{"id":60099180,"date":"2025-09-15T11:02:22","date_gmt":"2025-09-15T10:02:22","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/dialogue.earth\/?post_type=opinion&p=60099180"},"modified":"2025-09-15T11:02:29","modified_gmt":"2025-09-15T10:02:29","slug":"plastics-talks-failure-is-bad-news-for-the-circular-economy","status":"publish","type":"opinion","link":"https:\/\/dialogue.earth\/en\/pollution\/plastics-talks-failure-is-bad-news-for-the-circular-economy\/","title":{"rendered":"Plastics talks failure is bad news for the circular economy"},"content":{"rendered":"\n

In August, negotiators trying to finalise a treaty on ending global plastics pollution failed to reach an agreement. The draft text<\/a> that did emerge from Geneva was even weaker than the one<\/a> that had come out of the last negotiations in Busan, in December 2024. The text had shifted from a legally binding framework to a more nationally determined approach.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

The negotiations, which began in 2022, are intended to create the first ever legally binding treaty tackling the annual USD 1.5 trillion<\/a> in health harms caused by plastic pollution<\/a>. These include the microplastics which are now found in human organs. But the Geneva text removes a list of plastic products to be phased out, waters down compulsory controls on certain plastic products, and reduces the funding responsibilities of developed nations. This all makes that goal seem less achievable.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

As the world\u2019s biggest plastics exporter, China is seeking to balance industrial competitiveness with supporting the circular economy. I think the more flexible framework of the Geneva text risks leading to differing standards, which means higher compliance costs for businesses and reduced effectiveness of national investments in plastics reuse. It could also slow the construction of the infrastructure needed to facilitate reuse.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

A weakened text<\/h2>\n\n\n\n

The Geneva talks were difficult, with key disagreements over the definition of plastics and the scope of governance. That countries define chemical additives and polymers differently affects future management. Some want an inclusive definition to cover the entire industry; others worry too much regulation will stifle innovation. Industrial interests lie behind these disagreements: plastic producers are not keen on manufacturing restrictions, while the small island nations affected by the pollution want it tackled at source.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

The negotiators were divided into clear camps. The European Union (EU) led a 130-strong group of nations calling for powerful measures, including limits on production. The US was supportive of recycling but unsure about limits on production, which may be related to its 40% share of PVC exports. China aimed to maintain its competitiveness while balancing that with the circular economy. A \u201cproducer responsibility system\u201d \u2013\u00a0in which manufacturers are responsible for the waste created at the end of their products’ lives \u2013 advocated by the EU and the Pacific island nations, was met with opposition by oil-producing nations excluding China.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Funding mechanisms no longer prioritise re-use projects, making waste plastics more likely to be recycled or burned<\/blockquote><\/cite><\/div><\/div>\n\n\n\n

Another key dispute was over financing. The developing nations wanted developed nations to be obliged to provide money and resources for funding mechanisms to meet the eventual treaty\u2019s aims. The new talks, however, removed that obligation in favour of voluntary commitments. The US delegation also questioned whether China and other emerging economies can be classed as developing nations. There were deep divisions over who would pay \u2013\u00a0particularly over the idea of a polluter-pays principle.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

The Geneva draft text is also less binding than the 2024 draft from Busan.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

There are changes on the allocation of responsibility, regulatory models, and the effectiveness of enforcement. On funding, the text has downgraded a \u201cshall\u201d to a \u201cshould\u201d, reducing the responsibilities of the developed nations to the developing, least-developed and small-island nations.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

On regulatory approaches, Busan stressed a top-down approach, with a global list of products to be phased out. Geneva shifts to national standards and risk assessments, with no restrictions on production.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

On enforcement, the Geneva text downgrades the role of a science and technology committee. No longer a permanent committee with independent assessment and policy-making powers, it becomes subordinate to the Conference of the Parties, to which it provides advice. Meanwhile, the word \u201cmay” associated with producing national plans is strengthened to \u201cshould”.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Potential impacts of the new text<\/h2>\n\n\n\n

