Bonn climate talks: Wins, misses and gridlocks ahead of COP30

After two weeks of intense negotiations, the Bonn climate conference ended last week with hits, misses, some wins and gridlocks, as the long road to COP30 officially began. 

Climate finance, just transition, the Global Goal on Adaptation (GGA) indicators and the transparency of tracking progress of climate action were the main battleground, as countries sought to shape the agenda for upcoming COP30 in the Amazonian city of Belem, Brazil. 

And when the curtains fell on the event, it was both a relief and a close shave, especially for developing countries, including Kenya, currently on the receiving end of the climate crisis.   

Also read: Bonn climate talks: Rich nations score against their poor counterparts

At the closing plenary of the talks, UN Climate Chief Simon Stiell didn’t mince words as he expressed frustrations at the slow progress of the 62nd sessions of the UNFCCC Subsidiary Bodies (SB 62). The conference started on a sour note last week when rich and poor nations disagreed on what to include in the agenda.

‘‘I’m not going to sugar coat it; we have a lot more to do before we meet again in Belém. There is so much more work to do to keep 1.5 °C alive, as science demands,’’ Stiell told hundreds of delegates at the World Conference Centre in Bonn, Germany. 

One of the biggest wins from these climate talks was the tabling of Just Transition priorities, an agenda pushed by civil society organisations in what many see as a vital step towards centering climate action on justice, dignity and decent work.

This outcome was the product of a relentless campaign and pressure from social movements, workers and frontline communities from around the world. It seeks to put people and the planet first while eliminating corporate greenwashing and elite control of both resources and the climate narrative. 

Experts welcomed the outcome, with the global lead on climate justice at ActionAid International, Ms Teresa Anderson, saying it represented a major evolution in climate action.

‘‘Governments are starting to get excited about Just Transition and shaping energy and food systems in a way that works for workers, women, farmers and communities,’’ she said. 

If adopted at COP30, she believes the just transition mechanism will deliver climate action by compelling governments ‘‘to put people’s needs first and foremost at the start of every climate plan.’’ 

Ms Anderson, however, warned that the ‘‘continued refusal’’ by wealthy nations to put real climate finance on the table risks putting climate talks on an uncertain path.  

Also read: Bonn climate meeting must deliver on indicators and finance

While climate finance discussions were light in the official agenda of these talks, the topic loomed large in the other negotiating rooms where developing countries expressed their dissatisfaction with the outcomes of climate finance negotiations last year. They decried limited resources at a time when needs in their countries are growing as the climate crisis worsens. 

‘‘Even with its omission from the agenda, consultations between Parties made it clear that this is a pressing issue for developing countries,’’ said Bertha Argueta, a senior policy advisor on climate finance and development at Germanwatch.

Ms Argueta noted that the tension in negotiation rooms highlights the dilemma of developing countries that have to roll out climate action without accessible and adequate climate finance. Ironically, the UNFCCC process is shifting its focus to implementation. 

In consultations led by the COP29 and COP30 presidencies on finance, a process called the Baku to Belem Roadmap, the tone was described as concerning. In the discussions, experts spent the bulk of time discussing private finance to the chagrin of delegates from developing countries. 

‘‘The issue of public finance is unlikely to go away. The COP30 Presidency must strike the right balance by allowing enough space for serious discussions about the role of both public and private climate finance,’’ Ms Argueta said.

To Marlene Achoki, a climate negotiator from Kenya, systemic reforms of the international financial structure will address the financing challenges. Ms Achoki argued that these reforms are necessary and urgent, especially as geopolitical tensions soar and the climate finance landscape becomes more complex.  

‘‘There’s a need for building transparency in global policy processes to streamline access to funds to effectively build resilience and reduce vulnerability,’’ Ms Achoki said.

The biggest win from the talks was on the Global Goal on Adaptation (GGA) indicators and the means of implementation (MoI), with many experts welcoming the results. Those following the discussions said the GGA had finally attained the political attention and recognition it had lacked for long. 

Lina Adil, an expert on adaptation and loss and damage, described the moment as ‘‘genuinely refreshing’’. 

‘‘Parties were, at last, willing to engage meaningfully in how adaptation finance fits into the picture. This is a signal that countries are ready to move from rhetoric to action,’’ Ms Adil told the Nation.

Still, what SB 62 achieved for the GGA is only a guide for the experts who will now craft the indicators. ‘‘Indicators alone do not deliver adaptation action,’’ Ms Adil warned. To her, the real battle will be staged at COP30 in five months. 

‘‘The test ahead is whether this spirit holds, especially when the conversation turns to implementation, and more importantly, to accountability once the GGA becomes operational in Belém.’’ 

Cristina Rumbaitis agreed with Adil’s sentiments, saying Bonn could not fail. ‘‘Failure to deliver clear next steps on the GGA indicators and guidance to technical experts would potentially have set back the process for another year, or more,’’ said the senior advisor on adaptation and resilience at UN Foundation.

