Countries attending a first-of-its-kind summit have walked away with plans to develop national roadmaps away from fossil fuels, along with new tools to address harmful subsidies and carbon-intensive trade.
The first conference on “transitioning away” from fossil fuels held in Santa Marta, Colombia, from 24-29 April saw 57 countries – representing one-third of the world’s economy – debate practical ways to move away from coal, oil and gas.
Against a backdrop of war, a global oil crisis and worsening extreme weather events, ministers and envoys from across the world sat side-by-side in small meeting rooms to have open and frank conversations about the barriers they face in transitioning from fossil fuels to clean energy.
This new format – devised by co-hosts Colombia and the Netherlands – was described as “refreshing”, “highly successful” and “groundbreaking” by countries attending the talks.
The event also featured a “science pre-conference” attended by 400 global academics, which included the launch of a new science panel that will aim to provide agile and bespoke analysis to nations wanting to accelerate their transition away from fossil fuels.
At the summit’s conclusion, Tuvalu and Ireland were announced as the co-hosts of the second transitioning away from fossil fuels summit, which will take place in the Pacific island nation in 2027.
Below, Carbon Brief outlines all of the key takeaways from the talks.
- Colombia and Netherlands leadership
- High-level segment
- Academic meeting
- Indigenous and civil society participation
Colombia and Netherlands leadership
The idea for a specific fossil-fuel transition conference hosted in Colombia first emerged during tense end-game negotiations at the COP30 climate summit in Belém, Brazil.
Amid a push by a group of around 80 nations to refer to a “roadmap” away from fossil fuels in the formal COP30 outcome text, Colombia and the Netherlands jointly announced that they would co-host a summit in Santa Marta in April.
The calls for a fossil-fuel “roadmap” to be mentioned in COP30’s outcome text ultimately failed. However, the Brazilian COP30 presidency promised to bring forward an “informal” fossil-fuel roadmap, drawing on the discussions and debates in Santa Marta.
The Santa Marta conference took place from 24-29 April. It included a “science pre-conference” from 24-25, a day for subnational governments, parliamentarians and other stakeholders and a “high-level segment” with ministers and climate envoys from 28-29.
Colombian environment minister Irene Vélez Torres – herself a former academic – was particularly keen to emphasise the importance of science to the conference, telling journalists: “We need to go back to science and base our decisions on science.” (See: Academic meeting)
From the outset, the hosts stressed that the high-level segment was not a space for negotiations, but rather a forum for countries and other stakeholders to discuss practical steps to move away from fossil fuels.
This format was widely praised by ministers and climate envoys, who described the conversational atmosphere in break-out sessions as “refreshing”, “highly successful” and “groundbreaking”. (See: Closed-door discussions.)
A total of 57 countries participated in the conference, according to the Colombian government.
These countries were: Angola, Antigua and Barbuda, Australia, Austria, Bangladesh, Belgium, Brazil, Cameroon, Canada, Chile, Colombia, Denmark, Dominican Republic, the EU, the Federated States of Micronesia, Finland, France, Germany, Ghana, Guatemala, Iceland, Ireland, Italy, Jamaica, Kenya, Luxembourg, Malawi, the Maldives, the Marshall Islands, México, Mongolia, the Netherlands, Nepal, Nigeria, Norway, New Zealand, Palau, Panama, Philippines, Portugal, Saint Lucia, Senegal, Singapore, Slovenia, the Solomon Islands, Spain, Sweden, Switzerland, Tanzania, Turkey, Tuvalu, Uganda, the UK, Uruguay, Vanuatu, the Vatican and Vietnam.
At the summit’s opening press conference on 24 April, Vélez Torres confirmed that Colombia and the Netherlands had decided to only invite a select group of countries to the conference.
Vélez Torres told journalists that countries including China, Russia and the US were not invited. She suggested that they had not shown the necessary spirit to be part of the “coalition of the willing” and that Colombia wanted to avoid a rehashing of the lengthy debates at COP30. (Carbon Brief understands that India was also not invited.)
In a later press huddle, Dutch climate minister Stientje van Veldhoven clarified that the two co-hosts had partially based their invitation criteria on who showed support for the fossil-fuel roadmap at COP30, saying:
“It was a combination of what happened in Belém and all the existing initiatives that have been driving this agenda for a long time already.”
However, it is worth noting that some countries that had opposed a formal reference to a fossil-fuel roadmap in the COP30 outcome were invited to Santa Marta, according to Carbon Brief’s analysis of the “informal list” of those against the idea in Belém.
For example, Tanzania was invited to take part in the Santa Maria talks, despite appearing on the list of countries opposed to the roadmap in Belém.
On the other hand, neither China nor India were invited, despite having rejected media coverage portraying them as the “blockers” of the fossil-fuel roadmap at COP30.
Country officials and observers expressed a range of views on whether excluding certain countries from the conference was the right approach.
Juan Carlos Monterrey Gómez, Panama’s special representative on climate change, told a small group of journalists that he thought it was the “right decision”, adding:
“This first meeting had to be done with those that wanted something to be done. Otherwise, it would have been a repeat of a UNFCCC meeting.”
UK special representative for climate, Rachel Kyte, told a press huddle that China should feel “welcome to be here”, adding:
“China has to be part of this equation for multiple reasons.”
One veteran observer told Carbon Brief that their impression was that Colombia and the Netherlands had been “overly cautious” about who would have caused disruption if invited to the conference, saying:
“Yes, maybe there is an argument for not inviting countries that have a long history of blocking progress, such as the Gulf states. But, if we look at what countries are really doing on the ground – including JETP [Just Energy Transition Partnerships] initiatives – then more countries should have been here, including Indonesia, for example.”
However, they also urged caution on reading too much into which countries were and were not present, adding that this could also partially be explained by “scheduling and countries’ availability”.
