Limiting global plastic production may be difficult to achieve as countries disagree on the basic scope of a treaty.

Recently, the fifth meeting of the Intergovernmental Negotiating Committee on the Global Plastic Pollution Governance Process (INC-5) held a plenary meeting in Busan, South Korea, but failed to reach a final agreement on the international convention on plastic pollution because countries had different opinions on the basic scope of the treaty. Among them, a disagreement that is crucial to the chemical industry is whether plastic production should be restricted globally. The author believes that the production restriction proposal led by Panama is well-intentioned, but at the current stage, plastic production in many developing countries is not in excess, but still insufficient. This determines that production restrictions are extremely difficult to roll out globally at once. Global source restrictions on plastics are a general trend, but it may need to take the form of developed regions with relatively saturated markets first.

Previously, Panama submitted a production restriction proposal requiring signatories to clarify production reduction targets, establish a monitoring mechanism, and control plastic production from the source. This proposal has been supported by more than 100 countries. Countries and environmental organizations that support plastic restrictions believe that restricting plastic production is crucial to the success of the convention, especially in the context of a sharp increase in plastic production. Any treaty without production restrictions may not be able to effectively solve the problem of plastic pollution. The author believes that the idea of ​​this proposal is not wrong. Source control is an inevitable choice to deal with plastic pollution and is also a feasible choice at this stage. After all, it is easier to control plastic production enterprises than to establish effective recycling channels in every community.

However, this proposal ignores several realistic factors. For example, for areas where the plastic market is relatively saturated, it is relatively easy to restrict production and has less impact on society. But for developing countries where the demand for plastics is still soaring, how to set the production limit? If the regulations are too low, the plastic market in developing countries can easily get out of control. If the regulations are too high, developing countries can easily become plastic production centers, which is equivalent to developed countries moving the plastic industry chain to developing countries. In addition, the reason why oil-producing countries such as Saudi Arabia expressed opposition to the proposal is mainly economic. In the economic transformation, oil-producing countries use plastic production as an alternative to oil demand. At the same time, Saudi Arabia's target market is developing countries in Asia and Africa. Restricting developing countries will have an extremely adverse impact on Saudi Arabia's plastics and even petrochemical industries, and due to unclear indicators, this impact is difficult to predict and estimate. Therefore, the Saudi representative said: "Several clauses were inexplicably written into the document. They are not in the scope of negotiation at all."

The author sees the issue of plastic pollution as complicated and concerned with all aspects of production and life. It is necessary to analyze all aspects of production, consumption, recycling, and disposal comprehensively. One must also consider the ramifications in the upstream and downstream industries and the interaction with residents' lives. It is fair to assume that this consideration is realistic and possible for developed countries, where the plastic market is rather saturated; meanwhile, it would not have much impact on the economy and society in developing countries if they strengthened their efforts in relation to usage and recycling.