'COP30 must mark the end of Climate Debt'

As the two-week COP30 summit enters its fourth day, global leaders remain locked in intense negotiations over climate ambition, justice and finance -where the struggle between loan-driven promises and debt-free climate action is emerging as the central fault line.

At the heart of these debates is M Zakir Hossain Khan, a prominent climate-finance expert whose newly published Climate Debt Risk Index reveals how climate-vulnerable nations are being pushed deeper into debt through loan-heavy climate funding.

His organisation will host a press conference on the findings on Climate Debt Risk on 15 November, followed by a high-level dialogue on Natural Rights-Led Governance (NRLG) on 17 November.

Khan is an Independent Observer of the Climate Investment Funds and Co-founder & Managing Director of Change Initiative, a Dhaka-based climate think tank.

In this interview, he speaks about expectations, disappointments and what COP30 must deliver to restore global trust.

Why is COP30 considered such a pivotal moment in global climate diplomacy?

Zakir Hossain Khan: COP30 in Belém is not "just another COP." Taking place on the edge of the Amazon, at the 10-year mark of the Paris Agreement, it comes at a moment when the 1.5°C goal is slipping out of reach. Current global policies still put us on a 2.3°C path, something the UN Secretary General has already called a moral failure.

This COP will be judged on delivery, not diplomacy. If Belém produces a finance framework rooted in justice, a credible 1.5°C pathway and an operational loss-and-damage mechanism, it could represent the first real shift from pledges to protection.

If not, it risks confirming that the Paris system has reached its political ceiling. COP30 may determine whether Paris was a turning point, or a broken promise.

What are the key expectations from COP30?

Zakir Hossain Khan: I see several critical deliverables.

First, we need 1.5°C-aligned NDCs 3.0, binding, time-bound national commitments under CBDR that peak emissions before 2030, include fossil-fuel phase-out milestones and scale nature-based solutions. Countries must submit updated NDCs by 2025.

Second, a New Collective Quantified Goal (NCQG) on climate finance that moves beyond the expired USD 100 billion pledge. It must reach USD 1-1.3 trillion annually by 2030, be largely grant-based and include sub-targets for adaptation, loss and damage, and LDC/SIDS access. Redirecting OECD fossil-fuel subsidies and reducing war expenditures can close much of this gap.

Third, a Debt-Just Climate Finance Framework, 100% grant-based support for resilience, adaptation and damage, integrating debt-risk screening, debt swaps and relief mechanisms. Loan-heavy finance is intensifying climate debt for vulnerable countries.

Fourth, a fully operational Loss and Damage Mechanism, capable of fast, predictable and direct disbursement to affected communities.

Fifth, a Global Adaptation Implementation Framework to shift from plans to measurable, community-led adaptation and early-warning systems.

Sixth, a Nature and Forest Protection Compact for the Amazon, Congo Basin and Southeast Asia, supported by Indigenous stewardship and measurable deforestation-free commitments.

We also need a Climate Accountability Package, a Just Energy Transition and Fossil Fuel Phase-Out Deal, an Inclusion and Rights-Based Governance Charter, and a Science, Equity and Accountability Platform to guide Global Stocktake follow-up.

How is Change Initiative contributing to achieving these expectations?

Zakir Hossain Khan: From Change Initiative's perspective, COP30 must not recycle broken finance systems or symbolic targets. It must redefine global climate action through justice, where finance is debt-free, ecosystems have rights and communities act as stewards, not victims. Belém is the final bridge between political promises and planetary protection.

We are contributing in several ways: First, we are putting hard numbers behind climate injustice. Our Climate Debt Risk Index 2024–2025 quantifies how loan-based climate finance worsens debt burdens across 55 vulnerable countries. Bangladesh already falls in the high-risk category, with per-capita climate debt around USD 80, several times the LDC average. This evidence strengthens the call for a grant-based NCQG and debt-sensitive finance rules.

Second, we advocate for direct, fast-track disbursement to affected communities and reforms to Loss and Damage assessment and funding. Real-time data makes clear why this mechanism must be fully resourced and operational.

Third, through our report Justice in the Balance, we advance Natural Rights-Led Governance (NRLG), a shift from loan-driven climate finance to rights-based climate justice, recognising the inherent rights of people and ecosystems.

