Polymer pathos

NEW DELHI: Earlier this month, negotiators working on a treaty to address the global crisis of plastic pollution in Busan, South Korea, failed to reach an agreement and planned to resume the talks next year. The representatives of various nations were at an impasse over whether the treaty should reduce the total plastic on Earth and put global, legally binding controls on toxic chemicals used to make plastics. The Busan negotiations were supposed to inspire the first legally binding treaty on plastics pollution, including in the oceans, by the end of 2024. The process was set into motion in March 2022, when 175 nations sought the treaty to limit production as well as tackle cleanup and recycling, and many have said that is essential to address chemicals of concern. But for some plastic-producing and oil and gas countries, that comes with its fair share of economic disadvantages.

A few numbers might help contextualise this. Every year, the world produces more than 400 million tonnes of new plastic. And plastic production could climb about 70% by 2040 without policy changes. According to the Plastics Industry Association, China was by far the biggest exporter of plastic products in 2023, followed by Germany and the US. Together, the three nations account for 33% of the total global plastics trade. From a practical standpoint, India has also been against capping the manufacture of polymers — raw materials for the production of plastic by the petrochemical industry, one of the largest in the world. India generated around 3.5 mn tonnes of plastic waste in 2020-21, but it could recycle less than half of it. Consider that the per capita consumption of plastic in India is just 15 kg compared to the US's 139 kg and China's 46 kg. In spite of our lower per capita consumption, India went ahead and banned single use plastics from July 2022.

As a remedial measure, this year, India proposed a dedicated multilateral fund to compensate developing countries for their transition towards plastic-free living. The fund would aid emerging economies meet the additional costs of transition and invest in alternative sustainable materials. As many as 100 other nations including the African and Latin and Caribbean Group made similar suggestions including the creation of an independent financial framework to support developing countries meet their obligations under the proposed treaty.

India has also sought the transfer of clean tech to emerging economies to enable compliance with control measures. Island nations proposed a 40% reduction of production levels by 2040 based on 2025 levels. The negotiations were primarily centred around the developing nations which were held responsible for more than two thirds of the annual 57 million tonnes of plastic pollution. The largest sources of pollution include India, Nigeria, Indonesia, and Sub-Saharan Africa. Interestingly, observers even called out the practice of high income countries exporting their plastic waste to lower income nations. The items include plastic scrap, hidden plastic waste in electronic equipment, synthetic textiles, waste fuels, among others.

Stakeholders in the sustainability space have bemoaned that allowing fossil fuel and petrochemical companies to exert their influence in the negotiations was akin to letting foxes guard the henhouse. Even with regard to India, which has a tall order on its hand vis-a-vis tackling the plastic menace, activists decried that New Delhi was more interested in opting for a downstream treaty that merely manages the waste rather than address the real problem of plastic pollution.