COP30 Belém Amazônia (DAY 03) - PCOP Daily Press Briefing. Credit: Rafa Neddermeyer/COP30 Brasil Amazônia
By Joyce Chimbi
BELÉM, Brazil, Nov 17 2025 (IPS)
COP30 negotiations are midway. So far, talks about historic agreements are moving forward, backward, or stalling, depending on who you ask. The most pressing issues on the table are finances, adaptation, fossil fuel phase-outs, and climate justice.
Wide-ranging and ambitious promises across these issues are not translating smoothly into action. On the first day of COP30, the Fund for Responding to Loss and Damage [established at COP27 and operationalized at COP28] launched the call for funding requests for its startup phase.
From December 15, 2025, developing countries will have six months to request funding for projects and programs of between USD 5 and 20 million. The entire kitty has USD 250 million, which compares poorly to what is needed. On matters of loss and damage, developing countries needed USD 395 billion in 2025 alone.
The issue of finance is not a sticking point in itself at COP30, but has been identified as the thread that connects all other thematic areas as encapsulated in the ‘Baku to Belém Roadmap.’ When COP29 in Baku failed to deliver an ambitious climate finance package deal, this roadmap was added on at the last minute to build on the USD300 billion per year in financing agreed upon in Baku.
But this roadmap is not a singular goal to be achieved; it is about coming together to ‘scale up climate finance in the short and long term to ensure that annual climate financing climbs from USD 300 billion to at least USD 1.3 trillion a year by 2035. The roadmap is about increasing finance across all climate funds, be it for preventing, reducing or adapting to climate change.
Climate finance discussions have focused on mobilizing new funding sources, including innovative mechanisms like the proposed Tropical Forests Forever Facility (TFFF). Brazil has defined oceans and forests as the twin priority areas for discussion at COP30.
TFFF is a Brazil-led initiative that aims to mobilize nearly USD 125 billion for tropical forest conservation. It is a radical new solution to combat deforestation.
Brazil has, however, been left ‘surprised’ the UK would not be joining Germany, Norway and other nations towards contributing to the TFFF funds, despite the UK having helped design the tropical forest conservation initiative.
COP30 is determined to build a bridge between promises and performance, words and actions, and there are multiple sticking points in the development of this bridge. In other words, it’s a ‘COP of implementation.’
Unlike the emotive issues of fossil fuel phase-outs and finances that defined recent COPs, COP30 seems to be where the rubber meets the road. After all is said and done, with the agreements to move away from fossil fuels, the Loss and Damage Fund, and the calls for climate adaptation financing, the technical details of how these promises become actions are the sticking point.
For fossil fuels, those whose economies are not dependent on oil, gas, or coal want an immediate transition. Those that depend on fossil fuels are asking for time to find a pathway that helps the transition as they seek alternatives to cushion their economies. This is one of the most contentious climate mitigation issues.
But still all is not lost; there seems to be notable movement in this direction, in 2024 alone, more than USD 2.2 trillion was put into renewable energy—which is more than the GDP of over 180 countries.
Amidst fragile and fragmented geopolitics, COP30 is multilateralism under test. Leaders of China, the US, Russia and India are absent. Some say this is symbolic and could derail climate talks, but many observers say taking this as a sign that political support for international climate initiatives is waning is misleading.
Some observers from the natural-resource-rich African continent say the developing world simply needs to start conducting the climate business differently, particularly in how they trade with the global North over their natural resources.
To be clear, what defines this COP is not necessarily finance, adaptation, fossil fuels or even climate justice; for many, this is a COP implementation. The ongoing negotiations face challenges in translating ambitious promises into action.
Brazil has already launched the COP30 Circle of Finance Ministers—a key initiative under the COP30 presidency to support the development of the Baku to Belém roadmap. This circle will be a platform for regular consultations throughout 2025.
Another first in the history of COPs is that the Asset Owners Summit is included in the official COP agenda. Asset owners representing approximately USD 10 trillion met in Belém in the first week of the COP to work with climate scientists, multilateral development banks, and governments to meet the climate’s financial needs.
A major point of discussion is how to shift from loans to other forms of finance, with a focus on increasing funding for adaptation and ensuring transparency. Climate finance loans remain an unresolved issue.
