The first session of the Plenary of the Intergovernmental Science-Policy Panel on Chemicals, Waste and Pollution (ISP-CWP P1) concluded in Geneva, Switzerland on 6 February 2026. The IPCP delegation included Gabriel Sigmund and Ipek Imamoglu who also provided daily meeting summaries. Policy briefs prepared by the IPCP as inputs to the process are available here. Other IPCP board members in attendance included Noriyuki Suzuki as a member of the delegation from Japan and Miriam Diamond as the Chemicals & Waste member of the Scientific and Technical Advisory Panel of the Global Environment Facility.
Day 2 – Tricorder Measurements Indicate Glacial Speed
Enthusiasm and energy are starting to mix with tiredness and low expectations, based on what unfolded. We only later learned to appreciate the progress made on the previous day. While our metaphorical space shuttle was slowly placed onto the takeoff ramp yesterday, today we were teleported into the visible proximity of the event horizon of a black hole, where time flows differently. Odd phenomena could play tricks on your mind, with Cardassians making valid points while decisions looped in time and content, no beginning or end in comprehensible sight.
The Contact Group started the day by finishing the first reading of the Draft Rules of Procedures (RoP) in an efficient manner. Thereafter, a modified text of the RoP congruent with the Foundational Document was presented. After lunch, we launched into the second reading – which – as explained by the Chair in the Plenary, is the most important reading. It is here that negotiations and re-writes of the text take place. Deliberations on the second reading now included the USA as a member of the ISP-CWP, altogether having 129 members as of 3rd of February.
Our tricorders measured a speed of 0.2 Rules/minute in the first reading, whereas it dropped almost below limit of quantification to less than 0.01 Rules/minute in the second reading! Deliberations were especially lengthy on issues related to Rule 1 – Scope, Rule 2 – Definitions (of Observers) especially relating to Indigenous Peoples. The non-mention of academics was also raised. A consequential point which enabled us to see the event horizon – where time stands still – with our own eyes was when Rule 4 was discussed regarding the frequency with which ordinary sessions of the plenary will be held; a range from “every year” to “every three years” was discussed. Issues of finance and the absence of associated Convention(s) to the ISP-CWP were also raised.
Delegates, Observers, and all related parties were in for a surprise upon convening after dinner: The meeting was moved from the plenary room to a much smaller holodeck (Room B). One can speculate whether this was a purely practical decision due to a lesser number of people showing up after dinner, or more likely a strategic move to increase efficiency by stirring things up. Whatever the reason, we observed an increase in momentum after this change. However, the day ended with exhausting discussions on Rule 7, which includes text on Observers. These discussions took over two hours, with the contact group working until late in the night (23:00). Much remains to be done. Still, hope remains…..
Policy briefs and other materials prepared by the IPCP as inputs to the process are available at: https://www.ipcp.ch/policy-briefs/
https://www.ipcp.ch/publications/
Longer daily reports prepared by the International Institute for Sustainable Development, Earth Negotiations Bulletin are available at: https://enb.iisd.org/isp-cwp-p1-intergovernmental-science-policy-panel-chemicals-waste-pollution
Official UNEP website: https://www.unep.org/isp-cwp/plenary/session-1