Highlights and images for 3 February 2026

Every intergovernmental body has rules of engagement. They set out who participates and how. These rules also give, or take back, powers from the Chairs, Member States, and subsidiary bodies. The ability to vote, or the need to reach consensus, are often flashpoints when setting these rules.

The new Intergovernmental Science-Policy Panel on Chemicals, Waste and Pollution (ISP-CWP) is working to establish these rules of procedure. The discussions can be pedantic. Considerable time was spent on whether the rules of procedure apply to the sessions of the Plenary, or to the entire ISP-CWP, including its subsidiary bodies, for example. In the afternoon, progress slowed to a crawl.

Want to dig deeper into today's talks? Read the full Earth Negotiations Bulletin daily report.

But even at the slow pace, the discussions are important. As Chair Álvarez Pérez explained, getting consensus on a set of practical rules is worth the time investment. Clarity and precision in the rules of procedure will provide comfort to all Member States as they work in the future. Exploring and explaining the implications of the rules of procedure helps ensure that all Member States are on board with full knowledge of how the rules could shape discussions going forward. It is important to get the rules right because they can be difficult to change.

More immediately, the rules of procedure set out how Member States will elect the Bureau and choose which country will host the Secretariat. Many participants want to see these decisions taken at this first meeting because they constitute major milestones toward making the ISP-CWP operational.

The slow pace of work, however, worried those hoping for this smooth start. After spending three hours on the definition of observers, especially how to reflect the differences between Indigenous Peoples and local communities, those with concerns were especially vocal. This wording was already debated at length in the previous session in Punta del Este and remains in brackets in the ISP-CWP’s foundational document. Similarly, the lengthy discussion on how often to hold the Panel’s meetings - annually or biennially - prompted frustrations that the rules of procedure will take much longer than hoped.