Free shipping on orders in North America

Justice

54925963201_b383383df4_c-480x329-2
, , , ,

Rich nations push back on calls for new just transition mechanism

Rich nations push back on calls for new just transition mechanism
Rich nations push back on calls for new just transition mechanism
Rich nations push back on calls for new just transition mechanism
Rich nations push back on calls for new just transition mechanism
Rich nations push back on calls for new just transition mechanism

Developed nations including the UK, Norway, Canada, Australia and the EU are pushing back on a proposal at COP30 to create a just transition mechanism to bolster and unify efforts to help workers and communities adversely affected by the shift away from fossil fuels, the plan’s backers say.

Championed by civil society activists who have dubbed it the “Belém Action Mechanism” (BAM), the proposal to establish a dedicated global facility won backing at the climate talks from the largest group of developing nations, the G77+China. Under the proposal, developing countries would receive financial and technical assistance aimed at ensuring a fair transition to clean energy.

A global green shift is expected to change the nature of employment in sectors such as coal mines, oil refineries, construction and car factories. Jobs will be lost in high-carbon industries and new ones created in clean technology supply chains, bringing both threats and opportunities for the affected workers and their families and communities.

Activists say establishing an institutional framework is vital to making sure global climate action to cut emissions does not end up leaving anyone behind.

    But a significant number of developed countries are “generally not being positive about the mechanism”, said Anabella Rosemberg, senior advisor on just transition at Climate Action Network International, adding that they did not see the need for a coordination unit on just transition policies.

    “Basically these countries do not want any new or innovative way of bringing the just transition community together,” Rosemberg said, referring to the proposals for the mechanism aimed at facilitating global dialogue, sharing best practice and informing new policy around the world.

    The draft text on the UN’s Just Transition Work Programme released on Tuesday included several alternatives to the mechanism, including an action plan and a policy toolbox to help countries advance their just transition plans and turn principles into concrete national strategies.

    UN Secretary-General António Guterres welcomed the calls for the mechanism, as well as the “growing coalition asking for clarity on the transition away from fossil fuels”.

    “Governments must support workers and communities still relying on coal, oil and gas with training, protection and new opportunities to go on with their lives in a positive way,” he said at COP30 on Thursday.



    Sharing know-how, and financing

    Supporters of the BAM proposal say just transition efforts are currently fragmented and would benefit from having an institutional mechanism to pull together funding and policymaking experiences, as well as fostering cooperation between different agencies and financial institutions working to support just transition.

    “What we are trying to do with the mechanism is to really help the countries that want to put [just transition] strategies in place access much faster the capacity and the financing that is out there,” Rosemberg said.

    Bert De Wel, global climate policy coordinator at the International Trade Union Confederation (ITUC), said a mechanism could help countries introduce just transition policies “with a strong focus on labour rights, trade union participation and social dialogue”.

    Integrate just transition instead, says Norway

    Some opponents of creating a new mechanism say just transition efforts would be better advanced by strengthening existing institutions rather than building a new one.

    “This is most efficient because then the committees can start working without delay,” a spokesperson from the Norwegian Ministry for Climate and Environment told Climate Home News, adding that existing bodies under the Paris Agreement already cover most of the topics in the just transition draft decision, including finance, technology development and transfer, and capacity building

    “It takes many years to develop a new mechanism,” the spokesperson said, even if countries can overcome their current differences over its potential scope and mandate. In the meantime, Norway supports developing guidance for existing bodies to better integrate just transition into their work. 

    Civil society activists stage protests at COP30 in Belem calling for the institutionalisation of a just transition mechanism. Photo by IISD/ENB | Mike Muzurakis

    “Not a fund” 

    The fear that a BAM could become another source of financial demands is one of the biggest concerns for the EU and developed countries, De Wel said. But while public finance is needed to roll out a just transition, he said “this doesn’t mean that these issues need to be sourced in the just transition mechanism”.

    A just transition for renewables: Why COP30 must put people before power

    He said the mechanism would seek to get multilateral development banks and other funders on board to make sure that money is being spent in a way that “respects labour criteria” and does not stop the Global South accessing resources that are already available.

    Rosemberg said there have been questions around whether the mechanism would be a new fund but the civil society and G77 proposals clarify that the two things are not the same. “This is much more a facility for accelerating delivery of finance that already exists than a new fund,” she said. 

    Rosemberg said, however, that what would need to be funded is the operation of the BAM, which would cost about $10 million per year. This money would support research and the setting up of a secretariat, Kuda Manjojo of Power Shift Africa told Climate Home.

    The post Rich nations push back on calls for new just transition mechanism appeared first on Climate Home News.

    Source Link Rich nations push back on calls for new just transition mechanism
    Climate Home News

    Brandon-Wu-e1763744463163-120x120-1
    , , , , , ,

    Just transition, finance and equity – that’s how we get COP30 to act on fossil fuels 

    Just transition, finance and equity – that’s how we get COP30 to act on fossil fuels 
    Just transition, finance and equity – that’s how we get COP30 to act on fossil fuels 
    Just transition, finance and equity – that’s how we get COP30 to act on fossil fuels 
    Just transition, finance and equity – that’s how we get COP30 to act on fossil fuels 
    Just transition, finance and equity – that’s how we get COP30 to act on fossil fuels 

    Brandon Wu oversees research, advocacy, coalition building and campaigning work for ActionAid USA.

    Leaders are supposed to lead by example. If you broke it, you’re meant to fix it (or at least pay for it). You’re supposed to do unto others as you’d have them do unto you.

    These and any number of other tired cliches are actually incredibly useful for describing the seemingly interminable deadlocks at UN climate negotiations like COP30. 

