A new report on deforestation reflects the persistent gap between global ambitions to conserve and restore forests and enduring practices that continue to destroy them. Credit: UN Climate Change/Diego Herculano

By Umar Manzoor Shah
BERLIN, Germany/WASHINGTON, D.C., USA , Oct 14 2026 (IPS)

The world lost more than 7 million hectares of forest to deforestation in 2025, a modest improvement on recent years but still far from what is needed to meet global forest protection targets by 2030, according to a new assessment of international conservation efforts.

The Forest Declaration Assessment 2026, prepared by a coalition of civil society organisations and researchers and released worldwide on October 14, says deforestation remains stubbornly high despite international commitments to halt and reverse forest loss. The average annual area cleared since 2021 has exceeded 8 million hectares, highlighting the gap between government promises and progress on the ground.

Ivan Palmegiani, senior consultant at Climate Focus and one of the key report authors, told Inter Press Service in an exclusive interview that a key reason deforestation remains so high is that commitments have not been matched by the scale of action needed, and where action has been taken, it has not always been sufficient to deliver lasting impact.

“We have seen what is possible under dedicated political leadership, such as the Lula administration in Brazil, where targeted policies, enforcement, and political will reduced deforestation within a single term. However, these successes remain the exception rather than the norm, and they can be quickly reversed when priorities change.”

He added that at a deeper level, forest commitments have not been translated into the structural transformation in how natural resources are governed and used. Forests, Palmegiani said, continue to face strong economic pressures from agriculture, infrastructure, extraction, and other land uses, while decision-making systems and incentives still frequently favour the powerful few, who are physically and emotionally disconnected from forests, rather than the many who depend on them for their livelihoods, well-being, and cultural identity. “Until our societies, political and economic systems change how decisions about forests and other ecosystems are made, forest loss is likely to remain high despite global pledges.”

Ivan Palmegiani, senior consultant at Climate Focus and one of the authors of the Forest Declaration Assessment 2026. Credit: Supplied

The report also found that at least 65.4 million hectares of forest worldwide lost ecological integrity in 2024 because of human activities. The figure highlights a problem that extends beyond the complete removal of trees. Forests can remain standing while losing biodiversity, carbon storage capacity and their ability to sustain wildlife and local communities.

“Both figures reflect a persistent gap between global ambitions to conserve and restore forests and enduring practices that keep destroying them,” the report says.

The assessment examines progress on forest protection, sustainable production, finance and governance. It finds that some initiatives are moving forward, including efforts to improve forest monitoring and recognise Indigenous land rights. But these developments have not yet produced the scale of change required to reverse forest destruction.

More than 140 countries pledged under the Glasgow Leaders’ Declaration on Forests and Land Use, announced at the 2021 United Nations climate conference, to halt and reverse forest loss and land degradation by 2030.

Five years later, the latest assessment suggests that the world remains far from achieving that objective.

Tropical forests face particular pressure from agricultural expansion, infrastructure development and commercial activities. The report says these pressures are reinforced by weak enforcement of environmental laws and economic incentives that continue to favour activities associated with forest destruction.

‘We No Longer Look at Country-Level Figures’

Tropical Latin America recorded the largest absolute area of deforestation among the regions assessed but also made the most significant progress compared with the 2018-20 baseline. Deforestation there fell by 33 percent in 2025.

Tropical Africa, however, experienced a continued rise in forest loss. Annual deforestation in the region reached about 2.4 million hectares in 2025, comparable to the 2.5 million hectares recorded in tropical Latin America.

Tropical Asia lost approximately 1.6 million hectares of forest in 2025. That represented a 12 percent reduction compared with the 2018-20 baseline, although the report cautions that the underlying causes of deforestation remain largely unchanged.

The assessment describes tropical Asia’s progress as ambiguous. Two consecutive years of modest declines may indicate that the worst recent peaks have passed, but they do not establish that the region is on a sustained path towards forest recovery.

Tropical Oceania was the only tropical region assessed as being on track to meet its 2030 forest goals. Its relatively small share of global tropical forest area and lower current pressure on forests partly explain this difference.

The findings underline how national policies, commodity production and enforcement capacity can produce sharply different outcomes across regions.

When asked which countries have contributed most to this progress and what challenges continue to prevent deeper reductions in terms of deforestation, Palmegiani said, “We no longer look at country-level figures because the global datasets used for our calculations can sometimes misrepresent national trends. In fact, to avoid overstating the precision of the data, we only publish regional and global aggregates for our indicators.”

He added, ”That said, independent analyses and regional initiatives suggest that Indonesia and Malaysia have been important contributors to the decline in deforestation observed across tropical Asia. Despite this progress, the region continues to face significant economic pressures. These include growing demand for critical minerals, particularly nickel, of which Indonesia is the world’s leading exporter, as well as broader economic uncertainty linked to geopolitical conflicts and disruptions in global markets. When these pressures intensify, short-term economic priorities can outweigh environmental considerations, and forests often bear the cost.”

Agricultural Expansion and Commercial Interests

Agriculture remains a major driver of forest loss, with commercial production and growing demand for food, animal feed and bioenergy putting pressure on natural ecosystems.

The report says between 61 and 94% of tropical deforestation linked to commercial agriculture may be illegal. It estimates that environmental crime, including illegal deforestation and timber and wildlife trafficking, generates as much as US$281 billion annually.

Such activities often overlap with other criminal enterprises.

A 2025 study by the United Nations Office on Drugs and Crime, cited in the assessment, found links between environmental offences and crimes including drug trafficking, illegal mining and human trafficking.

The scale of these activities presents a major challenge for governments seeking to protect forests while regulating international commodity supply chains.

The assessment also points to gaps in corporate accountability. Companies in sectors linked to forest loss have increasingly adopted sustainability commitments and reporting systems, but disclosure and implementation remain uneven.

Financial institutions have begun to recognise deforestation as an environmental and financial risk. Yet the report says many regulatory frameworks lack detailed guidance on how banks should assess and manage those risks.

More than 60 percent of the countries assessed had yet to establish disclosure requirements covering deforestation-related risks for banks or insurance companies.

The report’s findings suggest that voluntary commitments and corporate reporting need to be accompanied by stronger enforcement and clearer requirements if they are to produce measurable changes in production and investment.

Forest Finance Remains a Major Challenge

The assessment identifies the scale and distribution of finance as another obstacle to forest protection.

Although international funding commitments have increased, financial support for conservation remains difficult to reconcile with the economic incentives that encourage activities harmful to forests.

The report estimates that subsidies linked to the production and use of fossil fuels reached $921 billion in 2024. Emergency measures introduced in 2026 to ease high energy prices could push the global total above $1 trillion this year.

The assessment warns that such subsidies can undermine efforts to shift to less harmful energy sources.

It also highlights the potential benefits of redirecting public support to activities that restore nature.

“Every dollar of agricultural support that is repurposed to support farming practices that restore nature, such as agroforestry, silvopasture, and low-carbon agriculture, can generate up to USD 30 in economic benefits, especially for rural communities,” the report says.

The findings point to an opportunity for governments to reform existing spending rather than rely entirely on new funding.

However, the report notes that international forest finance does not consistently reach the Indigenous peoples and local communities who manage and protect forest territories.

Community-led funding mechanisms can help direct resources towards local priorities, but they remain secondary recipients of direct funding from governments and multilateral institutions.

