NITERÓI, Brazil, Jan 9 2026 (IPS) – “We moved from a context of socio-environmental exclusion to one of environmental justice,” said Dionê Castro, coordinator of the Sustainable Oceanic Region Program which led Brazil’s largest nature-based solutions project.
Having won national and global awards, the Orla Piratininga Park (POP) built 35,000 square meters of filtering gardens and improved the water quality of the Piratininga lagoon, in the oceanic south of Niterói, a municipality in metropolitan Rio de Janeiro, across the Guanabara Bay.
The project, named after the late Brazilian environmentalist Alfredo Sirkis, began in 2020, and aims to environmentally restore an area of 680,000 square meters on the lagoon’s shores whose waters cover an area of 2.87 square kilometers.
[embedded content]
At the heart of the project are the treatment systems for the waters of the Cafubá, Arrozal, and Jacaré rivers, which flow into the lagoon. Sedimentation and pollution were deteriorating the water resource and the quality of life in the surrounding area.
A weir, which receives the river flow, a sedimentation pond, which removes solid waste, and the filtering gardens make up the chain that partially cleans the water before releasing it into the lagoon, reducing environmental impacts, in a process called phytoremediation.
The gardens are small reservoirs where aquatic plants called macrophytes are planted, which feed on the nutrients from the pollution, explained Heloisa Osanai, the biologist specialized in environmental management of the Sustainable Oceanic Region Program (PRO Sustainable).
Three polluted water treatment stations are in the neighborhoods crossed by the rivers, based on natural resources, “without the use of electrical energy, chemicals, or concrete,” explained Castro, the coordinator of PRO Sustainable.
Furthermore, some macrophytes produce abundant flowers. Only native Brazilian species are planted, with priority given to biodiversity, added Osanai.
Along with these water treatment systems, 10.8 kilometers of bike paths, 17 recreation centers, a 2,800-square-meter Eco-Cultural Center, and other environmental works with social goals were built.
The bike path, generally along a pedestrian sidewalk, caters to physical and leisure activities but is also a factor in protecting the lagoon shoreline by blocking urban occupation and real estate invasions, explain the officials.
The area where the water system was built at the mouth of the Cafubá river was highly degraded by an open-air dump and flooding. A reformed “belt channel,” in some sections also reinforced by macrophyte islands, corrected the waterlogging.
On the other side of the lagoon, 3.2 kilometers of bioswales improve the drainage of rainwater. They are trenches with pipes, stones, and other materials, plus vegetation, that accelerate drainage and prevent pollutants from reaching the lagoon.
The main result, according to Castro, reconciled the local population with the lagoon. The old houses that “turned their backs on the lagoon” are joined by new buildings facing the water, some with balconies overlooking the new landscape, said Mariah Bessa, the engineer in charge of hydraulic aspects of the project.
The local population was highly involved in the design and construction of the new environmental and social facilities that transformed the lagoon shoreline. This led to new attitudes, such as not littering on the ground or in the water and preventing others from doing so, according to Castro.
The Ecocultural Center promotes permanent environmental education, with films, children’s games, audiovisual resources, and a large space for visits and classes.
“We moved from a context of socio-environmental exclusion to one of environmental justice,” said the coordinator of PRO Sustainable.
Food solutions were on display everywhere around COP30—from the 80 tonnes of local and agroecological meals served to concrete proposals for tackling hunger—but none of this made it into the negotiating rooms or the final agreement. —Elisabetta Recine, IPES-Food panel expert
Agriculture is both a challenge and a solution for climate change. Busani Bafana/IPS
BULAWAYO, Jan 9 2026 (IPS) – As they ate catered meals, COP30 negotiators had no appetite for fixing broken food systems, a major source of climate pollution, experts warn.
Food systems are the complete journey food takes—from the farm to fork—which means its growing, processing, distribution, trade and consumption and even the waste.
The International Panel of Experts on Sustainable Food Systems (IPES-Food) warns that the final COP30 agreement risks deepening climate and hunger crises. It failed to address global warming emissions from food systems and the escalating damages caused by fossil-fuel-dependent industrial agriculture.
Food appears only once in the negotiated text, as a narrow indicator on ‘climate resilient food production’ under the Global Goal on Adaptation, IPES-Food pointed out.
“There is no mention of food systems, no roadmap to tackle deforestation, and no recognition that industrial agriculture drives nearly 90 percent of forest loss worldwide,” noted the think tank, emphasizing that negotiators also weakened language in the Mitigation Work Programme from addressing the ‘drivers’ of deforestation to vague ‘challenges.’