During the summit’s final plenary, van Veldhoven stated that, going forward, it was the Netherlands and Colombia’s wish to create an “open coalition”, including by extending an “invitation for others to join us”.
Dr Maina Talia, the climate minister of Tuvalu, who will co-host the second transitioning away from fossil fuels summit alongside Ireland, told journalists that the island nations would “revisit” and “improve” the criteria used for inviting countries to the conference.
[anchor]3″>
National statements and pledges
The two-day high-level segment began with an opening plenary, which saw more than 20 countries put forward their views on the need to transition away from fossil fuels.
Developed and developing nations alike spoke of the need to transition away from fossil fuels not only to tackle worsening climate change, but also the high prices, insecurity and volatility associated with continued reliance on coal, oil and gas.
Opening the plenary alongside Colombia, Dutch climate minister Stientje van Veldhoven told countries:
“Price volatility and dependence on imports are structurally and unacceptably impacting our economies. We need to move away from fossil fuels not only because it is good for the climate, but because it strengthens our energy security. Investment in clean energy also lays the foundation for a more resilient and sustainable economy, capable of mitigating these shocks.”
First to speak in plenary was Nigerian minister, Abubakar Momoh, who said:
“Nigeria is actively diversifying its economy away from extracting oil, which accounts for around 80% of our exports. Nigeria strongly believes that it is not whether extraction should decline, but how to organise it so it is manageable, fair and politically viable across countries.”
Also speaking during the session, UK special representative for climate Rachel Kyte said it “would be irresponsible to ignore the second fossil-fuel crisis in five years”.
Several nations also used their interventions to lament a lack of progress in addressing fossil-fuel use during the last 30 years of annual UN climate negotiations.
Dr Maina Talia, climate minister for Tuvalu, said that “for years, international climate negotiations have circled around fossil fuels without directly confronting the core issues”.
Juan Carlos Monterrey Gómez, Panama’s special representative on climate change, told countries:
“For 34 years, we have negotiated the symptoms of the climate crisis and bulletproofed its cause. Thirty-four years of pledges. And where are we now?
“Economies built on fossil fuels are unravelling in real time. Fossil fuels are not just dirty. They are unreliable, they are dangerous and they must end.”
A small number of nations from the Pacific and Africa used their interventions to show their support for the Fossil Fuel Treaty initiative, an idea to negotiate a new legally binding agreement to control fossil-fuel use, currently supported by 18 countries. (The treaty did not feature in the summit’s final outcome.)
France’s special climate envoy, Benoît Faraco, used his intervention to announce that the nation has produced a new roadmap for transitioning away from fossil fuels.
Later on, on the first day, Colombian president Gustavo Petro also gave a speech at the summit, telling countries:
“What I see is resistance and inertia within the power structures and the economy of this archaic energy system. Today, fossil fuels bring death; undoubtedly, that form of capital could commit suicide, taking humanity and life itself. Humanity cannot allow that.”
Closed-door discussions
Following the opening plenary, ministers and climate envoys spent much of the two-day high-level segment in closed-door “breakout sessions”, discussing issues ranging from “planned phase down and closure of fossil-fuel extraction” to “closing gaps in financial and investment systems”.
Carbon Brief understands that each session featured 12 ministers and envoys representing different countries sitting in an inner circle, with an outer circle made up of civil society members and other stakeholders. Each session was led by a different minister, appointed by the co-hosts.
In a departure from UN climate negotiations, the conversations that took place were free-flowing, with ministers and stakeholders given equal opportunities to contribute, observers told Carbon Brief.

Many countries were highly complimentary of this informal format, describing it in the closing plenary as “refreshing”, “highly successful” and a “safe space for discussion”.
UK special representative on climate, Rachel Kyte, told a huddle of journalists that there was “real value” to having informal conversations with other country officials, saying:
“I have to say that it is really nice to sit in a small circle…In a negotiation, it’s very, very fast-moving and transactional. But now we have had two days to think about [fossil-fuel transition issues] and this only.”
Speaking to Carbon Brief, Panama’s special representative on climate change, Juan Carlos Monterrey Gómez, said the format was “groundbreaking”, adding:
“I’m going to be honest. [At] first I was like: ‘What the f*ck am I doing here? I don’t know where this is going’.
“But then, as the workshop started, I realised there were ministers, envoys, civil society leaders and Indigenous people. They put us in a format where we could not open our computers, so we had to speak from our minds and our hearts. That completely flipped my perception. That kind of space I haven’t seen in my 10-year history with the UNFCCC.”
All of the sessions were held under the Chatham House rule, meaning discussions were not attributable to individual speakers to encourage more open debate.
Co-host nations Colombia and the Netherlands gave a broad overview of the topics and themes discussed during the sessions in a takeaways report. (See: Final outcomes.)
Final outcomes
At the conference’s final plenary session on 29 April, co-host nations Colombia and the Netherlands presented a range of “key outcomes” from the summit.
The first outcome was confirmation of the news that Tuvalu and Ireland will co-host a second transitioning away from fossil fuels conference in the Pacific island nation in 2027.
The co-hosts also announced the establishment of three “workstreams” on issues to bring forward to the second summit.
The first of these workstreams will focus on developing national and regional roadmaps away from fossil fuels.
Speaking in plenary, Vélez Torres said that the roadmaps should be “connected” to countries’ UN climate plans, known as nationally determined contributions (NDCs). She added that it would be important for the roadmaps to be “very clear and honest” about “emissions exported from producing countries”.
The development of the roadmaps will be supported by the newly established science panel for global energy transition and the NDC Partnership, a global initiative helping nations prepare their NDCs, she added.
(At the final press conference, it was clarified that countries are not obligated to produce a new fossil-fuel roadmap and that participation in all of the work streams is voluntary.)
