Climate & environment, explained.
Leaders pose for a family photo during the UN Climate Change Conference COP30 on 7 November 2025 (Hermes Caruzo/COP30)
Ten years after Paris, climate talks are bogged down by insufficient action, unfinished business, and declining global trust.
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.
Why COP30 may disappoint – againWhy COP30 may disappoint – again
This year’s UN climate summit – a decade after the world sealed the historic Paris Agreement to limit global warming to 1.5°C by the end of this century – should have been a moment to showcase how far the world has come. Instead, the talks in Belém threaten to expose continuous delaying tactics by oil-producing nations and many developed countries, resulting in insufficient progress to date.
Updated national climate plans by countries, known as Nationally Determined Contributions (NDCs), to be delivered at the talks in Brazil should include enhanced commitments to reduce greenhouse gas emissions aligned with the Paris temperature goal. But the outlook is dire. Many governments have yet to file their updated plans. Those that have offer little reassurance.
An assessment of those plans by the UN acknowledges incremental progress, but no country’s submission, other than the United Kingdom, aligns with a 1.5°C temperature trajectory. The previous round of NDCs in 2020 pointed to an average global warming of 2.8°C by the end of the century. The latest UN Emissions Gap Report trims this to 2.6°C – a marginal gain after 10 years.
Moreover, large implementation gaps remain. While countries’ plans commit to achieve their stated pledges, there is no guarantee that they will follow through. Many developing nations’ commitments, for example, remain conditional on uncertain external finance.
Complicating matters further is the withdrawal of the United States, the world’s second-largest carbon polluter and a key source of climate finance. So far, no other country has chosen to follow Washington. Still, aware of the scale of the task ahead, COP30 President Corrêa do Lago has floated the idea of a “Globally Determined Contribution”. The initiative attempts to widen formal participation in the pledging process beyond national governments and include cities, Indigenous Peoples, youth and businesses, as a means circumnavigating the lobbying of vested interests that makes it difficult to pass domestic climate legislation.
The United States supplied almost 10% of total climate finance in 2024 but has since dismantled much of its climate-related foreign aid.
At this stage, US President Donald Trump is not planning to send a US delegation to Brazil. A COP without Washington’s direct involvement would, in theory, remove one of the biggest roadblocks to progress, given America’s history of slowing consensus. Yet, Trump could still interfere with the outcomes at COP30.
During recent negotiations at the International Maritime Organisation over a global deal to tax shipping fuels, Trump reportedly threatened supportive countries with sanctions, visa restrictions and port levies, resulting in a deferral of an agreement until next year. It would surprise few if he sought to influence COP30 with similar tactics from the sidelines or decides to send a delegation with the sole purpose to stymie the talks.
Two major tasks left unresolved at last year’s COP29 in Azerbaijan also fall to Brazil: finalising the details of a new climate finance goal (NCQG) and reaching agreement on how to transition from fossil fuels.
Last year’s summit wrapped up with a pledge to provide US$300 billion a year in climate finance for developing countries by 2035, tripling the previous target of US$100 billion. A broader call sought to lift total flows to at least US$1.3 trillion annually. At the time, the first aim seemed achievable, with developed countries expected to take the lead. That prospect is now slipping out of reach. The United States supplied almost 10% of total climate finance in 2024 but has since dismantled much of its climate-related foreign aid. European donors have also begun to scale back their financial commitments. How to achieve the second goal of US$1.3 trillion was left vague, giving Brazil the job to fill in the gaps through what became known as the “Baku to Belém Roadmap”. The five action pillars in the Roadmap contain little that is not known about scaling up financial resources and questions remain about how achievable the ideas are in the timeframe needed.
Hopes that COP30 in Belém will finally end the impasse over the phase-out of fossil fuels will be tested. COP28 in Dubai marked the first time that fossil fuels were explicitly named in a UN decision text. This victory proved fleeting. At subsequent talks, Saudi Arabia led efforts to undermine that decision, going as far as meddling with negotiating text, and forcing the postponement of an outcome until this year.
Belém needs to deliver well beyond updated national climate pledges that are aligned with the Paris goal. It inherits negotiations weighed down by unfinished business and fading trust in global cooperation, and must steer talks through a moment when wars, protectionism, and economic headwinds threaten to crowd out climate priorities.
About the authors
Melanie Pill
Dr Melanie Pill was a Research Fellow in the Lowy Institute’s Indo-Pacific Development Centre where she was responsible for progressing the Centre's work on climate change.
Georgia Hammersley
Georgia Hammersley was a Research Associate in the Lowy Institute’s Indo-Pacific Development Centre .
Topics
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.
