Episode 13: The final agreement from Belém, explained

Speaker A: Foreign. Hello and welcome to the final episode of COP 30 covered, the daily podcast show from Edie, where we've been bringing you all of the latest news and views from the UN's 2025 climate summit in Belem, Brazil. So we are on hand to answer your questions like what have nations agreed on fossil fuel phaseouts or phase downs? What is the language on climate adaptation in the text? And who was happy with the final agreement? We explain everything in this final episode. Yes. Welcome back for the last time to COP 30 covered, from edie, the UK's longest standing business, to business media brand for sustainability and energy leaders. You're listening to the voice of Edie's content editor, Sarah George. And it is Monday 24th November, which means that we are now just over one day after the end of the COP. So joining me in our podcast studio to help demystify the final agreements and everything else that happened on the side is our editor, uh, Matt Mace.

Speaker B: Hello.

Speaker A: How are you doing?

Speaker B: I am tired. It's kind of a classic thing of when you're in the midst of it, you don't realize how hard you're working and then it finishes or at least the, the gavel comes down. We're not quite finished with our content yet, but um, you, you kind of take pause and you're like, okay, that was, that was tiring. And pretty much a full day's work on Saturday doesn't, doesn't uh, help that much, but in all the grand scheme of things I'd much rather be writing about it than actually being the, the people trying to deliver it.

Speaker A: So yeah, it seemed to go really down to the wire on the ground from what I saw. So Kot managed to wrap up sort of mid afternoon on the Saturday, which was a little sooner than we've seen in previous years. But I understand there were some sort of logistical challenges, meaning that they really wanted to get that um, over the line, I think. Matt M. You sent me an email about flights and cruise ships.

Speaker B: Yeah, obviously like accommodation's been such a big issue in terms of logistics out in Belem and they brought a load of cruise ships in and kind of just um, anchored them up near Belem. People could actually stay. The, the issue being is that those cruise ships are uh, uh, they don't stay in one place and they had to move. I think it was 8am on uh, Brazil time on the Saturday they were due to depart. So that's people's actual accommodation just leaving um, the vicinity there, which uh, which

Speaker A: sped up matters Yeah, I saw that as, as well. And it was a bit rushed in the final room. So what, what happens towards the end of the COP is that the COP presidency team calls everyone in for what they call a plenary. They double check a text that's already been publicly made available and available to all delegates and then they essentially read it out point by point and see if there are any objections. Um, so Mr. M. Delago, who was the COP30 president, started on this and started gabbling through quite quickly. Um, in fact gabbling through pretty much most of the final text um, before a lot of people expected to didn't split it into necessarily as many bullet points, um, which prompted quite a bit of backlash straight away. I think Matt M. And I counted at least eight official objections. We were both live streaming and thinking, you know, this is better than any reality TV we've seen this year. Right.

Speaker B: Yeah, it was uh, it was a kind of presumably as he said it was a, ah, it was an oopsie. Right. He didn't see but I think he was just speeding through um, to try and get this done. And maybe it's a case of didn't see, maybe it's a case of ignored, who's to say? But um, it was a mix of nations as well I think was kind of said it wasn't just kind of segmented by region or size. You know, you had the eu, you had Switzerland, you had Panama, you had Colombia, Uruguay, uh, all kind of coming forward um, and saying uh, that as it stands that they object to what's in the text which um, made for uh, some pretty uncomfortable viewing. I always remember back to Copping Glasgow and like Alok Sharma being pretty much on kind of like the verge of tears for like, for trying so hard to get it through. So I do, I do have sympathy with these presidencies. You know, I think most of the time they are well meaning and I think this has been proof that maybe COP and its consensus based format just doesn't deliver what it needs to anymore.

