The first week of COP30 in Belém got underway with intense talks in the main climate groups, one focusing on putting plans into action and the other on climate science and technology. As usual, the first week focused on technical work and drafting, laying the groundwork for political decisions expected this week under the Brazilian Presidency. While progress was uneven, several themes emerged across the negotiations: persistent divides on finance and trade measures, slow movement on the Global Stocktake, and continued pressure from vulnerable countries to put adaptation and climate–health at the centre of the COP30 outcome.
Across negotiation rooms, familiar disagreements resurfaced.
These debates are not new, but the stakes feel higher than ever as climate impacts intensify globally.
Climate change is already affecting water systems, heatwaves, disease patterns, and food security. For many countries, especially small islands, least developed countries and those in hotspots, adaptation isn’t optional. It’s survival.
Countries continued working on how to strengthen global adaptation efforts. Key discussions included:
Developing countries stressed that adaptation receives far too little funding, even though climate impacts are accelerating quickly.
Health was a major focus in adaptation talks. Extreme weather drives disease outbreaks, and changes in water systems influence waterborne diseases, especially in low-resource settings. Countries highlighted that health must be integrated into adaptation planning, not treated as a side topic.
A major milestone this week was the launch of the Belém Health Action Plan, which supports the health sector’s adaptation to climate change. Philanthropic organisations pledged USD 300 million to help strengthen health systems, early-warning systems, and preparedness for climate-related disease risks. Small island states and African countries argued that adaptation must put “people first” — meaning health systems, clean water, and early-warning systems for vulnerable communities.
Global stocktake (GST)
The Global Stocktake, a major review of how the world is doing on climate action, hit roadblocks. Countries disagreed over what it should cover, whether its findings should guide future commitments, and whether the IPCC should be the main scientific reference. While everyone agreed the political phase needs more time, consensus ended there.
Just Transition
Discussions also struggled around the idea of a Just Transition, which aims to ensure workers and communities are supported as economies shift to low-carbon pathways. Countries disagreed on mentions of the 1.5°C goal, trade tools like the EU’s Carbon Border Adjustment Mechanism (CBAM), and the breadth of the agenda. Developing countries called CBAMs “unfair punishment,” while developed nations argued they prevent carbon leakage.
Loss & damage
One bright spot: the new Fund for Responding to Loss and Damage launched its first call for proposals, meaning money could soon reach communities hit by storms, rising seas, or cultural losses. Unresolved questions remain on eligibility, delivery mechanisms, and inclusion of non-economic losses like heritage and identity.
Climate finance
Finance continued to be a major tension point. Discussions focused on what“consistent financial flows” mean, how to ensure funding for adaptation as well as mitigation, and whether countries should go into debt to handle disasters(most said no). China declined to contribute to Brazil’s Tropical ForestsForever Facility, arguing that richer countries must carry the bulk of financial responsibility.
Carbon markets
Countries continued working on international carbon markets. A new standard on carbon “removals” (e.g., storing carbon in forests or soil) was adopted, but many countries lack the capacity to measure and report reductions, which could slow participation. Negotiators and civil society stressed that the process must be transparent and inclusive.
Food & agriculture
Debates highlighted that agriculture receives only a small share of climate finance. Support for small farmers and Indigenous Peoples is needed, and vague“climate-smart” solutions were criticised. While no final decisions were made, positions were clarified for next year.
Gender
Talks on the Gender Action Plan stalled due to objections over terms like “gender-diverse people” and references to human rights defenders. The text remains full of brackets, showing disagreements are far from resolved.
Action for Climate Empowerment (ACE)
Week 1 also focused on education and youth engagement. Countries agreed on a plan to advance climate education and public awareness, which was officially adopted. Events highlighted working with young people, teachers, and community groups to ensure climate information is clear, accurate, and accessible.Empowering people to understand climate issues was seen as essential for taking strong climate action.
Nationally Determined Contributions (NDCs)
A global report showed that more than 100 countries are making progress on their climate pledges, but gaps remain in ambition, implementation, and funding. Developing countries emphasised fairness, historical responsibility, and protection from trade measures that could disadvantage them. By the end of week 1, 114 countries had updated their pledges, but many called for stronger, science-based, and transparent commitments.
Mitigation
Parties discussed scaling up ambition and improving finance and digital platforms. The Leave it in the Ground Initiative linked forest conservation with fossil fuel phaseout, proposing sustainability-linked bonds to keep fossil fuels un extracted while protecting biodiversity.
National Adaptation Plans (NAPs)
Discussions focused on helping countries implement plans to adapt to climate change, secure funding, and create supportive conditions. Developing countries proposed compromises gaining broad support, but disagreements remain over who should pay for adaptation and how it should be done. Talks will continue under the COP30 leadership.
Oceans
The Ocean and Climate Change Dialogue highlighted ocean-based mitigation and adaptation, sustainable fisheries, blue food systems, and marine renewable energy. Small Island Developing States (SIDS ) and Least Developed Countries (LDCs) emphasised the severe underfunding of ocean action and the need to recognise Indigenous knowledge and the ocean’s central role in meeting Paris Agreement goals.
Biodiversity
Nature discussions focused on synergies between the three Rio conventions (the UN Framework Convention on Climate Change, the UN Convention on Biological Diversity, and the UN Convention to Combat Desertification). While there were disagreements on timelines and decision-making, Parties agreed to continue discussions in Week 2, aiming for cooperation while respecting the separate agendas. Forest conservation and nature-based solutions were highlighted as areas for potential progress.
Looking ahead to week 2: As ministers arrive, the pressure rises: Week 2 will need to turn scattered draft texts into real decisions. The coming days will show whether COP30 can move from long debates to tangible action, and whether vulnerable communities will finally see their voices reflected in the outcomes.
Please note that we have done our best to ensure that all updates are accurate, up to date, and cover the most important issues and developments. However, if you notice a mistake, please contact us.