Global South Can Rebalance Climate Agenda in Belém, Says Gambian Negotiator

Active Citizens, Africa, Climate Change, Climate Change Finance, Climate Change Justice, COP30, Development & Aid, Editors’ Choice, Environment, Featured, Global, Headlines, International Justice, Latin America & the Caribbean, Sustainable Development Goals, TerraViva United Nations

COP30


COP30 negotiator Malang Sambou Manneh believes the method of countering growth in fossil fuel development lies in technology. Showcasing alternatives that work provides the opportunity for the global South to take the lead and present best practices in renewables.

Climate change is a significant contributor to water insecurity in Africa. Water stress and hazards, like withering droughts, are hitting African communities, economies, and ecosystems hard. Credit: Joyce Chimbi/IPS

Climate change is a significant contributor to water insecurity in Africa. Water stress and hazards, like withering droughts, are hitting African communities, economies, and ecosystems hard. Credit: Joyce Chimbi/IPS

NAIROBI, Oct 14 2025 (IPS) – The Gambia’s lead negotiator on mitigation believes that COP30 presents a unique opportunity to rebalance global climate leadership.


“This COP cannot be shrouded in vagueness. Too much is now at stake,” Malang Sambou Manneh says in an interview with IPS ahead of the climate negotiations. He identified a wide range of issues that are expected to define COP30 climate talks.

The global community will shortly descend on the Amazon rainforest, the world’s largest intact forest, home to more than 24 million people in Brazil alone, including hundreds of thousands of Indigenous Peoples. Here, delegates will come face-to-face with the realities of climate change and see what is at stake.

Malang Sambou Manneh

Malang Sambou Manneh.

COP30, the UN’s annual climate conference, or the Conference of Parties, will take place from November 10-21, 2025 in the Amazonian city of Belém, Brazil and promises to be people-centered and inclusive. But with fragmented and fragile geopolitics, negotiations for the best climate deal will not be easy.

Sambou, a lead climate negotiator who has attended all COPs, says a unified global South is up to the task.

He particularly stressed the need for an unwavering “focus on mitigation or actions to reduce or prevent greenhouse gas emissions.” Stating that the Mitigation Work Programme is critical, as it is a process established by the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC) at COP26 to urgently scale up the ambition and implementation of efforts to mitigate climate change globally.

Sambou spoke about how COP30 differs from previous conferences, expectations from the global South, fossils fuels and climate financing, stressing that “as it was in Azerbaijan for COP29, Belem will be a ‘finance COP’ because climate financing is still the major hurdle. Negotiations will be tough, but I foresee a better outcome this time round.”

The Baku to Belém Roadmap to 1.3T is expected to be released soon, outlining a framework by the COP 29 and COP 30 Presidencies for scaling climate finance for developing countries to at least USD 1.3 trillion annually by 2035.

Unlike previous conferences, COP30 focuses on closing the ambition gap identified by the Global Stocktake, a periodic review that enables countries and other stakeholders, such as the private sector, to take inventory to assess the world’s collective progress in meeting its climate goals.

The first stocktake was completed at COP28 in 2023, revealing that current efforts are insufficient and the world is not on track to meet the Paris Agreement. But while the Paris Agreement, a legally binding international treaty on climate change, set off on a high singular note when it entered into force in November 2016, that unity is today far from guaranteed.

Malang Sambou Manneh with She-Climate Fellows. Credit: Clean Earth Gambia/Facebook

Malang Sambou Manneh with She-Climate Fellows. Credit: Clean Earth Gambia/Facebook

Unlocking high-impact and sustainable climate action opportunities amidst geopolitical turbulence was always going to be difficult. Not only did President Donald Trump pull the United States out of the Paris Agreement, but he is now reenergized against climate programs and robustly in support of fossil fuels—and there are those who are listening to his message.

Sambou says while this stance “could impact the transition from fossil fuels to clean energy, many more countries are in favor of renewable energy than against.”

“But energy issues are complex because fossil fuels have been a way of life for centuries, and developed countries leveraged fossil fuels to accelerate development. And then, developing countries also started discovering their oil and gas, but they are not to touch it to accelerate their own development and must instead shift to renewables. It is a complex situation.”

Ilham Aliyev, the President of Azerbaijan, famously described oil as a “gift from God” at COP29 to defend his country’s reliance on fossil fuels despite climate change concerns. This statement highlights the complexity of the situation, especially since it came only a year after the landmark COP28 hard-won UAE Consensus included the first explicit reference to “transitioning away from all fossil fuels in energy systems” in a COP agreement.

As a negotiator, Sambou says he is very much alive to these dynamics but advises that the global community “will not successfully counter fossil fuels by saying they are bad and harmful; we should do so through technology. By showcasing alternatives that work. This is an opportunity for the global South to take the lead and present best practices in renewables.”

And it seems there is evidence for his optimism. A recent report shows the uptake of renewables overtaking coal generation for the first time on record in the first half of 2025 and solar and wind outpacing the growth in demand.

This time around, the global south has its work cut out, as it will be expected to step up and provide much-needed leadership as Western leaders retreat to address pressing problems at home, defined by escalating economic crises, immigration issues, conflict, and social unrest.

