Plastics Treaty negotiations: we need higher ambition

CCB • November 28, 2023

Nairobi, Kenya – The third meeting of the Intergovernmental Negotiating Committee (INC-3) for a global agreement to end plastic pollution concluded on 19th of November at the UNEP headquarters in Nairobi. Despite a mandate for a revised draft, Member States failed to reach an agreement on priorities for intersessional work ahead of INC-4, despite an 11th-hour attempt, jeopardizing significant advancements for the treaty process. 

 

With the significant petrochemical influence in the treaty negotiations, including the ‘low ambition’ of a group of ‘like-minded’ plastic-producing countries, and the lack of ambition by the so-called ‘high ambition’ countries, the INC-3 concluded without concrete headway towards the mandate adopted at the fifth United Nations Environment Assembly (UNEA 5.2) to negotiate a comprehensive and legally binding treaty that will cover measures along the entire life cycle of plastic.


Downstream actions are not enough

According to the views of many Member States and INC observers, and based on mandate of UNEA resolution 5/14, a strong Global Plastics Treaty shall take into account the entire life cycle of plastics, from production to disposal. The most comprehensive modeling, incorporating the recent report “Towards Ending Plastic Pollution: 15 Global Policy Interventions for Systems Change” by Systemiq/the Nordic Council of Ministers, indicates that effectively tackling plastic pollution throughout its life cycle necessitates the implementation of supply-side controls on plastic production. Given the absence of projections indicating that waste management capacity will ever align with current estimates of plastic production, reducing the supply is the sole viable long-term solution. Currently, less than 10% of plastic waste is recycled, the U.N. Environment Programme says, while at least 14 million tonnes end up in oceans every year, the International Union for Conservation of Nature says.

Chemicals in plastics

During the negotiations many countries strongly supported provisions on addressing chemicals of concern, and protecting human and environmental health from chemicals in plastics.


A proposal by Switzerland and Uruguay to hold more discussions on curbing harmful polymers and chemicals of concern garnered support from more than 100 members states. It was an expectation from many Member States and observers, that INC will mandate intersessional work to create an initial list of chemicals of concern, including monomers and polymers, to be listed in the Annexes of the Treaty, together with respective criteria for their selection. However, the influence of a group of other countries, including fossil fuel and plastic-producing countries overpowered these perspectives. 


CCB along with many other environmental organizations, including IPEN reminds that plastics are a combination of chemicals and carbon. Thousands of those chemicals are known to be chemicals of concern and for most of the rest there is a remarkable lack of data. Moreover, for users and the waste management sector there is limited, or in most cases no data on the chemical composition of plastic materials and products. This lack of transparency, traceability, and available data means that there are no plastics that can be considered safe, since it is not possible to know if they contain toxic chemicals. These gaps are also key obstacles toward a safe circular economy.

Unfortunately, after seven days of negotiations, the INC-3 missed the opportunity to set the stage for ambitious intersessional work on any priority, including the development of targets, baselines, and schedules for an overall reduction in plastic production, as well as strict reporting mechanisms to inform and monitor compliance with a global reduction target.

“Currently, we see a lack of clear path towards to an effective Plastic Treaty. And there is a clear division between different Member States regarding the level of ambitious, and even scope of the upcoming Treaty. We really need to address this political divide very soon, as we have only 2 more rounds of talks in 2024”, commented Eugeniy Lobanov, CCB Hazardous Substances and Marine Litter Working Area Leader, and participant at the INC3.

 

The week in detail

 

Most of the INC-3 week was spent in three contact groups: (1) Contact group 1 reviewed the first two parts of the Zero Draft: Part I (Preamble, objective, definitions, principles, and scope) and Part II (Primary plastic polymers, chemicals and polymers of concerns, problematic and avoidable plastics, exertions, product design -including reuse-, substitutes, extended producer responsibility, emissions, waste management, trade, existing plastic pollution, just transition, and transparency). (2) Contact group 2 focused on the second two parts: Part III (financing and capacity building), and Part IV (National plans, implementation and compliance, reporting, and monitoring). (3) Contact group 3 discussed the Synthesis Report containing elements not discussed at previous meetings and intersessional work.

 

During the week, civil society organizations exposed the conflict of interest within the INC-3 process, starting with the publication of an analysis of the participants revealing that 143 fossil fuel and chemical industry lobbyists registered for INC-3, a 36% increase from INC-2; some of whom were registered under six Member States delegations.

 

The INC-3 agreed that the next round of negotiations (INC-4) will be held in Ottawa, Canada, on 21 - 30 April 2024, and INC-5 in Busan, Republic of Korea on 25 November to 1 December 2024. Ambassador Luis Vayas Valdiviezo (Ecuador) was confirmed as Chair for the rest of the INC process. 


