Education
Deadlocked SB64 exposes growing gap between implementation rhetoric, delivery – EnviroNews
– Advertisement –
SB64 ended on Thursday, June 18, 2026, with a deadlock among Parties in the negotiations regarding the Global Goal on Adaptation. Many developing countries, and in particular the Africa Group of Nations, drew a line in the sand in the negotiations on Adaptation. Their line was crossed when they failed to get agreement from developed countries on the inclusion in the text of the tripling of Adaptation finance, promised at COP30 in Belém.
The negotiations on the Global Goal on Adaptation will now have to start from scratch at the COP in Antalya. This outright rejection of the GGA text is seen as a display of the built up frustrations by many developing countries about the complete lack of commitment and bad faith by developed countries to fulfil their legal obligation to provide climate finance. This was a feature that affected all negotiation rooms.
What was supposed to mark the transition from commitment to implementation in Bonn instead exposed a negotiation process that increasingly speaks the language of implementation while repeatedly retreating into procedure when implementation requires decisions.
At SB64, the language of climate justice was everywhere. Across two weeks of negotiations, governments repeatedly affirmed the importance of Adaptation, Just Transition, resilience and supporting communities on the frontlines of the climate crisis. Few openly challenged these priorities. The language of a people-centred transition has become mainstream.
Yet progress on the provision of real support continued to lag behind progress on process.
When discussions turned to the finance, governance arrangements and institutional decisions needed to make those commitments real, negotiations repeatedly drifted back towards reviews, technical processes, terms of reference and procedural debates.
The result was a conference in which implementation was universally endorsed but frequently deferred. From Adaptation and Just Transition to mitigation, the central political struggle was no longer over whether action is needed, but over who has the power and the resources to make implementation possible.
For millions of people already facing devastating floods, prolonged droughts, extreme heat, food insecurity and displacement, climate change is not a future risk but a present reality. Communities cannot adapt with promises alone. Workers cannot transition on declarations. Resilience cannot be built through reviews and technical discussions.
The test at COP31 will be whether governments are prepared to match their words with the finance, support and political action needed to turn commitments into reality.
Jacobo Ocharan, Head of Political Strategies at CAN International, said: “Governments arrived in Bonn talking about implementation, but too often they killed time by talking about process. The debate over climate action has changed. The debate over who pays for it, governs it and delivers it has not. Across Adaptation, Just Transition, mitigation and finance, progress slowed whenever negotiations reached the decisions needed to turn commitments into reality. Communities facing climate impacts today do not need another review, another dialogue or another workshop about implementation. They need governments to deliver on what they have already promised.”
The rejection of the Global Goal on Adaptation text came down to the lack of commitment by developed countries to fulfil their legal obligation to not only provide, but triple finance for Adaptation, as agreed at COP30. Discussions throughout the Bonn session largely steered away from finance and means of implementation, focusing instead on technical processes and indicators and not the means to implement them.
Pooja Dave, Adaptation Policy Coordinator at Climate Action Network International, said: “What we saw in Bonn was clear bad faith and unwillingness by developed countries to make progress on the most important issue on Adaptation: the Global Goal on Adaptation. You cannot implement the GGA without finance. Yet continued attention was given to the technical processes, while progress on Adaptation finance remained limited.
“Developed countries largely focused discussions on the Technical Task Force, while developing countries stressed that all GGA mandates matter – including the commitment to triple Adaptation finance. For communities already living through floods, droughts and extreme heat, implementation is not about measuring Adaptation. It is about making it possible. Countries on the frontlines already know what they need to do. The question is whether they will receive the finance and support needed to do it.”
Unlike the Adaptation negotiations, Just Transition had a positive outcome. The negotiations produced a text outlining functions and modalities for a future Just Transition Mechanism. The emerging Belém-to-Antalya Mechanism (BAM) is intended to turn the political commitments agreed at COP30 into practical support for workers, communities and countries navigating the transition. The text represents an important step towards operationalising that vision.
However, key questions around governance, accountability, participation and implementation support remain unresolved. Civil society organisations repeatedly warned against allowing procedural debates and reviews to crowd out the substantive work needed to build a mechanism capable of identifying implementation gaps, mobilising support and helping deliver just transitions on the ground.
