticism about whether negotiators will reach a strong global treaty is understandable. However, we must not give in to those who seek to continue with business as usual. Governments must stand strong and unite to prevent irreversible loss for all, knowing that they have the support of the rest of the world.
We have done this before – the Montreal Protocol on ozone-depleting substances provides us with a shining example of how countries can come together to agree on common global rules that have brought us back from the brink. We must do this again and we must do it now as plastic pollution is rapidly escalating the threats to both nature and humanity.
Failure is not an option when there’s ample proof of plastics’ pervasive danger. Two years ago, just after the world agreed to create the treaty, researchers detected, for the first time, microplastics in human breast milk, potentially poisoning our children.
The more vulnerable among us need our support – not because they cannot help themselves, but because individual actions are insufficient to tackle the issue without the systemic changes needed to end plastic pollution. This is where our leaders need to step up and put in place a strong global treaty that the world not only wants but urgently needs.
The reasons we must take action now are clear, and so are the solutions that an effective treaty must entail.
One, a strong treaty will save lives. Research indicates that the current volume of plastic pollution is projected to increase exponentially, and it is already destroying ecosystems and wildlife populations, prompting climate change and infiltrating our bodies through the air we breathe and the food and water we consume.
To protect human lives and nature from the worst effects of plastic pollution, we need a strong treaty that bans the most harmful plastic products and chemicals. Additionally, a strong treaty is one that establishes global product design requirements so we can ensure the plastics we use are safe and can be effectively recycled.
Two, a strong treaty will help us address some of the current inequalities created and exacerbated by plastic pollution. The world is inundated with plastic pollution, yet its effects are not felt equally. In low-income countries, the lifetime cost of plastic is 10 times higher than in wealthier nations. Even in affluent countries, the plastic pollution toll can be severe and even deadly for some, as seen in Cancer Alley in the United States, an economically distressed area that accounts for a quarter of the country’s petrochemical production. Decades of plastic, petrochemical, and industrial pollution have led to this region having the highest cancer rate in the US.
To counter the crippling inequities in the plastics value chain, a strong treaty must contain robust financial mechanisms to support a just transition, especially in the Global South. This means aligning both private and public financial flows with the treaty’s obligations, while also mobilizing and distributing additional financial resources – especially for implementation in developing countries – to reduce plastic pollution. Furthermore, a treaty like this, through the mechanisms we just discussed, will be capable of halting harmful financial flows that contribute to the crisis.
Lastly, a strong treaty is the only approach that has the potential to deliver on the goal of ending plastic pollution. From scientists and governments to citizens and businesses, there is widespread agreement that the world urgently needs a treaty with global binding obligations. This type of treaty will raise the bar, create a level playing field for all, and mandate a shift away from destructive business-as-usual models towards meaningful systems change.
Securing enduring and impactful global action requires courage and leadership in carving a path that breaks free from harmful and deeply ingrained practices. Our leaders must take responsibility and be accountable for the promise they made two years ago to deliver a strong treaty, one that we need to put our planet on a path to recovery.
The views expressed in this article are the author’s own and do not necessarily reflect Al Jazeera’s editorial stance.
No comments:
Post a Comment