IPES-Food argued that the omission of food systems in the COP30 agreement was in stark contrast to the summit itself, which was held in the heart of the Amazon. Thirty percent of all food served during COP30 came from agroecological family farmers and traditional communities, and concrete public policy proposals for a just transition of food systems were on full display, IPES-Food said.
By not supporting a transition to environmentally friendly and low-emission agriculture, the agreement has left the global food system—and the billions who depend on it—highly vulnerable to the very climate shocks it helps cause, experts said.
“Food solutions were on display everywhere around COP30—from the 80 tonnes of local and agroecological meals served to concrete proposals for tackling hunger—but none of this made it into the negotiating rooms or the final agreement,” said Elisabetta Recine, IPES-Food panel expert and president of the Brazilian National Food and Nutrition Security Council (Consea), in a statement.
“Despite all the talk, negotiators failed to act, and the lived realities of people most affected by hunger, poverty, and climate shocks went unheard.”
Big Oil and Big Ag, Bigger voice
More than 300 industrial agriculture lobbyists were registered as delegates to COP30. They are blamed for influencing discussions and promoting false solutions to climate change.
“COP30 was supposed to be the Implementation COP—where words turned into action,” Danielle Nierenberg, an expert on sustainable agriculture and food issues and President of Food Tank, told IPS. “But once again, corporate interests won over people, nature, and the future of our food and agriculture systems as part of the solution to the climate crisis.”
Raj Patel, IPES-Food panel expert and professor at the University of Texas, argues that agribusiness lobbyists captured COP30 to influence outcomes favoring industrial agriculture and big oil interests.
“Food systems are second only to oil and gas as a driver of the climate crisis, and unlike oil wells, they are also the first victim of the chaos they create, Patel noted.
Obstacles and Opportunities
Scientists have warned that carbon emissions, including those from agriculture, must be cut considerably if the world is to meet the goals of the Paris Agreement to limit global warming to 2°C or less.
Even if fossil fuel emissions were eliminated immediately, emissions from the global food system alone would make it impossible to limit warming to 1.5°C and difficult even to realize the 2°C target, scientists have said.
Selorm Kugbega, a Research Fellow at the Stockholm Environment Institute, agrees that despite many promises made to tackle agriculture-linked emissions, COP30 turned out to be a damp squib for agrifood systems.
Initiatives such as RAIZ to restore 500 million hectares of degraded agricultural land by 2030 and TERRA to scale out climate solutions for smallholder farmers through blended finance, which were launched at COP30 omitted to highlight the effects of industrial food systems. Over 300 industrial agriculture lobbyists participated in discussions at COP30, leading to accusations of swaying the outcomes.
Analysts warn the final agreement at COP30 in Belém, Brazil, risks deepening climate and hunger crises. Credit: Raimundo Pacco/COP30
Kugbega observed that after several years of slow progress and momentum in integrating food systems in climate negotiations, COP30 should have been the opportunity to seal agriculture’s centrality in future COPs. However, it ended with no clear agreements on grant-based public finance for adaptation in agriculture or redirection of public funds that subsidize industrial systems.
The climate negotiations demonstrated power inequality in climate negotiations with the implicit protection of industrial agriculture interests, which weakened the credibility of any global efforts at mitigating agriculture-based emissions, Kugbega observed, highlighting that smallholders bear a high burden of climate risks and have little adaptation financing.
Kugbega argued the most powerful countries, which are generally less dependent on agriculture, tend to prioritize sectors such as energy and transport in climate negotiations. However, many least developed countries, particularly in Africa, are highly dependent on agriculture for employment and economic stability and face urgent climate risks.
“Yet these countries often lack the political influence to elevate agriculture and food systems as central issues in COP negotiations,” he said. “COP30 in Brazil presented a major opportunity to shift this imbalance, making the failure to position food systems at the center of the climate agenda particularly troubling.”
Frugal Financing for Food and Farmers
According to the Climate Policy Initiative (CPI) and the UN’s Standing Committee on Finance, agriculture receives a small and insufficient share of total global climate finance.
Of the available approximate total global climate finance of USD 1.3 trillion per year on average, agriculture gets around USD 35 billion per year. This is a huge shortfall given that food systems are estimated to be responsible for roughly one-third of global greenhouse gas emissions and are one of the sectors most vulnerable to climate impacts, according to the CPI. Worse still, smallholder farmers, who produce up to 80 percent of food in developing countries, only receive 0.3 percent—a striking imbalance, yet they feed the world and are more exposed to climate impacts.