It is in the developing world’s leadership that Sambou sees the opportunities—especially as scientific evidence mounts on the impacts of the climate crisis.

The World Meteorological Organization projects a continuation of record-high global temperatures, increasing climate risks and potentially marking the first five-year period, 2025-2029.

Sambou says all is not lost in light of the new and ambitious national climate action plans or the Nationally Determined Contributions.

This past September marked the deadline for a new set of these contributions, which will guide the COP30 talks. Every five years, the signatory governments to the Paris Agreement are requested to submit new national climate plans detailing more ambitious greenhouse gas emission reduction and adaptation goals.

“Ambition has never been a problem; it is the lack of implementation that remains a most pressing issue. Action plans cannot be implemented without financing. This is why the ongoing political fragmentation is concerning, for if there was ever a time to stand unified, it is now. The survival of humanity depends on it,” he emphasizes.

“Rather than just setting new goals in Belém, this time around, we are better off pushing for a few scalable solutions, commitments that we can firmly hold ourselves accountable to, than 200 pages of outcomes that will never properly translate into climate action.”

Despite many competing challenges and a step forward, two steps backwards here and there, from the heart of the Amazon rainforest, COP30’s emphasis on the critical role of tropical forests and nature-based solutions is expected to significantly drive action for environmental and economic growth.

Note: This interview is published with the support of Open Society Foundations.

IPS UN Bureau Report

  Source

Loss and Damage at COP30: Indigenous Leaders Challenge Top-Down Finance Models

Active Citizens, Civil Society, Climate Action, Climate Change, Climate Change Finance, Climate Change Justice, Conferences, COP29, COP30, Editors’ Choice, Featured, Headlines, Human Rights, Humanitarian Emergencies, Indigenous Rights, International Justice, Sustainable Development Goals, TerraViva United Nations

Indigenous Rights

Indigenous activists continue to fight for a seat at the table in solving climate change, asking for self-determination and financial agency.

Activists demand loss and damage reparations outside the hall where the COP29 negotiators were concluding their negotiations. Credit: UN Climate Change/Kiara Worth

Activists demand loss and damage reparations outside the hall where the COP29 negotiators were concluding their negotiations. Credit: UN Climate Change/Kiara Worth

UNITED NATIONS, Sep 17 2025 (IPS) – As climate-induced disasters continue to devastate the Global South, nations are steadily mounting pressure at the United Nations for wealthier countries to deliver on long-promised climate reparations through the Loss and Damage Fund. For Indigenous peoples, whose territories are often the most ecologically intact yet most damaged by climate change, these negotiations define survival, sovereignty and recognition as rights-holders in global climate governance.


After the fund’s operationalization at the 29th Conference of the Parties to the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (COP29) in Baku last fall, developing countries say that the pledges so far—approximately USD 741 million—fall drastically short of the trillions needed to recover from climate devastation.

This low number is acutely felt in Indigenous communities, whose local economies rely on thriving ecosystems.

“A lot of rich biodiversity, carbon sinks and the most preserved parts of the world are within indigenous territories,” said Paul Belisario, Global Coordinator for the Secretariat of the International Indigenous Peoples Movement for Self-Determination and Liberation (IPMSDL), in an interview with IPS. “Without recognizing Indigenous people’s right to take care of it, to govern it and to live in it so that their traditional knowledge will flourish, we cannot fully address the climate crisis.”

UN Secretary-General António Guterres echoed this sentiment in Baku, saying, “The creation of the Loss and Damage Fund is a victory for developing countries, for multilateralism and for justice.  But its initial capitalization of USD 700 million doesn’t come close to righting the wrong inflicted on the vulnerable.”

These “wrongs,” Indigenous leaders argue, must include the exclusion of traditional and tribal knowledge in decision-making. In light of pushback to make climate action a legal responsibility rather than a political agreement, many are hopeful that COP30 will yield a more successful negotiation for adequate compensation.

The call for action is led by coalition blocs including the Alliance of Small Island States (AOSIS) and G77, an alliance of developing countries with China as its primary political and financial supporter. Both alliances represent the countries most vulnerable to climate-related natural disasters. G77 was particularly vocal during COP29, where their rejection of the deal was backed by a number of climate and civil society organizations who criticized the negotiating text for giving developed countries too much leeway to shirk their climate finance obligations.

For Indigenous groups, this criticism stems from concerns that funding will not successfully reach their communities due to bureaucracy or geographical and political isolation.

Secretary-General António Guterres meets with André Aranha Corrêa do Lago, President-designate of COP 30, the 2025 UN Climate Change Conference, which will be held in Belém, Brazil. Credit: UN Photo

Secretary-General António Guterres meets with André Aranha Corrêa do Lago, President-designate of COP 30, the 2025 UN Climate Change Conference, which will be held in Belém, Brazil. Credit: UN Photo

Janene Yazzie, director of policy and advocacy at the NDN Collective, spoke about the importance of Indigenous involvement in funding distributions, saying, “What we’re advocating for is to ensure that these mechanisms… are accessible to Indigenous Peoples, uphold the rights of Indigenous Peoples, and can be utilized towards solutions and responses that are designed and prioritized by Indigenous Peoples.”