Fourth, we propose Natural Rights Finance (NRF) tools such as debt audits, debt-for-nature swaps and zero-interest green bonds, reframing climate finance as justice, not aid.

Fifth, we support 1.5°C-aligned NDCs through Natural Rights pathways. Our adaptation projects, including the Dhaka Hybrid Greening Roadmap and Blue Belt Eco Chain, demonstrate scalable, nature-based solutions.

Sixth, we integrate science and justice through NRLG and the Unified Natural Rights Index (UNRI), linking finance, equity and ecosystem health within the Global Stocktake.

Finally, as a Civil Society Active Observer to the Climate Investment Funds, I push for integrity, transparency and debt-risk screening to ensure new funds do not deepen old injustices.

In Belém, our role is simple: bring evidence, propose alternatives and prevent negotiators from hiding behind polished communiqués.

What should COP30 deliver?

Zakir Hossain Khan: From a climate-justice and NRLG perspective, COP30 must deliver six outcomes:

A real finance goal in the trillions, not headlines; with clear grant-based sub-targets for LDCs and climate-vulnerable countries.

Debt-sensitive climate finance rules, including climate-debt risk assessments and pathways for debt relief.

A fully operational Loss and Damage system, delivering rapid, grant-based support.

1.5°C-aligned NDCs with clear peaking timelines and fossil-fuel phase-out pathways.

A global adaptation implementation package, shifting from planning to community-led adaptation.

Formal recognition of natural and community rights, including Indigenous land rights and ecosystem personhood.

If we leave Belém without these pillars, we will have managed another news cycle — not a course correction.

What are the hopes for vulnerable people from COP30?

Zakir Hossain Khan: For vulnerable people in LDCs and climate-fragile regions, the hope is very specific.

They want to survive the next cyclone, flood or drought without sinking deeper into debt. Bangladesh alone loses around a billion dollars annually to cyclones, and climate shocks are tightening the debt noose.

They want climate finance to stop arriving as a bill. Our analysis shows families paying billions in hidden climate-debt servicing. People want COP30 to acknowledge this injustice and shift to predictable, grant-based funding.

And they want their rights and voices recognised. From Amazonian Indigenous defenders to Bangladesh's delta communities, people want to be treated as rights-holders, not charity recipients.

In essence, the hope is a transition from climate debt to climate justice.

Where are the disappointments so far?

Zakir Hossain Khan: There are several honest disappointments.

Global action is still lagging behind words: emissions continue rising, finance remains slow and loan-heavy, and trust in multilateralism is fading.

The 1.5°C goal is being treated as optional. Leaders acknowledge we are off-track but are not matching the urgency with fossil-fuel phase-outs or ambitious NDCs. Overshoot is increasingly normalised.

Major emitters are not demonstrating leadership. Their absence or low-profile roles send the wrong signal.

Adaptation remains chronically underfunded, even as climate-vulnerable nations face cascading losses.

Finance discussions remain defensive, with disbursement-to-commitment ratios hovering around 0.5 and continued resistance to grant-based finance or debt relief. Repackaged loans continue deepening climate debt.

Loss and damage progress is still painfully slow, with political declarations not matched by speed or scale.

And contradictions persist: even as Brazil foregrounds forests and Indigenous rights, new fossil fuel projects threaten sensitive ecosystems.

The disappointment is not scientific uncertainty; it is fragmented political will.

How should global leaders act now?

Zakir Hossain Khan: If leaders truly want to protect people and the planet, we need different behaviour from Belém onward.

They must treat 1.5°C as a red line, ending new fossil expansion and accelerating a just energy transition with adequate support for poorer nations.

They must recognise climate debt as a matter of justice, not charity, shifting from loans to grants, conducting debt audits and restructuring, and reforming MDBs and the GCF for transparent, direct access.

They must embed Natural Rights-Led Governance, ensuring legal protection for ecosystems and securing Indigenous and community land rights.

They must put vulnerable countries at the centre of rulemaking, giving LDCs and climate-fragile states real power over how funds are designed and monitored.

And they must move from symbolic pledges to enforceable obligations, with timelines and accountability.

If leaders fail, the credibility crisis of global climate governance will deepen. If they act, COP30 may still become the moment the world chose restoration over rhetoric.