***
Article written by Eugeniy Lobanov, CCB Hazardous Substances Working Area Leader

 

Resources:

UNEP online resource page for INC-3

IISD Daily coverage of INC-3

 

 

Call for Consultant / Expert : CCB Shadow Implementation Plan on the HELCOM Regional Action Plan for benthic habitat restoration

By CCB • June 2, 2026
About CCB Coalition Clean Baltic – CCB is a politically independent network, uniting 28 environmental non-profit organizations, as well as partners and experts from 11 countries surrounding the Baltic Sea. The main goal of CCB is to promote the protection and improvement of the environment and natural resources of the Baltic Sea region by encouraging new and constructive approaches and engaging people to become part of the solution instead of part of the problem. CCB Secretariat is based in Uppsala, Sweden. Background The HELCOM Baltic Sea Action Plan (BSAP) from 2021 includes a commitment to develop a regional action plan for habitat and biotope restoration by 2026. This plan is expected to: Define qualitative and quantitative restoration targets Establish a prioritized list of restoration actions Provide an implementation toolbox of best practices and methods The scope of the HELCOM action plan focuses exclusively on benthic habitats and biotopes , with particular emphasis on active restoration measures . Adoption of the plan is foreseen at the HELCOM Ministerial Meeting in November 2026. Coalition Clean Baltic (CCB) recognizes the importance of the HELCOM process but also the need to strengthen ambition, improve implementation guidance, consider a source-to-sea approach, and ensure long term ecological effectiveness . Therefore, a CCB Shadow Restoration Implementation Plan will complement and critically assess the HELCOM Restoration Action Plan. The purpose of the CCB Shadow Restoration Implementation Plan is to: Provide a science-based and practice-oriented complement to the HELCOM Restoration Action Plan Identify gaps, weaknesses, and missing elements in the HELCOM Restoration Action Plan Propose concrete, implementable actions, under a source-to-sea approach, to ensure effective restoration outcomes Strengthen alignment with the BSAP objectives and broader regional and EU policies Your Role You will compile the CCB Shadow Restoration Implementation Plan with aims to: 1. Assess the proposed HELCOM restoration measures , particularly their expected ecological impact by Reviewing proposed HELCOM actions for benthic habitats Evaluating whether actions are sufficient to achieve good environmental status Identifing missing measures, insufficient ambition, or unclear guidance 2. Define recommendations on how restoration should be implemented in practice including Required scale, intensity, and geographic coverage of actions Feasibility and effectiveness of active restoration methods 3. Propose additional actions and priorities , especially where the scope of the HELCOM action plan is insufficient, such as Integration of a source-to-sea approach for better ecological coherence Passive restoration measures Including actions on riverine systems (barrier removal, flow restoration) and coastal ecosystems (dunes, wetlands, lagoons) Incorporating important fish habitats and spawning/nursery areas, as well as ecosystem connectivity 4. Align HELCOM restoration efforts with other relevant policy frameworks , including the Baltic Sea Action Plan, Marine Action Plan, EU Biodiversity Strategy, Nature Restoration Regulation, Marine Strategy Framework Directive, Maritime Spatial Planning Directive, Water Framework Directive and Common Fisheries Policy. This is a Joint efforts with WWF Baltic Sea Programme The organisations, CCB and WWF Baltic Sea Program, will produce two separate documents with separate logos and will be presented at a joint side-event at the HELCOM Ministerial Meeting in November 2026. Actions for the Consultant/Expert & products to deliver The final document of the shadow restoration implementation plan Conduct interviews with all WA Leaders and MOs of CCB working on restoration to gather concrete input Share at the end all notes of the research and transcripts of interviews with MOs Bi-weekly call of consultant + CCB to check-in on progress, problems and next steps Publications/Sources CCB Restoration Guidelines https://irp.cdn-website.com/53007095/files/uploaded/CCB+Restoration+Guidelines_Update+October+2025.pdf CCB BSAP Shadow Plan: https://www.ccb.se/publication/Shadow%20Plan Profile A college degree, preferably in marine science, political science, environmental studies, social sciences, or a comparable field Experience in political campaigning, strategic communication, or advocacy, ideally in environmental, climate, nature, or marine conservation, preferably with an NGO Knowledge about relevant political settings and frameworks in the Baltic Sea (HELCOM, BSAP, MSFD, NRRL, ...) Experience in collaborating with coalitions, initiatives and civil society actors Initiative, independence and reliability working fully remotely Excellent written and spoken English are required Contract Terms Contract Type: can be structured as a consulting contract or a fixed-term employment (for candidates based in Sweden). We are open to discuss what works best depending on your situation. Time: From 15 June until 15 Oct 2026, at 50-75% work pace. Location: Remote position. Application Process: Should you be interested in applying for this position please send your CV (max. 2 pages) together with a personal letter (max. 1 page) before 9 June 2026 to: secretariat@ccb.se *** Being an international organization, CCB’s work is carried out in English. Applications submitted in any other language will not be considered. Incomplete applications (e.g. lacking either CV or personal letter) will be also not considered. We will be reviewing applications as they come in and encourage early applications. Only shortlisted candidates will be contacted. *** For inquiries , contact CCB Biodiversity Officer: andrea.cervantes@ccb.se Equal Opportunities CCB is an equal opportunity employer. In the application and hiring process, CCB will not discriminate against any individual based on race, colour, sex, language, religion, national or social origin, property, disability, age, family status, sexual orientation and gender identity, economic and social situation.

