WEBVTT
00:00:08.890 --> 00:00:11.858
Hello, and welcome to About Sustainability...
00:00:11.926 --> 00:00:15.278
, a podcast by the Institute for Global Environmental Strategies (IGES).
00:00:15.910 --> 00:00:17.500
It's your co-host, Erin.
00:00:17.949 --> 00:00:48.728
This time, Alice, Simon and I invited our colleagues Matthew Hengesbaugh and Chochoe Devaporihartakula, two experts following the ongoing international negotiations on plastics, the Intergovernmental Negotiating Committee on Plastic Pollution, or INC for short, is a process that was agreed in a historic resolution at the fifth session of the United Nations Environment Assembly (UNEA-5.2), in 2022.
00:00:49.298 --> 00:00:53.798
For a review of what happened at UNEA, check out our UNEA-5.2 episode.
00:00:54.548 --> 00:01:04.150
So the aim of the INC is to develop an internationally legally binding instrument on plastic pollution, including in the marine environment.
00:01:04.215 --> 00:01:11.019
And this involves using an approach that addresses the entire lifecycle of plastics.
00:01:11.468 --> 00:01:22.060
Our previous episode focusing on lifecycle approaches to plastics shows how challenging this actually is, and we learned that it continues to be a major contention at the actual negotiations.
00:01:22.358 --> 00:01:25.180
Be sure to check out our show notes for those references.
00:01:26.438 --> 00:01:34.420
We caught up with Matthew and Chochoe after they came back from the most recent INC meeting called INC-3, which concluded in November.
00:01:35.468 --> 00:01:43.810
We covered the major contentions at INC-3, who is responsible and what is needed to reach a global agreement on tackling this issue.
00:01:44.049 --> 00:01:45.400
Let's get into it.
00:01:48.858 --> 00:01:57.260
Plastic pollution is obviously a really serious problem globally, but how serious is it in this particular region, the Asia-Pacific region?
00:01:57.409 --> 00:01:59.269
Yeah, that's an excellent question.
00:01:59.450 --> 00:02:01.608
Um, I would say it's serious.
00:02:01.909 --> 00:02:06.438
Um, there's been a lot of research dating back now a number of years.
00:02:06.506 --> 00:02:19.550
For example, in 2017, some research came out discussing how the top 20 plastic-polluting rivers in the world are mainly located in the Asia region.
00:02:19.968 --> 00:02:25.580
Um, I think this study actually found that it was upwards of very close to 70%.
00:02:25.645 --> 00:02:33.288
A large bulk of the global total of plastics were being emitted from these rivers in Asia.
00:02:33.830 --> 00:02:37.520
The research shows that many of them are located in Southeast Asia.
00:02:37.908 --> 00:02:48.590
But actually, if you look- take a more global perspective, you find that a lot of the problem is actually originating in more advanced economies, of course.
00:02:48.656 --> 00:03:05.718
And there was a lot of debate around, uh, this- the INC, with certain countries calling for, for example, some identification of what they call the downstream countries that were actually fully getting the brunt of a lot of this plastic pollution.
00:03:05.786 --> 00:03:13.639
What you mean by downstream is- are countries basically getting the plastic from some other country?
00:03:13.705 --> 00:03:15.229
Is that- like for processing?
00:03:15.295 --> 00:03:16.250
Is that what you're referring to, or?
00:03:16.788 --> 00:03:20.300
It's difficult to really pinpoint where the problem originates.
00:03:20.658 --> 00:03:21.158
Mmm hmm.
00:03:21.225 --> 00:03:25.098
And a lot of this has to deal with what we think of in terms of lifecycle.
00:03:25.165 --> 00:03:34.250
So you have certain countries for example, a lot of countries that, you know, maintain very large petrochemical industries...
00:03:34.818 --> 00:03:39.590
They would say that plastic, the issue itself must be dealt fully downstream.
00:03:39.656 --> 00:03:42.830
So that's at the end of life, right?
00:03:42.895 --> 00:03:55.188
Um, where, you know, the most visible aspects of plastic pollution, you know, your single-use products that are discarded in the environment, the discarded fishing nets, etc.
00:03:55.460 --> 00:04:28.819
But there's other countries, and rightfully so, point out that, well, plastic actually begins very much upstream, and this was a real issue at INC because they- the countries, the member states were not able to really forge any consensus around this issue of polymers and chemicals of concern, because, you know, a lot of people would say that, you know, plastic actually begins very much at the base level- you know, basically the compounds that make up plastic, those- that is the issue in itself.
00:04:28.910 --> 00:04:47.088
So when I refer to downstream countries, these are countries who took a stance that plastic being a transboundary issue, a lot of these countries, particularly in the developing world, face issues with waste management, collection, sorting and disposal.
00:04:47.540 --> 00:04:54.439
And a lot of that plastic waste winds up on their shores and they just don't have the capacity to deal with it.
00:04:54.505 --> 00:05:00.949
So again, this goes back to the idea that there are many different perspectives when we talk about the lifecycle of plastics.
00:05:01.016 --> 00:05:11.899
And it remains to be seen whether or not countries will be able to really come to a broad consensus on how to tackle the many stages across the lifecycle.
00:05:12.560 --> 00:05:27.230
It sounds to me as if there is a discussion or contention around whether primarily the consumer of the plastic product should be responsible for the waste, or the producer of the raw plastic material should be responsible for it.
00:05:27.295 --> 00:05:29.569
So who's actually responsible for that?
00:05:29.636 --> 00:05:44.750
Like the country that created the industry that creates it, or the sector that creates the plastic bottles or the country that- in which the people consume the beverage that is in those plastic bottles but do not have the capacity to properly manage it, and it ends up in the rivers?
00:05:44.815 --> 00:05:53.180
Can you say something, Matt, about who are the biggest producers of plastic, and who are the biggest consumers of plastic in terms of countries or companies?
00:05:53.245 --> 00:05:54.500
I'm just not clear on that.
00:05:54.860 --> 00:05:55.459
Sure.
00:05:55.526 --> 00:06:01.189
Well, no, that actually touches on the point that again, plastic is not- I mean, it's multi-sectoral, right?
00:06:01.255 --> 00:06:07.670
So you have, for example, countries that rely heavily on their petroleum industries.
00:06:07.735 --> 00:06:12.740
Well, that's, you know, a major building block for the production of plastics.
00:06:12.805 --> 00:06:16.639
And then you have other countries that host very large chemical industries.
00:06:16.706 --> 00:06:20.990
That also is another factor that goes into the manufacture of plastics.
00:06:21.055 --> 00:06:27.350
And then you have countries that actually import the final products at their end of life.
00:06:27.415 --> 00:06:27.915
Right?
00:06:27.983 --> 00:06:35.480
So the plastic waste that other countries dispose of and don't necessarily deal with domestically.
00:06:35.545 --> 00:06:39.019
So it's a very multi-dimensional issue.
00:06:39.086 --> 00:07:00.680
This point that you make around, you know, how much is the consumer responsible- this is, uh, really a controversial issue because it's actually- a lot of the regulations that could be put in place really should fall on governments and how they regulate the corporations that are involved in the plastic trade.
00:07:00.745 --> 00:07:11.028
So for me, my personal perspective is that, you know, just putting all the responsibility on the consumer is a bit of a distraction.
00:07:11.778 --> 00:07:12.379
Hmmm.
00:07:12.446 --> 00:07:39.920
Again, given the multi-dimensional nature of how plastics are produced and manufactured and the ways that we consume them, if governments were to step in and really start enforcing some very strong regulations, including, for example, making use of extended producer responsibility-type approaches and ensuring that the companies, the corporations that are involved with the manufacture and distribution of plastics- they are clearly regulated.
00:07:40.430 --> 00:07:47.088
I mean, there's a lot of like eco-campaigning going on, right at the consumer level, you know, sustainable lifestyles, etc.
00:07:47.660 --> 00:07:51.769
, encouraging people to reuse their bags, reuse cups..
00:07:51.836 --> 00:07:52.336
.
00:07:52.403 --> 00:08:00.829
So what you're saying basically is that it's really something that should be tackled on a more systemic level and not just, you know, at the consumer level.
00:08:00.896 --> 00:08:01.550
Is that right?
00:08:02.379 --> 00:08:02.879
Right.
00:08:02.946 --> 00:08:07.509
And this goes back to that central tension again about what we mean by "lifecycle".
00:08:07.576 --> 00:08:19.028
And how can we- how could countries come together to agree on a series of interventions that, you know, tackle first the upstream, the midstream and the downstream.
00:08:19.180 --> 00:08:32.649
Upstream being the very production, you know, again, the raw compounds, the polymers that make up the plastics, then midstream in terms of product design and how plastics are actually produced.
00:08:32.716 --> 00:08:41.048
And then downstream, of course, you know, at the waste management level- how plastics should be properly handled and disposed of.
00:08:42.700 --> 00:08:46.210
And the objective is to complete this by next year.
00:08:46.275 --> 00:08:48.370
It's a very, very ambitious undertaking.
00:08:48.436 --> 00:08:48.936
Wow.
00:08:49.003 --> 00:08:51.850
Next year that's- We don't have much time, do we?
00:08:53.440 --> 00:08:54.908
No we don't, no we don't.
00:08:55.389 --> 00:08:55.928
Okay.
00:08:56.168 --> 00:09:02.110
Um, so how many meetings are there overall before they're supposed to agree on a new treaty?
00:09:03.350 --> 00:09:06.710
Set out to be a total of five INC meetings.
00:09:06.889 --> 00:09:07.389
Okay.
00:09:07.456 --> 00:09:09.139
This being the third.
00:09:09.259 --> 00:09:09.759
Okay.
00:09:09.826 --> 00:09:14.600
And then this final instrument is supposed to be unveiled.
