COP30: Key outcomes for food, forests, land and nature at t…

Summary

<p>The COP30 climate summit – held in the city of Belém, on the edge of...</p> <p>The post <a href="https://www.carbonbrief.org/cop30-key-outcomes-for-food-forests-land-and-nature-at-the-un-climate-talks-in-belem/">COP30: Key outcomes for food, forests, land and nature at the UN climate talks in Belém</a> appeared first on <a href="https://www.carbonbrief.org">Carbon Brief</a>.</p>

<p>The COP30 climate summit – held in the city of Belém, on the edge of the Amazon rainforest – saw the Brazilian presidency launch a new forest fund and promise a “roadmap” to put an end to deforestation. </p>

<p>Almost every country in the world <a href="https://www.carbonbrief.org/cop30-key-outcomes-agreed-at-the-un-climate-talks-in-belem/">signed off</a> on a final COP30 package called the “<a href="https://unfccc.int/sites/default/files/resource/cma2025_L24_adv.pdf">global mutirão</a>” – meaning “collective efforts” – after two weeks of talks ran into <a href="https://bsky.app/profile/jjgoodman.bsky.social/post/3m6ejrdhcy22s">overtime</a> amid deepening divisions, compromises and even a <a href="https://news.sky.com/story/fire-disrupts-last-minute-efforts-to-strike-global-deal-at-cop30-13473401">fire</a> in the conference venue.</p>

<p>Countries also agreed on a <a href="https://www.carbonbrief.org/qa-cop30-could-finally-agree-how-to-track-the-global-goal-on-adaptation/">set of indicators</a> for countries to track their efforts on climate adaptation, including within the food and agriculture sectors.</p>

<p>Brazil’s much-anticipated <a href="https://www.carbonbrief.org/cop30-could-brazils-tropical-forest-forever-fund-help-tackle-climate-change/">tropical forest fund</a>, launched just before COP30 officially began, raised $6.6bn, more than half of which will come from <a href="https://www.regjeringen.no/en/whats-new/norwegian-government-to-provide-nok-30-billion-to-new-fund-to-preserve-tropical-forests/id3137591/">Norway</a> and <a href="https://www.dw.com/en/germany-pledges-1-billion-to-brazils-rainforest-protection-fund/a-74814439">Germany</a>.  </p>

<p>In the second week of the negotiations, dozens of countries backed plans to agree on roadmaps to guide the move away from <a href="https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1O-0kPk0clysJ2TNJ0Pj29Q9qNlfpt7sbwJPBdHgwHdE/edit?gid=0#gid=0">fossil fuels</a> and <a href="https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1w-oeROmlnP0m_zfwL5uZ6hMmLbkBp5hcJ76ZvhghzV0/edit?gid=0#gid=0">deforestation</a>.</p>

<p>Although these roadmaps did not make it into the final negotiated text, COP30 president André Corrêa do Lago said they will be developed outside the formal UN process. </p>

<p>The final mutirão text mentioned biodiversity loss, land rights and deforestation, but did not feature food – which disappointed some observers, including one expert who said food systems had been “erased” from COP30. </p>

<p>Meanwhile, the formal agriculture negotiations ended without a substantive outcome and talks are expected to continue next year. </p>

<p>Indigenous peoples featured strongly at COP30 and <a href="https://earth.org/why-cop30-needs-indigenous-voices/">attended</a> the summit in larger numbers than ever before. During the talks, <a href="https://forestclimateleaders.org/news-and-resources/cop30-intergovernmental-land-tenure-commitment/">$1.8bn</a> was pledged for land rights and Brazil <a href="https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/c1d0vekq12ro">announced</a> new Indigenous territories. </p>

<p>Below, Carbon Brief breaks down the main COP30 outcomes on food, forests, land and nature. </p>

<div class="wp-block-columns is-layout-flex wp-container-core-columns-is-layout-9d6595d7 wp-block-columns-is-layout-flex">
<div class="wp-block-column is-layout-flow wp-block-column-is-layout-flow">
<ul class="wp-block-list">
<li><a href="#1" rel="nofollow">‘Global mutirão’</a></li>

<li><a href="#2" rel="nofollow">Adaptation</a></li>

<li><a href="#3" rel="nofollow">Tropical Forest Forever Facility and other forest pledges</a>
<ul class="wp-block-list">
<li><a href="#4" rel="nofollow">Other forest funds</a></li>
</ul>
</li>

<li><a href="#5" rel="nofollow">Agriculture and food security</a></li>

<li><a href="#6" rel="nofollow">Article 6</a></li>

<li><a href="#7" rel="nofollow">Deforestation roadmap</a></li>
</ul>
</div>

<div class="wp-block-column is-layout-flow wp-block-column-is-layout-flow">
<ul class="wp-block-list">
<li><a href="#8" rel="nofollow">‘Unilateral trade measures’</a></li>

<li><a href="#9" rel="nofollow">Biofuels</a></li>

<li><a href="#10" rel="nofollow">Food systems and water</a></li>

<li><a href="#11" rel="nofollow">Climate and nature ‘synergies’</a></li>

<li><a href="#12" rel="nofollow">Indigenous representation</a></li>

<li><a href="#13" rel="nofollow">Methane</a></li>

<li><a href="#14" rel="nofollow">Agricultural greenwashing</a></li>
</ul>
</div>
</div>

<p>(See Carbon Brief’s coverage of key outcomes for food, forests, land and nature from <a href="https://www.carbonbrief.org/cop29-key-outcomes-for-food-forests-land-and-nature-at-the-un-climate-talks-in-baku/">COP29</a>, <a href="https://www.carbonbrief.org/cop28-key-outcomes-for-food-forests-land-and-nature-at-the-un-climate-talks-in-dubai/">COP28</a>, <a href="https://www.carbonbrief.org/cop27-key-outcomes-for-food-forests-land-and-nature-at-the-un-climate-talks-in-egypt/">COP27</a> and <a href="https://www.carbonbrief.org/cop26-key-outcomes-for-food-forests-land-use-and-nature-in-glasgow/">COP26</a>.)</p>

<h2 class="wp-block-heading">‘Global mutirão’</h2>

<p>COP30 saw countries agree to a new “<a href="https://unfccc.int/sites/default/files/resource/cma2025_L24_adv.pdf">global mutirão</a>” decision, a text calling for a tripling of <a href="https://www.carbonbrief.org/un-report-five-charts-which-explain-the-gap-in-finance-for-climate-adaptation/">adaptation finance</a> by 2035 (later than some hoped), a new “Belem mission” to increase collective actions to cut emissions and – to the disappoint of many countries – no new “roadmaps” on transitioning away from fossil fuels and reversing deforestation. (See Carbon Brief’s <a href="https://bsky.app/profile/drsimevans.carbonbrief.org/post/3m6a2dtm5a72h">snap analysis</a>.) </p>

<p>“<a href="https://cop30.br/en/news-about-cop30/burkinidi-minka-and-balu-wala-learn-about-the-many-versions-of-cop30s-global-mutirao">Mutirão</a>” is a Portuguese word originating in the Indigenous <a href="https://cop30.br/en/news-about-cop30/burkinidi-minka-and-balu-wala-learn-about-the-many-versions-of-cop30s-global-mutirao">Tupi-Guarani language</a> that refers to people working together towards a common aim with a community spirit – something the COP30 presidency was <a href="https://cop30.br/en/news-about-cop30/burkinidi-minka-and-balu-wala-learn-about-the-many-versions-of-cop30s-global-mutirao">keen</a> to emphasise.</p>

<p>The presidency was also keen to <a href="https://cop30.br/en/brazilian-presidency/letters-from-the-presidency/eleventh-letter-from-the-presidency">stress</a> that the mutirão text was not a cover text (sometimes referred to as a “cover decision”). However, like a cover text, it sought to bring together important issues that were not on the formal agenda with negotiated targets, acting as the key agreement from COP30.</p>

<p>The <a href="https://unfccc.int/documents/654375">first draft</a> of the mutirão put forward by the Brazilian presidency on 18 November included optional text to create a “high-level ministerial round table”, aimed at supporting countries to develop their own national roadmaps on transitioning away from fossil fuels and halting and reversing deforestation. (See: <a href="#7" rel="nofollow">Deforestation roadmap</a>.)</p>

<p>The language around this was criticised as <a href="https://www.climatechangenews.com/2025/11/19/as-fossil-fuels-dominate-amazon-cop-a-roadmap-to-end-deforestation-falls-behind/">weak</a> by some observers, but its inclusion was widely welcomed. </p>

<figure class="wp-block-image size-full"><img alt=""Option 2: Encourages all Parties to cooperate for and contribute to the global efforts referred to in paragraphs 28 and 33 of decision 1/CMA.5 in a nationally determined manner, taking into account the Paris Agreement, and decides to convene a high-level ministerial round table on different national circumstances, pathways and approaches with a view to supporting countries to developed just, orderly and equitable transition roadmaps, including to progressively overcome their dependency on fossil fuels and towards halting and reversing deforestation;"" class="wp-image-60339" height="804" src="https://www.carbonbrief.org/wp-content/uploads/2025/11/Option-2-ragout-scaled.png" width="2560" /><figcaption class="wp-element-caption">Option two for paragraph 35 of the first draft of the mutirão decision, published on 18 November. Source: UNFCCC (<a href="https://unfccc.int/sites/default/files/resource/DT_-cop30-01.pdf">2025</a>)</figcaption></figure>

<p>The final mutirão decision did not mention fossil fuel or deforestation roadmaps. It did mention deforestation once, “emphasising” the importance of boosting efforts to halt and reverse deforestation by 2030 to help achieve the Paris <a href="https://interactive.carbonbrief.org/one-point-five-pathways/index.html">temperature goal</a>. </p>

<p>It noted that this is “in accordance with Article 5 of the Paris Agreement”, which is a section of the landmark climate deal that calls for strengthening of the world’s carbon sinks, including forests. (Carbon Brief understands that a large group of rainforest nations, called the Coalition of Rainforest Nations, were particularly keen to have Article 5 referenced in the final mutirão decision.)</p>

<figure class="wp-block-image size-full"><img alt=""Mindful of being in the heart of the Amazon and emphasizing the importance of conserving, protecting and restoring nature and ecosystems towards achieving the Paris Agreement temperature goal, including through enhanced efforts towards halting and reversing deforestation and forest degradation by 2030 in accordance with Article 5 of the Paris Agreement, and other terrestrial and marine ecosystems acting as sinks and reservoirs of greenhouse gases and conserving biodiversity, while ensuring robust social and environmental safeguards,"" class="wp-image-60334" height="275" src="https://www.carbonbrief.org/wp-content/uploads/2025/11/ragout4.webp" width="1200" /><figcaption class="wp-element-caption">The final text of the global mutirão decision, referencing aims to reverse deforestation and forest degradation by 2030. Source: UNFCCC (<a href="https://unfccc.int/sites/default/files/resource/cma2025_L24_adv.pdf">2025</a>) </figcaption></figure>

<p>The final mutirão decision makes multiple brief mentions of nature and the need to tackle climate change and biodiversity loss in a synergistic way.</p>

<p>Paragraph two of the agreement, in the section sometimes called the “preamble”, “emphasises” the importance of “conserving, protecting and restoring nature and ecosystem”.</p>

<p>Further down, in a section “recalling” the first global stocktake of climate action conducted at <a href="https://www.carbonbrief.org/cop28-key-outcomes-for-food-forests-land-and-nature-at-the-un-climate-talks-in-dubai/">COP28</a> in Dubai in 2023, the text “underlines” the “urgent need to address, in a comprehensive and synergetic manner, the interlinked global crises of climate change, biodiversity loss, and land and ocean degradation in the broader context of achieving sustainable development”.</p>

<p>This inclusion likely reflects the presidency’s keenness to prioritise “synergies” between climate change, biodiversity loss and land degradation. (See: <a href="#11" rel="nofollow">Climate and nature ‘synergies’.</a>)</p>

<p>While the mutirão text included references to safeguarding Indigenous rights, conserving biodiversity and maintaining nature-based stores of carbon, no mention of food or agriculture appeared in any draft of the text.</p>

<p><a href="https://ipes-food.org/people/raj-patel/">Prof Raj Patel</a>, a member of the <a href="https://ipes-food.org/">International Panel of Experts on Sustainable Food Systems</a> (IPES-Food), said in a statement that it was as if food systems were “erased” from the negotiations, adding: </p>

<blockquote class="wp-block-quote is-layout-flow wp-block-quote-is-layout-flow">
<p>“Two years ago, 160 countries <a href="https://www.carbonbrief.org/cop28-key-outcomes-for-food-forests-land-and-nature-at-the-un-climate-talks-in-dubai/">signed</a> a Declaration on Sustainable Agriculture with great ceremony. Today, they cannot bring themselves to mention the word ‘food’ in the mutirão decision.” </p>
</blockquote>