For developing nations, developed nations whose industrial revolution is responsible for altering the climate system have a moral obligation to climate finance on terms and conditions that take into account that developing nations are the victims. Developed nations, on the other hand, see climate finance loans as a business opportunity—for every five dollars received in climate finance loans, they repay seven dollars.
Activism has been a defining issue at COP30, as has been the increased participation and visibility of indigenous people. It is a step in the right direction when 15 national governments, including Brazil, Colombia, the Democratic Republic of Congo, Ghana, Tanzania, the United Kingdom and Germany, and one sub-national government have formally announced their support for the Intergovernmental Land Tenure Commitment, a landmark global agreement to secure and strengthen the land tenure rights of Indigenous Peoples and local communities on 160 million hectares in tropical forest countries.
As to how COP30 pans out, the next few days will be critical as the UN Climate Summit nears its conclusion.
IPS UN Bureau Report
This feature is published with the support of Open Society Foundations.
Follow @IPSNewsUNBureauExcerpt:
Brazilian Indigenous leader and environmentalist Cacique Raoni Metuktire (center) during the closing ceremony of the Peoples’ Summit in Belem on November 16, 2025. Credit: Tanka Dhakal/IPS
By Tanka Dhakal
BELÉM, Brazil, Nov 17 2025 (IPS)
Brazilian Indigenous leader and environmentalist Cacique Raoni Metuktire appealed for support for Indigenous peoples and their land. From the podium of the Peoples’ Summit, Cacique Raoni warned negotiators at the UN climate conference in Belém that without recognizing Indigenous peoples’ land rights, there will be no climate justice.
“It is getting warmer and warmer. And a big change is going on with the earth. Air is harder to breathe; this is only the beginning,” he said on Sunday while addressing representatives of the global climate justice movement at the Peoples’ Summit. “If we don’t act now, there will be very big consequences for everyone.”
Indigenous people and civil activists from around the world took part in the Peoples’ Summit. Credit: Tanka Dhakal/IPS
While Belém city is hosting world leaders, government officials, scientists, policymakers, activists, and more than 1,600 fossil fuel lobbyists to decide the future course of global climate action, the Peoples’ Summit gathered frontline voices.
About nine kilometers from the COP30 venue, at the grounds of the Universidade Federal do Pará (UFPA-Federal University of Pará), activists engaged in diverse dialogue for five days and issued the “Declaration of the Peoples’ Summit Towards COP30” in the presence of Indigenous leaders like Raoni, which was handed over to the COP presidency.
The Declaration states that the capitalist mode of production is the main cause of the growing climate crisis. It claims that today’s environmental problems are “a consequence of the relations of production, circulation, and disposal of goods, under the logic and domination of financial capital and large capitalist corporations.” It demands the participation and leadership of people in constructing climate solutions, recognizing ancestral knowledge.
Artists performing indigenous folklore during the closing event of the Peoples’ summit. Credit: Tanka Dhakal/IPS
Sebastián Ordoñez Muñoz, associated with War on Want, a UK-based organization and part of the political commission of the Peoples’ Summit, said the political declaration constructed through the summit process reflects peoples’ demands and proposals. “It has our solutions, people’s solutions,” he said. He explained that crafting the declaration was a convergence of diverse voices, uniting around clarity on what needs to happen to address the climate crisis.
“It is an expression of the autonomy of people’s movements coming together, converging to develop clear proposals that are based on the real solutions happening on the ground-in the territories, in the forests, in the seas, in the rivers, and so on,” he added. “It’s important to hand it over because we need to make sure that our voices are represented there [at COP]. Any space that we have inside the COP has always been through struggle.”
As a space for community members to come together and deliver the public’s point of view, Peoples’ Summits have been organized as parallel conferences of the COP. It did not take place during the last three COPs. But in Brazil, civil society is actively making its case.
The Peoples’ Summit attracted a large number of Indigenous leaders and community members, whereas at COP their access is limited. Credit: Tanka Dhakal/IPS
“We need to continue making our voices heard there, but also not to beg-to state that we have the solutions and that we must be listened to, because none of these answers, none of these solutions are possible without the communities themselves,” Ordoñez Muñoz told IPS News from the Peoples’ Summit ground. “I think it’s a statement and a road map. Where do we go from here?”
Unlike COP30, the Peoples’ Summit attracted diverse groups of community members and civil society leaders. The COP venue follows the process of negotiations, while the summit emphasizes collaboration to find solutions and celebrate unity. It blends discussion with Indigenous folklore and music to bring stories of community.
“If you go into the COP summit, it’s so stale. It’s so sterile. It’s so monotonous. So homogeneous. So corporate,” Ordoñez Muñoz said. “Over here, what we have is the complete opposite. We have such diversity-differences in voice, vocabulary, language, and struggles.”
He added that the COP process is moving in one direction, unjust in nature, and reproducing many of the dynamics that led to the crisis in the first place.
“Over here, we’re all moving together. We have unity.”
This feature is published with the support of Open Society Foundations.
IPS UN Bureau Report
Follow @IPSNewsUNBureau
Credit: R_Tee / shutterstock.com
By Ambika Vishwanath and Treesa Shaju
Nov 17 2025 (IPS)
Emerging research on the nexus between climate, peace and security (CPS) supports the integration of climate adaptation and mitigation methods to advance sustainable peace. While climate change itself may not be the direct cause of conflict, its cascading effects such as resource scarcity, displacement, and economic stress could become focal points of tension. Although these links remain debated, meaningful responses could have delayed stabilizing effects. Locally driven responses become essential in addressing climate change as a security concern, to mitigate future cycles of conflict. A nuanced CPS framing can support smarter climate action while enhancing security at multiple levels. India’s scalable local models, Germany’s technical expertise, and Australia’s Pacific engagement pose an opportunity for the three countries to collaborate on advancing integrated CPS approaches.
How is this playing out in the Indo-Pacific?
The Indo-Pacific, one of the fastest growing regions from an economic, trade and development standpoint, is facing some of the most complex challenges arising from climate change and geopolitical developments. These are compounded by non-traditional security issues such as rising food, water and health insecurities, the intensity of which often eclipses traditional security concerns for regional policy makers. The COP27 Presidency initiative “Climate Responses for Sustaining Peace” (CRSP), spearheaded a pivot from a climate security nexus towards a climate and peacebuilding nexus that becomes useful to adapt for the Indo-Pacific region. The dichotomy of need, approach and security response provides countries a new potential for innovative engagement across the region.
Innovative approaches require acknowledging that current development models and business as usual will no longer be sustainable. As risks and challenges intensify with global repercussions, new partners must step-up with skills, knowledge and resources for ground up, contextual transformation. Germany, India and Australia have very different historical contexts and regional approaches, yet these growing global powers must respond proactively and in a coordinated manner.
Beyond solely relying on existing multilateral institutions, it is pragmatic to explore new configurations that address gaps left by larger organizations. Smaller groupings working with local actors can deliver ground-up solutions that states can sustain beyond donor cycles/political changes. They are also better equipped to pursue integrated approaches while working towards larger strategic balance and security concerns.
As one of the oldest and largest partners in the region, Australia has committed to being a principled and reliable partner to countries in the Pacific as well as the wider Indian Ocean region. Its 2024 National Defence Strategy, International Development Policy and remarks by senior leadership over the last few years suggest a strong commitment to relationships, with a global security agenda that is (debatably) climate-forward, ranging from disaster response to renewable energy. As a founding member of the India Ocean Rim Association (IORA) and the Pacific Islands Forum (PIF), it remains the largest donor with deep ties and networks despite a chequered legacy.
India positions itself as the primary security provider for the Indian Ocean region, evolving from a regionally focused Neighbourhood First Policy to a more comprehensive Security and Growth for All in the Region (SAGAR) initiative. It is a founding member of the International Solar Alliance which focuses on climate positive solutions especially for LDCs and SIDS. While India has had a longer history in the Indian Ocean, its engagement with the Pacific Island Countries (PICs) has steadily increased through grants, lines of credit, concessional loans, humanitarian assistance, capacity building, and technical assistance in areas like Health, IT, education, and community development. India’s development cooperation is guided by the principles of South-South cooperation, anchored on low-cost development solutions and non-conditional aid.