Indigenous Rights and Participation

The assessment identifies recognition of Indigenous land rights as an important part of effective forest governance.

At the 2025 United Nations climate conference, known as COP30, an intergovernmental commitment involving 16 countries and one subnational jurisdiction pledged to recognise or strengthen rights over an additional 160 million hectares of Indigenous lands and territories.

The launch of the Tropical Forests Forever Facility also created a provision reserving 20 percent of country-level payouts for direct transfers to Indigenous and local community organisations.

These developments represent progress, but the report says participation in international policymaking does not necessarily translate into decision-making power.

Indigenous coalitions have stressed that their increased presence at COP30 remained largely consultative. Indigenous peoples still lack formal standing in the United Nations climate negotiations, such as COP 31, which will take place in Antalya, Türkiye, from November 9 to 20.

National climate plans also frequently mention Indigenous peoples and local communities without specifying how they will participate in designing or implementing policies.

A 2026 review of 84 national climate plans found that 61 referred to under-represented groups, including Indigenous peoples and local communities. However, the assessment says most references were descriptive rather than linked to concrete measures.

The report argues that meaningful participation requires more than recognition in policy documents. It requires secure land rights, opportunities to influence decisions and access to the financial resources needed to manage territories.

Environmental Defenders Face Continuing Threats

Forest protection also carries serious risks for people who challenge illegal activities and defend community land.

The assessment cites Global Witness data showing that at least 124 land and environmental defenders were killed in 2025. More than half of the documented killings were linked to land disputes, and nearly three-quarters of the victims were Indigenous people, small-scale farmers or people of African descent.

Front Line Defenders separately reported that at least 358 human rights defenders were killed in 28 countries in 2025. Those working on land, environmental and peasant rights, as well as Indigenous rights, were among the groups that were frequently targeted.

Erin Matson, a lead consultant of Climate Focus and report author, told IPS in an interview that the statistics from Global Witness that we cite each year are always humbling. It’s important to remember that that figure is likely a significant underestimate, as many killings and disappearances go unreported.

Erin Matson, a lead consultant of Climate Focus and one of the authors of the Forest Declaration Assessment 2026. Credit: Supplied

“There are many factors at play, most of which are rooted in governance. The vast majority of environmental defenders are killed over land disputes, for example, when a mining operation encroaches on Indigenous territories. If those Indigenous communities do not have secure, recognised tenure rights to their territories, it makes it that much harder for them to resist operators who are acting illegally.”

She added that, therefore, securing tenure rights is a major step that governments need to enable. Next, Matson added that an environment of corruption and impunity allows actors to literally get away with murder. “In locations where government actors and law enforcement are under the sway and on the payroll of special interests, they will look the other way when people are harmed. Rooting out corruption, therefore, and instituting reforms to corrupted systems is essential. It must be ensured that public officials are paid well for their services so that they won’t be susceptible to corruption in the first place.”

The report identifies weak enforcement, limited government capacity and impunity for powerful actors as major obstacles to effective forest governance.

It also warns that environmental defenders face forms of intimidation beyond lethal violence, including criminalisation, threats and harassment.

Improved technology is helping authorities detect illegal forest clearance. Satellite monitoring, traceability systems and new investigative tools can help identify offences and strengthen cooperation across borders.

In Guatemala’s Maya Biosphere Reserve, for example, researchers are testing artificial intelligence-powered acoustic sensors designed to recognise chainsaws, gunshots and engines. The technology can alert rangers to potential illegal logging in remote areas that are difficult to patrol regularly.

But the report stresses that improved detection must be matched by fair and effective enforcement. Otherwise, small-scale producers and local communities may carry a disproportionate share of the burden while more powerful actors escape accountability.

The report reveals further that deforestation in 2025 was lower than in much of the preceding decade, and forest finance has increased. Monitoring systems have also improved, while several countries have taken steps towards recognising Indigenous land rights.

But the report cautions against interpreting these gains as evidence of a lasting turnaround.

It says the reduction in deforestation may partly reflect temporary factors, including stronger enforcement in some jurisdictions, changing commodity prices and economic conditions that slowed land conversion.

“These wins should not be mistaken for the transformation still needed,” reads the report.

IPS UN Bureau Report

A community health worker examines a pregnant woman inside her home while family members look on, highlighting the growing challenges mothers face as extreme heat and climate-related pressures strain access to healthcare in vulnerable communities. Credit: Wellcome

By Umar Manzoor Shah
SUVA, Fiji & SRINAGAR, India, Oct 5 2026 (IPS)

Extreme heat is increasingly threatening pregnant women and newborn babies around the world, with almost all maternal health professionals surveyed across five continents saying they have cared for women or infants whose health was affected by high temperatures.

The findings, released as climate ministers gathered in the Pacific ahead of the COP31 climate summit, provide an extremely distressing picture of how global heating is affecting maternity wards, delivery rooms and newborn-care units.

A survey of 1,001 healthcare professionals in Australia, Brazil, India, the United Kingdom and Zimbabwe found that 98 percent had personally cared for a pregnant woman whose health they believed was adversely affected by extreme heat.

Some 99 percent said they had cared for a foetus or newborn whose health, in their professional judgment, had been affected by extreme heat.

Almost three-quarters, 73%, said heat-related cases or complications affecting pregnant women had increased over the previous five years. The proportion rose to 76% when health workers were asked about complications involving foetal health, childbirth or newborn babies.

The survey was commissioned by the global health foundation Wellcome and conducted among obstetricians, gynaecologists, doctors, midwives, nurses and other maternal-health professionals between September 17 and October 1.

The findings were released in Fiji at the launch of Birthright, a global campaign seeking greater protection for pregnant women, babies and healthcare workers as temperatures rise.

Speaking at the event, United Nations Climate Change Executive Secretary Simon Stiell said climate change was creating a new and potentially deadly risk around pregnancy and childbirth.

“The picture is clear and very disturbing: as extreme heat worsens, pregnancy and birth are now a new faultline in the global climate crisis, and one which is potentially fatal,” Stiell said.

“This faultline must not become another deep chasm of climate-driven suffering, inequality and injustice.”

The survey offers detailed evidence of what healthcare professionals say they are already witnessing.

Among pregnant women,

• 25% reported seeing muscle cramps or muscle aches that they believed extreme heat had contributed to or worsened
• 24% reported severe fatigue, sleep problems or a reduced ability among pregnant women to carry out daily activities
• 23% reported breathing difficulties or worsening respiratory symptoms
• 23 percent reported pregnancy complications requiring additional monitoring or treatment, while an equal proportion reported hypertensive disorders, including pre-eclampsia
• More than one in five reported mental distress, anxiety or stress linked to heat
• 21% said they had encountered severe maternal illness requiring medical attention or hospital care
• 20% reported dizziness, fainting or loss of consciousness, while 19 percent reported preterm contractions, labour or birth
• Nearly 18% said they had observed pregnancy loss or stillbirth in circumstances where, in their professional judgment, extreme heat had contributed to or worsened the problem.

The survey did not attempt to establish that heat alone caused individual complications. The responses provide information about the professional judgment and clinical experience of the healthcare workers questioned.

Protect Life at Its Most Fragile

The findings involving babies were similarly worrying.