<h2 class="wp-block-heading">Adaptation</h2>

<p>One of the major negotiated outcomes of the Belém summit was the agreement of a set of indicators for countries to measure their progress towards the <a href="https://www.carbonbrief.org/qa-cop30-could-finally-agree-how-to-track-the-global-goal-on-adaptation/">global goal on adaptation</a> (GGA).</p>

<p>The GGA, agreed at COP28 in Dubai, sets out 10 targets for countries to measure their progress towards, including targets on water scarcity, climate-resilient food systems and reducing climate impacts on ecosystems. </p>

<p>The initial list of indicators for these targets numbered 10,000. These had been whittled down by experts since COP28 and, at COP30, negotiators were tasked with agreeing on just 100 for countries to use.</p>

<p>Divisions were apparent from the first day of COP30, with the African group and Arab group proposing a two-year period for refining the GGA indicators before formally adopting them in 2027, according to the <a href="https://enb.iisd.org/belem-un-climate-change-conference-cop30-daily-report-11nov2025">Earth Negotiations Bulletin</a>. This move was opposed by several other blocs, including the Independent Alliance of Latin America and the Caribbean (AILAC) and the EU.</p>

<p>Disagreements arose between countries on the need for finance in order to implement the GGA, whether indicators infringed on countries’ sovereignty and indicators around domestic financing. </p>

<p><a href="https://www.agnclimatechange.org/leadership.html">Richard Muyungi</a>, African group chair, told Carbon Brief in the first week:</p>

<blockquote class="wp-block-quote is-layout-flow wp-block-quote-is-layout-flow">
<p>“We need to put guardrails or caveats on the adoption [of the indicators]. For example…the indicators should not infringe on the sovereignty of countries, asking countries to change their laws, their strategies. I mean, you cannot ask my country to change laws, because they want to address the global goal.”</p>
</blockquote>

<p>Ultimately, countries <a href="https://unfccc.int/sites/default/files/resource/cma2025_L25_adv.pdf">adopted</a> a set of 59 indicators and agreed to a two-year work programme “aimed at developing guidance for operationalising the Belém adaptation indicators”. </p>

<p>The set included five indicators on assessing progress towards climate-resilient and sustainable food systems.</p>

<figure class="wp-block-image size-full"><img alt="4. The indicators for assessing progress under target 9(b), attaining climate-resilient food and agricultural production and supply and distribution of food, as well as increasing sustainable and regenerative production and equitable access to adequate food and nutrition for all, are as follows: (a) Proportion of area under management for food and agricultural production utilizing practices and technologies relevant to climate change adaptation; (b) Extent of implementation of institutional frameworks for knowledge transfer, research and development, and extension services supporting climate change adaptation in the areas of food and agriculture relative to needs; (c) Level of degraded areas that are under management for food and agricultural production, including as an outcome of adaptation actions where applicable; (d) Level of food and agricultural yield in areas that are under management for food and agricultural production, including as an outcome of adaptation actions where applicable; (e) Proportion of the population with equitable access to adequate food and nutrition, including as an outcome of adaptation actions where applicable." class="wp-image-60341" height="655" src="https://www.carbonbrief.org/wp-content/uploads/2025/11/ragout9.webp" width="1200" /><figcaption class="wp-element-caption">Indicators assessing food systems and agriculture within the final GGA text. Source: UNFCCC (<a href="https://unfccc.int/sites/default/files/resource/cma2025_L25_adv.pdf">2025</a>)</figcaption></figure>

<p>The indicators on ecosystems and biodiversity included measuring the proportion of ecosystems “providing services to populations that depend on them”, the level of adaptive capacity due to the implementation of nature-based solutions and the levels of threat status of ecosystems and species.</p>

<p>However, observers noted that the indicators were heavily caveated, with the introductory text of the agreement “emphasis[ing]” their voluntary nature.</p>

<figure class="wp-block-image size-full"><a href="https://unfccc.int/sites/default/files/resource/cma2025_L25_adv.pdf"><img alt="7. Emphasizes that the Belem Adaptation Indicators are voluntary, non-prescriptive, non-punitive, facilitative, global in nature, respectful of national sovereignty and national circumstances and country-driven, and that the indicators should not create additional reporting burdens, particularly for developing country Parties, are not intended to serve as a basis for comparison among Parties, shall not become a barrier and shall not be used under any circumstances as a condition for developing country Parties to access funding under the Convention and the Paris Agreement;" class="wp-image-60342" height="282" src="https://www.carbonbrief.org/wp-content/uploads/2025/11/ragout10.webp" width="1200" /></a><figcaption class="wp-element-caption">Introductory text from the GGA text agreed at COP30, emphasising the voluntary and non-binding nature of the indicators. Source: UNFCCC (<a href="https://unfccc.int/sites/default/files/resource/cma2025_L25_adv.pdf">2025</a>).</figcaption></figure>

<p>(For more on adaptation and the GGA, see <a href="https://www.carbonbrief.org/cop30-key-outcomes-agreed-at-the-un-climate-talks-in-belem/">Carbon Brief’s</a> explainer of COP30’s key outcomes.)</p>

<h2 class="wp-block-heading">Tropical Forest Forever Facility and other forest pledges</h2>

<p>At the COP30 leaders’ summit, Brazil <a href="https://cop30.br/en/news-about-cop30/over-usd-5-5-billion-announced-for-tropical-forest-forever-facility-as-53-countries-endorse-the-historic-tfff-launch-declaration">officially launched</a> the Tropical Forest Forever Fund to “reward” countries that conserve their tropical forests.</p>

<p>During the negotiations, the facility raised $6.6bn and had the support of 53 countries, including countries with tropical forests and those that will act as investors.</p>

<p>This instrument is intended to be a financial vehicle to raise $125bn from countries, philanthropy and private investors, which will then be invested in the global bond market. It is intended to be able to support up to 74 countries that have tropical forests across many regions, such as the Amazon and the Congo Basin.</p>

<p>The TFFF has been <a href="https://cop30.br/en/news-about-cop30/cop30-evening-summary-november-17">described</a> as “the largest forest-finance mechanism ever created” and <a href="https://cop30.br/en/news-about-cop30/over-usd-5-5-billion-announced-for-tropical-forest-forever-facility-as-53-countries-endorse-the-historic-tfff-launch-declaration">praised</a> by Brazil’s finance minister, Fernando Haddad, as “innovative” for combining public and private financing.</p>

<p>However, it has also received criticism.</p>

<p>As <a href="https://www.carbonbrief.org/cop30-could-brazils-tropical-forest-forever-fund-help-tackle-climate-change/">Carbon Brief</a> has previously reported, experts have concerns around fragmenting existing climate finance and inadequate accountability. Other criticisms have focused on worries that the fund could benefit investors over forest countries and that 20% of the funds being directed to Indigenous peoples is insufficient.</p>

<p>For<a href="https://thedialogue.org/expert/sandra-guzman-luna"> Sandra Guzmán</a>, founder and general director of the<a href="https://www.gflac.org/"> Climate Finance Group for Latin America and the Caribbean</a> (GFLAC), the Brazilian government focused on moving forward with the TFFF and neglected other aspects of financing, such as the <a href="https://www.carbonbrief.org/cop30-what-does-the-baku-to-belem-roadmap-mean-for-climate-finance/">Baku to Belém roadmap</a> to mobilise $1.3tn per year in climate finance by 2035. She told Carbon Brief:</p>

<blockquote class="wp-block-quote is-layout-flow wp-block-quote-is-layout-flow">
<p>“The TFFF is not a mechanism that has been agreed upon multilaterally. [If the fund fails in its mission], it would only confirm that Brazil could have [capitalised] on other funds that are within the [UN climate] convention and do have a future.”</p>
</blockquote>

<p>After the launch of the TFFF, it was <a href="https://globalforestcoalition.org/no-to-tfff-yes-to-forest-rights/">rejected</a> by 150 civil society groups and Indigenous peoples’ organisations, who said the fund “does not seek to address the true structural causes of forest destruction” and “does not prioritise Indigenous peoples and local communities”. </p>

<p>The COP30 presidency <a href="https://cop30.br/en/news-about-cop30/cop30-evening-summary-november-17">stated</a> that, in the second week of negotiations, governments, multilateral funds and Indigenous leaders met to discuss how an Indigenous governance model – known as Dedicated Grant Mechanism (DGM) – can “inform and strengthen the emerging generation of climate finance facilities”.</p>

<p>Analysis by the civil society organisation <a href="https://www.leave-it-in-the-ground.org/">Leave it in the Ground</a> (LINGO), presented at COP30, suggested that not extracting fossil fuels beneath forests eligible for the TFFF would prevent 4.6tn tonnes of CO2 from being released. </p>

<p>These emissions would be saved if countries “were to adopt a pledge of no fossil-fuel extraction in its forests”, the report said. </p>

<p>Kjell Kǘhne, director of LINGO, said in a press conference attended by Carbon Brief that while restrictions on fossil fuels are not part of the scope of the discussions of the TFFF, this would make it “even stronger”.</p>

<h3 class="wp-block-heading">Other forest funds</h3>

<p>Elsewhere at COP30, countries renewed their <a href="https://www.carbonbrief.org/cop26-key-outcomes-for-food-forests-land-use-and-nature-in-glasgow/">COP26</a> commitment to help protect rainforests in the Congo Basin, which contains the world’s <a href="https://www.worldwildlife.org/places/congo-basin/">second-largest</a> area of tropical forest. <br />A Belém “<a href="https://www.elysee.fr/en/emmanuel-macron/2025/11/06/joint-press-release-the-belem-call">call to action</a>” pledged to raise more than $2.5bn for the cause over the next five years. This was put forward by Gabon and France and signed by Germany, Belgium, Norway and the UK, alongside development banks and other groups.</p>

<p>A new pledge of $1.8bn was put forward from more than 35 governments and philanthropic organisations to help secure land rights across forests and other ecosystems for Indigenous peoples, local communities and Afro-descendent communities, according to the <a href="https://forestclimateleaders.org/news-and-resources/governments-aim-to-collectively-recognise-160-million-hectares-of-indigenous-peoples-and-local-community-lands-in-tropical-forest-countr/">Forest & Climate Leaders’ Partnership</a>. (See: <a href="#12" rel="nofollow">Indigenous representation</a>.)  </p>

<p>The UK also <a href="https://www.fao.org/newsroom/detail/cop30-fao-secures-long-term-financial-support-from-the-UK/en">announced</a> almost £17m in funding for the <a href="https://www.fao.org/in-action/aim4forests/en">Accelerating Innovative Monitoring for Forests</a> (AIM4Forests) programme, a cooperation between the <a href="https://www.fao.org/home/en">UN Food and Agriculture Organization</a> (FAO) and the UK that supports countries in monitoring and reporting on forests.  </p>

<p>Meanwhile, Brazilian development bank <a href="https://www.bndes.gov.br/SiteBNDES/bndes/bndes_en/">BNDES</a> approved R$250m (£35m) for ecological restoration and tree-management projects in parts of the Amazon and Atlantic forests, Brazilian outlet <a href="https://www.infomoney.com.br/economia/bndes-libera-r-250-mi-para-recuperar-19-mil-hectares-de-amazonia-e-mata-atlantica/">InfoMoney</a> reported, adding that the funding will help to recover up to 19,000 hectares of forest land. </p>

<p>On 17 November, when forests featured as one of the COP30 <a href="https://cop30.br/en/news-about-cop30/cop30-announces-ambitious-thematic-days-invites-the-world-to-belem">themes</a> of the day, more than 70 civil-society groups <a href="https://earth-insight.org/press-release/fossil-free-exclusion-zones-2025/">called on</a> governments to set up forest “fossil-free zones” – areas where oil, coal and gas are not extracted – to protect forests and the rights of Indigenous peoples and local communities. </p>

<p>Earlier that week, Colombia said it was the first Amazonian nation to keep its entire Amazon forest area “free from oil and mining activities”, <a href="https://infoamazonia.org/en/2025/11/13/colombia-declares-itself-the-first-nation-in-the-amazon-with-its-entire-forest-free-from-oil-and-mining-activities/">InfoAmazonia</a> reported. </p>

<p>Countries that hold the Amazon rainforest, including Brazil, Peru and Colombia, also launched an initiative, called <a href="https://cop30.br/en/news-about-cop30/amazonian-countries-launch-a-mechanism-to-mobilize-us-1-billion-for-resilient-cities-and-infrastructure">Amazonia Forever</a>, to gather more than $1bn to invest in Amazonian infrastructure and cities. </p>

<p>Brazil’s planning and budget minister, Simone Tebet, <a href="https://www.iadb.org/en/news/amazon-countries-launch-1-billion-facility-resilient-infrastructure-and-cities-under-idb-groups">said</a> this programme for cities and resilient infrastructure would “enable us to take action not only on forest and water resources, but also on urban challenges”. </p>

