After a record-breaking year of devastating effects of climate change, from record wildfires in Greece and Canada to floods in Libya, the United Nations COP28 conference comes at a decisive moment for international climate action to put us on a safer path.
Temperature records are being beaten and climate effects are felt worldwide. As climate scientist Zeke Hausfather described global temperature data for September, it’s “absolutely gobsmackingly bananas”.
As seen in Hausfather’s chart, last month’s temperature beat the prior monthly record by over 0.5°C, and was around 1.8°C warmer than pre-industrial levels.
So, what is the world doing about it? How do national governments tackle the climate crisis? The UN COP28 summit will show humanity’s progress in meeting the climate goals first set at the landmark Paris Agreement. Representatives from around 200 countries will come together to talk about it and agree on crucial climate actions.
In case you’ve never heard of COP28 or you most likely have if you’re following the climate change conversation but need a fresher, this comprehensive article will tell you the things you need to know about this defining climate summit.
First, let’s talk about the COP.
What is COP?
The Conference of the Parties to the Convention or COP is the product of the Rio Summit and the launch of the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC).
Every year since the creation of the COP, member countries meet to agree how to deal with climate change. Tens of thousands of delegates from around the world gather together at the climate conference. Head of states, government officials, and representatives from international organizations, private sector, civil society, nonprofits, and the media are attending.
The COP’s 21st session led to the birth of the Paris Agreement, a global consensus to collectively achieve three important goals:
- Limit global temperature rise to 1.5°C above pre-industrial levels by 2100,
- Act upon climate change, adapt to its impact, and develop resilience, and
- Align financing with a “pathway towards low greenhouse gas emissions and climate-resilient development”.
Here’s the COP in a timeline, alongside global carbon emissions record.
This year’s UN climate convention is the 28th session of the parties or simply COP28.
How Important is COP28?
So what makes this COP session significant and different from the previous climate talks? The Global Stocktake.
The GST is the first ever report card on the world’s climate progress. It shows exactly how far we are in achieving the Paris Agreement goals set in 2015. Are we on or off track?
Though the details won’t be in until COP28 takes place in November 30 – December 12 in Dubai, United Arab Emirates (UAE), there’s a hunch that we need rapid climate actions and have to act now. COP28 is our chance to do that.
Plus the fact that UAE is a major oil producing country makes COP28 quite different and controversial. Many are raising concerns that the agenda doesn’t match well with the host country’s plan to increase oil production.
Some environmental groups noted that it could result in weak results leading to a point where curbing fossil fuels has to be ratcheted up rapidly to make the 1.5°C achievable. Their point is valid. About 100+ years ago, there was far less carbon released into the atmosphere than there is today.
The designation of Sultan al-Jaber as COP28 president-designate incited a furious backlash from climate activists and civil society groups. They warned that there could be a conflict of interest and that protesters would be restricted.
Dr. Sultan al-Jaber is a managing director and CEO of the Abu Dhabi National Oil Company (ADNOC). As appointed president, he would lead the talks, consult with stakeholders, provide leadership roles, and broker any agreements produced.
Given his position within the fossil fuel industry, it raised concerns about impartiality in the climate talks.
But putting aside these controversies, it’s more important to know what would be the specific talking points for this year’s climate summit.
What Are the Focus Issues to Watch at COP28?
Similar to previous sessions, the host nation sets the tone and direction of discussion for the conference. For this year’s COP28, here are the major areas to be deliberated.
Money Matters
As the case with the rest of the COPs, climate finance is one of the key issues. More so, if the money involved is worth $100 billion annually which was pledged by developed nations to developing countries.
Climate finance is critical because developing nations need resources, financial and technological, to enable them to adapt to climate change.
It was back in 2009 when rich countries promised to provide $100 billion from 2020 onwards to help poor nations in dealing with the impacts of climate change. However, until now that pledge has never been met, stirring frustrations for many developing countries.
The potential consequences of failing to meet the promised target in a timely manner could extend to the broader negotiations. It heavily affects the trustworthiness of governments to fulfill their commitments.
