Article 10 of the Global Plastics Treaty is pivotal in ensuring equity for communities impacted by plastic pollution.
Delegates are pushing for binding commitments to safeguard the rights of waste pickers and informal workers, while also addressing socio-economic justice.
The discussions stress the importance of a treaty that integrates environmental objectives with human rights, aiming for a fair transition that acknowledges the burdens borne by vulnerable groups.
As governments continue negotiating the Global Plastics Treaty, one article stands out for its potential to make or break the agreement’s commitment to equity: Article 10 on Just Transition. This article is not just policy language, it represents the lives and livelihoods of millions of waste pickers, informal workers, Indigenous peoples and communities disproportionately affected by plastic pollution. These are the people who often bear the greatest burdens of plastic’s lifecycle, yet remain invisible and unprotected in global discussions. Recognising and safeguarding their rights is essential to crafting a treaty that is both effective and just.
Many delegations welcomed the Chair’s text as a constructive starting point and offered proposals to strengthen it. A key ask was to shift the language from voluntary to binding, replacing “should” with “shall”. This reflects a widely shared understanding: a just transition cannot be optional. However, some countries pushed for collective responsibility by using “Parties” instead of “each Party”, despite noting that the “Each Party reference” creates a stronger obligation.
Another recurring theme was the importance of broadening the scope of those considered affected. Delegations called for the explicit inclusion of waste pickers, plastic industry workers, cooperatives, small-scale enterprises and Indigenous peoples and local communities. There were also calls to recognise Afro-descendant peoples, persons with disabilities, older persons and youth, along with a suggestion to use “people” instead of “communities” to better reflect individual lived experiences.
Framing matters; how we talk about justice in the treaty is essential. Many countries agree that Article 10 should emphasise fairness and social justice, ensuring the treaty respects human rights and supports the development needs of all nations. While some countries hesitated to include detailed background statements within the main rules, many urged recognising that wealthier nations bear a greater responsibility for past plastic pollution. This is a concept known as Common But Differentiated Responsibilities, which underlines that solutions must be tailored to each country’s specific situation.
Discussions aimed to keep the language clear and straightforward. Some wanted the text to be shorter and simpler, while others emphasised the need to protect decent jobs, social safety nets and human rights. There was strong support for naming waste pickers and informal workers, who often face the harshest impacts, and expanding the focus to vulnerable groups and workers in the plastics industry.
Some delegations also called for the addition of sections on international cooperation, financial aid, sharing technical knowledge and establishing a global system to assist developing countries in managing the transition fairly. However, others warned against including politically sensitive topics like trade restrictions or unilateral actions, which could complicate the agreement.
Even though most countries agree on the need for a fair transition away from plastic pollution, there is still disagreement about how to include it in the treaty. Some countries want to keep a strong, standalone section on Just Transition (Article 10), while others have questioned whether it’s needed at all. They’ve suggested merging it with other sections or removing it entirely, saying it’s too political or overlaps with other parts of the treaty. References to human rights, the responsibility of richer nations and differences in countries’ economies have become flashpoints for debate. But these disagreements go beyond wording; they strike at the core of what kind of future this treaty will create.
A Just Transition is not a political distraction. It’s about making sure that the millions of people who already help reduce plastic waste and those who are impacted by plastic pollution, are protected, recognised and supported. Leaving them out would be a failure of justice. As time runs out and informal talks continue, the way forward requires not compromise, but courage and moral clarity to prioritise people, fairness and dignity in a treaty designed to heal not only the planet but also the broken systems that caused the crisis.
Pinky Chandran is trustee for Solid Waste Management Roundtable
Views expressed are the author’s own and don’t necessarily reflect those of Down To Earth