    There is a set of rich developed countries that call themselves “climate leaders.” They caused the climate crisis through their emissions, and they should be fixing it by zeroing out those emissions and paying for poorer countries to do the same. They should be treating countries and communities harmed by climate impacts with compassion and solidarity.

    News flash: they aren’t doing any of those things. And somehow we act surprised that the climate negotiations haven’t yet produced the massive breakthroughs the world needs?

    No transition without concrete support

    It might be easy to blame certain countries for being unhappy with a proposed roadmap to end fossil fuels, backed by 80-90 nations at the talks. But let’s not lose sight of the fact that the wealthy countries that are pushing for the roadmap – the European Union most stridently – are themselves not anywhere close to being on track to phase out fossil fuels. 

    Just as importantly, developed countries as a whole have consistently refused to provide meaningful amounts of climate finance in line with needs, despite their extremely clear obligations and the practical realities of the need for support in developing countries.

    COP30 Bulletin Day 11: With talks in “crisis”, countries urged to unite for COP30 deal

    Of course we need a roadmap to phase out fossil fuels – that is what many of us are here to achieve. But if the transition away from fossil fuels is not just, it will not succeed. And if there is no support from developed to developing countries, not only will the transitions there not be just – in many cases they will not happen at all.

    Just transition mechanism close?

    To that end, at COP30, negotiators are getting tantalizingly close to an outcome on “just transition” – a framework to support countries to ensure their communities and workers are lifted up rather than left behind as they transition to a new and more sustainable economy. 

    Civil society has been pushing hard for a “Belem Action Mechanism,” or BAM, that would embed just transition principles into a coherent, practical and actionable system. The guiding principle behind the push for the BAM, and for just transition more broadly, is that without justice, any massive economic transition will fail, as it will be impossible to garner the necessary political support to implement it.

    The BAM was the major priority for many activists and developing countries coming into this COP, and a great deal of open and transparent negotiations have gone into trying to make it a reality. In contrast, the fossil fuel roadmap – necessary as some form of it is – was dropped into the formal negotiations late, without any transparent process.

    Rich nations push back on calls for new just transition mechanism

    Developing countries need a comprehensive package

    Between rich country intransigence and undemocratic processes, it’s understandable – and justifiable – that many developing countries, including most of the Africa Group, are uncomfortable with the fossil fuel roadmap being pushed for at COP30. It doesn’t mean they are all “blockers” or want the world to burn, and characterizing them as such is irresponsible.

    The core package of just transition, public finance – including for adaptation and loss and damage – and phasing out fossil fuels and deforestation is exactly that: a package. The latter simply will not happen, politically or practically, without the former. 

    If COP30 ends without a roadmap to phase out fossil fuels and deforestation, let’s make sure we keep the pressure on the real culprits: the rich countries that keep coming to these negotiations offering nothing but demanding everything.

    The post Just transition, finance and equity – that’s how we get COP30 to act on fossil fuels  appeared first on Climate Home News.

    Source Link Just transition, finance and equity – that’s how we get COP30 to act on fossil fuels 
    Climate Home News

    P-068209_00-14_02-HIGH-759322-480x320-1
    , , , , ,

    Colombia seeks to speed up a “just” fossil fuel phase-out with first global conference

    Colombia seeks to speed up a “just” fossil fuel phase-out with first global conference
    Colombia seeks to speed up a “just” fossil fuel phase-out with first global conference

    As sharp divisions at UN talks stall progress on a shift away from fossil fuels, 24 countries have backed a first global conference on the transition, saying the summit in Colombia next April is needed to speed up efforts to wean the world off planet-heating oil, gas and coal. 

    The conference aims to bring together governments, experts, industry leaders and Indigenous people among others, to chart “legal, economic and social pathways” for a fair and just phase-out of fossil fuels, Colombia’s Environment Minister Irene Vélez Torres told journalists at COP30 on Friday. 

    Supporters of the initiative include major fossil fuel producers Australia and Mexico, as well as several European, Latin American and Pacific island nations. 

    Colombia and the Netherlands will co-host the event on April 28-29 in the Colombian port city of Santa Marta, which plays a significant role in coal exports.  

    Speaking after the release of a COP30 draft decision text that failed to mention fossil fuels, Vélez Torres told a packed-out room: “We know that this conversation cannot end here.”

    “We must keep the momentum, lead with bravery, rise to the challenge, and build a coalition of the willing,” she added. 

    The conference is meant to sit alongside discussions taking place under the UN climate regime, where all 198 signatories need to reach decisions by consensus. 

    Conference to feed into COP31

    Vanuatu’s climate minister Ralph Regenvanu said the Colombia-led coalition is needed to advance discussions over the transition regardless of what happens at COP30. The conference “will strengthen the process here next time we meet in Turkiye” at COP31, he added.

    Australia, a backer of the initiative, announced this week that it will run negotiations at COP31 next year even though the conference will take place in the Turkish coastal city of Antalya. 

    The 24 countries signed a joint declaration supporting calls to develop a roadmap for the shift away from fossil fuels and setting out the conditions for a just and equitable transition.

    Those include consideration of national circumstances and the need to support workers and vulnerable communities, as well as the importance of financial and technological support and of promoting diversified economies that reduce reliance on fossil fuel revenues. 

      Alex Rafalowicz, director of the Fossil Fuel Non-Proliferation Treaty Initiative, described the declaration as “historic”. That’s because for the first time a fossil-fuel producing country like Australia “recognises that production, licensing, subsidising and consumption [of fossil fuels] are matters of international concern”, he added.

      Matthew Webb, associate director for Global Clean Power Diplomacy at think-tank E3G, said the coalition demonstrates “the growing and unprecedented level of support at COP30 to deliver a process for a roadmap to the just transition away from fossil fuels”. 