While Germany’s engagement in the region has been more recent in comparison, it brings technical knowledge and capacity in climate adaptation, ecosystem-based solutions, and capacity-building initiatives. German universities and research organizations are engaged in developing cutting edge climate tech solutions, which can be contextualised with regional partner countries. For example, the ‘Ensuring climate-resilient access to water and sanitation’ project strengthened rural water, sanitation, and hygiene (WASH) systems by integrating modern climate-resilient technologies.
Unlikely partners make for innovative engagement
Though minilateral cooperation has tended to proceed ad hoc or with a strict focus on blue economy or marine pollution issues, it offers a nuanced approach to balance traditional security concerns and emerging climate related risks and challenges. While many trilateral and quadrilateral efforts exist, a more efficient streamlining of projects, knowledge and resources can benefit small island countries in the Indian and Pacific Ocean that are often overwhelmed by attention. Many current efforts consume valuable resources while primarily functioning as discussion forums with limited tangible impact on ground. While Germany, India and Australia might seem like unlikely partners, their unique and complementary skills and resources can implement a more nuanced CPS agenda with partners across the Indo-Pacific. Their potential lies in addressing overlooked areas such as smaller projects, research, financing options and capacity building.
One way to begin collaboration is by establishing a trilateral technical cooperation track with the Pacific Nationally Determined Contributions (NDC) Hub, a coordinated regional support mechanism for PICs to implement and finance their climate commitments. While Germany and Australia are already among the key financiers, this track could leverage Australia’s regional presence and expertise while Germany and India could offer institutional support on low grade technology, low-cost project design merging modern technology with traditional knowledge. The track could commence with scaled down water security related projects, a key area of concern for many Pacific nations.
Another possibility is expanding the India–Australia Centre of Excellence for Disaster Management to include Germany-based Karlsruhe Institute of Technology (KIT) that specializes in technology such as AI for Pandemics and Disaster Risk Reduction. Together, they could jointly develop, and pilot dual-use disaster risk resilience technologies and capacity-building programs tailored for the Indo-Pacific region.
While both India and Germany have ongoing capacity constraints, their technical knowledge can complement Australia’s operations in the Pacific. Ignoring these opportunities risks leaving the region trapped in reactive cycles of crisis management, without solutions that are locally owned and sustainable. Innovative approaches that focus on filling the gaps can address the complex ways in which CPS linkages play out. Moving forward, strategic coordination among partners will be essential to translating these approaches into sustained regional impact.
Related articles:
Reconstructing the China–India Climate Diplomacy
The Case for a Climate-First Maritime Reframing of the Indian Ocean Region
The Indus Water Treaty Suspension: A Wake-Up Call for Asia–Pacific Unity?
Left Behind: Why Afghanistan Cannot Tackle Climate Change Alone
Ambika Vishwanath is the Founder Director of Kubernein Initiative and a Principal Research Fellow at La Trobe Asia. She is a geopolitical expert and works at the intersection of emerging security challenges, climate security, and foreign policy.
Treesa Shaju is a Programme Associate at Kubernein Initiative with an interest in the intersection of gender, foreign policy and conflict. She is a 2023 Women of Colour Advancing Peace, Security, and Conflict Transformation (WCAPS) fellow..
This article was issued by the Toda Peace Institute and is being republished from the original with their permission
IPS UN Bureau
Follow @IPSNewsUNBureau
A girl walking to collect water for her family in Sindh Province, Pakistan. Heatwave posed social impact on vulnerable groups such as women and girls. Credit: UNICEF/Saiyna Bashir
The Ninth Session of the ESCAP Committee on Disaster Risk Reduction is scheduled to take place from 26 to 28 November 2025 at the United Nations Conference Centre in Bangkok.
By Armida Salsiah Alisjahbana
BANGKOK, Thailand, Nov 17 2025 (IPS)
The year 2024 was the hottest on record globally. In Asia and the Pacific, Bangladesh was the worst-hit country, with about 33 million people affected by lower crop yields that destabilized food systems, along with extensive school closures and many cases of heatstroke and related diseases. Children, the elderly and outdoor low-wage earners in poor and densely populated urban areas suffered the most, as they generally had less access to cooling systems or to water supplies and adequate healthcare. India, too, was badly affected, with around 700 heat-related deaths mostly in informal settlements.