00:09:15.200 --> 00:09:16.100
So that's right.
00:09:16.166 --> 00:09:20.298
And they refer to that as the internationally legally binding instrument.
00:09:20.509 --> 00:09:23.000
But the acronym was thrown around was "ILBI".
00:09:23.690 --> 00:09:24.190
ILBI.
00:09:24.255 --> 00:09:24.860
Alright.
00:09:25.490 --> 00:09:28.908
[Laughs] What kind of instrument is that, exactly?
00:09:28.975 --> 00:09:31.820
Is it something like the Paris Agreement for plastics?
00:09:31.885 --> 00:09:41.899
Well, it's too early to tell, but yeah, there's a lot of, a lot of- Again, the debate is around whether or not there'll be any global targets that are set, for example.
00:09:41.966 --> 00:09:50.928
So that would entail a lot of, you know, mandatory actions on the part of all countries kind of following a kind of systematised, harmonised kind of approach.
00:09:51.230 --> 00:10:02.960
And then there's also other countries that feel very strongly that the treaty should resemble something like Paris, uh, and being very much determined by nationally-set targets.
00:10:03.558 --> 00:10:04.058
Okay.
00:10:04.125 --> 00:10:08.090
So were you able to follow the previous INCI meetings?
00:10:08.155 --> 00:10:16.340
If so, can you maybe give us like a little bit of a recap on what happened at those meetings before the third meeting, which concluded recently?
00:10:16.668 --> 00:10:17.168
Sure.
00:10:17.235 --> 00:10:31.190
Well, I was fortunate enough to take part in INC-2, and that took place in Paris earlier this year and INC-2 basically- it was again held up very much due to procedural issues.
00:10:31.255 --> 00:10:33.710
Sorry, what do you mean by "procedural issues"?
00:10:34.070 --> 00:10:46.820
So I mean, it gets a little bit complicated here, but we're talking about issues of rules or procedure, disagreements over how the negotiations would proceed on that basis.
00:10:46.885 --> 00:11:07.639
And basically countries were able to come together in the end to mandate the development of a zero draft for the new treaty, which would be very much discussed during this interim period and developed and presented by the Presidency at the INC-3 that took place in Nairobi.
00:11:07.879 --> 00:11:25.879
So, basically, after getting over a lot of these procedural challenges, countries were able to come together to at least agree on the idea that a treaty, a zero draft, would be developed, and then it would be taken up again for consideration and discussion at INC-3.
00:11:26.820 --> 00:11:27.570
Right.
00:11:27.635 --> 00:11:30.538
So maybe let's turn it over to Chochoe.
00:11:30.605 --> 00:11:31.950
What happened on INC-3?
00:11:32.340 --> 00:11:49.710
So the main focus of the inquiry was the revised zero draft text and also discussions around synthesis report that was aimed to address the global agreement on plastic pollution and also the marine pollution as well.
00:11:49.775 --> 00:12:15.450
So all of the delegates[formed] three groups to discuss different part of the zero draft, for example, the objectives, principles, scope of the treaty, chemicals and polymers of concern, waste management, existing plastic pollution, just transition, implementation, compliance and more.
00:12:15.515 --> 00:12:19.710
So all of these issues can be found in the zero draft.
00:12:19.775 --> 00:12:32.788
And there were proposals and also options presented for each of the sections, which also reflected the diverse view and also approaches of the member countries as well.
00:12:34.360 --> 00:12:37.418
Can you just tell us what your role was at INC-3?
00:12:38.460 --> 00:12:42.600
I'm part of the IISD- you know, IISD is a partner organisation of IGES.
00:12:42.778 --> 00:12:45.690
It's the International Institute for Sustainable Development.
00:12:45.755 --> 00:12:47.250
Then they've got this wing.
00:12:47.548 --> 00:12:49.678
It's called the Earth Negotiations Bulletin.
00:12:49.745 --> 00:12:57.480
And basically it's a reporting service for all these intergovernmental negotiating processes.
00:12:57.546 --> 00:13:02.668
Basically, it's like an auxiliary rapporteuring team for the UN.
00:13:02.735 --> 00:13:08.940
They refer to themselves as a kind of the largest neutral reporting service in the world.
00:13:09.005 --> 00:13:17.129
Basically, your task is to go in and report what each country says and what their position is in that meeting in real time.
00:13:17.519 --> 00:13:18.418
Okay, great.
00:13:18.485 --> 00:13:20.009
And what about you, Chochoe?
00:13:20.076 --> 00:13:22.048
We know that you had maybe a side event?
00:13:22.115 --> 00:13:22.889
Sure.
00:13:22.956 --> 00:13:40.980
IGES was selected as one of the co-organisers for the thematic side event at INC-3 on monitoring the situation, progress of the future instrument, with the focus on objectives, targets, baseline indicators and timelines.
00:13:41.158 --> 00:13:50.070
So the sessions serve as a critical platform for discussing the measurement and monitoring of progress in a future treaty.
00:13:50.135 --> 00:14:07.889
The session was held on 15 November 2023, and was structured to explore different perspectives on who should be involved in this process, what should be measured and monitored, and how these activities should be carried out.
00:14:08.490 --> 00:14:19.408
So my presentation was specifically focused on the ASEAN region's progress and challenges in tackling plastic waste and marine debris.
00:14:20.250 --> 00:14:33.600
So we emphasised the need for setting realistic and achievable targets, and also highlighted the crucial need for transparent, consistent and harmonised data collection.
00:14:34.168 --> 00:14:45.149
We also advocate for standardised approach to data that also take into account, you know, the specific context of local regions.
00:14:45.298 --> 00:14:55.798
We also underlie the importance of both regional and global collaborations in the ongoing battle against plastic pollution.
00:14:55.980 --> 00:15:17.340
So this session actually [was] led by a representative from IUCN and [was] convened [with] a broad spectrum of participants, ranging from government officials and environmental specialists to NGO representative academics and the private sector.
00:15:17.428 --> 00:15:33.149
The session's importance lies in its ability to gather diverse insight and practical experience, which are quite essential for crafting a robust, inclusive and effective draft of the INC agreement.
00:15:33.450 --> 00:15:37.350
Okay, were you also part of, like, observing the negotiations?
00:15:37.416 --> 00:15:37.916
Yeah.
00:15:37.982 --> 00:15:38.482
Like Matthew?
00:15:38.549 --> 00:15:39.049
Okay.
00:15:39.115 --> 00:16:02.399
So for me, apart from co-organising a side event, I was also one of the representatives from IGES who participated in INC-3 and had a unique chance to participate in both the Contact Groups and also Plenary sessions, thanks to a floating badge that granted me flexible access.
00:16:02.759 --> 00:16:07.408
The event itself was really quite intense in my view.
00:16:07.500 --> 00:16:12.360
The official sessions could start as early as 8 a.m.
00:16:12.426 --> 00:16:16.590
in the morning and occasionally running until midnight.
00:16:16.918 --> 00:16:17.970
Oh my gosh.
00:16:18.035 --> 00:16:28.139
It's also worth noting that a key debate at the INC-3 was also about the role of industry in drafting the treaty as well.
00:16:28.206 --> 00:16:48.298
There were concerns about conflict of interest due to the industry involvement in plastic and also fossil fuel production, and there were calls for strong policy to manage these conflicts within the UNEP and also the INC Secretariat as well.
00:16:48.840 --> 00:17:01.379
Yeah, it was interesting to learn- for example, I'm just citing this press release that came out - I only was able to come across this in part because I was sitting next to somebody that was representing one of these advocacy groups.
00:17:01.446 --> 00:17:06.930
This in particular is for the Center for International Environmental Law.
00:17:07.019 --> 00:17:17.009
But they found that over 143 fossil fuel and chemical industry lobbyists were registered, which was upwards of 36% increase from INC-2.
00:17:17.076 --> 00:17:27.390
And these representatives actually outnumbered- these lobbyists outnumbered many of these smaller member state delegations that were there on-site.
00:17:27.455 --> 00:17:28.980
This was actually raised a few times.
00:17:29.046 --> 00:17:35.608
I had the good fortune of speaking to some representatives from some SIDs countries, small island developing states.
00:17:35.675 --> 00:17:36.175
Yeah.
00:17:36.242 --> 00:17:52.660
Among these small island developing states, there's clear agreement that, you know, we need very ambitious actions, in part because the impacts of plastic pollution are quite visible and posing a real threat to their- not only their ecosystems, but also their economies.
00:17:52.726 --> 00:17:54.670
And they were calling for real, clear action.
00:17:54.736 --> 00:18:01.028
But they were also saying that, look, you know,"we're here, we're only a member of- two or three members of our team.
00:18:01.096 --> 00:18:13.808
And, you know, we're far outnumbered by some of these other larger countries who aren't really willing to take action and really move forward on a very ambitious treaty".
00:18:13.875 --> 00:18:21.759
And then you look at a press release like this and you learn like, well, wait, you actually have many vested interests that are part of this process, and-
00:18:21.826 --> 00:18:32.710
I heard that some organisations also raised this to the INC Secretariat as well, but I'm not sure if any progress has been made or any action has been made.
00:18:32.776 --> 00:18:33.276
Hmm.
00:18:33.343 --> 00:18:41.230
But despite challenges, the Contact Groups made a lot of progress based on country feedback.
00:18:41.296 --> 00:18:54.098
There were different approaches with some favour[ing] upstream measures to prevent plastic pollution and other actually support[ing] downstream industry-allied strategy.
00:18:54.165 --> 00:19:08.710
So the discussion actually, you know, emphasised the need for leading nations in fossil fuel, petrochemical and plastic product production to take decisive action.
00:19:08.890 --> 00:19:18.730
The talks also highlighted the importance of trade provisions, legally binding treaty aspects and the urgency of reducing plastic pollution.