Anabella Rosemberg, Senior Advisor on Just Transition at CAN International, said: “The Belém-to-Antalya Mechanism for Just Transition (BAM) is now within reach. Bonn was often slow and frustrating, but it produced the foundations for a meaningful outcome at COP31. The next three months will determine whether governments build a mechanism that supports workers, communities and countries through the transition, or settle for another space for dialogue. BAM must help identify implementation gaps, mobilise support and strengthen cooperation on just transition. CAN and its allies will continue pushing for a mechanism that moves beyond discussion and helps make just transition a reality.”
Finance remained the unresolved political question beneath almost every negotiation at SB64. Whether the issue was adaptation, Just Transition, mitigation or loss and damage, developing countries repeatedly stressed that implementation depends on finance, technology transfer and capacity-building reaching the countries and communities expected to deliver climate action. Yet most developed countries remain unwilling to commit the scale of public, grant-based finance needed to match their rhetoric on implementation. Looking away does not make the need disappear. It simply leaves vulnerable countries and communities to carry the burden and the costs, including paying the price with lives lost.
The transition away from fossil fuels remained another test of whether governments are prepared to move from agreement to implementation. While Parties continue to endorse the commitment agreed at COP28, Bonn offered limited clarity on how the transition is being delivered in practice, particularly for developing countries that want to accelerate the shift but with no real support to do this.
Mitigation negotiations reflected the same pattern. While Parties increasingly embraced the language of implementation, discussions continued to avoid the harder questions of ambition, support and how to close the emissions gap at the speed required by science. The risk is that implementation becomes another agenda item to discuss rather than a mandate to deliver.
As governments now turn towards COP31 in Antalya, the challenge is no longer defining the purpose of climate action. The science is clear, and what we need now is the strengthening of the IPCC, the backbone of the UNFCCC process, especially as it brings in more scientific voices from the Global South, as well as local and Indigenous knowledge systems. There is broad agreement, grounded in science and lived reality, that climate action must protect people, strengthen resilience, advance equity and support a Just Transition. The question is whether governments are prepared to move beyond process and take the decisions needed to deliver it.
Baboucarr Nyang, Regional Coordinator, Climate Action Network Africa, said: “The SB negotiations once again highlighted the widening gap between the urgency of the climate crisis and the pace of political action. While procedural discussions continue, communities across Africa and the Global South are already experiencing devastating impacts from droughts, floods, food insecurity, and loss of livelihoods. Africa and Global South countries deserve better than delayed decisions and unfulfilled commitments.”
Camila Mercure, Climate Policy Coordinator, Fundación Ambiente y Recursos Naturales (FARN), said: “Too often, Just Transition has remained a conversation rather than a reality. The Belém-Antalya Mechanism offers an opportunity to change that by creating a space focused on implementation and support for communities and territories. While Bonn exposed significant differences among Parties, it also showed there is a pathway towards a meaningful outcome at COP31. Governments must now engage constructively to make that happen.”
Marlene Achoki, CARE International’s Global Climate Justice Policy and Advocacy Lead, said: “Implementation without finance is just bad fiction. Commitments to provide Adaptation finance cannot simply disappear when it is time to deliver on them. Families are already facing impossible choices as climate impacts intensify. The looming threat of a turbo-charged El Niño, combined with record-breaking temperatures, droughts and increasingly unpredictable rainfall, risks worsening hunger, reducing access to clean water and essential health services, and deepening the challenges already faced by women and girls.
“Developed countries must provide a clear and transparent pathway for delivering Adaptation finance to vulnerable countries. This finance must come from public sources, be provided as grants rather than loans, and reach the communities on the frontlines of the climate crisis.”
Denise Cauchi, CEO, Climate Action Network Australia, said: “As COP31 President and President of the Negotiations, Türkiye and Australia must build on any progress made in Bonn and turn it into meaningful commitments and action. That means putting the 1.5°C goal at the heart of COP31 to protect communities around the world. It means accelerating an orderly and equitable transition away from coal, oil and gas, backed by a Just Transition for workers and communities. And it means ensuring wealthy countries deliver on their commitments to provide the finance developing nations need to adapt to climate impacts and drive the transition to a clean energy future.”
Nithi Nesadurai, Director and Regional Coordinator, Climate Action Network Southeast Asia, said: “The negotiations at SB64 have been disappointing due to the lack of climate ambition across core issues including Adaptation, mitigation, agriculture and Just Transition. This is because developed countries have refused to provide additional climate finance to developing countries. Instead, they have been using diversion tactics by articulating the importance of science and the 1.5C temperature goal; as if developing countries experiencing the harsh impacts of climate change because of temperature rise, do not give equal priority to science. It is the provision of climate finance to developing countries, based on the principle of equity as enshrined in the Convention, that will raise climate ambition, facilitate greater climate action, and prevent overshoot of the 1.5C goal.”