• 36% of health professionals reported dehydration or heat-related illness among newborns during the pregnancy-related care they provided
• 34% reported low birth weight or restricted foetal growth
• 33% had observed breathing, feeding or temperature-regulation difficulties
• 28% said babies required additional monitoring, treatment or neonatal care, and a similar proportion reported preterm birth
• During the newborn period, 38% of respondents reported low birth weight or restricted growth
• 36% reported dehydration or heat-related illness, and another 36% reported breathing, feeding or problems regulating body temperature
• Almost 30% said heat-related conditions resulted in babies needing additional monitoring, treatment or neonatal care
• 9% percent reported stillbirth or neonatal death during the newborn period in cases where they believed extreme heat had contributed to or worsened the condition.

Stiell said the findings showed that rising temperatures could no longer be treated simply as an environmental issue.

“The climate policy process is measured in degrees, targets and finance,” he said. “But a deep test of climate action is far simpler: whether we protect life at its most fragile.”

He said the world was entering conditions for which many health systems had not been designed.

“We are in a new, hotter world, as the world continues to burn planet-heating fossil fuels, overwhelmingly in G20 economies,” Stiell said.

“The last eleven years smashed records.”

He said rising temperatures meant “rising danger in pregnancy”, citing evidence linking extreme heat to premature birth, stillbirth, low birth weight and maternal complications.

A healthcare worker cradles a newborn baby at a maternal health facility, illustrating frontline efforts to protect mothers and infants amid mounting concerns over the impact of extreme heat on pregnancy, childbirth and newborn health. Credit: Wellcome

No One Is Immune

The survey also revealed significant differences between countries.

Zimbabwean health workers were among those reporting the sharpest increases.

Eighty-five percent of respondents in Zimbabwe said heat-related cases or complications affecting pregnant women had increased during the previous five years. The figure was 79% in Australia, 74% in Brazil, 66% in the United Kingdom and 62% in India.

When respondents were asked about foetal or newborn health, 89% of Zimbabwean health professionals reported an increase in heat-related cases or complications. The corresponding figure was 79% in Brazil, 78% in Australia, 68% in the United Kingdom and 66% in India.

The results suggest that the effects are being felt across countries with very different climates, incomes and healthcare systems.

Concern was also widespread.

More than 92% of all respondents said they were concerned about the impact of extreme heat on the health and well-being of pregnant women in the areas where they worked and 90% expressed concern about foetal health during pregnancy and childbirth, as well as the health of babies during the newborn period.

Zimbabwe recorded some of the highest levels of concern, with 97% of respondents concerned about foetal and newborn health.

Stiell said no country or family could consider itself completely insulated from the risk.

“No one is immune,” he said. “But the risks and impacts are not shared equally.”

The survey showed that extreme heat was also disrupting the healthcare systems expected to protect women and infants.

• 29% of health workers said they had seen increased urgent or emergency presentations during extreme heat
• 28% reported difficulties safely storing or using medicines, supplies or medical equipment
• 27% said pregnant women and their families found it harder to travel to or access healthcare
• 25% reported increased demand for advice, monitoring or treatment, while another quarter reported staff illness, fatigue or a reduced ability to work safely
• 24% had experienced interruptions to electricity, water, cooling systems, medical equipment or other essential services
• A similar proportion reported healthcare services becoming overburdened or having insufficient capacity
• Nearly one-quarter said temperatures inside healthcare facilities had become unsafe or uncomfortable.

The findings highlight a basic problem in responding to extreme heat. Advising pregnant women to stay cool may be of little practical value when families lack air conditioning, cannot afford electricity, work outside, or live far from medical services.

“‘Staying cool’ is simply not an option when there is no cool place to go,” Stiell said.

“A safe birth is already too often shaped by geography, income and access to care. Without action, extreme heat will widen that injustice.”

The survey asked health professionals what most limited pregnant women’s ability to protect themselves and their babies.

• 26% cited limited awareness or understanding that extreme heat could affect health during pregnancy
• 24% cited the need to work outdoors or in hot conditions
• About 23% pointed to limited support from family or the wider community
• The same proportion cited limited access to cooling or air conditioning
• 23% identified the cost of electricity, water or other protective measures.

Other barriers included existing health conditions, inadequate access to safe drinking water, homes that were difficult to keep cool, lack of employer support and difficulties travelling to healthcare facilities.

Only 0.4 percent said no factors limited women’s ability to protect themselves from extreme heat.

Stiell said such conditions meant that climate change risk was increasingly intertwined with inequality.

“Someone working outdoors, living in unregulated housing, travelling far to a clinic, or relying on facilities without water, power or cooling, cannot be protected by advice alone,” he said.

Harm that is not counted is too easily ignored

For Pacific Island countries, the issue is particularly sensitive.

Many small island states have contributed only a tiny fraction of historic greenhouse gas emissions but face rising sea levels, intensifying storms, heat and pressure on food, water and health systems.

“Here in the Pacific, climate change is no abstraction,” Stiell said.

“It is felt in homes, villages, farms, fisheries and clinics, in journeys for care, and in the availability and cost of food, water, power and transport.”

The Fiji event was held as ministers and climate officials gathered for the pre-COP meeting hosted by Australia and Fiji from October 5 to 8.

The meeting is intended to advance negotiations ahead of COP31 in Antalya, Türkiye, and give greater prominence to Pacific Island perspectives and climate solutions. Tuvalu was hosting a leaders’ event as part of the Pacific meetings.

Despite the growing risks, the survey suggests many healthcare workers believe they need more support to respond effectively.

• An overwhelming 92% said they wanted additional training and resources to help pregnant women during periods of extreme heat.
• 55% said clearer national or international guidance on protecting pregnant women from extreme heat would help them perform their jobs better
• When asked what would most improve their ability to protect women and babies, 33% selected practical information and materials for pregnant women and families
• 31% called for improvements to buildings, cooling, ventilation, water or electricity
• 29% wanted stronger referral pathways and better coordination between health services
• A similar proportion called for improved data and surveillance on heat, pregnancy and newborn health, as well as better local heat alerts and communication
• 28% said more staff, time or funding during periods of extreme heat would help
• 28% called for greater community outreach to people who may otherwise be difficult for health services to reach.

Stiell urged governments to make maternal and newborn health an explicit part of national climate adaptation and heat-response strategies.

“What is not named in a plan is too often not funded, not measured and not protected,” he said.

He outlined three priorities.

The first was to make pregnancy and newborn care part of national adaptation, health and extreme-heat planning.

That would require resilient clinics, dependable electricity and water supplies and properly trained health workers.

The second was to convert scientific evidence into direct protection, including improved guidance, professional training, heat alerts, safer medical facilities and health systems prepared before extreme weather strikes.

The third was better monitoring.

“Harm that is not counted is too easily ignored,” Stiell said.

“As temperatures rise, data must show where risks are growing, which interventions work, which communities are exposed, and where finance and technology support is needed.”

The survey found broad support among health workers for stronger policy action.

• 81% agreed that without further action, extreme heat would increasingly endanger maternal, foetal and newborn health during the next five years
• 82% said protecting pregnant women and babies from extreme heat should become a higher priority for health-system leaders and policymakers
• Another 82% agreed that better evidence on heat, pregnancy and newborn health would help drive effective action.

Stiell linked the issue to broader international climate finance negotiations.

He said commitments on adaptation finance agreed at COP30 in Brazil needed to be implemented and called for governments and the international financial system to help mobilise $1.3 trillion annually for developing nations.