00:19:19.750 --> 00:19:46.298
Um, apart from that, frontline representatives like waste pickers, indigenous peoples, activists and scientists also contrasted with the industry suggestion by presenting the effect of plastic pollution and also emphasised the importance of focusing on reuse and including indigenous knowledge in treaty negotiations as well.
00:19:46.568 --> 00:19:56.858
So, um, what struck me the most about the INC-3 were the intense negotiations in the Contact Groups, really.
00:19:56.925 --> 00:20:07.028
So these talks were time-consuming, you know, and, um, very unpredictable and sometimes challenging to actually find common ground.
00:20:07.630 --> 00:20:19.750
I myself, for example, I tried to make [an] intervention four different days, but the schedule was packed with member states' discussion.
00:20:19.816 --> 00:20:28.269
And sometimes, you know, I was told that there were 50 observers were waiting for speaking.
00:20:28.336 --> 00:20:45.578
So despite this, I also kept engaging with representatives from various countries to understand their views on compliance mechanism, a topic I found fascinating and something that I've been working for a decade.
00:20:45.970 --> 00:20:46.470
Right.
00:20:46.536 --> 00:20:55.808
So by compliance, you're talking about whatever agreement they come to, whether they can keep it or like some kind of monitoring and evaluation process?
00:20:55.875 --> 00:21:18.970
So if I could go into a little bit detail about my proposed intervention, which was unfortunately never considered, it was actually focused on the ambiguous language in the current zero draft, particularly the frequent use of "necessary or appropriate measures" without specific definitions.
00:21:19.240 --> 00:21:58.808
I also suggested that adding a clear definition to ensure consistent understanding throughout the treaty, and incorporating this language into sections where it was absent for enhanced clarity, I also proposed developing a set of compliance and enforcement principles to support [national] implementation of this comprehensive treaty, including, you know, guidelines for drafting law, anticipating non-compliance, ensuring robust monitoring, specifying reporting requirements, and encouraging public disclosure for oversight.
00:21:59.048 --> 00:22:16.630
And this principle would also cover incentives for self-auditing, early compliance training and restorative justice mechanisms, and also consideration for product life cycle and design to prevent non-compliance as well.
00:22:16.695 --> 00:22:25.028
So I think it was very unfortunate that my proposal was never really considered due to the time limitation.
00:22:25.096 --> 00:22:28.960
But overall I felt the process was really interesting.
00:22:29.558 --> 00:22:30.058
Hmmm.
00:22:30.460 --> 00:22:40.660
So it seems to me- this is just my general impression- that both you (Chochoe) and Matt believe that this meeting wasn't super successful.
00:22:40.726 --> 00:22:42.098
I mean, what's your verdict on that?
00:22:42.220 --> 00:22:54.730
Well, if you actually compare this INC-3 with the second one, I could say that a lot of progress was made by members, by the INC Secretariat.
00:22:54.796 --> 00:22:56.259
No question about that.
00:22:56.500 --> 00:22:57.940
Progress was made.
00:22:58.150 --> 00:23:10.509
But we also couldn't deny the fact that the fundamental issue, like, for example, why we were there, was to actually end plastic pollution.
00:23:10.808 --> 00:23:24.759
But at the end of the day, the most important thing that should be discussed during INC-3 and also should actually reach the consensus, which was the intersectional work was not achieved.
00:23:25.088 --> 00:23:28.415
Okay, so what was supposed to be achieved by this point?
00:23:28.598 --> 00:23:46.868
So, um, you know, some of the countries actually dominated the discussion, meaning that if some other countries- like the majority of the countries actually propose something, then it doesn't mean that it would go through, right?
00:23:46.935 --> 00:23:47.435
Uh huh.
00:23:47.502 --> 00:23:55.118
Just simply because[of] some- a few dominated countries that maybe are influenced by industry.
00:23:55.390 --> 00:24:00.640
Then it could also, you know, hinder the negotiation process as well.
00:24:01.000 --> 00:24:14.108
For example, something like, you know, the chemicals and polymers of concern and so many things there should be discussed and also that should be ready for the INC-4, but that didn't really happen.
00:24:15.318 --> 00:24:24.980
I'm just having a hard time understanding how the presence of the petrochemical industry's lobbies can affect the decision making process of this INC.
00:24:25.578 --> 00:24:28.098
What is the actual voting system ?
00:24:28.165 --> 00:24:30.710
Is it decided on a majority base?
00:24:30.776 --> 00:24:35.538
So the voting system is not yet decided because the treaty has not been fully formulated.
00:24:35.605 --> 00:24:51.048
But it's fair to say that just by nature, by virtue of having some of these lobbyists there on-site, it shows that they have a much more amplified voice and how they advise the country delegations, especially some of the larger country delegations.
00:24:51.500 --> 00:24:59.269
And yeah, how they participate in the process and basically how they're having their voices heard.
00:24:59.336 --> 00:25:19.548
And again, it just relates to some of these other- these countries and many of them, as we spoke upon earlier, representing some very large petrochemicals and other industries- how they, you know, are really, it seems, steering the process away from an ultimate goal, which is having a very ambitious treaty.
00:25:19.759 --> 00:25:21.380
So I can just speak on one.
00:25:21.445 --> 00:25:25.308
I mean, for example, you have many different coalitions that are formed, right?
00:25:25.375 --> 00:25:38.028
One of which is this High Ambition Coalition (HAC) that started out very strongly right out the gate from, you know, the first ink calling for very, very strong actions to address plastic across the lifecycle.
00:25:38.096 --> 00:25:55.220
Their voice was hardly heard at all at INC-3, but you did have another newer coalition that must have- again, a lot of this probably happens not so much in the Plenary, but behind the scenes- But this new coalition refer to themselves basically as "the like-minded group".
00:25:55.286 --> 00:26:27.380
But then we learned they represented a much, much broader, diverse range of countries, probably many countries that, again, are dominated by very, very large petro- or chemical industries, who yeah, without singling out any particular countries that are very much looking to focus the ultimate ILBI probably more on downstream actions, so waste management, as opposed to very much upstream addressing those primary polymers and polymers and chemicals of concern.
00:26:28.200 --> 00:26:30.690
Yeah, so you just mentioned the High Ambition Coalition.
00:26:30.756 --> 00:26:37.680
So if you could just tell us if we know what countries are part of it and what are their objectives as part of the INC.
00:26:38.618 --> 00:26:39.118
Yep.
00:26:39.185 --> 00:26:45.640
So the High Ambition Coalition again, not very visible or present, at least by our observations, at INC-3.
00:26:45.705 --> 00:26:53.618
But it's made up of a broad sweep of countries from all around the world, you know, advanced, middle-income, And low-income countries.
00:26:53.685 --> 00:27:05.618
And again, just going back to an earlier point, it's fair to say that a lot of the calls for ambitious action are taking place among countries of the lower economic strata.
00:27:05.890 --> 00:27:08.858
But, yeah, this is many, many countries.
00:27:08.925 --> 00:27:19.150
And I can read off a few, you know, EU, Netherlands, Uruguay, Ghana, Colombia, Jordan, a number of others.
00:27:19.215 --> 00:27:33.220
So very diverse range of viewpoints, but they basically agree on a number of main objectives or strategic goals, and one of which involves, you know, reducing plastic production to sustainable levels.
00:27:33.400 --> 00:27:36.430
Another is to promote a more circular economy.
00:27:37.210 --> 00:27:41.740
Another one is to ensure the environmentally sound management and recycling waste.
00:27:42.220 --> 00:27:56.108
So yeah, it's- they're calling for basically or at least starting from the early on in the process- they're looking for, you know, minimising plastics and ensuring safe and sound collection and disposal of plastics.
00:27:56.175 --> 00:28:05.470
But may the main focus on based on these points are really on the midstream to downstream aspects of plastic waste.
00:28:05.950 --> 00:28:06.450
Hmmm.
00:28:06.516 --> 00:28:16.568
And I actually just read recently that Japan had recently joined the HAC, and I was wondering if by any chance, you knew what motivated that reasoning?
00:28:17.460 --> 00:28:27.960
So I think with Japan deciding to join HAC- that was like a significant shift in the approach [to] plastic pollution.
00:28:28.890 --> 00:28:40.950
That's simply because, you know, that Japan was a major producer, consumer [and exporter] of plastic waste as well, and they rely heavily on incineration for plastic waste management.
00:28:41.400 --> 00:28:41.900
Uh huh.
00:28:42.180 --> 00:28:45.930
Joining the HAC is like, kind of like big thing, I guess.
00:28:46.078 --> 00:28:47.338
Like big commitment.
00:28:47.405 --> 00:28:55.048
And it actually shows that the Japan[ese] government is really taking plastic pollution seriously.
00:28:55.115 --> 00:29:02.640
And this can be demonstrated through many of their initiatives throughout the negotiations.
00:29:03.240 --> 00:29:03.740
Great.
00:29:03.806 --> 00:29:06.480
So I guess that's some progress, right?
00:29:06.960 --> 00:29:07.460
[Laughs]
00:29:08.298 --> 00:29:12.558
But yeah, it's some progress and it's really encouraging that Japan joins.
00:29:12.650 --> 00:29:27.348
I just very much hope that more discussion can be around on the reduction of plastic, not only reduction of production of conventional plastics as we know them, but also reduction of the demands of plastic.
00:29:27.415 --> 00:29:31.009
This is something that comes out very clearly from the HAC.
00:29:31.250 --> 00:29:38.960
Unfortunately, at least my observations of INC-3, nobody is really talking about reduction.
00:29:39.026 --> 00:29:39.526
Hmmm.
00:29:39.650 --> 00:29:42.650
Everyone is talking about-Yes, exactly.
00:29:42.715 --> 00:29:45.440
Everyone's talking about how plastics can be managed.