Sriram Madhusoodanan, Director of Policy & Advocacy, United States Climate Action Network (USCAN), said: “Across negotiation rooms, the intersessionals made clear that the implementation questions at the core of the global climate regime remains who is responsible and who pays. Nowhere was this more apparent than in the negotiations around the Global Goal on Adaptation where parties failed to agree on a text.
“In a year marked by escalating defense spending by Global North countries, a global energy crisis and the minting of the world’s first trillionaire, it is unacceptable that those on the global frontlines of the crisis must wait longer for the support they are owed. The money exists to address the crisis and deliver much-needed remedies and justice. Missing, still, is the political will to make those responsible – rich polluters – pay.”
Sven Harmeling, Head of Climate, Climate Action Network Europe, said: “Climate finance is not an optional gesture of goodwill – it is the very foundation for global climate cooperation. Cuts to climate and development finance, as we see them happening in some EU Member States, send exactly the wrong signal, undermining trust, weakening implementation and making the road to COP31 even more complicated.”
Caroline Brouillette, Executive Director, Climate Action Network – Réseau action climat Canada, said: “When we most need its scientific clarity, the IPCC – the backbone of the UNFCCC process – is being progressively weakened. Right now it needs to be protected, supported, and strengthened, especially as it brings in more scientific voices from the Global South, as well as local and Indigenous knowledge systems.The call for modelling and scenarios that incorporate equity is not new, and is based in the principle of CBDR-RC which is fundamental to the Paris Agreement that we all aim to deliver.
“Yet science will remain words on paper if we don’t act on what it tells us: that fossil fuel expansion in countries like Canada is accelerating and is blowing up the carbon budget for 1.5°C; and that Adaptation and climate finance gaps are widening and pushing marginalised communities to face increasing climate impacts. As a result we are heading towards devastating levels of warming. If the countries warning about the risks to the integrity of science in this process are serious, they also need to act on what science demands at home.”
Laura Restrepo Alameda, Advocacy Officer, CANLA (Climate Action Network Latin America), said: “From Latin America and the Caribbean, we demand urgent structural change based on the principle of funding life rather than paying for the climate crisis, calling for the global, orderly, and just phase-out of fossil fuels to curb extractivism in our territories without losing sight of the risk of falling back into old colonial and extractive paradigms. Drawing on the Advisory Opinions, we demand compliance with public financing commitments as a form of historical and inescapable reparations, rejecting illegitimate debts or conditionalities. We demand environmental governance that mandatorily integrates territorial standards, guaranteeing transparency, direct community participation, and legal protection for all environmental defenders.”
Mohamed Adow, Director, Power Shift Africa, said: “What we witnessed in Bonn was a stress test for multilateralism, and parts of it failed. Agenda items were blocked, commitments were relitigated, and civil society access faced restrictions. The UNFCCC process only works if all parties play by the rules and honour what they’ve agreed. We hope COP31 will press the reset button and provide the world with a moment where the multilateral system demonstrates it can still deliver for the people who need it most. Developed countries came to Bonn to undo what they agreed in Belém. They must not be allowed to do the same in Antalya.
“Bonn was meant to build the runway for COP31 in Antalya, Turkey later in the year. Instead, developed countries spent the two weeks trying to erase from the record a commitment they made just months ago in Belém to triple Adaptation finance. You cannot arrive at a climate summit, make a promise to the most vulnerable people on earth, and then fly home and pretend it never happened. COP31 must be where that promise is kept, not just in writing, but with numbers and timelines attached, and with real support delivered.
“The African Group said it plainly: a text without explicit tripling language is not a basis for negotiations. They were right. Developed countries are hiding behind procedural arguments by claiming Adaptation finance belongs in some other room, on some other day. But climate disasters don’t wait for the right agenda item. Africa is burning and flooding now. COP31 must lock in binding trajectories on Adaptation finance, or it will be remembered as the summit where the world looked away.”