At COP28, governments will persist in their discussions on a fresh climate finance objective, aiming to supplant the existing $100 billion commitment. Though the deadline for reaching an agreement is 2024, substantial progress in Dubai remains pivotal to establishing a foundation for next year’s COP.
Moreover, financial matters will prominently feature in talks on the Green Climate Fund and on loss and damage.
Ultimately, deliberations and pledges related to the amplification and execution of climate finance may impact various other areas of negotiation. It may also help propel more climate actions or impede progress.
Where’s the ‘Loss and Damage’ Fund?
The concept of ‘loss and damage’ compensation isn’t new; it has been around for some time. It’s an arrangement wherein rich nations should pay the poorer ones that have suffered the brunt of climate change.
It differs from the funds to help poor nations adapt to the effects of climate change. While it gives hope for low-income countries heavily impacted by the climate-related disasters, it left several unanswered questions.
Unsurprisingly, one big question is:
- Who’s going to pay into the fund and who deserves to get it?
This issue has been unresolved for some time and was also discussed in COP27 at Egypt last year. Different organizations have different suggestions as to how much the fund needed to pay for the loss and damage.
- For one study, the funding can be as high as $580 billion each year by 2030, going up to $1.7 trillion by 2050.
Matter experts noted that the fund has been the “underlying climate finance discussions for a long time”. But after years of stalemate, the question hasn’t been resolved still.
Governments decided and agreed to form a ‘transitional committee’ at COP27. At COP28, they expect to come up with the recommendations on how to operationalize the fund.
Putting Food on the Table
Leading up to COP28, there’s been growing attention on food systems and agriculture in global discussions.
The current food systems are failing us; over 800 million people face hunger right now. Climate-related droughts and floods are destroying farmers’ crops and livelihoods. At COP28, world leaders must devise a plan that changes the ways the world produces and consumes food.
The COP28 presidency and the UN Food Systems Coordination Hub launched the COP28 Food Systems and Agriculture Agenda in July. It urges nations to align their national food systems and agricultural policies with their climate plans.
The agenda emphasizes the inclusion of targets for food system decarbonization in national biodiversity strategies and action plans.
Like the other issues above, food systems were also part of the COP27 summit. But there was also still some resistance to fully adopting a holistic approach to them.
Sultan al-Jaber is encouraging both private and public sectors to contribute funds and technology to transform food systems and agriculture. He also emphasized that food systems contribute to a significant portion of human-generated emissions. In line with this, the UAE and the US team up to promote their Agriculture Innovation Mission for Climate (AIM4C).
The increased focus on food at COP28 has been well-received. The GST synthesis report even stresses the need to address interconnected challenges, including demand-side measures, land use changes, and deforestation.
It’s important that actions to change food systems work together with efforts to speed up the transition to cleaner energy. Transformations in both sectors are crucial to meeting climate goals.
Moving Cities At the Front
For many years, UN climate summits have historically concentrated solely on national-level climate action, overlooking a crucial aspect.
Urban centers, responsible for around 70% of global CO2 emissions, face heightened vulnerability to climate change impacts, too. To restrict warming to 1.5C, all cities must achieve net zero emissions by 2050.
Research indicates that existing technologies and policies can cut urban emissions by 90% by 2050. But cities alone can realize only 28% of this potential.
Full decarbonization requires robust partnerships between local and national governments, along with engagement in international climate initiatives.
At COP28, it’s crucial for national, regional, and local governments to intensify partnerships, accelerating progress toward climate goals.
Moreover, national governments should also integrate urban areas more effectively into their climate plans. This includes reinforcing city-centric targets in their NDCs and National Adaptation Plans, expanding public transit, enhancing building energy efficiency, and ensuring that subnational actors have easy access to climate finance.
COP28: The Deciding Moment for Climate Action
Leaders at the national, corporate, and municipal levels must not only showcase progress in fulfilling previous commitments but also unveil new, ambitious plans. These plans are vital to curbing the worsening impacts of climate change, safeguarding both people and the environment.
