By Abbas Nazil
The seventh session of the United Nations Environment Assembly (UNEA-7) concluded in Nairobi after two weeks of negotiations marked by last-minute compromises, resulting in the adoption of several resolutions that many observers say fell short of the ambition needed to confront the global environmental crisis.
Originally designed to tackle critical global challenges including biodiversity loss, chemicals and waste management, and institutional governance issues, the Assembly saw many proposed resolutions weakened significantly or abandoned altogether during negotiations.
Although UNEA-7 featured symbolic milestones such as the first-ever Women’s Assembly and the inaugural high-level Indigenous Peoples event, these achievements were overshadowed by setbacks inside negotiation rooms where references to rights holders were removed from official texts.
Women’s and Indigenous Peoples’ Major Groups openly protested the deletion of language recognizing gender, women, and Indigenous Peoples, describing the move as a regression in inclusive environmental governance.
Observers from civil society groups, including NGOs, youth organizations, scientific communities, farmers, local authorities, workers, and Indigenous Peoples, repeatedly raised concerns about shrinking participation and reduced transparency throughout the process.
Much of the debate during the Assembly revolved around the United Nations Environment Programme’s medium-term strategy and budgetary issues, which many participants viewed as essential for enabling effective global environmental action.
According to the Center for International Environmental Law, the failure to adequately resource governing bodies continues to undermine progress, with political obstruction preventing more equitable and forward-looking decisions.
Despite these challenges, Member States managed to make limited progress on some technical issues, particularly in the area of chemicals and waste management.
A resolution on chemicals and waste, although heavily diluted, set the stage for further work in 2026, including renewed focus on heavy metals and the long-awaited update to the UNEP and WHO State of the Science report on endocrine-disrupting chemicals.
The resolution also paved the way for the operationalization of the Intergovernmental Science-Policy Panel on Chemicals, Waste and Pollution, scheduled to meet for the first time in February.
Beyond formal negotiations, significant developments occurred on the margins of UNEA-7, highlighting the importance of informal dialogue and side events in shaping environmental governance.
Concerns that some countries might attempt to reopen the mandate for negotiating a global plastics treaty did not materialize, preserving the existing framework established under UNEA-5/14.
Although the adopted resolutions did not explicitly mention plastics, the Ministerial Declaration reaffirmed a shared commitment among Member States to conclude negotiations urgently and cooperatively.
Civil society organizations, rights holders, and governments engaged actively in discussions through panels and side events, helping sustain momentum toward the next round of plastics treaty negotiations.
Solar geoengineering, while absent from the formal agenda, emerged as a significant topic during side discussions at the Assembly.
The Africa Group launched a new initiative calling for a plurilateral dialogue on a Solar Geoengineering Non-Use Agreement, building on recent African ministerial decisions.
This initiative seeks to prevent the development and deployment of solar geoengineering technologies, which critics argue are unpredictable, ungovernable, and potentially dangerous.
Environmental advocates welcomed the Africa Group’s leadership, viewing it as a strong signal that governments can collectively reject risky technological interventions.
UNEA-7 highlighted both the limitations of multilateral environmental negotiations and the growing influence of grassroots advocacy and regional leadership in shaping the future of global environmental governance.