Daniel Porcel, Climate Policy Specialist, Talanoa Institute, said: “The Bonn negotiations were an important opportunity to clarify the remaining gaps from the Adaptation decisions agreed at COP30 and to begin building a clear pathway for implementation. Throughout the talks, developing countries showed strong unity in calling for the tripling of Adaptation finance agreed in Belém to be reflected across the Global Goal on Adaptation. Means of implementation is what allows developing countries to turn these commitments into concrete action on the ground. Looking ahead to COP31, we need delivery. Parties need to understand that this is not simply a financial target, it’s their responsibility to protect communities from increasing climate impacts, including the upcoming El Niño this year.”
Wafa Misrar, Policy Lead, Climate Action Network Africa, said: “At SB64, implementation became the defining theme of the negotiations. But implementation is ultimately a question of delivery. Countries already know the challenges, the solutions, and the support required. The real question is whether commitments will finally be matched by action. The credibility of this implementation era will not depend on new dialogues or initiatives, but on whether people and communities see tangible results from decisions that have been negotiated for years.”
Özlem Katısöz, Senior Climate & Energy Policy Coordinator for Turkey, CAN Europe, said: “Electrification must be based on renewable energy and energy efficiency, not on prolonging fossil fuel use through new infrastructure or false solutions. Similarly, any roadmap for transitioning away from fossil fuels must be aligned with the 1.5°C limit, equity, international cooperation, and the needs of affected workers and communities.”
James Trinder, International Climate Policy Coordinator, CAN Europe, said: “Bonn showed that Just Transition is not a side issue: it is central to whether climate action can be delivered at the speed and scale required, without anyone being left behind. The EU should now build on the progress made here, work constructively with partners, and help secure a strong Just Transition Mechanism at COP31. This is not another fund, but will make sure finance reaches the right places to deliver national Just Transition initiatives. If done well, this could become one of the defining legacies of the summit.”
Teresa Anderson, Global Lead on Climate Justice, ActionAid International, said: “Developing countries are furious at rich countries’ efforts to break a historic promise on Adaptation finance. Only six months ago, governments at COP30 in Belém agreed to triple finance to help climate-hit countries cope with the impacts of a changing climate. Developing countries asked for a clear plan to deliver on this promise. But they were met with stonewalling. It seems that wealthy countries want to quietly forget their promise to help vulnerable countries survive the escalating climate impacts that will otherwise devastate millions of lives.
“But the good news is that we came a step closer to untangling knotty questions on how to reshape energy and food systems without harming people’s jobs and wellbeing. If COP31 succeeds in setting up a just transition mechanism to support countries and communities to navigate the many challenges of climate transitions, this could be a vital key to unlocking and speeding up climate action and justice everywhere.”
Ana Mulio Alvarez, Policy Advisor, E3G, said: In the end no agreement has been found for the Global Goal on Adaptation item, which sought to set up a technical taskforce to support the policy alignment of the Belem Indicators to the UAE Framework for Global Climate Resilience. This Rule 16 is more than a procedural outcome: it is a warning sign. Countries have effectively pressed pause on a process that was supposed to help turn Adaptation commitments into action. While communities face worsening floods, droughts, and extreme heat, governments have failed to agree on the mechanisms needed to track progress and drive implementation. Countries must come to COP31 ready to move quickly on this subject so the important work can begin.”
Fernanda de Carvalho, Global Climate and Energy Policy Head, WWF International, said: “Negotiations remain the backbone of global climate action – but they cannot become a waiting room for implementation. Bonn showed the climate agenda is shifting from promises to delivery. That shift is welcome, but it is still slow, uneven and fragile. Presidency-led initiatives on fossil fuels, forests, finance and national climate plans now need hard edges: clear governance, real money and strong accountability. Governments must arrive at COP31 ready to turn this momentum into a credible delivery package – one that accelerates the transition away from fossil fuels, halts and reverses deforestation and degradation and puts finance behind the countries and communities already on the frontlines.
“A key issue still unresolved in Bonn is mitigation or reducing emissions, one of the pillars of the Paris Agreement. The Mitigation Work Programme should only continue if improved to strengthen the connection with the GST, input into GST2 and deliver meaningful implementation outcomes. We need a formal space for a serious mitigation discussion, based on science and equity.”
Jasper Inventor, Deputy Programme Director, Greenpeace International, said: “Stalled talks around climate finance for developing countries and a repeated deadlock on mitigation played out in Bonn again. It’s this repeated playbook that took some of the shine off the emergence of a coalition of countries supporting a transition away from fossil fuels at a time where the climate and energy crisis is set to be supercharged by the El Niño.