The second workstream will be focused on changing the financial system to better facilitate the transition away from fossil fuels.
This will include work to identify fossil-fuel subsidies and find solutions to “debt traps”. It will be supported by the International Institute for Sustainable Development thinktank, the co-hosts said.
Separately, Dutch climate minister van Veldhoven said that all countries would be invited via “email” to begin a process for identifying and reporting their fossil-fuel subsidies. (The Netherlands is the co-chair of COFFIS, a group of 17 nations that have pledged to remove fossil-fuel subsidies.)
The final workstream will address fossil-fuel-intensive trade, with the aim of “advancing progress towards a fossil fuel-free trade system”, Vélez Torres said. This workstream will be supported by the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD) group of wealthy nations.
A document summing up the co-chair’s takeaways from the summit says that other key outcomes include the establishment of a “coordination group [to] ensure continuity towards the second and subsequent conferences”, adding:
“It will consist of countries leading different alliances and initiatives that are implementing elements of the transition away from fossil fuels, and of the co-hosts of the first and second conferences, Colombia, the Netherlands, Tuvalu and Ireland.”
The document adds that a key task will be delivering the findings of this conference to the COP30 presidency, which is currently preparing a global fossil-fuel roadmap to present at COP31 in November.
Academic meeting
The summit kicked off with a “science pre-conference” attended by around 400 academics from across the globe from 24-25 April, held at the University of Magdalena in Santa Marta.
At the behest of the Colombian government, these scientists split into 11 different “workstreams” to debate a vast array of topics related to transitioning away from fossil fuels.
These ranged from “fossil-fuel phaseout policies” and the role of methane, to “just transitions and economic diversity” and the role of multilateralism.
Speaking on the summit’s first day, Colombian environment minister Irene Vélez Torres – herself a former academic – stressed the importance of science in political decision-making. She told a press conference:
“There has been a growing gap between science and governments, and governmental decisions, and it happens because there is a lot of denialism. There is a lot of economic and political lobbying as well. That is actually deviating [from] scientific rationale.
“The true belief of the countries that are here is that we need to go back to science and base our decisions on science, and back up our decision-making, processes and pathways with science.”
Science panel for global energy transition
The pre-conference saw the announcement of three new scientific initiatives.
The first was a new global science panel, calling itself the “science panel for global energy transition”, which was launched by Dr Johan Rockström, director of the Potsdam Institute for Climate Impact Research in Germany and Dr Carlos Nobre, an eminent researcher on the Amazon rainforest from the University of São Paulo in Brazil.
They announced at a public event in Santa Marta that the panel will involve “50-100 scientists” from around the world and will be based at the University of São Paulo.
The scientists on the panel will aim to provide rapid analysis on how to transition away from fossil fuels for countries and multilateral talks, including bespoke information for nations that request it, they said.
Speaking at its launch, Rockström said the panel will be split into four working groups, focusing on “transition pathways”, “technology solutions”, “policy design and evaluation” and “finance instruments and governments”.
It will have three co-chairs: Dr Vera Songwe, an economist and climate finance expert from Cameroon; Prof Ottmar Edenhofer, chief economist at the Potsdam Institute for Climate Impact Research; and Prof Gilberto M Jannuzzi, professor of energy systems at Universidade Estadual de Campinas in Brazil.
Speaking to Carbon Brief, Nobre said that he and Rockström were first approached with the idea for a new panel by Ana Toni, Brazilian economist and CEO of the COP30 climate summit, while the negotiations were taking place in Belém. He said:
“Johan and myself, we’re not energy transition scientists, but we were the creators of the planetary science pavilion at COP30, that’s why Ana Toni came to us. And we have already invited three top energy transition experts to join us.”
At the launch, Rockström said the panel would be different in several ways from the world’s existing global climate science panel, the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC).
He said that, in comparison to the “seven-year cycle” for IPCC reports, this panel will “be able to come up with annual updates” and “be able to scale down to the national level”.
Nobre told Carbon Brief that he was among scientists who have grown “frustrated” with some aspects of the IPCC’s process, including the line-by-line approval of summaries for policymakers by all of the world’s governments. He said:
“A long time ago, when I was working as a scientist studying the Amazon, I wanted to include some information about the risks the Amazon faces in one of the summaries. But a representative from my own country [Brazil] said no.
“This panel is totally independent. There is no way for somebody to say ‘you can’t say that’ or ‘you can’t do that’.”
Action insights report
The second new science initiative to emerge from the academic conference was a new “synthesis report”, offering “12 action insights” for how countries can transition away from fossil fuels.
First covered by Carbon Brief, the report contains some explicit “action recommendations” for countries, such as “halt all new fossil-fuel expansion” and “prohibit fossil fuel advertising…recognising fossil fuels as health-harming products”.
The report was first put together by an “ad-hoc” group of 24 scientists at the request of the Colombian government. It was then further debated and refined by many of the 400 scientists gathered at the academic pre-conference in Santa Marta.
A preliminary version of the report was circulated to governments attending the talks.
In addition, one of the report’s coordinating authors, Prof Andrea Cardoso Diaz, from the University of Magdalena, was given a two-minute slot in the opening plenary of the “high-level segment” to highlight its findings to gathered ministers.
Colombia’s fossil-fuel roadmap
The final scientific initiative unveiled at the academic segment was a new roadmap for how Colombia can transition away from fossil fuels. This was drafted by a team led by Prof Piers Forster, head of the Priestley Centre for Climate Futures at the University of Leeds.
The roadmap says that Colombia can cut its emissions from energy use to 90% below 2015 levels by 2050, through ambitious policies to move away from fossil fuels and electrify its transport sector.
This would require “considerable” upfront investment, with the roadmap estimating the cost to be an average annual investment of around $10bn above a business-as-usual scenario.
