Connect with us

Published

on

Professor Elisa Morgera is the UN Special Rapporteur on Climate Change and Human Rights.

In the global fight against catastrophic, human-induced climate change, diplomacy plays a vital role.

Historic initiatives like the Paris Agreement and the Fund for Responding to Loss and Damage were the consequence of tireless, coordinated international efforts of states, civil society and scientists. The role of COP, and other summits like it, remains key. However, they are coming under increasing pressure.

Last year the climate COP30 was unable to take a decision on fossil fuels, despite calls from over 80 states, as well as children and youth, medical professionals, Indigenous peoples and climate justice movements. A landmark deal to cut global shipping emissions was put on ice and global talks to develop a much-needed treaty to end plastic pollution were stalled by a few states who wish to avoid even mentioning fossil fuels in international negotiations.

    In these instances, the process of building consensus was hijacked by actors whose priorities lie in the continued exploration and production of fossil fuels, magnifying the views of a handful of powerful states at the expense of all others.

    In recent months, illegal aggressions in Venezuela and Iran, armed conflicts, political turbulence and economic instability have conspired to make international cooperation harder. At the same time, the impact our reliance on fossil fuels and petrochemical fertilisers has on the cost of living, energy and food insecurity has been laid bare.

    Against this backdrop, a new idea was born at COP30: the First Conference on Transitioning Away from Fossil Fuels, which the Colombian government is co-hosting with the Netherlands in Santa Marta this week.

    Inclusion and implementation

    It represents the possibility of a new kind of multilateral forum: one that foregrounds the voices of those most impacted by the climate crisis and is relentlessly focused on implementation. It is only open to states that wish to make progress and discuss how – not if – to move away from fossil fuel dependency. And it is set to draw on the insights of Indigenous peoples, Afro-descendants and peasants, civil society, cities and academics, women and youth, who are often left out of international negotiating rooms.

    The talks centre on how to ensure that the transition away from fossil fuels is also a just one: a transition that protects workers, communities and the environment, respects human rights and builds public legitimacy, rather than imposing new costs on those least responsible for the crisis.

    To phase out fossil fuels, developing countries need exit route from “debt trap”

    The conference is also unpacking how international cooperation must work for countries and communities facing fiscal dependence, debt burdens and limited implementation capacity. It aims to identify the financial and technological support required from the Global North to allow other countries to leapfrog into sustainable renewables-based economies.

    In addition, it will seek to address the harmful international legal barriers – such as the thousands of international investment agreements which include investor–state dispute settlement (ISDS) provisions – that allow foreign corporations to sue states for measures adopted in the public interest.

    Solutions that tackle injustice

    These are complex, but necessary conversations to be had for all governments. Most international fora are being used to “avoid the conversation”. We have many of the solutions, but we need to ensure they’re implemented in ways that benefit all countries and sectors of society, not just a few.

    Santa Marta aims to strengthen a “coalition” of ambitious states, who are responsive to the voices of those most affected by climate change. It also aims to mobilise scientists, lawyers, economists, policy and energy experts, and the medical community to support states, as well as cities and citizen initiatives to pilot promising approaches around the world. Through a deeply inclusive and participatory approach, at every level, Santa Marta can pave the way towards solutions that are co-developed and respond directly to what’s needed on the ground.

    New panel of climate scientists calls for fossil fuel transition roadmaps

    This will be key for achieving a just transition. Many countries, especially in the Global South, are not held back by a lack of ambition, but by structural barriers: debt, high borrowing costs and international rules that still reward continued fossil fuel extraction over managed decline at the expense of people’s health and economic well-being.

    Santa Marta comes at a critical moment: environmentally, morally, economically but also legally.

    Legal accountability on fossil fuels

    The landmark advisory opinion on climate change, issued last July by the International Court of Justice, made clear that states have a legal obligation to act effectively and ambitiously on climate change, and that fossil fuel expansion, production, consumption and subsidies are not in line with these international obligations. It followed similar rulings, by the International Tribunal for the Law of the Sea in 2024 and the Inter-American Court of Human Rights, also in 2025.

    The transition away from fossil fuels is not simply an environmental necessity, but an urgent matter of security, resilience and health. It is a human rights imperative. And an inherently exclusionary approach focused on major powers will not deliver all the benefits of a fossil fuel-free global economy.

    Vanuatu pursues new UN resolution to turn ICJ climate opinion into action

    The Santa Marta conference is set to address this and look at how fossil-fuel-dependent countries can diversify on fair terms, how communities can access and produce affordable and reliable renewable energy, and how the transition can deliver visible social and economic gains instead of reproducing new forms of exclusion, dependency, and insecurity.

    At Santa Marta we can make meaningful, lasting progress through a diplomacy of implementation, inclusion and legal accountability that can provide a new yardstick for all the other multilateral processes on climate change and other fossil fuel-related issues, such as plastics, food, health, taxation and the protection of peace.

    A full statement by the UN Special Rapporteur on the Santa Marta Conference can be found here.

