At the fifth and final scheduled session of the UN’s Intergovernmental Negotiating Committee on Plastic Pollution (INC-5), member countries hope to finalise and approve the text of the “international legally binding instrument on plastic pollution”.

A successful treaty could have important implications for climate change.

The production, use and disposal of plastics is responsible for around 5% of global greenhouse gas emissions and they are typically made from fossil fuels. Plastics production is expected to be one of the leading drivers of oil demand growth over the coming years.

Measures to reduce plastics use will be a key part of the agenda, as around 90% of emissions from plastics come from production. The negotiations will see countries discuss setting targets, accountability and transparency measures.

Carbon Brief analysis shows that without any agreement to cut plastic production, emissions from plastics could consume half of the remaining carbon budget for limiting warming to 1.5C above pre-industrial levels.

One expert tells Carbon Brief that the best outcome possible for the negotiations is to ratify a global target to limit plastics production, coupled with legally binding national targets.

However, she warns that oil-producing countries are likely to veto any such proposal.

Below, Carbon Brief presents five key charts showing why the plastics treaty matters for climate change.

Developed nations have agreed to help channel “at least” $300bn a year into developing countries by 2035 to support their efforts to deal with climate change.

However, the new climate-finance goal – agreed along with a range of other issues at the COP29 summit in Baku, Azerbaijan – has left developing countries bitterly disappointed.

They were united in calling for developed countries to raise $1.3tn a year in climate finance.

In the end, negotiators agreed on a looser call to raise $1.3tn each year from a wide range of sources, including private investment, by 2035.

Some countries, including India and Nigeria, accused the COP29 presidency of pushing the deal through without their proper consent, following chaotic last-minute negotiations.

Countries failed to reach an agreement on how the outcomes of last year’s “global stocktake”, including a key pledge to transition away from fossil fuels, should be taken forward – instead shunting the decision to COP30 next year in Brazil.

They did manage to find agreement on the remaining sections of Article 6 on carbon markets, meaning all elements of the Paris Agreement have been finalised nearly 10 years after it was signed.

Negotiations were overshadowed by the reelection of Donald Trump, who has promised to roll back climate action and take the world’s biggest historical emitter out of the Paris Agreement once again.

COP president Azerbaijan – a country that sources two-thirds of its government revenue from fossil fuels – faced accusations of conflict of interest and malpractice, with one minister labelling its hosting style “deplorable”.

Here, Carbon Brief provides in-depth analysis of all the key outcomes in Baku – both inside and outside the COP.