Fishing & NGOs:Sustainable herring fishing in the Gulf of Bothnia is strengthened through better knowledge, long-term and ecosystem-based fisheries management, and protection of herring spawning areas

By CCB • May 28, 2026
28 May 2026 - Baltic Sea herring stocks and the herring fisheries have in recent years become a central point of contention in Baltic Sea fisheries policy. Member States' approaches to the International Council for the Exploration of the Sea (ICES) recommendations for herring quotas have varied, and the public debate around herring is polarised. At the same time, dialogue between groups of fishers and other stakeholders in different countries has been limited, and not all actors have had a clear picture of each other's perspectives and needs. Within the framework of the Fisheries for the Future project, funded by Ålandsbanken’s Baltic Sea Project, Finnish and Swedish fishers, environmental organisations and researchers gathered last autumn to discuss the status of herring stocks and fishing in the Baltic Sea. Participants gained a better understanding of differences between countries and areas regarding stock status, fisheries management and research. The organisations that took part in the workshop all agree on the need for joint dialogue and wish for the cooperation to continue. “ The project combines research and practical understanding of the herring situation in the Baltic Sea. That makes the initiative particularly important, as the lessons learned can contribute to better decisions and more accurate measures going forward ," notes Crista Hietala, Head of Marketing and Communications at Ålandsbanken and the Baltic Sea Project. During the workshop, a shared understanding emerged of the complexity of the issue, where fishing is one factor but not the only cause of the state of the stocks. The need for a holistic approach was emphasised, in which environmental changes and factors affecting fisheries regulation are considered alongside fishing itself. " Herring stocks are affected by a range of interacting factors – from water quality and salinity to changes in food webs and climate change. At the same time, knowledge about how these factors interact remains limited, which contributes to increased uncertainty in management ," says Aimi Hamberg, Marine Policy Officer at Coalition Clean Baltic. More stable quotas increase predictability The predictability and economic sustainability of fishing can be improved by reducing annual variations in fishing quotas. Multi-annual and more stable quotas would facilitate the planning of fishing operations and better secure the herring's central role in the Baltic Sea ecosystem. The fishing and environmental organisations that participated in the workshop propose that EU member states ask the International Council for the Exploration of the Sea (ICES) to investigate how the quota system can be developed in a more stable and long-term direction, while at the same time ensuring the recovery of sustainable herring stocks. More knowledge about herring spawning areas Workshop participants emphasise that a significantly better knowledge base is needed about herring spawning and nursery areas than what we have today. Updated information on the most important reproduction areas for herring is central to marine spatial planning, for example when siting offshore wind power and other uses of sea areas. Towards ecosystem-based stock assessments During the workshop, it was recommended that herring stock assessments should be based on an ecosystem perspective. ” We believe that stock assessments and advice on fishing quotas need to take greater account of changes in central ecosystem factors, such as predation by seals and cormorants. It is important to expand data collection in order to achieve this ," say representatives of Vi Svenska Fiskare (We Swedish Fishers). As a first step, workshop participants recommend that Finland and Sweden initiate a joint regional project in the Gulf of Bothnia, which can later be extended to other parts of the Baltic Sea. Management areas should be reviewed – dialogue on protected areas needs to continue The workshop highlighted the need to review the division of management areas in the Baltic Sea. Participants propose that the Bothnian Sea and the Bothnian Bay be separated as distinct regulatory areas. This is motivated by genetic differences between the stocks and the fish's migration patterns. In addition, participants consider it important to continue the dialogue on possible protected areas in the Bothnian Sea. Such areas could be introduced as time-limited pilot trials, whose effects are evaluated scientifically. The dialogue on protected areas in the Bothnian Sea has continued between the organisations at a meeting held in February. *** Related documents Read the press release in Swedish and in Finnish . Main outcomes of the workshop in Swedish and Finnish. *** Further information The Fisheries for the Future workshop was a collaborative project between the environmental organisation Coalition Clean Baltic (CCB) and WWF Finland, with funding from Ålandsbanken’s Baltic Sea Project. Among the represented fishing organisations were Suomen Ammattikalastajaliitto/Finlands Yrkesfiskarförbund (Finnish Professional Fishers' Association), Österbottens Fiskarförbund (Ostrobothnia Fishers' Association), Vi Svenska Fiskare (We Swedish Fishers), Kustfiskarna Bottenhavet (Bothnian Sea Coastal Fishers), Ålands fiskare (Åland Fishers) and Sportfiskarna (the Swedish Anglers' Association). Fisheries management was represented by the Government of Åland and the County Administrative Board of Stockholm. In addition, experts from the Natural Resources Institute Finland, the University of Turku and the Swedish University of Agricultural Sciences participated.