The fifth session of the Intergovernmental Negotiating Committee (INC-5) in Busan, South Korea, aimed to finalise a legally binding Global Plastics Treaty but ended without consensus. Due to major divergences around key elements of the future Treaty, the session has been extended to INC-5.2, with the date and location still to be determined.

Key Developments

Negotiations began slowly, hindered by procedural delays and disagreements, particularly around:

  • Problematic plastic products and chemicals of concern (Article 3)
  • Supply – potential production cap (Article 6)
  • Financial mechanisms (Article 11)

To accelerate progress, the Chair introduced informal negotiations mid-week, which improved discussions but limited transparency for observers. Ultimately, the final Plenary in Busan adopted a draft text proposed by the Chair as the basis for INC-5.2, though significant work remains.

A powerful moment occurred during the final Plenary, when Rwanda called for ambition, prompting observers and delegations to stand in solidarity, signaling resistance to pressure from oil-dependent economies advocating lower ambition.

Bioplastics in the Treaty

While “alternatives and non-plastic substitutes,” the category under which bioplastics will fall, were not a primary focus amid high-level political issues, Article 5 on product design provides a key opportunity. The text calls to: “ Foster research, innovation, development and use of sustainable and safer alternatives and non-plastic substitutes, including products, technologies and services, taking into account environmental, economic, social and human health aspects and their potential for waste reduction and reuse, as well as availability, accessibility and affordability, based on life cycle assessments and best available science, and, where relevant, traditional knowledge, knowledge of Indigenous Peoples and local communities.”

This inclusion validates biobased, biodegradable, and compostable plastics as part of the solution. Countries such as China, Sri Lanka, Indonesia, and Australia openly supported bioplastics, while oil-producing nations like Russia and Saudi Arabia opposed them, as they did many other parts of the Treaty.

EUBP’s Contributions and Engagement

European Bioplastics (EUBP) delegation, including Celmira Sousa (NatureWorks), Maria Puustinen (Neste), Brian Pontious (Ingevity), and Julie Pieters (EUBP), actively promoted bioplastics as solutions to plastic pollution:

  • Advocating for the role of biobased plastics in defossilisation and biodegradable plastics in waste management.
  • Engaging with many national delegations, NGOs, and industry partners
  • Highlighting bioplastics’ role at events like the USDA/Korean Government panel on biopolymers.

Next Steps

The Chair’s text will serve as the starting point for INC-5.2, though all options remain open under the principle of “nothing is agreed until everything is agreed.” EUBP will continue to advocate for the inclusion of bioplastics in product design criteria while monitoring developments around definitions, recycling technologies, and problematic plastics.

While challenges remain, the progress made in Busan has shaped a clearer outline for the future Treaty. The EUBP delegation remains committed to ensuring bioplastics have a recognised and credible place in the global fight against plastic pollution.