However, by the 2040s, Colombia could see net economy-wide savings from transitioning away from fossil fuels, says the analysis, which could reach $23bn annually by 2050.
Speaking to Carbon Brief, Forster said his experience as interim chair of the UK’s Climate Change Committee highlighted to him the importance of presenting national roadmaps in economic terms. He said:
“The biggest issues facing countries are economic and to do with the cost of living. To convince our own government back in the UK to sign up to our recommended carbon budget, we put a lot of work into the economic aspect. So that was also the focus of this work for Colombia.”
Indigenous and civil society participation
In addition to holding a dedicated meeting for scientists, the Colombian government also organised a “People’s Assembly”. This brought together hundreds of Indigenous peoples, Afro-descendent peoples, peasant farmers, trade representatives, women and children and other civil society members.
The goal was to gather the thoughts from these groups on the summit’s main “pillars” of addressing fossil-fuel production, economic constraints and global governance and multilateralism.
According to Climate Lens News, Óscar Daza, the secretary general of the Organisation of Indigenous Peoples of the Colombian Amazon, Karebaju people, told the gathering:
“The Indigenous peoples of the world have made historic demands, such as the non-extraction of natural resources from our territories, so that our resources that are there in the territory remain intact, remain still.
“As Indigenous peoples, we want those historic struggles to somehow be reflected and taken up here by the different states.”

Following on from the meetings, the Colombian government summarised the main talking points discussed by each of these groups in a series of “contributions” documents.
Indigenous peoples and civil society groups were also allocated opportunities to speak during the summit’s high-level segment.
In a departure from UN climate summits – where inputs from civil society are usually heard after countries have finished speaking – the Santa Marta summit invited a range of representatives to speak alongside ministers in the opening and closing plenary sessions.
This included an intervention in the opening plenary by Larissa Baldwin-Roberts, a climate leader from the Bundjalung Nations, who told countries:
“This is the last time we will be a token. You want our pictures, not our voices. You want our stories, not our struggles…True solidarity with each other is the prerequisite to a just transition.”
Indigenous peoples and civil society members were also free to speak in closed-door discussions with ministers, Carbon Brief understands.
Separately from the events organised by the Colombian government, civil society also organised its own “people’s summit”, involving 900 organisations and networks, held in the city of Santa Marta from 24-26 April.
This summit also organised sessions for representatives from different groups to offer their thoughts and insights into the transition away from fossil fuels, ending in a joint “declaration”.
In a statement, Tasneem Essop, the executive director of Climate Action International, said:
“Movements from across the globe and the region – Afro-descendants, feminists, youth, peasants and fisherfolk, social movements and Indigenous peoples converged in a three-day peoples summit in Santa Marta to build a collective consensus on our demands and solutions for the just transition away from fossil fuels.
“[We saw] the adoption of a powerful declaration that spells out our positions on ensuring that the transition has to be rights-based, funded and results in the dismantling of the systems that have caused harm and destruction driven by fossil fuel dependency.”
The post Santa Marta: Key outcomes from first summit on ‘transitioning away’ from fossil fuels appeared first on Carbon Brief.
Santa Marta: Key outcomes from first summit on ‘transitioning away’ from fossil fuels
Climate Change
EU, UK lead push for electrification as “powerful weapon” against fossil fuels
Dozens of governments led by the EU and the UK have pledged to throw their political weight behind a rapid electrification of the world’s economy, billed as a “powerful weapon” for cutting reliance on planet-heating fossil fuels.
At a high-level summit in London’s Mansion House on Tuesday, energy ministers and business leaders were joined by UN secretary-general António Guterres in calling for faster action to curb demand for oil, coal and gas by powering homes, industry and transport with clean electricity.
Electrification – which spans measures such as switching from petrol cars to electric vehicles – has emerged as a key priority in climate and energy policy circles this year.
COP31 co-hosts Türkiye and Australia have made a global target for electricity to meet 35% of final energy demand by 2035, up from around 20% today, the main plank of this year’s action agenda for the UN summit. Reaching that level is necessary to keep the 1.5C warming limit within reach, according to the International Renewable Energy Agency (IRENA).
Turkish COP31 President-Designate Murat Kurum said earlier this month that the host nation would work to forge “a strong global coalition that is ready and determined to act” and promised to facilitate access to technical assistance.
Rallying support for electrification
Five months before countries are due to sign on to the pledge, efforts to rally support gathered momentum at London Climate Action Week, as a record-breaking heatwave baking the capital underscored the urgency of weaning the world off fossil fuels.
Guterres said the world faces an “historic opportunity” to turn the page on its dependence on fossil fuels and fully embrace clean electrification powered by renewables.
“The age of clean electrification is here,” he added. “The question is whether we can build the grids and storage, mobilize the investment, and deliver the infrastructure at the speed and scale required”.
Without investment and government policies supporting upgrades in infrastructure, ageing power grids are often unable to handle the growing influx of renewable energy, creating bottlenecks and slowing the energy transition, according to the International Energy Agency (IEA).
Meanwhile, the high upfront costs of buying electric vehicles, heat pumps and industrial equipment remains a challenge to switch households and businesses away from using fossil fuels across the world, according IEA analysts, despite these technologies being cheaper over their whole lifecycle.
Global coordination platform
In a bid to overcome these hurdles, the European Commission and the UK government on Tuesday launched a new platform to coordinate global progress on electrification.
EU energy commissioner Dan Jorgensen said the goal was to build coalitions, draw up policy recommendations, share best practice and secure new funding to speed up the electrification of homes, industry and transport.
Brazil’s COP30 presidency, the joint Australia-Türkiye COP31 presidency, Ethiopia’s incoming COP32 presidency, Canada, the Philippines and South Korea joined the initiative at launch.
