US Changes Position on UN Plastics Agreement

The US, one of the world's largest plastic makers, will now support a global treaty calling for a reduction in how much new plastic is produced each year in a major policy shift, changing its position.

The 180-degree turn from its earlier view to leave such decisions up to each country puts the US in direct opposition to countries like Saudi Arabia and China.

Those countries have argued that the hoped-for United Nations treaty, which negotiators are scheduled to conclude at a November summit in Busan, South Korea, should ignore questions of production and focus on downstream measures, such as encouraging recycling and changing packaging design. The Busan talks will take place after the US presidential election on Nov. 5.

The policy shift on the UN plastics treaty also puts the US in closer alignment with a group of so-called high ambition countries that includes EU member states, South Korea, Canada, Rwanda, and Peru, and has called for a global plastics treaty to cap and phase down the production of plastic. The group also has targeted a list of chemicals of environmental concern used in plastic production that should be eliminated.

American Chemistry Council's Take

The ACC doesn't agree with the US changing positions. The Council said the shift signals that the Biden administration "caved" to the wishes of environmental groups. The ACC backs a global treaty but does not support caps or lists of chemicals to control.

"With today’s shift in position to support plastic production caps and regulate chemicals via the UN Plastics Agreement, the White House has signaled it is willing to betray US manufacturing and the hundreds of thousands of jobs it supports," said ACC president and CEO Chris Jahn.

He believes this decision is a lose-lose situation in that American jobs will be at risk of being outsourced, the cost of goods likely to rise globally, and the US negotiators’ influence at the next round of negotiations will be significantly diminished since other countries know such drastic positions are unlikely to secure the 67 votes needed in the Senate to join the agreement.

ACC still believes in the need for a strong global agreement to address plastic pollution, Jahn added. "We can create a future where we retain the massive societal benefits plastics provide while also preventing used plastics from becoming pollution. Unfortunately, this change in position will hinder both objectives."