      With Australia now on board, there is a clear path for such a roadmap to be landed in Belem and taken forward into COP31, he added. Current draft texts do not refer to a fossil fuel transition roadmap, to the chagrin of some including the European Union, as well as Latin American and Pacific island states. 

      “Securing our survival”

      Tuvalu’s climate minister Maina Talia expressed disappointment over the lack of a “survival map” for quitting fossil fuels at COP30, as his country faces an existential threat from rising sea levels. 

      He added that “after 30 years, this process is still failing us, so we will not wait” and instead work on a different process “to secure our survival”. 

      Johanna Gusman, senior attorney at the Center for International Environmental Law, described Colombia’s 2026 conference as “a step towards good-faith international cooperation to actually tackle the climate crisis”.

      “We need a time-bound plan to curb [fossil fuel] production and use, end new licensing and subsidies, and mobilise finance for developing countries,” she added in a statement.

      The post Colombia seeks to speed up a “just” fossil fuel phase-out with first global conference appeared first on Climate Home News.

      Source Link Colombia seeks to speed up a “just” fossil fuel phase-out with first global conference
      Climate Home News

      A man pushes an old tyre at a tyre recycling shop, in Obilic
      , , , , , , ,

      COP30 fails to land deal on fossil fuel transition but triples finance for climate adaptation

      COP30 fails to land deal on fossil fuel transition but triples finance for climate adaptation
      COP30 fails to land deal on fossil fuel transition but triples finance for climate adaptation
      COP30 fails to land deal on fossil fuel transition but triples finance for climate adaptation
      COP30 fails to land deal on fossil fuel transition but triples finance for climate adaptation
      COP30 fails to land deal on fossil fuel transition but triples finance for climate adaptation

      After all-night talks, governments at COP30 agreed on Saturday to launch limited initiatives to strengthen emissions-cutting plans, as well as tripling finance to help poor countries cope with worsening climate change impacts by 2035. But the Amazon summit’s outcomes fell short on the global transition away from oil, gas and coal.

      In an effort to deliver something on fossil fuels, the Brazilian presidency complemented the final “Belém political package” by promising to create roadmaps on transitioning away from fossil fuels and protecting forests – as requested by Brazilian President Lula da Silva.  

      Brazil tabled its roadmap proposal at the eleventh hour as a compromise solution after some nations – especially European and Latin American states – voiced disappointment that a formal deal was not reached on one after strong pushback from large fossil fuel producers led by Saudi Arabia. 

      Brazil’s roadmap process will sit outside the UN climate regime. It will be supported by other countries such as Colombia, which is organising the first global conference on the issue, said COP30 President André Aranha Corrêa do Lago. He added that he will also craft a second roadmap to halt and reverse deforestation and report back to the COP on them both.  

      “We know some of you had greater ambition for some of the issues at hand,” Corrêa do Lago told a closing plenary. “I will try not to disappoint you.” 

        Brazil’s Environment Minister Marina Silva, who first championed the idea of a fossil fuel roadmap, said that, although “this fundamental call” was left out of the final outcome, the support shown from several countries and civil society will strengthen Brazil’s commitment.

        UN climate chief Simon Stiell said 194 countries had shown in Belem that they could stand firm in solidarity “amid the gale-force political headwinds”. “This year there has been a lot of attention on one country stepping back,” he added.

        He was referring indirectly to the US’s abandonment of climate action under US President Donald Trump, who in September at the UN General Assembly called climate change “the greatest con job ever”.  

        “Denial, division and geopolitics has dealt international cooperation some heavy blows this year,” Stiell said in a statement. But, he added, “COP30 showed that climate cooperation is alive and kicking”.

        Russia calls Latam nations ‘children’ in plenary spat

        After the key decisions in the Belém package were gavelled through, the conference descended into an argument over procedure, as European and Latin American nations objected to already-adopted texts on a global adaptation goal and emissions-cutting work. Colombia pushed for a last-minute mention of fossil fuels in the text on mitigating planet-heating emissions.

        The plenary was suspended and following hurried consultations, resumed after an hour. The COP president clarified that the gavelled decisions could not be revoked and work on those areas would continue at mid-year talks next June.

        COP30 President Andre Correa do Lago in consultations after the closing plenary was suspended. Photo: Ueslei Marcelino/COP30

        COP30 President Andre Correa do Lago in consultations after the closing plenary was suspended. Photo: Ueslei Marcelino/COP30

        Saudi Arabia, Russia and India criticised their Latin American colleagues for disrupting the proceedings, with Russia saying they were acting like children who don’t want to share their sweets. “You want to stuff them down your throat until you make us all sick,” the Russian delegate said in Spanish.

        Panama’s delegate hit back, saying children are “extremely intelligent and visionary” and her country would continue to push for “transformative decisions”. “We wish we all behave like children, to work for a better future, instead of all future-less adults,” she added.

        After week-long row, COP30 fails to mention fossil fuels

        Earlier in the week, after more than 80 countries had called for a roadmap to phase down oil, coal and gas to be kickstarted at COP30, observers said fossil fuel heavyweights, including Gulf States, Russia and India, insisted it stay out of the final “Global Mutirão” decision that was adopted in Belém, along with any explicit mention of fossil fuels. 

        On Friday, the European Union and the UK had fought hard against that opposition but ultimately had to settle for two new processes that are meant to reinforce ambition and implementation of countries’ national climate plans (NDCs), with reports and a high-level dialogue due next year. 

        Before the final plenary, EU Climate Commissioner Wopke Hoekstra said it had been “an intense and sometimes difficult week and evening”, adding “we would have liked to have more”. But, he said, “we think we should support [the COP outcome] because at least it is going in the right direction.”

