Plastic pollution is an emerging threat to our marine and terrestrial environments. International policy development to mitigate this pollution is currently underway; however, the process is complex. In parallel, local, national and regional initiatives are being developed. The research community is advocating for strong regulations based on robust evidence of the harm and severity of plastic pollution on oceans, land and for humans. However, the research community comprises different disciplines, research traditions and methodological approaches. This heterogeneity is in its core a great advantage, but only when we manage to build on each other where “synthesis” occurs. Currently, there remains a divide between the physical and social sciences, with research predominantly skewed toward the physical sciences, focusing on concentrations, fate and impact of plastic pollution.

In this article, I question the lack of philosophical discussions about the foundation of our research on plastic pollution, our knowledge claims, our views of “clean,” “pristine” and nature itself, as well as of the need for such discussions. I also propose a possible way forward to bridge the gap between disciplines and research traditions, fostering real interdisciplinarity.

This perspective article invites readers to (re)imagine research as a means of practicing right relations with the places we inhabit and descend from. We anchor our work in a Kanaka Hawaiʻi, a Native Hawaiian cosmogeny and epistemology, one that recognizes all life as kin. We begin with the central question, “Where have the sand turtles gone?” to explore how a Kanaka Hawaiʻi-informed perspective, grounded in the genealogical creation chant, ke Kumulipo, can guide plastics research in Hawaiʻi. We elaborate this perspective through a moʻolelo, a story of a collaboration between a Kanaka Hawaiʻi cultural practitioner and a French and Swedish plastics researcher along the shores of Kapua, Waimānalo. By tracing the transformation of a conventional scientific study, we aim to grow entry points for research that is accountable to the place and the genealogical descendants of those specific lands, who have inherited the privilege and responsibility to steward them. We conclude by discussing how this perspective might offer critical insights for global environmental policy, such as the UN Plastic Treaty, urging a shift from treating Indigenous Peoples as stakeholders to honoring them as rights-holders. Ultimately, this work is a call to research in ways that honor the original peoples of the places where we are blessed to live, work, and research, particularly in ways that amplify the knowledge traditions and lifeways birthed from those specific lands. We write this piece for and with Waimānalo as a living, reciprocal co-author. We hope the experiences shared here return to and strengthen those places and people.

Negotiations by more than 180 States during the Intergovernmental Negotiating Committee (INC) session 5.2 to develop a legally binding instrument with the purpose to end plastic pollution have, once again, concluded without a treaty. This is especially disastrous for developing States and marginalized peoples (such as indigenous communities and waste pickers), who are disproportionately suffering from plastic pollution. In this article, we show that developing States were underrepresented at the INC-5.2 negotiations in Geneva: Their delegations were on average only half as large (~5 delegates) when compared to delegations from Western European States (~13 delegates) and those from States with a high and very high Human Development Index (~10 delegates). In addition, more than 230 industry representatives participated in INC-5.2, exerting influence in diverse ways, both during official negotiations and through side events, organized by lobbying organizations. Finally, we discuss the importance of how treaty negotiations were organized: Simultaneously occurring negotiation formats (such as contact groups and informal meetings) put smaller delegations at a disadvantage, causing procedural injustice, which falls under the responsibility of the INC Secretariat.

In areas where waste management is inadequate, the welfare of free-roaming animals can be significantly affected by the ingestion of plastic waste, potentially impacting human livelihoods and health. However, the effect of plastic pollution on terrestrial animals is poorly understood. Using a combination of methodologies from animal behaviour, environmental and social sciences, this study assesses the effects of plastic pollution on donkeys, cattle and their owners in Kenya. Behavioural observations suggested that donkeys and cattle preferentially fed at waste sites, where 1 in every 10–20 items ingested were plastic. Faecal sampling also showed much higher concentrations of microplastics than those reported in previous studies of farmed cattle and significantly higher concentrations in the faeces of donkeys and cattle grazing at waste sites compared to rural areas. Survey data showed that the majority of livestock owners believed that plastic pollution was a problem, and nearly a third of local residents had witnessed an animal becoming ill following plastic ingestion, reporting mortality rates of 78%. Triangulating data from multiple methods highlights the risks terrestrial plastic pollution poses to domestic animals, demonstrating the need for interdisciplinary projects that tackle this important issue by addressing the interconnectedness of human behaviour, animal welfare and environmental health.