“For small islands and other nations that did practically nothing to cause this climate crisis, it underscores the need for support at scale,” he said.

He also pointed to the Belém Gender Action Plan and Belém Adaptation Indicators as mechanisms that could help governments measure climate-related health risks and build more resilient health services.

Stiell praised Türkiye’s COP31 presidency and Australia, which is serving as President of Negotiations, for putting health on the agenda ahead of the Antalya summit.

For Stiell, the issue ultimately goes beyond climate-negotiating language.

“I am a parent, but I cannot pretend to know what it feels like to carry a pregnancy through those conditions,” he said.

“Mothers, midwives, doctors, nurses and families speak from lived experience. We should listen.”

The survey suggests those voices are already delivering a clear warning.

Pregnant women are struggling with heat exposure. Babies are requiring additional care. Health workers are seeing more complications. Facilities are facing pressure on electricity, water, medicines and staff. And many doctors, nurses and midwives say they lack the training and resources they need.

“Pregnancy should be a time of hope,” Stiell said. “But for millions, it is becoming a time of anxiety, as climate impacts fill everyday life with risk.”

He ended with an appeal for governments to treat protection of mothers and babies as a basic test of climate policy.

“A changing climate must never be accepted as a reason pregnancy and birth become less safe,” he said.

“A newborn’s healthy start must never depend on a family’s ability to escape the heat.”

“This work is urgent, deeply human, and we all share the responsibility to drive it forward together.”

IPS UN Bureau Report

Delegates huddle during the informal consultations on cooperation with other international organisations. The climate talks in Bonn were long and tense. Credit: IISD/ENB/Kiara Worth

By Umar Manzoor Shah
BONN, Jun 19 2026 (IPS)

The United Nations June Climate Meetings (SB64) ended in Bonn with sharp disagreements between developed and developing countries over climate finance, adaptation support and emissions reductions, leaving negotiators with significant unresolved issues ahead of the COP31 climate summit in Antalya, Türkiye.

After nearly two weeks of negotiations at the World Conference Center Bonn, delegates acknowledged some progress on technical matters such as technology transfer, capacity building and just transition discussions. However, many of the most politically sensitive issues, particularly adaptation finance and implementation support for developing countries, remained unresolved.

UNFCCC Executive Secretary Simon Stiell described the atmosphere as increasingly difficult, warning against what he called a tendency among countries to wait for others to act first.

“In some negotiating rooms, we’ve heard a familiar tendency towards ‘you-first-ism’ — groups refusing to deliver commitments or allow the process to move forward unless others go first. This is a recipe for gridlock when we need all negotiating tracks to be moving in the fast lane,” Stiell said in his closing assessment.

The Bonn meetings serve as a key preparatory stage for annual UN climate summits. The discussions are intended to advance technical negotiations and lay the groundwork for political decisions at the next Conference of the Parties. This year, however, the meetings exposed deep divisions over who should pay for climate action and how quickly countries should reduce emissions.

Climate negotiators in Bonn. Credit: UN Climate Change/Lara Murillo

Developing countries argued that adaptation remains an urgent priority because millions of people are already suffering from climate-related disasters. They stressed that without substantial financial support, adaptation plans cannot be implemented effectively.

Speaking on behalf of the Group of 77 and China, Uruguay said developing countries remained deeply concerned about the lack of progress on adaptation and adaptation finance.

“Adaptation remains a key priority for developing countries,” the group said, stating that there is a  need to move forward in ways that address the growing adaptation needs of vulnerable nations.

The G77 and China also called for greater attention to climate finance commitments under Article 9.1 of the Paris Agreement and stressed the importance of turning discussions into practical action.

“We should move beyond dialogues and reports and translate into effective implementation of climate action,” the group said, noting that agriculture, livelihoods and food security in developing countries are already being affected by climate change.

The European Union acknowledged that some progress had been achieved but said the pace of negotiations remained too slow.

“The pace remains insufficient to meet the scale of the challenge before us,” the EU said in its closing statement. The bloc urged countries to focus on implementing previous climate agreements and reaffirmed support for limiting global warming to 1.5 degrees Celsius above pre-industrial levels.

The EU also expressed frustration over the handling of adaptation negotiations.

“We are extremely disappointed in how GGA negotiations have been handled here in Bonn,” the bloc said, while calling for discussions to continue at a higher political level ahead of COP31.

Several negotiating groups voiced concern over attempts to challenge or weaken scientific findings that underpin international climate action.

The Environmental Integrity Group, represented by Switzerland, warned against efforts to undermine the role of science.

“Science is not negotiable,” the group declared, urging countries to support the timely publication of future reports by the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC).

The group said scientific evidence had consistently guided global climate action and should remain central to future decisions, including the second Global Stocktake process under the Paris Agreement.

The Umbrella Group, represented by the United Kingdom, echoed similar concerns.

“Our climate action must always be guided by the best available science,” the group said. It expressed disappointment that negotiators were unable to reach more substantial conclusions on research and systematic observation.

The Alliance of Small Island States (AOSIS), representing some of the world’s most climate-vulnerable countries, delivered one of the strongest critiques of the Bonn outcome.

The group said it was disappointed by the pace, tone and approach of the negotiations and warned that insufficient progress had been made to ensure a successful COP31.

“AOSIS is deeply concerned by the attempts that were made across agenda items to place the 1.5 limit in doubt, to overlook and diminish its significance as a lifeline for SIDS,” the group said.

Small island nations face existential threats from sea-level rise, coastal erosion and increasingly severe storms.

AOSIS also criticised the slow progress on adaptation finance and transparency issues, saying procedural obstacles had prevented meaningful advances.

The African Group of Negotiators similarly expressed frustration over the lack of movement on climate finance.

Speaking on behalf of 54 African countries and more than 1.6 billion people, Ghana warned that Africa could not afford delays as climate impacts intensify across the continent.

“Antalya and Addis Ababa must deliver meaningful progress as a solid foundation for GST2,” the group said, referring to the second Global Stocktake process.

African negotiators argued that disputes over governance and terminology should not delay efforts to provide desperately needed adaptation finance for vulnerable communities.

The BASIC group, which includes Brazil, South Africa, India and China, also highlighted concerns over declining support for developing countries.

The group called for climate finance to occupy a central place at COP31 and urged countries to complete the transition of the Adaptation Fund so that it can better support vulnerable nations.

BASIC further stressed that developed countries must take the lead in reducing emissions while also mobilising financial support for developing nations.

The Least Developed Countries (LDC) Group delivered an emotional message, saying vulnerable populations were running out of time.

“LDCs do not look to this process for promises, but for action,” Timor-Leste said on behalf of the 44 least developed countries. “Our people didn’t send us here to negotiate the terms of their suffering.”

The group warned that climate impacts are accelerating faster than international responses.

“We reject the blatant undermining of science at this session,” the LDCs said. “Science is neither contentious nor negotiable for our group.”

The Mountain Group, representing 11 mountainous countries, focused attention on the growing vulnerability of mountain regions. Kyrgyzstan said mountain communities are facing severe challenges from glacier loss, water shortages, floods and ecosystem degradation.

The group welcomed the first formal Dialogue on Mountains and Climate Change and called for mountain issues to become a permanent part of the UN climate process.