00:29:45.506 --> 00:29:55.788
Very, very little was spoken on how we might- behavioural changes that are necessary for us to reduce our consumption of plastics or whatever alternative material.
00:29:55.855 --> 00:30:09.078
So I'm hopeful that the High Ambition Coalition will continue to grow and be a countervailing voice or force against maybe some of these other coalitions that are calling for less ambitious actions.
00:30:09.650 --> 00:30:15.618
I just agree with Matthew that reduction was not widely addressed.
00:30:15.685 --> 00:30:16.640
Some country did.
00:30:16.705 --> 00:30:24.798
But, you know, then it was not really addressed effectively during the negotiation process.
00:30:25.730 --> 00:30:30.920
The discussion more focused on, you know, solid waste management.
00:30:30.986 --> 00:30:54.380
And if we would like to end plastic pollution, we would like to take measures, then it needs to be done according to- I think the word that they use is like"national jurisdiction", meaning that the country will be able to decide by themselves the target and not necessarily, you know, the collective one.
00:30:55.180 --> 00:30:55.750
Right.
00:30:55.816 --> 00:30:58.058
And that is a real tension, isn't it?
00:30:58.125 --> 00:31:01.930
Because, as we know, plastics is a transboundary challenge.
00:31:01.996 --> 00:31:19.568
And for countries to come together and try to establish some kind of treaty to address, you know, this global challenge, planetary crisis, national actions alone probably will not be sufficient, uh, to do so and in a kind of unified, systematic way.
00:31:20.019 --> 00:31:22.028
So that's a real- that's a real issue.
00:31:23.759 --> 00:31:29.338
When you're talking about reduction, I think there are many ways, I guess we could interpret that word.
00:31:29.405 --> 00:31:33.930
And I just want to make sure wha- that I understand what you're trying to argue for.
00:31:33.996 --> 00:31:34.528
That's great.
00:31:34.596 --> 00:31:41.068
I mean, Chochoe, feel free to come in here, but when I refer to reduction, I mean reduction of both supply and demand.
00:31:41.608 --> 00:31:42.108
Okay.
00:31:42.175 --> 00:31:44.068
So across the market.
00:31:44.135 --> 00:31:54.210
This also lends to the idea that maybe alternatives or some kind of other quote unquote"sustainable materials" might come and take the place of plastics.
00:31:54.276 --> 00:31:58.019
But, you know, here's where the science is not entirely clear.
00:31:58.086 --> 00:32:11.338
I think just recently we found that- there was a paper that just came out a couple of weeks ago that shows that actual plastics recycling often emits a lot of other hazardous chemicals into the environment.
00:32:11.405 --> 00:32:15.269
Just by the process- by way of the process itself.
00:32:15.480 --> 00:32:19.200
Same goes with the identification of some kinds of alternatives.
00:32:19.266 --> 00:32:22.528
We find that biodegradable often isn't biodegradable.
00:32:22.596 --> 00:32:27.420
And it can also have kind of negative impacts on the environment.
00:32:27.868 --> 00:32:32.278
I think for me, production should be reduced in the first place.
00:32:32.368 --> 00:32:42.778
You know, I'm not saying that you can't produce it, but the main discussion during the INC-3 was all about the waste management- was about the recycling.
00:32:43.048 --> 00:32:46.288
Does that make sense that we are talking about recycling?
00:32:46.355 --> 00:32:48.450
Because how many years-
00:32:48.516 --> 00:32:49.318
We can't do it well.
00:32:49.385 --> 00:32:51.210
Yeah, we are not doing that well.
00:32:51.276 --> 00:32:51.808
Right?
00:32:51.875 --> 00:33:02.190
So and then at the INC-3, when it comes to the financial mechanism during the intersessional work- this was also not achieved as well.
00:33:02.256 --> 00:33:15.420
So how can we be sure that, you know, those countries, for example, in developing countries like ASEAN, they have good infrastructure to actually do all this kind of recycling.
00:33:15.486 --> 00:33:15.986
Right?
00:33:16.053 --> 00:33:21.000
And how many years that is going to take to actually end all of these things.
00:33:21.066 --> 00:33:25.950
So I think that it would be better for us to try to reduce in the first place.
00:33:26.016 --> 00:33:37.140
But at the same time, we also advocate with people in the community or people that we work with or even ourselves to also reduce the consumption as well.
00:33:37.205 --> 00:33:45.538
I think that's the way how we should look at it, but that was not really widely addressed during the INC as well.
00:33:45.605 --> 00:33:47.220
I mean, when it comes to the outcome.
00:33:48.130 --> 00:33:52.210
And there's just no way that we can recycle out of this problem.
00:33:52.328 --> 00:33:58.358
Um, it really comes down to reducing the production and consumption of plastics.
00:33:58.425 --> 00:33:59.230
Full stop.
00:33:59.500 --> 00:34:00.000
Right.
00:34:00.066 --> 00:34:00.566
Yes.
00:34:00.633 --> 00:34:05.380
So that's really, you know, the whole idea about taking a lifecycle approach.
00:34:06.068 --> 00:34:06.759
Right.
00:34:07.450 --> 00:34:13.000
Okay, so I mean, it looks like INC is slowly but surely moving forward.
00:34:13.065 --> 00:34:13.840
We hope?
00:34:13.905 --> 00:34:14.440
Very much hope.
00:34:14.768 --> 00:34:17.110
Yes, with lots of hope.
00:34:17.559 --> 00:34:29.289
[Laughs] Are there other apart from this idea, you know, incorporating the idea of reduction mechanisms or actions that are necessary to end plastic pollution in your view?
00:34:29.710 --> 00:34:44.949
Um, so basically I think from my side, I feel that the countries have to take the compliance mechanism more seriously and also harmonise data and also, um, monitoring tools.
00:34:45.016 --> 00:34:53.920
So basically what happened in many countries in ASEAN region now or- and also elsewhere, it's like we have got so many tools.
00:34:53.985 --> 00:34:54.579
Really.
00:34:54.646 --> 00:34:56.800
Maybe one country has so many tools.
00:34:56.865 --> 00:35:31.719
And then, you know, if we can actually harmonise all of these tools in one single tool or something, then, and then we apply this globally or regionally, you know, then I think it will be possible for us to actually monitor if the country has made any progress, because I can tell you that based on my experience with some ASEAN member states and also other countries, they have set their targets very high and they don't actually have the baseline.
00:35:32.018 --> 00:35:34.869
And then they don't actually have the monitoring.
00:35:35.050 --> 00:35:42.010
So, I think all these things should be in place and should be, you know, well-structured and formed.
00:35:42.076 --> 00:35:47.650
And then, of course, countries will not have the capacity to do that by themselves.
00:35:47.715 --> 00:36:05.018
International organisations, you know, all of the funders, the financial mechanism need to be there for them and to provide this support so that we will be able to hopefully address plastic pollution in an effective manner.
00:36:05.139 --> 00:36:05.639
Right.
00:36:05.706 --> 00:36:06.206
Yeah.
00:36:06.460 --> 00:36:07.719
Just chiming in there.
00:36:07.786 --> 00:36:13.210
I think that really important point that Chochoe raised is the need for multi-stakeholder actions.
00:36:13.275 --> 00:36:24.730
You need to be talking about government-, country-led action together with businesses, together with, you know, research institutions, together with the citizens themselves in trying to address the problem.
00:36:24.940 --> 00:36:29.289
I think really fundamental to driving the change will be education.
00:36:30.159 --> 00:36:31.659
Especially among young people.
00:36:31.726 --> 00:36:42.219
And again, it's hard to put any definite timelines on how quickly we'll be able to draw down, the issue of plastic pollution at least over the next 10, 20 years.
00:36:42.286 --> 00:37:03.699
But it's important to ensure that, you know, young people are not only have the capacity and the understanding to know how to deal with these issues, but also are inspired and don't feel like this existential challenge that we face - whether it be climate or pollution or biodiversity loss- is insurmountable.
00:37:03.766 --> 00:37:11.889
And yeah, so it's important to highlight the role of not only governments, policymakers, but also educators and advocates.
00:37:11.956 --> 00:37:37.900
And some of the work that is ongoing by IGES - sorry if it sounds like a shameless plug - But we're doing some excellent work in the educational level in Sri Lanka, as part of this Basel, Rotterdam, Stockholm transboundary pollution project and very much working with young people to identify sources of plastic pollution and devise solutions to address them, very much following a kind of citizen science-type approach.
00:37:38.018 --> 00:38:04.809
So I think that maybe if this kind of approach or these kinds of practices can be scaled up and replicated in other locations, other countries, starting locally and then moving upwards, maybe to, you know, more nationally, I think we stand a real chance of really addressing whatever challenge- environmental challenges we might face, plastics included.
00:38:10.360 --> 00:38:13.000
Thank you for listening to About Sustainability...
00:38:13.268 --> 00:38:16.360
Please subscribe at podcast.iges.
00:38:16.780 --> 00:38:18.309
jp.
00:38:18.699 --> 00:38:20.469
Or search for About Sustainability...
00:38:20.536 --> 00:38:22.690
wherever you normally get your podcasts.
00:38:23.050 --> 00:38:31.150
If you've got feedback, you can review us on your podcast directory of choice or reach out on Twitter at IGES_EN.
00:38:33.280 --> 00:38:34.510
About Sustainability...
00:38:34.576 --> 00:38:38.079
is produced by the Institute for Global Environmental Strategies.
00:38:38.146 --> 00:38:45.610
Any views expressed during the podcast are those of the speaker at the time of recording, and do not necessarily reflect the views of IGES.
00:38:46.090 --> 00:38:48.760
Thank you for choosing to spend your time with us.
00:38:48.826 --> 00:38:52.659
We don't take that lightly and we hope you'll join us next time.