<h2 class="wp-block-heading">Agriculture and food security</h2>

<p>With <a href="https://www.gov.br/agricultura/en/news/brazilian-agribusiness-reaches-historic-milestone-in-global-food-security">agribusiness giant</a> Brazil hosting this year’s summit, many expected COP30 to have a stronger focus on agriculture and food than previous years.</p>

<p>Formal negotiations for agriculture and food systems under the UN climate convention fall under the <a href="https://www.fao.org/climate-change/action-areas/climate-negotiations/sharm-el-sheikh-joint-work/en">Sharm el-Sheikh joint work on the implementation of climate action on agriculture and food security</a> (SJWA). COP30 ended without a substantive outcome for the SJWA.</p>

<p>The current four-year mandate of SJWA – which runs workshops, is developing an online portal and prepares an annual synthesis report of agriculture-relevant work undertaken by UN climate convention bodies – began in 2022 and runs out at COP31 next year.</p>

<p>At COP30, the main points of discussion for countries were a consideration of the <a href="https://unfccc.int/sites/default/files/resource/SJWA_cop30_DC_0.pdf">outcomes</a> of a workshop on “systemic and holistic approaches” to implementing climate action on food and agriculture, as well as countries weighing in on a <a href="https://unfccc.int/event/2025-forum-of-the-standing-committee-on-finance">special forum</a> of the standing committee on finance (SCF) on financing for sustainable food systems and agriculture. </p>

<p>As the summit got underway in Belém, several parties began pushing the idea of capturing key messages from the workshop and forum into a formal SJWA decision.</p>

<p>Observers told Carbon Brief that Argentina, the African group and the least-developed countries (LDCs) wanted “means of implementation” – shorthand for finance – added to the text, while the EU opposed references to “Article 9.1” in the agriculture workstream. (See: <a href="https://www.carbonbrief.org/cop30-key-outcomes-agreed-at-the-un-climate-talks-in-belem/#climate">Climate finance</a> in Carbon Brief’s main COP30 outcomes piece.)</p>

<figure class="wp-block-image size-full"><img alt="(c) Further recognized the urgent need to foster adaptation and resilience-building in agricultural systems and that solutions must be context-specific and take into account national and local circumstances; (d) Recognized that the extent to which developing country Parties are able to embed relevant measures in their adaptation strategies relating to agriculture and implement them effectively depends on the provision of adequate, predictable and accessible means of implementation, including finance, technology development and transfer, and capacitybuilding support from developed country Parties; (e) Acknowledged that only a small portion of climate finance is directed to agriculture and food systems; (f) Invited developed country Parties to significantly scale up the provision of new, additional, predictable and grant-based finance for actions related to adaptation in agriculture and improvement of food security and to ensure that such finance is accessible, country-driven and aligned with the national priorities and plans of developing country Parties;" class="wp-image-60179" height="831" src="https://www.carbonbrief.org/wp-content/uploads/2025/11/ragout-01.webp" width="1478" /><figcaption class="wp-element-caption">Draft text on agriculture negotiations published on 13 November, with references to means of implementation. Credit: UNFCCC (<a href="https://unfccc.int/sites/default/files/resource/SJWA_cop30.pdf">2025</a>)</figcaption></figure>

<p>The next day, various blocs circulated text proposals on recognising the workshop outcome. These texts, seen by Carbon Brief, included proposals from the EU and the <a href="https://unfccc.int/process-and-meetings/parties-non-party-stakeholders/parties/party-groupings">Environmental Integrity Group</a> (EIG) on food systems “which span the entire value chain”, links to biodiversity, “precision agriculture” and market-based rewards for farmers.</p>

<p>G77 and China, meanwhile, flagged 13 points for inclusion in the draft text, including recognising the “fundamental priority of ending hunger” and a call for developed countries to “significantly scale up…grant-based finance for adaptation actions in agriculture”. </p>

<p>Language from all of these proposals was incorporated into a <a href="https://unfccc.int/sites/default/files/resource/SJWA_cop30_DC.pdf">draft text</a> released on the first Thursday of COP30. </p>

<p>This draft – with 23 square brackets, indicating text not yet agreed – included many references, ranging from agroecology to AI-farming and using “high-integrity carbon-market approaches under Article 6” to reward farmers. </p>

<p>It also recognised that the <a href="https://www.wto.org/">World Trade Organization</a> (WTO) “can be useful in ensuring a stable, predictable global agricultural trade underpinned by rules” that support climate action. </p>

<figure class="wp-block-image size-full"><img alt="(i) Noted that an approach to building sustainable food systems that encompasses all components of the value chain – from food production, storage and processing to food packaging, distribution and consumption, as well as disposal of waste – is essential to ensuring food security and can contribute to reducing greenhouse gas emissions; (j) Acknowledged that, for systemic and holistic approaches to implementation of climate action on agriculture, food systems and food security to be successful, they must consider the central role of farmers in and take into account the national and local circumstances and specificities of agricultural production systems; (k) Highlighted the potential of agroecology in ensuring the sustainability of agriculture and food systems;" class="wp-image-60178" height="529" src="https://www.carbonbrief.org/wp-content/uploads/2025/11/ragout-02.webp" width="1211" /><figcaption class="wp-element-caption">Sections from a 13 November draft text incorporating blocs’ divergent views on “holistic approaches” to climate action in agriculture. Source: UNFCCC (<a href="https://unfccc.int/sites/default/files/resource/SJWA_cop30_DC_0.pdf">2025</a>)</figcaption></figure>

<p>Five hours later, this was replaced by a <a href="https://unfccc.int/sites/default/files/resource/SJWA_cop30_0.pdf">brief draft</a>, which postponed further discussions until June next year, taking into account the earlier text. </p>

<figure class="wp-block-image size-full"><img alt="Sharm el-Sheikh joint work on implementation of climate action on agriculture and food security Version 13/11/2025 21:30 Draft conclusions proposed by the co-facilitators 1. The Subsidiary Body for Scientific and Technological Advice and the Subsidiary Body for Implementation continued consideration of the Sharm el-Sheikh joint work on implementation of climate action on agriculture and food security.1 2. They agreed to continue consideration of this matter at their sixty-fourth sessions (June 2026) taking into account the draft text “Version 13/11/2025 16:00” prepared for these agenda items at these sessions. 2" class="wp-image-60176" height="580" src="https://www.carbonbrief.org/wp-content/uploads/2025/11/ragout-03.webp" width="1411" /><figcaption class="wp-element-caption">The draft text published on the evening of 13 November, with countries agreeing to conclude agricultural negotiations under SJWA at COP30. Source: UNFCCC (<a href="https://unfccc.int/sites/default/files/resource/SJWA_cop30_0.pdf">2025</a>).</figcaption></figure>

<p>Many observers expressed their dismay at negotiations finishing so abruptly, before the end of week one and without a substantive outcome. </p>

<p><a href="https://docs.google.com/document/d/1IgnD3gtfzFjrT6kMjU2Cr4XCYdc8XpJhyKBrNLc-30c/edit?usp=sharing">Teresa Anderson</a>, global climate justice lead at <a href="https://actionaid.org/">Action Aid International</a>, told Carbon Brief that negotiations “took a turn for the worse” after Australia and the EIG “pushed for dodgy language” on what could be considered “systemic” and “holistic”. Anderson said:</p>

<blockquote class="wp-block-quote is-layout-flow wp-block-quote-is-layout-flow">
<p>“In <a href="https://www.carbonbrief.org/bonn-climate-talks-key-outcomes-from-the-june-2025-un-climate-conference/">June</a>, many countries talked about agroecology. And yet here in the COP, Australia and others just submitted language on precision agriculture, on AI and just basically a lot of corporate greenwash…Countries weren’t able to agree on [this] because there was just too much new nonsense in there.”</p>
</blockquote>

<p>The final <a href="https://unfccc.int/sites/default/files/resource/sb2025_L05_adv.pdf">draft conclusions</a> “recognised that progress was made at these sessions” and “noted that more time is needed to conclude the discussions thereon”.  </p>

<h2 class="wp-block-heading">Article 6</h2>

<p>Carbon markets – particularly relating to forests – were expected to be a key priority for the Brazilian presidency at COP30.</p>

<p>On 7 November, the Brazilian presidency <a href="https://cop30.br/en/news-about-cop30/carbon-market-coalition-welcomes-18-member-countries-at-cop30">launched</a> a global <a href="https://www.gov.br/mre/pt-br/canais_atendimento/imprensa/notas-a-imprensa/declaracao-sobre-a-coalizao-aberta-de-mercados-regulados-de-carbono/OpenCoalitiononComplianceCarbonMarkets.pdf">coalition</a> on “compliance carbon markets”, endorsed by 18 countries.</p>

<p>The voluntary initiative <a href="https://www.gov.br/mre/pt-br/canais_atendimento/imprensa/notas-a-imprensa/declaracao-sobre-a-coalizao-aberta-de-mercados-regulados-de-carbono/OpenCoalitiononComplianceCarbonMarkets.pdf">said</a> it is designed to allow members to “share experiences and learn from each other”. It also said the coalition will “explore options to promote interoperability of compliance carbon markets in the long term”.</p>

<p>Finally, it mentioned information exchange on the “potential use of high-integrity <a href="https://interactive.carbonbrief.org/carbon-offsets-2023/glossary.html">offsets</a>”, referencing a sector that has faced <a href="https://interactive.carbonbrief.org/carbon-offsets-2023/index.html">intense scrutiny</a> in recent years. </p>

<p>The same day, Honduras and Suriname announced a <a href="https://www.rainforestcoalition.org/news/cop30-honduras-and-suriname-partner-with-deutsche-bank-bayer-siemens-symrise-and-cfrn-to-mobilize-financial-support-for-rainforest-protection/">deal</a> to issue “high-integrity rainforest carbon credits” in partnership with Deutsche Bank, German agrochemical giant Bayer and the Coalition for Rainforest Nations (CfRN). </p>

<figure class="wp-block-image size-full"><img alt="An action outside the COP30 venue on 11 November, resisting what activists called a “carbon casino” at the climate talks. Credit: Bianka Csenki, Artivist Network (2025)." class="wp-image-60364" height="683" src="https://www.carbonbrief.org/wp-content/uploads/2025/11/CarbonMarkets_BiankaCsenki-854A2641.jpg" width="1024" /><figcaption class="wp-element-caption">An action outside the COP30 venue on 11 November, resisting what activists called a “carbon casino” at the climate talks. Credit: Bianka Csenki, Artivist Network (2025).</figcaption></figure>

<p>Formal negotiations on carbon trading under <a href="https://www.carbonbrief.org/in-depth-q-and-a-how-article-6-carbon-markets-could-make-or-break-the-paris-agreement/">Article 6</a> of the Paris Agreement were expected to be somewhat muted, but ended up being rather complicated.</p>

<p>In <a href="https://www.carbonbrief.org/cop29-key-outcomes-agreed-at-the-un-climate-talks-in-baku/">Baku last year</a>, countries had finally agreed on the rules for country-to-country carbon trading under Article 6.2 and for a new international Paris Agreement carbon market under Article 6.4, bringing a decade of negotiations to a close. Countries also agreed to undertake a review of these rules in 2028.</p>

<p>Within the Article 6.4 market, key tools for “nature-based” removals and rights safeguards were still being developed after COP29 by the “<a href="https://unfccc.int/process-and-meetings/bodies/constituted-bodies/article-64-supervisory-body">supervisory body</a>” in charge of standards.</p>

<p>At COP30, negotiations focused on the annual report of this body, which had been given autonomy to set these standards at <a href="https://www.carbonbrief.org/cop29-key-outcomes-agreed-at-the-un-climate-talks-in-baku/">COP29</a>.</p>

<p>The supervisory body had recently adopted a <a href="https://unfccc.int/sites/default/files/resource/A6.4-SBM018-A13.pdf">standard on non-permanence</a> on 10 October, which had been the subject of <a href="https://carbonmarketwatch.org/2025/10/15/un-carbon-market-drops-the-ball-on-permanence/">heated</a> <a href="https://cdn.sanity.io/media-libraries/mlmEWUxEY7eQ/files/bf1b0c4b5f44949e393dd1fadd7df0e8aad951cc.pdf">debate</a> in the sector. </p>

<p>The standard describes how to handle the risk of someone selling <a href="https://interactive.carbonbrief.org/carbon-offsets-2023/glossary.html">carbon credits</a> for a project that removes CO2 from the atmosphere, only for this stored carbon to be released back into the atmosphere. This is a phenomenon known as “reversal” and is particularly pertinent for tree-planting projects, which may be at risk from wildfires and drought.</p>

<p>In a <a href="https://cdn.sanity.io/media-libraries/mlmEWUxEY7eQ/files/bf1b0c4b5f44949e393dd1fadd7df0e8aad951cc.pdf">joint letter</a> published on 12 November, a group of NGOs and carbon-trading advocates said this and other standards “could exclude all <a href="https://www.carbonbrief.org/qa-can-nature-based-solutions-help-address-climate-change/">land-based activities</a>”, such as forests, from the Article 6.4 market.</p>