Meanwhile, the Like-Minded Developing Countries (LMDCs), represented by China, emphasised equity and the principle of common but differentiated responsibilities as essential foundations for climate cooperation. The group argued that implementation gaps often arise because promised support from developed countries fails to materialise.

Outside the negotiating rooms, civil society organisations sharply criticised the outcome.

Oxfam accused wealthy countries of avoiding their responsibilities on climate finance.

“The UN negotiations have once again been derailed by rich countries’ refusal to take responsibility for increasing critical public climate finance,” said Mariana Paoli, Oxfam’s Climate Policy Lead.

According to Oxfam, even if the pledge to triple adaptation finance were fully implemented, it would provide about $120 billion, far below the estimated adaptation needs of developing countries, which are projected to reach between $310 billion and $365 billion annually by 2035.

Paoli described the situation as a “dark irony,” noting that the world’s first trillionaire emerged at a time when vulnerable countries were struggling to secure adequate climate finance.

“The unwillingness of rich countries to engage meaningfully is astonishing,” she said.

Despite the tensions, negotiators did achieve some notable progress.

Countries agreed on the selection of the United Nations Environment Programme (UNEP) as the new host of the Climate Technology Centre and Network, a key institution supporting technology transfer and climate solutions in developing countries. Several groups welcomed the decision as an important step toward strengthening climate action.

Delegates also reported progress on capacity-building initiatives and discussions surrounding a just transition, which aims to ensure that workers and communities are protected during the shift toward low-carbon economies.

IPS UN Bureau Report

Follow @IPSNewsUNBureau

Monika Stankiewicz, Executive Secretary of the Minamata Convention on Mercury, at the 71st GEF Council Meeting. Credit: Stella Paul/IPS

By Stella Paul
SAMARKAND, Uzbekistan, Jun 2 2026 (IPS)

On day 2 of the Global Environment Facility’s 71st Council Meeting, which focused on process and procedure, a clear message emerged: global environmental governance cannot afford fragmentation.

With six major multilateral environmental agreements (MEAs) under its financial mechanism – the UN Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC), the UN Convention on Biological Diversity (UNCBD), the Stockholm Convention on Persistent Organic Pollutants (POPs), the Minamata Convention on Mercury, the UN Convention to Combat Desertification (UNCCD), and the emerging Agreement on Marine Biological Diversity of Areas beyond National Jurisdiction – the GEF sits at the centre of a complex reporting architecture.

For many convention secretariats, reporting requirements have become increasingly difficult for countries, constrained by limited staffing and multilayered requirements. Calls for greater synergies, including simpler processes across conventions, have taken on new urgency.

“This is the year of three COPs – a great opportunity for us to create synergies,” said Asad Naqvi, representing the CBD, setting the tone for discussions.

A System Under Strain

Across conventions, similar challenges surfaced: fragmented reporting, misaligned data requirements, and duplication, especially for smaller secretariats and developing countries.

Monika Stankiewicz, Executive Secretary of the Minamata Convention on Mercury, highlighted the gap between global commitments and local realities while acknowledging GEF’s progress in integrating Indigenous Peoples and Local Communities (IPLCs). She pointed to artisanal and small-scale gold mining – one of the largest sources of mercury emissions – that often occurs in indigenous territories. Yet many affected communities remain unaware of how the issue is addressed under the convention. Without meaningful engagement, broader goals such as biodiversity conservation become difficult to achieve.

“If Indigenous Peoples are not adequately engaged in combating mercury pollution, even biodiversity goals will fall short,” she warned, calling for stronger integration across conventions.

Delegates at the 71st GEF Council Meeting debated how to remove fragmentation in the management of funding across six major multilateral environmental agreements. Stella Paul/IPS

The ‘Minefield’ of Reporting

The complexity of reporting was underscored by Dr Rolph Payet, Executive Secretary of the Basel, Rotterdam and Stockholm (BRS) Conventions. Despite efforts to build synergies within the chemicals and waste cluster, reporting remains what he described as a “minefield”.

“We have one convention where reporting has started and others where reporting formats have changed; some stakeholders still prefer paper-based systems, while others want digital platforms – and they do not always share data,” Payet explained.

The result is a system that remains difficult for countries to navigate. Still, Payet struck a cautiously optimistic note, pointing to ongoing efforts to harmonise compliance mechanisms and streamline data collection.

“This is not something we should run away from,” he said. “We have a unique opportunity to bring our heads together and find ways to make reporting easier, more effective, and more useful for measuring impact.”

From Silos to Systems

For Naqvi and others, synergies go beyond administrative efficiency; they are essential for addressing interconnected global crises.

Synergies are not just about efficiency but addressing interconnected crises, says Naqvi. The Global Biodiversity Framework (GBF) is often viewed as a conservation blueprint.

“All these challenges – climate, biodiversity, land degradation, pollution – are interconnected,” he said. “The global financial landscape does not allow us to continue with siloed projects.”

He urged the GEF to leverage its role as a financial mechanism for multiple conventions to deepen integration. Existing coordination platforms, such as the Joint Liaison Group among the three Rio Conventions, could be expanded to include chemicals, waste, and emerging issues.

Equally important, he added, is shifting the focus from outputs to systemic change – understanding and addressing the economic drivers behind environmental degradation.

“We must not only fight the flames but also turn off the tap that fuels the fire,” Naqvi said.

Financing the Transition

Across conventions, the scale of investment required far exceeds available grant resources, creating an urgent need for innovative financing.

Stankiewicz highlighted the funding gap for mercury pollution and hazardous chemicals, noting that grants alone are insufficient. She pointed to blended finance – combining public, private, and sovereign capital – as a key pathway.

“Grants can catalyse,” she said. “They can crowd in larger investments and unlock development opportunities while addressing environmental challenges.”

According to her, emerging examples reflect this approach. For example, the GEF-supported PCB animation project not only reports on the destruction of Persistent Organic Pollutants (POPs) but also on co-benefits such as emissions reduced through energy efficiency.

“That will be integration in practice. And I hope the implementation agencies will also join us on this important job,” Stankiewicz said.

Land, Drought, and Resilience

From the UNCCD perspective, synergies closely link to scaling investment and building resilience, particularly in vulnerable regions.

Cathrine Mutambirwa, Programme Coordinator at the UNCCD’s Global Mechanism, stressed the need to mobilise private capital and expand blended finance models beyond pilot initiatives. This is especially critical in drylands and drought-prone regions where financing remains limited.

She welcomed the proposed integrated programmes on drought and land restoration under GEF-9 as a timely response to country needs.

“These are precisely the kinds of cross-sectoral approaches that affected countries are asking for,” she said.

Mutambirwa also highlighted partnerships with multilateral development banks and regional institutions, showing how coordinated financing can bring together resources – including GEF, climate funds, and development banks – into cohesive programmes.

Speakers also stressed that integration must be inclusive, placing Indigenous Peoples, women, youth, and vulnerable communities at the centre and supported by accessible information and simplified systems.

“There has been too much fragmentation,” Naqvi of UNCBD acknowledged. “We need to ensure that our processes work for those who are custodians of biodiversity and natural resources.”

A Pivotal Moment

The Eighth GEF Assembly comes at a critical time. With multiple COPs scheduled in the same year and the GEF entering its ninth replenishment cycle (GEF-9), there is a rare alignment of political attention, financing, and institutional momentum.