        The Mutirão text encourages countries ”to strengthen their existing nationally determined contribution at any time with a view to enhancing its level of ambition” and calls on them to accelerate their implementation “while striving to do better collectively and cooperatively”.

        In a last-minute push, Colombia – which championed a declaration to transition away from oil, coal and gas – told the closing plenary the country was “left with no other choice” but to object to the outcome of the dedicated mitigation track on emission-cutting efforts unless a mention to fossil fuels was added.

        The Colombian delegate calls for the inclusion of fossil fuels in the final decision. Photo: UN Climate Change – Kiara Worth

        The Colombian delegate calls for the inclusion of fossil fuels in the final decision. Photo: UN Climate Change – Kiara Worth

        Developed countries – especially the EU – had felt isolated in their push for stronger language on emission-cutting measures after failing to win vocal support from traditional allies such as the Alliance of Small Island States (AOSIS) and the Least Developed Countries (LDCs). 

        That was mainly because of Europe’s inability to make a compelling offer on finance for adaptation, negotiators and observers said. 

        “Adaptation COP” triples finance for climate resilience 

        A demand from the world’s poorest nations to triple adaptation finance was agreed, but only by a deadline of 2035 rather than 2030, and without a clear number.

        However, the main Mutirão decision urges developed countries to increase their collective provision of climate finance for adaptation to the Global South. It also sets up a two-year process on climate finance as well as a high-level ministerial roundtable to discuss progress towards meeting the new climate finance goal agreed last year at COP29.

        That COP29 goal set a target for rich nations to provide $300 billion a year for climate action by 2035 – and the Belém call “for efforts to at least triple” adaptation finance will be part of this, as the EU had insisted.

        “It is very clear that we should stand shoulder to shoulder with the poorest nations,” the EU’s climate chief Wopke Hoekstra said before the final conference session began. 

        Poorest countries appeal for more adaptation finance at COP30

        Some African ministers gave the outcome on adaptation finance a cautious welcome. But many countries – including the EU, some Latin American states, Switzerland and Canada – were angry about a text that adopted indicators to measure progress on adaptation efforts.

        They made interventions rejecting the decision on a new Global Goal on Adaptation (GGA) –  expected to be a flagship outcome at this COP – which included a rewritten and shortened list of metrics to measure progress on climate resilience originally developed by technical experts.

        Jiwoh Abdulai, environment minister of Sierra Leone, said they had worked tirelessly to craft a set of indicators that would reflect “lived realities” on the ground, but are now left with “unclear, unmeasurable and – in many cases – unusable” ones. 

        “For us, this is not technical, this is about our survival,” he added before the plenary was suspended.

        Wins on trade and just transition mechanism

        As the Belém political package was adopted to muted applause from countries, campaigners at the back of the room whooped with joy as the conference approved a decision on just transition.

        They and developing countries had swung behind the new action mechanism which will now be set up and is intended to serve as a hub to support countries in taking concrete steps to ensure their shift from dirty to clean energy systems is fair and equitable.  

        Civil society stage protests calling for the institutionalisation of a just transition mechanism; Photo by IISD/ENB | Mike Muzurakis

        Civil society stage protests calling for the institutionalisation of a just transition mechanism; Photo by IISD/ENB | Mike Muzurakis

        The Mutirão decision also includes trade, another key issue that was not on the official negotiating agenda, along with long-term climate finance and the gap in emissions-cutting ambition.

        Annual dialogues will take place at the next three mid-year Bonn sessions on boosting international cooperation on trade – an emerging economy priority in the context of a carbon levy on imports proposed by the EU. 

        COP31 will be hosted by Türkiye but run by Australia

        Experts said the inclusion of trade in a COP decision was a big win for China. “For the first time, trade is elevated alongside mitigation and finance as a critical third pillar for climate progress,” said Kate Logan, director of China Climate Hub at the Asia Society Policy Institute, adding that this “is likely to remain a key arena for China’s influence” in the climate regime. 

        The decision reaffirms that “measures taken to combat climate change, including unilateral ones, should not constitute a means of arbitrary or unjustifiable discrimination or a disguised restriction on international trade”.

        The post COP30 fails to land deal on fossil fuel transition but triples finance for climate adaptation appeared first on Climate Home News.

        Source Link COP30 fails to land deal on fossil fuel transition but triples finance for climate adaptation
        Climate Home News

        Climate Summit 2025
        , , , , , ,

        “We are still here” – COP30 tests resolve to keep fighting climate crisis

        “We are still here” – COP30 tests resolve to keep fighting climate crisis
        “We are still here” – COP30 tests resolve to keep fighting climate crisis
        “We are still here” – COP30 tests resolve to keep fighting climate crisis

        COP30 came to a close on Saturday afternoon in the Amazon city of Belém with government delegates grumpy and exhausted after all-night talks. It ended with a political deal that was weaker than many had hoped for and which failed to tackle – or even directly mention – the elephant in the room: fossil fuels.

        Strong resistance from oil, coal and gas-producing countries, including Saudi Arabia, Russia and India, made it impossible to include a roadmap to transition away from fossil fuels – which European nations had fought for hard – in the final negotiated package. Brazil, instead, said it would create one, along with another roadmap on halting deforestation.

        There were some wins – not least that against a hostile geopolitical background, this year’s UN climate conference managed to land a deal with modest steps towards increasing ambition on cutting emissions and helping poor countries cope with worsening climate impacts. 

        COP30 fails to land deal on fossil fuel transition but triples finance for climate adaptation

        At this weekend’s G20 summit, where the US was also absent, leaders of the world’s biggest economies confirmed their support for the Paris Agreement and efforts to limit global warming to its temperature goals, as well as enabling the Global South to access more finance for climate action.