A shame

While Rumbaitis was relieved that Parties could fashion a plan to take the GGA indicator work forward, she said it was a shame that Bonn could not make more progress to drive ‘‘greater action and support for adaptation’’ in the days to come. 

‘‘Progress in Brazil will require parties to show up with [victims of the climate crisis] in mind, ready to compromise and take bolder, more urgent action.’’

For millions of frontline communities in Kenya, Africa and the developing world, climate adaptation is a matter of survival; it’s the only means to secure lives and livelihoods. Urged Ms Rumbaitis: ‘‘We must find a way to make progress on the GGA, which remains a critical but unfulfilled pillar of the Paris Agreement.’’ 

Amy Gilliam Thorp described the final GGA outcome as a major leap forward for climate-vulnerable regions in the world, where adaptation is a lifeline. 

‘‘For many of us, the final hours were tense. Our hearts were in our mouths as negotiations teetered on the edge,’’ said Ms Thorp, the programmes manager at Power Shift Africa. 

‘‘The inclusion of guidance to experts on the means of implementation, especially finance, when hope appeared lost, marked a hard-won victory,’’ Amy told the Nation. 

But the GGA outcome did not come without a fight. Negotiations on the GGA were long-drawn and featured a 6.5-hour opening workshop, eight informal consultations, three ‘‘informal-informal’’ meetings and a seven-hour session on the final day. 

Despite these wins, countries failed to reach consensus on several core issues, particularly on the structure of the indicators list and guidance on the Means of Implementation. 

The means of implementation include resources such as finance, technological support and capacity building to facilitate climate interventions in developing countries. 

Images seen by the Nation revealed tension and exhaustion as haggard-looking negotiators attempted to get agreements over the line as discussions went past 11pm Bonn time – long after the closing plenary had wound. 

‘‘In a difficult geopolitical moment, this outcome helps restore faith that global solidarity and meaningful climate action are still possible,’’ Ms Thorp said.

But not everyone was happy with the outcomes in Bonn. 

Mohamed Adow described the overall outcome as “a sobering reminder that the international community is still dragging its feet, even as lives are being lost to climate breakdown.” 

“The slow pace on core issues like finance, adaptation, and just transition reveals a deepening trust gap between rich and vulnerable nations,” said the director of Power Shift Africa, adding that the disputes went beyond just procedural wrangling to signify ‘‘a retreat from obligations.’’  

Tasneem Essop, the executive director of Climate Action Network International (CANI), said that while bombs get billions and polluters increase their record profits, ‘‘Bonn has once again exposed a system rigged to protect polluters and profiteers.’’ 

‘‘It’s a global order that funds destruction but balks at paying for survival.’’

For experts like Nafkote Dabi, the Bonn climate conference exposed the stark injustices meted out on poor nations by their rich counterparts. 

‘‘The richest, primarily responsible for the climate crisis, are dodging their duty to provide public, grant-based finance for developing countries to adapt and rebuild,’’ said Ms Dabi, the climate policy lead at Oxfam International.

‘‘As warming spirals toward a catastrophic 3°C, urgent action is critical. Rich countries must own their climate debt and stop pushing private finance, which prioritises profit over people,’’ she said, calling on the Brazilian COP presidency to step up and champion equity and justice in Belem.

There are also some like Ife Kilimanjaro from Climate Action Network who feel that this edition of climate talks confirmed the UNFCCC’s ‘‘dangerously lack of touch’’ with global crises, from wars to crippling socioeconomic inequalities and a climate catastrophe already past 1.5 degrees. 

‘‘The fight for public climate finance was an uphill battle; rich nations diverted responsibility, pushing risky private solutions that won’t close the ambition gap,’’ said Ms Dabi. 

To her and many others following the events in Bonn, all is, however, not lost. ‘‘We must keep bridging the gap between power and lived realities, demanding genuine accountability and justice,” she said. 

The delayed start stemmed from an attempt by developed countries to remove from the agenda reference to Article 9.1 of the Paris Agreement, which obligates them to provide climate finance. 

Stiell warned that countries had to “go further, faster, and fairer” if they are to keep the Paris Agreement goals alive and prevent a full-blown climate collapse.

As the dust settles on SB 62, focus will now shift to COP30 in Brazil, where decisions made in Germany will be adopted by countries. Before that, countries will attempt to iron out the issues that the climate talks could not resolve. 

What countries do in the next five months will determine if the Amazonian COP is a success or yet another flop. 

This was aptly captured by Stiell in his closing remarks: ‘‘We must find a way to get to the hard decisions sooner. We need leaders and ministers to roll up their sleeves. We will need negotiators to sit together between sessions to find common ground.’’

[email protected]