Last year, countries eventually settled on mobilizing USD 300 billion annually by 2035 to developing countries for climate finance—far below the USD 1 trillion experts say is the minimum for effective mitigation and adaptation. The financial commitment is voluntary, meaning that countries can withdraw without consequence and no protections exist to ensure the money is distributed with regard for Indigenous governance systems.

The Forest Stewardship Council (FSC) Indigenous Foundation noted that groups without formal land titles could be excluded entirely, despite their role in stewarding biodiverse landscapes.

However, a recent International Court of Justice (ICJ) report has created new legal pathways. The court placed stringent obligations on states to prevent significant climate harm and tackle climate change, stating that failure to do so triggers legal responsibility. Scientific evidence can link emissions to specific countries, allowing those affected by climate change to seek legal action, which could include getting money back, restoring land, improving infrastructure, or receiving compensation for financial losses.

Indigenous activists at COP29. Credit: UN Climate Change/ Kiara Worth

Indigenous activists at COP29. Credit: UN Climate Change/Kiara Worth

This legal opinion opens new pathways for seeking restitution—not only in money but also in land recovery, infrastructure for adaptation, and guarantees of political participation.

This legal shift comes at a crucial time. In April 2025, thousands of Indigenous Brazilians marched in the capital ahead of COP30 in Belém, demanding land rights and decision-making influence. Meanwhile, the National Organization of the Indigenous Peoples of the Colombian Amazon (OPIAC) also issued a statement about the summit for Deforestation of the Amazon. They outline an action plan to end deforestation, strengthen land rights and phase out oil and gas exploration.

After indigenous groups were denied a co-presidency for COP30, Conference President André Corrêa do Lago pledged to establish a “Circle of Indigenous Leadership” within the conference. Many leaders found the arrangement insufficient—the FSC Indigenous Foundation called instead for “co-governance models where Indigenous Peoples are not just consulted but are leading and shaping climate action.”

Indigenous people make their message clear during COP29. Credit: Photo- UN Climate Change/Lara Murillo

Indigenous people make their message clear during COP29. Credit: UN Climate Change/Lara Murillo

Other groups were more explicitly critical. The Indigenous Climate Action co-authored a statement at the end of COP29 saying, “There is nothing to celebrate here today… While we urgently need direct and equitable access to climate finance for adaptation, mitigation and loss and damage across all seven socio-cultural regions… we reject the financial colonization that comes from loans and any other financial mechanisms that perpetuate indebtedness of nations that have contributed the least to climate change yet bear the brunt of its tragedies.”

Belisario frames the funding question as a matter of justice rather than charity.

“This funding is not just corporate social responsibility or compensation,” he told IPS. “This is historical justice.”

However, without Indigenous influence in the distribution of money from the Loss and Damage Fund, it remains unclear how effective this aid will be in combating climate change based on Indigenous knowledge and science. Many activists advocate for more localized approaches to climate action.

Belisario acknowledges the limitations of international negotiations.

“It’s been a running joke that we will negotiate until COP100, and we might not have that long. What we would really like to get out of COP30 is to meet many communities to discuss the common problems and make them realize that this COP is just a part of how we would like to solve our climate crisis,” he said. “We really believe that more radical ways to enact accountability and responsibility will start with movements in people’s own countries, in their own localities.”

As the FSC Indigenous Foundation concluded, “Indigenous Peoples must lead the design, management, and oversight of financial mechanisms that affect their lands, lives, and futures. Climate justice will only be possible when Indigenous Peoples are recognized as rights-holders and partners in decision-making.”

IPS UN Bureau Report

 

Bending the Curve: Overhaul Global Food Systems to Avert Worsening Land Crisis

Biodiversity, Civil Society, Climate Action, Climate Change, Combating Desertification and Drought, Conferences, Conservation, COP30, Development & Aid, Editors’ Choice, Environment, Featured, Food and Agriculture, Food Systems, Global, Headlines, Human Rights, Humanitarian Emergencies, Natural Resources, Sustainable Development Goals, TerraViva United Nations

Food Systems

Scientists say replacing just 10 percent of global vegetable intake with seaweed-derived products could free up large portions of land. Credit: Joyce Chimbi/IPS

Scientists say replacing just 10 percent of global vegetable intake with seaweed-derived products could free up large portions of land. Credit: Joyce Chimbi/IPS

Current rates of land degradation pose a major environmental and socioeconomic threat, driving climate change, biodiversity loss, and social crises. Food production to feed more than 8 billion people is the dominant land use on Earth. Yet, this industrial-scale enterprise comes with a heavy environmental toll.


Preventing and reversing land degradation are key objectives of the United Nations Convention to Combat Desertification (UNCCD) and are also fundamental for the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC) and the Convention on Biological Diversity (CBD).

These three conventions emerged from the 1992 Rio Earth Summit to address the interconnected crises of biodiversity loss, climate change and land degradation. A paper published today in Nature by 21 leading scientists argues that the targets of “these conventions can only be met by ‘bending the curve’ of land degradation and that transforming food systems is fundamental for doing so.”

Lead author Fernando T. Maestre of the King Abdullah University of Science and Technology (KAUST), Saudi Arabia, says the paper presents “a bold, integrated set of actions to tackle land degradation, biodiversity loss, and climate change together, as well as a clear pathway for implementing them by 2050.”

