With global plastic waste projected to reach 1.7 billion metric tons by 2060, the world turns to Geneva’s INC-5.2 treaty negotiations in search of a solution. From seaweed packaging to circular systems, a post-plastic era is already taking shape.
Can we really live without plastic? And, critically, what will replace it? That’s on the minds of experts meeting in Geneva this month as a final round of global negotiations could define the timeline to phase out plastic. The United Nations Environment Programme’s INC-5.2 meeting is set to determine the language of a treaty that, if passed, would become the first legally binding international agreement to address plastic pollution across its full lifecycle — from material design to disposal.
This is not a discussion confined to waste management. The scope of the treaty includes everything from primary polymer production and toxic chemical additives to circular economy strategies and financial systems that can support low-income countries in transition.
The stakes are high. Global plastic production has reached more than 460 million metric tons annually, with at least 20 million of that ending up as pollution in oceans, freshwater systems, and land. The Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD) estimates this number will grow to 1.7 billion metric tons by 2060 if no meaningful action is taken.
With the cumulative economic damage of plastic pollution projected to cost up to $281 trillion between 2016 and 2040, according to the World Economic Forum, the urgency for a paradigm shift is mounting.
From plastic’s peak to policy deadlock
The United Nations Environment Assembly first passed a resolution to create this treaty in 2022, kicking off a five-session negotiation series known as the International Negotiating Committee (INC). The most recent meeting in Busan, South Korea, fell short of an agreement, with core issues left unresolved: Should the treaty prioritize waste reduction or target upstream levers like virgin plastic production and chemical additives? Should the rules be legally binding or voluntary? How will it be financed, and by whom?
The current draft — referred to as the “Chair’s Text” — reflects a balancing act between ambition and feasibility. At INC-5.2, negotiators will attempt to finalize this language. If successful, it could usher in a new era of global alignment on plastic policy — something no single country or continent has yet achieved.
“Plastic pollution is one of the greatest environmental challenges of our time,” says the World Economic Forum’s Global Risks Report 2025, which ranks pollution among the ten most severe risks expected to impact the planet over the next decade. What the treaty may ultimately enable is not just the management of an entrenched environmental threat but the acceleration of an entirely new material economy — one that rethinks the role of plastic in modern life and dares to build without it.
The cost of convenience
Plastics were once hailed as the materials of modernity: light, durable, and endlessly moldable. But their omnipresence now serves as a case study in externalized costs. Only nine percent of all plastic ever made has been recycled, while over 90 percent of plastic pollution in oceans is made up of microplastics — fragments that result from both the intentional design of small particles (like those in personal care products) and the disintegration of larger plastic items such as bottles, textiles, and packaging.
The International Union for Conservation of Nature (IUCN) notes that single-use items like bottles, caps, straws, cups, and bags remain among the top contributors to global waste. The pollution is especially acute in regions without the infrastructure to process discarded plastics, where products manufactured or consumed elsewhere ultimately accumulate.
Plastic’s impacts extend beyond ecosystems. Its lifecycle — production, consumption, and disposal — accounts for approximately four percent of all global greenhouse gas emissions. That figure could nearly double by 2050 if current trends continue, according to a 2023 report from the Minderoo Foundation. Additionally, the accumulation of microplastics in food and drinking water presents growing concerns for human health, with emerging research linking exposure to immune disruption, endocrine interference, and even increased risk of cardiovascular disease.
The search for substitutes
If plastic is no longer a viable foundation for the future, what materials are ready to take its place?
The answer may lie in both cutting-edge biotechnology and ancient agricultural wisdom. From seaweed polymers to mushrooms’ root structure, mycelium, startups and research institutes around the world are racing to commercialize alternatives that match plastic’s convenience without the legacy of waste.
Notpla, a U.K.-based company, has developed seaweed-based packaging that biodegrades in weeks and won the prestigious Earthshot Prize in 2022. Its product line includes everything from edible sauce sachets to coated cardboard containers that require no recycling, because they disappear naturally.
Meanwhile, companies like Ecovative are growing mycelium-based packaging materials that replace Styrofoam. These are engineered by feeding agricultural waste to fungal networks that form custom-shaped, fully compostable packaging in just a few days. Fashion brands including Stella McCartney and Hermès have also experimented with mycelium leather alternatives, signaling crossover potential into luxury sectors.
In the foodware space, Finnish company Sulapac has created a line of biodegradable straws and containers made from wood chips and natural binders. Its materials are designed to biodegrade without leaving microplastics behind — a problem with many so-called “bioplastics,” which may break down into smaller plastic particles rather than natural elements.
Yet scalability remains a barrier. Most biomaterials today cost more to produce than conventional plastics, and large-scale manufacturing infrastructure is limited. The challenge is not just inventing alternatives but it’s reinventing the supply chain to support them.
Reuse as revolution
While material innovation is part of the post-plastic playbook, the real disruption may lie in reuse. If the 20th century was about disposability, the 21st could be about loops.
Loop, a platform by TerraCycle, partners with major brands to provide reusable packaging for everyday items like ice cream, shampoo, and toothpaste. Customers return the containers after use, and they’re cleaned and refilled — cutting both plastic waste and raw material demand. Retailers like Carrefour in France and Kroger in the U.S. have piloted the model.
Supermarkets and delivery apps are also experimenting with closed-loop containers, while local governments across Europe have passed reuse quotas requiring retailers to offer refillable options by law.
The World Economic Forum says reusable packaging models can provide a more than 20 percent reduction in total annual plastic leakage into the environment by 2040. Moreover, it says the conversion of 20 percent of single-use packaging to reuse models is a “$10 billion economic opportunity.”
Still, success hinges on convenience and consumer behavior — two factors not easily redesigned. Consumers increasingly say they care about eco-friendly packaging, but only a fraction adjust purchasing habits when convenience is impacted.
Fashion’s plastic reckoning
Fashion, too, is being forced to rethink its plastic problem — often hidden in plain sight. Synthetic textiles like polyester, nylon, and acrylic are plastic by another name and make up over 60 percent of global fiber production. Each laundry cycle sheds thousands of microplastic fibers into waterways, contributing to the growing contamination crisis.
Brands are beginning to respond. Patagonia, Stella McCartney, and Ganni are all investing in next-gen fibers or closed-loop systems. Patagonia, in particular, has joined the Pack4Good initiative led by Canopy, committing to shift away from virgin forest fiber and fossil fuel-derived plastic in its packaging. It’s part of a broader shift toward packaging that is paper-based, reusable, or fully compostable. But critics argue that material swaps are not enough without tackling overproduction.
A treaty for transformation
The global plastics treaty could be the linchpin for meaningful change — if negotiations are successful. But experts warn that even a signed treaty may fall short without strong financing frameworks to support infrastructure in low- and middle-income countries.
Many developing nations struggle with basic waste management, let alone the sophisticated logistics required for reuse or bio-based alternatives. A just transition must include technology transfer, financial assistance, and inclusive policy design — otherwise, the treaty risks reinforcing global inequities.
The Global Plastic Action Partnership, an initiative of the World Economic Forum, is attempting to bridge that gap. Working with national governments and local stakeholders, it supports countries in building customized action plans to meet global goals. It also acts as a conduit between negotiators and the realities on the ground.
As the world watches Geneva, industries, activists, and innovators alike are recalibrating. Whether through better design, smarter systems, or radical restraint, the post-plastic world is no longer theoretical. It’s a matter of political will, economic alignment, and cultural shift.
What comes after plastic is not just another material — it’s an entirely new logic.
Related on Ethos:
