Brazil’s Belém is set to host the 30th UN Climate Change Conference (COP 30). This comes at a time when global cooperation is turning increasingly fragile, and yet, the urgency of the climate crisis leaves no room for half-measures. With the Paris Agreement having aged a whole decade, COP30 will need to evaluate progress, acknowledge failures, and decide whether ambition can finally match reality (which it should). And there could not have been a better symbolic choice than Belem to mark this occasion, with it serving as the gateway to Earth's largest carbon sink, the Amazon. Brazil has seen dramatic shifts in how it’s dealt with climate change and conservation. From viewing conservation through the lens of opportunity costs to favouring forests as valuable assets, the country has reframed its climate leadership.
Where Climate Action Falls Short
The first step in thorough assessment was taken in 2023 at COP28 in Dubai with the start of the Global Stocktake. This offered a clear picture — inclusive of both achievements and shortfalls — of collective progress in line with the Paris Agreement.
The GST report stated that if current policies are to continue, by the end of the century, warming would remain in the range of 2.4–2.6 °C, which is above the desired and emphasised target of 2°C (which should ideally be 1.5°C above pre-industrial levels). It also found that current commitments will leave emissions 20.3–23.9 gigatonnes CO₂-equivalent higher than what is needed to stay on track for the same goal. Therefore, these emissions would need to fall roughly 43% and 60% from 2019 levels by 2030 and 2035, respectively. The net zero emissions target needs to stick to the 2050 deadline. The GST identified energy, transport, industry, and land use sectors as those requiring urgent attention, along with non-CO2 GHGs.
The GST report identified the inefficiency of developed countries in meeting their past obligations. Climate action funding is often issued as loans, and not grants. And the slow disbursal of such funds adds to the trouble for vulnerable countries. Such gaps in funding cannot easily be filled by private finance. Public interventions, accompanied by tested incentives are necessary to offer an environment conducive for private players to step in. This also means providing the right risk structures. The GST report highlights the need for accurate accounting and accountability in tracking the contributions made by non-state actors in climate financing.
Another key issue is the trust deficit that marks climate action and negotiations. Developing nations cannot help but feel that the burden of climate action is disproportionately shifting onto them without the necessary support in funding, technology, or capacity-building. These nations also need to prioritise welfare goals such as poverty alleviation,energy access and food security, along with infrastructural expansion, and industrialisation. Transitioning to renewables and climate-proof infrastructure is, therefore, not an easy task here. In addition to this, the mandates for forest protection, reforestation, or conservation can, at times, come into conflict with indigenous rights or customs. Reducing climate obligations to developed-urbanised terms will, therefore, risk overlooking the cultural and economic nuances of such nations.
What to Expect — and Watch — at COP30
The New Collective Quantified Goal (NCQG) determined at COP29 as $1.3 trillion is ambitious, but diplomatic persuasion at Belém should make this actionable. Time cannot be spent endlessly on bickering over procedural rules rather than deliverables, as seen at the intersessional talks at Bonn. It remains to be seen if developed countries can commit to flexible, yet accountable pathways for climate actions and finance.
The continuity in policy, exemplified by the Baku to Belém Roadmap is admirable. It also places focus on non-debt instruments, multilateral participation, and most importantly, transparency. The final version of this roadmap, and whether this can truly translate into measurable goals, are key aspects to closely monitor at COP30.
Several environmental and human rights groups have called for discussions at COP30 on reparations to address the “historical roots” of climate crisis. This has received backing from Colombia’s minister for environment. The signatories urge global leaders to look at the climate crisis not in isolated terms, but as a “continuation of centuries of greenhouse gas emissions, extraction, dispossession, and racial violence.” Whether this comes up for discussion, drawing attention to the legacy of “colonialism and enslavement”, as stated in the groups’ letter, remains to be seen.
COP30 should integrate discussions on climate justice, community livelihoods, and national sovereignty into its climate action agenda. This would require ‘financialisation’, as we know it, to become more inclusive and accountable. However, such negotiations may be difficult, especially when big players like the US, are celebrating nationalistic fervour. Getting these countries to commit amidst their nation-first charges will be one of the big wins for Belém.