“By transforming food systems, restoring degraded land, harnessing the potential of sustainable seafood, and fostering cooperation across nations and sectors, we can ‘bend the curve’ and reverse land degradation while advancing towards goals of the UN Convention to Combat Desertification and other global agreements.”

Co-author Barron J. Orr, UNCCD’s Chief Scientist, says, “Once soils lose fertility, water tables deplete, and biodiversity is lost, restoring the land becomes exponentially more expensive. Ongoing rates of land degradation contribute to a cascade of mounting global challenges, including food and water insecurity, forced relocation and population migration, social unrest, and economic inequality.”

“Land degradation isn’t just a rural issue; it affects the food on all our plates, the air we breathe, and the stability of the world we live in. This isn’t about saving the environment; it’s about securing our shared future.”

The authors suggest an ambitious but achievable target of 50 percent land restoration for 2050—currently, 30 percent by 2030—with enormous co-benefits for climate, biodiversity and global health. Titled ‘Bending the curve of land degradation to achieve global environmental goals,’ the paper argues that it is imperative to ‘bend the curve’ of land degradation by halting land conversion while restoring half of degraded lands by 2050.

“Food systems have not yet been fully incorporated into intergovernmental agreements, nor do they receive sufficient focus in current strategies to address land degradation. Rapid, integrated reforms focused on global food systems, however, can move land health from crisis to recovery and secure a healthier, more stable planet for all,” reads parts of the paper.

Against this backdrop, the authors break new ground by quantifying the impact of reducing food waste by 75 percent by 2050 and maximizing sustainable ocean-based food production—measures that alone could spare an area larger than Africa. They say restoring 50 percent of degraded land through sustainable land management practices would correspond to the restoration of 3 Mkm² of cropland and 10 Mkm² of non-cropland, a total of 13 Mkm².

Stressing that land restoration must involve the people who live on and manage the land—especially Indigenous Peoples, smallholder farmers, women, and other vulnerable people and communities. Co-author Dolors Armenteras, Professor of Landscape Ecology at Universidad Nacional de Colombia, Bogotá, says land degradation is “a key factor in forced migration and conflict over resources.”

“Regions that rely heavily on agriculture for livelihoods, especially smallholder farmers, who feed much of the world, are particularly vulnerable. These pressures could destabilize entire regions and amplify global risks.”

To support these vulnerable segments of the population, the paper calls for interventions such as shifting agricultural subsidies from large-scale industrial farms toward sustainable smallholders, incentivizing good land stewardship among the world’s 608 million farms, and fostering their access to technology, secure land rights, and fair markets.

“Land is more than soil and space. It harbors biodiversity, cycles water, stores carbon, and regulates climate. It gives us food, sustains life, and holds deep roots of ancestry and knowledge. Today, over one-third of Earth’s land is used to grow food – feeding a global population of more than 8 billion people,” says Co-author Elisabeth Huber-Sannwald, Professor, the Instituto Potosino de Investigación Científica y Tecnológica, San Luis Potosí, Mexico.

“Yet today,” she continues, “Modern farming practices, deforestation, and overuse are degrading soil, polluting water, and destroying vital ecosystems. Food production alone drives nearly 20 percent of global emissions of greenhouse gases. We need to act. To secure a thriving future – and protect land – we must reimagine how we farm, how we live, and how we relate to nature – and to each other.”

With an estimated 56.5 Mkm² of agricultural land, cropland, and rangelands being used to produce food, and roughly 33 percent of all food produced being wasted, of which 14 percent is lost post-harvest at farms and 19 percent at the retail, food service and household stages, reducing food waste by 75 percent, therefore, could spare roughly 13.4 Mkm² of land.

The authors’ proposed remedies include policies to prevent overproduction and spoilage, banning food industry rules that reject “ugly” produce, encouraging food donations and discounted sales of near-expiry products, education campaigns to reduce household waste and supporting small farmers in developing countries to improve storage and transport.

Other proposed solutions include integrating land and marine food systems, as red meat produced in unsustainable ways consumes large amounts of land, water, and feed and emits significant greenhouse gases. Seafood and seaweed are sustainable, nutritious alternatives. Seaweed, for example, needs no freshwater and absorbs atmospheric carbon.

The authors recommend measures such as replacing 70 percent of unsustainably produced red meat with seafood, such as wild or farmed fish and mollusks. Replacing just 10 percent of global vegetable intake with seaweed-derived products could free up over 0.4 Mkm² of cropland.

They nonetheless note that these changes are especially relevant for wealthier countries with high meat consumption. In some poorer regions, animal products remain crucial for nutrition. The combination of food waste reduction, land restoration, and dietary shifts, therefore, would spare or restore roughly 43.8 Mkm² in 30 years (2020-2050).

The proposed measures combined would also contribute to emission reduction efforts by mitigating roughly 13.24 Gt of CO₂-equivalent per year through 2050 and help the world community achieve its commitments in several international agreements, including the three Rio Conventions and UN SDGs.

Overall, the authors call for the UN’s three Rio conventions—CBD, UNCCD and UNFCCC—to unite around shared land and food system goals and encourage the exchange of state-of-the-art knowledge, track progress and streamline science into more effective policies, all to accelerate action on the ground.

A step in the right direction, UNCCD’s 197 Parties, at their most recent Conference of Parties (COP16) in Riyadh, Saudi Arabia, have already adopted a decision on avoiding, reducing and reversing land and soil degradation of agricultural lands.

The Findings By Numbers

  • 56%: Projected increase in food production needed by 2050 if we stay on our current path
  • 34%: Portion of Earth’s ice-free land already used for food production, headed to 42% by 2050
  • 21%: Share of global greenhouse gas emissions produced by food systems
  • 80%: Proportion of deforestation driven by food production
  • 70%: Amount of freshwater consumption that goes to agriculture
  • 33%: Fraction of global food that currently goes to waste
  • USD 1 trillion: Estimated annual value of food lost or wasted globally
  • 75%: Ambitious target for global food waste reduction by 2050
  • 50%: Proposed portion of degraded land to be restored by 2050 using sustainable land management
  • USD 278 billion: Annual funding gap to achieve UNCCD land restoration goals
  • 608 million: Number of farms on the planet
  • 90%: Percentage of all farms under 2 hectares
  • 35%: Share of the world’s food produced by small farms
  • 6.5 billion tons: Potential biomass yield using 650 million hectares of ocean for seaweed farming
  • 17.5 million km²: Estimated cropland area saved if humanity adopts the proposed Rio+ diet (less unsustainably produced red meat and more sustainably sourced seafood and seaweed-derived food products)
  • 166 million: Number of people who could avoid micronutrient deficiencies with more aquatic foods in their diet

IPS UN Bureau Report

  Source

Bonn Climate Talks: Why World Needs to go Further, Faster, and Fairer

Climate Change, Climate Change Finance, Conferences, COP30, Environment, Featured, Headlines, TerraViva United Nations | Analysis

Climate Change

The June Climate Talks, SB62 under the UNFCCC, in Bonn 16-26 June, Photo Credit: UN Climate Chang/Lara Murillo

The June Climate Talks, SB62 under the UNFCCC, in Bonn 16-26 June, Photo Credit: UN Climate Chang/Lara Murillo

SRINAGAR & BONN, Jul 11 2025 (IPS) – This 62nd meeting of the Subsidiary Bodies (SB62) from June 16 to 26, 2025 revealed the persistent complexities and political tensions that continue to challenge multilateral climate governance. 


The United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC) convened its 62nd meeting of the Subsidiary Bodies (SB62) from June 16 to 26, 2025 – a critical juncture in the global climate negotiation process ahead of the 30th Conference of the Parties (COP30) set for November in Belém, Brazil.

Often referred to as a “mini-COP”, SB62 serves as a mid-year platform where negotiators and technical experts advance discussions on implementing the Paris Agreement and lay the groundwork for decisions at the COP.

While some progress was made on adaptation and procedural issues, key areas such as climate finance, technology, and scientific assessments remained contentious. Interviews with climate experts Jennifer Chow of the Environmental Defence Fund and Meredith Ryder-Rude shed light on systemic challenges within the UNFCCC process and offered insights into pathways for more effective climate action.

Jennifer Chow of the Environmental Defense Fund

Jennifer Chow of the Environmental Defense Fund

Deadlock That Foreshadowed the Tense and Fractious Atmosphere

The Bonn conference brought together government delegations, UN agencies, intergovernmental organisations, Indigenous and youth representatives, and civil society observers. The Subsidiary Body for Implementation (SBI) focused on operational matters including finance, capacity-building, and gender equality, while the Subsidiary Body for Scientific and Technological Advice (SBSTA) addressed scientific guidance and technical issues such as carbon markets under Article 6 of the Paris Agreement.

Brazil, as COP30 host, fielded the largest delegation with 173 provisional attendees, signalling its intent to influence the upcoming COP agenda. The Brazilian COP presidency outlined three priorities: reinforcing multilateralism, connecting climate regime outcomes with people’s everyday lives, and accelerating Paris Agreement implementation through institutional reforms.

Yet the meeting’s opening was marked by a two-day delay in adopting the agenda, largely due to disagreements over including discussions on developed countries’ finance obligations under Article 9.1 of the Paris Agreement. This early procedural deadlock foreshadowed the tense and fractious atmosphere permeating the conference.

How Scientific Discussions Remained Politically Sensitive

Adaptation emerged as a focal point, with negotiators agreeing on a refined list of global adaptation indicators, including measures related to access to financing — a key demand from developing countries. Steps were also taken toward transitioning the Adaptation Fund to operate exclusively under the Paris Agreement framework and clarifying loss and damage reporting procedures.

Nonetheless, the broader finance discussions exposed deep divides. The collective quantified goal (NCQG) of USD 300 billion, established at COP29 in Baku, continues to be a source of dissatisfaction, especially among developing nations seeking more predictable and adequate funding. These finance issues cut across multiple agenda items, influencing adaptation, transparency, and just transition talks.

Scientific discussions remained politically sensitive. Although the parties agreed to “take note” of recent scientific reports from the World Meteorological Organisation, stronger language expressing concern about current warming trends was blocked by some countries. This reflected ongoing sensitivity around acknowledging the Paris Agreement’s 1.5°C temperature limit.

