An International Agreement on Natural Resource Management: An overview of opportunities and challenges
This policy report, commissioned by the Public Waste Agency of Flanders (OVAM), examines the opportunities and challenges associated with developing an international agreement on natural resource management — a governance gap that has become increasingly urgent as global material consumption continues to grow at an unsustainable pace.
The case for such an agreement is compelling. Global extraction of materials more than tripled between 1970 and 2017 — rising from 27 billion to 92 billion tonnes annually — driven by population growth, rising living standards, and a fourfold expansion of global economic activity. Yet existing environment-related policies tend to focus on the consequences of resource overexploitation — such as climate change, biodiversity loss, and waste — rather than on the underlying driver: unsustainable resource extraction and consumption. While governments, businesses, and international organisations have adopted various resource-efficiency initiatives, these remain largely uncoordinated and fragmented. What is missing is a global governance mechanism capable of addressing unsustainable resource use in a coordinated way — one that would also reduce concerns about competitive disadvantage for countries acting unilaterally.
The report maps existing international treaties and agreements to assess how well they address natural resource management. It finds a significant coverage gap: while Multilateral Environmental Agreements (MEAs) cover some aspects of resource use, they tend to focus on specific resources or parts of the value chain, and leave metals, minerals, and fossil fuels largely unaddressed. Existing MEAs also suffer from inherent weaknesses, including the absence of quantifiable targets, weak provisions, and an implementation gap. Similarly, while Free Trade Agreements (FTAs) contain a growing number of provisions relevant to circular economy and resource efficiency — including references to relevant MEAs, sustainable forestry and fisheries provisions, and reductions in fossil fuel subsidies — these provisions are scattered, lack specificity, and are often not subject to effective enforcement mechanisms. Critically, they tend to focus on sustainable production rather than sustainable consumption, limiting their effectiveness in keeping global resource use within planetary boundaries.
Against this backdrop, the report argues that an international agreement on natural resource management would fill an important and currently unaddressed gap. It could galvanise coordinated global action, reduce free-riding, and help ensure that material consumption remains within planetary limits. The report recommends a gradual approach to developing such an agreement, beginning with a framework convention setting out general principles — drawing on the model of the UNFCCC and other multilateral environmental agreements — followed by subsequent protocols addressing specific resources or issues. Key design recommendations include a global target for resource productivity aligned with the principle of common but differentiated responsibilities, a material footprint indicator with per capita dimensions, and the establishment of an Intergovernmental Panel on Sustainable Resource Management building on the existing work of the International Resource Panel (IRP) under UNEP.
