Experts Call for Stronger Conditions for Effective Global Plastics Treaty

Negotiation process and collective problem-solving are key to securing meaningful agreement, say experts.

Mar. 18, 2026 at 4:02am

Got story updates? Submit your updates here. ›

Experts have warned that a credible path to a global agreement to end plastic pollution will depend not only on political ambition, but on creating the right conditions for collective problem-solving and ensuring the treaty can be "future proofed" - even if it is not perfect from the outset. The conclusion emerged from an event hosted by the Global Plastics Policy Centre at the University of Portsmouth's Revolution Plastics Institute, which brought together representatives from governments, international organizations, civil society and academia to discuss how international negotiations on a plastics treaty can move forward more effectively.

Why it matters

The effectiveness of the negotiation process itself - including trust, transparency, and structure - will be critical to securing an agreement on a global plastics treaty. Experts emphasize that while ambition remains essential, progress depends on creating the conditions for collective problem-solving, rather than just focusing on ambition alone.

The details

The event featured a panel discussion with representatives from government delegations, diplomats, and experts. Panelists stressed the importance of establishing shared foundations before tackling complex details, and highlighted the need for greater momentum and decision-making within the process. The discussion also pointed to shortcomings in the current process, including the lack of cumulative progress between sessions and the challenge of translating discussion into negotiated treaty text.

  • The event was hosted last week by the Global Plastics Policy Centre at the University of Portsmouth's Revolution Plastics Institute.
  • The report examined the global plastics treaty negotiation process over the past three years.

The players

Global Plastics Policy Centre

A research institute at the University of Portsmouth that hosted the event and published a report on effective international environmental negotiation processes.

Dennis Clare

Representative from the Federated States of Micronesia delegation.

Guillaume Lecaros De Cossio

Peruvian diplomat and expert negotiator.

Magnus Løvold

Expert from the Norwegian Academy of International Law.

Andrea Zbinden

Representative from the Federal Office for the Environment, Switzerland.

Got photos? Submit your photos here. ›

What they’re saying

“It's very difficult to negotiate the details, if we haven't agreed on the fundamentals.”

— Andrea Zbinden, Federal Office for the Environment, Switzerland

“A lot of discussions have been opened on a lot of issues that are super complex, but not a single item of substance has really been closed, and that makes things very messy.”

— Magnus Løvold, Norwegian Academy of International Law

“There is a tendency to focus on ambition alone, but ambition without the right process will not deliver results. What we are seeing is that progress depends on creating the conditions for collective problem-solving. Even if the treaty is not perfect at the outset, it must be designed in a way that allows it to strengthen over time.”

— Dr Antaya March, Director of the Global Plastics Policy Centre

What’s next

The report sets out a series of recommendations to strengthen the negotiation process as it enters its next phase, including developing a clear roadmap to guide negotiations, improving the integration of technical understanding with political dialogue, and building on informal discussions to develop a basic proposal ahead of the next substantive meeting.

The takeaway

Achieving a meaningful global plastics treaty will depend not only on political will, but on whether the conditions are in place to support a more focused, constructive, and solution-oriented negotiation process that can translate discussions into concrete negotiated text, rather than extending existing patterns of discussion without resolution.