Jorgensen urged governments worldwide to “choose transformation over turbulence” and switch to clean electricity to make economies and societies more resilient and shield them from future shocks driven by volatile fossil fuels.
COP31 leaders unveil global targets, with spotlight on electrification
For many countries, especially those heavily reliant on imported fossil fuels, the oil and gas crisis triggered by the US and Israeli attacks on Iran and the ensuing blockade of the Strait of Hormuz has driven home the urgency of the clean energy transition.
The UK’s energy secretary Ed Miliband said on Tuesday that, unlike previous fossil fuel shocks, clean electrification now offers the world a clear alternative.
“An alternative that cannot be disrupted by foreign wars, that isn’t subject to global shocks because it is locked in stable prices at home, and that can create good jobs and drive growth,” he added, “an alternative that can deliver national security, energy security and indeed climate security.”
At the recent conference on transitioning away from fossil fuels in Santa Marta, a group of 60 governments led by the Netherlands and Colombia said electrification is one of the areas where they can align work with the UN climate talks.
Financial reforms needed
Achieving the electrification target – dubbed the “35 by 35” goal – will require significant financial resources. Investments in power grids alone need to double from their current rate to around $1 trillion each year in the next decade, according to IRENA.
But Guterres said that developing countries are still “starved from investment” in their clean energy sector. He urged deeper reforms of the global financial architecture by reducing lending risk, lowering the cost of capital and attracting more private investment.
Surangel Whipps Jr., president of the low-lying Pacific island state of Palau, said faster progress in electrification is a “powerful weapon in our arsenal”. But he warned that the energy transition would stall without “fit for purpose investment that is fast, predictable and accessible”.
The post EU, UK lead push for electrification as “powerful weapon” against fossil fuels appeared first on Climate Home News.
EU, UK lead push for electrification as “powerful weapon” against fossil fuels
Climate Change
Mombasa: Key outcomes from the Our Ocean Conference in Kenya
A major ocean conference has ended in Mombasa, Kenya, with just a handful of countries committing to high-level political declarations on banning deep-sea mining, protecting climate-resilient coral reefs and combatting illegal fishing.
The Our Ocean Conference (OOC) brought together more than 5,000 delegates to discuss marine issues and make voluntary commitments to advance ocean sustainability.
It was the first time in the conference’s 11 editions that it had been held on African soil.
African countries played an “important leadership role” at the talks, observers told Carbon Brief, helping to drive ambition on fisheries transparency, a precautionary pause on deep-sea mining and developing proposals for marine protected areas on the high seas.
Across the three-day conference, attendees also made 320 separate commitments, including new funding for scientific research, improving waste-management programmes to reduce marine pollution and mapping Indigenous groups’ customary waters.
Some of these commitments were accompanied by announcements of new funding, with a total of $6.4bn “mobilised” across all pledges.
Several non-governmental organisations also released new reports during the conference, on topics ranging from the implementation of marine protected areas to “climate-resilient” coral reefs.
Observers told Carbon Brief that the commitments and discussions at the conference were “positive steps”, but added that these pledges must now be backed up by action.
During the opening ceremony, former US secretary of state John Kerry urged delegates to move “from commitments to implementation”.
Here, Carbon Brief outlines the key takeaways from the OOC across five major climate-related topics.
Background
The OOC was first held in Washington DC in 2014, where it was championed by Kerry.
The conference aims to “identify action-based solutions and make tangible commitments” towards addressing key issues facing the ocean, such as climate change and overfishing. It does so through voluntary commitments made by governments, non-governmental organisations, civil society groups and others.
These commitments align with the six “pillars” of the conference:
- The ocean-climate nexus
- Marine pollution
- Marine protected areas
- Maritime security
- Sustainable blue economy
- Sustainable fisheries
Since then, the conference has been held annually (with the exceptions of 2020 and 2021 during the Covid pandemic), with the host city changing every year.
Each edition of the conference is very different, attendees told Carbon Brief, and the host country plays a large role in setting the conference’s priorities.
For example, at the 2024 conference, held in Athens, Greece, shipping and sustainable tourism were discussed at length alongside the six existing pillars.
At this year’s summit, extra attention was paid to the roles of local communities in achieving a “healthy” ocean.
Since 2025, the conference has had its own dedicated secretariat, hosted at the research organisation, the World Resources Institute (WRI). (Prior to that, the US Department of State acted as the de-facto secretariat.)

Conference participants told Carbon Brief that the OOC has been “highly successful” in achieving its aims over the past decade.
An analysis of the first 10 years of the conference, published by WRI in 2025, found that of a total 2,618 commitments made at the OOC, around 1,130 had been completed and a further 1,005 were in progress.
In Mombasa this year, 104 countries and organisations made a total of 320 voluntary commitments. More than one-quarter of these commitments were made in the “sustainable blue economy” action area.
According to the preliminary report released by the secretariat at the conclusion of the OOC, the commitments made at the conference represent $6.4bn in “mobilised” finance. However, it is unclear from the report how much of this figure is new committed funding.
Marine protected areas
Marine protected areas (MPAs) are one of the six key action areas of the Our Ocean Conference.
A June 2026 independent assessment of the MPA-related commitments at previous editions of the OOC found that the conference has “made an outsized contribution to global marine conservation efforts”.
According to the analysis, more than one-third of the Earth’s MPAs stemmed from announcements made at the OOC – a total area of more than 10m square kilometres (km2).
This progress is the result of nearly two-thirds of MPA-related OOC commitments already fully implemented, the assessment says, while most of the remaining commitments “show evidence of progress”.
If all pledged MPAs were to be implemented, it would represent protection for around 14.4m km2 or 4% of the ocean.
The chart below shows the number of pledged actions related to MPAs and other area-based conservation methods that were pledged at the OOC between 2014 and 2025, coloured by the progress made on each commitment.