Higher-income areas usually lie in cooler, greener neighbourhoods, so the hottest districts are often the poorest – adding to social inequality. In the city of Bandung, Indonesia, for example, a study shows that there can be temperature differences of up to 7°C between the hottest and coolest parts of town.
Future prospects for the region will depend critically on the progress of climate change. Under a high-emissions scenario, we project that extreme heat will be more frequent, intense and widespread — what were once occasional events will become seasonal or even year-round phenomena. Rising temperatures also affect other parts of the Earth’s ecosystem – notably glacial melt.
Warming in the Arctic can influence weather, precipitation and glacial behaviour across Central and South Asia. Globally, this century, glaciers have lost about 5 per cent of their volume. By 2060, under a high-emissions scenario, the Islamic Republic of Iran, Mongolia, Myanmar, Türkiye and Uzbekistan could lose more than 70 per cent of their glacier mass. These phenomena also add to sea-level rise, raising existential risks for some countries in the Pacific.
To tackle these challenges, countries will meet this week at the United Nations Economic and Social Commission for Asia and the Pacific to consider opportunities to integrate heat risk into early warning systems and development planning.
The key priority is to move from reactive heat risk management to long-term, science-informed strategies. Policy actions are needed at local, national, regional and global levels. This is the International Year of Glacial Preservation, which offers a critical opportunity for collective action.
At the local level, nature-based solutions such as trees lining streets, urban parks, green roofs and wetland conservation help lower urban temperatures. These measures can increase shade, promote evapotranspiration and act as heat sinks, reducing heat island effects. Vegetation and tree canopies can reduce peak summer temperatures by up to 5°C.
While effects vary by vegetation type and density, green roofs and walls in Singapore, for example, have been shown to reduce surface temperatures by up to 17°C and ambient air temperatures by as much as 5°C.
Countries in Asia and the Pacific can significantly reduce heat-related illness, mortality and disruptions to livelihoods by building heat-ready, multi-hazard early warning systems. Expanding heat-health warning systems in just 57 countries could save approximately 100,000 lives each year.
To support countries, ESCAP plans to scale-up climate-responsive and inclusive social protection schemes that include technical support for heat-specific social protection provisions that ensure heat readiness, along with income and non-income support, especially for the poor living in densely populated urban areas.
Additionally, recognizing the benefits of nature-based solutions, our efforts can strengthen collaboration among national governments, municipalities and local communities to create green, cooling cross-border corridors.
These passages can chill the air, reduce surface temperatures and provide buffers against desertification, land degradation, drought and sand and dust storms.
Finally, we must push the use of innovative space solutions to strengthen heat preparedness in early warning systems. Despite the proven benefits of early warning systems, coverage remains incomplete. Only 54 per cent of global meteorological services issue warnings for extreme temperatures, and even fewer provide alerts for heatwaves or thermal stress.
In Nepal, for example, a community survey revealed that about three-quarters of respondents from vulnerable groups had not received any heat alerts.
ESCAP can leverage existing cooperation to share Earth observation data and technical expertise for mapping and monitoring heat exposure and city vulnerability to urban heat island effects. This information enables greater precision in forecasting and quantifying heat risk, as well as for issuing timely heat alerts.
The Asia-Pacific region has considerable experience in managing cascading disasters. But the rising threat of extreme heat adds a new level of urgency. Every country needs to act now to meet the scale of this evolving disaster risk landscape and to turbocharge regional cooperation. ESCAP stands ready to support countries in these endeavours – as we prepare for an ever-hotter world.
IPS UN Bureau
Follow @IPSNewsUNBureau
Excerpt:
Armida Salsiah Alisjahbana is UN Under-Secretary-General and Executive Secretary of ESCAPIntegration of crop-livestock systems in Urubici, State of Santa Catarina, southern Brazil. Credit: Ivan Cheremisin's/Unsplash
By Appolinaire Djikeng
NAIROBI, Kenya, Nov 14 2025 (IPS)
As the world gathers in Brazil for the UN climate talks, the country’s livestock sector – one of the largest in the world – is understandably in the spotlight.
Livestock are a significant contributor of greenhouse gas emissions in Brazil (and around the world) and have been linked to deforestation, but these animals represent so much more than that to so many, especially in the Global South.
