April 24 — During the fourth session of the Intergovernmental Negotiating Committee (INC-4), Contact Groups 1 and 2 continued intensive technical discussions aimed at advancing the review of the Revised Draft Text of the international treaty to end plastic pollution.
Deliberations focused on streamlining, consolidating, and clarifying textual options, enabling delegates to identify areas of convergence while acknowledging issues requiring further negotiation.
Contact Group 1
Contact Group 1, co-chaired by Gwendalyn Kingtaro Sisior and Axel Borchmann, held discussions on the technical and substantive streamlining of Parts I and II of the Revised Draft Text.
Key highlights included:
- Text streamlining on scope, with broad support for proposals to consolidate references to fishing gear under waste management or emissions and releases provisions.
- Stand-alone articles on principles, objectives, and scope, where some delegations expressed concern due to limited convergence, while others supported their retention as guidance for implementation.
- Scope definition, with differing views between delegations referencing UNEA Resolution 5/14 and those supporting merged textual options.
- Inclusion of principles, with diverging views on extended producer responsibility (EPR) and common but differentiated responsibilities (CBDR) as core principles.
- Areas of convergence, particularly on problematic plastic products, product design, and existing pollution.
- Areas of disagreement, including primary plastic polymers, chemicals of concern, and trade-related elements. Some delegates noted that chemical-related issues are already addressed under the Basel, Rotterdam, and Stockholm Conventions.
- Cross-cutting issues, such as whether financial resources and technical assistance should be addressed within technical provisions or under the means of implementation.
Within Subgroup 1.1, co-facilitated by Sara Elkhouly and Julius Piercy, discussions focused on streamlined text addressing objectives, scope, and just transition, assessing its suitability as a basis for a first reading of Part I.
Preamble discussions included calls from some States for the inclusion of human rights language, alongside proposals to reference the Rio Principles, just transition, and potential unintended consequences of shifting away from plastics.
Contact Group 2
Contact Group 2 advanced discussions through its two subgroups.
Subgroup 2.1
Co-facilitated by Naomi Namara Karekaho and Antonio Miguel Luís, delegates discussed streamlining provisions related to the financial mechanism, including financing, capacity building, technical assistance, and technology transfer.
Discussions addressed:
- Clarifying the scope, objectives, and funding sources of the financial mechanism.
- Proposals for hybrid financing approaches and the need for adequate and predictable funding.
- Recognition of private sector challenges in accessing financial resources.
- Broad support for identifying developing countries as primary recipients, with discussions on eligibility criteria for SIDS, LDCs, and other vulnerable countries.
- Proposals for a dedicated financial mechanism for vulnerable countries and refinement of related textual references.
Subgroup 2.2
Subgroup 2.2 initiated streamlining discussions on:
- National action or implementation plans, with differing views on terminology, flexibility, and whether to establish standardized content for monitoring progress.
- Implementation and compliance, where delegates agreed to narrow options toward a compliance mechanism operating as a subsidiary body of the governing body.
Delegations emphasized a facilitative, non-adversarial approach, respecting national sovereignty and capacities. Proposals included naming the body the “Implementation and Cooperation Committee”, granting it authority to adopt its own rules of procedure.
Voting rules within the committee were also discussed, including proposals for majority voting where consensus efforts fail. Further discussions are scheduled later in the week.
The discussions held across both Contact Groups demonstrated meaningful technical progress and a shared commitment to refining the treaty text, laying the groundwork for a clearer, more coherent, and effective international agreement to end plastic pollution.