COP30 was both chaotic and successful. How can this contradiction be explained? Known as “the COP of Truth”, the conference carried a unique paradox from the outset: it was held in the heart of the Amazon, the ultimate symbol of global climate urgency, and at the same time in a region marked by major structural challenges. It clearly revealed the contradictions between discourse and practice, ambition and implementation, hope and political-institutional limits.
Thirty-three years after the Conferences of the Parties (COPs) were created in Rio-92, Brazil is once again at the centre of global talks on climate and the environment, this time in Belém. The choice of city was celebrated by many but has faced great resistance since it was announced. On the one hand, it symbolises recognition of the strategic importance of the Amazon for the planet’s climate balance.
On the other hand, it exposes deep weaknesses. Belém has one of the lowest GDPs per capita among Brazilian capitals, high levels of inequality and significant infrastructure limitations: insufficient transportation and mobility, restricted basic sanitation, vulnerability to extreme weather events such as flooding and heat waves.
A paradox of promised justice
This was the central paradox. A COP that was meant to symbolise the ambition to transform the world took place precisely in a territory that has not yet received, on a compatible scale, the benefits of the climate promises made in recent decades. It is the COP of the just transition taking place in a territory where socio-environmental justice is still a promise in the making.
COP30 also amplified another tension: the Amazon is seen globally as the ‘planet’s climate heritage’, but in practice it continues to be the target of geopolitical disputes, divergent interests and disproportionate expectations. While the world is demanding tougher targets, more generous funding, and immediate protection, the Amazon countries are dealing with institutional challenges, fiscal limitations, and urgent social needs that require time, planning, and collective construction.
Growing frustration: challenges of climate change
Over the two weeks of the conference, we followed the course of negotiations marked by growing frustration at the slow pace of global action. From the point of view of social participation, however, COP30 was a success. The Green Zone was buzzing with panels, debates, round tables, presentations, Amazonian products, cooperatives, science and cultural diversity. Many programmes were launched, consolidating a fertile environment for exchange and learning.
In the ‘Blue Zone’, the contrast was evident: while the negotiating rooms maintained the high standard expected for a meeting of this magnitude, the pavilions faced extreme heat that symbolically and literally exposed the challenges of climate change. The situation reached its peak on the penultimate day of the COP, when a fire paralysed the negotiations for a few hours, precisely at one of the most decisive moments of the process.
Reducing dependency on fossil fuels
Belém also stood out for the hospitality of its population, its socio-cultural richness and the vitality of its historical and gastronomic heritage, reinforcing its position as a vibrant cultural centre.
The COP30 Presidency performed exceptionally well, consistent with Brazil’s track record. Brazil is recognised as a ‘negotiating powerhouse’, and the president of the conference, André Corrêa do Lago, upheld this tradition. Despite the deadlocks in the Bonn preparations, Brazilian diplomacy demonstrated capacity and leadership. At the opening of the COP, the agenda was approved without question, a feat not achieved four COPs ago, due to the requirement of unanimity between the parties.
One of the most eagerly awaited topics was the discussion on reducing dependence on fossil fuels. There were statements indicating the possibility of a roadmap for phasing out these fuels. Although difficult to make official in the negotiations, countries such as the United Kingdom, Germany, France, Denmark, Colombia and Kenya have already signalled their support for a possible Fossil Fuel Treaty within the United Nations Framework Convention for Climate Change (UNFCCC).
Brazil, with 88% of its electricity coming from renewable sources and a unique history of biofuels, is well placed to lead this agenda, but has chosen not to support the initiative led by Colombia. The host country raised the phase-out of fossil fuels as a possible topic of discussion, but its endorsement to it was limited to informal conversations.
Nationally Determined Contributions: numbers are still insufficient
Right at the start of the event, President Lula announced the Tropical Forest Forever Facility (TFFF), a fund designed to pay countries for conserving forests, promoting climate and biodiversity benefits. Around $6.5bn have already been committed – still far from the target of $125bn involving governments and the private sector.
So far, 118 countries have submitted their new Nationally Determined Contributions (NDCs), climate action plans stipulated by the Paris Agreement. Even so, the number remains insufficient in the face of climate urgency.
In terms of adaptation, several countries presented their National Adaptation Plans and the first call for proposals for the Loss and Damage Fund was launched, for $250mn.
Despite the US withdrawal from the Paris Agreement, the opposition to the Donald Trump administration made its presence felt. The governor of California, Gavin Newsom, took part in a press conference on the second day of the COP, openly criticising the federal administration’s silence on the climate crisis.
COP30: inadequacy of the present
The expectation was that the success or failure of this conference would say a lot about the global capacity to overcome the contradictions that have marked the climate agenda over the last decade. COP30, more than any other, demanded coherence between discourse and action.
The negotiations concluded on Saturday, 22 November, with results that were less than expected. Not uncommonly, some COPs end with part – or all – of the delegations dissatisfied. It should have been the COP of climate ambition, but the financing mechanisms remain timid in the face of the scale of the Amazonian challenge.
Thus, the meeting that most symbolised the future unavoidably highlighted the inadequacy of the present.
And that’s the paradox we urgently need to resolve.
Editor’s note: An amendment was added, on 24 November 2025, at the end of paragraph 11 of this article to include the actual position of the host country with regard to the Fossil Fuel Treaty.
More on environment.
Your voice, your story – independent powerful citizen journalism.
Consider supporting us monthly
A newspaper costs approximately £60.00/year, you can enjoy Bylines Scotland for £36.00/year – please think about supporting independent citizen journalism
.jpg){kind=link}