Towards a Global Treaty against Plastic: Pollution under the microscope

An urgent call: the plastic pollution crisis

These days, delegates from 184 countries are meeting in Geneva to advance a UN-led Global Plastics Treaty . The central objective of this binding agreement is to curb the overaccumulation of plastic on the planet, already considered one of the three major global environmental crises. Urgent measures are needed to reduce the amount of plastic waste , given the magnitude of the impact not only on ecosystems but also on human health. In fact, the draft treaty proposes addressing plastic throughout its entire life cycle: regulating the production, distribution, and final disposal of plastic waste, improving product design for a circular economy, and minimizing the release of microplastics. It also proposes banning open dumping and burning waste , cleaning up existing pollution, enforcing extended producer responsibility , and ensuring a just transition for industry workers. There is broad scientific, political, and social consensus on the need for this treaty; however, negotiations face tensions over key points such as limiting the production of virgin plastic and banning certain toxic chemicals used in plastics.

Some hard numbers on plastic:

• 460 million tons of plastic produced each year worldwide (an estimated 81% of plastic products become waste in less than 12 months, and only 9% is recycled) .

• 150 kg per person per year: average plastic consumption in Western Europe, more than double the world average (about 60 kg per inhabitant) .

• 13.4 million tonnes of CO₂: annual emissions attributable to plastic production in the European Union.

• 85% of marine litter originates on land: the proportion of waste in the ocean that is plastic (ending up in the sea via rivers, sewage, and poor waste management).

• 1000+ rivers : According to a study by Science , just over a thousand rivers are responsible for transporting nearly 80% of the plastics that reach the ocean.

Negotiations in Geneva: production vs. recycling

Negotiations for the treaty, which conclude on August 14 in Geneva, have revealed a struggle among countries over how to tackle plastic pollution. Ambitious proposals were put forward: reducing the production of single-use plastics , banning hazardous chemical additives, establishing eco-design guidelines, and coordinating international financing for the transition to more sustainable alternatives. However, a group of oil-producing countries—led by Russia and Saudi Arabia—has attempted to shift the debate toward waste management and recycling, evading commitments to cut virgin plastic production.

The confrontation became evident when the chair of the negotiations, Ecuadorian ambassador Luis Vayas, presented a new draft treaty that eliminated or softened points that bothered these petrochemical-producing countries. The text was met with massive rejection by an overwhelming majority of delegations from all regions (Latin America, Asia, Africa, the European Union, and even small island states). Criticism of the draft focused on its "lack of ambition" and "weakness" : it lacked firm measures to control plastic production , references to the impact on human health, and proposals to restrict the use of toxic chemical additives were missing. In other words, the document watered down the toughest commitments, presumably to appease certain industrial interests, which generated disappointment both in civil society and in the majority of countries committed to stemming this crisis.

On the one hand, more than 100 countries (including the European Union, numerous nations in Africa, Asia, Latin America, and small island states) are pushing for strict limits on the production of new plastics and global measures for responsible management. On the other hand, powers with large petrochemical industries are resisting any binding caps : the United States, for example, despite having initially supported an ambitious plan under the Biden administration, is now “pushing to avoid limiting plastic production” in these negotiations. Indeed, countries such as Argentina have kept a low profile and aligned themselves with the US position: its delegation confirmed its intention to sign a global agreement, but opposed setting limits on plastic production or on certain chemicals of health concern. This more flexible stance contrasts with that of Latin American neighbors such as Colombia and Costa Rica, which advocate for greater regulation.

From the other end of the spectrum, environmental organizations and scientists warn that a weak treaty would be a missed opportunity . “If there's going to be a treaty, we want it to be a good and ambitious one. If it's going to be a document just for compliance, it's better not to have one. We don't want this to be a Paris Agreement” (that is, just symbolic, powerless declarations), noted María Esther Briz, of the GAIA alliance for Latin America. Her message reflects the concerns of civil society: a global pact against plastic must attack the entire pollution chain , not just the end. Along the same lines, the OECD has warned that if the treaty focuses solely on improving waste management and does not address reducing production or demand , 13.5 million tons of plastic waste would continue to leak into the environment each year by 2040. In short, without curbing production at the source, the problem will continue to grow at an unsustainable rate.

