"The UN’s draft plastics treaty is a pivotal step towards ending plastic pollution, taking a full life-cycle approach from product design and production to waste management and circularity. Particular note must be taken of its interest in science-oriented policy formulation and knowledge diffusion of technologies.

To achieve its fullest potential impact, the treaty shall actively promote the adoption of the latest recycling and upcycling technologies, and upstream measures such as design for easy depolymerisation and safe chemistries. Financial and capacity development mechanisms shall be required to bridge the gap from innovation to large-scale implementation, particularly in developing countries.
 
My research is focused on photocatalytic reforming of plastics, powered by solar energy and catalysts, changing plastic waste to valuable products. This can not only prevent leakage of plastics to the environment, but also transform garbage to a renewable source, encouraging a circular carbon economy.
 
Plastic pollution is not only an environmental crisis but also a catalyst for technological progress. By integrating science-based, scalable solutions in the treaty, we can make high hopes become real environmental benefits, creating a future where plastics are no longer a waste burden but a sustainable resource."

"I'm a marine biologist at Flinders University tackling the plastic crisis that’s choking our oceans and waterways. My work takes in microplastics, tiny algae and environmental monitoring. I`m part of a team at Flinders University that is working to develop partnerships across all of Australia.

We hope to tackle plastic pollution by developing monitoring strategies to understand the baselines, identify which type of plastic prevails and develop corresponding mitigation strategies. Have you heard about the algae bloom in SA? It was driven by climate change. But plastic pollution is what was generated by humans only. It acts as an additional stress factor that makes our marine ecosystems less resilient.

Plastics quickly become part of ecosystems. Marine microbes, plants and animals colonise the surface of plastics, providing an additional pathway to viruses, pathogens and invasive species. Alarmingly, current estimates suggest that by 2040, plastics in the ocean may outnumber fish.

Environmental exposure breaks larger plastics into micro- and nanoplastics—the most harmful forms for marine life. Persistent traces of common plastics in the environment suggest we have now entered the “Plastic Age”. The real progress lies in changing our behaviour: consuming less, choosing smarter alternatives, and preventing waste. I can see the solution in collaborative efforts of researchers and industries, forced by appropriate regulations by government. The Global Plastic Treaty is just the first step—now the real work begins for all of us."

“As the UN’s Intergovernmental Negotiating Committee approaches the deadline for a global plastics treaty, the focus must shift from downstream fixes to upstream accountability. With global plastic waste projected to reach 1.7 billion metric tons by 2060, the root cause – overproduction - must be addressed.

One of the most effective pathways is binding Extended Producer Responsibility (EPR), which makes companies legally and financially accountable for the environmental impacts of their products and packaging. Based on the “polluter pays” principle, EPR shifts costs from taxpayers to producers, creating strong incentives to design out waste, reduce plastic use, and innovate sustainable alternatives from the outset.

Unlike post-consumer recycling schemes that tackle waste after it’s created, EPR changes the economics of production itself. When producers bear the true costs of their design and material choices, market forces drive toward less wasteful systems.

This treaty is a historic opportunity to embed mandatory producer responsibility into international law. It’s an opportunity to move beyond voluntary pledges to enforceable regulations and cutting-edge innovation, such as molecular tracing, to help turn the tide on the plastic pollution crisis”.

"I don’t envy the teams negotiating the UN plastics treaty. Most of us have no idea how hard these sorts of negotiations are. They have to tread a very fine line between environmental protection and potential overregulation, and some people will be upset no matter what decisions they make. I'm sure feelings are running high on both sides.

However, even if the answer is not the one you were hoping for, the very fact that these talks happened at all is a good news story in itself. People want to come together to solve the problem. It is just that there are no easy answers, and complex decisions take time to get right. 
 
You don’t have to go far on social media to find a lot of scary information about plastics in the environment most of this is shared by people with no scientific training and actual evidence of harm is quite limited Both the WHO and the US FDA recently noted that there is no strong evidence of harm to humans from microplastics for example. 
 
In the end, even the best science can only inform policy, not drive it. Policy is set by politicians, hopefully acting on the will of their constituents. I really hope they are able to do something about plastic pollution, but I am prepared to wait for good policy over a bad one."

"The international plastics treaty provides an essential opportunity for countries around the world to come together on a pressing issue that knows no geographic boundaries and affects the health of our planet and the global population. At its core, this is an issue of governance and equity. The production of plastics has gone unchecked for too long under a global culture of mass consumerism, with little thought as to long-term impacts.

I have experienced first-hand the detrimental impacts of this to the environment and local communities through our collaborative work in Indonesia, where plastic burning is largely the norm for waste management. Whole villages are covered in plastic particles, and the air is thick with ash and smog.