<p>They called for new guidance to be given to the supervisory body to prevent this from happening. Their recommendations on amending the rules around reversal risk to give more scope to include nature-based projects – which were opposed by some <a href="https://planetarysciencepavilion.org/2025/11/19/scientists-statement-on-state-of-cop30-negotiations-november-19-2025/">scientists</a> and <a href="https://bsky.app/profile/ciel.org/post/3m5lrzfp7vs2z">other</a> <a href="https://carbonmarketwatch.org/2025/10/15/un-carbon-market-drops-the-ball-on-permanence/">NGOs</a> – were <a href="https://news.mongabay.com/2025/11/indonesia-labeled-fossil-of-the-day-for-echoing-industry-talking-points-at-cop30/">picked up</a> and <a href="https://bsky.app/profile/did:plc:wfuybzxgaqfpzfn242rvexzb/post/3m5lwfvzkds2q">reflected</a> in an early <a href="https://unfccc.int/sites/default/files/resource/A6.4_dt_cma7_i15b.pdf">draft text</a> at COP30.</p>

<p>This text, published on 14 November, asked the market’s supervisory body to “consider carbon market forecasts” and revise its standards so as not to “discourage the development” of nature-based solutions.</p>

<p>At the same time, text options “urging” the body to make its decisions more transparent and “minimise time in closed-door sessions” were heavily bracketed.</p>

<figure class="wp-block-image size-full"><img alt="24. Encourages the Supervisory Body to monitor the application of the “Standard: Addressing non-permanence and reversals in mechanism methodologies” to mechanism methodologies developed for Article 6.4 activities involving nature-based solutions and revise the methodologies as appropriate to facilitate the development of such types of Article 6.4 activities without compromising the environmental integrity; 25. Requests the Supervisory Body to prioritize the work on the development of largescale crediting programs and jurisdictional approaches drawing lessons from the Warsaw Framework for REDD+, including exploring the requirements needed for jurisdictional approaches to nature-based solutions to ensure environmental integrity; 26. Also requests the Supervisory Body to provide a clear science-based procedure for assessing international leakage in the adopted “Standard: Addressing leakage in mechanism methodologies”, emphasizing the need for flexibility in methodological development given the lack of established global leakage accounting for nature-based approaches;" class="wp-image-60337" height="506" src="https://www.carbonbrief.org/wp-content/uploads/2025/11/ragout7.webp" width="1200" /><figcaption class="wp-element-caption">The first draft text on Article 6.4 carbon markets had several references to nature-based solutions and approaches, calling for flexibility from the supervisory body in applying its standards to them. Source: UNFCCC (<a href="https://unfccc.int/sites/default/files/resource/A6.4_dt_cma7_i15b.pdf">2025</a>)</figcaption></figure>

<p>In response to this draft text, <a href="https://carbonmarketwatch.org/author/isamulder/">Isa Mulder</a> of <a href="https://carbonmarketwatch.org/">Carbon Market Watch</a> told Carbon Brief:</p>

<blockquote class="wp-block-quote is-layout-flow wp-block-quote-is-layout-flow">
<p>“All of the pro-market flexibility in there [would] completely undermin[e] the Paris Agreement.”</p>
</blockquote>

<p>On 15 November, <a href="https://climatenetwork.org/resource/fossil-of-the-day-indonesia/">Climate Action Network</a> awarded Indonesia its “<a href="https://climatenetwork.org/resource/fossil-of-the-day-indonesia/">Fossil of the Day</a>” for repeating “lobbyists’ talking points” surrounding weaker rules on the permanence of nature-based credits – “sometimes verbatim” – in its intervention in Article 6.4 negotiations.</p>

<p>While explicit references to nature and nature-based carbon crediting projects were removed in a <a href="https://unfccc.int/sites/default/files/resource/A6.4_dt_cma7_i15b_0.pdf">second draft</a> issued late on 15 November, the text still asked the body to apply a “tailored approach” and weigh the “economic feasibility” of its standards.</p>

<p>In the end, references to these two terms were also dropped. Many countries saw the effort to give detailed guidance to the supervisory body as an attempt to “<a href="https://enb.iisd.org/belem-un-climate-change-conference-cop30-daily-report-15nov2025">micro-manage</a>” its work, creating uncertainty for market actors.</p>

<p>The <a href="https://unfccc.int/sites/default/files/resource/cma2025_L10_adv.pdf">final decision</a> on Article 6.4 gave carbon-credit projects registered under the “<a href="https://interactive.carbonbrief.org/carbon-offsets-2023/glossary.html#clean-development-mechanism">clean development mechanism</a>” (CDM) a six-month deadline extension, until June 2026, to “transition” into the Paris Agreement’s new carbon market.  </p>

<p>In theory, this could allow up to another <a href="https://unepccc.org/article-6-pipeline/">760m tonnes</a> of CO2-equivalent of <a href="https://interactive.carbonbrief.org/carbon-offsets-2023/glossary.html#carbon-credits">credits</a> to enter the Paris Agreement regime.</p>

<p>The <a href="https://unfccc.int/sites/default/files/resource/cma2025_L10_adv.pdf">final Article 6.4 decision</a> “averted disaster” and could potentially make the UN-backed carbon market “marginally” more inclusive, according to <a href="https://carbonmarketwatch.org/2025/11/22/cop30-attempts-to-dilute-inadequate-carbon-market-rules-thwarted/">Carbon Market Watch</a>, which added that these improvements “do little to change the rather worrying course that Article 6 seems to be on”.</p>

<p>The <a href="https://unfccc.int/sites/default/files/resource/cma2025_L10_adv.pdf">decision</a> “reiterates” that supervisory body members should not have “any financial or other interests” that could affect – or be seen to affect – their impartiality.</p>

<p>It also “requests” that the body strengthen its consultation processes by informing, reaching out to and including Indigenous peoples, local communities and others who “cannot easily participate” in the complex mechanism. </p>

<figure class="wp-block-image size-full"><img alt=""18. Requests the Supervisory Body to enhance the transparency of its decision-making and that of the Methodological Expert Panel while safeguarding the productivity of their work; 19. Also requests the secretariat to raise awareness of the multiple opportunities for stakeholder engagement in the mechanism to ensure that stakeholders are informed and able to participate in stakeholder consultation processes effectively; 20. Further requests the Supervisory Body to strengthen its stakeholder consultation processes while also ensuring the expeditious operationalization of the mechanism; 21. Requests the Supervisory Body to facilitate the engagement of a broad range of stakeholders, including designated national authorities, relevant experts and those that cannot easily participate in the mechanism, including Indigenous Peoples and local communities, and also requests the Supervisory Body to report on its outreach measures taken to ensure broad participation in public consultations across different groups of stakeholders in its next annual report;"" class="wp-image-60338" height="565" src="https://www.carbonbrief.org/wp-content/uploads/2025/11/ragout8.webp" width="1200" /><figcaption class="wp-element-caption">The final COP30 decision on Article 6.4 calls for the UN-backed carbon market’s autonomous body to include Indigenous peoples in its consultations. Source: UNFCCC (<a href="https://unfccc.int/sites/default/files/resource/cma2025_L10_adv.pdf">2025</a>)</figcaption></figure>

<p>While there are fewer rules that govern country-to-country carbon trading under Article 6.2, countries were supposed to submit “initial reports” of these bilateral carbon-trading deals for review by technical experts ahead of COP30. </p>

<p>The <a href="https://unfccc.int/sites/default/files/resource/cma2025_inf01.pdf">first six reviews</a> – including a Swiss-supported project to promote “climate-smart” rice cultivation in Ghana and sustainable forest management in Guyana and Suriname – were completed ahead of the summit.</p>

<p>A particular issue being considered at COP30 was the fact that, to date, “<a href="https://www.linkedin.com/feed/update/urn:li:activity:7397270064732868609/">all trades</a>” under Article 6.2 so far have been flagged with “inconsistencies” during expert review.</p>

<p>The COP30 Article 6.2 <a href="https://unfccc.int/sites/default/files/resource/A6.2_dt_cma7_i15a_3.pdf">decision</a> simply “notes” these inconsistencies and “urges” countries to sort them out, while adding that the reporting and review process is still “in the early stages”. It also asks reviewers to “clearly explain” any issues they find and how to resolve them.</p>

<figure class="wp-block-image size-full"><img alt=""10. Also notes the inconsistencies with the requirements in the guidance on cooperative approaches identified in the first round of Article 6 technical expert reviews, while noting that the Article 6, paragraph 2, reporting and review processes are still in the early stages of implementation and urges Parties to address the inconsistencies identified in accordance with decision 4/CMA.6, paragraphs 39–44; 11. Requests Article 6 technical expert review teams to clearly explain their findings on any inconsistencies and any recommendations on how to resolve them;"" class="wp-image-60175" height="800" src="https://www.carbonbrief.org/wp-content/uploads/2025/11/ragout-04-scaled.webp" width="2560" /><figcaption class="wp-element-caption">Conclusions on how to deal with “inconsistencies” found during reviews of country reports under Article 6.2. Source: UNFCCC (<a href="https://unfccc.int/sites/default/files/resource/A6.2_dt_cma7_i15a_3.pdf">2025</a>).</figcaption></figure>

<h2 class="wp-block-heading">Deforestation roadmap</h2>

<p>During the Belém talks, momentum began to build around agreeing a roadmap to end deforestation, although it was largely <a href="https://www.climatechangenews.com/2025/11/19/as-fossil-fuels-dominate-amazon-cop-a-roadmap-to-end-deforestation-falls-behind/">overshadowed</a> by the push for a similar fossil-fuel phase-out plan. </p>

<p>At <a href="https://www.carbonbrief.org/cop26-key-outcomes-for-food-forests-land-use-and-nature-in-glasgow/">COP26</a>, more than 130 countries had signed on to a non-binding pledge to halt and reverse deforestation by 2030. This pledge was formally recognised in the <a href="https://www.carbonbrief.org/qa-what-is-the-global-stocktake-and-could-it-accelerate-climate-action/">global stocktake</a> agreed at <a href="https://www.carbonbrief.org/cop28-key-outcomes-for-food-forests-land-and-nature-at-the-un-climate-talks-in-dubai/">COP28</a>. Although the rate of deforestation is <a href="https://www.carbonbrief.org/un-report-five-charts-showing-how-global-deforestation-is-declining/">decreasing</a>, countries are <a href="https://forestdeclaration.org/resources/forest-declaration-assessment-2025">off track</a> to meet this goal. </p>

<p>A roadmap aimed to help achieve this deforestation target did not appear in the final mutirão decision agreed at COP30. However, in the closing plenary of the summit, Corrêa do Lago said the Brazilian presidency would work to create deforestation and fossil-fuel roadmaps outside the COP negotiation process.</p>

<p>In a <a href="https://cop30.br/en/news-about-cop30/accelerating-the-global-energy-transition-and-safeguarding-nature-are-the-most-effective-pathways-to-mitigating-global-warming-stated-president-lula-in-opening-session-of-the-belem-climate-summit">speech</a> at the opening of the leaders’ summit before COP30 began, Lula had called for roadmaps to “reverse deforestation, overcome dependence on fossil fuels and mobilise the resources required to achieve these goals in a fair and planned manner”. </p>

<p>By the second week of negotiations, around 45 countries backed a deforestation roadmap, including Brazil, Colombia, Mexico, the EU and the Democratic Republic of the Congo, according to a <a href="https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1w-oeROmlnP0m_zfwL5uZ6hMmLbkBp5hcJ76ZvhghzV0/edit?gid=0#gid=0">Carbon Brief</a> tracker. This increased to at least 92 countries by Friday 21 November, after a large group of more than 50 rainforest nations got behind the proposal.</p>

<p><a href="https://wwf.panda.org/discover/our_focus/climate_and_energy_practice/?15363391/Joint-Statement-by-WWF-and-Greenpeace-on-a-Forest-Roadmap">WWF and Greenpeace</a> had urged countries to adopt the deforestation roadmap “as a formal outcome at COP30”, while Colombia’s environment minister, <a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Irene_V%C3%A9lez_Torres">Irene Vélez-Torres</a>, wrote in <a href="http://backchannel1.substack.com/p/its-crunch-time-for-the-forest-cop?utm_source=cbnewsletter&utm_medium=email&utm_term=2025-11-19&utm_campaign=Daily%2BBriefing%2BPush%2Bfor%2Bfossil-fuel%2Broadmap%2BChina%2Bblasts%2BEU%2Bgoal%2BCrunch%2Btime%2Bfor%2Bforest%2BCOP%2B">Backchannel</a>, a climate commentary platform: </p>

<blockquote class="wp-block-quote is-layout-flow wp-block-quote-is-layout-flow">
<p>“We need to see the global north come behind a roadmap – and quickly.” </p>
</blockquote>

<p>However, the final text signed off on 22 November did not include mentions of either roadmap. (See: <a href="#1" rel="nofollow">‘Global mutirão’</a>.)</p>