Speaker A: Yeah, I mean the presidency did say that, you know, this was a failure in process. It would, it should and would never happen again essentially. And looking at the objections and what ultimately was in the text and what happened, um, so after all the objections were heard and the vast majority of them were on the language of the global goal on adaptation and indicators upon which to measure that, ah, everyone sort of went outside for a huddle to decide what was to be done. Ultimately the Brazilian presidency was advised that a gaveled decision can't necessarily be reopened and they sought sort of permission to go with that approach and ultimately did get the support of groups including the group of 77 and the like minded developing and emerging countries group, which includes big economies like. So they were able to go ahead with going through. So with all of that in mind, what was and wasn't in the text? Um, so Matt and I have been combing through these texts and Matt's talked a lot about the wordings that are in these texts and how difficult they are to understand. For me, the top thing to note in the text was that all mentions of fossil fuels explicitly that were in previous versions were taken out essentially. So two years ago in Dubai, nations agreed to transition away from fossil fuels. The final text does make note of that UAE um, consensus or UAE declaration, but it doesn't explicitly mention fossil fuels itself. There was a massive objection from Colombia on those grounds. So that's one important thing to note in the text. The text does include a new commitment on climate adaptation. It does finalise the global goal on adaptation and related indicators that were on the page and commits to work towards improving them over time. It also says that nations should strive to treble adaptation finance by 2035. So this is something that people are hailing as a success of the cop. But an earlier text did try and push for a 2030 date for that. So commentators have said this really reflects how constrained the international finance and aid piece is at the moment and have noted that it is not in line with what the UN says is scientifically necessary. So those are some of the really big bits that are in the agreement that you might have heard of. Other things that are not necessarily as talked about is that the COP um agreement referenced the first time a new work stream on the just transition. So that countries are specifically committing to working together to make sure that the energy transition is just fair, inclusive and creates good, well paid jobs where it's needed. So we're showing really that sort of more economic and more practical focus of COPS and of other multinational agreements that are coming out at the moment. So those for me are like the top three things that were weren't in the agreement. And you can also check out our website to look at the exact wording about, you know, whether countries are still fully behind the Paris agreement and updating their NDCs etc. So that was my takeaways on the text. Is there anything that you think I'm missing, Matt, in my sort of like post COP fog?

Speaker B: No, I don't think so. I think it is just bizarre that a process designed to combat and respond to climate change and limit its impact on, on the world just has such a kind of um, reluctance to really address the, the big contribution which is fossil fuels. The fact that you know, it was only a couple of years ago when fossil fuels were first included in a text and now they're taken out again. There's a lot of comparisons um, going around of it's the same as you know, going to a lung health conference and not talking about something smoking. Right. And it's, it's similar to that. I think it's bizarre. I think for me personally it's probably proof that ah, as I've said already the, the consensus based approach to this just doesn't work and what we've seen for this and I think, I don't think this was a good cop, but I, I do at least appreciate the, the Brazilian presidency's efforts to take the fossil fuelled roadmap and the deforestation roadmap which were both excluded from, from the final draft and launch those outside of the COP process. And I think there's going to be a lot of uptake there, um, and it'd be really interesting to see how that shapes up.

Speaker A: So I was going to ask you Matt for your sort of key things that happened outside of the text. So just to start with, maybe we could revisit those roadmaps um, in a bit more detail.

Speaker B: Yep, sure. Um, so obviously the fossil fuel roadmap is probably the big one. We knew kind of going into week two that um, there was ah, a call for it in the text that got remove that was backed by almost 90 nations. Uh, I'm sure many of our listeners may have even signed the We Mean Business Coalition letter um, highlighting its support for it. Miliband was quite vocal about the need for it as well. UK was one of the um, supporters of this and it's ultimately not come through. The COP presidency has said that they will strive to launch that um, still as a kind of voluntary initiative. And all eyes all of a sudden seem to be pointing to Colombia which I think in September announced it was going to host this kind of first, first ever international uh, summit on kind of transitioning away from fossil fuels in partnership with the Netherlands I believe it was um, and that's happening in April next year. So there's a lot of people speculating that maybe that's where this roadmap kind of really starts to get its, get its kind of outline and what it would look like and voluntary. Who would sign up for it. And, uh, it's the same with deforestation. Again, there was calls for an official kind of roadmap, but it wouldn't probably be the actual roadmap in time bound in the final text, but more so an agreement that a roadmap would be developed. Um, again, lots of nations backing that and again, just not included. Uh, I haven't heard as much about what that will look like in terms of, um, when and how that's launched. But again, the presidency has agreed to kind of take it on and launch that as a, uh, as a voluntary initiative. So it's now a case of this very fragmented approach to climate action, where nations will sign up on a voluntary basis, um, because some people haven't kind of seen fit to do so. My very terrible analogy of it would be when you go to the pub with a few friends and rather than just buying rounds because some people don't want to do that, you kind of go off and you kind of form your own little coalitions of like, well, I'll buy this round, you buy that round, and then you've just got someone kind of buying their own drink as and when. Which, you know, is a classic case of who ends up paying for what. Which I suppose is what this cop's been about as well. So lots of kind of, um, questions to be answered. But we know obviously that the next COP is going to be in Turkey and that they've got their, I think, work cut out with Australia, obviously, because, um, um, Australia are going to be chairing that to, I think, prove to a lot of people outside of the COP process that it still works more than anything.

