COP30: Did anything actually happen?

The 30^th annual UN climate meeting recently wrapped up, and just over a month on from its conclusion, it is a suitable time to look back at what happened and try and answer the question which many find themselves asking; is there even a point to COP30?

A little history

COP stands for “Conference of the Parties” and brings together almost 200 countries, along with many journalists, delegates and, unfortunately, lobbyers. In the past, COP enabled monumental climate progress in shifting away from damaging fossil fuels. Most notablythe Paris Agreement of COP21 marked the first time that 195 countries came together and signed a legally binding agreement which acknowledged climate change, and set the important, yet highly optimistic, goal of holding the increase in global temperature to “well below 2°C above pre-industrial levels”, and ideally below 1.5°C.  

Although the UN now believes they will fail to limit the rise to below 1.5°C, the agreement still proved useful and produced something that was needed - a target. A number which encourages nations to work together to reduce their negative climate impact. It holds them accountable, and highlights when more aggressive and ambitious measures are needed to tackle climate change.

As a result of COP21, on a rolling 5-year cycle, countries which signed the Paris Agreement are to release Nationally Determined Contributions (NDCs) which document how they will reduce carbon emissions to achieve the set-out climate goals. The aim being that every five years, these promises will become increasingly ambitious, in order to deliver the change we need.  

Unfortunately, only 64 countries submitted their NDCs before the start of COP30. This rose to 122 submissions by the end of the summit. Timely submission should be the bare minimum, however, 73 countries, including India and Saudi Arabia, have failed to submit at all.

COP30: Belém, Brazil

Held in Belém, Brazil, “the gateway to the Amazon”, COP30’s location was symbolic, intended to highlight the importance of our rainforests. With this focus in mind, Brazil launched the “Tropical Forests Forever Facility” which is a fund to raise an aspirational 96 billion GBP from public and private sources, with 4.7 billion GBP already pledged. Revenue produced by the fund will be awarded to countries conserving their tropical forests, incentivising their continued protection.  

Whilst the UK government has not committed any public funds towards this, they have encouraged private investment. This fund has raised hopes for many about the progress which COP can foster, but this was undermined by the final agreement’s failure to mentionfossil fuels at all.  

Inevitable disappointment

This is of course disappointing to government delegates and spectators alike, inviting criticism of COP’s effectiveness. Reliance on consensus has left the talks vulnerable to political agendas, with many countries determined to protect fossil fuels as a key source of economic growth. French Environment Minister Monique Barbut stated the deal was held back by “oil-producing countries – Russia, India, [and] Saudi Arabia”. Saudi Arabia believes that “each state must be allowed to build its own path” – an understandable butnotably self-interested approach at a time when collaboration is vital.  

Fossil fuel lobbyists flooded this year’s COP, making up one in 25 participants and outnumbering the delegation of every country but Brazil. Representatives sent by France, Sweden and Italy weakened the EU’s position as a climate change leader and threatened to stallimportant policymaking.  Actions like these have solidified scientists’ stance that it is “unlikely” that COP30 will have much impact on climate change.  

Small wins are still wins

It is easy to fixate on what COP30 has not achieved, but it is also important to remember the small wins. For example, Brazil’s President Lula helped avoid a near collapse of the talks by offering a voluntary roadmap to phase out fossil fuels, outside of the formal UN process. Past climate promises were not reneged, meaning progress is still possible. In a time of such global divisiveness regarding the climate (inflamed by US President Trump and his public stance against renewable energies), it remains impressive that the world can come together to drive change diplomatically, and that multilateralism can still be effective.

COP has already helped initiate and promote significant reductions in global emissions, evidenced by the NDCs submitted this year. Estimates suggest that emissions are on track for a 12% reduction by 2035 compared to 2019 levels, rather than rising by 20-48% without COP. While this progress is undeniable, challenges in urgency persist, and outcomes could always be stronger. Despite these hurdles, COP remains one of the most compelling cases of effective multilateralism to emerge from the UN.

‍