Support for a high-ambition plastics treaty is gaining strength, particularly within global civil society and among lower-income developing countries. Still, opposition to binding measures – such as obligations to regulate petrochemicals or reduce global plastics production – remains intense and widespread. We propose the concept of a “petrochemical historical bloc” to help reveal the depth and extent of the forces opposing strong global governance of plastics. At the bloc’s core are petrostates and industry, especially producers of oil and gas feedstock, petrochemicals and plastics. Extending its influence are broader social forces – including certain political and economic institutions, consultancy firms and nongovernmental organizations – that reinforce and legitimize the discourses and tactics thwarting a high-ambition treaty. This bloc is driving up plastics production, externalizing the costs of pollution, distorting scientific knowledge and lobbying to derail negotiations. Yet the petrochemical historical bloc is neither monolithic nor all-powerful. Investigating differing interests and evolving politics within this bloc, we contend, can expose disingenuous rhetoric, weaken low-ambition alliances and reveal opportunities to overcome resistance to ambitious governance. In light of this, and toward highlighting fractures and potential counter-alliances and strategies, we call for a global research inquiry to map the full scope and nature of the petrochemical historical bloc.

After the second Intergovernmental Negotiating Committee (INC) for the Plastics Treaty meeting in Paris in June 2023, a Zero Draft of the Treaty was released for comment. Member states involved in the treaty negotiations were to respond to the Zero Draft before the third INC meeting in November 2023 in Nairobi. In this paper, we analyse the content and structure of the Zero Draft. We identify parts of the Zero Draft that work and others that will need further attention. These include applicability to different regions; atmospheric input; recycling and waste management; labelling and standards; harmful chemicals; scientific backing; the circular economy; just transition and climate change. We argue that this draft was a useful starting point for further negotiations for member states and the Revised version of the Zero Draft has resolved some of its shortcomings but not all. These are likely to contribute to further debate during future INC negotiations. We conclude with an overview of INC-3 and INC-4 and how the Zero Draft and Revised Zero Draft were received.

Waste pickers are recognised as a key stakeholder in the ongoing negotiations towards an international legally binding instrument to end plastic pollution. Up to 34 million waste pickers contribute to recovering close to 60% of recycled post-consumer plastic waste globally. The International Alliance of Waste Pickers (IAWP) has actively engaged in the negotiations to safeguard a just transition for these important but vulnerable and frequently overlooked workers. This article explores how the IAWP has gained prominence in the plastics treaty negotiations through three iterative processes. First, the reiterative naming of “waste pickers” has constituted a symbolic practice and discursive influence that heightened recognition of waste pickers’ role as knowledge and rights holders in a just transition to end plastic pollution. Second, the performative dimension of waste picker advocacy has influenced official and informal events. Third, by engaging in “scale work”, waste pickers have influenced and leveraged their alliances to work towards a just transition across national, regional and international levels. By examining the role and influence of waste pickers in the plastics treaty through the frames of naming, performance and scale, the article contributes to advance the scholarly literature on just transition and grassroots movements in global environmental governance (GEG).