States were again unable to reach consensus on the text of a plastics treaty during negotiations in Geneva in 2025. The majority of states stood firm against petrochemical interests and demanded a “high-ambition” treaty with binding global obligations across the full life cycle of plastics. What these states specifically support, however, varies considerably, as does the strength of their commitment. The case of South Korea offers insights into how changes in political leadership, industry lobbying, shifting narratives and competing foreign policy goals can shape the nature of ambition. Early in the negotiations, South Korea called for ambitious measures and was chosen to host the final round of talks set for late 2024. Yet, this did not translate into meaningful action or strong advocacy in later stages. Some South Korean policymakers may have been sincerely committed to global controls. South Korea’s early signaling of high ambition, however, was primarily motivated by strategic calculations to influence the treaty and become a “global pivotal state.” Its support for ambition, moreover, grew increasingly ambiguous as leadership changed and as states describing themselves as “ambitious” pushed for binding controls on plastics production and supply. South Korea’s foreign policy strategy, we further argue, failed to enhance the country’s diplomatic standing, as its ambiguous ambition came to light, and as industry recalcitrance, bureaucratic infighting and political turmoil undermined its capacity for effective leadership.

Rivers act as long-term plastic storage and a pathway for land-based plastic pollution into the ocean. Monitoring river plastic at a global scale remains challenging, with only limited large-scale and long-term monitoring efforts to date. Citizen science approaches may ensure a more continuous basic knowledge of plastic pollution in rivers, which can be used to assess the efficacy of reduction measures. We evaluated the suitability of several river plastic monitoring methods for citizen science, through field monitoring and a subsequent survey with citizen scientists in Accra, Ghana. Four measurement techniques (visual counting, macroplastic net sampling, microplastic net sampling and hydrometric measurements) were tested in the field and evaluated by citizen scientists. The visual counting method, used to estimate floating macroplastic transport, emerged as the most promising method for citizen science–based river plastic monitoring. Using the data collected by citizens, we quantify the variability in transport and concentration of both macroplastic and microplastic.

This article challenges the OECD’s dominant downstream-centric framework on plastic pollution by drawing on long-term ethnographic fieldwork in India, Indonesia and the Philippines. While OECD policies emphasize mismanaged waste and littering in low- and middle-income countries as primary causes of plastic leakage, the authors argue this perspective obscures the structural role of upstream plastic production, driven largely by petrochemical interests in the Global North. Through field data, the article reveals how “leaky” infrastructures – such as incineration plants in India, public–private waste partnerships in Indonesia and grassroots upcycling in the Philippines – fail to contain plastic waste, often exacerbating pollution and exposing communities to toxic emissions and microplastics. The study introduces a conceptual framework of “material and structural leakiness,” emphasizing how plastics and the infrastructures designed to manage them are inherently porous. It critiques the notion of shared responsibility, highlighting how it disproportionately burdens marginalized communities. The authors call for a paradigm shift away from recycling and clean-up as core solutions, advocating instead for upstream interventions like production caps and chemical regulation. The article underscores that without legally binding global commitments to reduce virgin plastic production, the toxic burden of plastic pollution will continue to fall on the most vulnerable populations.

Plastics have come to symbolize the lifestyle and technological advancements of the 20th century, representing modern convenience and progress. In recent years, global plastic production surpassed 360 million tons in 2018 and is projected to reach between 500 and 600 million metric tons by 2025. This plastic accumulates as waste in freshwater, marine and land environments, leading to habitat disruption, alterations in nutrient cycles and harm to wildlife through exposure to toxic substances, entanglement and ingestion which pose significant ecological and health risks. The long-term ecological changes resulting from this pollution are likely irreversible. Developing countries in the Global South, including Bangladesh, are particularly vulnerable to the challenges of poorly managed plastic waste due to a lack of institutional, financial and technical resources to combat plastic pollution. The Aquatic Zoology Research Group has focused on addressing plastic pollution in Bangladesh and adopted a comprehensive strategy to tackle plastic pollution, starting with identifying the issue through various methods, followed by a thorough assessment of the plastic pollution situation and finally proposing solutions for mitigation. Our review of the current state of plastic pollution in Bangladesh’s aquatic systems highlighted significant research gaps, despite the country’s early ban on plastic bags. As a conservation research team from a developing nation facing the severe impacts of plastic pollution, we studied and listed specific expectations for the upcoming INC 5.2 meeting, highlighting challenges faced by many similar countries. We hope that INC 5.2 will move beyond mere statements to implement concrete and equitable actions.

An effective and just Financial Mechanism will be crucial to the success of the Global Plastic Treaty. The content in the latest Chair’s Text from INC-5.1 on finance (primarily in Article 11) could be strengthened to avoid replicating shortcomings in existing financing models, which have often been insufficient and have not always provided the necessary resources for global sustainable development. Experiences with climate finance mechanisms reveal a pattern of misdesign that needs to be addressed. The current Article 11 reflects the deep divisions evident in the two main proposals tabled at INC-5.1 in November 2024. In the light of past precedents and tensions, we argue that several core design principles related to scope, scale and social and health considerations could ensure that the Global Plastics Treaty’s Financial Mechanism supports just, ambitious and transformative global action on plastic pollution. Furthermore, we argue that several elements in the current treaty text may undermine the design and implementation of an effective and just Financial Mechanism for the future Global Plastics Treaty. These risks include overemphasizing waste management; missing connections between finance and other measures in the treaty; risks of not addressing the most effective responses; not adequately addressing plastic leakage, releases and emissions; sustaining financial investments in techno-economic lock-ins lacking sufficient safety and sustainability criteria, standards and monitoring requirements and the prospect of plastic credits, which risks repeating past false solutions. There is an opportunity for the treaty to overcome these challenges with a financial mechanism that addresses overproduction and incentivizes safer, more sustainable, accessible and cost-effective upstream solutions.

