Australia, explained.
Australia is rightly focused on engagement about climate challenges with Southeast Asian and Pacific neighbours (NASA Goddard Space Flight Centre)
Hosting a global climate conference in partnership with the Pacific will need domestic climate ambition and stronger international support.
Subscribe to The Informer for monthly expert analysis, and to Events for advance notice of visiting world leaders and distinguished guests.
You may unsubscribe from Lowy Institute newsletters at any time. For information on our privacy practices and how to unsubscribe, see our Privacy Policy.
Technology can power Australia to lead climate diplomacy with Pacific familyTechnology can power Australia to lead climate diplomacy with Pacific family
Australia’s election was not just the “referendum” on nuclear that the opposition leader Peter Dutton had insisted on. In addition to removing the political risk that was clouding Australia’s domestic clean energy transition, the emphatic result confirmed Australia’s stance in international climate politics. For the first time in almost two decades, Australian climate policy doesn’t come with the implicit threat of a three-year expiry date.
The re-elected government is within Australia’s tradition of active, pragmatic multilateralism. It participates in UN climate negotiations by helping to shape outcomes – like Energy Minister Chris Bowen’s role facilitating critical finance talks last year. It is rightly focused on engagement with Southeast Asian and Pacific neighbours. It does not regard the sea-level rise threatening Pacific neighbours as a laughing matter.
This augurs well for Australia’s bid to host next year’s UN Conference of the Parties, or COP, in Adelaide in partnership with the Pacific.
The COP is the annual meeting of countries that are party to the UN Climate Convention. Countries use it to make joint decisions on international climate cooperation, like adopting the Paris Agreement a decade ago. The concentration of government and business leaders attending makes COP a hub for all sorts of negotiations, the place for announcing climate initiatives, and a climate trade show.
The right to host COP rotates among UN regions, or “constituencies”. Each constituency selects one of its members to host. 2026 is the turn of the “Western Europe and Others Group”, which includes Australia. (Fans of the classic comedy about the Sydney Olympics, “The Games”, may recall the organising committee’s efforts to avoid having to seat Australia at the “other” table.) Fellow WEOG member Türkiye is also bidding to host the COP.
The COP host, or Presidency, must shepherd the almost 200 parties towards consensus. Because the Presidency gets to set priorities and “hold the pen”, it is a position of great influence in international climate politics. And since climate policy has whole-of-economy ramifications, countries compete to host COPs.
It might therefore surprise some that the opposition opposed Australia’s bid to host COP31 during the recent campaign. Dutton labelled the bid “madness” and outlandishly claimed it would cost “tens of billions of taxpayer dollars”.
The hosting bid matters, and not just because of the influence that a Presidency can wield. As a partnership with the Pacific, it is a golden opportunity to strengthen Australia’s relations with Pacific neighbours on an existential challenge.
This is not just about money. Aiding the adoption and implementation of climate technologies is another much-needed form of support for countries.
The decision on hosting is expected to be made this year, possibly as early as next month at a climate summit in Germany. In assessing bids, parties will look for ambitious domestic climate policies and, from developed countries such as Australia, major commitments to help developing countries.
This is not just about money. Aiding the adoption and implementation of climate technologies is another much-needed form of support for countries that don’t have the means or capabilities to decarbonise their economies and prepare for a rapidly changing climate. In recent years, developing countries have made enhanced technology transfer a priority ask in climate talks.
Multilateral organisations are major players in technology transfer. The central Paris Agreement body is the United Nations Climate Technology Centre & Network (CTCN). Drawing on the expertise of over 900 Network member institutions, the CTCN has responded to hundreds of assistance requests from developing countries.
In the Pacific, the CTCN is delivering climate tech projects ranging from climate-resilient agriculture to green buildings to using AI to track coral reef bleaching. The current project to help Timor-Leste harness its solar resources is another case in point.
In Papua New Guinea, a CTCN project on E-mobility provides guidance to a transportation sector experiencing double digit growth in electric vehicles. As Australia’s nearest neighbour with a landmass equal to Sweden and population larger than the rest of the Pacific combined, PNG is utilising its CTCN connections to accelerate technology transfer in multiple areas.
With CTCN support, PNG has partnered with the Korean Institute of Science and Technology to research and develop ocean energy technologies. This initiative not only builds local technical capacity but also provides a strategic entry point for foreign investors. The linking of innovation, sustainability, and commercial opportunity is creating a new model of economic diplomacy for engagement between countries.
UN bodies like CTCN can similarly serve as force multipliers for Australia’s engagement with Pacific neighbours. Donor parties can craft bespoke programmes that meet regional priorities for the CTCN to implement, such as the EU’s climate change and security programme. A donor can use the CTCN’s capabilities, including its unique Network, to make its climate dollar go further.
As the race to host COP31 enters the final furlong, there are indications that Australia’s 2035 climate target won’t be out in time for next month’s climate conference. In this context, scaling support for developing countries would strengthen Australia’s hosting bid.
Backing efforts like the CTCN would also be an investment in practical multilateralism in the Pacific. One in keeping with a proud tradition of working for progress not just at home but anywhere in need of a helping hand.
About the authors
Stephen Minas
Stephen Minas is associate professor at the School of Transnational Law, Peking University and senior research fellow at the Transnational Law Institute, King’s College London, where he completed a PhD in law.
Christian Lohberger
Christian Lohberger is Vice-Chair of the UNFCCC’s Climate Technology Centre and Network (CTCN) Advisory Board and represents Papua New Guinea in international climate negotiations, focusing on technology policy and access for developing countries.
The most-pressing world events explained by Lowy Institute experts and global contributors, in your inbox, every Thursday.
You may unsubscribe from The Interpreter at any time. For information on our privacy practices and how to unsubscribe, see our Privacy Policy.
