COP30: Between ambition and contradictions

If the decision to host COP30 in the remote Amazonian city of Belem initially appeared puzzling, the symbolism became clearer by the time the summit concluded with the Tropical Forests Forever Facility (TFFF) securing a $6.7 billion fund. 

Situated at the mouth of the Amazon, Belem offered a powerful setting for a conference centred on forests, climate justice and global responsibility.

The TFFF is designed to incentivise the conservation and expansion of tropical forests by making annual payments to tropical forest countries that maintain their standing forests. By linking protection to predictable financial rewards, the mechanism offers a rare example of environmental stewardship aligned with economic incentives. 

For forest-rich nations in the Global South, it marks an overdue acknowledgement that conservation cannot rely on goodwill alone.

In the heart of a land shaped by acai palms – central to the livelihoods and diets of Amazonian communities which Bangladeshis could easily mistake for areca palms – the TFFF also carried symbolic significance for Brazil's COP30 presidency. The initiative allowed the host country to place forests, livelihoods and finance at the centre of the climate agenda.

Yet COP30 ended in Belem with a familiar paradox at the heart of global climate diplomacy: sweeping declarations paired with limited enforcement, and long-term pledges overshadowed by short-term hesitation. While the conference delivered several outcomes long demanded by developing countries, it stopped short of decisive action on fossil fuels and near-term emissions cuts – the core drivers of the climate crisis. 

Alongside the TFFF, COP30 established a global Just Transition Mechanism to support workers and communities as economies shift away from fossil fuels. Long championed by developing countries and labour groups, the framework seeks to promote orderly and equitable transitions that protect livelihoods while accelerating decarbonisation. 

Several civil society groups, including Climate Action Network (CAN), described the mechanism as one of the strongest social justice advances in the history of UN climate negotiations.

Beyond these flagship outcomes, governments adopted a new Gender Action Plan to strengthen gender-responsive climate policies and endorsed a Declaration on Information Integrity to improve transparency and trust in climate data and communication. 

Countries also reaffirmed their collective aim to mobilise at least $1.3 trillion annually by 2035 for climate action – a figure intended to reflect the scale of global mitigation and adaptation needs.

These gains, however, were tempered by significant shortcomings. Most notably, COP30 failed to deliver measures robust enough to safeguard the 1.5°C temperature limit.

Despite sustained calls from more than 80 countries, the conference did not produce a clear, binding commitment to phase out fossil fuels. Negotiations once again relied on voluntary language that fell short of aligning global action with scientific pathways. 

The agreed texts emphasised cooperation, dialogue and future roadmaps, cloaking political reluctance in technical wording while pushing the most difficult decisions into future COP cycles.

Near-term emissions reductions also remained weak. Countries did not significantly strengthen their 2030 mitigation targets, leaving a substantial gap between current pledges and the emissions trajectory required to avoid the worst climate impacts.

Climate finance – the central demand of developing countries – proved another major fault line. While the $1.3 trillion figure signals recognition of the scale of need, COP30 offered few concrete mechanisms to ensure predictable and accessible funding. Timelines remain vague, delivery pathways uncertain, and concerns persist over the continued dominance of loans rather than grants.

For climate-vulnerable countries such as Bangladesh, already burdened by debt, this distinction is not technical but existential.

Adaptation finance, a top priority for frontline nations, was marked by ambiguity. While countries agreed to "at least triple" adaptation funding by 2035, the pledge lacked a fixed baseline or interim milestones. 

Many developing countries had pushed for an earlier 2030 target, arguing that climate impacts are already unfolding faster than finance flows. Even if the tripling is calculated from the previous $40 billion benchmark – rising to $120 billion – the figure still falls far short of ensuring parity between mitigation and adaptation within the broader $300 billion climate finance goal.

Loss and damage finance followed a similar pattern. While the Loss and Damage Fund secured additional pledges and began operationalising disbursements, the amounts remain far below estimated needs. 

Current funding totals in the hundreds of millions, while losses in vulnerable countries are measured in the hundreds of billions annually. The progress was symbolically important, but materially insufficient.

Underlying these gaps is a persistent accountability problem. COP30 launched new dialogues, roadmaps and follow-up processes, but did little to strengthen compliance mechanisms or establish consequences for non-delivery. 

As previous COPs have shown, ambitious language without enforcement often translates into delayed or uneven implementation once delegations return home.

For countries on the climate frontline, the stakes are immediate. Rising seas, intensifying floods, heatwaves and storms are already eroding livelihoods and reversing development gains. Each delay in finance delivery or emissions reduction imposes higher economic, social and human costs – borne disproportionately by those least responsible for the crisis.

COP30 ultimately captured the contradictions of the current climate moment: unprecedented recognition of justice and equity alongside a continued reluctance to confront fossil-fuel dependency head-on – a fitting reflection, perhaps, of an Amazonian city equally shrouded in cloud and rain as well as the abundance of a fierce sun. 

Masum Billah/Journalist. Illustration: TBS