00:00:08.890 --> 00:00:11.858
Hello, and welcome to About Sustainability...
00:00:11.926 --> 00:00:15.278
, a podcast by the Institute for Global Environmental Strategies (IGES).
00:00:15.910 --> 00:00:17.500
It's your co-host, Erin.
00:00:17.949 --> 00:00:48.728
This time, Alice, Simon and I invited our colleagues Matthew Hengesbaugh and Chochoe Devaporihartakula, two experts following the ongoing international negotiations on plastics, the Intergovernmental Negotiating Committee on Plastic Pollution, or INC for short, is a process that was agreed in a historic resolution at the fifth session of the United Nations Environment Assembly (UNEA-5.2), in 2022.
00:00:49.298 --> 00:00:53.798
For a review of what happened at UNEA, check out our UNEA-5.2 episode.
00:00:54.548 --> 00:01:04.150
So the aim of the INC is to develop an internationally legally binding instrument on plastic pollution, including in the marine environment.
00:01:04.215 --> 00:01:11.019
And this involves using an approach that addresses the entire lifecycle of plastics.
00:01:11.468 --> 00:01:22.060
Our previous episode focusing on lifecycle approaches to plastics shows how challenging this actually is, and we learned that it continues to be a major contention at the actual negotiations.
00:01:22.358 --> 00:01:25.180
Be sure to check out our show notes for those references.
00:01:26.438 --> 00:01:34.420
We caught up with Matthew and Chochoe after they came back from the most recent INC meeting called INC-3, which concluded in November.
00:01:35.468 --> 00:01:43.810
We covered the major contentions at INC-3, who is responsible and what is needed to reach a global agreement on tackling this issue.
00:01:44.049 --> 00:01:45.400
Let's get into it.
00:01:48.858 --> 00:01:57.260
Plastic pollution is obviously a really serious problem globally, but how serious is it in this particular region, the Asia-Pacific region?
00:01:57.409 --> 00:01:59.269
Yeah, that's an excellent question.
00:01:59.450 --> 00:02:01.608
Um, I would say it's serious.
00:02:01.909 --> 00:02:06.438
Um, there's been a lot of research dating back now a number of years.
00:02:06.506 --> 00:02:19.550
For example, in 2017, some research came out discussing how the top 20 plastic-polluting rivers in the world are mainly located in the Asia region.
00:02:19.968 --> 00:02:25.580
Um, I think this study actually found that it was upwards of very close to 70%.
00:02:25.645 --> 00:02:33.288
A large bulk of the global total of plastics were being emitted from these rivers in Asia.
00:02:33.830 --> 00:02:37.520
The research shows that many of them are located in Southeast Asia.
00:02:37.908 --> 00:02:48.590
But actually, if you look- take a more global perspective, you find that a lot of the problem is actually originating in more advanced economies, of course.
00:02:48.656 --> 00:03:05.718
And there was a lot of debate around, uh, this- the INC, with certain countries calling for, for example, some identification of what they call the downstream countries that were actually fully getting the brunt of a lot of this plastic pollution.
00:03:05.786 --> 00:03:13.639
What you mean by downstream is- are countries basically getting the plastic from some other country?
00:03:13.705 --> 00:03:15.229
Is that- like for processing?
00:03:15.295 --> 00:03:16.250
Is that what you're referring to, or?
00:03:16.788 --> 00:03:20.300
It's difficult to really pinpoint where the problem originates.
00:03:20.658 --> 00:03:21.158
Mmm hmm.
00:03:21.225 --> 00:03:25.098
And a lot of this has to deal with what we think of in terms of lifecycle.
00:03:25.165 --> 00:03:34.250
So you have certain countries for example, a lot of countries that, you know, maintain very large petrochemical industries...
00:03:34.818 --> 00:03:39.590
They would say that plastic, the issue itself must be dealt fully downstream.
00:03:39.656 --> 00:03:42.830
So that's at the end of life, right?
00:03:42.895 --> 00:03:55.188
Um, where, you know, the most visible aspects of plastic pollution, you know, your single-use products that are discarded in the environment, the discarded fishing nets, etc.
00:03:55.460 --> 00:04:28.819
But there's other countries, and rightfully so, point out that, well, plastic actually begins very much upstream, and this was a real issue at INC because they- the countries, the member states were not able to really forge any consensus around this issue of polymers and chemicals of concern, because, you know, a lot of people would say that, you know, plastic actually begins very much at the base level- you know, basically the compounds that make up plastic, those- that is the issue in itself.
00:04:28.910 --> 00:04:47.088
So when I refer to downstream countries, these are countries who took a stance that plastic being a transboundary issue, a lot of these countries, particularly in the developing world, face issues with waste management, collection, sorting and disposal.
00:04:47.540 --> 00:04:54.439
And a lot of that plastic waste winds up on their shores and they just don't have the capacity to deal with it.
00:04:54.505 --> 00:05:00.949
So again, this goes back to the idea that there are many different perspectives when we talk about the lifecycle of plastics.
00:05:01.016 --> 00:05:11.899
And it remains to be seen whether or not countries will be able to really come to a broad consensus on how to tackle the many stages across the lifecycle.
00:05:12.560 --> 00:05:27.230
It sounds to me as if there is a discussion or contention around whether primarily the consumer of the plastic product should be responsible for the waste, or the producer of the raw plastic material should be responsible for it.
00:05:27.295 --> 00:05:29.569
So who's actually responsible for that?
00:05:29.636 --> 00:05:44.750
Like the country that created the industry that creates it, or the sector that creates the plastic bottles or the country that- in which the people consume the beverage that is in those plastic bottles but do not have the capacity to properly manage it, and it ends up in the rivers?
00:05:44.815 --> 00:05:53.180
Can you say something, Matt, about who are the biggest producers of plastic, and who are the biggest consumers of plastic in terms of countries or companies?
00:05:53.245 --> 00:05:54.500
I'm just not clear on that.
00:05:54.860 --> 00:05:55.459
Sure.
00:05:55.526 --> 00:06:01.189
Well, no, that actually touches on the point that again, plastic is not- I mean, it's multi-sectoral, right?
00:06:01.255 --> 00:06:07.670
So you have, for example, countries that rely heavily on their petroleum industries.
00:06:07.735 --> 00:06:12.740
Well, that's, you know, a major building block for the production of plastics.
00:06:12.805 --> 00:06:16.639
And then you have other countries that host very large chemical industries.
00:06:16.706 --> 00:06:20.990
That also is another factor that goes into the manufacture of plastics.
00:06:21.055 --> 00:06:27.350
And then you have countries that actually import the final products at their end of life.
00:06:27.415 --> 00:06:27.915
Right?
00:06:27.983 --> 00:06:35.480
So the plastic waste that other countries dispose of and don't necessarily deal with domestically.
00:06:35.545 --> 00:06:39.019
So it's a very multi-dimensional issue.
00:06:39.086 --> 00:07:00.680
This point that you make around, you know, how much is the consumer responsible- this is, uh, really a controversial issue because it's actually- a lot of the regulations that could be put in place really should fall on governments and how they regulate the corporations that are involved in the plastic trade.
00:07:00.745 --> 00:07:11.028
So for me, my personal perspective is that, you know, just putting all the responsibility on the consumer is a bit of a distraction.
00:07:11.778 --> 00:07:12.379
Hmmm.
00:07:12.446 --> 00:07:39.920
Again, given the multi-dimensional nature of how plastics are produced and manufactured and the ways that we consume them, if governments were to step in and really start enforcing some very strong regulations, including, for example, making use of extended producer responsibility-type approaches and ensuring that the companies, the corporations that are involved with the manufacture and distribution of plastics- they are clearly regulated.
00:07:40.430 --> 00:07:47.088
I mean, there's a lot of like eco-campaigning going on, right at the consumer level, you know, sustainable lifestyles, etc.
00:07:47.660 --> 00:07:51.769
, encouraging people to reuse their bags, reuse cups..
00:07:51.836 --> 00:07:52.336
.
00:07:52.403 --> 00:08:00.829
So what you're saying basically is that it's really something that should be tackled on a more systemic level and not just, you know, at the consumer level.
00:08:00.896 --> 00:08:01.550
Is that right?
00:08:02.379 --> 00:08:02.879
Right.
00:08:02.946 --> 00:08:07.509
And this goes back to that central tension again about what we mean by "lifecycle".
00:08:07.576 --> 00:08:19.028
And how can we- how could countries come together to agree on a series of interventions that, you know, tackle first the upstream, the midstream and the downstream.
00:08:19.180 --> 00:08:32.649
Upstream being the very production, you know, again, the raw compounds, the polymers that make up the plastics, then midstream in terms of product design and how plastics are actually produced.
00:08:32.716 --> 00:08:41.048
And then downstream, of course, you know, at the waste management level- how plastics should be properly handled and disposed of.
00:08:42.700 --> 00:08:46.210
And the objective is to complete this by next year.
00:08:46.275 --> 00:08:48.370
It's a very, very ambitious undertaking.
00:08:48.436 --> 00:08:48.936
Wow.
00:08:49.003 --> 00:08:51.850
Next year that's- We don't have much time, do we?
00:08:53.440 --> 00:08:54.908
No we don't, no we don't.
00:08:55.389 --> 00:08:55.928
Okay.
00:08:56.168 --> 00:09:02.110
Um, so how many meetings are there overall before they're supposed to agree on a new treaty?
00:09:03.350 --> 00:09:06.710
Set out to be a total of five INC meetings.
00:09:06.889 --> 00:09:07.389
Okay.
00:09:07.456 --> 00:09:09.139
This being the third.
00:09:09.259 --> 00:09:09.759
Okay.
00:09:09.826 --> 00:09:14.600
And then this final instrument is supposed to be unveiled.
