Plastics Industry Challenges: Reality Behind the Treaty
After three years of global negotiation, the latest plastics treaty discussions in Geneva ended the same way they began—with no binding agreement and very little progress. For those of us working in recycling and material recovery, that outcome is deeply frustrating.
I’ve spent much of my career focused on how we can close the loop, create real circularity, and make recycled materials a viable part of modern manufacturing. Yet what we’re seeing today is a global system that talks about change, but resists it at every turn.
The Global Plastics Treaty and Why It Matters
The global plastics treaty was supposed to be a turning point. After years of mounting concern about waste and overproduction, more than 100 countries came together to establish global limits on plastic production and address chemical safety and pollution. However, the talks broke down when several oil-producing nations, including the United States, opposed production caps.
From my perspective, that decision reverberates across the entire industry. Without limits on virgin resin production, there’s no economic incentive to prioritize recycled resin. When oversupply drives virgin resin prices down, recycled resin falls right along with it, leaving little room for recyclers to stay profitable or cover the real costs of processing. That’s why we’re seeing post-industrial recycling companies struggle or disappear altogether.
Price still outweighs environmental consciousness in most markets. Until policies level the playing field by capping virgin production or requiring the use of recycled content, economic reality will continue to undercut sustainability goals.
For oil-producing nations, plastic isn’t just a commodity, it’s a lifeline for continued fossil fuel demand. As long as that remains true, treaty progress will be slow. Yet even amid the frustration, the plastics treaty negotiations show that awareness is growing. The world recognizes the urgency of reform, even if it hasn’t yet agreed on how to make it happen.
Policy Inaction is the Enemy, Not Plastic
Over the past few months, I’ve read countless calls to “end the use of plastic.” I understand the emotion behind those arguments, but that’s not a realistic solution. Plastic is essential to modern life, from the medical field to food preservation, and from transportation to technology.
What we need isn’t an end to plastic. We need a smarter system for managing it. The problem isn’t the material itself. It’s the lack of infrastructure, accountability, and global coordination to recycle it effectively.
I often remind people that alternatives like glass and cotton come with their own environmental tradeoffs. Glass is heavier and more carbon intensive to produce and ship. Cotton consumes far more water and land than polyester. The real issue is not whether we use plastic, but how we handle it after it’s used.
We could prevent much of what’s described as plastic pollution if nations invested in better recycling systems and supported domestic recycling industries. Without that commitment, waste will continue to leak into landfills and oceans regardless of how much we “ban.”
The Real Barrier: Economics, Not Awareness
Most people understand the importance of recycling. The problem lies in the economics. Major brands have pledged to increase recycled content in their packaging, but those commitments are difficult to meet when virgin resin is so much cheaper. The imbalance discourages manufacturers from switching to recycled resin, no matter how strong their sustainability goals might be.
A global policy solution could help. If virgin resin were priced to reflect its environmental impact, or if production were limited, demand for recycled material would rise. This is the kind of market correction the plastics treaty could deliver if countries were willing to cooperate.
At Extera, we’ve experienced these pressures firsthand. Our recycling division has enormous potential, but we constantly face challenges outside our control. Despite that, we continue investing in circularity because we believe that progress at the local level can lead to broader change.
Where Progress Can Still Be Made
Even as treaty talks stall, the path forward doesn’t depend entirely on policy. It depends on industry action. Manufacturers, recyclers, and logistics providers have the power to work together to close the loop. That means designing for recyclability, committing to reused and recycled materials, and supporting partners who are doing the hard work of recovery and processing.
I want to see more collaboration between policymakers and producers: real conversations about economics, infrastructure, and responsibility. Until global regulations catch up, it’s up to those of us in the industry to model what’s possible.
At Extera, we’ll keep doing our part. We’ll continue to repair, recycle, and reuse containers to extend their lifecycle and keep plastics in circulation where they belong.
The ambition to solve the world’s plastic challenges is strong, but ambition alone won’t create change. Until policy aligns with industry reality, progress will depend on leadership from companies willing to act now.
That’s what drives me and our team every day. We’re not waiting for permission to build a better system. We’re proving that circularity works when people commit to it.