Will COP31 Deliver?
While COP30 highlighted the need to tackle climate change impacts through the transformation of food systems, such as highlighted in the Belém Declaration on Hunger, Poverty and Human-Centered Climate Action, it remains to be seen if COP31 will deliver a positive outcome on food systems.
Waiting for COP31 to save the world is surrendering because agribusiness lobbyists do not take holidays, argues IPES-Food panel’s Raj Patel.
“The test is not whether diplomats can craft better language in Antalya, but whether farmers’ movements, indigenous movements, and climate movements can generate enough political pressure to make governments fear inaction more than they fear confronting corporate power,” he said.
COP31, to be hosted by Turkey with Australia as negotiations president in 2026 , is expected to prioritize an action agenda centered on adaptation finance, fossil fuel phase-out, adaptation in Small Island Developing States, and oceans.
While this agenda aligns with broader climate justice goals, it means food systems risk becoming indirectly addressed rather than explicitly championed, Kugbega said.
Given the stalled negotiations on financing sustainable agriculture transitions and the postponement of the Sharm el-Sheikh Joint Work on Agriculture, Kugbega said COP31 will likely focus more on developing new roadmaps and agreements than on full-scale implementation.
COP32 could be a greater opportunity for the implementation of the work program under Ethiopia’s COP32 presidency, given the country’s direct exposure to climate risks in agriculture, he noted.
“COP31 will likely shape whether the world arrives at COP32 ready to implement and operationalize sustainable food systems or once again be forced to renegotiate what is already known.”
This feature is published with the support of Open Society Foundations.
These processes are all about people. We should never lose our humanity in the process. There should not be a ‘COP of the people’ pitted against a ‘COP of negotiators.’ We need to approach COP jointly as a conference of the people, by the people, and for people. —Yamide Dagnet, NRDC’s Senior Vice President, International
Yamide Dagnet, Senior Vice President, International at the Natural Resources Defense Council. Credit: Joyce Chimbi/IPS
BELÉM, Brazil, Nov 24 2025 (IPS) – As observers at the Conference of Parties closely monitored proceedings in Belém, many, such as Yamide Dagnet, approached the UN Climate Summit as an implementation COP. They are advocating for tangible signals to ignite crucial climate action before the climate crisis reaches irreversible levels.
For Dagnet, Senior Vice President International at the Natural Resources Defense Council (NRDC), it is an all hands-on deck situation where talks need to turn into action on the ground, which in turn must inform the acceleration expected from the negotiations.
“As COP focuses more on how we do things, we know the stakes will be more complex,” said Dagnet. “This is why the Paris Agreement set up improvement five-year-policy cycles, acknowledging that we might not get it right the first time, despite good intentions, and in view of possible unintended consequences and trade-offs.”
As a former negotiator now overseeing the international program at NRDC, an international nonprofit environmental organization that uses science, law, convening, and advocacy to mobilize a wide range of stakeholders to safeguard the Earth, Dagnet understands all too well how difficult the task ahead will be.
She points out that with increased geopolitical headwinds and development remaining front and center for countries around the globe, “we are not dealing just with a climate COP but a socio-economic COP.” To succeed, the multilateral process and climate action need to be designed in a way that is just, inclusive, and participatory.
Like many other observers, Dagnet believes that cooperation among nations and across regions is still moving in the right direction despite the United States’ withdrawal from the Paris Agreement.
“This COP was about diplomacy in action. Only one country has withdrawn from the Paris Agreement; the rest broadly remain on course. There are many issues that will make or break this conference, including the matter of scaling up finance for adaptation and for limiting loss and damage due to climate change. To manage these challenges, you need to measure, and to measure, you need to be guided by indicators, especially those that actually help us to move from just risk and vulnerability assessments to opportunity frameworks and value creation.”
But mobilization cannot be left to the government alone, she cautions.
“It requires support from multilateral and domestic financial institutions, as well as private capital investment. The private sector has for far too long seen climate finance for adaptation as an investment that brings no financial or economic returns. But the tide is changing. Insurance companies, asset managers, pension funds, commercial development, and small and medium companies realize it is an imperative to address adaptation. We need to amplify and demonstrate how there are a multitude of financial resources that could be saved through adaptation,” says Dagnet.