The Global Stocktake was established to reach the objectives of the Paris Agreement. It also particularly highlighted the need to phase out unabated fossil fuels, which are the major culprit in releasing carbon. It will face its inaugural evaluation at COP28, presenting a crucial assessment of decision-makers’ commitment to its goal.
The report card of the world’s collective climate action was out. And the data isn’t good. COP28 is our best chance to make a critical course correction. It isn’t just a conference; it’s a decisive moment for leaders to demonstrate commitment to curbing harmful emissions.
The post What Is COP28? Key Issues to Watch Out at 2023 Climate Summit appeared first on Carbon Credits.
Nature-based carbon investments deserve consideration when they address a specific business dependency and produce outcomes you can measure. Imagine Moonbucks, a global coffee roaster planning next season’s espresso blend. It is considering natural Grade 4 coffee from Jimma, in southwestern Oromia, Ethiopia. Its sourcing decisions affect the roasting schedule and the cash tied up in coffee purchases. Moonbucks needs to understand which measures could protect that supply, what they would cost and how it would judge the results.
1. Define the sourcing problem before choosing a project
Moonbucks needs a dependable component for its espresso blend. Its procurement team wants continuity of volume and an agreed cup profile. Replacing a shipment at short notice could require new sample approval and changes to the blend, and given the schedules for cultivation, processing, and freight delivery, is practically impossible. Moonbucks needs to get this right, and its initial concern is inconsistent deliveries. It commissions an assessment of the supplying farms and post-harvest chain. The questions cover land condition, harvest availability and whether drying or storage problems are affecting saleable lots.
This distinction changes the investment brief. A tree-planting proposal cannot be assumed to fix drying problems. Better storage cannot restore eroded land. The team must establish which problem exists before selecting the response.
CCC’s guide to finding nature-based solutions in your supply chain explains where to look. Here, the next task is to turn a broad concern into a testable proposal.
2. Develop nature-based carbon investments around the actual supply chain
The assessment would trace Moonbucks’ purchases back through the exporter and supplying producer groups. Which farms supply the contracted lots? Who controls land-management decisions? How long does the buyer expect to maintain the purchasing relationship?
Furthermore, Jimma natural Grade 4 cannot be treated as interchangeable with every Ethiopian coffee. Moonbucks would need to test any substitute against its own blend and quality requirements.
Suppose Moonbucks’ assessment identifies an opportunity to maintain shade trees and restore vegetation along exposed streambanks. The IPCC describes agroforestry as a way to store carbon in vegetation and soil, with potential benefits for erosion control and water quality.1 Moonbucks would need local advice on species, growing conditions and maintenance before deciding how these measures fit its sourcing plan.
The proposal now has a defined sourcing connection and a candidate intervention. The next steps are to test its effect on production, assess carbon eligibility and build the financial case.
3. Compare the proposal with other ways to protect supply
WBCSD’s Nature-based Solutions Blueprint recommends comparing nature-based options with other responses across their benefits and costs.2 For Moonbucks, that means evaluating the landscape proposal alongside drying improvements, storage controls and alternative sourcing arrangements.
The product’s natural-process designation matters. Moonbucks should examine the drying and dry-milling chain alongside land conditions. Its team would check storage practices, contamination risks and incoming-lot quality to see whether problems arise before or after the coffee leaves the farms.
The revised proposal might combine land stewardship with separate post-harvest controls. Each component needs its own purpose and budget. A sustainability label should not obscure which activity is expected to solve which problem.
The project develops as the evidence improves. Its scope should follow the diagnosis rather than preserve the first idea unchanged.
4. Establish what the carbon outcome could count toward
Moonbucks’ sustainability team now tests the proposed carbon case separately from the sourcing case. Is the objective a measurable change in Moonbucks’ value-chain emissions, verified credits for separate voluntary use, or distinct outcomes under carefully defined arrangements?