        In one of the few political wins from COP30, the poorest countries secured a promise to triple international funding for them to adapt to more extreme weather and rising seas by 2035, though that deadline was five years later than they wanted and lacking a firm number.

        Perhaps the most celebrated result, however – slipping largely under the radar – was an agreement to set up a “just transition mechanism” to ensure that workers and their communities do not lose out from the shift from dirty to clean energy and get a fairer share of the benefits. 

        Trade was another new kid on the block, with governments deciding to hold a series of dialogues on cooperating “to promote a supportive and open international economic system that would lead to sustainable economic growth and development” in all countries.

        Here’s a selection of reactions from top politicians, UN officials, experts and campaigners to the COP30 outcome:  

        Marina Silva, Brazil’s Minister of the Environment and Climate Change:

        “I believe we can show today that, despite delays, contradictions and disputes, there is continuity between the ambition of Rio-92 and today’s effort. That we remain capable of cooperating, of learning, and of recognising that there are no shortcuts – and that the courage to confront the climate crisis is the result of persistence and collective effort.

        “But even if those earlier versions of us were to say we have not gone as far as we once imagined we would – or needed to – they would nevertheless recognise something essential: we are still here. And we continue steadfast in our commitment to undertake the journey necessary to overcome our differences and contradictions in urgently confronting climate change.”

        Comment: Not another COP-out – We must rewrite the rules of the UN climate talks

        Juan Carlos Monterrey-Gomez, Special Representative for Climate Change & National Climate Change Director of the Ministry of Environment of Panama:

        “Ten years after the adoption of the Paris Agreement, the negotiators that your governments sent to COP30 are not defending your future. They are defending the very industries that created this crisis: the fossil fuel industry and the forces driving global deforestation…

        “A Forest COP with no commitment on forests is a very bad joke. A climate decision that cannot even say “fossil fuels” is not neutrality, it is complicity. And what is happening here transcends incompetence.”

        António Guterres, Secretary-General of the United Nations:

        “COPs are consensus-based – and in a period of geopolitical divides, consensus is ever harder to reach. I cannot pretend that COP30 has delivered everything that is needed.

        “COP30 is over, but our work is not. I will continue pushing for higher ambition and greater solidarity. To all those who marched, negotiated, advised, reported and mobilised: do not give up. History is on your side – and so is the United Nations.”

        Secretary-General António Guterres addresses the Climate Summit 2025, a high-Level special event on Climate Action at UNHQ in New York, September 24, 2025. (Photo: UN Photo/Manuel Elias)

        Secretary-General António Guterres addresses the Climate Summit 2025, a high-Level special event on Climate Action at UNHQ in New York, September 24, 2025. (Photo: UN Photo/Manuel Elias)

        Al Gore, former US Vice President:

        “Despite petrostates’ attempt to veto the development of a roadmap away from fossil fuels, the Brazilian COP30 Presidency will lead an effort to develop this roadmap, bolstered by the more than 80 countries that already support the effort. Ultimately, petrostates, the fossil fuel industry, and their allies are losing power…

        “The rest of the world is fed up with delay and denial. Now is the time to forge global partnerships among all levels of government, the private sector, finance, and civil society to cultivate and achieve the level of action necessary to fulfill the promise the world made to future generations under the Paris Agreement.”

        Johan Rockström, Earth system scientist and Director of the Potsdam Institute for Climate Impact Research (PIK):
        “Ten years after Paris, COP30 was declared to be the COP of ‘truth and implementation’. Scientifically, this was an appropriate label. But leaders gathered in Belém failed to fulfil this promise.

        “The ‘truth’ is that our only chance of ‘keeping 1.5°C within reach’, is to bend the global curve of emissions downward in 2026 and then reduce emissions by at least 5% per year. ‘Implementation’ requires concrete roadmaps to accelerate the phase out of fossil fuels and the protection of nature. We got neither.”

        Inger Andersen, United Nations Environment Programme Executive Director:

        “COP30… reinforced the growing global momentum, both in and outside of the negotiating halls, to transition away from fossil fuels as agreed in Dubai at COP28, halt deforestation – including the launch of the Tropical Forest Forever Facility that now stands at US$6.7 billion – and pursue rapid, high-impact measures such as cutting methane emissions.

        “The Action Agenda, the foundation to such an inclusive COP from the Brazil Presidency that saw unprecedented Indigenous Peoples leadership from the Amazon and across the world, reinforced momentum is coming from all sources, including businesses, cities and regions, local communities, civil society, women, people of African descent, youth, and many more.”

        Toya Manchineri, Manchineri Peoples, Coordination of Indigenous Organizations of the Brazilian Amazon (COIAB):

        “Indigenous Peoples will remain vigilant, mobilised, and present beyond COP30 to ensure that our voices are respected and that global decisions reflect the urgency we experience in our territories. For some, COP ends today, for us territorial defense in the heart of the Amazon is every day.”

        An indigenous person holds a sign reading: “Water is worth more than copper”, during a protest to call for climate justice and territorial protection during the U.N. Climate Change Conference (COP30), in Belem, Brazil, November 17, 2025. REUTERS/Anderson Coelho

        An indigenous person holds a sign reading: “Water is worth more than copper”, during a protest to call for climate justice and territorial protection during the U.N. Climate Change Conference (COP30), in Belem, Brazil, November 17, 2025. REUTERS/Anderson Coelho

        Kaysie Brown, Associate Director, Climate Diplomacy & Geopolitics, E3G:

        “In an increasingly turbulent and multi-polar world, COP30 was a litmus test of whether political will and commitment to multilateralism could keep pace with the momentum already evident in the real economy.  

