- Formal negotiations
- Finance
- Global review
- Global report
- Digital sequence information
- Harmful subsidies
- Marine biodiversity
- Planning, monitoring, reporting and review
- Article 8(j) implementation
- Biodiversity and climate change
- Links with other bodies
- Around the COP
- Armenian presidency
- Protests
- Lobbying and influence
- Carbon and biodiversity markets
Countries reached a last-minute compromise deal on the Global Goal on Adaptation (GGA) at the Bonn climate talks on Thursday night, papering over their differences on how progress to adapt to climate change should be measured, as a fast-warming world increases the urgency of such action.
Established under the Paris Agreement a decade ago, the goal is meant to support countries – especially the most climate-vulnerable – to bolster their resilience and preparedness for extreme weather linked to climate change, from deadly floods and heatwaves to droughts. Where the financing should come from is a crucial part of it, and tracking the access and quality of this finance with yardsticks is another.
But discussions on the GGA at Bonn almost collapsed due to disagreements over how the funding of this support will be measured to ensure developed countries are meeting their obligations to developing nations.
Brazil’s environment minister suggests roadmap to end fossil fuels at COP30
Observers told Climate Home News that developing countries wanted clear language outlining developed countries’ responsibility to provide finance, as enshrined in the Paris Agreement. They said measuring adaptation progress must include indicators to track whether developed countries are meeting their responsibilities to provide the “means of implementation” (MoI) in UN jargon.
But developed countries resisted, instead proposing a broader definition of adaptation finance, allowing, for instance, developing country budgets to count, talks observer Imane Saidi of Morocco-based think-tank IMAL Initiative for Climate and Development.
But after more than six hours of deadlock that ran late into the night, negotiators found a compromise.
The final text laying out guidance to experts working to refine a set of no more than 100 adaptation indicators includes adaptation finance under the so-called means of implementation (MoI) – but does not say who should provide it or who should receive it. It refers only to “parties”, wording that some observers said reflected a deliberate move by developed countries to dodge their responsibilities under the Paris Agreement.
“It’s good news that the MoI indicators must align with the Paris Agreement. But again, it says ‘to help parties’, not ‘developing country parties’. So it’s a compromise,” Saidi said.
Pooja Dave of Climate Action Network International (CAN-I) said that while the text contains language that developing countries wanted, “we live to fight another day” – suggesting more wrangling lies ahead.
‘Bad faith’ of developed countries
Despite the compromise wording that includes adaptation finance, after years of resistance by donor governments, some developing country delegates voiced disappointment. India complained the document was adopted too quickly, rushing parties who did not get an opportunity to take an in-depth look at it because it was uploaded while the closing plenary was already underway.
Bolivia’s lead negotiator Diego Pacheco said negotiations demonstrated “the bad faith of developed countries”, denouncing “their lies and hypocrisy” over financing as they tried to postpone meaningful progress in the GGA.
While posing as climate champions, he said wealthy nations “do not have the political will to provide finance to developing countries”.
Mining for transition minerals can be responsible with joint push, experts say
The European Union, meanwhile, said it was “very pleased with the outcomes” reached, having come to the talks in “good faith and in the spirit of cooperation and solidarity”. It said it looked forward “to implementing these decisions as we move forward towards Belém”.
Eyes on COP30
As delegates fly out of Bonn, hopes are that the talks on how to measure the GGA will conclude at COP30 in Belém in November, delivering indicators and outcomes that all or most parties will be happy with.
CAN-I’s Dave said that while a last-minute result was reached in Bonn allowing work on the GGA indicators to move forward, “the real fight will be in Belém”.
Brazil’s Ana Toni, COP30’s CEO, said in London she hoped November’s climate summit would advance the adaptation talks, adding that “finance for adaptation must be part of the indicators for adaptation in GGA”.
The post Countries reach hard-fought compromise on climate adaptation metrics in Bonn appeared first on Climate Home News.
Countries reach hard-fought compromise on climate adaptation metrics in Bonn
Continue Reading
Prepared by a coalition of nine Western Australian union, industry, conservation, and community organisations—including UnionsWA, the Conservation Council WA, and the Smart Energy Council—the WA Clean Energy, Jobs & Industry Plan provides a practical roadmap to transform Western Australia into a clean energy powerhouse while creating thousands of secure local jobs.
Western Australia stands at a pivotal crossroads: lead the global clean energy economy or watch investment, future industries, and secure jobs go elsewhere. The WA Clean Energy, Jobs & Industry Plan outlines a transformative blueprint to harness the state’s world-class solar and wind resources. Discover how legislated renewable targets, green iron manufacturing, and a dedicated regional training strategy can generate tens of thousands of local jobs, lower household bills, and build a resilient, net-zero future for all Western Australians.
WA needs a clear and forward-thinking plan if it is going to become a competitive renewable energy powerhouse and maintain its economic strength through the energy transition.
“Western Australians know a faster renewable energy transition will lower their household expenses and prevent harmful climate pollution. But the community also needs clear direction to ensure this transition will create jobs, lower costs and not cause undue environmental harm.
“Here, sectors representing a broad range of interests have laid the groundwork for those outcomes, clearly outlining what is needed to create a future for WA that is good for the environment, for the climate, for workers and for the economy.
Summary
The WA Clean Energy, Jobs & Industry Plan sets out a strategic roadmap to position Western Australia as a global clean energy superpower while creating thousands of secure local jobs.
The report establishes three overarching goals:
- Creating local employment.
- Maintaining industrial competitiveness.
