Global Plastics Treaty in Peril as Oil Producers and U.S. Push Back on Production Caps

Hopes for a strong, legally binding global treaty to curb plastic pollution are fading as negotiators convene in Geneva this week for what was intended to be the final round of talks. Efforts led by the European Union and small island nations to cap virgin plastic production, largely derived from fossil fuels, are facing fierce resistance from major petrochemical-producing countries and the U.S. administration of President Donald Trump.

The stakes are high. Without intervention, plastic production is projected to triple by 2060, exacerbating climate change, harming marine ecosystems, and posing serious health risks, according to the OECD.

“This is really our last best chance,” warned Ilana Seid, chair of the Alliance of Small Island States (AOSIS), stressing the disproportionate burden plastic pollution places on vulnerable nations. These island states are grappling with severe environmental and economic consequences, especially in tourism and fisheries.

The sixth official round of negotiations follows a stalled session in South Korea last year. Contentious issues include capping plastic production, regulating hazardous chemicals, and establishing financial support for developing nations. However, oil-rich countries such as Saudi Arabia and Russia are reportedly opposing these measures, instead advocating for voluntary, national-level policies that many fear would dilute the treaty’s effectiveness.

Adding to the challenge, the Trump administration supports a treaty focused only on downstream solutions, like recycling and waste management, rather than tackling the root cause: production. A State Department spokesperson said the U.S. backs an agreement that avoids “burdensome restrictions” on domestic producers.

Climate advocates and legal experts have expressed concern over the growing politicization of scientific facts around plastic toxicity. “We are in a moment of revisionism,” said Andres Del Castillo of the Center for International Environmental Law.

Industry influence also looms large. Over 1,000 delegates, including petrochemical lobbyists, are attending the talks. While the industry claims to support the treaty, it advocates for advanced recycling technologies over production caps. Nestlé and other corporations back globally harmonized rules, calling them more cost-effective for packaging reform.

Meanwhile, U.S. lawmakers are split. Senate Democrats are calling for strong production caps, while House Republicans are pushing for an expansion of recycling tech. With two-thirds Senate approval needed for ratification, the outcome remains uncertain.

UNEP head Inger Andersen emphasized the need for consensus: “You would want something that is effective, that has everybody inside, and therefore everybody committed to it.” Yet with deep divisions, a weakened treaty or a breakaway agreement among ambitious nations is increasingly being considered.

Plastic-production caps failing at treaty level shifts the compliance weight onto national frameworks and downstream EPR - which for consumer-goods and packaging brands means the pressure keeps rising even without a global deal. Our circular-economy and sustainability-due-diligence teams help clients read what these treaty dynamics mean for their circular-economy strategy and disclosure.