    The post Santa Marta marks a new chapter in climate diplomacy appeared first on Climate Home News.

    https://www.climatechangenews.com/2026/04/28/santa-marta-marks-a-new-chapter-in-climate-diplomacy/

    Continue Reading

    Climate Change

    Latin America Faces ‘Hydrological Whiplash’ as Climate Risks Mount

    Published

    on

    A new World Meteorological Organization report estimated 13,000 annual heat-related deaths across 17 countries in the region.

    If the 2025 climate year in Latin America and the Caribbean showed anything, it was that floodwaters can’t erase long-term drought, that temperatures will continue to soar past livable limits and that once-unprecedented storms are part of the region’s new climate reality.

    Latin America Faces ‘Hydrological Whiplash’ as Climate Risks Mount

    Continue Reading

    Climate Change

    Health risks from climate change spur stronger public support for action, research finds

    Published

    on

    Informing people about the health risks linked to climate change is twice as likely to spur public support for government-led climate action than messages focused on economic or environmental impacts, an international study has found.

    Based on a survey of around 30,000 respondents in Brazil, India, Japan and South Africa carried out in late 2025, the report published this month by the Climate Opinion Research Exchange (CORE) and the Wellcome Trust reveals strong public support for climate action.

    Over 80% of respondents said they are concerned about the impacts from climate change, the survey shows. A majority also back government measures to prevent public health impacts associated with the climate crisis.

    “Humanitarian emergencies” are already increasing around the world due to human-caused rising temperatures, according to the World Health Organization (WHO). More than a third of the global population is exposed to climate threats like wildfires, extreme heatwaves, and tropical storms and floods, it says. These threats are amplified by human-caused greenhouse gas emissions.

    Dustin Gilbreath, a researcher at CORE and one of the study’s lead authors, said that communicating these risks to the general public can be an effective way to inspire climate action, given that health is a basic concern for everyone across the political spectrum.

    “If you suddenly find out that climate change is hurting your health and your children’s health, more people are rightfully more open to that argument,” he said. “At the end of the day, we all care about our health, regardless of our political inclinations.”

    At COP28 in Dubai, more than 150 countries issued a declaration “expressing grave concern” over climate-fuelled health impacts, and pledged to strengthen policies that can cut carbon emissions and benefit people’s health in the process – for example by reducing air pollution from cars or factories.

    More than 80 nations also endorsed a plan to improve the health sector’s resilience to climate impacts at the COP30 summit in Belém last year. The initiative received $300 million in philanthropic backing to help governments identify health risks, improve monitoring of climate threats, and strengthen emergency responses to extreme weather events, among other measures.

    Despite these pledges, health has not been at the top of the agenda at key meetings like the recent conference on Transitioning Away from Fossil Fuels in Santa Marta, Colombia. The Global Climate and Health Alliance, which represents 250 health organisations, said leaders in Santa Marta “did not address the importance of protecting people’s health”.

      Health priorities vary by country

      To gain insights into people’s attitudes towards climate change, researchers tested 16 different messages with respondents in a survey-based randomised trial, comparing their reactions to messages on health-related issues like extreme heat or infectious diseases, and non-health issues related to jobs, the cost of living or nature. They also compared the participants’ reactions to a control group in each country who were not shown any messages.

      While a majority were concerned about the health impacts from climate change, the types of effects that caused the strongest reaction varied depending on the country.

      In South Africa, for example, public opinion resonated very strongly with messages related to children’s health. Messages linked to food and water insecurity also chimed well with South Africans, who recognised widely that climate change is a threat to people’s health.

      The study’s authors say that context is key to understanding the effectiveness of messaging. South Africa, for example, has a young population with a median age of 28 years – compared to Europe’s 45 years – and has faced severe water shortages in cities like Cape Town, which was close to a “Day Zero” event after a major drought between 2016 and 2018. This term refers to the threat of municipal services running out of water.

      Brazilians, on the other hand, reacted strongly to messages related to mental health impacts, which performed better than other messages by a wide margin. These types of impacts include, for example, severe anxiety or stress caused by losses after a flood or hurricane. In total, 93% of Brazilians said they are somewhat, or very concerned about, climate change.

      Neha Dewan, senior advisor at the Wellcome Trust, a health-focused charitable foundation, said this finding was “counter-intuitive”, given that mental health is often seen as less of a priority. “This really helps us see what’s unexpected and find newer ways of reaching different audiences,” she added.

      In Japan, extreme heat was the top-performing message, while in India it was air pollution and access to healthcare. Dewan said the India results confirm what people already discuss informally. “Every time I’m back home seeing family in India, everybody talks about air pollution. It’s the living, breathing reality.”

      Webinar: From Santa Marta to Bonn – where next for the fossil fuel transition?

      Commission urges government action

      Dewan said she hoped the findings “go beyond journals” and instead can “actually end up in society”, with the goal of helping “empower policy conversations”. Respondents across countries firmly supported government action to prevent or protect them from the health impacts of a warming climate.

      In Brazil and South Africa, emissions-cutting measures such as building solar capacity to produce clean energy had more than 90% support, while in India and Japan respondents strongly backed adaptation measures like investments in allowing air-conditioned public buildings to be used during heatwaves.

