With increased international concern over the pervasive plastic pollution problem, early negotiations to develop a legally binding instrument to end plastic pollution (“the Plastics Treaty”) were supported by 175 member countries toward a sustainable plastics future. Defining features of the plastics treaty by UNEP member countries began in Punta del Este, Uruguay in November 2022 during the first session of the Intergovernmental Negotiating Committee (INC-1). However, INC-1 ended with many unanswered questions regarding the structure, scope, and targets of the treaty. Sixty-seven member countries, including members of the High Coalition Ambition, submitted their objectives, guiding principles, and expectations for the treaty before the INC-2 negotiations while also suggesting measures for its effective implementation. This paper compiles submissions of the 67 member countries and evidence-based policymaking approaches that have been described in peer-reviewed and gray literature following INC-1, but before the INC-2 negotiations in Paris, France in June 2023. Recommendations for developing an effective plastics treaty by most member countries include incorporating the complete life cycle of plastics, promotion of transparency in global trade through uniform labeling measures, capping virgin plastic production, incorporating extended producer responsibility to develop a circular economy, and addressing hazardous chemicals in plastics. Suggested implementation measures include building a multilateral fund, supporting smaller countries with technology transfer, improving local stakeholder engagement, developing subsidiary bodies, and regular national reporting. Encouragingly, many of these national plans were proposed in the Zero Draft document released in September 2023 before INC-3 in Nairobi, Kenya in November 2023 and further developed in the revised draft text which served as the provisional agenda at INC-4 in April 2024 in Ottawa, Canada.

This study reviews various financing solutions available for fisheries and aquaculture development in Caribbean small island developing states (SIDS) and Barbados, Grenada, and St. Vincent and the Grenadines. Previously identified financing needs within the fisheries and aquaculture sectors have been matched with the most suitable financing mechanisms. However, the use of blue levies is recommended and applicable in almost every scenario, as they allow these sectors to drive their own development in financing research and conservation projects to their own benefit. The use of “blue tokens” with sufficiently low repayment coupons allows development projects to gather public support for fisheries, thereby increasing the likelihood of the project being successful through community buy-in. The possibility of natural capital being traded as public equities as “Natural Asset Companies” provides the opportunity for development projects to fund themselves. The review concludes that natural capital can be leveraged as the base through which public-private partnerships (PPPs) can facilitate optimal delivery of ecosystem services, benefit multiple stakeholders, and provide numerous development opportunities. An enabling environment for debt and lending with low-interest loan repayments is also applicable to almost every scenario, as it facilitates access to capital finance for infrastructure development and the acquisition of increasingly sustainable fishing equipment. Steps towards generating an enabling environment for financing fisheries and aquaculture in the Caribbean region are also discussed. The establishment of dedicated financing institutions, PPPs, and sufficient data reporting infrastructure for the fisheries and aquaculture industry are essential for driving development in these sectors. Likely, the largest limiting factor in financing Caribbean fisheries and aquaculture industries is a lack of awareness of the range of finance and financing mechanisms available to stakeholders, as well as an enabling environment for financing blue Economy sectors. This review is thus intended to aid financing institutions, Blue Economy developers, and specifically Caribbean fisheries and aquaculture stakeholders and Caribbean governments by raising awareness of the financing mechanisms available, encourage the incorporation of their use in the fisheries and aquaculture industries in the Caribbean, and encourage policymakers to create an enabling environment for financing development in these crucial sectors.

National Action Plans (NAPs) are a possible implementation measure for the Global Plastics Treaty, through a NAP-based approach. Their effectiveness in other international agreements is contested, and their current format allows for weak, voluntary measures with limited accountability. By analysing stakeholder and country submissions to the Intergovernmental Negotiating Committee (INC) secretariat ahead of INC-2 negotiations in Paris, June 2023, conducting a literature review, and interviewing key actors, this study aims to determine the support that governments and stakeholders have for a NAP-based approach in the Treaty, and identify the key enablers needed to ensure that NAP-based approaches, if adopted in the Treaty, are effective. Results indicate that by INC-2, more than 85% of countries supported a NAP-based approach, suggesting a high chance of this approach being selected as the means of implementation of the Treaty. However, interviewees and literature reviews indicate that NAPs in their current form are not likely to be effective at delivering ambitious Treaty targets. Six key enablers to improve the effectiveness of plastics NAPs are identified. These enablers should be integrated into any plastics NAPs both independently, and as potential requirements of the Treaty to ensure that NAP-based approaches are effective and have the impact intended.

Policy effectiveness is a critical measure for assessing whether policies are working and determining necessary adjustments. However, understanding the effectiveness of plastic policies is a significant gap in the toolkit driving solutions to the plastics crisis. This review examines effectiveness evaluations and existing tools for assessing policy effectiveness. The review further identifies the barriers to understanding effectiveness before proposing ways forward. Most studies focus on plastic bag bans or taxes, neglecting other policy instruments. Additionally, these studies often employ simple attribution approaches, rather than causal inference methods, limiting our ability to determine the true impact of policies on desired outcomes. The lack of monitoring and evaluation of plastic policies further hampers knowledge acquisition. The global understanding of the plastics economy and measurable success metrics is insufficient, hindering the design of systemic interventions. These findings highlight the development and evaluation of plastic policies with limited information. A more nuanced understanding of effective plastic policies is necessary, including a harmonised approach to evaluations, a shared definition of effectiveness, the use of rapid assessment tools and the integration of monitoring and evaluation into policy instruments.