Published

1 year ago

December 25, 2024

Alice Rush

More than 65,000 delegates have registered to attend the COP29 climate summit in Baku, Azerbaijan, potentially making it the second-largest COP on record.

This total is more than 15,000 lower than the record-breaking COP in Dubai last year – and marks the first time in seven years that a COP is not larger than its predecessor.

The figures are released amid reports that numerous world and industry leaders are skipping the summit, while Papua New Guinea has pulled its delegation out entirely.

Nonetheless, the size of the Baku summit still likely outstrips major COPs of the past, including Copenhagen, Paris and Glasgow.

COP29 host Azerbaijan has the largest delegation at the summit, with 2,229 people registered for badges. This is followed by Brazil (1,914) and Turkey (1,862) with the second and third-largest delegations, respectively.

The United Arab Emirates (UAE), hosts of COP28 in Dubai, has the fourth-largest delegation (1,011) and China (969) has the fifth.

While China’s delegation is smaller than at COP28 (when it was 1,296), both summits have seen a much larger presence for the country. For the 10 COPs before COP28, China’s average delegation of named participants was around 100 people.

All aboard to Baku

COP28 in Dubai last year was the largest COP in an almost 30-year history of summits – by some distance. More than 83,000 people attended the summit in person, beating the previous record of around 50,000 set in Sharm El-Sheikh in Egypt the year before.

The total number of registered delegates for COP29 in Baku clocks in at 66,778 – falling between the totals of the previous two COPs. With 3,975 “virtual” participants, this takes the overall provisional delegate total for COP29 to more than 70,000.

As the chart below shows, this bucks the recent trend that has seen the size of COPs increase every year since the 16,000 participants that travelled to Bonn, Germany, for COP23 in 2017.

It is worth noting that these are provisional figures, based on the delegates that have registered for the summit. The UNFCCC will release the final figures – based on participants collecting a physical badge at the venue – after the summit has closed.

Overall totals for delegates from parties, observers and the media for all COPs, as published by the UNFCCC (see this article for more details on the data). Data for COPs 1-28 are the “final” figures, while COP29 data is “provisional”. Chart by Carbon Brief.

This group adds up to 17,680 delegates – second only to COP28 in Dubai.

At last year’s COP, the participant lists published by the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC) – for the first time – named every single person that had registered for the summit (excluding support staff). Previously, COPs have typically included thousands of “overflow” participants in which countries and UN agencies could nominate delegates without their names appearing on their official lists.

The Baku summit continues this more transparent approach, providing spreadsheets that name all participants.

For consistency with Carbon Brief’s analysis of previous COPs, the above chart includes overflow delegates as a single group. However, the participant lists do divide the overflow delegates between parties and observer groups. Including the overflow numbers takes the total for party representatives to 33,158.

The next-largest group is that of observers from non-governmental organisations (NGOs), which totals 9,881 delegates. This is the third-largest total in COP history (after the previous two COPs).

Along with the NGOs, there are several other groups that fall into the category of “observer organisations” – such as those participants representing UN bodies, intergovernmental organisations, other agencies and business representatives. These total 2,377 registered delegates – or 3,204 when overflow badges are included.

Finally, 3,575 media delegates have registered for COP29, a provisional total that is second only to COP3 in Kyoto in 1997.

Host lead

As is common at COP summits, the largest delegation at COP29 represents the host country. Azerbaijan has registered a delegation – including party overflow badges – of 2,229.

This is a far cry from Azerbaijan’s tiny delegations of the past. Before COP28 in Dubai, Azerbaijan’s delegation amounted to an average of six people.

The second-largest delegation comes from Brazil with 1,914 participants. Brazil typically brings one of the largest delegations and this year is no exception. A substantial delegation from Brazil was also likely considering they will be hosting COP30 next year.

(It is worth noting that some countries allocate some of their party badges to NGOs, which can artificially inflate the size of their official delegation.)

The third-largest delegation comes from Turkey (1,892), followed by UAE (1,011) and China (969). The rest of the top 10 comprises Russia (900), Indonesia (810), Nigeria (634), Japan (595) and Kazakhstan (478).

Just outside the top 10 is the UK in 11th (470), as well as the US (405) in 16th and Australia (394) in 19th.

Azerbaijan has seen the biggest increase in delegation size since COP28, increasing by 995 people. This is followed by Turkey (966 more) and Russia (448).

The smallest delegations belong to Niger and San Marino (two), Nicaragua (three), and Andorra and North Korea (five).