The new text, compared to Busan, would reduce the effectiveness of international governance of plastic pollution.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Two methods for tackling the problem \u2013 recycling and biodegradable plastics \u2013 both have their limitations. Currently only 9% of plastics are recycled. Chemical recycling can produce toxic byproducts such as dioxins, and carbon emissions can be as much as 40%<\/a> higher than conventional recycling methods. Most biodegradable plastics need to spend 180 days<\/a> in an industrial composting facility to break down. In reality, only 0.007%<\/a> of plastics go through this process.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Reuse is one of the \u201cThree Rs\u201d of plastic management \u2013 reduce, reuse, recycle. This means ensuring plastic containers can be refilled with their original contents, extending the lifespan of containers and reducing disposal and recycling costs.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

The Busan text tried to set out a framework for that kind of circular economy. It made clear that plastic products would have to be designed for reuse, refilling and repair. It would have banned the production and sale of \u201coxo-degradable\u201d plastics, meaning conventional polymers that break down into microplastics and cannot be reused or recycled. It also called for national standards to be set for the collection and recycling of plastic waste and a compulsory producer-responsibility system, to promote full-lifecycle management of plastic products. In the section on funding mechanisms, it listed reuse infrastructure as eligible for funding, creating a complete policy system covering design, production and recycling. These provisions would have laid a solid foundation for the circular economy.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

\"man<\/div>
The Thinker\u2019s Burden, a sculptural remix of Rodin\u2019s Thinker, created for the plastics treaty negotiations, and positioned in front of the European headquarters of the UN in Geneva (Image: Newscom \/ Alamy)<\/div><\/div><\/div><\/div>\n\n\n\n

The softening of the Geneva text may hamper that circular economy. There is no more mention of a technical standard for \u201crefillability\u201d \u2013 that is, plastic packaging or containers being refilled after cleaning or other processing rather than simply discarded. The ban on oxo-degradable plastics is also removed, as are quantified targets for reuse rates, making promoting the circular economy more of a principle than a measurable goal.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Producer-responsibility systems are now optional rather than required. Although funding mechanisms will continue to \u201csupport the circular economy\u201d, priority is no longer given to reuse projects, which may mean waste plastics become more likely to be recycled or burned for power or heat. The Geneva text also removes the requirement for businesses to disclose the chemical components of their products, and national progress reports have become voluntary. These changes challenge the safety, oversight and transparency of the reuse system. The shift from one global approach to different national programmes means reduction at source becomes optional, and global efforts may become focused on improving downstream recycling.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

For China, the weakening of the text brings two challenges. First, exporters will need to deal with multiple national standards, increasing compliance costs. Second, changes to the funding mechanisms makes availability of international funding uncertain; this may delay the roll-out of reusable packaging or infrastructure such as community cleaning stations.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Sustainable solutions<\/h2>\n\n\n\n

Reuse is one of the most effective and sustainable solutions to the plastic pollution crisis, and China has made a lot of progress on the circular economy and reuse, with various policies and laws in place. <\/p>\n\n\n\n

The 14th Five Year Plan for the Circular Economy, for example, has targets<\/a> for resource reuse rates. While the Method for Use and Reporting of Commercial Single-use Plastics requires<\/a> firms to report how much plastic they use, laying a foundation for reuse.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Businesses are also seeking out solutions that include reuse. For example, e-commerce site Cainiao stated that by reusing cardboard boxes and introducing reusable plastic boxes it reduced carbon emissions from its warehouses by over 32,000 tonnes<\/a> in 2024. Meanwhile, SF Express<\/a>, a delivery firm, packs goods in reusable boxes in 119 cities. There are 1.3 million of the boxes in circulation and they have been used 20.6 million times.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