The need of the hour is to design investment as well as financial and insurance models that work for climate scenarios. Insurance business models are largely based on making money from what the company believes is unlikely to happen or happens rarely. Such is not the case when it comes to climate disasters, which there are going to be a lot more of.
A COP at the mouth of the Amazon and the proximity to the world’s largest tropical forest is not only symbolic but also provides the context to find new ways to value nature and attract funding to make nature and the people who depend on it, more resilient
Addressing whether the intense activism and lobbying at COP30 translated to shaping negotiation outcomes, Dagnet reminds us that the lobbyists from the fossil fuel industry have felt threatened by the Paris Agreement and are worried about the inevitable journey towards greener economies, something that challenges their business model.
Sonia Guajajara, Minister for Indigenous Peoples of Brazil attends the “Global March: The Answer is Us” during the 30th Conference of the Parties (COP30). Credit: Hermes Caruzo/COP30
Indigenous-led protests in Belem have consistently called for climate action and justice, as well as fossil fuel phase-outs and a halt to deforestation. Dagnet has frequent interactions with the Indigenous People, especially women, in Brazil. This includes Puyr Tembe, the first Indigenous woman to head a state secretariat in Pará; Joenia Wapichana, current president of the National Commission for the Defense of the Rights of Indigenous Peoples; Sonia Guajajara, who followed in Wapichana’s steps; and Indigenous leader Célia Xakriabá.
Dagnet stresses the importance of ensuring the protection of these environmental and human rights guardians. Add to that, she pushes for the need to amplify their stories, told in their own words with their voices. She believes that the world has a lot to learn from indigenous communities about living in harmony with nature and also about the increasing and complex threats they face that often cost them their lives.
Dagnet also highlights that climate talks and actions must be inclusive, and no one should be left behind, least of all women, local communities, and indigenous people, who want to be at the table rather than on the menu. “We need to engage with them in a meaningful way and move beyond tokenism,” she says.
NRDC has been integrating gender equity into its environmental initiatives, especially in India. Their multifaceted approach includes promoting women’s economic agency. Implemented through partnerships with organizations like Self-Employed Women’s Association (SEWA) in India, NRDC fosters women’s access to clean energy in rural communities, helping them replace diesel water pumps with solar-powered ones, enabling clean cooking through biogas plants, and providing access to clean transportation. “This has helped increase their household income, improve health, save time and money, and position them as clean-energy leaders in their communities,” says Dagnet.
More recently, NRDC has identified finance as the connecting thread to various complex issues driven by climate change. At COP30, NRDC launched the Fostering Investable National Planning and Implementation (FINI) for Adaptation and Resilience collaborative in partnership with the Atlantic Council’s Climate Resilience Center. FINI connects capital to climate solutions. It is a collaborative effort to unite 100 organizations, including governments, philanthropies, investors, civil society, and more, to develop pipelines of USD 1 trillion worth of investments by 2028 for adaptation and resilience projects that will support countries and communities on the frontlines of the climate crisis.
When all is said and done at COP, with the negotiations, diplomacy, lobbying, and activism, Dagnet says, “These processes are all about people. We should never lose our humanity in the process. There should not be a ‘COP of the people’ pitted against a ‘COP of negotiators.’ We need to approach COP jointly as a conference of the people, by the people, and for people.”
Oceans contribute to climate regulation by absorbing over a quarter of human-caused CO₂ emissions and around 90 percent of excess heat but attract only 1.7 percent of everything that’s invested in science.
Moderators Masanori Kobayashi (far right) and Farhana Haque Rahman, Senior Vice President and Executive Director, Inter Press Service (far left), at a COP30 side event titled ‘Innovation and social collaboration for climate change adaptation in the pursuit of sustainable blue economies.’ Credit: Joyce Chimbi/IPS
BELÉM, Brazil, Nov 20 2025 (IPS) – The oceans are a fundamental part of Earth’s climate system, regulating it by absorbing and storing vast amounts of solar heat, redistributing that heat around the globe through currents, and absorbing a significant portion of human-caused carbon dioxide (CO₂) emissions—yet scientific research into them remains underfunded.
Oceans contribute to climate regulation by absorbing over a quarter of human-caused CO₂ emissions and around 90 percent of excess heat. But COP30 participants heard during a side event titled ‘Innovation and social collaboration for climate change adaptation in the pursuit of sustainable blue economies’ that the amount of money invested in ocean science is only about 1.7 percent of everything that’s invested in science.