Streamlining, Trust, and Effective Finance Delivery

In an exclusive interview with Inter Press Service, Jennifer Chow, Senior Director for Climate-Resilient Food Systems at the Environmental Defense Fund, highlighted structural challenges impeding UNFCCC efficiency and effectiveness:

“As is true for other multilateral processes, it is nearly impossible to address a growing list of issues efficiently without a concerted effort to prioritise, simplify approaches, and partner with others who may not require budgetary support. I think this is more pertinent to focus on than funding fluctuations.”

Chow claimed that the proliferation of agenda items and ballooning delegation sizes have complicated negotiations. “There are too many agenda items—and delegations have ballooned as a result. The secretariat and bureau could closely examine the COP, CMA, and SB agendas, propose streamlining, and develop a list of agenda items to sunset over the next two years, as some issues may no longer require negotiation. In some areas, constituted bodies can take up the work. Closing agenda items does not have to equal a lack of ambition.”

She also pointed to the trust deficit within the process.

“We can focus on giving more time for areas of convergence and less ‘unlimited’ time on issues where there is no consensus. Additionally, we need to give more leadership roles to Small Island Developing States (SIDS) and Least Developed Countries (LDCs). We have conflated progress review and rule-making, and renegotiating matters that were already agreed upon can erode trust.”

On countries’ climate plans, Chow stressed the need to prioritise implementation. “A plan is a plan. Evidence of implementation and progress towards 2030 commitments should be highlighted just as much as new 2035 commitments. Let’s not lose sight of the critical decade and sprint to 2030. Stronger implementation now will result in more ambitious plans later.”

Environmental Defense Fund's expert Meredith Ryder-Rude

Environmental Defense Fund’s expert Meredith Ryder-Rude

Meredith Ryder-Rude, also from the Environmental Defense Fund, shed light on the reasons behind stalled adaptation finance negotiations and the challenges of ensuring funds reach vulnerable communities.

“The recent negotiations stalled because the sticking point has historically been disagreement over which funding sources can be ‘counted’ towards adaptation finance goals. There is no disagreement over the urgent need for dramatically higher adaptation finance, but political and ideological differences remain over what types of funding from developed countries are truly delivering adaptation outcomes.”

She explained the complexity of adaptation finance integration.

“Guidance directs countries to mainstream adaptation in development, economic, and financial planning. Given distrust between parties and the severe impacts and costs involved, finding middle ground is difficult. Developed country budgets are tight, and those controlling funds are often not closely involved in climate discussions or understanding of multilateral climate funds, creating a big gap to bridge.”

On improving the effectiveness of finance delivery, Ryder-Rude highlighted the importance of capacity building in recipient countries. “One of the most critical ways to ensure climate finance reaches vulnerable communities effectively is increasing absorptive and financial management capacity at the local level. Funding levels have remained largely static for decades. We focus much on unlocking more funding—the supply side—but more attention is needed on the demand side.”

She pointed to promising models emerging from developing countries. “National-level organisations serve as aggregators managing multimillion-dollar grants from multilaterals and disbursing smaller grants to local community groups. They mentor these groups to increase independence and ability to manage larger sums over time. Eventually, local organisations can manage funding directly with donors. We need more small grant programmes, more national aggregators familiar with local contexts, and generally more trusting, flexible financing—especially for adaptation.”

Empowering most vulnerable remains critical to the UNFCCC’s future effectiveness

Meanwhile, with the world approaching the COP30 in Belém, Brazil, the outcomes of SB62 reveal both the urgency and difficulty of advancing ambitious climate action. Key issues expected to dominate the COP agenda include operationalising the new collective quantified goal for climate finance, finalising rules for carbon markets under Article 6, and translating adaptation frameworks into real-world support.

Countries were expected to submit updated Nationally Determined Contributions (NDCs) aligned with the 1.5°C target; however, nearly 95 percent missed the informal February 2025 deadline, raising concerns about political will and transparency.

Brazil’s presidency faces scrutiny over inclusiveness and transparency, especially regarding its proposed Circle of Finance Ministers tasked with developing a new climate finance roadmap. Questions about Belém’s capacity to host an effective COP add another layer of complexity.

Geopolitical challenges—including the notable absence of a formal U.S. delegation due to previous administration policies—further underscore the fragility of global climate leadership. In this context, rebuilding trust, streamlining negotiating processes, and empowering the most vulnerable remain critical to the UNFCCC’s future effectiveness.

IPS UN Bureau Report

  Source

Oceans at Risk: Report Warns Global Fossil Fuel Expansion Threatens Marine Biodiversity

Biodiversity, Climate Action, Climate Change, Conferences, Conservation, COP30, Economy & Trade, Editors’ Choice, Europe, Featured, Global, Headlines, Natural Resources, Ocean Health, Sustainable Development Goals, TerraViva United Nations, Trade & Investment

Ocean Health

A report documents the impact of unchecked oil and gas projects in biologically rich and ecologically sensitive environments. Credit Credit: Spencer Thomas

A report documents the impact of unchecked oil and gas projects in biologically rich and ecologically sensitive environments. Credit: Spencer Thomas

SACRAMENTO, US & NEW DELHI, India:, Jun 9 2025 (IPS) – A newly released report by Earth Insight in collaboration with 16 environmental organizations has sounded a global alarm on the unchecked expansion of offshore oil and gas projects into some of the most biologically rich and ecologically sensitive marine environments on the planet.