Brazil accounts for approximately 20 per cent of global beef exports. The livestock sector is a major contributor to the country’s economy – responsible for 8.4 per cent of gross domestic product (GDP) and roughly nine million jobs.
For 1.3 billion people worldwide, livestock is a lifeline: a protector of livelihoods, guardian of nutrition, cornerstone of tradition, and potential pathway out of poverty. For the majority and especially pastoralists, reducing herd sizes is not an easy, or frankly viable, option.
COP30 is supposed to bring people from vastly different contexts together, to find solutions that work for everyone, as well as funding to enable it to happen. This year’s host offers special lessons for Africa’s livestock sector, as Brazil’s livestock sector was not always so productive and efficient.
Brazilian policies and investments have seen livestock productivity rise 61 per cent in the past two decades, while pasture land use and emissions intensity – that is, the emissions per unit of meat, milk or eggs produced – have gone down.
The key to this success has been avoiding uniform prescriptions and instead adopting regionally adapted and context-specific approaches.
For example, high-yield tropical grasses like Brachiaria have become central to boosting productivity across the country’s Cerrado region, improving cattle health and overall performance, and reducing costs. In southern Brazil, where smaller farms are more common, the integration of crop-livestock systems have increased land efficiency, promoted biodiversity, and diversified farm incomes. Mineral supplements and high-energy feeds have had the biggest impact in the Southeast of Brazil, where there are large feedlots.
Much like Brazil thirty years ago, many of today’s developing countries struggle to produce meat, milk and eggs efficiently. Poor quality feed, animal health, and genetics mean animals take much longer to reach slaughter weight or milk volume. Even if herd sizes are smaller, the emissions per unit of product can be 16 times higher.
The impact is that hunger and poverty are prevalent in these countries and, in some, still rising. Micronutrient deficiency – a result of insufficient animal-source food consumption – is also widespread among children, which has a devastating effect on health and economic development (contributing to annual GDP losses up to 16 per cent).
This is why at the International Livestock Research Institute (ILRI) we are researching science-based interventions that raise productivity and cut emissions intensity. For example, MaziwaPlus is an animal health-oriented project focused on Mastitis, a disease in dairy cows responsible for milk yield losses of up to 25 per cent. With Scotland’s Rural College we are also working on highly digestible forages, which could result in 20 per cent methane emissions reductions. EnviroCow is another productivity-oriented initiative, trying to identify livestock that remain productive despite environmental challenges.
And ILRI’s work does not stop at research. The Institute also connects evidence with policy and practice, as seen in Kenya’s recent submission to the UNFCCC’s Sharm el-Sheikh portal, which cites participatory rangeland management approaches developed by ILRI and partners.
Unlocking these benefits at the global level will require reframing the worldwide sustainability discussion around livestock – seeing it as a solution to be invested in, rather than a problem to be swept under the rug.
For example, climate finance should start rewarding reductions in emissions intensity (not just absolute emissions), so that countries improving productivity and lowering emissions per litre of milk or kilo of meat are supported. Moreover, the world needs to invest far more than the 0.2 per cent of climate finance currently put towards livestock research and innovation (and even less to developing solutions in low- and middle-income countries).
Most importantly, livestock should be embedded in national climate plans. Livestock should be recognised as more than a source of emissions, and as an important solution for climate resilience, food security, and adaptation – especially in developing countries and regions where they are the backbone of rural economies.
But as COP30 concludes, the conversation cannot end there.
This year’s conference must be a moment when the world recognises that livestock, managed well, are an important part of a more pragmatic global strategy which both protects the planet and raises the welfare of its people.
The timing could not be more fitting as next year will begin the UN-declared International Year of Rangelands and Pastoralists. Rangelands cover over half of the Earth’s land surface, store vast amounts of carbon, and support hundreds of millions of pastoralist livestock keepers, yet barely feature in most national climate plans.
If we choose to recognise and act on the potential of rangelands and pastoralists, they can become one of the great success stories of climate and development – driven by science, stewardship, and local knowledge.
Professor Appolinaire Djikeng is the Director General of the International Livestock Research Institute (ILRI).
IPS UN Bureau
Follow @IPSNewsUNBureau