At the fifth and final meeting of the United Nations Intergovernmental Negotiating Committee to finalize a global plastics treaty in Busan, South Korea, an anti-pollution activist said on Wednesday that “waste pickers, indigenous peoples and young people Leaders and front-line members of the community have left.” Their families travel thousands of miles to get here because they are fighting to survive, not to protect business interests. ”
But a new analysis from the Center for International Environmental Law (CIEL) raises questions about how marginalized communities fighting plastic pollution can ensure their voices aren’t drowned out by participating fossil fuel and chemical industry lobbyists. .
“The fact that they are being forced to compete for representation with the very industry that pollutes their communities is a grave injustice,” said the Global Plastics Program of the Global Alliance for Incinerator Alternatives. said Ana Rocha, director of .
CIEL’s analysis found that more lobbyists with a vested interest in continuing plastic production were participating in the talks, including 220 fossil fuel and chemical lobbyists.
This figure gives the industry the largest representation in the negotiations, and advocates hope to secure a final agreement that includes legally binding caps on plastic production, as well as provisions governing plastic waste management, which the industry has pushed for. I’m looking for.
At current rates, plastic production is expected to triple by 2060. Currently, around 460 million tons of plastic are produced every year.
According to the Organization for Economic Co-operation and Development, plastic waste more than doubled from 2000 to 2019 to 353 million tonnes, but only 9% was recycled.
Improved waste management alone will not pollute the planet and public health, according to more than 900 independent scientists who signed a declaration calling for an ambitious plastics treaty aimed at eliminating plastic pollution by 2040. cannot be protected from.
But in Busan, industry lobbyists outnumber representatives of the Union of Scientists for an Effective Plastics Treaty by a ratio of three to one.
With only 89 representatives representing small island developing States in the Pacific, the country’s average per capita waste generation is 48% higher than the global average due to its heavy dependence on packaged imports.
The entire Latin America and Caribbean region was represented by just 165 people, while the European Union and its member states sent 191 delegates.
Sixteen countries include plastics industry lobbyists in their official delegations: China, the Dominican Republic, Egypt, Finland, Iran, Kazakhstan and Malaysia.
“Allowing fossil fuel and petrochemical companies to influence these negotiations is like letting the fox guard the chicken coop,” said von Hernandez, global coordinator for plastic free. “Their disproportionate presence threatens to turn important environmental agreements into a sham and undermine serious efforts to curb plastic production and pollution.Government negotiators are determined. We need to take this stance and ensure that the negotiations are not hijacked by those with a vested interest in maintaining the status quo.”
CIEL noted that the number of fossil fuel and petrochemical industry lobbyists participating in negotiations increases each time the Intergovernmental Negotiating Committee meets. Environmental scientists have reported intimidation and harassment by lobbyists at meetings.
In addition to dispatching lobbyists to Busan, oil and gas industry watchdog group Fieldnotes last week revealed that the National Association for PET Container Resources (NAPCOR) has been engaged in a multi-year campaign to mislead consumers about the recyclability of single-use plastic products. They released a report showing that they have embarked on the project. The coordinated efforts include an infomercial hosted by actor Dennis Quaid and paid deals with TikTok influencers who repeat industry topics in their videos.
“We observe industry lobbyists surrounding negotiations with sadly familiar tactics of obstruction, distraction, intimidation, and misinformation,” Delphine Levi Alvarez, CIEL’s global petrochemical campaigns coordinator, said Wednesday. I’ve done it,” he said. “Their strategy is taken directly from the strategy of climate change negotiations and seeks to protect the economic interests of countries and corporations that prioritize fossil fuel profits over human health, human rights, and the future of the planet.” This is the purpose.”
“The obligations of this treaty are very clear: to end plastic pollution. Growing evidence from independent scientists, frontline communities and indigenous peoples shows that we must reduce plastic production. It clearly shows that this cannot be achieved without “The choice is clear: our lives or their bottom line.”