Unsurprisingly, the largest decrease in delegation size is for UEA (dropping by 3,148). Next is India (909) and France (649), while the US delegation has shrunk by 434.

Papua New Guinea has registered a delegation of 28, although prime minister James Marape announced back in August that the country would not be attending to “signal our protest at the big nations…for their lack of quick support to those who are victims of climate change, and those of us who are forest and ocean nations”.

Also, according to the provisional participant lists, Afghanistan has not registered a delegation. However, reports earlier this week suggested that Taliban officials will attend as observers. Therefore, their invitation from COP hosts Azerbaijan may have come outside the usual registration process.

The map and table below present the delegation size – split between party and overflow badges – for all the countries registered for COP29. The darker the shading, the more delegates that country has signed up. Use the search box to find the data for a specific party.

Gender split

The UNFCCC’s participant lists typically provide a title – such as Mr, Ms, Sr or Sra – for each registered delegate. In the past, this has allowed Carbon Brief to work out the balance of men to women in the delegations that each country has sent to a COP.

(This analysis always carries the caveat that the titles are designated by UNFCCC and not by Carbon Brief. In addition, Carbon Brief recognises that gender is not best categorised using a binary “male” or “female” label and appreciates that the UNFCCC’s lists may not be wholly accurate.)

However, since COP28 last year, the UNFCCC has started using other titles that do not indicate gender – such as Dr, Prof, Ambassador and Honourable. Therefore, for this analysis, these non-gendered titles – which make up around 150 names of more than 17,000 in the list of party delegates – have not been included.

This gives an average gender balance of party delegations of 60% male to 40% female.

As the chart below shows, this makes COP29 the most balanced COP in history. (Note that, for consistency, the COP28 and COP29 figures only include those on party badges, not overflow ones.

The average size of named party delegations (not including overflows) for each COP, divided by male (orange) and female (purple) participants. The lines show what percentage of the average delegation is male (orange) and female (purple). Data for COPs 1-28 collated from “final” participant lists published by the UNFCCC, while COP29 data is based on the “provisional” list. Note that 145 delegates in the COP29 provisional list are not included because there is no information on their gender. Chart by Carbon Brief.

There are two all-male party delegations this year – North Korea (five delegates) and Niger (two delegates).

In addition, this year, Carbon Brief’s analysis reveals that the gender balance across all registered delegates – both in-person and virtual – for COP29 is 59% male to 41% female.

The full list of COP29 party delegation sizes can be found here.

The post Analysis: Which countries have sent the most delegates to COP29? appeared first on Carbon Brief.

Analysis: Which countries have sent the most delegates to COP29?

Climate Change

A Tiny Caribbean Island Sued the Netherlands Over Climate Change, and Won

Published

1 day ago

February 28, 2026

Alice Rush

The case shows that climate change is a fundamental human rights violation—and the victory of Bonaire, a Dutch territory, could open the door for similar lawsuits globally.

Interview by Paloma Beltran, Living on Earth

From our collaborating partner Living on Earth, public radio’s environmental news magazine, an interview by Paloma Beltran with Greenpeace Netherlands campaigner Eefje de Kroon.

A Tiny Caribbean Island Sued the Netherlands Over Climate Change, and Won

Climate Change

Greenpeace organisations to appeal USD $345 million court judgment in Energy Transfer’s intimidation lawsuit

Published

1 day ago

February 28, 2026

Alice Rush

SYDNEY, Saturday 28 February 2026 — Greenpeace International and Greenpeace organisations in the US announce they will seek a new trial and, if necessary, appeal the decision with the North Dakota Supreme Court following a North Dakota District Court judgment today awarding Energy Transfer (ET) USD $345 million.

ET’s SLAPP suit remains a blatant attempt to silence free speech, erase Indigenous leadership of the Standing Rock movement, and punish solidarity with peaceful resistance to the Dakota Access Pipeline. Greenpeace International will also continue to seek damages for ET’s bullying lawsuits under EU anti-SLAPP legislation in the Netherlands.

Mads Christensen, Greenpeace International Executive Director said: “Energy Transfer’s attempts to silence us are failing. Greenpeace International will continue to resist intimidation tactics. We will not be silenced. We will only get louder, joining our voices to those of our allies all around the world against the corporate polluters and billionaire oligarchs who prioritise profits over people and the planet.

“With hard-won freedoms under threat and the climate crisis accelerating, the stakes of this legal fight couldn’t be higher. Through appeals in the US and Greenpeace International’s groundbreaking anti-SLAPP case in the Netherlands, we are exploring every option to hold Energy Transfer accountable for multiple abusive lawsuits and show all power-hungry bullies that their attacks will only result in a stronger people-powered movement.”