      Ahead of the May 18-22 World Health Assembly, the WHO’s highest decision-making body, experts highlighted the urgency of implementing such steps. The Pan-European Commission on Climate and Health, composed of former global leaders and chaired by former Icelandic Prime Minister Katrín Jakobsdóttir, called on governments “to take forward climate action that delivers benefits for human health”.

      The commission issued a 17-point plan to address health impacts from the climate crisis, which includes declaring climate change a “global health emergency” and bringing it to the agenda of national security councils, as well as scaling up “climate-health investment”.

      “The climate crisis is a threat to our safety and security, social cohesion, human rights and health,” Jakobsdóttir said in a statement. “Climate action is not merely a necessity. It is a high-return investment for a more just and resilient society.”

      The Wellcome Trust’s Dewan said the survey provides data-backed insights showing policymakers that the public supports stronger action on climate change. “It’s beyond anecdotal now. Here’s the evidence telling us that constituents really care about these issues,” she said.

      Fresh approach to climate dialogue

      The findings of the study suggest that a focus on health could become an effective way for policymakers and activists to draw in new audiences and inspire action on climate change, the authors of the report said.

      “The cost-of-living message or the jobs and economy messages have been used over and over again. People have been saying this for a good decade. Probably the people that are convinced by this already would’ve said they’re concerned about climate change,” said Gilbreath of CORE.

      He added that the health angle is probably a newer approach for some audiences, but the hypothesis based on the survey findings would need to be tested with further research. He also noted that economic messages still serve a purpose in some contexts and should not be abandoned.

      Dewan said health messaging could become a “missing piece” in climate communications. “Health is personal, proximal, relevant and – politically speaking – it’s depolarising,” she said.

      “It gives us an inroad to talk about climate differently in a way that feels very relevant,” she explained. “It’s about figuring out what’s the next insight to unpack and make these communications and engagements even stronger and relevant.”

      The post Health risks from climate change spur stronger public support for action, research finds appeared first on Climate Home News.

      Health risks from climate change spur stronger public support for action, research finds

      Continue Reading

      Climate Change

      Factcheck: US and Iran are world’s only major emitters without net-zero targets

      Published

      on

      Many right-leaning figures have tried to push the idea that the UK is an outlier on net-zero.

      Conservative leader Kemi Badenoch has claimed that other countries are “not following us” in aiming to cut emissions to net-zero, while GB News owner Paul Marshall said in March that the UK is “pursuing a path of unilateral economic disarmament”.

      Both are among those on the right of UK politics who have falsely claimed that the UK’s net-zero target is “unilateral” and that this is a reason why the goal should be abandoned.

      However, these claims ignore that 140 of the world’s 198 countries (71%) have net-zero targets. 

      In fact, Iran and the US are the only two of the world’s top 20 carbon dioxide (CO2) emitters that lack a net-zero target, as shown in the map below.

      If the UK were to scrap its net-zero target, as called for by both the opposition Conservatives and hard-right Reform UK, this is the group of major emitters it would be joining.

      Countries with net-zero targets, as of May 2026.
      Countries with net-zero targets, as of May 2026. Data source: Net Zero Tracker

      The latest assessment report from the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC), the world’s foremost authority on climate science, said the only way to stop global warming was to reach net-zero CO2 emissions.

      The UK was the first major economy to set a net-zero target in 2019.

      Since then, almost all of the world’s major emitters have followed suit, with China announcing a net-zero target in 2020 and India, Saudi Arabia and Russia launching goals in 2021.

      Around 74% of global emissions are now covered by some kind of national net-zero target, according to data from the Net Zero Tracker, a consortium tracking net-zero policies.

      According to the Net Zero Tracker, 34 nations – including the UK – have set a net-zero target into law, signifying the highest possible level of commitment.

      In addition, 63 nations have stated their goal in a policy document, 16 nations have made a net-zero “pledge” and 23 nations have a net-zero “proposal”. (Four nations have declared that they have already reached net-zero.)

      Types of net-zero targets across countries.
      Types of net-zero targets across countries. Data source: Net Zero Tracker

      The US, the world’s largest historical emitter when counting its cumulative climate impact since the start of the industrial revolution, had a net-zero target under former president Joe Biden. However, it was abandoned by the current Trump administration.

      Despite this, some 18 regions and 43 cities in the US still have some form of net-zero commitment, according to the Net Zero Tracker.

      John Lang, lead of the Net Zero Tracker, tells Carbon Brief:

      “Ironically, of the world’s 20 largest emitters, only the US and Iran lack net-zero targets – precisely as the Iran crisis exposes the risks of dependence on fossil fuels and volatile oil markets.

      “Arguing against net-zero is arguing for greater exposure to geopolitical instability and energy price shocks. The UK has already shown that cutting fossil-fuel dependence can go hand in hand with economic growth, reducing emissions by 54% since 1990 while almost doubling the size of the economy.”

      The post Factcheck: US and Iran are world’s only major emitters without net-zero targets appeared first on Carbon Brief.

      Factcheck: US and Iran are world’s only major emitters without net-zero targets

      Continue Reading

      Trending

      Copyright © 2022 BreakingClimateChange.com