Speakers were clear: this moment must not be missed.

Greater synergies in reporting, financing, and programme design are essential to reduce burdens and improve their impact.

If implemented effectively, such integration could transform global environmental governance from parallel efforts into a coherent system capable of addressing the world’s most pressing challenges.

As Naqvi put it, the opportunity is clear: to move beyond fragmentation and build a system where sustainability is not just a goal but a pathway to inclusive and resilient development.

The speakers revealed that UN agencies and conventions were cutting operational costs – through reduced travel and the use of technologies like AI. At such a time, they are expected to push for simpler reporting systems that align with tighter budgets, smaller teams, and growing workloads. It will be telling to see how the GEF-9 cycle reflects these constraints in both design and implementation.

Note: The Eighth Global Environment Facility Assembly is underway until June 6, 2026, in Samarkand, Uzbekistan.

This feature is published with the support of the GEF. IPS is solely responsible for the editorial content, and it does not necessarily reflect the views of the GEF.

IPS UN Bureau Report

Follow @IPSNewsUNBureau

Yamide Dagnet, Senior Vice President, International at the Natural Resources Defense Council (NRDC). Credit: COP30

By Joyce Chimbi
NAIROBI, Jan 15 2026 (IPS)

President Donald Trump has escalated efforts to further distance the United States from international organizations and entities focused on climate, the environment, and energy. This strategy is in step with his administration’s established approach to undermine and redirect funds and international cooperation away from climate and clean energy programs.

But where some see a catastrophic escalation, other global experts, such as Yamide Dagnet, Senior Vice President, International at the Natural Resources Defense Council (NRDC), see first and foremost a continuing formalization of damaging positions already taken by the current administration.

In January 2025, President Trump initiated a second withdrawal from the Paris Agreement on climate change to limit global warming. Simultaneously, the U.S. administration began to significantly reduce funding for climate programs, withdrawing from international climate funds such as the Green Climate Fund, cancelling billions in domestic clean energy grants, halting climate research and, overall, prioritizing fossil fuels over climate initiatives.

While conceding that the moment at hand is indeed overwhelming, especially coming on the back of COP30, Dagnet told IPS that “the rest of the world must turn this challenge into an opportunity to break new ground in climate action, financing and international cooperation.”

“I have a stubborn yet grounded optimism. The path ahead will be challenging but achieving the set-out climate goals is far from impossible. This is far from a catastrophe. Only one country has withdrawn from the U.N. Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC); the rest of the world is still firmly on board.”

Regarding the exit from UNFCCC, Dagnet’s colleague Jake Schmidt from NRDC, pointed out in his blog that  the legal ramifications are such that it is unsettled constitutional law whether a president can unilaterally withdraw from international agreements that the Senate gave its advice and consent to join. The Constitution specifies the entry provisions, but it is silent on the exit provisions.

Dagnet also noted that while the withdrawal from the UNFCCC is unprecedented, making the United States the only nation outside the bedrock UN Climate Treaty, “the exit is not cast in stone; a future administration could bring the country back to the fold.”

Nevertheless, the United States will be back in the headlines come January 27, 2026, when the country will technically become a non-signatory to the Paris agreement and will not be part of international climate negotiations unless the withdrawal is reversed.

“The optimism I feel is also grounded in pragmatism. To borrow the words of author James Baldwin, ‘Not everything that is faced can be changed, but nothing can be changed until it is faced.’ The U.S. administration was not represented at COP30 and still the world pushed forward a comprehensive climate action agenda to move beyond pledges through accelerated collaboration between governments, businesses, civil society, and investors.”

In his 2025 inauguration speech, Trump called oil ‘liquid gold’ and vowed to ‘unleash’ America’s fossil fuels in the form of oil and gas. Dagnet says the die was already cast on the path forward for the United States and that the world should continue to rethink, re-strategize and reorganize, for those who are for climate action are more than those against.

Trump finds an assortment of 66 UN and non-UN entities, including those focused on climate and clean energy, that are not aligned with the United States’ national interests. They include the UN’s Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC), which is the world’s most authoritative scientific body on climate change, UN water, UN Oceans and UN Energy.

Others are the International Union for Conservation of Nature, which is the global authority on technical and policy advice on conservation, and the UN Collaborative Programme on Reducing Emissions from Deforestation and Forest Degradation in Developing countries.

Non-UN organizations include the International Renewable Energy Agency, Renewable Energy Policy Network for the 21st Century, 24/7 Carbon-Free Energy Compact, Commission for Environmental Cooperation, Intergovernmental Forum on Mining, Minerals, and Sustainable Development, and the Intergovernmental Science-Policy Platform on Biodiversity and Ecosystem Services.

Concerns are rife that communities such as those in the informal settlements will be dangerously exposed to the vagaries of climate change in the face of looming budget cuts to support climate efforts. Credit: Joyce Chimbi/IPS

There are widespread concerns that the withdrawal will have far-reaching negative consequences on financing and technical support for climate and clean energy. But Dagnet reminds us that  the United States did not pay its dues to the UN in 2025. The UN Chief has expressed regret over the country’s exit from UN entities and urged the Trump administration to settle what is owed to the international body, as the payments are mandatory. The United States owes the largest share, amounting to about 22 percent of the regular budget.

Similarly, before this withdrawal, the United States was already failing to fulfill many of its climate finance commitments.  While this new development, alongside past insufficient funding pledges, signals a major retreat from international climate action and support for developing nations, that challenge is  not insurmountable.

Climate financing trackers found that even during President Joe Biden’s administration, the United States’ international climate finance contributions were insufficient and fell far short of goals. Dagnet notes that while the country’s actions on multilateralism represent a setback, multilateralism is also evolving and will hopefully be capable of navigating uncharted territories.

She hails the broad recognition that climate change urgently and sustainably requires global cooperation and collaboration. She further stressed that international cooperation would expand the climate finance basket, as financial support for climate action can come not only from governments but also from a diverse array of non-state and public-private actors.

“This withdrawal is not the end of the road.”

Dagnet is one of nine members of the GHG (Greenhouse Gas) Protocol Steering Committee, which is the primary governing body providing direction and oversight to the GHG Protocol. The Protocol provides accounting standards and tools to help the corporate sector, countries and cities track progress towards climate goals.

The development of such standards is facilitated through a transparent multi-stakeholder governance process, drawing on expertise from business, finance, governments, academia, auditors and civil society in a milestone move and landmark partnership, she says.

The GHG Protocol is leading the global harmonization of greenhouse gas accounting with the International Organization for Standardization (ISO), as part of the COP30 Action Agenda, to enable comprehensive decarbonization action. This collaborative effort will strengthen the enabling conditions (in terms of policy, benchmarking, and governance) that are paramount to achieving sectoral breakthrough and will shape the journey towards the next global stocktake, or inventory taking, on progress towards climate goals in line with the Paris Agreement.

Subnational efforts also keep Dagnet pragmatically optimistic and solutions-focused. Indeed, she felt energized after attending the Resilient Cities Forum 2025 in London, a remarkable highlight as a major international platform where global leaders and experts converged to tackle urban resilience, emphasizing collaboration, best practices and practical innovation for sustainable, equitable cities.  She was inspired by the various and clear visions for a healthier planet.

“The resolve was stronger than ever,” says Dagnet.