<p>Although more than 90 countries backed the deforestation roadmap, “wider political will to secure this in Belém was lacking”, WWF said in a <a href="https://wwf.panda.org/wwf_news/press_releases/?15418966/WWF-Small-wins-leave-gaps-at-COP30-core-climate-goals-stay-out-of-reach">statement</a>.</p>

<p><a href="https://www.sustainability-conference.org/en/participants/carolinapasquali">Carolina Pasquali</a>, executive director of <a href="https://www.greenpeace.org/brasil/">Greenpeace Brazil</a>, <a href="https://www.greenpeace.org/africa/en/press/59582/climate-forest-protection-roadmaps-slashed-from-formal-cop30-outcome-as-people-demand-change/">said</a> that Lula’s government had “set the bar high” in calling for deforestation and fossil-fuel roadmaps, but the “divided multilateral landscape was unable to hurdle it”. </p>

<p>After the talks ended, <a href="https://www.ox.ac.uk/news-and-events/find-an-expert/professor-nathalie-seddon">Prof Nathalie Seddon</a>, the director of the <a href="https://www.naturebasedsolutionsinitiative.org/">nature-based solutions initiative</a> at the <a href="https://www.ox.ac.uk/">University of Oxford</a>, said in a statement:  </p>

<blockquote class="wp-block-quote is-layout-flow wp-block-quote-is-layout-flow">
<p>“Until we have coupled roadmaps for ending deforestation and phasing out fossil fuels, grounded in rights and direct finance for those who safeguard ecosystems, we will remain off track for a safe and just future.”</p>
</blockquote>

<h2 class="wp-block-heading">‘Unilateral trade measures’</h2>

<p>After several <a href="https://www.carbonbrief.org/cop28-key-outcomes-agreed-at-the-un-climate-talks-in-dubai/">failed</a> <a href="https://www.carbonbrief.org/cop29-key-outcomes-agreed-at-the-un-climate-talks-in-baku/">attempts</a> to bring climate-related “<a href="https://unfccc.int/sites/default/files/resource/Submission_by_Bolivia_LMDC.pdf">unilateral trade measures</a>”, such as the <a href="https://www.carbonbrief.org/qa-what-does-the-eus-new-deforestation-law-mean-for-climate-and-biodiversity/">EU’s deforestation regulation</a>, onto the agenda at previous COPs, the issue was taken up in Belém as part of presidency-led <a href="https://unfccc.int/process-and-meetings/conferences/un-climate-change-conference-belem-november-2025/cop-30/cmp-20/cma-7-presidency-and-ministerial-consultations">discussions</a> and reflected in the key outcome of the summit, the “global mutirão”.</p>

<p>This decision <a href="https://bsky.app/profile/arunacsekhar.bsky.social/post/3m6a5257qkc2l">creates</a> three annual “dialogues” on trade, to be held at the Bonn intersessional meetings in 2026, 2027 and 2028. It also “reaffirms” that climate measures, “including unilateral ones, should not constitute” trade restrictions that are “arbitrary” or “discriminat[ory]”.</p>

<p>This is the first-ever mention of trade measures in a COP cover decision.</p>

<p>While the issue of trade has received a significant level of attention at recent summits, it is not a new one for the UN climate regime. The text agreed in Belém, below, precisely repeats the language in article 3.5 of the <a href="https://unfccc.int/files/essential_background/background_publications_htmlpdf/application/pdf/conveng.pdf">1992 UN climate convention</a>.</p>

<figure class="wp-block-image size-full"><img alt="56. Reaffirmsthat Parties should cooperate to promote a supportive and open international economic system that would lead to sustainable economic growth and development in all Parties, particularly developing country Parties, thus enabling them better to address the problems of climate change and also reaffirms that measures taken to combat climate change, including unilateral ones, should not constitute a means of arbitrary or unjustifiable discrimination or a disguised restriction on international trade; 57. Requests the subsidiary bodies to hold a dialogue at their sixty-fourth, sixty-sixth (June 2027) and sixty-eighth sessions (June 2028), with the participation of Parties and other stakeholders, including the International Trade Centre, the United Nations Conference on Trade and Development and the World Trade Organization, to consider opportunities, challenges and barriers in relation to enhancing international cooperation related to the role of trade, taking into account paragraph 56 above, decides to exchange experiences and views on related matters at a high-level event in 2028 and requests the subsidiary bodies to present a report summarizing the discussions at the high-level event;" class="wp-image-60340" height="580" src="https://www.carbonbrief.org/wp-content/uploads/2025/11/ragout-19-1.webp" width="1200" /><figcaption class="wp-element-caption">The final COP30 mutirão decision referring to unilateral trade measures, a COP first. Source: UNFCCC (<a href="https://unfccc.int/sites/default/files/resource/cma2025_L24_adv.pdf">2025</a>)</figcaption></figure>

<p>In Belém, the issue of such measures had once again been <a href="https://unfccc.int/sites/default/files/resource/Submission_by_Bolivia_LMDC.pdf">raised</a> by Bolivia on behalf of the like-minded developing countries (LMDCs, a group that includes China, India and others). </p>

<p>Within the presidency-led <a href="https://unfccc.int/process-and-meetings/conferences/un-climate-change-conference-belem-november-2025/cop-30/cmp-20/cma-7-presidency-and-ministerial-consultations">consultations</a>, the LMDCs called for a recurring agenda item on trade, Tuvalu supported a dialogue and the African group proposed a system for countries to report new trade measures to the UN climate convention, according to the <a href="https://enb.iisd.org/belem-un-climate-change-conference-cop30-daily-report-12nov2025">Earth Negotiations Bulletin</a>.</p>

<p>On Sunday in the middle of COP, the presidency published a <a href="https://unfccc.int/sites/default/files/resource/20251116_Sum_Pres_Cons.pdf">summary</a> of its consultations, containing five options for a decision on trade measures, including dialogues, roundtables or the creation of a platform. </p>

<figure class="wp-block-image size-full"><img alt=""Options (mutually supportive or alternatives, as Parties see fit) 1. Implement and operationalize Article 3.5 of the Convention, including through an annual dialogue on climate change-related trade restrictive unilateral trade measures 2. Discussions related to cross-border impacts of climate policies to continue being addressed under response measures forum and its KCI with a focus in the near term on international cooperation and green/low carbon standards 3. Hold round tables on the nexus between trade and climate change in 2026 and 2027, with outputs serving as inputs to GST2 4. Parties introducing a climate-related trade measure (e.g., green standards) for consultations under the UNFCCC (potential role WTO, UNCTAD, etc) 5. Create a platform on climate-related trade measures for understanding the cross-border impacts on developing countries"" class="wp-image-60171" height="706" src="https://www.carbonbrief.org/wp-content/uploads/2025/11/ragout-06.webp" width="1311" /><figcaption class="wp-element-caption">Options presented in the presidency’s summary note on unilateral trade measures on 16 November, after conducting consultations with parties. Source: UNFCCC (<a href="https://unfccc.int/sites/default/files/resource/20251116_Sum_Pres_Cons.pdf">2025</a>)</figcaption></figure>

<p><a href="https://www.wri.org/profile/david-waskow">David Waskow</a>, director of the international climate initiative at the <a href="https://www.wri.org/">World Resources Institute</a> thinktank, told a media briefing that trade is a “real issue” for some countries and not just a “bargaining tactic or some sort of chit that’s being put on the table”.</p>

<p>He added that the EU “feels strongly” about the ways trade measures support climate action, but developing countries have “real concerns” about how those measures play out. </p>

<p><a href="https://in.linkedin.com/in/avantikagoswami">Avantika Goswami</a>, climate-policy lead at Delhi-based thinktank the the <a href="https://www.cseindia.org/">Centre for Science and Environment</a>, told Carbon Brief that, while it is “not ideal to not<em> </em>have a formal agenda item” on unilateral trade measures, the reference to the UN <a href="https://unfccc.int/files/essential_background/background_publications_htmlpdf/application/pdf/conveng.pdf">climate convention</a> in the text “is welcomed”, as well as the dialogues that will take place over the next three years. Goswami added:</p>

<blockquote class="wp-block-quote is-layout-flow wp-block-quote-is-layout-flow">
<p>“At the very least, this will elevate the issue of unilateral trade measures to be more high-profile within the COP space and will provide a forum for countries to discuss their concerns and challenges, as well as possible solutions for the way forward.”</p>
</blockquote>

<p>Alongside the discussions under the presidency, these measures continued to crop up within different negotiation streams, including on just transition, “<a href="https://www.carbonbrief.org/cop29-key-outcomes-agreed-at-the-un-climate-talks-in-baku/#response">response measures</a>” and <a href="https://unfccc.int/sites/default/files/resource/TIP_0.pdf">technology</a>.</p>

<p>The <a href="https://unfccc.int/sites/default/files/resource/cma2025L_L14_adv.pdf">final decision</a> on the just transition work programme removed all references to trade, although it recognised the role of smallholder farmers and food production.</p>

<figure class="wp-block-image size-full"><img alt="(f) The multisectoral and multidimensional nature of just transitions and the resultant need for whole-of-economy approaches to just transitions that engage the private sector, including micro-, small and medium-sized enterprises, and rural economy actors, especially smallholder farmers, and that contribute to the creation of decent work and quality jobs and food production;" class="wp-image-60333" height="305" src="https://www.carbonbrief.org/wp-content/uploads/2025/11/ragout3.png" width="1783" /><figcaption class="wp-element-caption">The final decision on the just transition work programme refers to the role of smallholder farmers and food production. Source: UNFCCC (<a href="https://unfccc.int/sites/default/files/resource/cma2025L_L14_adv.pdf">2025</a>)</figcaption></figure>

<p>Anderson, from ActionAid, told Carbon Brief that civil society had “fought hard” to make sure food and farmers were included in the just transition discussion. She told Carbon Brief:</p>

<blockquote class="wp-block-quote is-layout-flow wp-block-quote-is-layout-flow">
<p>“We’ve been calling for a just transition in agriculture because agriculture is the [second biggest] polluter after fossil fuels, and the [biggest] employer in the world. </p>
</blockquote>

<blockquote class="wp-block-quote is-layout-flow wp-block-quote-is-layout-flow">
<p>“We know we need to transition in agriculture, but it has to be fair to protect jobs, livelihoods, families, communities and global food security. That is really, really important, because we know there’s a lot to learn from many years of climate action that hasn’t always put rural communities, who are often marginalised, first in the conversation.”</p>
</blockquote>

<h2 class="wp-block-heading">Biofuels</h2>

<figure class="wp-block-image size-full"><img alt="A sign for Embrapa – Brazil’s state-owned firm that is a key player in biofuels research – at the entrance of the COP30 AgriZone. Credit: Associated Press / Alamy Stock Photo" class="wp-image-60330" height="683" src="https://www.carbonbrief.org/wp-content/uploads/2025/11/3D662G9.jpg" width="1024" /><figcaption class="wp-element-caption">A sign for Embrapa – Brazil’s state-owned firm that is a key player in biofuels research – at the entrance of the COP30 AgriZone. Credit: Associated Press / <a href="https://www.alamy.com/an-embrapa-sign-sits-inside-the-entrance-of-the-agrizone-near-the-cop30-un-climate-summit-tuesday-nov-18-2025-in-belem-brazil-ap-photojoshua-a-bickel-image709446761.html" rel="noreferrer noopener" target="_blank">Alamy Stock Photo</a></figcaption></figure>

<p>On 14 October, at the <a href="https://cop30.br/en/news-about-cop30/brazil-pledges-to-quadruple-production-of-sustainable-fuels">pre-COP</a> in Brasilia, the Brazilian presidency launched the <a href="https://www.gov.br/mre/en/contact-us/press-area/press-releases/launch-of-the-belem-4x-pledge-on-sustainable-fuels/2025-10-23_cop30-declaration_sustainable-fuels.pdf">Belém 4x pledge</a>, which aimed to gather high-level support to quadruple the production and use of “sustainable fuels” – such as hydrogen and biofuels – by 2035, as compared to 2024 levels.</p>

<figure class="wp-block-image size-full"><img alt="An excerpt of the Belém 4x pledge calling for a quadrupling of “sustainable fuels use” globally, while referring to the increased uptake of biofuels. Source: Government of Brazil (2025)" class="wp-image-60332" height="689" src="https://www.carbonbrief.org/wp-content/uploads/2025/11/ragout2.webp" width="1128" /><figcaption class="wp-element-caption">An excerpt of the Belém 4x pledge calling for a quadrupling of “sustainable fuels use” globally, while referring to the increased uptake of biofuels. Source: Government of Brazil (<a href="https://cop30.br/en/news-about-cop30/brazil-pledges-to-quadruple-production-of-sustainable-fuels">2025</a>)</figcaption></figure>