Beyond the obvious acute impacts of breathing difficulties and stinging eyes, few realise that inhalation and ingestion of these particles also cause serious long-term impacts to the respiratory, cardiovascular, and neurological systems. It can cause cancer and infertility – it is toxic in every sense. And as with most global challenges, the issue of plastics is one of intersectionality, where those who are poor and less able to protect themselves are the most impacted by these harmful exposures. Inaction on delivering this treaty is costing lives. "

"Why is the treaty important?
An international, legally-binding agreement to end plastic pollution is significant for because it puts plastic waste high on the agenda for international environmental action. Like the Paris Agreement did for greenhouse gas emission reduction, a Global Plastics Treaty makes action to reduce plastic waste a priority for signatory countries (including Australia). However, exactly what that action looks like depends on what is agreed to in the final treaty. 
 
What the treaty needs
To effectively address plastic pollution, the treaty needs a range of measures that tackle the whole lifecycle of plastic. This includes downstream measures that seek to reduce plastic pollution, better manage plastic waste, and improve recycling. Critically, a strong plastics treaty also needs to include upstream measures that prohibit or reduce the production and distribution of problematic, unnecessary, and hard-to-recycle plastic products (like soft plastic), and that regulate the production of new plastic products.
 
Opportunities for Australia
The Australian Government has identified plastic waste as a priority area in the National Waste Policy and has plans to strengthen product stewardship regulation for plastic packaging. Several state governments have also introduced single-use plastic bans. This treaty, if endorsed, will encourage governments in Australia to increase efforts and financing for better plastic waste management and hopefully, commit to capping plastic production.
 
The world is already suffocating in plastic, and every year that we delay putting caps on plastic production is another year that future generations will have to live with plastic pollution. A strong treaty that addresses plastic production is a critical step toward a future without plastic pollution. Let’s commit to making a future that our kids would be proud of."

"The Australian Plastic Research and Innovation Lab has been participating in all series of UN Plastics Treaty, unfortunately, the INC5.2 is not looking to achieve a positive outcome. Having been observing the developments online, for the first time in history, the world is within reach of a legally binding international instrument to end plastic pollution.

My team at the Australian Plastic Research and Innovation Lab, have broken down the potential consequences that could emerge from the INC-5.2:

1. A Legally Binding Treaty Finalised (highly unlikely)- If successful, INC-5.2 could propel the draft toward formal adoption at a future Diplomatic Conference of Plenipotentiaries in 2025
2. Minimal Progress or Continued Impasse-

• Key sticking points from INC-5.1 remain unresolved: capping plastic production, managing chemicals of concern, and securing financing—especially for developing nations.
• Civil society groups are already warning that negotiations are teetering on the verge of failure, urging negotiators to “fix the process” and keep treaty promises alive
• Reports from The Waste and Resources Action Programme (WRAP) confirm that progress is slow, echoing the overall sentiment inside the negotiation halls

1. Partial Agreement - The Australian Plastic Research and Innovation Lab thinks that it is possible to achieve the Hybrid Outcome:Partial Agreement

• There could be agreement on limited but impactful areas, such as toxic chemical phase-outs, improved product design, or governance elements, while other complex issues (e.g., production caps) remain unresolved. This kind of compromise may reflect growing alignment among over 100 countries on critical treaty components, yet fall short of a fully robust treaty.

Roadmap Toward Plenipotentiaries If No Treaty Is Finalised

• If consensus remains out of reach, INC-5.2 may at least produce a more precise roadmap or refined Chair’s Text to guide a future plenipotentiary conference — buying more time for negotiations

A robust final agreement would set the world on a path to end plastic pollution forever. "

"The scientist coalition agrees that we know enough to act: plastic pollution, from the largest debris to the tiniest nanoplastics, is harmful to the environment and poses growing concerns for human health. These pollutants are generated across the whole plastic life cycle — from production to use to disposal — not just from ocean litter.

Unless we curb hyper-production at the source, the situation will only get worse.

Industry has shown before that it can pivot and innovate in response to bans and urgent environmental challenges — from phasing out microbeads in cosmetics to replacing ozone-depleting aerosols. I'm hopeful it can do so again. With the right incentives, safer, truly sustainable materials that don’t generate microplastics at all could be developed. But innovation must be genuine and focused on real solutions — not just on finding loopholes to dodge penalties, like swapping one banned chemical for another equally harmful one. Recycling alone won’t solve this.

That’s why we need global transparency, and why the treaty is a unique opportunity: to ensure harmful additives are disclosed, new materials are proven safe before use, and upstream measures — like reducing production and simplifying plastic chemistry — are prioritised. 

But none of this is possible if science is misrepresented or sidelined. As a researcher, I worry when legitimate concerns about harm are downplayed or delayed by powerful interests — as we’ve seen before, not just with tobacco or PFAS, but also with lead in petrol, asbestos, and hormone-disrupting chemicals found in everyday products (you heard of BPA and Phthalates?).

Casting doubt on emerging evidence may serve short-term profit, but it delays action and increases long-term risk. If we want real solutions, we must ensure that research is not just heard — but also properly supported and funded to lead the way."