During the side event, Meredith Morris, Senior Director of Strategic Philanthropy (Planet) at XPRIZE spoke of opportunities to tackle humanity’s toughest challenges with bold, scalable breakthroughs. XPRIZE, she said, does its part by inviting the world’s brightest minds to turn audacious ideas into lasting impact for people and the planet.
Owned by the XPRIZE Foundation, the nonprofit organization designs and operates large-scale incentive competitions.
It has supported numerous projects across various fields, including space exploration, carbon removal, global health, and education, by using large-scale incentive competitions to drive breakthrough innovations.
“I lead the portfolio around energy, climate, and nature. We are a 30-year-old incentivized prize model that sets a bar for the change we want to see in the world and incentivizes innovators to reach that bar or exceed it. We do not honor and celebrate work that’s already being done.
“At XPRIZE, what we’re trying to do is really catalyze systemic change.” Morris continues, “We believe in philanthropy, but we also believe it has to create value. And at the end of investing in doing something like protecting nature or addressing climate change, there should be viable businesses and industries on the other side of that.”
Moderated by Masanori Kobayashi, Senior Research Fellow of the Sasakawa Peace Foundation and Farhana Haque Rahman, Senior Vice President and Executive Director of Inter Press Service, the side event was an insight into life-transformative scientific projects that can only be born at the intersection between science and funding.
Haque Rahman spoke extensively of the urgent need to communicate science in a manner that helps connect with the places on the frontlines of the climate crisis. Masanori Kobayashi confirmed the need to amplify blue economy solutions, as raising awareness can and does lead to more action.
The XPRIZE Carbon Removal, a USD 100 million competition, incentivized the development of scalable solutions for removing carbon dioxide directly from the atmosphere or oceans. Winning projects included using enhanced rock weathering on farms to lock away CO₂ and technologies that permanently store CO₂ in concrete.
The Shell Ocean Discovery XPRIZE challenged teams to develop autonomous underwater technologies for rapid, high-resolution ocean floor mapping. The winning technology helped dramatically reduce the time estimated to map the entire ocean from centuries to just a decade.
Alexander Turra, Professor at the Oceanographic Institute of the University of São Paulo and head of the UNESCO Chair on Ocean Sustainability, based at the Oceanographic Institute and the Institute of Advanced Studies of the University of São Paulo, spoke about Brazil’s Oceans Without Plastics initiative.
Formally known as the National Strategy for a Plastic-Free Ocean, the initiative is a comprehensive, six-year plan (2025–2030) launched by the federal government to address marine pollution by targeting the entire lifecycle of plastics, from production to disposal.
The primary goal is to prevent, reduce, and ultimately eliminate plastic waste from entering Brazil’s marine and coastal environments. Brazil, with a vast Atlantic coastline, is a top-ten global contributor to marine plastic pollution, an issue that impacts biodiversity, human health, fishing, and tourism.
Also on the panel was Leonardo Valenzuela Perez, who serves as the Director of International Partnerships at Ocean Visions, where he leads the Global Ecosystem for Ocean Solutions. He spoke to participants about carbon removal at scale and the place of science in these efforts. What is needed is an unparalleled level of investment, mobilization of resources, and scale of action.
“We Colombians are the only country in South America with both the Pacific and Caribbean coasts, and we have various ecosystems as well as culturally diverse traditional peoples and communities,” said Laura Catalina Reyes Vargas, Founder and Executive Director of Ocean Hub.
“And, mostly, Afro-descendants and Indigenous communities on both coasts happen to be the poorest people in the country. It’s all about racism sometimes, economic inequality, infrastructure, poverty and lack of sanitation—it’s about almost all of the challenges that are being addressed throughout the 17 SDGs.”
“When it comes to the blue economy,” she continues, “We prioritize not only talking about scientific research. As a scientist myself, of course, I truly believe we will be able to address and understand the major steps needed to achieve not only the SDGs but also national plans with very high standards, as we have in Colombia.”
It was also crucial to address the regional organizational challenges.
COP30 has demonstrated a commitment to placing oceans at the center of global climate initiatives and announced the Task Force on Oceans earlier this week during a high-level ministerial meeting. Led by Brazil and France, the initiative integrates oceans into a global mechanism that accelerates the adoption of marine solutions in national climate plans —encouraging countries to set protection targets for the ocean when updating their NDCs.