The Court’s final judgment today rejects some of the jury verdict delivered in March 2025, but still awards hundreds of millions of dollars to ET without a sound basis in law. The Greenpeace defendants will continue to press their arguments that the US Constitution does not allow liability here, that ET did not present evidence to support its claims, that the Court admitted inflammatory and irrelevant evidence at trial and excluded other evidence supporting the defense, and that the jury pool in Mandan could not be impartial.[1][2]

ET’s back-to-back lawsuits against Greenpeace International and the US organisations Greenpeace USA (Greenpeace Inc.) and Greenpeace Fund are clear-cut examples of SLAPPs — lawsuits attempting to bury nonprofits and activists in legal fees, push them towards bankruptcy and ultimately silence dissent.[3] Greenpeace International, which is based in the Netherlands, is pursuing justice in Europe, with a suit against ET under Dutch law and the European Union’s new anti-SLAPP directive, a landmark test of the new legislation which could help set a powerful precedent against corporate bullying.[4]

Kate Smolski, Program Director at Greenpeace Australia Pacific, said: “This is part of a worrying trend globally: fossil fuel corporations are increasingly using litigation to attack and silence ordinary people and groups using the law to challenge their polluting operations — and we’re not immune to these tactics here in Australia.

“Rulings like this have a chilling effect on democracy and public interest litigation — we must unite against these silencing tactics as bad for Australians and bad for our democracy. Our movement is stronger than any corporate bully, and grows even stronger when under attack.”

Energy Transfer’s SLAPPs are part of a wave of abusive lawsuits filed by Big Oil companies like Shell, Total, and ENI against Greenpeace entities in recent years.[3] A couple of these cases have been successfully stopped in their tracks. This includes Greenpeace France successfully defeating TotalEnergies’ SLAPP on 28 March 2024, and Greenpeace UK and Greenpeace International forcing Shell to back down from its SLAPP on 10 December 2024.

-ENDS-

Images available in Greenpeace Media Library

Notes:

[1] The judgment entered by North Dakota District Court Judge Gion follows a jury verdict finding Greenpeace entities liable for more than US$660 million on March 19, 2025. Judge Gion subsequently threw out several items from the jury’s verdict, reducing the total damages to approximately US$345 million.

[2] Public statements from the independent Trial Monitoring Committee

[3] Energy Transfer’s first lawsuit was filed in federal court in 2017 under the RICO Act – the Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations Act, a US federal statute designed to prosecute mob activity. The case was dismissed in 2019, with the judge stating the evidence fell “far short” of what was needed to establish a RICO enterprise. The federal court did not decide on Energy Transfer’s claims based on state law, so Energy Transfer promptly filed a new case in a North Dakota state court with these and other state law claims.

[4] Greenpeace International sent a Notice of Liability to Energy Transfer on 23 July 2024, informing the pipeline giant of Greenpeace International’s intention to bring an anti-SLAPP lawsuit against the company in a Dutch Court. After Energy Transfer declined to accept liability on multiple occasions (September 2024, December 2024), Greenpeace International initiated the first test of the European Union’s anti-SLAPP Directive on 11 February 2025 by filing a lawsuit in Dutch court against Energy Transfer. The case was officially registered in the docket of the Court of Amsterdam on 2 July, 2025. Greenpeace International seeks to recover all damages and costs it has suffered as a result of Energy Transfers’s back-to-back, abusive lawsuits demanding hundreds of millions of dollars from Greenpeace International and the Greenpeace organisations in the US. The next hearing in the Court of Amsterdam is scheduled for 16 April, 2026.

Media contact:

Kate O’Callaghan on 0406 231 892 or kate.ocallaghan@greenpeace.org

Greenpeace organisations to appeal USD $345 million court judgment in Energy Transfer’s intimidation lawsuit

Climate Change

Former EPA Staff Detail Expanding Pollution Risks Under Trump

Published

1 day ago

February 28, 2026

Alice Rush

The Trump administration’s relentless rollback of public health and environmental protections has allowed widespread toxic exposures to flourish, warn experts who helped implement safeguards now under assault.

By Liza Gross

In a new report that outlines a dozen high-risk pollutants given new life thanks to weakened, delayed or rescinded regulations, the Environmental Protection Network, a nonprofit, nonpartisan group of hundreds of former Environmental Protection Agency staff, warns that the EPA under President Donald Trump has abandoned the agency’s core mission of protecting people and the environment from preventable toxic exposures.