Titled Ocean Frontiers at Risk: Fossil Fuel Expansion Threats to Biodiversity Hotspots and Climate Stability, the report documents how 2.7 million square kilometers of ocean territory—an area nearly the size of India—has been opened to oil and gas exploration, much of it within or adjacent to protected areas and biodiversity hotspots.

The findings are based on a detailed spatial analysis of 11 case study regions, with data drawn from government ministries, investor briefings, and independent mapping efforts. The report was released ahead of the 3rd UN Ocean Conference (UNOC3) taking place in Nice, France, this week.

Tyson Miller, Executive Director of Earth Insight, described the process in an exclusive interview with Inter Press Service (IPS).

“Our research unit selected 11 frontier regions out of many and built a dataset with a mix of publicly available data and digitized information where government data was lacking,” Miller said. “It was shocking to see the scale of planned oil and gas expansion and LNG development, knowing that fossil fuel expansion shouldn’t be happening—let alone in some of the world’s most sensitive ecosystems.”

‘Overlap between oil blocks and critical habitats deeply troubling’

The report warns of massive ecological consequences as oil and gas activities encroach on coral reefs, mangroves, seagrass meadows, and Important Marine Mammal Areas (IMMA). Many of these zones fall within existing or proposed Marine Protected Areas (MPAs) and Key Biodiversity Areas (KBAs), which the international community has pledged to safeguard under initiatives like the 30×30 goal—protecting 30% of land and sea by 2030.

“Expanding marine protected areas is essential,” said Miller. “Safeguarding protected areas from oil and gas expansion and industrial development should go without saying. Yet, the extent of overlap between oil blocks and critical habitats is deeply troubling.”

In regions like the Gulf of California—also known as “the world’s aquarium”—LNG projects are already threatening a marine ecosystem that supports 39 percent of all marine mammal species and sustains hundreds of millions of dollars in fisheries. Despite local opposition and delayed environmental impact assessments, the area remains under active threat from fossil fuel expansion.

Meanwhile, off the coasts of Seychelles and Mauritius, the Saya de Malha Bank—a massive seagrass meadow that stores up to 10 percent of the ocean’s annual carbon despite covering just 0.2 percent of its surface—is now 98 percent overlapped by oil and gas blocks.

“There are important efforts underway to support the creation of a Marine Protected Area in the region—and if an exclusion of oil and gas and industrial activity in the area accompanied that, that would be a real positive step in the right direction,” Miller said.

Another key theme of the report is the outsized pressure placed on countries in the Global South to become new frontiers for fossil fuel extraction, even as they face increasing debt and climate vulnerability. Governments facing financial strain are often courted by foreign energy firms with promises of investment, job creation, and energy independence. However, the long-term consequences—both ecological and financial—are far more complex.

“Many countries in the Global South face high external debt and economic development pressures,” Miller explained. “Perhaps debt relief and payments for ecosystem services can become effective levers to help safeguard coastlines. Without this support, elected officials may greenlight projects that ultimately cost far more in the form of pollution, habitat destruction, and cleanup efforts.”

Indeed, the Ocean Protection Gap Report, also referenced in Earth Insight’s study, identifies billions of dollars in promised—but yet to be delivered—financing for marine conservation and climate resilience in low-income nations.

Incredible Work by Frontline and Indigenous Communities

Despite facing immense challenges, Indigenous and coastal communities are leading grassroots resistance movements in many of the threatened regions. In Mexico’s Gulf of California, local activism has successfully delayed LNG terminal approvals due to the absence of proper environmental reviews. In the Philippines, Papua New Guinea, Mozambique, and elsewhere, community-led campaigns continue to demand transparency, ecological justice, and a halt to extractive projects.

“Frontline and Indigenous communities are doing incredible work to oppose fossil fuel expansion, often with limited resources and at great personal risk,” said Miller. “They need more direct support and more visible platforms to champion their vision for the future.”

Yet these communities, according to the report, are frequently up against entrenched corporate and political interests, making their fight not just environmental but also a struggle for democratic participation, land rights, and long-term sovereignty over natural resources.

Policy Roadmap

The report has pitched a policy roadmap for global leaders, particularly in the lead-up to high-stakes forums like COP and the UN Ocean Conference (UNOC). These include:

  • Halting all new coastal and offshore fossil fuel developments, especially in environmentally sensitive regions.
  • Removing unassigned oil and gas blocks and stopping the approval of new exploration licenses and permits.
  • Ending financial support—including investments, insurance, and financing—for planned offshore fossil fuel projects.
  • Shifting public and private capital to renewable energy, including offshore wind and solar.
  • Ensuring a just transition that includes full decommissioning of abandoned offshore infrastructure and stakeholder inclusion.
  • Undertaking habitat restoration where damage from fossil fuel operations has already occurred.
  • Strengthening global legal frameworks, including support for treaties like the Fossil Fuel Non-Proliferation Treaty to prevent new coastal and offshore oil expansion.

“It’s time for global leaders to take bold, enforceable actions,” said Miller. “If the UN Ocean Conference wants to be taken seriously, it must directly address the growing threat of fossil fuel industrialization on coastlines and oceans.”