Several groups announced new MPAs – or the completion of previously announced MPA designations – at the OOC.
These included the establishment this year of two new MPAs in the Juan Fernández region of Chile, protecting a total of around 337,000km2 of ocean, and the approval of the Azores Marine Park, which will span 287,000km2 – making it the largest network of protected areas in the north Atlantic Ocean.
However, despite the progress made in designating MPAs, further work is needed to ensure that these areas are truly protected, experts told Carbon Brief in Mombasa.
A report released by the Smithsonian Tropical Research Institute (STRI) at the summit detailed the “implementation gap” facing MPAs. It noted that “at least half of existing MPAs remain unimplemented or operationally ineffective”, while just 3.5% of the global ocean is “fully and highly” protected.
Closing this gap will require “inclusive, sustained and context-sensitive design, management and funding approaches”, continued the report.
Dr Ana Spalding, the director of STRI’s Adrienne Arsht community-based resilience solutions initiative, told Carbon Brief that, while MPAs are typically evaluated based on their biodiversity outcomes, the communities that rely on ocean ecosystems are also very important to consider. Focusing on just one aspect or the other will result in an MPA that is not effective, she added:
“There’s going to be a sweet spot between the two.”
High Seas Treaty
The Agreement on the Conservation and Sustainable Use of Marine Biological Diversity of Areas Beyond National Jurisdiction – also known as the BBNJ Agreement or the High Seas Treaty – entered into force on 17 January 2026.
This followed the treaty, achieving the necessary 60 state ratifications on 19 September 2025. The week before the OOC, the east African nation of Comoros became the 90th party to ratify the agreement.
The first Conference of the Parties for the High Seas Treaty will be held in January 2027 in New York City. At that meeting, parties will be tasked with creating the rules of procedure, establishing the subsidiary bodies and carrying out other foundational work.
Because so many key decisions will be made at this COP1, it is “imperative” to have as many ratifications as possible before the conference begins, said Rebecca Hubbard, director of the High Seas Alliance, a coalition of non-governmental organisations that advocates for protection of the high seas. She added:
“We hope that well over 100 countries will be party to the agreement by COP1, so that they can be at the decision-making table.”

One of the key provisions of the High Seas Treaty is that it creates a mechanism for countries to establish MPAs in international waters. This will be key to achieving the “30 by 30” target of protecting 30% of the world’s land and oceans by 2030, Hubbard told Carbon Brief.
However, establishing a high-seas MPA under the agreement requires a thorough process, including a review by a scientific and technical subsidiary body, a consultation with parties and a vote by the COP. Thus, in order to achieve the “30 by 30” target, parties will need to act swiftly to begin the process of establishing high-seas MPAs, according to Hubbard. She said:
“It will be very, very tight. It’s definitely possible, but it requires really strong government leadership and prioritisation.”
She added that it is “essential” that governments begin forming proposals for high-seas MPAs before the COP meets in January, noting that some countries are already doing so.
At a side event on 16 June, representatives from South Africa and the EU detailed plans to propose a high-seas MPA that would link two existing protected areas in the sub-Antarctic – one South African and one French. Hubbard told Carbon Brief:
“That’s a really great example of what we can do with the High Seas Treaty – having developed and developing countries working together, sharing knowledge [and] developing scientific approaches together. I think that’s the hopeful future, collaboration [and] cooperation, that the High Seas Treaty really provides.”
Also at the summit, Senegal, Mauritania, the Gambia and Guinea-Bissau committed to creating “at least two” transboundary west African MPAs.
Deep-sea mining
Although deep-sea mining was not a major focus of the Mombasa talks, it did feature at several side events.
At a reception held by the Deep Sea Conservation Coalition (DSCC), Prof Rashid Sumaila of the University of British Columbia said the “wrong question is being asked” about deep-sea mining. He continued:
“It’s not whether they have the minerals, it’s whether extracting them gives a net-positive impact.”
Sumaila added that evaluating the risk of deep-sea mining will require a cost-benefit analysis that is as “broad and inclusive as possible”.
At the same reception, the foreign-affairs minister of Malawi, Dr George Chaponda, announced the country’s support of a “precautionary pause” on seabed mining in international waters. This would prohibit mineral exploration in such areas until there is robust scientific evidence showing limited environmental harm.
In doing so, Malawi became the first African country to support such a pause – and the 41st country overall to support a precautionary pause or moratorium on the activity.
Chaponda told the assembled guests that Malawi’s existence as a landlocked country did not preclude its involvement in the deep-sea debates, urging:
“To my fellow landlocked states: geography does not diminish our stake in the ocean.”
Later in the week, Kenya and Madagascar also announced their support for such a pause.
In a statement, David Willima, the Africa lead at DSCC, said:
“The leadership shown by Malawi, Kenya and Madagascar sends a vital signal that African nations are stepping forward to defend the deep ocean and are unwilling to accept the risks of deep-sea mining.”
Coral reefs
At the third UN Ocean Conference (UNOC), held in Nice, France, in June 2025, 11 countries and several partner organisations launched the high-level commitment to protect “climate-resilient” coral reefs.
These are reefs that, according to scientists, have the “best chance of long-term survival in the face of climate change”.
(UNOC occurs every three years and is specifically focused on achieving the UN Sustainable Development Goal on sustainable ocean use. Unlike the OOC, UNOC results in a negotiated political declaration.)
A further four countries signed the commitment in Mombasa: Comoros, the Dominican Republic, Kenya and the UK. According to a representative at the launch event, the goal is to reach 31 signatories – representing 80% of the world’s coral cover – by COP31 in Turkey in November this year.
Signatory governments pledged their commitment to:
- Identifying climate-resilient reefs and prioritising their protection.
- Integrating coral-reef protection into national strategies and plans.