After years of restrictions, consumers are now more accepting of the need to reuse plastic products. According to a survey<\/a> we carried out at Plastics Free China, while the reuse of food containers is not popular, most other reuse scenarios see approval rates of over 50%, with 66% of respondents being willing to pay a premium for reusable packaging.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

I think government support and a coordinating mechanism are needed for reuse to scale up. Government policy could be used to reduce initial costs for companies, with a shared recycling system, which would raise the market competitiveness of reusable packaging. The transition needs full participation across society. Companies should explore new business models and share their experiences. Consumers need to build new and greener habits. And everyone needs to raise levels of awareness and acceptance of reuse.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

The thought-provoking sculpture outside the European headquarters of the UN in Geneva showed us the thinker and the child atop a mountain of plastic waste, warning us of our duties to the planet and to future generations.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"

The shift from a global approach to national programmes means reducing plastics at source becomes optional, and presents new challenges for China, writes Chen Aijia<\/p>\n","protected":false},"featured_media":60099192,"comment_status":"closed","ping_status":"closed","template":"","categories":[760],"tags":[515,569,578],"country":[20000110,50003615],"class_list":["post-60099180","opinion","type-opinion","status-publish","has-post-thumbnail","hentry","category-pollution","tag-circular-economy","tag-negotiations","tag-plastics","country-china","country-world-2"],"acf":[],"yoast_head":"\nPlastics talks failure is bad news for the circular economy<\/title>\n<meta name=\"description\" content=\"The shift from a global approach to national programmes means reducing plastics at source becomes optional, and presents new challenges for China, writes Chen Aijia\" \/>\n<meta name=\"robots\" content=\"index, follow, max-snippet:-1, max-image-preview:large, max-video-preview:-1\" \/>\n<link rel=\"canonical\" href=\"https:\/\/dialogue.earth\/en\/pollution\/plastics-talks-failure-is-bad-news-for-the-circular-economy\/\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:locale\" content=\"en_US\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:type\" content=\"article\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:title\" content=\"Plastics talks failure is bad news for the circular economy\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:description\" content=\"The shift from a global approach to national programmes means reducing plastics at source becomes optional, and presents new challenges for China, writes Chen Aijia\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:url\" content=\"https:\/\/dialogue.earth\/en\/pollution\/plastics-talks-failure-is-bad-news-for-the-circular-economy\/\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:site_name\" content=\"Dialogue Earth\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:modified_time\" content=\"2025-09-15T10:02:29+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:image\" content=\"https:\/\/dialogue.earth\/content\/uploads\/2025\/09\/INC5.2-activist-demonstration-Geneva_Alamy_3C90AJ6-1-scaled-e1757927579246.jpg\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:width\" content=\"1200\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:height\" content=\"801\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:type\" content=\"image\/jpeg\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:card\" content=\"summary_large_image\" \/>\n<script type=\"application\/ld+json\" class=\"yoast-schema-graph\">{\"@context\":\"https:\/\/schema.org\",\"@graph\":[{\"@type\":\"WebPage\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/dialogue.earth\/en\/pollution\/plastics-talks-failure-is-bad-news-for-the-circular-economy\/\",\"url\":\"https:\/\/dialogue.earth\/en\/pollution\/plastics-talks-failure-is-bad-news-for-the-circular-economy\/\",\"name\":\"Plastics