“Importantly, we have locally designed tools, international frameworks and corporate standards to turn our vision towards a more prosperous, healthier and greener future into our lived reality. The worst we can do is to give up our imagination and ability to innovate.”

IPS UN Bureau Report

Follow @IPSNewsUNBureau
  

André Corrêa do Lago, COP30 President of Brazil, during a highly charged closing plenary. Credit: UN Climate Change/Kiara Worth

By Joyce Chimbi
BELÉM, Brazil, Nov 23 2025 (IPS)

Following tense, nightlong negotiations and bitter rows between more than 190 country delegations, a “politically charged Belém package” was finally forged at COP30—so named because of the highly contentious and difficult-to-negotiate issues within the climate talks. Belém was supposed to be ‘a how’ climate conference. Decisions made at the 30th Conference of the Parties to the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change would shape how the Paris Agreement moves from word to action and to what extent global climate actions can be reached. In this COP of “implementation and multilateralism in action,” politics carried the day in more ways than one.

Observers, such as Wesley Githaiga from the Civil Society, told IPS that issues touching on trade, climate finance, and fossil fuels are politically charged because of competing and conflicting national interests.

Gavel came out without a roadmap for ending fossil fuels. Credit: UN Climate Change/Kiara Worth

“Some countries bear more responsibility for the climate crises than others and have a higher financial responsibility to address climate change,” Githaiga said. “Striking a balance between the needs of vulnerable developing nations and the economic priorities of developed wealthy countries is difficult.”

Conflicting national interests escalated when COP30 was suspended for additional side consultations just one hour before the final outcome on Saturday, following an argument that broke out over procedural issues.

The Elephant in the Room: Fossil Fuels

On one hand, a few highly organized petrostates from the Arab Group of nations, including Saudi Arabia, were opposed to Colombia, which was supported by the European Union and other Latin American countries like Panama and Uruguay regarding fossil fuels. Fossil fuels are by far the largest contributors to global warming. Scientists have warned of catastrophic temperature rises of up to 2.5°C by mid-century.

Githaiga says the issue was procedural because Colombia was objecting to an already-approved text. The main point of contention was the transition away from fossil fuels. COP28 achieved a historic breakthrough by advocating for a global shift away from fossil fuels. How to transition had been the most highly contentious issue at Belém.

So contentious that COP30 ultimately decided to sidestep ‘fossil fuels’ altogether.

Despite nearly 80 developed and developing countries standing firm demanding an end to the use of planet-warming fossil fuels, there is no mention of fossil fuels in the final COP30 agreement, only an oblique reference to the ‘UAE consensus.’ Despite the demands of Brazil’s neighbors Colombia, Panama, and Uruguay for stronger language, the announcement of a voluntary roadmap outside the UN process went ahead.

Throughout the tense climate talks, observers speculated that the COP30 outcome would include text on either “phasing away” from fossil fuels or “phasing down.” The end result did not include a roadmap for abandoning oil, gas, and coal. Recognizing that the world expected more ambition, Brazilian COP30 President André Aranha Corrêa do Lago told delegates, “We know some of you had greater ambitions for some of the issues at hand.”

Despite the lack of consensus, the COP30 President announced on Saturday that the presidency would publish a “side text” on fossil fuels and forest protection due to the lack of agreement. There will be two roadmaps on these two issues. The work will be done outside of the formal negotiations headed by President Luiz Inácio Lula da Silva and the Brazilian COP Presidency.

Climate Finance

Nevertheless, all was not lost. According to Mohamed Adow, the Director of Power Shift Africa, the creation of a Just Transition Action Mechanism emerged as a positive development, acknowledging that the global shift away from fossil fuels will not abandon workers and frontline communities.

Adow nonetheless stressed that “developed countries have betrayed vulnerable nations by both failing to deliver science-aligned national emission reduction plans and also blocked talks on finance to help poor countries adapt to climate change caused by the global north.”

“Rich countries cannot make a genuine call for a roadmap if they continue to drive in the opposite direction themselves and refuse to pay up for the vehicles they stole from the rest of the convoy.”

Disagreements are not about climate finance in itself but about how funds will flow from the wealthy to the vulnerable, poor states. But the lack of ambition did not cut across the eight-page declaration developed at the mouth of the world largest rainforest—the Amazon.

The negotiations did succeed in their determination to deliver an economic transition, even though there are concerns that some of the climate finance agreements, such as those on adaptation, are too sweeping, too general, and lacking in specifics. COP 29 raised the annual climate finance target of developing nations from USD 100 billion to USD 300 billion. COP30 agreed to scale finance and to specifically mobilize USD 1.3 trillion annually by 2035 for climate action.

On adaptation, Adow said, “Belém restored some integrity to the Global Goal on Adaptation, removing dangerous indicators that would have penalized poorer countries simply for being poor.”

“The slow pace of finance negotiations is worrying. The promise to triple adaptation lacks clarity on a base year and has now been delayed to 2035, leaving vulnerable countries without support to match the escalating needs frontline communities are facing. As it stands, this outcome does nothing to narrow the adaptation finance gap.”

Adow continues, “COP30 was intended to focus significantly on raising funds to assist vulnerable nations in adapting to climate change; however, European nations have undermined these discussions and removed the protections that poorer countries were seeking in Belem.”

“Europe, which colonized much of the global south and then imperiled it further through its industrialized carbon emissions, now works against even efforts to help it adapt to the climate crisis.”

Many of the countries that have submitted their National Adaptation Plans lack funding. The agreement moving forward is to double adaptation finance by 2025 and triple it by 2035. But it is not clear where this money will come from—public financing, private or wealthy nations.

On the frontlines of the climate crises, Sierra Leone challenged the emphasis on private capital to fund climate adaptation efforts, stating that the private sector is not known for its robust support of adaptation. Observers like Githaiga say instead, there is a need to triple public funding for adaptation.

“If you read the text carefully, you actually realize there is no agreement requiring countries to contribute more funds for climate activities,” he says.

Loss and Damage

On the Loss and Damage Fund, operationalization and replenishment cycles are now confirmed. A first in the history of COPs, trade was and will be discussed within the UNFCCC rather than just the World Trade Organization, in recognition of the intersection between trade and climate change.

The UN climate summit also delivered new initiatives such as the launch of the Global Implementation Accelerator and the Belém Mission to 1.5°C to drive ambition and implementation. This is about meeting the ambition gap by cutting emissions. The ‘Belem Package’ seeks to raise ambition by setting a new 1.5°C warming target to match the pace of the climate crisis. There was also a commitment to promote information integrity and counter false narratives.

Ultimately, COP30 will be remembered for increased climate activism and, more so, the visibility of Indigenous Peoples and the recognition of Afro-descendants. Importantly, it’s the recognition of the cross section between climate change and action and racial justice—although the reaction from some Indigenous peoples is that they would like to have a formal seat at the table.

Belém also raised ambitions for protecting the world’s forests, as the Forest Finance Roadmap is already backed by 36 governments, accounting for 45 percent of global forest cover and 65 percent of GDP. This roadmap seeks to close a USD 66.8 billion annual gap for tropical forest protection and restoration.

UN Climate Change Executive Secretary Simon Stiell summed up the positives.

“So COP30 showed that climate cooperation is alive and kicking. Keeping humanity in the fight for a livable planet. And that’s despite roaring political headwinds. That while one country stepped back. 194 countries have stood firm in solidarity. Rock-solid in support of climate cooperation.