- Enacting policies to reduce the local pressures facing coral reefs, such as overfishing, pollution and overdevelopment.
- Implementing national reef monitoring programmes and action plans.
- Ensuring equity and working with local communities in protecting reefs.
The Mombasa conference also coincided with the presentation of a new study on climate-resilient reefs, covered in the 17 June edition of Carbon Brief’s Cropped newsletter. (The study is currently in the final stages of peer review.)

Building on a 2018 project that identified the 50 coral reefs that “form an optimal portfolio of reefs that are most likely to survive climate change”, the new work mapped more than 165,000km2 of coral reefs across 70 countries. These were found to have the best chances of persisting in the face of climate change and a warming, acidifying ocean.
Dr Emily Darling, director of coral-reef conservation at the Wildlife Conservation Society and a co-author of the study, told Carbon Brief that “one of the key things countries can do that have these important reefs is elevate them into national policy” across multiple government sectors.
She added that learning from these reefs will become vital over the coming months as El Niño warms the world’s oceans even further.
Darling told Carbon Brief:
“Climate change is not a single blanket on the world’s oceans. There are a lot of pockets of resilience, there are pockets of revolution for corals, and it’s all about finding those places, and how do we support them through the other local pressures that they experience that we know we can manage.”
Although few monetary coral-related commitments were made at the summit, Norway pledged to allocate NOK 20m ($2m) to the Global Fund for Coral Reefs.
Fisheries
One of the major achievements of the summit was the adoption of the Mombasa Declaration to advance fisheries transparency and combat illegal fishing.
The declaration “recognise[s]” that illegal, unreported and unregulated (IUU) fishing is a major factor driving the unsustainable use of ocean resources and the degradation of marine ecosystems.

The declaration, which was signed by 16 national governments – eight of them from Africa – commits parties to follow a set of principles laid out in the Global Charter for Fisheries Transparency. This was developed and promoted by a group of civil society organisations known as the Coalition for Fisheries Transparency.
The commitments in the Mombasa Declaration fall within four broad categories:
- Supporting transparency and accountability in the fishing industry.
- Strengthening monitoring of fishing activities and cooperating with enforcement actions.
- Building capacity and supporting implementation of transparency reforms.
- Strengthening ocean-observing systems and promoting the use of open-access data.
The declaration notes that these principles should “apply to and benefit both small-scale and industrial fisheries” and support “broader ocean-management efforts”.
At a press conference announcing the launch of the declaration, Ghanaian fisheries and aquaculture minister Emelia Arthur called it a “global testament of our collective commitment to transparent fisheries”. She emphasised the importance of the sector to all aspects of life, saying:
“Fisheries is nutrition. Fisheries is food security. Fisheries is livelihoods. Fisheries is national security.”

Several civil society organisations, philanthropies, community groups and governments also made separate fisheries-related commitments at the summit.
The EU committed €46m ($52m) through its Horizon Europe research programme to fisheries work, including €32m ($36m) for “adaptive co-management strategies” and €14m ($16m) for research on conservation and sustainable management of migratory fishes.
The EU and Italy both also announced contributions to the European Maritime, Fisheries and Aquaculture Fund.
The government of Kenya made nine fisheries-related pledges at the summit, including committing to train compliance officers dedicated to combatting IUU fishing, developing management plans for all of its commercial fisheries and establishing bycatch mitigation measures.
At the summit, the UN Food and Agriculture Organization launched its biannual “state of world fisheries and aquaculture” report.
According to the report, the world set a new record for fisheries and aquaculture in 2024 – producing a total of 235m tonnes of fish and algae. This total consisted of nearly 92m tonnes of fish from capture fisheries, 103m tonnes of farmed fish and 40m tonnes of algae production.

The amount of fish produced by capture fisheries has remained largely stable since 2000, while aquaculture production has increased by an average annual percentage rate of just under 5%, according to the report.
While the largest growth has occurred in Africa, Latin America and the Caribbean, the vast majority of aquaculture production – 89% – occurs in Asia.
The report also says that more than one-third of the world’s marine fish stocks are overfished, with significant variation based on region and species. It adds that climate change may play an increasing role in driving the unsustainability of fisheries in the future:
“Despite the uncertainty of climate risks in the short, medium and long term, studies on the impacts of climate change on aquatic food systems around the world increasingly document the relevance and potential success of adaptation measures, urging decision-makers to integrate climate change considerations into fisheries and aquaculture planning and management.”
The post Mombasa: Key outcomes from the Our Ocean Conference in Kenya appeared first on Carbon Brief.
Mombasa: Key outcomes from the Our Ocean Conference in Kenya
Climate Change
Did Colombia’s energy transition just come to a halt?
Christopher Wright is the principal analyst at CarbonBridge, a decarbonisation consulting firm.
Less than two months ago, Colombia hosted the world’s first international conference on Transitioning Away from Fossil Fuels. This weekend, however, it appears that Colombia’s first ever leftist presidency has ended. Far-right candidate Abelardo de la Espriella, who was last week strongly endorsed by Donald Trump, will not only take the reins of government but also steer the future of Colombia’s energy transition.
As the world’s sixth-largest coal exporter, and fourth largest oil exporter in Latin America, Colombia plays a critical role in the world’s energy markets. However, this role had shrunk under President Gustavo Petro’s administration, as it sought to proactively shift the country away from its fossil-fuel based economy, ahead of a potential oil and gas production shortage over the next decade.
That could all change as De la Espriella’s takes power. Calling himself the Tiger (“El Tigre”), he has promised to focus on deregulation, exploit oil extraction “to the maximum” and leverage the energy sector as a key “engine of growth”.