Speaker A: Yeah, I read a really interesting piece in Reuters and do go away and look at this. Nice book. 230 people that are either still involved in COP negotiations or have been in the past. And there's a general consensus that this year was sort of like the last of the old cops, if you will, and the first of the new ones. And the new ones being where the general agreement is the lowest common denominator, um, and then high ambition or regional or very specific coalitions are created. But before we come on to, like, what the future of COP could look like, I did want to just pull out your point on forests and finance really quick, Matt, because I think we'd be remiss not to mention the tropical forest fore, um, facility. So this is something we mentioned a lot in, especially the first week of this show. So one of Brazil's big aims was to operationalise this new investment vehicle that will incentivise communities in tropical forest regions to keep those ecosystems standing and in good health. It set a lofty goal of trying to get 25 billion of public finance with no deadline actually, but going in, that was the number they sort of went in with. They have come out with more than 6 billion of commitments. So that is something that has come out of this from a sort of coalition of the willing, namely Indonesia, France, Norway, Germany and Brazil itself. The UK continues to be under quite a lot of pressure to pay in itself, given that it was the architect of the Glasgow Declaration on halting deforestation. So we'll see who else puts their money where their mouth is in the months to come. And then the other big financial agreement that I saw coming out was that the Net Zero Utilities Alliance. So this is essentially, if you're in the uk, you'll probably know National Grid and UK power networks, the equivalents of these organisations across the world have collectively agreed to up uh, their grid investment to US$1.5 billion to try and unlock that trebling of renewables that we committed to, to two years ago. So there is some money flowing or maybe trickling depending on how you see it. Even though this has been a really difficult circumstance in which to host the cop. So those would be my top non text takeaways as well.

Speaker B: Yeah, I think there's, I think of all cops. Um, it's important to mention that progress was made in some areas and um, this is by no means a kind of abject failure across the board. But um, and the, the tfff, uh, is probably kind of, I think the biggest success that was was delivered at this cop. And it feels like every COP gets one, don't they? They get kind of one big launch that kind of really um, acts as a bit of a springboard for action and investment. Um, although I think even a few years later from someone, uh, some of the stuff in like Dubai, we're still kind of wondering where the money is and how it's provided. So again, devil is in the detail but there was some notable um, promises there. I do think as you mentioned at the start, the just transition working group aspect is really important. First time that trade's been kind of referenced in the, in the documents as well. So not all bad but I think there was some genuine signs of what could have been at the start of week two and to where we are now. It feels um, bitterly disappointing. Um, it does feel like the first test of the Ashes where England came out and bowled really well. And it was like, oh, okay, what could be, we're beating the Aussies in Australia. And then the um, the kind of normality resumed and it was wrapped up by day two of a crushing defeat.

Speaker A: I'd say that not everyone's as pessimistic as Matt and we need to come on too as well. Sort of. People must be one drunk. What, what happens next? And I know that what happens next for us is a few more weeks of work and then collapsing on the sofa with a box of Quality street to finally enjoy the Christmas break. But you mentioned Matt that next year's COP quite unique. So what does happen next for cop?

Speaker B: Yeah, so as mentioned we got. There was always a battle between kind of to say a battle, uh, there was a kind of bid for to host the next cop, um, between Turkey and Australia. And in a kind of weird middle ground, Turkey is going to host, but Australia is going to kind of be the chair and set up the uh, initiatives of it. Um, I was quite surprised about it. I think there was quite a important reason for Australia to be hosting because of the uh, surrounding small island states that would have been like been um, able to really kind of showcase and be present like we saw with the indigenous peoples at this one. But um, Turkey's taking it on which I suppose from our audience perspective might generate a bit more kind of accessibility for business leaders, uh, in that sense. So we will get, I suppose the. There's usually like an official passing of presidency uh, at ah, some point. Uh, Turkey and Australia will then lay out their agenda, probably summer this year building up to that. In the meantime though, there's lots of kind of key dates for the calendar that I've mentioned. Colombia and Fossil Fuel Summit will have the uh, kind of Davos early next year as well. I know the garden, uh, 20 or I suppose G19 meeting is happening right now because the US hasn't gone to that either. So lots of international diplomacy where climate change won't necessarily be at the forefront for all of it but would still probably shape out what this coalition of the willing, this voluntary coalition as we're calling it would look like in the build up to um, the official kind of launch in Turkey.