Fabio Nogueira, a leader of the Menino Jesus Quilombola Afro-descendant community, stands in front of a proposed landfill, which is 500m from their homes. Credit: Joyce Chimbi/IPS
BELÉM, Brazil, Nov 20 2025 (IPS) – Just 30 minutes from where the UN climate negotiations are unfolding in the port city of Belém, Afro-descendant communities are engaged in a fierce struggle for the full recognition and legal titling of their ancestral territories—critical as their security and livelihoods are compromised by businesses wanting to set up contaminating landfill sites and drug cartels.
A boat ride along the expansive Amazon basin takes you inside the forest. It is the largest rainforest in the world, estimated to be 5.5 to 6.9 million square kilometers and spanning eight countries.
In the forest are the Quilombos or communities founded by descendants of Africans who escaped enslavement. They have defended their rights for generations. Across Latin America and the Caribbean, they may be known by different names, but they are all Afro-descendant communities with shared histories.
Well over 130 million people in Latin America identify as Afro-descendant, descendants of those forcibly brought to the Americas during the transatlantic slave trade. In Brazil, Ecuador, Colombia, and Suriname, these communities collectively hold recognized management rights to nearly 10 million hectares, or nearly 24 million acres, of land.
Açaí is harvested in an Afro-descendant community near Belém, Brazil, where COP30 is underway. Açaí is part of the daily diet and is historically known as a source of subsistence. Credit: Joyce Chimbi/IPS
But the Amazon is the backdrop for the struggle for the full recognition and legal titling of their ancestral territories, as guaranteed by the Brazilian Constitution of 1988.
IPS spoke to Fabio Nogueira, a leader among the Menino Jesus Quilombola community home to 28 families about their struggles and successes.
“Without titles, Quilombolas are exposed to invasion and displacement from big companies, ranchers, farmers and land grabbers.”
Alarmingly, criminal gangs target the Quilombola communities and their leaders for illegal activities.
Increased surveillance and drug seizures on direct routes from Latin America to Europe have turned the Amazon into a drug corridor. In Brazil, drug traffickers use ‘rios de cocaine,’ or cocaine rivers, jeopardizing the safety of the Quilombos along the Amazon rainforest.
Major rivers and remote areas in many Quilombola territories serve as key “cocaine corridors” for drug trafficking. The lack of state presence and land titling makes these communities soft targets.
Today, the Amazon rainforest is also the scene of a fierce struggle against landfills or sites for the disposal of waste material. He says landfills in the Amazon cause significant problems, including contaminating the soil and water with heavy metals and other toxins and releasing greenhouse gases like methane.
“We are currently 15 kilometers away from the lixão de Marituba landfill and it still pollutes our air and environment. Now they want to bring a landfill only 500 meters from our community. The landfill will be 200 hectares in size. We are saying no to landfills and have a case in court,” Nogueira said.
“The Menino Jesus quilombola community is in a legal dispute. We are resisting the proposed landfill project.”
Belém is a port city and gateway to Brazil’s lower Amazon region. A 30-minute boat ride through the expansive Amazon River takes you inside the forest. Credit: Joyce Chimbi/IPS
The project was planned without recognition of their existence or the impact it would have on them. The Public Defender’s Office of Pará has filed legal action and recommended the project’s suspension, citing that the land is public and part of the area traditionally occupied and claimed by the community for twenty years.
If the Brazilian State maintains the current pace of land regularization of quilombola territories, it will take 2,188 years to fully title the 1,802 processes currently open at the National Institute for Colonization and Agrarian Reform.
The slow pace of titling negatively affects forest preservation. Despite two studies indicating that the Quilombola play a crucial role in climate solutions, their ongoing struggle for basic recognition makes it difficult for them to secure their rights or access climate finance in formal spaces, such as COP30, according to Malungu, the coordinator of Associations of Remaining Quilombo Communities of Pará, which represents and advocates for the Quilombola communities in the state.
Two recent studies indicate that titling is a determining factor for the success of Quilombos in protecting the Amazon and titled territories maintain 91 percent of their forests, while non-titled territories preserve 76 percent.
“Alarmingly, self-declared territories that do not yet have certification (necessary for starting the titling process) had a rate of forest loss 400 percent higher than that of titled territories, highlighting the urgency of recognition to halt degradation.”
During COP30, a visit to the two Quilombos—Menino Jesus and Itaco-Miri—in the Amazon rainforest demonstrates the significance of communal land titling. It illustrates how this titling enhances the well-being of Afro-descendant peoples across the Amazon and how secure land tenure contributes to climate goals through carbon absorption, forest protection, and biodiversity preservation through traditional agriculture.