“With or without Navigation Aids, the direction of travel is clear: the shift from fossil fuels to renewables and resilience is unstoppable, and it’s gathering pace,” Stiell said at a press conference at the end of the COP.

However, many others will also remember COP30 for its lack of ambition to deliver on a 2023 promise made to the world to phase out fossil fuels. The lack of a science-based pathway to facilitate a fast, fair and funded phaseout of fossil fuels is a blemish on Belém’s climate deal.

IPS UN Bureau Report

Follow @IPSNewsUNBureau
  

Excerpt:

Ongoing negotiations at Bonn, Germany, during the ongoing SB62. Credit: UNFCCC

By Umar Manzoor Shah
SRINAGAR & BONN, Jun 25 2025 (IPS)

A packed conference room buzzing with the energy of over 300 national experts, negotiators, and implementers discussed their submissions of the First Biennial Transparency Reports (BTRs) during the 62nd session of the Subsidiary Body for Implementation (SB62) negotiations taking place in Bonn, Germany.

The workshop was convened as part of the ongoing SB62 under the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC) and was being held at a crucial time for global climate governance, providing a rare and vital platform for countries to exchange honest reflections on their first forays into enhanced climate transparency.

Daniele Violetti, Senior Director at the UNFCCC, while offering a snapshot of global progress, said, “As of today, 103 Biennial Transparency Reports have been submitted, of which 67 are from developing countries, including 15 Least Developed Countries (LDCs) and Small Island Developing States (SIDS).”

The reports, which were due in December last year under the Paris Agreement’s Enhanced Transparency Framework, aim to enhance transparency and build trust among parties to the UNFCCC by providing a regular update on progress towards climate goals.

He lauded the extensive support provided through the Global Environment Facility (GEF) and other agencies, noting, “We at the UNFCCC Secretariat remain fully committed to collaborating with partners and enhancing the capacity of developing countries.”

Over the past five months, the Secretariat convened 17 country support events attended by 319 national experts and 11 sub-regional and regional workshops with 373 experts from 112 developing countries. Additionally, 1,700 review experts were certified under the BTR Technical Expert Review Training Program.

“This is a meaningful and valuable learning experience under the Paris Agreement,” Violetti said, stressing the importance of “reflection and mutual learning” to build “stronger national transparency systems that will serve countries well beyond this reporting cycle.”

The workshop’s agenda moved from introductory remarks to a series of concise presentations by key implementing agencies: the Global Environment Facility (GEF), Conservation International (CI), the Food and Agriculture Organization (FAO), the United Nations Development Programme (UNDP), the United Nations Environment Programme (UNEP), and the World Wide Fund for Nature (WWF).

Esteban Bermudez Forn, Climate Change Specialist from the GEF stated that the Facility has supported the preparation of 163 BTRs in 111 countries, including multiple reports from countries advancing to their second and third BTRs. “We encourage countries to see GEF support as a savings account—prepare your BTR, but also request access to ensure you have resources available when you need them,” he advised.

Highlighting  the continued availability of funds, Forn  said, “We still have USD 92 million available under the current replenishment cycle. Please, if you haven’t requested support from the GEF, do it as soon as possible before the replenishment cycle ends.”

Ricardo Urlate of Conservation International spotlighted the importance of nurturing local talent, referencing a project in Rwanda that partners the government with academia. “Normally, there is a big dependency on external experts—very expensive experts from outside—and this is something that cannot continue if countries want to be more efficient and engaged,” he warned.

Through the Evidence-Based Climate Reporting Initiative, Rwanda’s Environmental Management Authority and the African Institute of Mathematical Sciences trained over 50 staff in data analysis, climate modeling, and greenhouse gas inventories. Ricardo emphasized, “The important thing is that there are a lot of options… to identify at the country level which is the one that better fits their own needs and priorities.”

CI also highlighted a sub-regional project with the Common Market for Eastern and Southern Africa (COMESA), which aims to build capacity for enhanced transparency across member countries. “Reporting and transparency are two of the key elements they are supporting,” Ricardo said, pointing to the value of regional approaches.

FAO’s Marcel Bernhofs drew attention to a persistent challenge: finding appropriate executing agencies with the managerial capacity to lead projects. “This gap can create bottlenecks and delay implementation, slowing down the preparation and submission of funding requests,” he observed.

FAO’s approach emphasizes on-the-ground engagement, leveraging regional and national teams. Their Capacity Building Initiative for Transparency (CBIT) and Forestry and Other Land Use (FOLU) project, for example, “provides easy-to-access and knowledgeable technical experts” and focuses on supporting agriculture and land use sectors—areas that are “not easy, where we are really struggling quite a lot to do a good job,” Marcel acknowledged.

Marcel also stressed the importance of language accessibility: “Sometimes working in English is fine, but we also need, when we enter the detail and close discussion, to use the national languages.” FAO’s capacity-building activities, including a recent forest monitoring course in three languages, supported 2,500 participants from 141 countries.

The Value of Timely Technical Assistance

Richmond Azee from UNDP shared practical lessons on the importance of selecting the right executing partners and providing timely technical assistance. “Never let [countries] work alone on the BTRs but be ready beside them with some resources… to provide technical assistance as soon as possible and as needed to unlock some issues and overcome some challenges,” he advised.

He cited Guinea-Bissau’s experience aligning multiple reporting requirements and Niger’s successful correction of technical errors in their submission, both facilitated by UNDP’s hands-on support. “As a result, Guinea-Bissau, an LDC, submitted its BTR before December 2024… and Niger submitted on time, enhancing their understanding for the next cycle of BTRs.”

Funding Modalities and Sustainability Susanne Lecoyote, dialing in from UNEP, addressed the evolving funding modalities.

“Out of the total 111 countries that have accessed funding so far for BTRs, UNEP has supported 66,” she stated, describing how diverse modalities—such as bundled projects—help tailor support and ensure continuity for countries as they move through reporting cycles.

Susanne explained the streamlined approval process for expedited funding, typically taking just three to four months. She encouraged project coordinators to “be flexible to start preparing proposals while you are concluding your reports… do not mind about the technical review comments, because when they come in, we will provide a room for you to make amendments if needed.”

UNEP’s CBIT-GSP (Global Support Program) is a hub of collaboration, she said, “working closely with the Consultative Group of Experts, Climate Promise, Pacific Adaptation to Climate Change (PACC), Implementation and Coordination of Agricultural Research & Training (ICART) and many other initiatives to make sure that transparency-related services are provided to all countries, irrespective of whether they are supported by UNEP or other agencies.”

National Ownership and the Importance of Coordination

Rajan Dhappa from WWF shared Nepal’s experience, celebrating the country’s recent submission of its first BTR and its third Nationally Determined Contribution (NDC), making Nepal the first in South Asia to do so.

“We tried our best to submit the document with the best available data and information. But BTR is a time-taking process; it requires coordination among agencies and also the technical and financial support,” he reflected.

He stressed the centrality of government ownership: “If there is a high level of ownership and if they tend to implement such projects… then every project gets a success result or every project receives its intended goal on time.”

Nepal’s work on establishing a national Monitoring, Reporting, and Verification (MRV) mechanism is expected to pay dividends for future reporting.

IPS UN Bureau Report

Follow @IPSNewsUNBureau