Crandi

Are Un Climate Summits A Waste Of Time No But They Are In Dire Need

Leo Migdal
-
are un climate summits a waste of time no but they are in dire need

Research fellow, The University of Melbourne Arthur Wyns has received funding from the University of Melbourne, the World Health Organization, and the World Bank. University of Melbourne provides funding as a founding partner of The Conversation AU. The United Nations’ global climate summit has finished for another year. Some progress was made in Brazil on climate finance and adaptation. But efforts to end reliance on fossil fuels were stymied by – you guessed it – fossil fuel powers.

It left many observers with a question: is this really the best we can do? Nearly every country (except the United States) joined the COP30 summit in the Brazilian city of Belém. The meeting showed the best and the worst of multilateralism – when countries try to address global problems beyond the capacity of an individual nation. The United Nations’ global climate summit has finished for another year. Some progress was made in Brazil on climate finance and adaptation. But efforts to end reliance on fossil fuels were stymied by – you guessed it – fossil fuel powers.

It left many observers with a question: is this really the best we can do? Nearly every country (except the United States) joined the COP30 summit in the Brazilian city of Belém. The meeting showed the best and the worst of multilateralism – when countries try to address global problems beyond the capacity of an individual nation. On one hand, COP30 managed to draw world leaders to the heart of the Amazonian rainforest to highlight the global issue of deforestation. And it maintained political momentum on climate action despite an unprecedented year of geopolitical turbulence, wars, finance cuts and UN job losses. But the protracted climate negotiations failed to acknowledge the main drivers of climate change in the final text, including fossil fuels.

And the UN’s decision-making process broke down on the final day of the summit. Many countries objected to the opaque and undemocratic way Brazil pushed through the final decision text. A decade on from the Paris Agreement, there’s a growing sense climate summits are disconnected from real-world climate action. This begs the question: are the UN climate negotiations still fit for purpose? Or do they need to be reformed? COP30 President President André Corrêa do Lago at a critical moment in the final plenary session of talks

In three decades of these meetings aimed at forging global consensus on how to prevent and deal with global warming, this will go down as among the most divisive. Many countries were livid when COP30 in Belém, Brazil ended on Saturday with no mention of the fossil fuels that have heated up the atmosphere. Other nations - particularly those with most to gain from their continued production - felt vindicated. The summit was a reality check on just how much global consensus has broken down over what to do about climate change. Here are five key takeaways from what some have called the "COP of truth". The 2025 UN climate talks wrapped on Saturday, Nov.

22 after negotiations pushed into overtime. The resulting decision secured some important wins, both inside and outside the negotiations. But it omitted some of the big-ticket items many hoped to see. With efforts to halt temperature rise severely off track and climate disasters becoming ever-more destructive, the summit (COP30) aimed to establish clear pathways to deliver past pledges and put the world on a safer... A key question was how countries would address lagging ambition in their new climate commitments (NDCs). Hopes that countries would commit to roadmaps to end fossil fuel use and halt deforestation were ultimately dashed after opposition from petrostates.

The final decision only included new voluntary initiatives to accelerate national climate action, though the Brazilian Presidency intends to move forward with fossil fuel and deforestation roadmaps outside of the formal COP talks. Building resilience to climate impacts took center stage, with COP30 securing a new target to triple finance for climate adaptation. The COP also laid out practical solutions to increase finance for the low-carbon transition. In an era of trade wars and tariffs, negotiators also agreed for the first time to hold discussions on how trade policies can help — or hinder — climate action. Against the backdrop of the Amazon, nature also saw advances, including a new fund for tropical forest conservation. Indigenous Peoples and other local communities were recognized like never before.

And outside the formal negotiations, the summit saw a raft of new pledges and action plans from cities, states, countries and the private sector. It is clear that we are moving from negotiations to implementation, and from wrangling over what to do to how to do it. These victories matter. It shows that international cooperation can still deliver, despite deepening divides on climate action and a difficult geopolitical context. NEW YORK, Oct 18 (IPS) - Next month, the latest annual United Nations climate extravaganza, COP27, will take place in Sharm el-Sheikh, Egypt. Last year it was in Glasgow.

