INC-5 Recap: Progress and Setbacks in Busan
Nour Mansour
Environmental Consultant | Marine Conservationist| Co-founder TunSea | Charles R. Wall Young African Policy Program Alumna
Progress, Challenges, and the Path Forward
The fifth round of negotiations to develop an international legally binding instrument on plastic pollution, including in the marine environment (INC-5), concluded in Busan, South Korea, without a final agreement. Delegates left with an extended timeline and a proposal by the Chair to reconvene at an extra session, INC-5.2, to resolve key disagreements. Countries agreed to use the latest Chair’s text as the basis for continued negotiations, though the Chair reminded participants that the entire text remains subject to negotiation.
Stalling Tactics and Industry Influence
Civil society groups expressed disappointment at the lack of consensus, attributing delays to resistance from bad state actors bolstered by ever-increasing industry influence. More than 220 fossil fuel and chemical industry lobbyists registered to attend INC-5—together, forming the largest single delegation at the talks. This outsized presence highlights the challenge of combating vested interests determined to undermine meaningful progress.
Key unresolved issues include:
While fossil fuel producers once again succeeded in stalling progress, global momentum for a robust plastics treaty has only intensified. In a remarkable show of strength, over 100 Member States united to insist on a treaty with concrete measures to cut plastic production and ban toxic chemicals fueling the crisis.
领英推荐
A Way Forward
As we approach INC-5.2, countries must once and for all clarify their readiness to use all options—including voting—to deliver the treaty they continue to affirm is urgently needed. The choice is stark:
Promising Signs of Collaboration
While the lack of consensus is disheartening, the discussions in Busan have shown promising signs of #collaboration, with a growing number of countries aligning on #ambitious approaches to tackle plastic production and pollution.
As we look ahead to INC-5.2, the focus must remain on delivering a #robust and #effective #global treaty that prioritizes tangible solutions over universal compromise!
Building on Incremental Progress
It’s easy to overemphasize the significance of a single negotiation while undervaluing the impact of consistent, incremental progress at each session. Every INC meeting builds upon the last, bringing us closer to the shared goal of an impactful plastics treaty.
The road to INC-5.2 must prioritize action, collaboration, and ambition—because the world cannot afford further delays.
Sustainability | Climate change| ESG| Forestry| Blue economy| Waste & Circular Economy| Earthshot Prize Youth
3 个月The Chair’s proposal to reconvene offers a critical opportunity. At INC-5.2, countries must rise above the stalemates and demonstrate real political will. The world needs a treaty rooted in accountability, robust global rules, and a comprehensive financing mechanism that prioritizes the most vulnerable nations. Anything less risks undermining the very purpose of this process. This is a defining moment: do we settle for diluted agreements or embrace bold, transformative action to address the plastics crisis? The clock is ticking, and the choices made now will define the legacy of these negotiations. Let’s not lose sight of the end goal—a healthier, more sustainable future.
Independent climate change consultant
3 个月UN Multilateral negotiations were always able to deliver on hughly complex Environmental thematics (this is how we got a number of excellent MEAs - Multilateral Environmental Agreements, such as UNFCCC, UNCCD, CBD...) when negotiations were lead by technical and scientific delegates. But since Environmental and technical UN negotiations are lead by politics, business, and diplomacy.... #COPs and others negotiations' meetings such as INC became either sterile, unproductive or ending with wrong outcomes... mostly not in favor of developing countries. Other reason that has its importance is that developed countries representatives are selected and nominated based on competence and efficiency, while for developing countries it's more about friendships, networks, allegiance, awarding...