00:09:15.200 --> 00:09:16.100
So that's right.
00:09:16.166 --> 00:09:20.298
And they refer to that as the internationally legally binding instrument.
00:09:20.509 --> 00:09:23.000
But the acronym was thrown around was "ILBI".
00:09:23.690 --> 00:09:24.190
ILBI.
00:09:24.255 --> 00:09:24.860
Alright.
00:09:25.490 --> 00:09:28.908
[Laughs] What kind of instrument is that, exactly?
00:09:28.975 --> 00:09:31.820
Is it something like the Paris Agreement for plastics?
00:09:31.885 --> 00:09:41.899
Well, it's too early to tell, but yeah, there's a lot of, a lot of- Again, the debate is around whether or not there'll be any global targets that are set, for example.
00:09:41.966 --> 00:09:50.928
So that would entail a lot of, you know, mandatory actions on the part of all countries kind of following a kind of systematised, harmonised kind of approach.
00:09:51.230 --> 00:10:02.960
And then there's also other countries that feel very strongly that the treaty should resemble something like Paris, uh, and being very much determined by nationally-set targets.
00:10:03.558 --> 00:10:04.058
Okay.
00:10:04.125 --> 00:10:08.090
So were you able to follow the previous INCI meetings?
00:10:08.155 --> 00:10:16.340
If so, can you maybe give us like a little bit of a recap on what happened at those meetings before the third meeting, which concluded recently?
00:10:16.668 --> 00:10:17.168
Sure.
00:10:17.235 --> 00:10:31.190
Well, I was fortunate enough to take part in INC-2, and that took place in Paris earlier this year and INC-2 basically- it was again held up very much due to procedural issues.
00:10:31.255 --> 00:10:33.710
Sorry, what do you mean by "procedural issues"?
00:10:34.070 --> 00:10:46.820
So I mean, it gets a little bit complicated here, but we're talking about issues of rules or procedure, disagreements over how the negotiations would proceed on that basis.
00:10:46.885 --> 00:11:07.639
And basically countries were able to come together in the end to mandate the development of a zero draft for the new treaty, which would be very much discussed during this interim period and developed and presented by the Presidency at the INC-3 that took place in Nairobi.
00:11:07.879 --> 00:11:25.879
So, basically, after getting over a lot of these procedural challenges, countries were able to come together to at least agree on the idea that a treaty, a zero draft, would be developed, and then it would be taken up again for consideration and discussion at INC-3.
00:11:26.820 --> 00:11:27.570
Right.
00:11:27.635 --> 00:11:30.538
So maybe let's turn it over to Chochoe.
00:11:30.605 --> 00:11:31.950
What happened on INC-3?
00:11:32.340 --> 00:11:49.710
So the main focus of the inquiry was the revised zero draft text and also discussions around synthesis report that was aimed to address the global agreement on plastic pollution and also the marine pollution as well.
00:11:49.775 --> 00:12:15.450
So all of the delegates[formed] three groups to discuss different part of the zero draft, for example, the objectives, principles, scope of the treaty, chemicals and polymers of concern, waste management, existing plastic pollution, just transition, implementation, compliance and more.
00:12:15.515 --> 00:12:19.710
So all of these issues can be found in the zero draft.
00:12:19.775 --> 00:12:32.788
And there were proposals and also options presented for each of the sections, which also reflected the diverse view and also approaches of the member countries as well.
00:12:34.360 --> 00:12:37.418
Can you just tell us what your role was at INC-3?
00:12:38.460 --> 00:12:42.600
I'm part of the IISD- you know, IISD is a partner organisation of IGES.
00:12:42.778 --> 00:12:45.690
It's the International Institute for Sustainable Development.
00:12:45.755 --> 00:12:47.250
Then they've got this wing.
00:12:47.548 --> 00:12:49.678
It's called the Earth Negotiations Bulletin.
00:12:49.745 --> 00:12:57.480
And basically it's a reporting service for all these intergovernmental negotiating processes.
00:12:57.546 --> 00:13:02.668
Basically, it's like an auxiliary rapporteuring team for the UN.
00:13:02.735 --> 00:13:08.940
They refer to themselves as a kind of the largest neutral reporting service in the world.
00:13:09.005 --> 00:13:17.129
Basically, your task is to go in and report what each country says and what their position is in that meeting in real time.
00:13:17.519 --> 00:13:18.418
Okay, great.
00:13:18.485 --> 00:13:20.009
And what about you, Chochoe?
00:13:20.076 --> 00:13:22.048
We know that you had maybe a side event?
00:13:22.115 --> 00:13:22.889
Sure.
00:13:22.956 --> 00:13:40.980
IGES was selected as one of the co-organisers for the thematic side event at INC-3 on monitoring the situation, progress of the future instrument, with the focus on objectives, targets, baseline indicators and timelines.
00:13:41.158 --> 00:13:50.070
So the sessions serve as a critical platform for discussing the measurement and monitoring of progress in a future treaty.
00:13:50.135 --> 00:14:07.889
The session was held on 15 November 2023, and was structured to explore different perspectives on who should be involved in this process, what should be measured and monitored, and how these activities should be carried out.
00:14:08.490 --> 00:14:19.408
So my presentation was specifically focused on the ASEAN region's progress and challenges in tackling plastic waste and marine debris.
00:14:20.250 --> 00:14:33.600
So we emphasised the need for setting realistic and achievable targets, and also highlighted the crucial need for transparent, consistent and harmonised data collection.
00:14:34.168 --> 00:14:45.149
We also advocate for standardised approach to data that also take into account, you know, the specific context of local regions.
00:14:45.298 --> 00:14:55.798
We also underlie the importance of both regional and global collaborations in the ongoing battle against plastic pollution.
00:14:55.980 --> 00:15:17.340
So this session actually [was] led by a representative from IUCN and [was] convened [with] a broad spectrum of participants, ranging from government officials and environmental specialists to NGO representative academics and the private sector.
00:15:17.428 --> 00:15:33.149
The session's importance lies in its ability to gather diverse insight and practical experience, which are quite essential for crafting a robust, inclusive and effective draft of the INC agreement.
00:15:33.450 --> 00:15:37.350
Okay, were you also part of, like, observing the negotiations?
00:15:37.416 --> 00:15:37.916
Yeah.
00:15:37.982 --> 00:15:38.482
Like Matthew?
00:15:38.549 --> 00:15:39.049
Okay.
00:15:39.115 --> 00:16:02.399
So for me, apart from co-organising a side event, I was also one of the representatives from IGES who participated in INC-3 and had a unique chance to participate in both the Contact Groups and also Plenary sessions, thanks to a floating badge that granted me flexible access.
00:16:02.759 --> 00:16:07.408
The event itself was really quite intense in my view.
00:16:07.500 --> 00:16:12.360
The official sessions could start as early as 8 a.m.
00:16:12.426 --> 00:16:16.590
in the morning and occasionally running until midnight.
00:16:16.918 --> 00:16:17.970
Oh my gosh.
00:16:18.035 --> 00:16:28.139
It's also worth noting that a key debate at the INC-3 was also about the role of industry in drafting the treaty as well.
00:16:28.206 --> 00:16:48.298
There were concerns about conflict of interest due to the industry involvement in plastic and also fossil fuel production, and there were calls for strong policy to manage these conflicts within the UNEP and also the INC Secretariat as well.
00:16:48.840 --> 00:17:01.379
Yeah, it was interesting to learn- for example, I'm just citing this press release that came out - I only was able to come across this in part because I was sitting next to somebody that was representing one of these advocacy groups.
00:17:01.446 --> 00:17:06.930
This in particular is for the Center for International Environmental Law.
00:17:07.019 --> 00:17:17.009
But they found that over 143 fossil fuel and chemical industry lobbyists were registered, which was upwards of 36% increase from INC-2.
00:17:17.076 --> 00:17:27.390
And these representatives actually outnumbered- these lobbyists outnumbered many of these smaller member state delegations that were there on-site.
00:17:27.455 --> 00:17:28.980
This was actually raised a few times.
00:17:29.046 --> 00:17:35.608
I had the good fortune of speaking to some representatives from some SIDs countries, small island developing states.
00:17:35.675 --> 00:17:36.175
Yeah.
00:17:36.242 --> 00:17:52.660
Among these small island developing states, there's clear agreement that, you know, we need very ambitious actions, in part because the impacts of plastic pollution are quite visible and posing a real threat to their- not only their ecosystems, but also their economies.
00:17:52.726 --> 00:17:54.670
And they were calling for real, clear action.
00:17:54.736 --> 00:18:01.028
But they were also saying that, look, you know,"we're here, we're only a member of- two or three members of our team.
00:18:01.096 --> 00:18:13.808
And, you know, we're far outnumbered by some of these other larger countries who aren't really willing to take action and really move forward on a very ambitious treaty".
00:18:13.875 --> 00:18:21.759
And then you look at a press release like this and you learn like, well, wait, you actually have many vested interests that are part of this process, and-
00:18:21.826 --> 00:18:32.710
I heard that some organisations also raised this to the INC Secretariat as well, but I'm not sure if any progress has been made or any action has been made.
00:18:32.776 --> 00:18:33.276
Hmm.
00:18:33.343 --> 00:18:41.230
But despite challenges, the Contact Groups made a lot of progress based on country feedback.
00:18:41.296 --> 00:18:54.098
There were different approaches with some favour[ing] upstream measures to prevent plastic pollution and other actually support[ing] downstream industry-allied strategy.
00:18:54.165 --> 00:19:08.710
So the discussion actually, you know, emphasised the need for leading nations in fossil fuel, petrochemical and plastic product production to take decisive action.
00:19:08.890 --> 00:19:18.730
The talks also highlighted the importance of trade provisions, legally binding treaty aspects and the urgency of reducing plastic pollution.
