• The elimination of fossil fuels is not mentioned in the final text
• Vague promises on adaptation fund spark calls for reform
• Critics warn that the multilateral process is “being held hostage”
The script for COP30 in Belem was no different from previous climate conferences: some delegates left the venue with mixed feelings, while others were completely disappointed.
The conference, held in the Brazilian city on the edge of the Amazon, ran over its schedule and ended on Saturday, a day after its scheduled closure.
One of the outcomes of this so-called implementation COP was cause for celebration, in particular the just transition mechanism “to enhance international cooperation, technical assistance, capacity development and knowledge sharing, and enable just and inclusive transitions.”
This agreement, widely celebrated by civil society as a “historic victory of people’s power,” came after days of protests and intense negotiations.
“This result did not fall from the sky; it was achieved thanks to the struggle, persistence and moral clarity of those living on the front lines of climate collapse,” said Tasneem Essop, executive director of the International Climate Action Network.
“Governments must now honor this Just Transition mechanism with real action. Anything else is a betrayal of the people and the promise of Paris,” he said.
However, adaptation funding for vulnerable communities left much to be desired. The conference was supposed to reach an agreement to triple adaptation funding to $120 billion by 2030.
However, the ‘mutirao’ decision – Portuguese term for “collective efforts” – calls for efforts to “at least triple adaptation financing by 2035” without setting a baseline target, a measure that does not match the level of ambition demanded by developing countries and civil society groups.
“The refusal to commit to increasing financing to the $300 billion annually needed for adaptation leaves the unprepared helpless in the face of inevitable ruin,” said Harjeet Singh, strategic advisor to the Fossil Fuel Treaty Initiative.
“By failing to meet their previous commitment to double adaptation finance (to $40 billion) by 2025 and keeping the new target baseline vague, developed nations have attempted to dilute their responsibility, forcing the world’s most vulnerable to face rising waters empty-handed,” he said.
Progressive phase-out of fossil fuels
The worst outcome was the phasing out of fossil fuels, which did not even receive a mention in the COP agreement despite strong support from more than 80 countries.
Instead, the COP presidency announced that a roadmap to move away from fossil fuels and stop deforestation would be presented at the next climate conference, namely COP31. The roadmap will be guided by a conference to be held in Santa Marta in April and co-sponsored by Colombia and the Netherlands, according to Carbon Brief.
COP31 will be held in Turkiye and will have Australia as president.
According to CAN International, the decision to ignore the harmful impacts of fossil fuels was deeply disappointing. “Given that oil, coal and gas remain the root cause of climate breakdown, this omission represents a serious failure for COP30,” he said in a statement.
Tracy Carty of Greenpeace International said the negotiations were derailed by inadequate climate financing, weak leadership from G20 nations, particularly developed ones, and the heavy hand of fossil fuel interests.
Like fossil fuels, the financial result was also discouraging. In the absence of the United States and European Union’s focus on defense, the responsibility for saving the planet appears to have fallen on China and the developing world, Dr. Abid Suleri of the Islamabad-based Sustainable Development Policy Institute said of rich nations’ reluctance to pay for loss and damage.
Calls for reform
The presence of fossil fuel lobbyists and a watered-down outcome also put the broader UNFCCC process under scrutiny. Still, some praised the mutirao text as a victory for multilateralism.
“COP30 has shown that the current consensus model has become a veto for vandals. We are trying to put out a planetary fire, but UN rules allow arsonists – the petrostates and their 1,600 lobbyists – to stand at the door and block fire trucks,” Singh told Dawn.
He said “consensus” becomes synonymous with capitulation if a handful of countries, such as Saudi Arabia and Russia, can simply delete mention of phasing out fossil fuels from the final text. “The multilateral process is alive, but it is held hostage,” he added.
Erika Lennon, senior attorney at the Center for International Environmental Law, also called for reforms to the UN process. “Petrostates and industry lobbyists use the consensus rule to block action and ambition. We now need to reform the UNFCCC so that the global majority can act, starting with conflict of interest rules and allowing majority voting,” he said.
Dr. Suleri agreed. He said the “polarized” conference ended in a compromise despite strong claims of principle. “President Lula called COP30 the COP of truth; the truth, however, is difficult to ignore. This COP still lacks the money and ambition necessary to match the promises made at the beginning,” he added.
The conference also launched the Climate Change Information Integrity Declaration, which sets out shared international commitments to address climate misinformation and promote accurate, evidence-based information on climate issues.
This initiative aims to mobilize resources to finance research projects and investigative journalism ideas that can produce evidence in a coordinated manner, offering more inputs for better climate policies, said the director of UNESCO’s Inclusion and Policy and Digital Transformation Division, Guilherme Canela, in an email to Sunrise.
Published in Dawn, November 27, 2025