Next year it will be held in (drum roll please) … Dubai! These big climate events have been around a long time. Since 1995, there has been a climate COP (short for “Conference of the Parties”) every year except 2020, when it was postponed due to the Covid pandemic. Over the years, the COP roadshow has traveled far and wide. From Berlin to Buenos Aires, Kyoto to Cancun, and Bali to Marrakesh, the COPs have criss-crossed the globe with the aim of finessing new agreements to see off the specter of climate change. These annual summits generate a lot of interest.

The most recent in Glasgow attracted tens of thousands of participants. World leaders and celebrities often jet in and join the throng, while the global media reports every move in the corridors of power and concerned citizens protest outside. And yet the COPs are only the tip of the proverbial iceberg when it comes to UN-sponsored climate meetings. If you add the several preparatory meetings in the lead-up to the COPs, plus a host of workshops and other events by various expert technical groups, you’re easily looking at several dozen gatherings every... Each event is supposed to help us move the needle on climate change, keeping our warming world within the 1.5o Celsius threshold beyond which we face potentially catastrophic consequences. But what, exactly, do all of these many meetings accomplish?

Are they really worth all this time and effort? The COP30 summit in Brazil showcased both the promise and pitfalls of global climate negotiations. While progress was made on finance, adaptation, and deforestation initiatives, consensus-based decision-making stalled action on fossil fuels. Experts argue reforms—such as majority voting, stronger implementation focus, and curbing vested interests—are essential to make these summits more effective. The United Nations’ global climate summit has finished for another year. Some progress was made in Brazil on climate finance and adaptation.

But efforts to end reliance on fossil fuels were stymied by — you guessed it — fossil fuel powers. It left many observers with a question: is this really the best we can do? Nearly every country (except the United States) joined the COP30 summit in the Brazilian city of Belém. The meeting showed the best and the worst of multilateralism — when countries try to address global problems beyond the capacity of an individual nation.

People Also Search

Research Fellow, The University Of Melbourne Arthur Wyns Has Received

Research fellow, The University of Melbourne Arthur Wyns has received funding from the University of Melbourne, the World Health Organization, and the World Bank. University of Melbourne provides funding as a founding partner of The Conversation AU. The United Nations’ global climate summit has finished for another year. Some progress was made in Brazil on climate finance and adaptation. But effor...

It Left Many Observers With A Question: Is This Really

It left many observers with a question: is this really the best we can do? Nearly every country (except the United States) joined the COP30 summit in the Brazilian city of Belém. The meeting showed the best and the worst of multilateralism – when countries try to address global problems beyond the capacity of an individual nation. The United Nations’ global climate summit has finished for another ...

It Left Many Observers With A Question: Is This Really

It left many observers with a question: is this really the best we can do? Nearly every country (except the United States) joined the COP30 summit in the Brazilian city of Belém. The meeting showed the best and the worst of multilateralism – when countries try to address global problems beyond the capacity of an individual nation. On one hand, COP30 managed to draw world leaders to the heart of th...

And The UN’s Decision-making Process Broke Down On The Final

And the UN’s decision-making process broke down on the final day of the summit. Many countries objected to the opaque and undemocratic way Brazil pushed through the final decision text. A decade on from the Paris Agreement, there’s a growing sense climate summits are disconnected from real-world climate action. This begs the question: are the UN climate negotiations still fit for purpose? Or do th...

In Three Decades Of These Meetings Aimed At Forging Global

In three decades of these meetings aimed at forging global consensus on how to prevent and deal with global warming, this will go down as among the most divisive. Many countries were livid when COP30 in Belém, Brazil ended on Saturday with no mention of the fossil fuels that have heated up the atmosphere. Other nations - particularly those with most to gain from their continued production - felt v...