Colombia’s world-leading energy transition
Over the last four years, Colombia has embarked on one of the most rapid and holistic energy transitions anywhere in the world. Shortly after coming to power in 2022, the government of Gustavo Petro halted new oil and gas exploration contracts, suspended all hydraulic fracking pilots, and pledged to end the development of new unabated coal power plants.
While many of these moves faced domestic and legislative challenges, they were widely praised in climate circles around the world.
Colombia soon became a pivotal member of the Powering Past Coal Alliance, the Beyond Oil and Gas Alliance and the Fossil Fuel Non-Proliferation Alliance. It then went on to host the biodiversity COP in 2024, launch a $40-billion climate transition investment portfolio, and famously, host the Santa Marta conference earlier this year.


While fossil fuels still comprise around 7% of Colombia’s GDP and 56% of its total exports, there were already signs that the transition policies had begun to have an effect.
Coal production last year fell to its lowest level in the last 22 years. According to the Colombian national association of coal producers, coal export volumes declined by 23% in 2025. While the oil sector has not seen an equivalent precipitous drop, production levels have remained historically low since COVID.
What about its domestic electricity sector?
Since the 1970s Colombia’s electricity sector has been dominated by large hydro-electric dams, endowing it with some of the lowest carbon electrons anywhere in the world. Today, close to 70% of its electricity supply comes from these large dams.
However, electricity demand rose by close to 10% under the Petro government. To meet this demand, total installed electricity capacity has expanded by a similar figure, and solar power has made up over 70% of new electricity capacity since.


As a result, by the end of 2025, gas power generation in the electricity sector had hit its lowest point since 2018. Wind power had doubled, and solar power generation had risen by over 630%. Colombia’s renewable energy association predicts that, by the end of 2026, the country may be home to more than 4.2 GW of installed variable renewable energy capacity.
Far-right jumps on energy challenges
Despite the progress, the last three years have been an incredibly challenging period for Colombia’s energy sector.
During Petro’s first two years in office, inflation remained above 10%, and interest rates stayed above 13% for most of 2023. This put a pause on new energy investments, as foreign direct investment fell by a third since 2022.
On top of this, Colombia suffered through an El Niño-fuelled drought in 2023-24, crippling its hydro-electric power supply. This forced the country to turn to expensive gas and coal power, just as both sectors had effectively begun to pull back. This sent electricity prices through the roof, increasing nearly 40% in a single year, and led the Petro government to intervene with price controls, aiming to protect everyday Colombians.
Unsurprisingly, this made energy investors even more cautious. By the end of 2023, GDP growth had plummeted and renewable energy investments fell by 70%. Since then, all the major credit agencies have downgraded the country’s credit rating, making it even shakier to invest.
As a result, even with the new solar coming online, and 1.2 GW of additional hydro-power from the Ituango dam expected by 2028, the country could still face a major energy deficit by 2027, with permitting delays halting project developments, and 5.1 GW of approved projects unable to reach financial close.
Challenging domestic debate
This has led to a challenging domestic debate on energy policy. While 96% of Colombians want to see solar expand further, they have been understandably frustrated by high electricity bills and limited economic growth.
As a result, De la Espriella’s campaign, which has largely focused on taking a hardline stance to combat growing concerns around security and crime, was relatively open to solar power, but sought to blame Colombia’s current energy crisis on the speed of its current energy transition.
Branding himself as neither a climate denialist nor “dogmatic environmentalist” the incoming president who will take office in August, will likely seek to revoke the ban on new hydrocarbon exploration contracts, legalise fracking and restructure the national oil company, Ecopetrol.
While he is unlikely to cancel market-driven projects and may reduce regulatory hold-ups, it is also likely that he will shift away from the government’s recent overwhelming support for long-renewable energy and battery storage projects, which have driven much of the recent uptake in solar power.
Future of energy transition in doubt
In a country of close to 54 million people, the final election count was only decided by about 250,000 votes. However, this weekend’s margin belies the magnitude of the shift that will likely now take place.
With the country facing a potential domestic energy shortage 2027, President-elect De la Espriella has promised to revitalise the hydrocarbon economy, shifting Colombia’s recent energy transition on an entirely new course.
While this may unlock some regulatory challenges hindering renewables roll-out, broader support mechanisms for solar projects will likely be dismantled, and the broader economic transition abandoned, along with its recent flurry of international climate alliances.
He will also take his place among a wave of right-leaning Presidents that have swept to power across the continent in the last 18 months. This has seen right-wing electoral victories across Ecuador, Bolivia, Chile, Costa Rica, Argentina and now Colombia, with Peru’s Keiko Fujimori potentially joining the club soon – pending a final vote count.
With the Brazilian elections scheduled for October, and run-off scenarios between Lula and Flávio Bolsonaro still far too close to call, 2026 will undoubtedly be a pivotal year for Latin America’s energy future.
The post Did Colombia’s energy transition just come to a halt? appeared first on Climate Home News.
-
Greenhouse Gases11 months ago
Guest post: Why China is still building new coal – and when it might stop
-
Climate Change11 months ago
Guest post: Why China is still building new coal – and when it might stop
-
Greenhouse Gases2 years ago嘉宾来稿:满足中国增长的用电需求 光伏加储能“比新建煤电更实惠”
-
Climate Change2 years ago嘉宾来稿:满足中国增长的用电需求 光伏加储能“比新建煤电更实惠”
-
Renewable Energy8 months agoSending Progressive Philanthropist George Soros to Prison?
-
Climate Change2 years ago
Bill Discounting Climate Change in Florida’s Energy Policy Awaits DeSantis’ Approval
-
Carbon Footprint2 years agoUS SEC’s Climate Disclosure Rules Spur Renewed Interest in Carbon Credits
-
Greenhouse Gases11 months ago
嘉宾来稿:探究火山喷发如何影响气候预测

