“Still, Bonn laid some foundations for COP31 as the negotiating text on Just Transition will form a basis for further negotiations. However, no conclusions were reached on mitigation, showing that while this process is still moving, it is far away from political breakthroughs.
“To bridge the 1.5°C ambition gap, governments must now sustain and strengthen international cooperation in and outside the UNFCCC. Instead of systematically trying to renegotiate 1.5°C and eliminate science from key negotiating tracks, what’s required is a fair, fast and funded Just Transition and an end to forest destruction by 2030.”
Mariana Paoli, Climate Policy Lead, Oxfam International, said: “The UN negotiations have once again been derailed by rich countries’ refusal to take responsibility for increasing critical public climate finance. At a time when multilateralism faces an existential threat and rich polluters accelerate the path to climate breakdown, the unwillingness of rich countries to engage meaningfully is astonishing. All governments, particularly the richest and most polluting, must use the months leading up to COP31 to show their leadership in scaling up public climate finance – and do so by cutting out the influence of super-rich polluters and centring the needs of the communities who are at the forefront of the climate crisis.”
Harjeet Singh, Founding Director, Satat Sampada Climate Foundation, said: “It matters that parties at Bonn kept reaffirming the COP28 commitment to transition away from fossil fuels, that signal needs to keep being sent. But reaffirming a commitment is not the same as having a plan to deliver it, and we don’t have time to treat this as a slow-moving process. Fossil fuels are driving more wars and crises by the year, and a patchwork of national roadmaps will not be enough. Those roadmaps are important but they cannot respond to a shift this big and they risk leaving the most vulnerable countries to manage a transition from a problem they didn’t create. This is exactly what almost 60 countries recognised at Santa Marta: that a transition away from fossil fuels cannot be left to disconnected national efforts, without international cooperation. It needs a shared and coordinated framework such as a Fossil Fuel Treaty to deliver this transition in a fast and equitable manner.”
Marie Cosquer, Advocacy analyst – food systems and climate, Action against Hunger, said: “In the agriculture negotiations, Bonn has not brought us closer to implementation. Despite repeated calls in workshops to provide public climate finance at scale to support agroecology, with direct access to grants for small-scale food producers in the Global South, the political signals we need out of the UNFCCC are not there. With a looming El Niño, small-holder farmers, peasants, Indigenous Peoples, women, youth, pastoralists, fisherfolks, and landless peoples around the world will once again face severe impacts, while managing to continue feeding the world. This is why, looking at COP31 and the immobility of agriculture negotiations, the delivery of the Belém-Antalya Mechanism (BAM) for a Just Transition is absolutely critical to put us on the path of climate justice, including for people working the land and food workers.”
Cheryl Kwapong, The Chisholm Legacy Project, Co-Steward of the Global Afro Descendant Climate Justice Collaborative, said: “Another SB intercessional session of hushed conversations, empty promises, and attempts to distract the collective as tangible progress is stalled. The fact that we continue to come to these negotiation processes knowing exactly what we need to do, but failing to do it anyways is indicative of a flawed system that shows no desire to right historic wrongs and save the lives of people. We know who is most harmed. We know who is most responsible. We are not discussing scenarios or made-up fantasies, but the realities of real individuals across the globe. Stop the rhetoric, fill the fund, and create consequences for countries who are kicking the can down the road.”
Ann Harrison, Climate Justice Policy Adviser, Amnesty International, said: “Implementation is the name of the game here at SB64 and going forward to COP31. But implementation of climate action will fail if it is done without the meaningful participation of those affected by climate change, whether young, old, women and girls, Indigenous Peoples, People of African Descent, LGBTI people, workers or people from other marginalised groups. In this regard, it’s disappointing there was not more progress on creating a formal constituency for people living with disabilities.
“Once again at Bonn, we heard numerous reports of both civil society colleagues and negotiators from African and Asian countries who were denied visas to attend or received them very late. Their voices and perspectives were missing in the rooms, and this undermines the effectiveness of the process. The barriers delegates from these countries face under the Schengen system constitute indirect racial discrimination and must be reformed so that all delegates are equally able to participate.“
Lien Vandamme, Senior Campaigner, Centre for International Environmental Law, said: “Outside the halls of the UNFCCC, momentum to advance meaningful climate action is growing. The Santa Marta conference demonstrated that a fossil fuel phaseout is not out of reach, and the United Nations resolution, supported by the overwhelming majority of countries, on implementing the International Court of Justice climate Advisory Opinion underscored that climate action must be anchored in legal obligations of prevention, cooperation, and accountability. But Bonn showed that the institutions meant to deliver that accountability remain constrained by outdated rules and undue influence from polluting interests.
