Global plastics treaty: Nearly 1,400 delegates from 180 countries met at the United Nations headquarters in Geneva to negotiate what was meant to be the world’s first legally binding treaty on plastic pollution. Instead, the meeting ended in stalemate, echoing last year’s inconclusive talks in South Korea. The Geneva round revealed a sharp split between high-ambition and low-ambition countries. The result: no agreement on how to curb one of the planet’s most pressing environmental crises.
At the heart of the deadlock lay two opposing priorities. One camp pushed for binding global limits on plastic production and controls on toxic chemicals used in manufacturing. The other argued for a circular economy model based on recycling, reusing, and redesigning plastics. For some, the absence of a weak compromise treaty was preferable to adopting one that lacked teeth.
READ | H-1B visa reforms leave Indian professionals facing tough choices
Global numbers underline the urgency. The world produces more than 400 million tonnes of plastic annually, half of it designed for single use. Of this, about 20 million tonnes leak into the environment, and less than 10 per cent is recycled. If current trends continue, annual plastic output could rise by 70 per cent by 2040.
India’s Position
India has aligned itself with the low-ambition group, citing the principle of Common but Differentiated Responsibilities (CBDR). This approach argues that developed nations, as historic polluters, should carry the greater burden of reducing plastic use and managing toxic chemicals. India has consistently sought to balance environmental imperatives with its developmental priorities, echoing its stance in climate negotiations.
Yet the country is far from blameless. India accounts for nearly one-fifth of global plastic pollution, generating about 9.3 million tonnes of waste annually. Everyday practices—from discarded diapers and sanitary napkins to inadequately collected medical waste—compound the challenge. Studies suggest that official figures on per-capita waste generation may even underestimate the problem.
Gaps in Waste Management
High-income countries may produce more waste, but they also excel in collection and disposal. India, by contrast, struggles with both. The Swachh Bharat Abhiyan introduced door-to-door waste collection, but implementation has been patchy. Traditional practices of composting green waste have been disrupted, and the mixing of biodegradable and non-biodegradable refuse ensures that much of it ends up in landfills. Animals feeding on these sites ingest plastics and toxins, adding a health hazard to an environmental one.
Other initiatives—the Plastic Waste Management Rules, Plastic Parks, and beach clean-up drives—often remain on paper or reduced to short-lived publicity campaigns. Even after the 2022 ban, single-use plastics continue to flood markets in the form of straws, grocery bags, takeaway containers, and toys.
Lessons From Success Stories
There are workable models to learn from. Kerala has shown how municipalities can compost kitchen waste and run dedicated collection days for different waste streams. Extending Extended Producer Responsibility (EPR) to manufacturers can compel them to manage plastics across their life cycle, shifting incentives towards design innovation and recycling.
Citizen engagement is equally important. The success of Swachh Bharat owed much to strong campaigns led by public figures, catchy messaging, and media partnerships. A similar effort against plastics could harness public pressure for better segregation, recycling, and compliance. Waste collectors need to enforce separation at the source, with dedicated bins or trucks for plastics, e-waste, and medical refuse.
Plastics treaty: India’s Opportunity
India has historically positioned itself as a leader in global environmental initiatives—whether through its role in the Paris Agreement, the International Solar Alliance, or its push for renewable energy. It can extend this leadership to plastics by committing to national production caps, improving waste management infrastructure, and making alternatives affordable.
The task will require collaboration across government, industry, academia, and civil society. Training urban local bodies, empowering panchayats, and recognizing waste pickers as vital contributors are essential steps. Equally, incentivising innovation by start-ups and industries through CSR channels can bridge the gap between intent and implementation.
Plastics account for 4 per cent of global greenhouse gas emissions, contribute to biodiversity loss, and infiltrate food chains as microplastics. The world cannot afford endless delays in global negotiations. While UNEP prepares to restart discussions, India must not wait for consensus abroad. By acting at home—through stronger regulation, better waste management, and promotion of alternatives—it can reduce its own footprint and set an example for others.
The choice is stark: short-term convenience or long-term disaster. India’s history of environmental innovation suggests it has the capacity to lead again. The question is whether it will seize the moment.
Aakansha Choudhary is a Policy Researcher and Consultant, and George Cheriyan is Executive Director at the Center for Environment and Sustainable Development India (CESDI).
George Cheriyan is Director of Centre for Environment and Sustainable Development India, a national NGO in Special Consultative Status with UN-ECOSOC, and accredited with UNEP & UN ESCAP. CESDI is also a member of South Asia Network on SDGs.