talks failure is bad news for the circular economy\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/dialogue.earth\/en\/#website\"},\"primaryImageOfPage\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/dialogue.earth\/en\/pollution\/plastics-talks-failure-is-bad-news-for-the-circular-economy\/#primaryimage\"},\"image\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/dialogue.earth\/en\/pollution\/plastics-talks-failure-is-bad-news-for-the-circular-economy\/#primaryimage\"},\"thumbnailUrl\":\"https:\/\/dialogue.earth\/content\/uploads\/2025\/09\/INC5.2-activist-demonstration-Geneva_Alamy_3C90AJ6-1-scaled-e1757927579246.jpg\",\"datePublished\":\"2025-09-15T10:02:22+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2025-09-15T10:02:29+00:00\",\"description\":\"The shift from a global approach to national programmes means reducing plastics at source becomes optional, and presents new challenges for China, writes Chen Aijia\",\"breadcrumb\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/dialogue.earth\/en\/pollution\/plastics-talks-failure-is-bad-news-for-the-circular-economy\/#breadcrumb\"},\"inLanguage\":\"en\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"ReadAction\",\"target\":[\"https:\/\/dialogue.earth\/en\/pollution\/plastics-talks-failure-is-bad-news-for-the-circular-economy\/\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"ImageObject\",\"inLanguage\":\"en\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/dialogue.earth\/en\/pollution\/plastics-talks-failure-is-bad-news-for-the-circular-economy\/#primaryimage\",\"url\":\"https:\/\/dialogue.earth\/content\/uploads\/2025\/09\/INC5.2-activist-demonstration-Geneva_Alamy_3C90AJ6-1-scaled-e1757927579246.jpg\",\"contentUrl\":\"https:\/\/dialogue.earth\/content\/uploads\/2025\/09\/INC5.2-activist-demonstration-Geneva_Alamy_3C90AJ6-1-scaled-e1757927579246.jpg\",\"width\":1200,\"height\":801,\"caption\":\"3C90AJ6 Geneva, Switzerland. 04th Aug, 2025. Activists demonstrate under a banner ahead of the fifth resumed session of Intergovernmental Negotiating Committee 5.2 (INC5.2) set to begin on 5th August 2025. Negotiators are meeting in what is expected to be the final round of negotiations to craft a legally binding Global Plastics Treaty- Intergovernmental Negotiating Committee 5.2 (INC5.2), at the Palais des Nations in Geneva Switzerland, following inconclusive talks in Busan, South Korea, in 2024. (Photo by James Wakibia\/SOPA Images\/Sipa USA) Credit: Sipa US\/Alamy Live News\"},{\"@type\":\"BreadcrumbList\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/dialogue.earth\/en\/pollution\/plastics-talks-failure-is-bad-news-for-the-circular-economy\/#breadcrumb\",\"itemListElement\":[{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":1,\"name\":\"Home\",\"item\":\"https:\/\/dialogue.earth\/en\/\"},{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":2,\"name\":\"Plastics talks failure is bad news for the circular economy\"}]},{\"@type\":\"WebSite\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/dialogue.earth\/en\/#website\",\"url\":\"https:\/\/dialogue.earth\/en\/\",\"name\":\"Dialogue Earth\",\"description\":\"Global climate and environment news\",\"publisher\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/dialogue.earth\/en\/#organization\"},\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"SearchAction\",\"target\":{\"@type\":\"EntryPoint\",\"urlTemplate\":\"https:\/\/dialogue.earth\/en\/?s={search_term_string}\"},\"query-input\":{\"@type\":\"PropertyValueSpecification\",\"valueRequired\":true,\"valueName\":\"search_term_string\"}}],\"inLanguage\":\"en\"},{\"@type\":\"Organization\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/dialogue.earth\/en\/#organization\",\"name\":\"\u5bf9\u8bdd\u5730\u7403\",\"url\":\"https:\/\/dialogue.earth\/en\/\",\"logo\":{\"@type\":\"ImageObject\",\"inLanguage\":\"en\