Road to Geneva: Why Just Transition must anchor the Global Plastics Treaty

During its fifth meeting in March 2022, the United Nations Environment Assembly (UNEA) adopted resolution 5/14, which mandated the creation of an Intergovernmental Negotiating Committee (INC) to develop a legally binding instrument to end plastic pollution.

As the key decision-making body on environmental issues, UNEA resolutions also inform the work of the United Nations Environment Program (UNEP). INC consists of all the member states of the UNEP that are negotiating the instrument. Since 2022, the world has witnessed five sessions of the INC, convened to develop a legally binding Global Plastics Treaty.

The treaty aims to tackle plastic pollution comprehensively, but beyond bans and regulations, it's also about people especially those most affected by this transition. That’s where Just Transition comes in. It has emerged as a crucial legal and policy framework to ensure that the shift towards sustainability is not only environmentally sound but also socially equitable.

Just Transition focuses on the fair distribution of economic and social benefits during systemic transitions aiming to maximise opportunities for all, especially vulnerable populations, and ensuring that no one is left behind.

At its core, Just Transition is about ensuring that the shift to sustainability is fair, inclusive, and equitable. It focuses on how we can redistribute social and economic benefits, protect livelihoods and support vulnerable groups like informal waste workers, women and marginalised communities throughout the entire plastics value chain, from production to disposal.

This transition must not create new injustices while trying to fix existing ones. It must offer real opportunities through retraining, upskilling and green jobs in sectors including recycling, renewable energy, and sustainable packaging while protecting existing roles like those of waste pickers, who’ve long been on the frontlines of plastic recovery.

In the context of ending plastic pollution, Just Transition involves the design, promotion, and implementation of actions that facilitate a shift toward sustainable plastic production and consumption. It recognizes the role of workers across the plastics value chain from production to waste management and seeks to ensure decent work, livelihood security, and inclusive decision-making in all transition processes.

Particularly at stake are informal waste workers, who play a critical role in recovering plastics yet remain unrecognised and unprotected. Addressing the social and economic impacts of transition such as job loss, economic displacement, and technological disruption is central to this framework. 
The framework also calls for global solidarity recognizing that transitions away from plastic pollution require collective action, technology transfer, and financial support, especially for developing countries and Small Island Developing States (SIDS).

Organisations like the International Alliance of Waste Pickers (IAWP) are at the forefront of demanding recognition, rights, and transformative policies that include legal recognition fair wages, social protection, and inclusion in both national and international policy frameworks for the informal waste pickers including the treaty itself.

As part of the negotiation process, member states and regional blocs have had the opportunity to submit in-session interventions, which are publicly available through the INC Secretariat.

Centre for Science and Environment (CSE) has been closely tracking the Global Plastics Treaty negotiations since the first session (INC-1), held in Punta del Este, Uruguay in November 2022. In an effort to map evolving national and regional priorities, CSE began compiling and analysing these submissions starting with INC-3, which took place in Nairobi in November 2023. Latest to this endeavor is the compilation of submissions made by the member states based on the Chair’s non-paper in Busan, South Korea during the INC 5.1. 

Background: Just transition as a cross-cutting agenda

Appreciably Just Transition secured its position as a standalone article in chair’s text but it should be embedded as a cross cutting agenda to strengthen the rights, roles, and livelihoods of workers impacted across the entire plastic lifecycle. Arguably, the following are key provisions where Just Transition needs to have strong visibility within the treaty framework.

Preamble: It recognises waste pickers' contribution to plastic recovery and their right to a just transition.

Article 2 — Definitions: No definition of waste pickers as informal or cooperative workers involved in collection, sorting, etc.
Article 8 — Waste Management: Includes waste pickers in para 2(f), but used "promote" a just transition for Plastic waste Management workers especially waste pickers and other informal workers. Diluting the mandatory mode
Article 9 — Existing plastic pollution: promote the engagement of Indigenous Peoples, local communities, civil society, scientists, and the private sector, as appropriate and foster the exchange of relevant technologies, experiences and lessons learned. Waste picker or other informal workers’ role is missing
Article 11 — Finance: Needed a financial mechanism to explicitly support Just Transition programs, especially for vulnerable groups like waste pickers.

Conclusion: Busan and way forward

The Busan meeting made clear that reaching consensus is insufficient if it weakens ambition. The failure to meet the 2024 deadline for finalising the treaty reflects this challenge. As negotiations move forward, the global community must insist on a treaty that addresses root causes, prevents exclusion and displacement, and upholds equity and accountability delivering real, systemic change for both people and the planet.

To ensure that the Global Plastics Treaty meaningfully supports a Just Transition, it is essential that provisions particularly Article 10 are legally binding rather than voluntary. The treaty must include definitional clarity, strong policy frameworks at both national and international levels, and explicit recognition of the most impacted groups, especially informal waste pickers. Their integration into the plastics value chain should be supported through enumeration, recognition, inclusion, and capacity building. Just Transition should also facilitate the creation of green jobs in sectors like reuse and safe alternatives to plastics, backed by robust social protection measures.

Expectations: What Geneva (INC 5.2) must deliver

• Debates on mandatory vs voluntary language in Article 10 and other JT related provisions
• Re-inclusion of deleted subparagraphs and operational guidelines (possibly referencing ILO standards)
• Push for stronger interlinkages between Article 10 and financial, capacity-building, and technology transfer mechanisms
• Global South advocacy for clearly defined rights and protections for informal waste workers

A strong Global Plastics Treaty must enshrine Just Transition as a cross-cutting priority not limited to a single article by aligning with global environmental goals and upholding social justice, human rights and the lived realities of those most affected.

It’s also a call for global solidarity. Developing countries, Least Develop Countries (LDC) and Small Island Developing States (SIDS) need finance, technology transfer, and capacity-building support to ensure no one is left behind in this process.

Final summary: The Global Plastics Treaty aims to end plastic pollution by incorporating a Just Transition framework that ensures social equity. This approach advocates for fair distribution of benefits, protection of vulnerable groups, and creation of green jobs. Binding commitments are crucial to prevent exclusion and uphold the rights of informal waste workers. Financial aid, technology transfer, and capacity-building assistance are essential for developing nations to ensure inclusivity.