Speaker A: And something else I'd note about what next for COP is that. So every two years we have a big cop. So this is a big cop. Dubai was a big cop. Glasgow was a big cop. Next year not so much, but next year is a triple COP year. So we've got not only the climate cop, but there will also be UN Conferences on biodiversity and desertification, which I will struggle to say I'm very proud of myself. Um, so essentially at this cop, meaning cop 30, there was a push to try and join up these agendas a bit more formally. It was essentially torpedoed by Saudi Arabia and it was a really lowest common denominator agreement. But we'll see what happens next year in terms of whether something could be got off the ground on either of the other two forums. And in terms of biodiversity, it's the first meeting of its kind since the Global Biodiversity Framework was signed in 2022. So the headline vision there is like Halt and Reverse nature's destruction by 2030. So this links to so many of the deforestation commitments made at cop. So I think that that's an important forum as well. So, basically, exact dates for definitely the climate cop TBC lots going on in the latter half of the year with those. But before we get there, we've got Davos in January and the Columbia Fossil Fuel Summit in April and then the Bonn intersessionals, as always in summertime. So that's everything in terms of international diplomacy. And I was going to ask Matt M. What next? What next for us? Is there anything to tell the listeners?

Speaker B: Well, I mean, I think for us it's obviously covering all of that as and when it comes. We're still wrapping up some COP content. So we've got our webinar tomorrow, which may well be today by the time you guys are listening to this, essentially on the 25th. Um, and you can watch it on demand as well. So, um, we're doing that with ecology, trying to make sense of what we've just spoken through and translate that into what that means for businesses. What should the business response be to, uh, another kind of case of slow progress and new initiatives? Um, so that's happening. We're going to have a COP debrief report that I've been working on over the last two weeks as well, summarizing those key outcomes with some expert views from contributors, uh, as well. And then as we kind of move into December, I mean, I say that we've got a lot in November still to do. The budget. There's this new kind of climate emergency parliamentary meeting happening later this week.

Speaker A: My M attentions are definitely pivoting back to Westminster. They're being magnetized back there.

Speaker B: So one kind of big last green policy push for that for the year, no doubt. Uh, and then, easy. We're obviously just looking ahead to early next year. So, Ed 26 still shaping up, uh, quite nicely. Um, we've got 100 and almost 30 speakers confirmed for that and putting on an agenda that basically showcases that business action is possible, um, regardless of what the kind of political climates look like. And we're continuing with our ESG resiliency piece, so there's a couple more contributions from our advisory group on that. And in January actually pivoting the focus from resiliency to resurgence, so showcasing that actually sustainable business has weathered this winter, as they've called it and all, uh, the kind of signs, despite some high profile kind of departures from the, from the net zero space point towards maintained or heightened kind of investment in the long run. So what does resurgent sustainability look like for businesses? Our big focus for next year.

Speaker A: Yeah. So if you have just found us through this podcast, first of all, welcome. Thank you for keeping us company. Our general bread and butter year round is to keep people that are working in sustainability, studying sustainability or just passionate about it, informed and inspired. So we cover everything from policy changes and regulatory compliance to what Matt's talked about, the sort of narrative shifts as well. Um, and we cover all manner of topics, so not only decarbonisation and the Paris Agreement and the social aspects of the energy transition, but also circular economy, green finance, nature reporting, cleantech. So if you're new here, we would love to hear from you more throughout the year. You can find everything we do on ed.net and sign up for our daily and weekly newsletters as well as our regular monthly podcasts there. But for today and for this whole miniseries, Matt, that is everything. So it's a goodbye from you.

Speaker B: Uh, goodbye until. Yeah, the next cop.

Speaker A: Yeah. So hopefully don't be a stranger until next year. It's a goodbye from me too. Goodbye. It.