“What’s clear? We need effective multilateralism and an effective climate regime, not one that is incapable of delivering accountability or tackling the root cause of the climate crisis – fossil fuels – at the speed and scale the crisis demands. As attention turns to COP31, governments must confront the structural barriers that continue to delay meaningful action, from consensus rules to the absence of robust safeguards against conflicts of interest.”
Romain Ioualalen, Global Policy lead at Oil Change International, said: “As the Bonn climate talks close, countries cannot ignore the devastating consequences of continued fossil fuel reliance. Across the world, fossil-fueled wars drive destruction and human suffering, while volatile oil and gas prices push up energy and food costs, making life unaffordable for millions.
“That is why countries need energy transition roadmaps. If designed well, these plans can protect economies from fossil-fueled volatility, ensure energy access for all, reduce energy bills, and build jobs, peace, and green industrialisation. Countries can either double down on fossil fuels and get caught up in the next fossil fuel crisis, or they can choose economic and energy sovereignty by planning for a Just Transition. The right choice is obvious.
“The next stop is COP31, where countries must bring their concrete plans to the table. Building a safe, renewable future requires planned, government-led transitions backed by regulations, public funding, and international cooperation. Rich countries must phase out fossil fuels first and fastest, equip the new Just Transition Mechanism with funding, capacity, and rights-based principles, and support reforming outdated global debt, tax, and trade rules to make the energy transition possible and fair for the most climate-vulnerable countries.”
Ramana Shareef, Project Manager – Energy and Just Development, World Future Council said: “SB64 was meant to mark the transition from commitment to implementation, but it was quite unfortunate that negotiations became too process oriented. While there was a successful placement of people at the centre of the debate and advancement of text on the Balem Antalya Mechanism (BAM), critical questions on funding, governance, and accountability remain unresolved. The question heading into COP31 is whether governments are ready to move past process and take the hard decisions needed to deliver a truly Just Transition.”
Rachel Cleetus, Senior Policy Director, Climate and Energy Programme, Union of Concerned Scientists, said: “Across the board, insufficient climate finance remains a major roadblock. Wealthy countries’ claims of supporting the 1.5°C goal ring hollow when year after year they fail to put forward funding for the very actions required by that goal, including transitioning away from fossil fuels, ramping up renewable energy, and Adaptation measures in lower income nations. Efforts to sideline climate science in this process, or to falsely pit science and equity against each other, must be wholly resisted. Policymakers must rely on the best available science, including Indigenous and traditional knowledge, to make well-informed decisions to protect people and our planet. Countries must come to COP31 ready to break this harmful stalemate, stand up to the malign influence of fossil fuel interests, and secure the necessarily ambitious and fair outcomes the world needs in the face of the worsening climate crisis.”
Javier Andaluz, Coordinator, Alianza por el Clima, said: “Far from learning from the consequences of relying on fossil fuels, as the Strait of Hormuz has shown us, the world remains caught between the conflicting interests of different countries. We remain caught in the conflict between climate-ambitious nations and those that are not, between those who need support and those who are unable to face up to their responsibilities and are unwilling to provide urgent funding; meanwhile, global temperatures continue to rise, and we have exceeded 1.5°C. The only possible and realistic response is greater ambition across all negotiating tracks, recognising that climate responsibility is shared but differentiated.”
Isatis M. Cintron-Rodriguez, Director, ACE Observatory, said: “The climate crisis continues to accelerate faster than the negotiations. The window for incremental progress is rapidly closing. For those already facing irreversible climate losses and damages, progress is not measured by brackets on a negotiating text, but by whether support reaches people on the ground and whether affected communities are able to shape the decisions that impact their lives.
“Participation, education, public awareness, and access to information are not peripheral issues. They are prerequisites for effective climate action, successful implementation, and the realisation of fundamental human rights, including the right to life. As climate impacts intensify and the gap between commitments and reality continues to grow, governments must really centre people, ambition, finance, accountability and inclusive decision-making. COP31 must provide a space to course-correct multilateralism so it can keep 1.5°C within reach, deliver on its promises and international responsibilities, and ensure that no community is left behind.”