Throughout six generations, Quilombola communities stand out as caretakers and conservers of the Amazon rainforest’s biodiversity, using sustainable practices passed down through generations.
Menino Jesus and Itacoã-Miri territories and other Afro-descendant community lands ‘have high biodiversity and irrecoverable carbon and were associated with a 29 to 55 percent reduction in forest loss compared to control sites.’
Still, communities deliver better results with tenure security. Key data from Instituto Social Ambiental’s Study on Quilombo Territories in the Brazilian Amazon shows that while Quilombos face significant land tenure challenges, approximately 47 percent of mapped Quilombos lack even basic delimitation or fixing of boundaries, and over 49 percent of communities have not even passed the first step.
Along the Amazon basin, communities often live in houses facing the river. The forest is their backyard. Credit: Joyce Chimbi/IPS
Meanwhile, they remain outstanding in their conservation performance. They have preserved nearly 92 percent of mapped Quilombo territories, including forests and native vegetation. From 1985 to 2022, these territories lost only 4.7 percent of original forest cover, compared to 17 percent loss in private areas.
But political recognition has moved much more slowly than scientific recognition. Shortly before COP30, President Luiz Inácio Lula da Silva visited the Afro-descendant communities of Menino Jesus and Itacoã-Miri near Belém, Pará, as part of an agenda of preparatory meetings for the COP30 climate conference.
It has taken 30 COPs for a historic breakthrough, as COP30 has included the term ‘people of African descent’ in draft negotiating texts of the UN climate convention for the first time. This inclusion is a significant step toward formally recognizing this population in global climate policy.
The term ‘people of African descent’ has been incorporated into draft documents, including those related to the Just Transition and the Gender Action Plan. This had never happened in the history of the UN climate convention system, which has often been more technical and less focused on human rights and racial justice.
The Belém Declaration on Fighting Environmental Racism is a political commitment that was joined by 19 countries at the leaders’ summit before COP30 began. The text acknowledges the disproportionate exposure of people of African descent, Indigenous Peoples, and local communities to environmental harms and climate risks.
This declaration is an international agreement that seeks to foster a global dialogue on the intersection of racial equality, climate change, and environmental justice. The declaration recognizes the global ecological and racial justice crises as intertwined and proposes cooperative actions to overcome historical inequalities affecting access to environmental resources.
Its goals include reinforcing human rights and social justice in environmental policy, broadening the scope of equality in sustainable development, and building a more equitable future for all.
Coelho Teles from the Quilombo community told IPS that he is not aware of this recognition because they have “been sidelined. We do not know how to get involved and participate in COP30.”
Brazil identified forests and oceans as twin priorities and launched the Brazil-led Tropical Forests Forever Facility at COP30, seeking to compensate countries for preserving tropical forests, with 20 percent of funds reserved for Indigenous Peoples.
Science has shown communities keep forests standing. For the Tropical Forests Forever Facility to achieve desired results, those in Quilombo territories say their recognition and participation will need to be significantly more substantial.
The COP30 Presidency is urging all “negotiators to join in a true mutirão—a collective mobilization of minds, hearts, and hands,” saying this approach helps “accelerate the pace, bridge divides, and focus not on what separates us, but on what unites us in purpose and humanity.”
Negotiations take place throughout the day and now late into the night. Credit: UN Climate Change/Kiara Worth
BELÉM, Brazil, Nov 19 2025 (IPS) – At a Conference of the Parties, where science intersects with politics, reaching agreements is often a tricky business. What is inside the last-minute negotiations as the COP presidency tries to get the parties to agreement at the final plenary?
COP negotiators are diplomats and government officials who meet at the Conference of the Parties to negotiate and agree on how to address climate change. They are also often joined by COP delegates’ representatives from civil society, social movements and businesses.
As representatives of their respective countries that are parties to the UNFCCC treaty, they discuss, debate, and haggle over their preferred wording of texts and legally binding agreements regarding how to address climate change during closed-door sessions.
Windowless Closed-Door Meetings
These closed-door meetings are often also windowless, and negotiators often lose track of time as they work through extensive documentation and diverse national positions to form a final agreement towards the end of the COP summit schedule.
COP 30, Belém, is posting a daily photographic glimpse into the collective effort to build trust, dialogue, and cooperation to accelerate meaningful climate action and deliver its benefits to all. Many hope this message will permeate inside these rooms.
