Picture courtesy of Number 10 via Flickr CC BY 4.0
COP30 arrives at a precarious moment for climate action. Global temperatures have reached a new record milestone, and the first climate tipping point has been breached. Without a rapid intensification of efforts, the totemic 1.5˚C of the Paris Agreement is in peril.
Following a generally disappointing COP29, climate experts pinned Belem as a pivotal moment for climate action (See: COP29Wheredowegofromhere.pdf). Set to take place at the gateway of the Amazon and at the 10-year milestone since the Paris Agreement, hopes for ambitious delivery were undoubtedly high. Marking a break in the road of Petro-state hosts, it presented as a crucial platform to amplify the demands of “developing” countries and bring global attention to the escalating realities of failing to mitigate the climate crisis. Unfortunately, the lead-up to Belem has been marred by rows over accommodation prices, escalating climate hazards, geopolitical headwinds, and concerns over a breakdown in multilateralism. The imperative to deliver has never felt greater. But with global cooperation strained, can the world rally to close both the emissions and ambition gap?
Billed as the “implementation” COP, the challenge is clear: meaningful delivery outcomes must prevail. Movement beyond headline-setting targets must drive negotiations. With adaptation and resilience set to take centre stage, could this mark a turning point for negotiations? The onus, however, will fall to “coalitions of the willing” to ensure cooperative action amid fading multilateralism.
The UK in Belém: walking the talk?
With the previous pillars of the climate order crumbling, it will fall to other countries to assume the mantle. In this ongoing political vacuum, Starmer and Miliband are keen to position the UK as a global climate leader and prove that multilateral climate diplomacy remains alive.
Yet, as the UK delegation arrives in Belém, its claims of global climate leadership face a test of substance.
Let’s be clear: Starmer and Miliband’s decision to both attend this year’s summit is highly significant. But their presence must be substantiated by clear and ambitious outcomes. The UK’s ambitious NDC is a clear marker of UK leadership as an anchor point for other countries to follow suit. However, it must also continue to move the dial on international finance commitments and adaptation plans.
The UK is yet to set out its next ICF commitment, due to end next year. Ahead of COP, Minister White signalled the UK’s commitment to lead in reaching the goal of at least $300 billion per year, but against the challenging domestic fiscal backdrop and previous cuts to the UK aid budget, achieving future sign-off by the Treasury could prove challenging.
Deforestation is a particular priority of the Brazilian COP Presidency. The key mechanism to achieve this is the Tropical Forests Forever Facility (TFFF). The UK has played a notable role in its establishment, building on the legacy of COP26. Brazil has pledged an initial $1 billion and hopes the UK and others will provide another $25 billion.
In a blow to the Brazilian hosts, the UK has declined to contribute. Ahead of a tax-rising Autumn Budget, the UK will not invest in the flagship fund. Instead, it will fall to other countries to pitch their share. Yet, delivering as a climate leader also requires the UK to walk the walk at home: bringing forward secondary legislation on forest risk commodities to tackle deforestation and align with the EU’s (albeit delayed) Deforestation Regulation would be a clear signal of intent.
One coalition in which the UK could match intent with delivery is the Premium Flyers Solidarity Coalition, which proposes introducing levies on “premium” air travellers. While the UK is not a member of the Global Solidarities Levies Task Force, it has recognised its work. Joining this Coalition would demonstrate a commitment to exploring alternative forms of raising public finance.
The UK’s high-profile delegation and ambitious NDC are a clear marker of intent and should not be understated. Yet Starmer remains bound to the UK’s political agenda, with any commitments to climate finance remaining at the behest of the Treasury. As Starmer landed in Brazil, selling the UK’s ports and jobs appeared top of the agenda, with any concrete commitments to climate finance and the TFFF fading into the background.
Conclusion
The road to Belém has been rife with challenges. Multilateral action has broken down, and this year’s summit is at a critical juncture. Success will be judged on closing the delivery gap, but this will likely fall to individual countries and commitments by “coalitions of the willing” to forestry and climate finance.
While the Prime Minister has promised “to stand up for our values and our future”, the UK’s domestic fiscal situation means it is hard to pinpoint the concrete outcomes the UK will deliver.