Environmental impact: oceans and microplastics

The oceans have become the ultimate victims of plastic overflow. Globally, some 460 million tons of plastic are produced each year , and 81% of plastic products become waste in less than twelve months. Barely 9% of discarded plastic is recycled, while the rest ends up in landfills or dispersed in nature. As a result, around 85% of marine litter originating from land is plastic. This unstoppable flow of waste is forming veritable "islands" of garbage in the sea: it is estimated that there are five large patches of floating plastic in the planet's oceans. The largest, in the North Pacific , is approximately three times the size of France —an unimaginable surface covered in plastic debris accumulated by currents .

Marine plastic pollution doesn't just affect the aesthetics of beaches or wildlife; it also poses risks to us. In the European Union, for example, the unintentional release of microplastics (small particles released from larger plastics or industrial pellets) has recently increased by 9% , contaminating soils, rivers, and seas. These microplastics are ingested by aquatic fauna and eventually enter the human food chain . Studies have detected plastic microparticles in virtually every corner of the planet, including in Arctic ice and deep waters (remote places where humans never directly reach). A study published in Science (2021) concluded that more than 1,000 rivers —mainly in densely populated regions—carry around 80% of the plastics that flow into the ocean. which shows that poor waste management anywhere in the world can have a global impact.

A global health problem

The plastic crisis is no longer just an environmental issue, but also a health concern. Recent research reveals that we are unknowingly incorporating plastic into our own bodies. Microplastics have been found in the air we breathe, the water we drink, and even inside human organs . In fact, for the first time, scientists have found polymer particles in people's blood and breast milk . This means that, from the womb onward, human life is exposed to plastic pollution in ways we are only just beginning to understand.

Although the long-term effects are still being investigated, preliminary reports point to possible harm. What do these microparticles do to the body? Experts fear they could trigger diseases associated with the immune and cardiovascular systems, among others. Some particles are so tiny that they can cross cell membranes or accumulate in organs such as the liver, kidneys, and even the brain. While much remains to be discovered, the logic is troubling: since these are non-biodegradable foreign materials, the body could react with inflammation or other adverse responses. "We need to regulate them, have clear rules, and sufficient information to develop policies that keep us away from harmful damage," concluded Michelle Reyes, a physician and researcher on plastic pollution in the Philippines. Protecting the environment from plastic also means protecting our present and future health.

Excessive consumption: plastic in numbers

Plastic production and consumption have continued to grow in recent decades, driven primarily by throwaway lifestyles. In 1950 , barely 2 million tons were produced annually; by 1980 , it was already ~70 million, and in 2020 , it will exceed 460 million tons. If we don't act, the trend will continue exponentially: projections indicate that global plastic production could more than double by 2050. This boom is accompanied by enormous waste and pollution, because global recycling has lagged far behind (less than 10% of plastic is recycled effectively).

Per capita consumption figures highlight inequalities, but also the contribution of each region to the problem. In Western Europe , each inhabitant uses an average of 150 kg of plastic per year , more than double the global average (~60 kg). This highly plastic-dependent lifestyle means that Europe not only generates a lot of waste, but also emissions: plastic manufacturing in the EU generates 13.4 million tons of CO₂ each year, exacerbating the climate crisis. If Europe does not change course, its total plastic use could reach 101 million tons by 2040 , according to OECD estimates.

In contrast, developing countries like Argentina have lower but rising per capita consumption: the average Argentine consumes about 42.7 kg of plastic per year. Even with this more modest amount, Argentina ranks as the third-largest plastic producer in Latin America (behind Brazil and Mexico). Global industrial growth means that more and more regions are contributing to the demand for plastic, without local recycling systems being able to catch up. For example, the European plastics industry recognizes some progress, but post-consumer recycled plastics only represent 10.1% of production in Europe. In Argentina, single-use plastics (such as packaging) have an effective recycling rate of only 9.3%. This means that more than 90% of these materials end up as litter. And when waste management fails—a common situation in many countries—a significant portion of this improperly disposed plastic ends up in rivers, oceans, or natural environments. Environmental organizations point out that Argentina, for example, lacks a comprehensive Packaging Law and has a "huge debt" in plastics legislation , resulting in tons of plastic waste ending up scattered or in open-air dumps every year.

