Concerns mount as fossil fuel interests join plastics treaty talks
A woman holds a sign during a rally to demand stronger global commitments to fight plastic waste at the fifth session of the Intergovernmental Negotiating Committee in Busan, South Korea.
What you need to know:
- In a press briefing on Thursday evening, the CSOs said that compared to last year in Busan, South Korea, the number of fossil fuel and chemical industry lobbyists at INC 5.2 had risen to 234, up from 221
As a historical global plastics treaty inches closer to being drafted, civil society organisations are watching a familiar script unfold. One that has, over the years, been witnessed in the Conference of the Parties (COP).
Also read: UN climate talks: A haven for lobbyists
A new analysis reveals a record presence of fossil fuel and chemical industry lobbyists, raising concerns that the very playbook used to stall climate action is now being deployed to weaken a treaty meant to end plastic pollution. Civil society organisations worry that the lobbyists’ involvement in the negotiation processes will eclipse the outcome.
In a press briefing in Geneva on Thursday evening, the CSOs said that compared to last year in Busan, South Korea, the number of fossil fuel and chemical industry lobbyists had risen to 234, from 221 last year.
They are not amused.
The analysis was crafted by the Centre for International Environmental Law (CIEL) with support from the International Indigenous Peoples’ Forum on Plastics (IIPFP), the International Pollutants Elimination Network (IPEN), the Break Free From Plastic movement, the Global Alliance for Incinerator Alternatives (GAIA), Greenpeace, the Stop Tobacco Pollution Alliance (STPA), the International Alliance of Waste Pickers (IAWP), and Public Services International (PSI).
“The fossil fuel and petrochemicals industry lobbyists aren’t just pulling strings behind the scenes — on the first day of INC-5.2, we saw them boldly take the floor, speak in plenary, and push their agenda in plain sight. Industry isn’t just stalling progress — they’re working in lockstep with petrostates in dragging the process toward the lowest common denominator. This may also reveal something else: public outcry over the plastics crisis shows them the tide is turning, and they’re doubling down,” said Rachel Radvany, CIEL Environmental Health Campaigner.
The data is based on publicly available information from the United Nations Environment Programme’s (UNEP) provisional list of the second part of the fifth session of the Intergovernmental Negotiation Committee (INC-5.2) participants.
The numbers
To put these numbers into context, they explained that the lobbyists' numbers outstrip the combined diplomatic delegations of all 27 European Union nations and the EU combined (233).
“Major fossil fuel and chemical companies and their lobbyists are particularly well represented, with Dow and the American Chemistry Council each bringing seven lobbyists, while ExxonMobil has brought six,” said Delphine Lévi Alvarès, CIEL Global Petrochemicals Campaign Manager.
About nineteen fossil fuel and chemical lobbyists have secured places in the national delegations of Egypt (6), Kazakhstan (4), China (3), Iran (3), Chile (2), and the Dominican Republic (1).
They also outnumber the Scientists’ Coalition for an Effective Plastic Treaty, which is about 60, and the International Indigenous Peoples’ Forum on Plastics (36).
John Chweya, the chairperson of the Kenya Waste Pickers Welfare Association, who is an observer in the negotiation process, said that while the data shared from different reports on the impacts of plastics on people seems obscure, his reality is different.
“When we talk about the impacts of the toxins from plastics, I relate those to actual names. People that I call family whose death is linked to those impacts,” he said.
"In a day, I get like about 100 messages from people who have been affected. Most of these effects are happening in landfills,” he added
Dylan Kava, Pacific Islands Climate Action Network, said that the credibility of our science policy is at risk, saying that there is a clear pattern of ‘petrostate capture’.
“It’s quickly becoming a pattern that is becoming a crisis of credibility. The treaty meant to shape plastic pollution is influenced by people who benefit from it. We refuse to be perceived observers while polluters shape our future,” he said.
Ximena Banegas, CIEL Global Plastics and Petrochemicals Campaigner, said that despite the existence of evidence on the fossil fuel and chemical industries’ playbook: deny, distract and derail –they are still registered to processes that want to phase them out.
“Fossil fuel companies are central to plastic production, as over 99 per cent of plastics are derived from chemicals sourced from fossil fuels. Many of these companies are facing legal scrutiny over their role in the climate crisis. After decades of obstruction in the climate negotiations, why would anyone think that they would suddenly show up in good faith in the Plastics Treaty talks?” she asked.
“Involving the very corporations that profit from harm in shaping the path forward guarantees one thing: a treaty that protects their bottom line, not the public or the planet,” she said.