IPS UN Bureau Report

 

Explainer: Why COP29 Baku Outcome is a Bad Deal for Poor, Vulnerable Nations

Climate Change, Climate Change Finance, Climate Change Justice, Conferences, COP29, Development & Aid, Editors’ Choice, Environment, Featured, Humanitarian Emergencies, Natural Resources, Sustainable Development Goals | Analysis

COP29

COP 29/CMP 19/CMA 6 closing plenary Credit: Vugar Ibadov/UNFCC

COP 29/CMP 19/CMA 6 closing plenary
Credit: Vugar Ibadov/UNFCC

NAIROBI & BAKU, Nov 26 2024 (IPS) – The culmination of bitter, difficult, and challenging climate negotiations concluded with an announcement from the COP29 Presidency of Azerbaijan of the “agreement of the Baku Finance Goal—a new commitment to channel USD1.3 trillion of climate finance to the developing world each year by 2035.” This is on top of the USD 300 billion that the developed world is to extend to developing nations annually by 2035.


Developed nations appear perturbed by the outrage from the Global South as the COP29 Presidency big-up what is for all intents and purposes a bad deal for vulnerable nations on the frontlines of climate change. Once an annual inflation rate of 6 percent is factored into the new goal, USD 300 billion is not the tripling of funds that is being made out to be.

The Baku deal indicates that “developed countries will lead a new climate finance goal of at least USD 300 billion per annum by 2035 from all sources, as part of a total quantum of at least USD 1.3 trillion per annum by 2035 from all actors, with a roadmap developed in 2025.”

Ambiguous Climate Finance Promises

The promise of a USD 1.3 trillion of climate finance in line with what developing countries wanted rings hollow, for the text does not lay out the road map for how the funds are to be raised, postponing the issue to 2025. Even more concerning, Baku seems to have set things in motion for wealthy nations to distance themselves from their financial responsibility to vulnerable nations in the jaws of a vicious climate crisis.

COP29 text “calls for all actors to work together to enable the scaling up of financing to developing country Parties for climate action from all public and private sources to at least USD1.3 trillion per year by 2035.”

In this, there is a mixture of loans, grants, and private financing. Essentially, the Baku agreement reaffirms that developing nations should be paid to finance their climate actions, but it is vague on who should pay.

Baku to Belém Road Map

For finer details, there is a new road map in place now known as the “Baku to Belém Road Map to 1.3T.” COP29 text indicates that the “Baku to Belém, Brazil’ roadmap is about scaling up climate finance to USD 1.3 trillion before COP30 and that this is to be achieved through financial instruments such as grants, concessional as well as non-debt-creating instruments. In other words, the roadmap is about making everything clear in the coming months.

In climate finance, concessionals are loans. Only that they are a type of financial assistance that offers more favourable terms than the market, such as lower interest rates or grace periods. This is exactly what developing nations are against—being straddled with loans they cannot afford over a crisis they did not cause.

Article 6 of Paris Agreement: Carbon Markets

Beyond climate finance, there are other concerns with the final text. Although it has taken nearly a decade of debate over carbon trading and markets, COP29 Article 6 is complex and could cause more harm than good. On paper, the carbon markets agreements will “help countries deliver their climate plans more quickly and cheaply and make faster progress in halving global emissions this decade, as required by science.”

Although a UN-backed global carbon market with a clear pathway is a good deal, it falls short on the “transparency provision” as the agreement does not address the trust crises compromising current carbon markets. Countries will not be required to release information about their deals before trading and that carbon trading could derail efforts by the industrialized world to reduce emissions as they can continue to pay for polluting, and this will be credited as a “climate action.”

Climate Funds Fall Short

The Loss and Damage Fund seeks to offer financial assistance to countries greatly affected by climate change. There is nonetheless delayed operationalisation and uncertain funding, as COP29 did not define who pays into the fund and who is eligible to claim and draw from the fund.

The Adaptation Fund was set up to help developing countries build resilience and adapt to climate change. Every year, the fund seeks to raise at least USD 300 million but only receives USD 61 million, which is only a small fraction—about one-sixth—of what is required.

Final Text Quiet on Fossil Fuels

The final COP29 text does not mention fossil fuels and makes no reference to the historic COP28 deal to ‘transition away from fossil fuels’. Climate change mitigation means avoiding and reducing emissions of harmful gases into the atmosphere.

Fossil fuels are responsible for the climate crises, but the COP29 text on mitigation is silent on the issue of fossil fuels and does not therefore strengthen the previous COP28 UAE deal. Saudi Arabia was accused of watering down the text by ensuring that “fossil fuels” do not appear in the final agreement. They were successful, as the final text states, “Transitional fuels can play a role in facilitating the energy transition.”

Earlier, while welcoming delegates to COP29, Azerbaijan’s President Ilham Aliyev left no one in doubt about his stand on fossil fuels, saying that oil and gas are a “gift from God,” praising the use of natural resources including oil and gas, and castigating the West for condemning fossil fuels while still buying the country’s oil and gas.

Against this backdrop, COP29 negotiations were never going to be easy, and although the Summit overran by about 30 hours more than expected, it was certainly not the longest COP, and it will certainly not be the most difficult as Baku has successfully entrenched bitter divisions and mistrust between the developed and developing world.

IPS UN Bureau Report