<p>The pledge was co-sponsored by Italy and Japan, supported by India and has been backed by 23 countries so far, including Canada and the Netherlands. On 14 November, Brazil <a href="https://cop30.br/en/news-about-cop30/cop30-presidency-mobilizes-countries-and-key-sectors-to-implement-commitment-to-quadruple-sustainable-fuels">announced</a> a partnership with the Clean Energy Ministerial to “advance Belem 4x”. </p>

<p>However, the pledge was “rejected” by some NGOs, including <a href="https://climatenetwork.org/2025/11/10/cop30-can-rejects-belem-4x-pledge-on-sustainable-fuels-as-credible-pathway-to-just-transition/">Climate Action Network</a> and <a href="https://www.greenpeace.org/southeastasia/press/68062/reject-quadrupling-bioenergy-use/">Greenpeace</a>, who criticised the environmental, social and food security impacts of <a href="https://www.carbonbrief.org/qa-how-countries-are-using-biofuels-to-meet-their-climate-targets/">biofuels</a>.</p>

<p><a href="https://archive.oilchange.org/about">Hikmat Soeriatanuwijay</a> at <a href="https://oilchange.org/">Oil Change International</a> said in a statement:</p>

<blockquote class="wp-block-quote is-layout-flow wp-block-quote-is-layout-flow">
<p>“The Belém 4x pledge uses the language of sustainability to justify continued fossil-fuel use. The [Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change] <a href="https://www.ipcc.ch/report/ar6/wg3/">states</a> that forest protection will have the highest mitigation value; however, exploitation of natural forests and cropland for bioenergy undermines this priority.” </p>
</blockquote>

<p>The 4x pledge was based on the <a href="https://www.iea.org/">International Energy Agency’s</a> <a href="https://iea.blob.core.windows.net/assets/77a8c816-dc61-4668-b501-b1793a3ab2c7/DeliveringSustainableFuels.pdf">report</a> on “delivering” sustainable fuels, which included “woody biomass” being converted into biofuels. </p>

<p>However, the IEA report also warned that, for fuels to be considered sustainable, they “need to comply” with other criteria, “such as preservation of biodiversity, sustainable water management and compliance with social safeguards”. </p>

<p>In a <a href="https://static1.squarespace.com/static/610ffde0dd5c39015edc6873/t/691262af7aa3715742f6e791/1762812591532/Biofuels+and+Carbon+Markets+do+not+Raise+Climate+Ambition.pdf">statement</a> from the <a href="https://www.clara.earth/">Climate Land Ambition and Rights Alliance</a> (CLARA), former Tasmanian Greens leader <a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Peg_Putt">Peg Putt</a> from the <a href="https://environmentalpaper.org/biomass/">Biomass Action Network</a> called the pledge’s promotion of liquid and gaseous fuels derived from wood a “dangerous distraction”. Putt said:</p>

<blockquote class="wp-block-quote is-layout-flow wp-block-quote-is-layout-flow">
<p>“The combustion of wood for bioenergy releases massive amounts of stored greenhouse gases immediately and the myth of its carbon neutrality is based on flawed accounting that ignores the decades forests need to regrow, if they ever do. The true carbon cost rarely appears on any national balance sheet.”</p>
</blockquote>

<p>Many <a href="https://www.desmog.com/2025/11/20/backed-by-industry-brazilian-hosts-seek-cop30s-blessing-for-biofuels/">observers</a> feared that biofuels would be included in the negotiations or in COP30’s cover decision. </p>

<p>As of an 18 November <a href="https://unfccc.int/sites/default/files/resource/UAE_JTWP_cop30_.pdf">informal note</a>, elements for a decision on the just transition work programme still referred to the role of “<a href="https://www.carbonbrief.org/cop28-key-outcomes-agreed-at-the-un-climate-talks-in-dubai/">transitional fuels</a>”.</p>

<p>That term has no officially agreed definition, although many states believe that it covers bioenergy and biofuels.</p>

<figure class="wp-block-image size-full"><img alt=""Option 1: The role of transitional fuels in achieving just transitions that align with different national priorities and circumstances; Option 2: no text"" class="wp-image-60331" height="192" src="https://www.carbonbrief.org/wp-content/uploads/2025/11/ragout1.webp" width="1089" /><figcaption class="wp-element-caption">Several iterations of the just transition text included an option with a reference to “transitional fuels”, which didn’t make it to the final text. Source: UNFCCC (<a href="https://unfccc.int/sites/default/files/resource/UAE_JTWP_cop30_.pdf">2025</a>)</figcaption></figure>

<p>This option was deleted from <a href="https://unfccc.int/sites/default/files/resource/UAE_JTWP_cop30_1.pdf">draft text</a> published on 21 November, and is not reflected in the <a href="https://unfccc.int/sites/default/files/resource/cma2025L_L14_adv.pdf">final</a> just transition work programme decision. </p>

<p>The final global mutirão decision also had no explicit mention of biofuels, transitional fuels or sustainable fuels.</p>

<h2 class="wp-block-heading">Food systems and water</h2>

<p>Transforming food systems and agriculture was one of the six “pillars” on the COP30 “<a href="https://cop30.br/en/action-agenda">action agenda</a>”, but many observers were disappointed with the outcomes on food in Belém. </p>

<p>Food solutions were “on display” at COP30 – in the form of <a href="https://www.fao.org/agroecology/database/detail/en/c/1748724/">local dishes</a> served to delegates and new pledges announced – but “none of this made it into the negotiating rooms or the final agreement”, said <a href="https://ipes-food.org/people/elisabetta-recine/">Dr Elisabette Recine</a>, a member of the <a href="https://ipes-food.org/">International Panel of Experts on Sustainable Food Systems</a> (IPES-Food). She added in a statement:</p>

<blockquote class="wp-block-quote is-layout-flow wp-block-quote-is-layout-flow">
<p>“Despite all the talk, negotiators failed to act, and the lived realities of those most affected by hunger, poverty and climate shocks went unheard.”</p>
</blockquote>

<p>Outside the formal negotiations, a number of new pledges were announced, including the <a href="https://cop30.br/en/news-about-cop30/leaders-sign-declaration-on-hunger-poverty-and-people-centered-climate-action">Belém declaration on hunger, poverty and human-centered climate action</a>, which aims to address the “unequal distribution of climate impacts”. </p>

<p>This was adopted by 43 countries and the EU and focused on a number of actions, including supporting climate adaptation for small farmers and expanding social-protection systems, such as government unemployment and illness pay. The German cooperation and development minister <a href="https://agenciabrasil.ebc.com.br/en/meio-ambiente/noticia/2025-11/environment-minister-hunger-climate-crisis-must-be-tackled-together">described</a> it as a “pioneering step in linking climate action, social protection and food security”. </p>

<p>The <a href="https://www.unep.org/node">UN Environment Programme</a> (UNEP) launched a <a href="https://www.unep.org/news-and-stories/press-release/food-waste-breakthrough-launches-help-cities-halve-food-waste-cut">food waste</a> initiative to help halve food waste by 2030 and also target a reduction in <a href="https://www.carbonbrief.org/in-depth-qa-what-food-waste-means-for-climate-change/">methane</a> emissions of up to 7%, as food waste is a <a href="https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S0095069625000580">source</a> of the potent greenhouse gas. (See: <a href="#13" rel="nofollow">Methane</a>.) </p>

<p>The food waste pledge was backed by Brazil, Japan and the UK, alongside several cities and private companies, and included goals for governments to integrate food waste into climate and biodiversity plans.</p>

<figure class="wp-block-image size-full"><img alt="Delegates inside the COP30 conference venue in Belém, Brazil on 14 November. Credit: IISD/ENB | Mike Muzurakis" class="wp-image-60349" height="683" src="https://www.carbonbrief.org/wp-content/uploads/2025/11/UNFCCC-COP30-MM-4551.jpg" width="1024" /><figcaption class="wp-element-caption">Delegates inside the COP30 conference venue in Belém, Brazil on 14 November. Credit: <a href="https://enb.iisd.org/media/around-venue-2-unfccc-cop-30-14nov-2025-photo">IISD/ENB | Mike Muzurakis </a></figcaption></figure>

<p>The thematic days for food and agriculture on 19 and 20 November saw a raft of other new announcements, including Brazil launching the <a href="https://www.fao.org/climate-change/news/news-detail/cop30--nine-countries-back-brazil-led-finance-accelerator-to-scale-farmland-restoration-worldwide/">resilient agriculture investment for net-zero land degradation</a> (RAIZ).</p>

<p>This initiative is aimed at bringing together governments and investors to restore degraded farmland. It was backed by 10 countries, including the UK, Australia and Saudi Arabia.</p>

<p>An FAO <a href="https://www.fao.org/climate-change/news/news-detail/cop30--nine-countries-back-brazil-led-finance-accelerator-to-scale-farmland-restoration-worldwide/">press release</a> said RAIZ will help governments to attract more funding and allocate investment towards restoring agricultural land. No specific financial goal was mentioned, but <a href="https://www.linkedin.com/in/bruno-brasil-5791749/?originalSubdomain=br">Bruno Brasil</a> from Brazil’s ministry of agriculture said in a <a href="https://www.fao.org/climate-change/news/news-detail/cop30--nine-countries-back-brazil-led-finance-accelerator-to-scale-farmland-restoration-worldwide/">statement</a> that it could “unlock billions globally to restore degraded farmland, protect biodiversity and ensure food security”. </p>

<p>Brazil and the UK also put forward a <a href="https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/belem-declaration-on-fertilisers/belem-declaration-on-fertilisers">declaration</a> to spur action around reducing the environmental impact of <a href="https://www.carbonbrief.org/qa-what-does-the-worlds-reliance-on-fertilisers-mean-for-climate-change/">fertilisers</a>. This expressed “intent” to prioritise sustainable production of fertilisers and improved nutrient management, alongside recognising that improper use of fertilisers “threaten[s] our ecosystems and food systems”. </p>

<p>Additionally, some initiatives launched at previous COPs were updated in Belém. Colombia, Italy and Vietnam <a href="https://allianceofchampions.org/wp-content/uploads/2025/11/COP30-Food-Day-press-release.pdf">joined</a> the <a href="https://allianceofchampions.org/">Alliance of Champions for Food Systems Transformation</a> – a coalition of countries pledging to take strong action on transforming food systems that was first launched at <a href="https://www.carbonbrief.org/cop28-key-outcomes-for-food-forests-land-and-nature-at-the-un-climate-talks-in-dubai/">COP28</a>. </p>

<p>A number of reports released during the talks looked at how food systems were included in countries’ climate plans, called “nationally determined contributions”, or NDCs. A <a href="https://climatefocus.com/wp-content/uploads/2025/11/Food_Forward_NDCs.pdf">report</a> from <a href="https://www.wwf.org.uk/">WWF</a> and <a href="https://climatefocus.com/">Climate Focus</a> found that 93% of new NDCs included at least one measure around agriculture or food systems, an increase from 86% of previous pledges. </p>

<p>Another NGO <a href="https://foodsystemsndcscorecard.org/">assessment</a> of how food systems were incorporated into 10 NDCs found that pledges from Somalia and Switzerland were “very strong” in this regard and included actions from across the entire food system. Climate pledges from Brazil and New Zealand, on the other hand, were ranked as “weak”, the report said. </p>

<p><a href="https://www.linkedin.com/in/sebastian-osborn-63a35192/">Sebastian Osborn</a> from <a href="https://mercyforanimals.org/">Mercy for Animals</a>, one of the organisations involved in the assessment, told a <a href="https://unfccc-events.azureedge.net/COP30_108772/agenda?_gl=1*obd5y0*_ga*MTM5MDQ2MDM4OC4xNzU3MDgyMzk3*_ga_7ZZWT14N79*czE3NjMzNzg0OTEkbzEwNiRnMSR0MTc2MzM3ODUwNSRqNDYkbDAkaDA.">press conference</a>:</p>

<blockquote class="wp-block-quote is-layout-flow wp-block-quote-is-layout-flow">
<p>“Overall, countries are not fully embracing the potential benefits of incorporating food systems into their climate policies.”</p>
</blockquote>

<p>Elsewhere, the <a href="https://www.gatesfoundation.org/ideas/media-center/press-releases/2025/11/smallholder-farmers-investment-cop30">Gates Foundation</a> put forward $1.4bn for smallerholder farmer climate adaptation in sub-Saharan Africa and south Asia. The <a href="https://www.rockefellerfoundation.org/news/rockefeller-foundation-supports-brazil-led-food-solutions-to-nourish-people-at-cop30/">Rockefeller Foundation</a> announced more than $5.4m to “strengthen the resilience” of food systems and provide children’s school meals.  </p>

<p>In terms of water and ocean outcomes, six more countries <a href="https://oceanographicmagazine.com/news/cop30-nations-boost-ocean-ambition-but-skip-key-emissions-cuts/">joined</a> the “<a href="https://oceanconservancy.org/work/climate/blue-ndc-challenge/">blue NDC challenge</a>”, an initiative launched by Brazil and France earlier this year that encourages nations to integrate ocean measures into their climate pledges. </p>