        “A deal was always going to be hard-fought, and the outcome on the table shows that Parties were not consistently resolute in pursuing the level of collective ambition required. Even so, there are important foundations to build on – elements that can be translated into tangible acceleration of real-world progress.”

        Li Shuo, Director of the China Climate Hub at the Asia Society Policy Institute:

        “COP30 marks a new inflection point in global climate politics. As national climate ambition slows, international negotiations are now constrained by diminishing political will. When the United States steps back, others are left cautious and indecisive.

        “Belém has laid bare an urgent truth: in the absence of strong political momentum for greater ambition, the climate agenda will be driven less by the COP process and more by the economic forces unfolding in the real world.”

        Mohamed Adow, Director, Power Shift Africa:

        “With an increasingly fractured geopolitical backdrop, COP30 gave us some baby steps in the right direction, but considering the scale of the climate crisis, it has failed to rise to the occasion. 

        “Among the green shoots to emerge was the creation of a Just Transition Action Mechanism – a recognition that the global move away from fossil fuels will not abandon workers and frontline communities.

        “COP30 kept the process alive — but process alone will not cool the planet. Roadmaps and work-plans will mean nothing unless they now translate into real finance and real action for the countries bearing the brunt of the crisis.”

        Activists show messages written on their hands as they take part in a protest while COP 30 negotiators leave the meeting room, during the UN Climate Change Conference (COP30), in Belem, Brazil, November 21, 2025. REUTERS/Anderson Coelho

        Activists show messages written on their hands as they take part in a protest while COP 30 negotiators leave the meeting room, during the UN Climate Change Conference (COP30), in Belem, Brazil, November 21, 2025. REUTERS/Anderson Coelho

        Tasneem Essop, Executive Director, Climate Action Network International:

        “We came here to get the Belém Action Mechanism – for families, for workers, for communities. The adoption of a Just Transition mechanism was a win shaped by years of pressure from civil society.

        “This outcome didn’t fall from the sky; it was carved out through struggle, persistence, and the moral clarity of those living on the frontlines of climate breakdown. Governments must now honour this Just Transition mechanism with real action. Anything less is a betrayal of people – and of the Paris promise.”

        Ani Dasgupta, President & CEO, World Resources Institute: 

        “COP30 delivered breakthroughs to triple adaptation finance, protect the world’s forests and elevate the voices of Indigenous people like never before. This shows that even against a challenging geopolitical backdrop, international climate cooperation can still deliver results…

        “COP30 succeeded in putting people at the center of climate action. Indigenous Peoples participated in record numbers and made their voices heard. The Global Ethical Stocktake affirmed that fairness, inclusion, and responsibility must guide every decision. New commitments for Indigenous Peoples’ and communities’ land rights and finance offer a strong step forward, though far more is needed.”

        The post “We are still here” – COP30 tests resolve to keep fighting climate crisis appeared first on Climate Home News.

        Source Link “We are still here” – COP30 tests resolve to keep fighting climate crisis
        Climate Home News

        Demonstrators attend a march in defense of the living forest, territorial rights, and global climate responsibility during the U.N. Climate Change Conference (COP30) in Belem
        , , , , ,

        “Coordinated backlash”: Activists say COP30 gender spat reflects wider threat

        “Coordinated backlash”: Activists say COP30 gender spat reflects wider threat
        “Coordinated backlash”: Activists say COP30 gender spat reflects wider threat
        “Coordinated backlash”: Activists say COP30 gender spat reflects wider threat
        “Coordinated backlash”: Activists say COP30 gender spat reflects wider threat
        “Coordinated backlash”: Activists say COP30 gender spat reflects wider threat

        During the closing session of COP30, the representative of the Holy See – the governing body of the Vatican – was booed. That reaction was triggered by his statement requesting that any mentions of gender should be “understood as grounded on the biological sexual identity that is male and female”.

        The comments followed a heated debate that had threatened to derail talks on the new Gender Action Plan (GAP) in Belém, stirring concerns that growing political pressure in the wider world to roll back advances on gender issues had seeped into the UN climate process.

        Gender was a hotter-than-usual topic at this COP. Negotiators were tasked with agreeing a new GAP – a document to guide how gender features in climate decisions and action over the next 10 years, including balanced participation in climate talks, ensuring that climate projects consider different gender needs in their implementation, and collecting data that is broken down by gender.

        Part of a broader work programme on gender, which was renewed during COP29, work on the GAP started at June’s mid-year talks in Bonn. That produced a text containing 99 brackets, denoting issues to be resolved. As disagreement among parties multiplied in Brazil, the last draft made public during COP30 had 496 brackets, making it a small miracle that a final version of the GAP was approved at the summit.

        COP30 fails to land deal on fossil fuel transition but triples finance for climate adaptation

        The most controversial issue was the definition of gender, which the Holy See, Argentina, Paraguay and Iran wanted to refer to as “biological sex”, reflecting their concerns about trans and non-binary people. One draft version of the text included a footnote added by each of those countries marking their objections. None of them made it into the final decision.

        While Russia did not submit its own footnote, Climate Home News understands that it pushed hard to replace the term “gender” with “women and girls” and “men and boys”. During its intervention at the closing plenary, Russia’s delegate said his government works to strengthen the institution of marriage, which it understands as “a relationship between a man and a woman”.

        Another thorny issue was “sexual and reproductive health”, a term that did not appear in the final text. The Holy See was among those that fought hard to exclude it. Archbishop Giambattista Diquattro, the head of delegation, said in an interview with Vatican News that tackling this topic was “a diversion from the real issue under discussion”, adding that “the inclusion in the text of sexual and reproductive rights, which include abortion”, is something the city-state could not “in any way accept.”

        “Cruel” intrusion into climate debate

        Partway through COP30, as the rows over gender surfaced, women’s rights organisations denounced the situation at a press conference.

