As global awareness surrounding the environmental and health repercussions of plastic pollution intensifies, scientific communities worldwide have united to influence international policy frameworks with rigorous evidence-based insights. The Scientists’ Coalition for an Effective Plastics Treaty represents this concerted effort, bringing together over 100 independent experts dedicated to supporting negotiations on a legally binding global treaty aimed at ending plastic pollution. Their mission is both urgent and intricate, navigating the complex nexus of plastic production, chemical safety, and sustainable materials governance.
From August 5th to 14th, 2025, a remarkable assembly of 58 independent scientists from diverse geographic and disciplinary backgrounds will convene in Geneva, Switzerland. Their presence at the resumed fifth session of the Intergovernmental Negotiating Committee (INC-5.2) underscores the critical role that scientific expertise plays in shaping policy decisions that could determine the future trajectory of plastic management. Acting pro bono, these scientists provide unbiased analyses and syntheses of the latest empirical research, ensuring that the draft treaty reflects a comprehensive understanding of the lifecycle impacts of plastics.
The coalition’s concerns center on the risk that scientific evidence—particularly regarding chemicals of concern embedded within plastic materials—may be excluded or deliberately misrepresented within the treaty text. Such exclusion threatens not only the treaty’s effectiveness but also, more profoundly, public health and ecosystem integrity. The coalition warns that manufactured doubt tactics, often employed by vested business interests, undermine transparent and evidence-driven policymaking, thereby perpetuating the proliferation of hazardous plastic chemicals and unchecked plastic production.
A foundational argument emanating from the scientists’ collective is that plastic pollution must be tackled holistically—from production to disposal—addressing chemical additives and the sheer volume of plastic introduced into global markets. Plastic is not a monolithic material but a complex matrix of polymer types and associated chemicals, many of which pose toxicological risks. Therefore, frameworks governing emissions, product content, and waste management cannot rely on superficial or generalized measures but must be predicated on nuanced scientific understanding.
Central to the coalition’s advocacy is the insistence on integrating “essential use” criteria within the treaty’s provisions. This approach would restrict the manufacture and deployment of plastic products solely to those applications deemed critical, thereby preventing unnecessary plastic production and incentivizing the development of innovative, safer alternatives. Embedded within these criteria are imperatives for hazard-based safety assessments and sustainability benchmarks that reflect lifecycle environmental impacts, including considerations for recyclability, biodegradability, and chemical safety.
Transparency emerges as another keystone in the coalition’s recommendations. They stress the adoption of globally harmonized standards for plastic product labeling and reporting mechanisms. Such transparency measures enable regulators, consumers, and other stakeholders to track the presence of hazardous substances and ascertain compliance with treaty obligations in real time. This approach enhances accountability across supply chains that are often complex and transnational, spanning chemical manufacturers, plastic producers, product designers, and waste management entities.
Importantly, the coalition underscores the necessity of involving a broad spectrum of expertise in treaty implementation. Beyond multidisciplinary scientists, input from frontline and fenceline communities, who bear the disproportionate burden of pollution, as well as Indigenous knowledge holders, is essential for developing inclusive and context-sensitive policies. Such inclusive engagement can enrich scientific discourse with lived experience and traditional ecological knowledge, fostering policies that are not only scientifically robust but socially equitable.
To facilitate dialogue and informed decision-making during INC-5.2, the coalition has developed a suite of resources including six detailed policy briefs that dissect critical articles from the Chair’s Text of the treaty negotiations. These documents are made available in multiple languages—English, French, and Spanish—reflecting the coalition’s commitment to accessibility and international collaboration. Additionally, a regularly updated newsletter, the INC Science Update, disseminates timely scientific analyses to delegates, observers, and the media.
The coalition’s coordinators articulate a unified yet multifaceted scientific position. Dr. Bethanie Carney Almroth from the University of Gothenburg highlights the urgent need to confront plastic pollution across the material’s entire life cycle, emphasizing threats posed by chemical additives and excessive plastic production. She notes that any attempts to undermine or distort scientific facts jeopardize environmental and public health protections that are essential for planetary well-being.
Dr. Trisia Farrelly of New Zealand’s Cawthron Institute and Massey University emphasizes the critical role of establishing robust safety and sustainability criteria based on hazard identification. According to her, these criteria are not merely technical guidelines but pivotal tools for steering global standards toward minimizing monitoring and compliance costs, enhancing supply chain transparency, and curbing hazardous plastic production. Moreover, she calls for a conflict of interest mitigation framework within expert advisory groups to maintain the integrity of treaty implementation.
Professor Richard Thompson from the University of Plymouth presents a compelling case for harmonized labeling and regulation to propel the plastics industry toward safer, more sustainable materials. He stresses that the current trajectory—business as usual—fails to meet the demands of safety or sustainability and that only through binding international standards informed by rigorous scientific evidence can transformative change be realized in global plastic markets.
The coalition’s uncompromising stand on science-driven policy comes at a critical juncture when plastic pollution has permeated virtually every ecosystem on Earth, from ocean depths to polar ice. Microplastics and chemical contaminants persistently infiltrate food webs, posing long-term risks to biodiversity and human health. Without immediate, enforceable measures addressing production scales and chemical hazards, the tide of plastic pollution risks becoming irreversible and disproportionately impacting vulnerable populations.
Furthermore, the coalition’s approach reflects a paradigm shift in environmental governance—one that leverages cutting-edge science to inform not only reactive waste remediation but proactive, preventative controls. The envisioned treaty aims to transition global plastic management from fragmented, voluntary efforts toward a cohesive and enforceable framework that prioritizes sustainability, health, and equity.
For negotiators, the scientists’ coalition offers an invaluable resource—combining rigorous expertise with a clear ethical mandate, devoid of conflicts of interest. By partnering collaboratively with policymakers, the coalition ensures that the plastic treaty reflects the best available science, thereby underpinning durable international agreements that genuinely address the multifaceted challenges of plastic pollution.
As the INC-5.2 session progresses over ten days in Geneva, the presence and contributions of these independent scientists will be instrumental in advancing a treaty that transcends political expediency and business-as-usual paradigms. Their efforts exemplify how scientific communities can actively shape global environmental governance, ensuring that international plastic policy is grounded in transparency, sustainability, and human and ecological safety.
This dynamic interface between science and policy represents a hopeful development in confronting one of the most pressing planetary crises of our time. The Scientists’ Coalition for an Effective Plastics Treaty not only advocates for robust legal instruments but also pioneers a model of interdisciplinary, inclusive, and transparent science-policy engagement essential for meaningful environmental breakthroughs in the 21st century.
Subject of Research:
Not applicable
Image Credits:
Scientists’ Coalition for an Effective Plastics Treaty