<p>Finally, analysis from the <a href="https://www.wri.org/">World Resources Institute</a>, <a href="https://ocean-climate.org/en/home-4/">Ocean & Climate Platform</a> and <a href="https://oceanconservancy.org/">Ocean Conservancy</a> found that more than 90% of new NDCs submitted by coastal and island countries included ocean-based climate actions, an increase from 73% in 2022. </p>

<h2 class="wp-block-heading">Climate and nature ‘synergies’</h2>

<p>Some hoped that a first-of-its-kind outcome on jointly addressing climate change, biodiversity loss and land degradation could emerge from COP30.</p>

<p>However, in the end, pushback from some nations scuppered plans for a new “synergies” agreement.</p>

<p>At the <a href="https://unfccc.int/process-and-meetings/the-rio-conventions">Rio Earth summit</a> in 1992, the world decided to address Earth’s most pressing environmental problems under three separate conventions: one on climate change, one on biodiversity and the final one on land desertification.</p>

<p>But, for the past few years, a growing number of <a href="https://www.carbonbrief.org/explainer-can-climate-change-and-biodiversity-loss-be-tackled-together/">scientists, politicians and diplomats</a> have questioned whether tackling these issues separately is the right approach.</p>

<p>And, at the most recent <a href="https://www.cbd.int/doc/decisions/cop-16/cop-16-dec-22-en.pdf">biodiversity</a> and <a href="https://www.unccd.int/sites/default/files/2025-03/8-cop16.pdf">land desertification</a> COPs, countries agreed to new texts calling for closer cooperation between the three Rio conventions. </p>

<p>Speaking at a side event on nature at COP30, <a href="https://time.com/collections/time-100-climate-2025/7326595/juan-carlos-monterrey-gomez/">Juan Carlos Monterrey</a>, Panama’s hat-sporting special climate envoy, said that countries committed a “big sin” when they decided to “decided to split the environment into three different structures”.</p>

<p>(Panama has <a href="https://unfccc.int/sites/default/files/resource/Panama_Presentation.pdf">plans</a> to be the first country to publish one document that will function as both its climate plan – known as a “nationally determined contribution” (NDC) – and its nature plan – known as a “national biodiversity strategy and action plan” (NBSAP).)</p>

<p>After pledging to make COP30 a “<a href="https://www.carbonbrief.org/cop29-key-outcomes-for-food-forests-land-and-nature-at-the-un-climate-talks-in-baku/">nature COP</a>”, the presidency <a href="https://bsky.app/profile/drsimevans.carbonbrief.org/post/3m5pcm7kv732p">held consultations</a> on an agenda item called “cooperation with other international organisations”, with the hopes of producing the first substantive outcome on addressing climate change, biodiversity loss and land degradation together.</p>

<p>A draft “areas of interest” <a href="https://unfccc.int/sites/default/files/resource/Cooperation_OIC_cop_30_1.pdf">text</a> linked to the issue spoke of “creat[ing] a space for continuous discussions to enhance cooperation among the Rio conventions” and the “establishment of a process to come up with a set of recommendations on how to enhance cooperation and policy coherence”.</p>

<p>However, several nations, including Saudi Arabia, <a href="https://enb.iisd.org/belem-un-climate-change-conference-cop30-daily-report-17nov2025">vocally opposed</a> the progression of a substantive outcome – and the <a href="https://unfccc.int/sites/default/files/resource/cp2025_L01_adv.pdf">final version</a> of the “synergies” text is just five paragraphs long, containing little that is new.</p>

<p>Observers pointed out to Carbon Brief that Saudi Arabia’s opposition was particularly puzzling, given it currently holds the presidency for the desertification COP.</p>

<p>In an interview with Carbon Brief, <a href="https://www.mewa.gov.sa/en/HowWeCanHelp/MinistryOfficials/Pages/main.aspx">Dr Osama Faqeeha</a>, deputy environment minister for Saudi Arabia and chief adviser to the COP16 desertification presidency, said that the nation did not support any action that might lead to “dissolving the conventions”.</p>

<p>When pressed on whether, as the COP16 desertification presidency, it should be prioritising more “synergistic” work between the three Rio conventions, Faqeeha added:</p>

<blockquote class="wp-block-quote is-layout-flow wp-block-quote-is-layout-flow">
<p>“We have to realise the convention is about land. Preventing land degradation and combating drought. These are the two major challenges.” </p>
</blockquote>

<p><a href="https://www.zsl.org/about-zsl/our-people/bethan-laughlin">Bethan Laughlin</a>, a senior policy specialist at the <a href="https://www.zsl.org/">Zoological Society of London</a>, said the final synergies text “fell short of the high ambition championed by many countries and civil society”, but does offer some hope for future collaboration. She told Carbon Brief:</p>

<blockquote class="wp-block-quote is-layout-flow wp-block-quote-is-layout-flow">
<p>“This agenda item may not have had a substantive outcome in the text, but it also did not fail. Countries have committed to continued dialogue and collaboration, moving [the agenda item] beyond its previous relegation as a brief annual intersessional discussion – towards meaningful political engagement.” </p>
</blockquote>

<h2 class="wp-block-heading">Indigenous representation</h2>

<p>COP30 achieved several milestones for Indigenous peoples, including securing recognition of their land rights in the mutirão decision and agreeing on a <a href="https://cop30.br/en/news-about-cop30/cop30-landmark-outcomes-emerge-from-negotiations-despite-unprecedented-geopolitical-tensions">just transition mechanism</a> that <a href="https://www.culturalsurvival.org/news/despite-record-indigenous-presence-brazil-cop30-climate-summit-sparks-frustration-over#:~:text=This%20year%27s%20major%20global%20climate,highlight%20the%20guardians%20of%20biodiversity">ensures</a> that Indigenous peoples rights are included.</p>

<p>Belém’s climate summit was attended by more than 3,000 representatives of Indigenous peoples, making it the <a href="https://www.culturalsurvival.org/news/despite-record-indigenous-presence-brazil-cop30-climate-summit-sparks-frustration-over">largest participation</a> of Indigenous peoples in the history of COPs.</p>

<p>However, <a href="https://www.culturalsurvival.org/?gad_source=1&gad_campaignid=1442219742&gbraid=0AAAAAD9zhqzgkNY3uVzbMthE3r7oQuXnz&gclid=Cj0KCQiAoZDJBhC0ARIsAERP-F-U6tXJ_CKQTkHM_dhTFiuaz2QkJ12UZx0L-SHve6wXJK5DzktbSJgaAoqvEALw_wcB">Cultural Survival</a> – a not-for-profit organisation that supports Indigenous rights worldwide – said in a <a href="https://www.culturalsurvival.org/news/despite-record-indigenous-presence-brazil-cop30-climate-summit-sparks-frustration-over#:~:text=This%20year's%20major%20global%20climate,highlight%20the%20guardians%20of%20biodiversity.">statement</a> that this COP was “one of the most frustrating and disappointing” for Indigenous peoples. It noted that only 14% of 2,500 Indigenous representatives from Brazil received accreditation to access the official negotiations area.</p>

<p><a href="https://coicamazonia.org/fany/">Fany Kuiru</a>, general coordinator of the <a href="https://coicamazonia.org/">Coordinator of Indigenous Organisations of the Amazon Basin</a> (COICA), told Carbon Brief that some Indigenous representatives felt discontent due to a lack of “full and effective” participation.</p>

<p>On the second day of COP30, dozens of Indigenous protesters<a href="https://www.reuters.com/sustainability/cop/protestors-force-their-way-into-cop30-venue-clash-with-security-2025-11-11/"> clashed</a> with security guards in order to enter the negotiations and demand climate action and forest protection.</p>

<p><a href="https://events.globallandscapesforum.org/speaker/emil-siren-gualinga/">Emil Gualinga</a>, a member of the Kichwa Peoples of Sarayaku, in Ecuador, said in a<a href="https://www.scoop.co.nz/stories/WO2511/S00224/indigenous-and-afro-descendant-leaders-from-tropical-forest-countries-assess-progress-on-cop30-demands.htm"> press release</a> that Indigenous peoples continue to be excluded from negotiation rooms and most of their proposals were not incorporated into final decisions.</p>

<p>In Belém, Brazil’s minister of Indigenous peoples, Sonia Guajajara <a href="https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2025/nov/15/indigenous-lands-must-be-recognised-as-part-of-climate-policy-says-brazilian-minister">called for</a> the mutirão text to integrate the demarcation of Indigenous lands as a climate policy.</p>

<p>Indigenous peoples viewed this statement as “quite positive”, <a href="https://rainforestjournalismfund.org/stories/video-voices-forest-toya-manchineri-portuguese#:~:text=Thirty%20Years%20Later:%20Brazil's%20Reconquered,interview%20in%20Portuguese%2C%20click%20here.">Toya Manchineri</a>, general coordinator of the <a href="https://coiab.org.br/">Coordination of Indigenous Organisations of the Brazilian Amazon</a> (COIAB), said at a press conference attended by Carbon Brief.</p>

<p>Currently, few countries’ climate plans recognise the territorial rights of Indigenous peoples as climate instruments, according to a recent <a href="https://rightsandresources.org/publication/a-model-proposal-for-rights-based-ndcs-the-ideal-nationally-determined-contribution-commitments-with-and-for-indigenous-peoples-afro-descendant-peoples-and-local-communities/">report</a> that analysed the NDCs of 15 countries in Latin America, Africa and Asia.</p>

<p>One of the major outcomes of COP30 for Indigenous peoples was the <a href="https://forestclimateleaders.org/news-and-resources/high-level-event-on-the-intergovernmental-land-tenure-commitment-at-cop30/#:~:text=A%20historic%20moment%20for%20territorial%20rights&text=The%20Commitment%20represents%20the%20first,the%20Commitment%20on%20Brazil's%20behalf.">commitment</a> to allocate $1.8bn to support Indigenous peoples and Afrodescendants’ tenure rights from 2026 to 2030 as part of the <a href="https://www.tenurepledge.org/ftfg-cop-30-pledge-press-release.pdf">Forest and Land Tenure Pledge</a>. Another finance-related outcome was the establishment of the Tropical Forest Forever Facility, which guarantees that 20% of its funds will go to Indigenous groups. (See: <a href="#3" rel="nofollow">Tropical Forest Forever Facility and other forest pledges</a>.)</p>

<p>Additionally, 15 countries <a href="https://forestclimateleaders.org/news-and-resources/high-level-event-on-the-intergovernmental-land-tenure-commitment-at-cop30/#:~:text=A%20historic%20moment%20for%20territorial%20rights&text=The%20Commitment%20represents%20the%20first,the%20Commitment%20on%20Brazil's%20behalf.">committed</a> to a collective target to recognise and secure land tenure of 160m hectares by 2030 for Indigenous peoples and Afro-descendant communities. Brazil <a href="https://forestclimateleaders.org/news-and-resources/high-level-event-on-the-intergovernmental-land-tenure-commitment-at-cop30/#:~:text=A%20historic%20moment%20for%20territorial%20rights&text=The%20Commitment%20represents%20the%20first,the%20Commitment%20on%20Brazil's%20behalf.">announced</a> the demarcation of 10 new Indigenous territories and <a href="https://www.scoop.co.nz/stories/WO2511/S00224/indigenous-and-afro-descendant-leaders-from-tropical-forest-countries-assess-progress-on-cop30-demands.htm">acknowledged</a> that 59m hectares must be secured over the next five years.</p>

<p>The preamble of the <a href="https://unfccc.int/documents/654389">mutirão decision</a> also recognised Indigenous rights, including their land rights and traditional knowledge.</p>

<figure class="wp-block-image size-full"><img alt=""Global Mutirão: Uniting humanity in a global mobilization against climate change The Conference of the Parties serving as the meeting of the Parties to the Paris Agreement, Acknowledging that climate change is a common concern of humankind and that Parties should, when taking action to address climate change, respect, promote and consider their respective obligations on human rights, the right to a clean, healthy and sustainable environment, the right to health, the rights of Indigenous Peoples, as well as their land rights and traditional knowledge, and of local communities, migrants, children, persons with disabilities and people in vulnerable situations and the right to development, as well as gender equality, empowerment of women and intergenerational equity,"" class="wp-image-60335" height="543" src="https://www.carbonbrief.org/wp-content/uploads/2025/11/ragout5.webp" width="1200" /><figcaption class="wp-element-caption">The mutirão decision sets out that climate action taken by countries should “respect, promote and consider” the rights of Indigenous peoples, including their land rights and traditional knowledge. Source: UNFCCC (<a href="https://unfccc.int/sites/default/files/resource/cma2025_L24_adv.pdf">2025</a>)</figcaption></figure>

<p>Gualinga, the Ecuadorean Indigenous leader, said in a<a href="https://www.scoop.co.nz/stories/WO2511/S00224/indigenous-and-afro-descendant-leaders-from-tropical-forest-countries-assess-progress-on-cop30-demands.htm"> press release</a> that this recognition was an “important step forward and it gives us tools to continue advocating for our rights in future decisions”.</p>

