The initial day of negotiations was uneventful, with member states participating in contact group discussions and working to organise tasks for subgroups
UNEP Executive Director Inger Andersen addresses the audience at INC4 Partnerships Day on April 23. Photo shared on @andersen_inger / X
The fourth session of the Intergovernmental Negotiating Committee of the United Nations General Assembly (INC-4) commenced on April 23 in Ottawa, Canada. This gathering marks the fourth of five planned meetings for the committee. Its objective is to negotiate and establish a comprehensive global framework of regulations addressing plastic pollution.
INC Chair Luis Vayas Valdivieso said, “Let us negotiate with accountability and integrity–grounded in the scientific evidence and facts on the scale and urgency of ending plastic pollution. Let us also approach this task with optimism, that it is both necessary and possible for us to achieve this new treaty.”
Participating governments are under pressure to achieve progress in this meeting due to criticism of the committee’s failure to achieve desired outcomes in the previous three INC sessions in Punta del Este, Paris and Nairobi. Over the next seven days, member states will negotiate and focus on refining the text of the revised zero draft, which forms the foundation of this round of negotiations.
Inger Andersen, executive director of the United Nations Environment Programme (UNEP) in her opening remarks, said “We can be proud of what we have achieved. But a job half-done is a job not done. Time is against us–both in terms of finalising the instrument and how much more the planet can take. As we deliberate, plastic pollution continues to gush into ecosystems.”
She urged the members of the committee to set the stage for INC-5 to finalise an instrument that will end plastic pollution, once and for all. Andersen highlighted that there is convergence on a lot of issues such as the elimination of short-lived and single-use plastic, redesigning systems and products, extended producer responsibility (EPR), innovative funding, just transition, legacy plastic pollution, and reporting framework. She also noted that there is divergence on issues like chemicals and polymers of concern.
According to Delhi-based think tank Centre for Science and Environment’s report titled Global Plastic Treaty Negotiations: Country Positions, member states hold divergent views on certain issues like primary plastic polymers, with opinions ranging from one extreme to another. Additionally, a coalition of nations involved in oil, gas, and plastic production has declined to engage in discussions concerning reducing plastic production. Identifying themselves as the ‘Like-minded countries’, they are noticeably engaging in more formal meetings and operations during this round, compared to previous gatherings.
Leading up to the fourth meeting of the INC, the Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory (LBNL) released a significant study highlighting the substantial climate impact of plastic production. One key discovery from the study is that to prevent exceeding the 1.5°C limit outlined in the 2015 Paris Agreement, primary plastic production needs to decrease by approximately 12 per cent to 17 per cent annually, starting in 2024.
“Agreeing to a global agreement on plastic pollution by the end of 2024 would mark one of the most significant environmental decisions and would be a first-of-its-kind agreement to unite the world around a shared goal to end plastic pollution,” said Steven Guilbeault, Canada’s Minister of Environment and Climate Change.
“Seize this opportunity, make these seven days count, deliver a text that is as close as possible to the final agreement that we all want to see,” said Jyoti Mathur-Filipp, executive secretary of the INC. “You delegates know the issues that need to be addressed at this session, and that flexibility will be needed to reach consensus. This is the only way forward.”
Read DTE Coverage: Run-up to Ottawa
The debate between consensus and voting remains a persistent concern for the chair and the INC secretariat. Although the negotiating committee has provisionally adopted the rules of procedure, there is still disagreement among member states regarding Rule 38.1, which empowers the committee to make decisions on substantive issues. This disagreement implies that substantive decisions must be reached solely through consensus.
India was the first country to intervene in the Plenary and request the Chair to reassure their delegation that Rule 38.1 of the draft rules of procedure will not be invoked at any point in this round of the negotiations and that all substantive decisions will solely be made on consensus.
Insisting on unanimous agreement for all decisions at the INC creates challenges. This requirement often leads to the lowest common ambition shared by all countries, causing frequent deadlock. In practice, this approach allows any party to block decisions.
Using majority voting instead can empower the majority interest, aiding consensus and democratic decision-making. Even if majority voting is only used as a last option during deadlocks, it encourages compromise among minority interests. Many international institutions and treaties have majority voting rules that are rarely used, serving as a safety net.
The initial day of negotiations was uneventful, with member states participating in contact group discussions and working to organise tasks for the subgroups.
To download the whole report by CSE, click here.
We are a voice to you; you have been a support to us. Together we build journalism that is independent, credible and fearless. You can further help us by making a donation. This will mean a lot for our ability to bring you news, perspectives and analysis from the ground so that we can make change together.
.png)
Comments are moderated and will be published only after the site moderator’s approval. Please use a genuine email ID and provide your name. Selected comments may also be used in the ‘Letters’ section of the Down To Earth print edition.