The UN climate summit has now entered its final stages. The Brazilian COP30 Presidency has extended working hours, scheduling late-night meetings for the last two nights—Monday and Tuesday, Nov 17 and 18, 2025.
Tonight might not be any different, as the COP30 Presidency pushes for a rapid compromise and conclusion of a significant part of negotiations to pave the way for a “plenary to gavel the Belém political package.”
After all, the COP is where the science of the Paris Agreement intersects with politics.
The Elusive True Mutirão
The COP30 Presidency is urging all “negotiators to join in a true mutirão—a collective mobilization of minds, hearts, and hands,” saying this approach helps “accelerate the pace, bridge divides, and focus not on what separates us, but on what unites us in purpose and humanity.”
But this is the point in the negotiations, even in a ‘COP of truth,’ as COP30 was staged to be, where the real claws come out amid accusations of protectionism, trade tensions and geopolitical dynamics as the worlds of business, politics and human survival intersect.
Even as UN officials urge parties to accelerate the pace, warning that “tactical delays and procedural obstructions are no longer tenable” and that deferring challenging issues to overtime results in collective loss, reconciling deep differences among nations is proving easier said than done even within the Global Mutirão—a concept championed by the COP30 presidency.
It calls for worldwide collective action on climate change, inspired by the Brazilian and Indigenous Tupi-Guarani tradition of mutirão, which means “collective effort.” The bone of contention at this juncture is what some parties see as weak climate commitments, insufficient financial pledges from the global North to South, and trade measures.
Protectionism
Trade measures are turning contentious and deeply debatable in Belém because of a difference of perspective—developing countries view them as protectionism, while some developed countries see them as necessary to level the playing field for their climate policies.
For developing countries, protectionism is a deliberate strategy by more developed countries to limit imports to protect their industries from foreign competition and therefore give them an undue advantage. Developing nations say this is unfair because it restricts their ability to export and gain access to larger markets.
The core of the debate at COP30 is the inclusion of issues like the EU’s Carbon Border Adjustment Mechanism (CBAM) in climate talks. For some countries, CBAM is a direct part of climate action and belongs at COP. Others say it is an agenda best discussed at the World Trade Organization.
The EU’s Carbon Border Adjustment Mechanism (CBAM) is a tool to put a price on the carbon emissions of certain imported goods, ensuring that the carbon price for imports is equivalent to that for domestic EU production. Its main goals are to prevent “carbon leakage,” or companies moving production to countries with weaker climate policies, encourage cleaner production globally, and protect EU businesses by creating a level playing field.
How to Go About a Just Transition?
The business of climate change is not the only thing that is complex and divisive. There are also small island states calling for rapid emissions cuts vis-à-vis the positions of major emerging economies. G77 and China are an intergovernmental coalition of 134 developing countries that work together to promote their collective economic and developmental interests within the United Nations framework.
China is not an official member and does not pay dues. It has been a partner since 1976, providing significant financial support and political backing to the G77. Developed countries such as the UK, Norway, Japan, and Australia are pushing back against their proposed global just transition, thereby prolonging the negotiations.
Developed nations are refusing the global just transition proposal by the G77 and China because they see it as a new and unnecessary mechanism and a duplication of existing structures. They refuse to accept the financial and technical support these countries are asking for to facilitate this transition. Simply put, they want a less strict framework that allows their own interpretations of existing institutions and funding structures for the just transition.
Where is the Adaptation Financing?
Finance for adaptation is similarly a sticking point. Developed nations are dragging their feet around committing sufficient funds to support developing nations to adapt to climate impacts and transition their energy systems. It is still not clear whether financial commitments will be embedded inside adaptation goals or remain as they are—separate.
Lobbyists and the Fossil Fuel Debate
Amidst growing tensions, it is also not clear whether this COP will phase out or phase down fossil fuels in the final agreement. The large delegation of fossil fuel lobbyists suggests it is too early to call. On the Global Goal on Adaptation (GGA), those who want indicators for measuring adaptation progress directly linked to financial commitments will not budge. The settlement of this matter could potentially take two years (or more).
Disagreements are ongoing about the mandate of the Mitigation Work Program, which seeks to raise ambitions on national emissions reduction. In general, insiders to the negotiations are saying general negotiation tactics are at play.
Some participants are employing delay tactics to buy time and ultimately weasel out of certain commitments; a lack of trust continues, as it has in previous COPs, along with generally slow progress on building consensus around various contentious issues.
This feature is published with the support of Open Society Foundations.