00:19:19.750 --> 00:19:46.298
Um, apart from that, frontline representatives like waste pickers, indigenous peoples, activists and scientists also contrasted with the industry suggestion by presenting the effect of plastic pollution and also emphasised the importance of focusing on reuse and including indigenous knowledge in treaty negotiations as well.
00:19:46.568 --> 00:19:56.858
So, um, what struck me the most about the INC-3 were the intense negotiations in the Contact Groups, really.
00:19:56.925 --> 00:20:07.028
So these talks were time-consuming, you know, and, um, very unpredictable and sometimes challenging to actually find common ground.
00:20:07.630 --> 00:20:19.750
I myself, for example, I tried to make [an] intervention four different days, but the schedule was packed with member states' discussion.
00:20:19.816 --> 00:20:28.269
And sometimes, you know, I was told that there were 50 observers were waiting for speaking.
00:20:28.336 --> 00:20:45.578
So despite this, I also kept engaging with representatives from various countries to understand their views on compliance mechanism, a topic I found fascinating and something that I've been working for a decade.
00:20:45.970 --> 00:20:46.470
Right.
00:20:46.536 --> 00:20:55.808
So by compliance, you're talking about whatever agreement they come to, whether they can keep it or like some kind of monitoring and evaluation process?
00:20:55.875 --> 00:21:18.970
So if I could go into a little bit detail about my proposed intervention, which was unfortunately never considered, it was actually focused on the ambiguous language in the current zero draft, particularly the frequent use of "necessary or appropriate measures" without specific definitions.
00:21:19.240 --> 00:21:58.808
I also suggested that adding a clear definition to ensure consistent understanding throughout the treaty, and incorporating this language into sections where it was absent for enhanced clarity, I also proposed developing a set of compliance and enforcement principles to support [national] implementation of this comprehensive treaty, including, you know, guidelines for drafting law, anticipating non-compliance, ensuring robust monitoring, specifying reporting requirements, and encouraging public disclosure for oversight.
00:21:59.048 --> 00:22:16.630
And this principle would also cover incentives for self-auditing, early compliance training and restorative justice mechanisms, and also consideration for product life cycle and design to prevent non-compliance as well.
00:22:16.695 --> 00:22:25.028
So I think it was very unfortunate that my proposal was never really considered due to the time limitation.
00:22:25.096 --> 00:22:28.960
But overall I felt the process was really interesting.
00:22:29.558 --> 00:22:30.058
Hmmm.
00:22:30.460 --> 00:22:40.660
So it seems to me- this is just my general impression- that both you (Chochoe) and Matt believe that this meeting wasn't super successful.
00:22:40.726 --> 00:22:42.098
I mean, what's your verdict on that?
00:22:42.220 --> 00:22:54.730
Well, if you actually compare this INC-3 with the second one, I could say that a lot of progress was made by members, by the INC Secretariat.
00:22:54.796 --> 00:22:56.259
No question about that.
00:22:56.500 --> 00:22:57.940
Progress was made.
00:22:58.150 --> 00:23:10.509
But we also couldn't deny the fact that the fundamental issue, like, for example, why we were there, was to actually end plastic pollution.
00:23:10.808 --> 00:23:24.759
But at the end of the day, the most important thing that should be discussed during INC-3 and also should actually reach the consensus, which was the intersectional work was not achieved.
00:23:25.088 --> 00:23:28.415
Okay, so what was supposed to be achieved by this point?
00:23:28.598 --> 00:23:46.868
So, um, you know, some of the countries actually dominated the discussion, meaning that if some other countries- like the majority of the countries actually propose something, then it doesn't mean that it would go through, right?
00:23:46.935 --> 00:23:47.435
Uh huh.
00:23:47.502 --> 00:23:55.118
Just simply because[of] some- a few dominated countries that maybe are influenced by industry.
00:23:55.390 --> 00:24:00.640
Then it could also, you know, hinder the negotiation process as well.
00:24:01.000 --> 00:24:14.108
For example, something like, you know, the chemicals and polymers of concern and so many things there should be discussed and also that should be ready for the INC-4, but that didn't really happen.
00:24:15.318 --> 00:24:24.980
I'm just having a hard time understanding how the presence of the petrochemical industry's lobbies can affect the decision making process of this INC.
00:24:25.578 --> 00:24:28.098
What is the actual voting system ?
00:24:28.165 --> 00:24:30.710
Is it decided on a majority base?
00:24:30.776 --> 00:24:35.538
So the voting system is not yet decided because the treaty has not been fully formulated.
00:24:35.605 --> 00:24:51.048
But it's fair to say that just by nature, by virtue of having some of these lobbyists there on-site, it shows that they have a much more amplified voice and how they advise the country delegations, especially some of the larger country delegations.
00:24:51.500 --> 00:24:59.269
And yeah, how they participate in the process and basically how they're having their voices heard.
00:24:59.336 --> 00:25:19.548
And again, it just relates to some of these other- these countries and many of them, as we spoke upon earlier, representing some very large petrochemicals and other industries- how they, you know, are really, it seems, steering the process away from an ultimate goal, which is having a very ambitious treaty.
00:25:19.759 --> 00:25:21.380
So I can just speak on one.
00:25:21.445 --> 00:25:25.308
I mean, for example, you have many different coalitions that are formed, right?
00:25:25.375 --> 00:25:38.028
One of which is this High Ambition Coalition (HAC) that started out very strongly right out the gate from, you know, the first ink calling for very, very strong actions to address plastic across the lifecycle.
00:25:38.096 --> 00:25:55.220
Their voice was hardly heard at all at INC-3, but you did have another newer coalition that must have- again, a lot of this probably happens not so much in the Plenary, but behind the scenes- But this new coalition refer to themselves basically as "the like-minded group".
00:25:55.286 --> 00:26:27.380
But then we learned they represented a much, much broader, diverse range of countries, probably many countries that, again, are dominated by very, very large petro- or chemical industries, who yeah, without singling out any particular countries that are very much looking to focus the ultimate ILBI probably more on downstream actions, so waste management, as opposed to very much upstream addressing those primary polymers and polymers and chemicals of concern.
00:26:28.200 --> 00:26:30.690
Yeah, so you just mentioned the High Ambition Coalition.
00:26:30.756 --> 00:26:37.680
So if you could just tell us if we know what countries are part of it and what are their objectives as part of the INC.
00:26:38.618 --> 00:26:39.118
Yep.
00:26:39.185 --> 00:26:45.640
So the High Ambition Coalition again, not very visible or present, at least by our observations, at INC-3.
00:26:45.705 --> 00:26:53.618
But it's made up of a broad sweep of countries from all around the world, you know, advanced, middle-income, And low-income countries.
00:26:53.685 --> 00:27:05.618
And again, just going back to an earlier point, it's fair to say that a lot of the calls for ambitious action are taking place among countries of the lower economic strata.
00:27:05.890 --> 00:27:08.858
But, yeah, this is many, many countries.
00:27:08.925 --> 00:27:19.150
And I can read off a few, you know, EU, Netherlands, Uruguay, Ghana, Colombia, Jordan, a number of others.
00:27:19.215 --> 00:27:33.220
So very diverse range of viewpoints, but they basically agree on a number of main objectives or strategic goals, and one of which involves, you know, reducing plastic production to sustainable levels.
00:27:33.400 --> 00:27:36.430
Another is to promote a more circular economy.
00:27:37.210 --> 00:27:41.740
Another one is to ensure the environmentally sound management and recycling waste.
00:27:42.220 --> 00:27:56.108
So yeah, it's- they're calling for basically or at least starting from the early on in the process- they're looking for, you know, minimising plastics and ensuring safe and sound collection and disposal of plastics.
00:27:56.175 --> 00:28:05.470
But may the main focus on based on these points are really on the midstream to downstream aspects of plastic waste.
00:28:05.950 --> 00:28:06.450
Hmmm.
00:28:06.516 --> 00:28:16.568
And I actually just read recently that Japan had recently joined the HAC, and I was wondering if by any chance, you knew what motivated that reasoning?
00:28:17.460 --> 00:28:27.960
So I think with Japan deciding to join HAC- that was like a significant shift in the approach [to] plastic pollution.
00:28:28.890 --> 00:28:40.950
That's simply because, you know, that Japan was a major producer, consumer [and exporter] of plastic waste as well, and they rely heavily on incineration for plastic waste management.
00:28:41.400 --> 00:28:41.900
Uh huh.
00:28:42.180 --> 00:28:45.930
Joining the HAC is like, kind of like big thing, I guess.
00:28:46.078 --> 00:28:47.338
Like big commitment.
00:28:47.405 --> 00:28:55.048
And it actually shows that the Japan[ese] government is really taking plastic pollution seriously.
00:28:55.115 --> 00:29:02.640
And this can be demonstrated through many of their initiatives throughout the negotiations.
00:29:03.240 --> 00:29:03.740
Great.
00:29:03.806 --> 00:29:06.480
So I guess that's some progress, right?
00:29:06.960 --> 00:29:07.460
[Laughs]
00:29:08.298 --> 00:29:12.558
But yeah, it's some progress and it's really encouraging that Japan joins.
00:29:12.650 --> 00:29:27.348
I just very much hope that more discussion can be around on the reduction of plastic, not only reduction of production of conventional plastics as we know them, but also reduction of the demands of plastic.
00:29:27.415 --> 00:29:31.009
This is something that comes out very clearly from the HAC.
00:29:31.250 --> 00:29:38.960
Unfortunately, at least my observations of INC-3, nobody is really talking about reduction.
00:29:39.026 --> 00:29:39.526
Hmmm.
00:29:39.650 --> 00:29:42.650
Everyone is talking about-Yes, exactly.
00:29:42.715 --> 00:29:45.440
Everyone's talking about how plastics can be managed.