        “We’ve always had fights on the Gender Action Plan… but this is different. This is trying to actually push women back by having this binary definition,” said Mary Robinson, former Irish president who is now a member of the Elders. “It’s so cruel. I mean, it’s actually unbelievable that this would enter into our space.”

        Demonstrators, with lamps called ‘Poronga’ on their heads, attend a march in defense of the living forest, territorial rights, and global climate responsibility during the U.N. Climate Change Conference (COP30) in Belem, Brazil, November 13, 2025. REUTERS/Adriano Machado

        Demonstrators, with lamps called ‘Poronga’ on their heads, attend a march in defense of the living forest, territorial rights, and global climate responsibility during the U.N. Climate Change Conference (COP30) in Belem, Brazil, November 13, 2025. REUTERS/Adriano Machado

        Bridget Burns, executive director of the Women’s Environment & Development Organization (WEDO), said it felt like a coordinated backlash – and it wasn’t limited to the gender negotiations.

        Argentina and Paraguay also raised objections to definitions of gender in the Just Transition Work Programme (JTWP) negotiations. But they didn’t get what they wanted there either.

        “The outcomes we got in the JTWP decision are the most ambitious from a rights and inclusion perspective ever,” said Anabella Rosemberg, senior advisor on just transition with Climate Action Network International, noting that the protestations by specific countries on gender would only be added to the UN climate summit’s report. “They didn’t get what they wanted, which was a footnote in each decision.”

        Had that happened, it would have posed “a very serious threat to the process”, said Rosemberg. Burns said allowing definitions on what words mean for individual parties to creep into the formal decision texts could have set “a bad precedent”.

        Claudia Rubio Giraldo, associate for policy and programmes at WEDO, said that such resistance to human rights language shows how important advocacy is – and advocacy groups should be ready to act when negotiation rooms that were previously “progressive points of discussion” become “battlegrounds” on human rights in climate action.

        Activists say COP30 row on human rights language reflects wider threat

        Members of civil society during the People’s Plenary (Photo: UN Climate Change – Kiara Worth)

        Nonetheless, noted Burns, this was the first time sexual and reproductive rights had entered a gender draft, albeit in brackets.

        And she pointed to a deliverable in the final GAP document that asks governments to submit the findings of national assessments, including on “health, violence against women and girls, and care work in the context of gender and climate change”.

        “We’re hopeful that [this] gives us the opportunity for countries who are making progress on this to actually share their solutions,” Burns added.

          A GAP without money

          On finance, however, campaigners were disappointed with the outcome. They had pushed for women to be given direct access to funding – and for gender to be addressed as part of the climate finance negotiations. Yet, even at a COP where one of the main wins was a tripling of finance for adaptation by 2035, there was little progress on funding for “gender-responsive” work.

          Burns described the talks as “a massive failure” on that front. But she pointed to the COP29 decision to renew the Enhanced Lima Work Programme on Gender, which says that the Green Climate Fund, the biggest UN climate fund, should “strengthen the gender-responsiveness of climate finance”, and facilitate access to climate finance for grassroots women’s organisations.

          In 2022, they received just 4% of government aid spent on adaptation. On mitigation efforts to reduce emissions, that number dropped to 2%.

          Burns said advocacy groups will also push for finance across broader areas like tax, trade and debt to intersect with gender needs and unlock more funds for climate programmes targeted at women.

          For now, she said, it is important to ensure COP30’s progress is protected and that the agreement on the GAP in Belém in allows for “focusing on solutions and ways in which we can both enhance climate action and gender equality without having to renegotiate our rights every single year”.

          The post “Coordinated backlash”: Activists say COP30 gender spat reflects wider threat appeared first on Climate Home News.

          Source Link “Coordinated backlash”: Activists say COP30 gender spat reflects wider threat
          Climate Home News

          Vanuatu-Regenvanu-presser-480x320-1
          , , , , , ,

          Why the ICJ’s advisory opinion on climate change took a backseat at COP30  

          Why the ICJ’s advisory opinion on climate change took a backseat at COP30  
          Why the ICJ’s advisory opinion on climate change took a backseat at COP30  
          Why the ICJ’s advisory opinion on climate change took a backseat at COP30  

          With the International Court of Justice’s landmark advisory opinion on climate change hot off the press this July, hopes were high it could be used as a diplomatic lever for stronger climate action at COP30 in Brazil. But it proved a difficult tool to wield in a tense atmosphere.

          The advisory opinion (AO) from the world’s top court – which determined that all states have obligations to protect the climate system from significant harm – has already been woven into new climate litigation and existing legal cases, and judges are starting to reference it in their rulings.

          The Mexican community of El Bosque in Tabasco even managed to use it as leverage in recent negotiations with the central government over its latest national climate plan (NDC).

          Yet, while some countries wanted the ICJ’s non-binding conclusions to feature in the main political decision approved at November’s climate COP in the Amazon city of Belém, the lack of a coordinated strategic push meant that did not happen, legal experts said.

            Monaco, Mexico, the Alliance of Small Island States (AOSIS) and the group of Least Developed Countries (LDCs) all called for the ICJ’s decision – and two other climate advisory opinions from the Inter-American Court of Human Rights and the International Tribunal on the Law of the Sea – to be recognised during various COP30 presidency consultations.

            But Jennifer Bansard, the Earth Negotiations Bulletin team leader, told journalists at COP30 that these requests were “at very generic levels” and did not go into the courts’ actionable findings.

            “Deep, deep, deep red line”

            The closest the ICJ advisory opinion came to being mentioned in a formal text was during a review of the Warsaw International Mechanism for Loss and Damage (WIM). This is key as experts believe the decision has particularly significant implications for the new loss and damage fund.