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/dialogue.earth\/en\/#\/schema\/logo\/image\/\",\"url\":\"https:\/\/dialogue.earth\/content\/uploads\/2024\/04\/Dialogue-Earth-Symbol-Logo_Black-Text.png\",\"contentUrl\":\"https:\/\/dialogue.earth\/content\/uploads\/2024\/04\/Dialogue-Earth-Symbol-Logo_Black-Text.png\",\"width\":256,\"height\":256,\"caption\":\"\u5bf9\u8bdd\u5730\u7403\"},\"image\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/dialogue.earth\/en\/#\/schema\/logo\/image\/\"},\"sameAs\":[\"https:\/\/twitter.com\/DialogueEarth_\",\"\",\"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/DialogueEarth.English\",\"https:\/\/www.instagram.com\/dialogue.earth\/\",\"https:\/\/www.linkedin.com\/company\/dialogueearth\/\"],\"publishingPrinciples\":\"https:\/\/dialogue.earth\/en\/about\/\"}]}<\/script>\n<!-- \/ Yoast SEO Premium plugin. -->","yoast_head_json":{"title":"Plastics talks failure is bad news for the circular economy","description":"The shift from a global approach to national programmes means reducing plastics at source becomes optional, and presents new challenges for China, writes Chen Aijia","robots":{"index":"index","follow":"follow","max-snippet":"max-snippet:-1","max-image-preview":"max-image-preview:large","max-video-preview":"max-video-preview:-1"},"canonical":"https:\/\/dialogue.earth\/en\/pollution\/plastics-talks-failure-is-bad-news-for-the-circular-economy\/","og_locale":"en_US","og_type":"article","og_title":"Plastics talks failure is bad news for the circular economy","og_description":"The shift from a global approach to national programmes means reducing plastics at source becomes optional, and presents new challenges for China, writes Chen Aijia","og_url":"https:\/\/dialogue.earth\/en\/pollution\/plastics-talks-failure-is-bad-news-for-the-circular-economy\/","og_site_name":"Dialogue Earth","article_modified_time":"2025-09-15T10:02:29+00:00","og_image":[{"width":1200,"height":801,"url":"https:\/\/dialogue.earth\/content\/uploads\/2025\/09\/INC5.2-activist-demonstration-Geneva_Alamy_3C90AJ6-1-scaled-e1757927579246.jpg","type":"image\/jpeg"}],"twitter_card":"summary_large_image","schema":{"@context":"https:\/\/schema.org","@graph":[{"@type":"WebPage","@id":"https:\/\/dialogue.earth\/en\/pollution\/plastics-talks-failure-is-bad-news-for-the-circular-economy\/","url":"https:\/\/dialogue.earth\/en\/pollution\/plastics-talks-failure-is-bad-news-for-the-circular-economy\/","name":"Plastics talks failure is bad news for the circular economy","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/dialogue.earth\/en\/#website"},"primaryImageOfPage":{"@id":"https:\/\/dialogue.earth\/en\/pollution\/plastics-talks-failure-is-bad-news-for-the-circular-economy\/#primaryimage"},"image":{"@id":"https:\/\/dialogue.earth\/en\/pollution\/plastics-talks-failure-is-bad-news-for-the-circular-economy\/#primaryimage"},"thumbnailUrl":"https:\/\/dialogue.earth\/content\/uploads\/2025\/09\/INC5.2-activist-demonstration-Geneva_Alamy_3C90AJ6-1-scaled-e1757927579246.jpg","datePublished":"2025-09-15T10:02:22+00:00","dateModified":"2025-09-15T10:02:29+00:00","description":"The shift from a global approach to national programmes means reducing plastics at source becomes optional, and presents new challenges for China, writes Chen Aijia","breadcrumb":{"@id":"https:\/\/dialogue.earth\/en\/pollution\/plastics-talks-failure-is-bad-news-for-the-circular-economy\/#breadcrumb"},"inLanguage":"en","potentialAction":[{"@type":"ReadAction","target":["https:\/\/dialogue.earth\/en\/pollution\/plastics-talks-failure-is-bad-news-for-the-circular-economy\/"]}]},{"@type":"ImageObject","inLanguage":"en","@id":"https:\/\/dialogue.earth\/en\/pollution\/plastics-talks-failure-is-bad-news-for-the-circular-economy\/#primaryimage","url":"https:\/\/dialogue.earth\/content\/uploads\/2025\/09\/INC5.2-activist-demonstration-Geneva_Alamy_3C90AJ6-1-scaled-e1757927579246.jpg","contentUrl":"https:\/\/dialogue.earth\/content\/uploads\/2025\/09\/INC5.2-activist-demonstration-Geneva_Alamy_3C90AJ6-1-scaled-e1757927579246.jpg","width":1200,"height":801,"caption":"3C90AJ6 Geneva, Switzerland. 