00:29:45.506 --> 00:29:55.788
Very, very little was spoken on how we might- behavioural changes that are necessary for us to reduce our consumption of plastics or whatever alternative material.
00:29:55.855 --> 00:30:09.078
So I'm hopeful that the High Ambition Coalition will continue to grow and be a countervailing voice or force against maybe some of these other coalitions that are calling for less ambitious actions.
00:30:09.650 --> 00:30:15.618
I just agree with Matthew that reduction was not widely addressed.
00:30:15.685 --> 00:30:16.640
Some country did.
00:30:16.705 --> 00:30:24.798
But, you know, then it was not really addressed effectively during the negotiation process.
00:30:25.730 --> 00:30:30.920
The discussion more focused on, you know, solid waste management.
00:30:30.986 --> 00:30:54.380
And if we would like to end plastic pollution, we would like to take measures, then it needs to be done according to- I think the word that they use is like"national jurisdiction", meaning that the country will be able to decide by themselves the target and not necessarily, you know, the collective one.
00:30:55.180 --> 00:30:55.750
Right.
00:30:55.816 --> 00:30:58.058
And that is a real tension, isn't it?
00:30:58.125 --> 00:31:01.930
Because, as we know, plastics is a transboundary challenge.
00:31:01.996 --> 00:31:19.568
And for countries to come together and try to establish some kind of treaty to address, you know, this global challenge, planetary crisis, national actions alone probably will not be sufficient, uh, to do so and in a kind of unified, systematic way.
00:31:20.019 --> 00:31:22.028
So that's a real- that's a real issue.
00:31:23.759 --> 00:31:29.338
When you're talking about reduction, I think there are many ways, I guess we could interpret that word.
00:31:29.405 --> 00:31:33.930
And I just want to make sure wha- that I understand what you're trying to argue for.
00:31:33.996 --> 00:31:34.528
That's great.
00:31:34.596 --> 00:31:41.068
I mean, Chochoe, feel free to come in here, but when I refer to reduction, I mean reduction of both supply and demand.
00:31:41.608 --> 00:31:42.108
Okay.
00:31:42.175 --> 00:31:44.068
So across the market.
00:31:44.135 --> 00:31:54.210
This also lends to the idea that maybe alternatives or some kind of other quote unquote"sustainable materials" might come and take the place of plastics.
00:31:54.276 --> 00:31:58.019
But, you know, here's where the science is not entirely clear.
00:31:58.086 --> 00:32:11.338
I think just recently we found that- there was a paper that just came out a couple of weeks ago that shows that actual plastics recycling often emits a lot of other hazardous chemicals into the environment.
00:32:11.405 --> 00:32:15.269
Just by the process- by way of the process itself.
00:32:15.480 --> 00:32:19.200
Same goes with the identification of some kinds of alternatives.
00:32:19.266 --> 00:32:22.528
We find that biodegradable often isn't biodegradable.
00:32:22.596 --> 00:32:27.420
And it can also have kind of negative impacts on the environment.
00:32:27.868 --> 00:32:32.278
I think for me, production should be reduced in the first place.
00:32:32.368 --> 00:32:42.778
You know, I'm not saying that you can't produce it, but the main discussion during the INC-3 was all about the waste management- was about the recycling.
00:32:43.048 --> 00:32:46.288
Does that make sense that we are talking about recycling?
00:32:46.355 --> 00:32:48.450
Because how many years-
00:32:48.516 --> 00:32:49.318
We can't do it well.
00:32:49.385 --> 00:32:51.210
Yeah, we are not doing that well.
00:32:51.276 --> 00:32:51.808
Right?
00:32:51.875 --> 00:33:02.190
So and then at the INC-3, when it comes to the financial mechanism during the intersessional work- this was also not achieved as well.
00:33:02.256 --> 00:33:15.420
So how can we be sure that, you know, those countries, for example, in developing countries like ASEAN, they have good infrastructure to actually do all this kind of recycling.
00:33:15.486 --> 00:33:15.986
Right?
00:33:16.053 --> 00:33:21.000
And how many years that is going to take to actually end all of these things.
00:33:21.066 --> 00:33:25.950
So I think that it would be better for us to try to reduce in the first place.
00:33:26.016 --> 00:33:37.140
But at the same time, we also advocate with people in the community or people that we work with or even ourselves to also reduce the consumption as well.
00:33:37.205 --> 00:33:45.538
I think that's the way how we should look at it, but that was not really widely addressed during the INC as well.
00:33:45.605 --> 00:33:47.220
I mean, when it comes to the outcome.
00:33:48.130 --> 00:33:52.210
And there's just no way that we can recycle out of this problem.
00:33:52.328 --> 00:33:58.358
Um, it really comes down to reducing the production and consumption of plastics.
00:33:58.425 --> 00:33:59.230
Full stop.
00:33:59.500 --> 00:34:00.000
Right.
00:34:00.066 --> 00:34:00.566
Yes.
00:34:00.633 --> 00:34:05.380
So that's really, you know, the whole idea about taking a lifecycle approach.
00:34:06.068 --> 00:34:06.759
Right.
00:34:07.450 --> 00:34:13.000
Okay, so I mean, it looks like INC is slowly but surely moving forward.
00:34:13.065 --> 00:34:13.840
We hope?
00:34:13.905 --> 00:34:14.440
Very much hope.
00:34:14.768 --> 00:34:17.110
Yes, with lots of hope.
00:34:17.559 --> 00:34:29.289
[Laughs] Are there other apart from this idea, you know, incorporating the idea of reduction mechanisms or actions that are necessary to end plastic pollution in your view?
00:34:29.710 --> 00:34:44.949
Um, so basically I think from my side, I feel that the countries have to take the compliance mechanism more seriously and also harmonise data and also, um, monitoring tools.
00:34:45.016 --> 00:34:53.920
So basically what happened in many countries in ASEAN region now or- and also elsewhere, it's like we have got so many tools.
00:34:53.985 --> 00:34:54.579
Really.
00:34:54.646 --> 00:34:56.800
Maybe one country has so many tools.
00:34:56.865 --> 00:35:31.719
And then, you know, if we can actually harmonise all of these tools in one single tool or something, then, and then we apply this globally or regionally, you know, then I think it will be possible for us to actually monitor if the country has made any progress, because I can tell you that based on my experience with some ASEAN member states and also other countries, they have set their targets very high and they don't actually have the baseline.
00:35:32.018 --> 00:35:34.869
And then they don't actually have the monitoring.
00:35:35.050 --> 00:35:42.010
So, I think all these things should be in place and should be, you know, well-structured and formed.
00:35:42.076 --> 00:35:47.650
And then, of course, countries will not have the capacity to do that by themselves.
00:35:47.715 --> 00:36:05.018
International organisations, you know, all of the funders, the financial mechanism need to be there for them and to provide this support so that we will be able to hopefully address plastic pollution in an effective manner.
00:36:05.139 --> 00:36:05.639
Right.
00:36:05.706 --> 00:36:06.206
Yeah.
00:36:06.460 --> 00:36:07.719
Just chiming in there.
00:36:07.786 --> 00:36:13.210
I think that really important point that Chochoe raised is the need for multi-stakeholder actions.
00:36:13.275 --> 00:36:24.730
You need to be talking about government-, country-led action together with businesses, together with, you know, research institutions, together with the citizens themselves in trying to address the problem.
00:36:24.940 --> 00:36:29.289
I think really fundamental to driving the change will be education.
00:36:30.159 --> 00:36:31.659
Especially among young people.
00:36:31.726 --> 00:36:42.219
And again, it's hard to put any definite timelines on how quickly we'll be able to draw down, the issue of plastic pollution at least over the next 10, 20 years.
00:36:42.286 --> 00:37:03.699
But it's important to ensure that, you know, young people are not only have the capacity and the understanding to know how to deal with these issues, but also are inspired and don't feel like this existential challenge that we face - whether it be climate or pollution or biodiversity loss- is insurmountable.
00:37:03.766 --> 00:37:11.889
And yeah, so it's important to highlight the role of not only governments, policymakers, but also educators and advocates.
00:37:11.956 --> 00:37:37.900
And some of the work that is ongoing by IGES - sorry if it sounds like a shameless plug - But we're doing some excellent work in the educational level in Sri Lanka, as part of this Basel, Rotterdam, Stockholm transboundary pollution project and very much working with young people to identify sources of plastic pollution and devise solutions to address them, very much following a kind of citizen science-type approach.
00:37:38.018 --> 00:38:04.809
So I think that maybe if this kind of approach or these kinds of practices can be scaled up and replicated in other locations, other countries, starting locally and then moving upwards, maybe to, you know, more nationally, I think we stand a real chance of really addressing whatever challenge- environmental challenges we might face, plastics included.
00:38:10.360 --> 00:38:13.000
Thank you for listening to About Sustainability...
00:38:13.268 --> 00:38:16.360
Please subscribe at podcast.iges.
00:38:16.780 --> 00:38:18.309
jp.
00:38:18.699 --> 00:38:20.469
Or search for About Sustainability...
00:38:20.536 --> 00:38:22.690
wherever you normally get your podcasts.
00:38:23.050 --> 00:38:31.150
If you've got feedback, you can review us on your podcast directory of choice or reach out on Twitter at IGES_EN.
00:38:33.280 --> 00:38:34.510
About Sustainability...
00:38:34.576 --> 00:38:38.079
is produced by the Institute for Global Environmental Strategies.
00:38:38.146 --> 00:38:45.610
Any views expressed during the podcast are those of the speaker at the time of recording, and do not necessarily reflect the views of IGES.
00:38:46.090 --> 00:38:48.760
Thank you for choosing to spend your time with us.
00:38:48.826 --> 00:38:52.659
We don't take that lightly and we hope you'll join us next time.