            During these discussions, the Independent Alliance of Latin American and Caribbean Nations (AILAC) said the AO provides “an informed legal foundation” for advancing work on loss and damage. They pointed to “the need for comprehensive assessment and health protection” for vulnerable groups and “forms of reparation” This was supported by Vanuatu, which led the diplomatic work resulting in the ICJ opinion.

            But Saudi Arabia, representing the Arab Group, responded that the ICJ’s final outcome is “non-binding” and “does not represent parties’ views” even though it participated in the process. Negotiations, it added, are a “party-driven process based on consensus, and not litigation”.

            According to a source in the room, the Arab Group described the inclusion of the ICJ AO anywhere in the WIM document as a “deep, deep, deep red line”. “If you insist on discussing it, we might as well just suspend this session to not waste each other’s time,” said Saudi Arabia’s negotiator. The AO is not mentioned in the final agreed WIM text.

            “We are still here” – COP30 tests resolve to keep fighting climate crisis

            Harjeet Singh, founding director of the Satat Sampada Climate Foundation and strategic advisor to the Fossil Fuel Non-Proliferation Treaty Initiative, said the group was particularly concerned about the ICJ’s reference to the status of a state as developed or developing as “not static”.

            “They feared that formally recognising the opinion would open the door to limitless legal liability for fossil fuel production,” he explained.

            Left out of the COP30 cover decision

            In addition, the AO’s recognition of a “just and fast transition in line with best available science” was mentioned by Fiji, for the Alliance of Small Island States (AOSIS), at an inaugural meeting on the Just Transition Work Programme. AILAC, Egypt and the UK also raised it during just transition negotiations, while Malawi used it to try to frame transition finance as a legal necessity.

            Some states had expected the cover decision to recognise the AO in some form, but text drawn up by Brazil’s COP presidency did not include relevant wording.

            The lack of references came despite the fact that the UN asked the ICJ for the advisory opinion unanimously and 96 countries spoke at the hearings.

            visualization

            Data visualisation developed by law professor Margaret Young and designers Dan Parker and Stanislav Roudavski.

            Singh said the COP30 battle lines were drawn so sharply on the ICJ opinion because it validates the claims of vulnerable countries for climate justice, while historical and large polluters wanted “to avoid acknowledging any legal framework that implies liability”.

            But, he added, while pushing back strongly against it, developed countries “neither championed nor explicitly opposed it in open plenary to avoid negative optics”.

            The ICJ’s recognition that COP decisions may have legal effects could also make negotiators more wary of what they agree to.

            In the closing COP30 plenary, Palau for AOSIS noted the ICJ’s clear assertion of 1.5C as the legal temperature limit. Yet the final Mutirao decision explicitly reiterates the Paris Agreement’s language of “pursuing efforts” to reach that level, while retaining the original goal of “well below 2°C”.

            No coordinated push to champion the AO

            Harj Narulla, a barrister specialising in climate litigation and counsel for the Solomon Islands, argued the COP30 decision “undermined” the ICJ’s conclusions. But barring a few nations like Saudi Arabia, he saw the overall outcome as a “failure of capacity and coordination, rather than a principled opposition to using the AO”.

            Insiders said government negotiating teams remain too separate from their legal teams, and the former were not properly briefed on how the AO could be used in practice.

            The leadership expected from climate-vulnerable countries, particularly the island nations that had advocated for the AO in the first place, also seems to have been absent. A briefing by Ed King and Lindsey Smith, who work on international climate strategy for the Global Strategic Communications Council, described AOSIS’s showing at COP30 in particular as “insipid”.

            EU alliance with climate-vulnerable nations frays over finance trade-off

            Ralph Regenvanu, minister of climate change of Vanuatu and a key architect of the AO campaign, mentioned it several times in public, including at Cambodia’s announcement that it would formally support a fossil fuel non-proliferation treaty. But his focus seemed to be on pursuing a new UN resolution recognising the ICJ’s findings.

            Neither AOSIS nor Regenvanu responded to requests for comment.

            Influencing the wider narrative

            Nonetheless, Mohamed Adow, director of Power Shift Africa who has followed the climate talks for many years, believes the AO is “starting to influence the wider narrative around responsibility and liability”.

            “Though it did not make the ‘waves’ in the formal text that many hoped for, it was clearly the ‘undercurrent’ beneath many streams of negotiation,” agreed Singh.

            Nikki Reisch, climate and energy programme director at the Center for International Environmental Law, an organisation that supports the youth activists who sparked the AO process, said the opinion also supports “the need to reform the UNFCCC to make it fit for purpose”. That includes preventing fossil fuel industry influence and allowing majority voting so that a handful of countries cannot block climate action.

            Eyes on Colombia fossil fuel transition conference

            In 2026, the opinion may start to play a stronger role on the global stage, including at an international conference on a just transition away from fossil fuels co-hosted by Colombia and The Netherlands next April.

            The Fossil Fuel Treaty initiative says that gathering will align with the AO, “which confirmed that states have a legal obligation to protect the climate, including by addressing fossil fuel production, licensing and subsidies”.

            Colombia seeks to speed up a “just” fossil fuel phase-out with first global conference

            Experts, meanwhile, expect more domestic lawsuits underpinned by the advisory opinion aimed at pushing countries to raise their ambition on cutting emissions and say inter-state litigation cannot be ruled out.

            “COP30 in Belém is by no means the last word on the ICJ AO or the climate duties it confirms,” Reisch said.

            A version of this article was originally published in The Wave.

            The post Why the ICJ’s advisory opinion on climate change took a backseat at COP30   appeared first on Climate Home News.

            Source Link Why the ICJ’s advisory opinion on climate change took a backseat at COP30  
            Climate Home News