- Lowering household energy costs
To realize this vision, the framework details actionable measures to follow on from the recent WA Government announcement of a 75% Renewable Energy Target by 2031 for the South West Interconnected System. This includes developing a statewide Renewable Energy Target, coordinating statewide workforce and training pipelines, strategically planning regional infrastructure to safeguard high-value biodiversity and cultural heritage, and ensuring equitable benefit-sharing through household electrification incentives and First Nations equity partnerships. Ultimately, the plan highlights that establishing clear policy and regulatory certainty will unlock lower energy bills, boost power reliability, and secure the state’s global competitiveness in emerging green commodity export markets.
Key Findings
- Statewide Renewable Energy Target and Emissions Reduction Targets: The report calls for a statewide RET and 1.5°C aligned emission reduction targets to remove policy risk, lower capital costs, and attract clean energy investment.
- Transformative Job Creation: Accelerating the transition offers massive employment prospects, including up to 8,800 solar and battery jobs by 2050, as well as 24,000 ongoing and 11,000 construction jobs in a commercial green iron industry.
- Industrial Electrification & Competitiveness: Requiring large gas users to adopt binding electrification timetables and providing concessional financing will protect existing energy-intensive manufacturers from rising energy costs and impending domestic gas shortfalls.
- Green Commodity Export Leadership: Western Australia can build new export markets in green iron, green ammonia, and offshore oil/gas decommissioning by constructing shared common-user infrastructure and setting dedicated Green Commodity Export Targets.
- Coordinated Workforce & Training Pipeline: To address critical skill shortages the plan recommends establishing a WA Clean Energy Jobs Plan 2050, three regional training hubs, and dedicated pathways for female and under-represented apprentices.
- Environmental Safeguards & Community Benefits: Fast-tracked development must be paired with State Planning Policies that avoid high-biodiversity and cultural heritage lands, mandate new data centres to run on additional renewable power, and deliver household electrification rebates and First Nations equity partnerships.
What you can do
WA has an opportunity to lead on sustainable, clean energy and associated industries. You can help by:
- Sending an email to Environment Minister Murray Watt and Prime Minister Anthony Albanese, calling on them to reject Browse.
- Sharing this story to help more Australians understand what’s at stake.
- Encouraging your friends and family to take action.
Countries have completed the first “global review” of their progress towards reversing nature loss by 2030 at the COP17 biodiversity talks in Yerevan, Armenia.
The review “notes with deep concern” that, unless action is “rapidly accelerated”, the goal to reverse nature loss and meet a set of 23 targets by 2030 “will not be achieved”.
It “urges” countries to accelerate action, including by “increased ambition in addressing the gaps”.
Much of the discussions in Yerevan focused on how to raise the necessary funds to help developing countries protect nature.
Some major economies pushed to expand the range of nations that are expected to provide finance, with countries agreeing at the end of the two weeks of talks that non-donors that want to contribute can “signal interest” before COP18.
This came after developed countries failed to meet a target to significantly ramp up nature finance over the last few years.
It also came as a landmark fund agreed at COP16 in Colombia to pay communities for the genetic resources derived from nature stands nearly empty two years on.
The Yerevan talks marked the halfway point of the “Kunming-Montreal Global Biodiversity Framework” (GBF), the “Paris Agreement for nature” first made in 2022 and due to be achieved by 2030.
During the nearly 12-hour-long final plenary, countries voted for Quito, Ecuador, to host the COP18 nature talks, which will be held in 2028.
Countries managed to sign off on all the major negotiation texts, marking a stark contrast to COP16, which ran so far over time that the Colombian presidency lost “quorum”, forcing talks to resume in Rome months later.
Below, Carbon Brief has detailed analysis of all of the key outcomes from COP17.
Formal negotiations
Finance
Finance, predictably, was at the heart of the discord and deadlock at the Yerevan talks.
At COP17, discussions on finance had to achieve several outcomes.
The first part – to take stock of biodiversity finance mobilised so far to meet the nature deal’s goals – fell under the global review.
As the global report noted, developed countries failed to meet their commitments to raise “at least $20bn a year by 2025” for nature. Delegates pointed to falling aid levels and a sharp 27% decline in environmental funding for the 2026-30 period.
The second part was to agree on how to mobilise resources for the next four years, to meet the GBF’s goals and targets.
Calls to “broaden the contributor base” of who pays to protect nature – and whether that should include emerging economies – became the most fraught element of the talks.
Eventually, countries agreed on what Switzerland described as a “super, mega-delicate” text. It hinged on major “political compromises”, with “no major winner or loser”, according to Kenya.
Per the decision, countries that want to be included on a list of developed country donors can “signal interest” through bilateral, confidential consultations before COP18 and every alternate COP after.
Finally, countries also agreed on criteria to shape and resource a new, permanent financial mechanism to protect nature after 2030.
However, this did not immediately take the form of a new fund under the COP that biodiverse countries have demanded since 2022, deferring the mechanism’s institutional structure to COP18.
Resource mobilisation discussions at the GBF’s halfway mark were supposed to agree on how to close the “biodiversity finance gap” and to “increase resources from all sources” to “at least” $200bn per year by 2030, as set out in target 19 of the GBF.
The talks were largely dominated by a push, led by the JUSCANZ bloc of developed countries, to “broaden the contributor base”. This could see emerging economies, such as Qatar, China, Saudi Arabia and India, being added to the list of countries that pay to protect nature.
Article 20 of the UN Convention on Biological Diversity (CBD) states that developed countries “shall provide new and additional financial resources” to developing countries to meet the costs of implementing measures to protect nature.
The text states that other countries – including emerging economies – may “voluntarily assume” these obligations to pay. However, it adds that this list of developed countries “shall” be reviewed periodically and amended “if necessary”.
The list was last amended in 2006.
(See this “