The latest Global Plastics Treaty talks failed. Where does that leave the plastic pollution crisis?

The former is a group of more than 70 countries, including the U.K., South Korea and Canada, and is co-chaired by Norway and Rwanda. It is pushing for an ambitious global agreement, insisting that plastic production must be curtailed to avoid ongoing negative impacts to the climate, the environment and human health. The coalition wants to end plastic pollution by 2040 — the same year by which, as things stand, plastic waste leakage into the ocean is due to triple. In the ongoing negotiations, they have been meeting with resistance from the aforementioned “like-minded group” of countries. This formation — including oil-producing nations such as China, Russia and Saudi Arabia, among a handful of others — was introduced by Iran in earlier negotiations. These countries have been pushing for a focus on recycling infrastructure instead of limiting plastic production. But their critics are skeptical that this could move the needle on pollution, and with good reason: Currently, only around 9 percent of global plastic waste is recycled.

The U.S. is a major plastics producer and polluter, but is not supporting global production caps. And, President’s Trump’s withdrawal from the Paris Agreement further underscores the limits of international treaties in building robust enforcement and formal accountability.

While we wait for INC delegates to reconvene, plastic waste continues to pollute our soil and oceans. And the human health risks posed by microplastics — plastic pieces that are less than five millimeters long — become an increasingly urgent concern. Various new studies have confirmed that these miniscule plastic pieces can now be found ubiquitously in our bodies. In some cases, we inhale tiny fragments in the air and in sea spray; in others, microplastics enter our bodies via our food. This can be due to contamination where foods are grown or raised. In 2024, a study discovered microplastic in more than a dozen commonly consumed proteins, with higher levels in more highly processed foods. Plastic packaging could also be contributing. A recent study in China found that frequent consumers of plastic-packaged foods exhibited significantly higher levels of microplastics than infrequent consumers of such products. And microplastics are even showing up in our tap water.

Drew Guillory, policy analyst at Food & Water Watch, calls the microplastics issue “one of the most challenging public health crises that we face.” In a mission to address this, he is focused on a campaign to get seven governors to sign on to a petition to the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), to get microplastics included in the Sixth Unregulated Contaminant Monitoring Rule (used by the EPA to collect data for contaminants that are suspected to be present in drinking water and that do not have health-based standards set under the Safe Drinking Water Act).

“Every governor in this country should want to know how much plastic is in their water,” Guillory says. Plus, he points out that polls do indicate that much of the public are concerned by this issue, citing a recent study that found that 79 percent of Americans surveyed agree that microplastics present a human health crisis. “I don’t know that there [are] any issues in American politics — certainly not in environmental politics — where you see that amount of agreement,” he says.

Monitoring microplastics in tap water is just one piece of a solution to a systemic issue. According to the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development, global plastics waste is set to nearly triple by 2060. And given current low recycling rates, Frankie Orona, executive director at the Society of Native Nations, who was present at INC-5.2, is adamant that the proposals of the nations favoring a recycling approach won’t work. Recycling will not address the microplastics in our environment and bodies. “We cannot recycle our way out of this,” he says. “If we could, we wouldn’t be in the situation that we’re in now.”

Orona echoes Guillory’s concerns about human health factors and wants to help raise awareness among the public. “The negative health impacts, the environmental impacts that it has in our communities, those that have been deemed sacrificed by government and by industry, it is a human rights crisis,” he says. He describes the back and forth that ensued at INC-5.2 as “a geopolitical battleground.” Despite the huge challenges, he feels that pushing on to continue the negotiations is a better outcome than settling for a weaker treaty with no teeth. As things stand, each nation must agree on proposals. “We know that consensus, at this point, isn’t working,” he says. “There needs to be some type of voting.” But it’s not clear if this process shift is imminent or if it is even on the table. Some other possible ways to break the deadlock might include a breakaway treaty between a group of nations — one negotiated and ratified outside of the U.N. — creating an incentive for producer states to adopt their rules.

No date has yet been set for the next round of INC negotiations. Guillory insists that there is no time to waste, and claims that the lobbyists derailing a meaningful treaty are “obstructing human health on a global level.” He points to the numerous studies that have been released in recent years detailing the increasing levels of microplastic present in our bodies. Notably, researchers at the University of New Mexico found that the accumulation of plastics in the brain has increased by 50 percent in the past eight years. And research published in 2020 links proximity to petrochemical facilities with a higher risk of leukemia: Residents living less than 5 kilometers (about 3 miles) from such a facility had a 30 percent higher risk of developing the disease than did residents from communities with no petrochemical activity.

The delays to a treaty are felt especially acutely in highly exposed communities, often low-income communities of color. Guillory notes that in some areas, residents have found tiny shards of plastic coating their front yards like snow. “That’s on the frontlines, but really the entire world is becoming the frontlines to this microplastics problem,” he says.