As governments prepare for the resumed session of the Intergovernmental Negotiating Committee on Plastic Pollution (INC-5.2), the urgency of agreeing on a legally binding global plastics treaty is more pressing than ever. This editorial introduces a collection of letters calling for systemic, science-based, and justice-oriented approaches to plastic governance delivered through an ambitious and effective global plastics treaty. The letters span environmental, health, and social disciplines, and highlight the shortcomings of fragmented policy and assert the need for coordinated and binding action. The letters advocate for reducing plastic production, implementing restrictions on toxic chemicals, incorporating the structural inclusion of affected communities, and ensuring robust scientific oversight. Taken together, the collection of letters reflects the scientific and ethical imperatives to act decisively in shaping a transformative and enforceable plastics treaty.

This letter discusses the complex nature of plastics, why regulating plastics is a ‘wicked problem’, and the implications of a life cycle approach. The draft Global Plastics Treaty attempts to address two key problems: the cap on production and the problem of chemical additives in plastics. As a ‘wicked’ problem with many conflicting interests, dealing with plastics requires a holistic life cycle approach completely different from the Montreal Protocol. Strict and enforced limits on polymer production would reduce plastics pollution and also encourage a reduction in the range of additives, as limiting production would make mechanical or chemical recycling more viable. Used plastics need to be turned into a commodity rather than a waste, and reducing and standardising the number of different chemical formulations would help by reducing the number of chemicals to be regulated. To achieve these objectives, this letter argues for a regulatory approach based on a forensic analysis that applies extended environmental systems analysis to all the life cycle stages of the plastics value chain.

Plastic chemicals are numerous and ubiquitous in modern life and pose significant risks to human health. Observational epidemiological studies have been instrumental in identifying consistent and statistically significant associations between exposure to certain chemicals and adverse health outcomes. However, these studies often fail to establish causality due to the complexity of real-world chemical mixtures, confounding factors, reverse causation, and study designs that lack measures reflecting underlying genetic and cellular mechanisms indicating causal pathways to harm. Addressing these limitations requires moving beyond traditional ‘black-box’ epidemiology, which mainly focuses on the strength of associations. We propose adopting hybrid epidemiological methodologies that incorporate genetic susceptibility and molecular mechanisms to uncover biological pathways, combined with machine learning and statistical analysis of chemical mixtures, to strengthen the causal evidence linking exposure to harm. By integrating observational multi-omics data with experimental and mechanistic models, hybrid epidemiology offers a transformative path to improve causal evidence and public health interventions. In addition, machine learning and statistical methods provide a more nuanced understanding of the health effects of exposures to plastic chemical mixtures, facilitating the identification of interactions within chemical mixtures and the influence of biological pathways. This paradigm shift is critical addressing the complex challenges of plastic exposure and protecting human health.

This letter to the editor explores the importance of a just transition for waste pickers in the context of the global plastics treaty. It sets out ideas for just transition at the level of production reduction, replacements and substitutes, systems change and waste management.

While it is vital to agree to a set of global objectives and targets to reduce plastic pollution as part of the Global Plastic Treaty, past negotiations have been troubled by differences in regional and national priorities and needs. To take these different priorities and needs into account, this letter proposes the adoption of an interdisciplinary source-to-sea approach. A source-to-sea approach emphasizes the connected nature between land-based sources of marine plastic pollution along the life cycle of plastic products on the one hand, and air, soil, and water cycles that determine marine plastic flows and associated sustainability risks on the other hand. It takes into account how we know more about the way in which production, use and plastic waste contribute to the pollution of rivers and seas in one location (e.g. in Europe), than we do for rivers and seas in other places (e.g. Africa). There are also regional and national differences in how much awareness exist about plastic pollution and how it is governed and regulated. These differences translate in different priorities and needs in terms of how to most efficiently and effectively reduce plastic pollution. The letter argues that these differences should be embraced and that an interdisciplinary source-to-sea approach can help to develop tailor-made regional and national targets and measures that in turn contribute to achieving the global ambitions of the Global Plastic Treaty. A key role is foreseen for existing governance institutions, such as river basin commissions and regional seas conventions (coordinated by UNEP Regional seas Programme), while the Global Plastic Treaty can become a platform for sharing of approaches, lessons and strategies between regions and countries so that over time, plastic pollution will be reduced worldwide.