Foreign countries|Negotiations begin
Finland’s hope is that the agreement includes binding obligations that cover the entire life cycle of the plastic, starting with production. Some countries are of the opinion that national plans would be sufficient.
in Paris an international plastic agreement is being negotiated this week.
During the five-day negotiations, billions of microplastic particles, a total of approximately 40–48 kilograms per day, rained down on the Paris metropolitan area. This is how they behave in their “plastic weather forecast” researchers from the Australian Minderoo Foundation. If the week brings heavy rains, the plastic accumulation can be up to tenfold, according to the researchers.
It’s no wonder that nowadays it’s hard to find a plastic-free corner of the world. Plastic has been found on mountain tops, seabeds, animals and people.
According to the Finnish Ministry of the Environment, the first round of negotiations of the international plastic agreement last fall in Uruguay was partly disappointing. However, a preliminary agreement was reached on the goal of the agreement, i.e. ending plastic pollution by 2040.
in Paris the negotiations that start on Monday will last until Friday.
The goal of Finland and the EU is to make progress in this time on issues concerning the content of the agreement and at the end of the week give the chairman a mandate to prepare the first draft of the agreement, says Finland’s chief negotiator, a negotiating official Tuulia Toikka.
Actions that cover the entire life cycle of plastic from production and use to recycling and waste management are wanted in the agreement, say Toikka and the negotiating official Tarja-Riitta Blauberg from the Ministry of the Environment.
Plastic pollution is a global problem that requires global solutions, they emphasize. Plastic pollution also affects countries that do not produce any plastic themselves.
Negotiations a list of possible measures has been made as a basis. Officials stress that measures to limit plastic production are essential to solving the problems: if the bathtub overflows, there is no point in mopping the floor before the faucet is turned off.
Restrictions on the phases of the plastic life cycle would also have effects on each other.
“If a goal is set to reduce the production of plastic made from non-renewable fossil raw materials, it would also increase the demand for recycled plastic raw material. Or the agreement could have, for example, a goal that a certain part of the plastic put on the market is recycled,” says Toikka.
In addition, for example, recycling must be taken into account already in the design phase: in order for products to be recycled at all, they must not contain harmful substances.
Disposable plastic has its own problem. Almost half of all plastic is used to make short-lived or disposable products.
In this matter, a model of the EU’s single-use directive could be included in the agreement, officials estimate. A list of prohibited products could be attached to the agreement, which could be supplemented later, from easy things to more extensive and impressive ones, says Toikka.
Restrictions or bans could be set, for example, on single-use packaging plastics, harmful chemicals in plastics and microplastics.
One theme is producer responsibility, i.e. the producer’s responsibility at the end of the product’s life cycle. In Finland, there are currently country-specific and EU-level regulations on this. Producer responsibility could include not only product design and the promotion of recycling, but also requirements regarding, for example, education and the prevention of littering, says Blauberg.
“Even if producer responsibility were national”, certain criteria could be defined for it.
Challenges the negotiations are caused by the countries’ different views on whether internationally binding obligations are necessary or whether national action plans would suffice.
Plastic production restrictions are a tough piece to break, especially for large oil-producing countries. For example, the United States has considered national action plans to be sufficient tools to combat pollution.
For example, Finland and the EU, on the other hand, support a legally binding agreement that would include obligations for the entire life cycle of the plastic. According to officials, Finland is at the forefront of the fight against plastic pollution, one proof of which is the national program Muovitiekartta, created to promote the circular economy of plastics.
Financing is also a challenge.
“In order to achieve an ambitious binding agreement in terms of content, it requires some kind of support for developing countries,” says Toikka.
There has been concern among activists about whether the plastics industry will be able to influence the negotiations too much.
However, according to Toika, representatives of the plastics industry are needed as experts in the negotiations.
“We civil service negotiators do not have sufficient expertise in, for example, production methods and innovation opportunities,” he says.
“Then you have to be able to decide for yourself which part is the pursuit of interests and which is exploitable know-how.”
The following plastic contract negotiations are scheduled to be held in November. The goal is to have the contract drawn up by the end of next year. The schedule is tight, but possible, says Toikka.
If implemented, the plastic agreement would be the first international circular economy agreement in the world, according to Toika.
Plastic pollution is a straightforward problem in the sense that it is caused solely by human activity, says Toikka. Thus, its solution is also completely in the hands of the people.
“When we no longer throw plastic into the sea”, it won’t get there from anywhere else.
#Negotiations #world #flooded #plastic #dozens #countries #turn #tap