04th Aug, 2025. Activists demonstrate under a banner ahead of the fifth resumed session of Intergovernmental Negotiating Committee 5.2 (INC5.2) set to begin on 5th August 2025. Negotiators are meeting in what is expected to be the final round of negotiations to craft a legally binding Global Plastics Treaty- Intergovernmental Negotiating Committee 5.2 (INC5.2), at the Palais des Nations in Geneva Switzerland, following inconclusive talks in Busan, South Korea, in 2024. (Photo by James Wakibia\/SOPA Images\/Sipa USA) Credit: Sipa US\/Alamy Live News"},{"@type":"BreadcrumbList","@id":"https:\/\/dialogue.earth\/en\/pollution\/plastics-talks-failure-is-bad-news-for-the-circular-economy\/#breadcrumb","itemListElement":[{"@type":"ListItem","position":1,"name":"Home","item":"https:\/\/dialogue.earth\/en\/"},{"@type":"ListItem","position":2,"name":"Plastics talks failure is bad news for the circular economy"}]},{"@type":"WebSite","@id":"https:\/\/dialogue.earth\/en\/#website","url":"https:\/\/dialogue.earth\/en\/","name":"Dialogue Earth","description":"Global climate and environment news","publisher":{"@id":"https:\/\/dialogue.earth\/en\/#organization"},"potentialAction":[{"@type":"SearchAction","target":{"@type":"EntryPoint","urlTemplate":"https:\/\/dialogue.earth\/en\/?s={search_term_string}"},"query-input":{"@type":"PropertyValueSpecification","valueRequired":true,"valueName":"search_term_string"}}],"inLanguage":"en"},{"@type":"Organization","@id":"https:\/\/dialogue.earth\/en\/#organization","name":"\u5bf9\u8bdd\u5730\u7403","url":"https:\/\/dialogue.earth\/en\/","logo":{"@type":"ImageObject","inLanguage":"en","@id":"https:\/\/dialogue.earth\/en\/#\/schema\/logo\/image\/","url":"https:\/\/dialogue.earth\/content\/uploads\/2024\/04\/Dialogue-Earth-Symbol-Logo_Black-Text.png","contentUrl":"https:\/\/dialogue.earth\/content\/uploads\/2024\/04\/Dialogue-Earth-Symbol-Logo_Black-Text.png","width":256,"height":256,"caption":"\u5bf9\u8bdd\u5730\u7403"},"image":{"@id":"https:\/\/dialogue.earth\/en\/#\/schema\/logo\/image\/"},"sameAs":["https:\/\/twitter.com\/DialogueEarth_","","https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/DialogueEarth.English","https:\/\/www.instagram.com\/dialogue.earth\/","https:\/\/www.linkedin.com\/company\/dialogueearth\/"],"publishingPrinciples":"https:\/\/dialogue.earth\/en\/about\/"}]}},"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/dialogue.earth\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/opinion\/60099180","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/dialogue.earth\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/opinion"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/dialogue.earth\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/opinion"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/dialogue.earth\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=60099180"}],"version-history":[{"count":3,"href":"https:\/\/dialogue.earth\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/opinion\/60099180\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":60099237,"href":"https:\/\/dialogue.earth\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/opinion\/60099180\/revisions\/60099237"}],"wp:featuredmedia":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/dialogue.earth\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media\/60099192"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/dialogue.earth\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=60099180"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/dialogue.earth\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=60099180"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/dialogue.earth\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=60099180"},{"taxonomy":"country","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/dialogue.earth\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/country?post=60099180"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}