Scope 3 covers value-chain emissions. A purchasing relationship alone does not prove that a farm intervention can be included in Moonbucks’ inventory. The team needs an applicable accounting method, defensible boundaries and evidence supporting attribution.
SBTi’s FLAG Guidance (forest, land and agriculture), version 1.2, says purchased credits used as offsets cannot meet near-term FLAG or energy and industry targets. Eligible land-based removals are subject to accounting requirements.3 Moonbucks needs to test its proposal against those rules before including an outcome in its targets.
For Moonbucks’ Jimma proposal, maintaining existing trees and establishing new vegetation could involve different carbon questions. Specialists must examine the baseline and additionality, meaning what changes because the project proceeds. They must also assess measurement and the risk that stored carbon is lost. CCC’s MRV and additionality article introduces those tests.
Until that work is complete, Moonbucks should not budget an assumed Scope 3 reduction or credit-sale receipt. Direct emissions reductions remain the priority.
5. Build a financial case that survives weaker assumptions
Moonbucks’ finance team would now build a multi-year budget. UNEP’s State of Finance for Nature 2023 compares current finance with the investment needed to meet climate, biodiversity and land-restoration goals.4 The company would cost its proposed activities, farmer participation and ongoing monitoring. Verification, where required, is a separate expense. Maintenance and responsibility for replacing failed plantings must remain visible after the initial establishment budget ends.
Operational benefits need equally careful treatment. If fewer rejected lots reduce emergency purchasing, count that saving once. Do not add “supply resilience” as another financial benefit when it represents the same avoided cost.
Moonbucks should compare a base case with slower benefits, higher implementation costs and no carbon revenue. It should also distinguish production outcomes from quality and shipment outcomes. A single good harvest would not prove that the landscape intervention caused better delivery performance.
A project can remain worth funding even when its carbon case needs more work. That decision must rest on the operational evidence and the company’s objectives, without unsupported environmental claims.
6. Fund a pilot with a clear expansion decision
Moonbucks’ first approval would fund a bounded pilot, rather than commit the entire sourcing program. Before spending, Moonbucks would agree on participating farms, responsibilities and the evidence needed at review.
Its scorecard could track farmer participation, implementation costs and plant survival, alongside accepted coffee volumes and lot-quality results. Carbon measurements would follow the selected method. Farm-level traceability must connect the intervention to the actual sourcing relationship.
Suppose Moonbucks’ review later finds that storage changes explain most quality improvements, while the land measures need longer observation. Those findings would shape the next decision: expand the proven component, adjust the landscape work or pause further spending. They would not justify crediting all improvements to tree planting.
This gives nature-based carbon investments a practical place in a multi-year strategy. Funding increases as the evidence supports it, and the project can change direction before a larger commitment.
Discuss a sourcing opportunity with CCC
Carbon Credit Capital’s nature-based supply-chain investment service uses its Dual-Value Model to examine supply-chain economics alongside potential sustainability outcomes.
Schedule a consultation to discuss your sourcing exposure and the questions to resolve before allocating capital.
Sources
- Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC), Climate Change 2022: Mitigation of Climate Change, Chapter 7, Agriculture, Forestry and Other Land Uses, section 7.4.3.3 (Agroforestry).
- World Business Council for Sustainable Development (WBCSD), Nature-based Solutions Blueprint, 5 June 2024.
- Science Based Targets initiative (SBTi), Forest, Land and Agriculture Science-Based Target-Setting Guidance, version 1.2, March 2026, section 3.1.4, pp. 37–38.
- United Nations Environment Programme (UNEP), State of Finance for Nature 2023, 2023.
A plastic credit funds the collection of plastic waste in places where no formal system exists to collect it. Each credit represents a measured, independently audited quantity of plastic taken out of the environment or returned to use, tracked on a public registry.
EU carbon credit claims changed on 27 September 2026, the day the Directive (EU) 2024/825 began to apply across the European Union. The change is narrow. It changes how a company can talk about the credits it buys. A product can no longer be called neutral on the strength of compensation alone; however, every specific, evidenced statement about what a company measured, reduced, and funded stays fully available.