Solutions in sight: reduce, recycle, redesign

Given the scale of the challenge, what needs to change to make a difference? Experts agree that there is no silver bullet; a multi-pronged approach involving governments, industry, and consumers is required. First, there is an urgent need to reduce the production and consumption of virgin (first-use) plastics . This involves promoting reusable alternatives and return systems: for example, expanding deposit, return, and refund (DRD) schemes beyond beverage bottles to include containers of all types. It also means designing products with an ecological mindset : prioritizing durable, easily recyclable materials free of toxic chemicals. Improved product durability, repairability, and reusability (from packaging to consumer electronics) can make a significant difference in sectors that currently account for the majority of plastic, such as construction, furniture, textiles, and technology.

International negotiations in Geneva are considering precisely these measures. Discussions include phasing out non-essential single-use plastics , standardizing eco-design so that all new plastics are recyclable or reusable, and banning hazardous additives (such as certain plasticizers and PFAS) that hinder recycling and harm health. Along with this, efforts are underway to mobilize funding for developing countries to improve their waste management infrastructure—because it's pointless to reduce waste in one place if waste continues to end up in rivers and oceans elsewhere.

Recycling , of course, is part of the solution, but not a panacea. We must increase recycling rates with new technologies and incentives, but we must be aware that we will not be able to recycle 100% of the plastic consumed (and even less so if production continues to grow unabated). Even in an optimistic scenario with ambitious policies, the OECD estimates that poorly managed plastic waste could increase by 47% by 2040 if production is not substantially reduced. In other words, without production cuts, plastic pollution will continue to grow even if we improve recycling . Therefore, numerous NGOs and experts insist on decoupling economic growth from plastic consumption by promoting circular economies and innovative business models (e.g., long-life products, refill and bulk sales systems, compostable materials where feasible, etc.).

Ultimately, addressing this crisis requires political will and citizen participation. An ambitious global treaty would be a major step, establishing a common framework and binding targets for all countries. But while that agreement is finalized and enters into force, each of us—citizens, businesses, and local governments—can act now : reduce the use of single-use plastics in our daily lives, demand sustainable packaging, support companies that innovate with recycled or biodegradable materials, and pressure leaders to adopt stricter regulations. Plastic pollution is a problem created in the span of one generation, and with joint efforts, we could reverse the trend in the next.

The role of HUNE: technology with a conscience

At HUNE , we take this issue very seriously and are part of the solution from our own perspective: the technology industry. We are a sustainable technology company ( “technology with a conscience” is our motto) and we design eco-responsible electronics that harmonize with nature and the community. This means we apply many of the strategies mentioned above: we use materials with a lower environmental impact, we promote eco-design and modularity, and we prioritize the durability and repairability of our products to extend their lifespan and reduce waste. We know that the consumer electronics sector is one of the largest users of plastic, so improving the design and lifespan of gadgets can make a real difference in reducing waste. For example, our headphones and chargers are free of single-use plastics in their packaging, incorporate recycled components whenever possible, and are designed so that the user can continue using them for years without needing constant replacement.

As a climate-responsible brand (certified by independent initiatives), at HUNE we actively support global initiatives to curb pollution. We applaud the international effort toward a Global Plastics Treaty and speak out as corporate activists to ensure this agreement is ambitious and effective. We believe that innovation and the market can (and should) go hand in hand with sustainability: we demonstrate that it is feasible to create high-quality electronic devices while reducing their plastic and carbon footprints.

What can you do? We invite you to join the change: reduce your consumption of single-use plastics, recycle correctly, support environmentally friendly companies with your purchases, and stay informed. On our HUNE blog, we'll continue to cover the progress of this global plastics treaty and share tips for a more sustainable lifestyle. Together—consumers, businesses, and governments—we can drive a future where technology and nature coexist in balance, without plastic choking the planet. The green revolution is also technological, and it's underway! 🌱🤝

Sources: The Bulletin, La Vanguardia/EFE. La Nación, among others. (We have compiled data from news agencies and scientific reports to ensure the accuracy of the information presented.)