.png)
(11)(1).png)
This climate summit is defined by partial progress.
One of the most important achievements of COP30 was the agreement to triple adaptation finance by 2035. This commitment, highlighted by the UN and the EU, aims to increase funding for countries already experiencing severe climate impacts such as floods, droughts, storms and sea level rise. Although the decision marks a step forward, several negotiators noted that the agreement does not include specific financial pledges or timelines for mobilising the required resources.
Another major outcome was the creation of a new climate finance work programme, known as the “Mutirão”, which will run for the next two years. The programme is intended to clarify how climate finance is defined, counted, tracked and delivered, in response to years of disagreement over transparency and reliability. Many countries hope this process will strengthen trust and establish clearer expectations ahead of COP31.
In addition, the “Belém package” introduced for the first time stronger frameworks for nature protection, Indigenous land rights, gender-responsive climate policy and transparency in financial flows - elements long requested by vulnerable countries.
Keep in touch with the latest news about COP here.
Negotiators also adopted a decision on a Just Transition Mechanism, aimed at ensuring that the shift to a low emissions economy is fair for workers and communities. However,it does not come with dedicated funding or a roadmap, limiting its immediate impact.
Several countries also pushed for social protections and public participation to be included in transition planning, which marks growing recognition that climate policy must work for citizens, not only for governments.
Additionally, countries were urged to prepare more ambitious Nationally Determined Contributions (NDCs) that align with the Paris Agreement’s goal of limiting global warming to 1.5 degrees Celsius. This call is linked to the findings of the first global stocktake, which shows that current commitments are far from sufficient.
By the end of the summit, 119 countries, representing roughly 74% of global emissions, had submitted updated climate plans. Yet combined, they cover only ~15% of the reductions needed by 2035 to keep 1.5°C within reach. Global warming remains on track for around +2.3–2.8°C without rapid, deeper action.
The central point of failure: fossil fuels
The most controversial aspect of COP30 was the removal of language calling for a transition away from fossil fuels. Earlier drafts referenced the need to shift the world’s energy system beyond coal, oil and gas. However, strong opposition from a group of countries led to the deletion of this wording in the final text.
As a result, the COP30 conclusions contain no reference to fossil fuel phase out, phase down or transition, despite broad scientific consensus that such measures are essential to meet the 1.5 degree target. Many nations, especially climate vulnerable states, expressed disappointment. Environmental organisations and scientific groups were more vocal, describing the final agreement as inconsistent with the severity of the climate crisis.
This omission came despite negotiation pressure from blocs representing climate-vulnerable regions and major emitters alike - signalling that fossil fuel diplomacy remains one of the most deeply polarised subjects in the UN system.
Beyond fossil fuels, disagreement also emerged around adaptation. Some developing countries objected to the set of indicators chosen to measure progress under the Global Goal on Adaptation. They argued that the indicators were not sufficiently clear, practical, or linked to real needs on the ground.
Overall, critics said that the decisions taken at COP30 do not reflect the urgency highlighted by record breaking global temperatures, widespread climate disasters and the findings of the global stocktake. They pointed to the lack of binding commitments and the overall vagueness of several decisions.
In short, while COP30 delivered progress in process - finance definitions, reporting frameworks, social equity - it did not deliver progress in outcome: emissions remain largely unaddressed.
What will happen next?
COP30 did not settle the most difficult questions. Instead, it postponed them.
• The fossil fuel issue will return to the negotiation table in six months, during the mid year climate meetings.
• The “Mutirão” climate finance work programme will continue for two years, aiming to produce clearer frameworks for funding.
• Countries are expected to begin preparing their next round of NDCs, which will be reviewed at COP31.
• COP31 itself is expected to focus on the collective level of ambition and on accelerating implementation of commitments already on the table.
Two new acceleration tracks launched - the Global Implementation Accelerator and the Belém Mission to 1.5°C - will attempt to convert pledges into measurable progress, though neither currently requires countries to act. Their effectiveness will depend on political will, not legal obligation.
While COP30 advanced parts of the climate agenda, the absence of agreement on fossil fuels means the world remains off track to meet temperature goals. The coming year will be crucial in determining whether the decisions made in Belém lead to meaningful action or whether the gaps exposed at COP30 continue to widen.
The summit will likely be remembered not as a turning point, but as a threshold moment: progress was made, but not at the pace required. The story of COP30 is unfinished, and COP31 will determine whether this was foundation-building or simply delay.
Find out more about COP30 here.