<p>However, he noted that Indigenous groups had proposed more robust language in the mutirão text, such as including their full and effective participation in the development and implementation of NDCs, as well as direct access to financing.</p>

<p>Indigenous peoples also demanded that the climate finance received by countries must include their traditional knowledge and “explicit guarantees” of principles such as free, prior and informed consent, legal security of land, Indigenous land tenure and complaint mechanisms, Kuiru told Carbon Brief.</p>

<p>She added that Indigenous communities have their own mechanisms for managing funds and that “have already demonstrated to be efficient”, which is why they advocate for direct funding to Indigenous peoples.</p>

<p>Indigenous peoples around the world have struggled to receive such funding directly. Only 0.7% of climate finance provided to developing countries mentions the word “Indigenous”, a <a href="https://www.iied.org/less-third-climate-finance-even-mentions-local-communities-study-suggests">new study</a> by the <a href="https://www.iied.org/">International Institute for Environment and Development</a> (IIED) found.</p>

<p>The mutirão decision <a href="https://www.scoop.co.nz/stories/WO2511/S00224/indigenous-and-afro-descendant-leaders-from-tropical-forest-countries-assess-progress-on-cop30-demands.htm">ultimately did not</a> include direct access to climate finance for Indigenous peoples.</p>

<h2 class="wp-block-heading">Methane</h2>

<p>Methane – the potent greenhouse gas that is the second-biggest <a href="https://www.carbonbrief.org/qa-why-methane-levels-are-rising-with-no-hint-of-a-decline/">contributor</a> to global warming, after CO2 – featured in several COP30 pledges and announcements, but overall did not make major waves in Belém. </p>

<p>A UNEP <a href="https://www.unep.org/resources/report/global-methane-status-report-2025">report</a> released during the summit looked at countries’ progress towards meeting the voluntary <a href="https://www.carbonbrief.org/guest-post-the-global-methane-pledge-needs-to-go-further-to-help-limit-warming-to-1-5c/">global pledge</a> to reduce methane emissions by 30% by 2030, which has been <a href="https://www.globalmethanepledge.org/">backed</a> by almost 160 countries since its launch at <a href="https://www.carbonbrief.org/cop26-key-outcomes-for-food-forests-land-use-and-nature-in-glasgow/">COP26</a>.</p>

<p>The report found that while progress has been made on the extent of the increase in methane, emissions are <a href="https://www.carbonbrief.org/qa-why-methane-levels-are-rising-with-no-hint-of-a-decline/">still rising</a> each year. Based on current government pledges, methane emissions will reduce by 8% by 2030, but they could reduce by 32% with more ambition and “full implementation of existing technically feasible reductions”, the report found. </p>

<p><a href="https://www.unep.org/people/martin-krause">Martin Krause</a>, the director of the climate-change division at UNEP, said at the report’s <a href="https://www.unep.org/events/unep-event/imeo-ministerial-cop30">launch</a> that drastically cutting methane is “like pulling the climate emergency brake”, saying countries should “pull that brake hard and fast”. </p>

<p><a href="https://changingmarkets.org/author/caitlin/">Caitlin Smith</a> at the <a href="https://changingmarkets.org/">Changing Markets Foundation</a> campaign group said in a statement that to make progress on cutting methane, governments must “ramp up action on agriculture – the biggest source of methane, yet a blind spot for most rich countries”. </p>

<p><a href="https://planet-tracker.org/global-methane-pledge-unachievable-without-action-from-agri-food-giants/">Research</a> from thinktank <a href="https://planet-tracker.org/">Planet Tracker</a> – released just before COP30 – found that 52 of the world’s largest meat, dairy and rice companies emit a combined 22m tonnes of methane every year. </p>

<p>The report also found that only seven of these 52 companies directly report the distribution and scale of their methane emissions and just one – <a href="https://www.danone.com/content/dam/corp/global/danonecom/about-us-impact/policies-and-commitments/en/Danone_Methane_Action_Plan_2025.pdf.coredownload.inline.pdf">Danone</a> – has a specific methane-reduction target. </p>

<p>Also during the talks, the <a href="https://changingmarkets.org/">Changing Markets Foundation</a> launched an <a href="https://changingmarkets.org/press-releases/new-methane-action-tracker-puts-agricultural-methane-emissions-under-the-spotlight-as-cop30-opens/">interactive tool</a> tracking agricultural methane <a href="https://methaneactiontracker.org/">emissions</a> from companies and countries around the world. </p>

<p>Meanwhile, <a href="https://www.fwi.co.uk/news/environment/lucky-escape-as-government-shelves-cop30-methane-pledge">Farmers Weekly</a> reported that the UK government “quietly shelved” plans to announce a national pledge to cut livestock methane emissions by 30% by 2030. </p>

<p>The UK, Brazil and China hosted a methane summit on the weekend before talks officially began. During this event, the <a href="https://www.ccacoalition.org/">Climate and Clean Air Coalition</a> launched an “action accelerator” to help governments in developing countries cut emissions from <a href="https://www.carbonbrief.org/guest-post-how-super-pollutants-harm-human-health-and-worsen-climate-change/">super pollutants</a>, including methane.</p>

<p>Brazil, Cambodia, Nigeria and four other countries have been initially chosen for this initiative and will receive a combined $25m to “advance their efforts in this area. The plan aims to work with up to 30 countries by 2030 and gather around $150m in funds. Additionally, 11 countries signed a <a href="https://www.ccacoalition.org/content/statement-drastically-reducing-methane-emissions-global-fossil-fuel-sector">statement</a> committing to “drastically reducing” fossil methane emissions. </p>

<p>Other measures were announced in Belém, including a joint <a href="https://www.globalmethanehub.org/2025/11/10/the-global-methane-hub-and-global-green-growth-institute-launch-strategic-partnership-to-accelerate-methane-emission-reductions-in-developing-economies/">strategy</a> to boost methane reductions across the agriculture, energy and waste sectors in developing countries, launched by the <a href="https://www.globalmethanehub.org/">Global Methane Hub</a> and the <a href="https://gggi.org/">Global Green Growth Institute</a>. </p>

<p>This initiative will focus on Mexico, Nigeria and Senegal, a <a href="https://www.globalmethanehub.org/2025/11/10/the-global-methane-hub-and-global-green-growth-institute-launch-strategic-partnership-to-accelerate-methane-emission-reductions-in-developing-economies/">statement</a> said. </p>

<p>On 19 November, a scheme to boost efforts to cut methane and nitrous oxide emissions from agriculture was launched. The <a href="https://www.ccacoalition.org/content/farmers-initiative-resilient-and-sustainable-transformations-first">farmers’ initiative for resilient and sustainable transformations</a> (FIRST) aims to help countries in Latin America, Africa and Asia share “practical, low-cost solutions that cut emissions, strengthen food security and improve resilience”, a <a href="https://www.ccacoalition.org/news/ministers-launch-global-south-south-effort-cut-methane-and-nitrous-oxide-agriculture">statement</a> from the Climate and Clean Air Coalition said. </p>

<p>Some funding was also put forward for tackling methane, with businessman <a href="https://x.com/MikeBloomberg">Mike Bloomberg</a> announcing <a href="https://carbon-pulse.com/453318/">$100m</a> in investment towards methane-cutting efforts, such as satellite monitoring of leaks of the gas. </p>

<p>Bloomberg told a press briefing attended by Carbon Brief that methane is an “extremely important part of the climate puzzle”. </p>

<h2 class="wp-block-heading">Agricultural greenwashing</h2>

<p>Brazil is a major <a href="https://www.ifad.org/en/w/countries/brazil">producer</a> of soya beans, beef, rice, biofuels and many other agricultural products. As a result, observers and media outlets were keenly watching out for any instances of agribusiness-related greenwashing or lobbying at COP30. </p>

<p>Before the negotiations began, <a href="https://www.desmog.com/2025/10/26/big-ag-greenwashing-climate-summit-cop30/">DeSmog</a> published a list of eight “big ag greenwashing terms” to watch out for in Belém. These included phrases such as <a href="https://interactive.carbonbrief.org/glossary/agriculture/index.html">regenerative agriculture</a>, as well as arguments around fossil fuels and ways of measuring <a href="https://www.carbonbrief.org/qa-what-the-controversial-gwp-methane-metric-means-for-farming-emissions/">methane emissions</a>. </p>

<p>The outlet published a number of other articles during the talks, reporting (alongside the <a href="https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2025/nov/18/big-agriculture-lobbyists-cop30-climate-summit">Guardian</a>) that more than <a href="https://www.desmog.com/2025/11/18/more-than-300-lobbyists-for-industrial-agriculture-are-attending-cop30/">300 agricultural lobbyists</a> attended COP30, <a href="https://www.desmog.com/2025/11/10/mapped-big-foods-routes-to-influence-at-cop30/">mapping</a> out the food and farming companies and trade groups at COP30 and detailing the <a href="https://www.desmog.com/2025/11/16/in-brazil-agribusiness-giants-hire-celebrity-influencers-to-win-hearts-and-minds/">social media influencers</a> “enlisted” by agribusiness companies ahead of the talks.</p>

<p>“Sustainable” claims around biofuels also came under <a href="https://www.context.news/just-transition/brazil-promotes-biofuels-at-cop30-but-how-clean-are-they">scrutiny</a> in Belém. <a href="https://www.desmog.com/2025/11/20/backed-by-industry-brazilian-hosts-seek-cop30s-blessing-for-biofuels/">DeSmog</a> identified nearly 60 events on the benefits of biofuels at COP30, led by both industry groups and related companies. </p>

<p>These included a “high-level event on the critical role of biofuels” and a “sustainable biofuels” section in the summit’s action agenda. </p>

<p><a href="https://unearthed.greenpeace.org/2025/11/11/cop30-sponsors-agribusiness-deforestation-lobbying/">Unearthed</a> reported that a COP30 sustainable agriculture pavilion, located around 2km outside the official “blue zone” where negotiations took place, was “sponsored by agribiz interests linked to deforestation and anti-conservation lobbying”.</p>

<p>Campaigners protested against “big agriculture lobbyists” outside this “AgriZone” pavilion during the negotiations, the <a href="https://www.thegrocer.co.uk/news/big-agrifood-brands-targeted-at-cop30-protests/711925.article">Grocer</a> said. </p>

<p>The <a href="https://apnews.com/article/climate-change-food-agriculture-cop30-belem-brazil-ba29d1e46a075dbe1b53e079f1541f9f">Associated Press</a> said the pavilion sought to “spread a message of lower-carbon agriculture possibilities”, but added that “industrial agriculture retains a big influence at the climate talks”. </p>

<figure class="wp-block-image size-full"><img alt="Civil society and farmers’ groups protest at the industry-sponsored “AgriZone” on the first day of COP30. Credit: Jason Valenzuela, Asian Peoples’ Movement on Debt and Development (2025)" class="wp-image-60355" height="576" src="https://www.carbonbrief.org/wp-content/uploads/2025/11/COP30_FoodAction_2.jpg" width="1024" /><figcaption class="wp-element-caption">Civil society and farmers’ groups protest at the industry-sponsored “AgriZone” on the first day of COP30. Credit: Jason Valenzuela, Asian Peoples’ Movement on Debt and Development (2025)</figcaption></figure>

<p>Brazilian outlet <a href="https://apublica.org/nota/joesley-e-wesley-batista-brasil-convida-bilionarios-para-cop30/">Agência Pública</a>, meanwhile, reported that Brazil placed the “billionaire brothers” who own JBS, the world’s largest beef producer, on a “VIP list” at COP30. </p>

<p>The Changing Markets Foundation also published a <a href="https://changingmarkets.org/report/the-meat-agenda-agricultural-exceptionalism-and-greenwash-in-brazil/">report</a> looking at COP30 events led by the agriculture industry and assessing Brazil’s “agricultural methane blind spot”. </p>

<p><a href="https://x.com/1TeresaAnderson">Teresa Anderson</a>, global climate justice lead at <a href="https://www.actionaid.org.uk/">Action Aid</a>, told Carbon Brief that agribusiness was the “elephant in the room” at COP30. She added: </p>

<blockquote class="wp-block-quote is-layout-flow wp-block-quote-is-layout-flow">
<p>“We’ve had this COP set in the Amazon, with the Brazilian presidency, talking a big game on forests, but absolute crickets when it comes to naming the biggest <a href="https://ourworldindata.org/drivers-of-deforestation">threat</a> to forests, which is big industrial agriculture.”</p>
</blockquote>

<div class="col-xs-12 col-sm-3">
<div class="card card-category">

<a href="https://www.carbonbrief.org/webinar-carbon-briefs-third-ask-us-anything-at-cop30/"><img src="https://www.carbonbrief.org/wp-content/uploads/2025/11/webinar-template-2-1-300x200.jpg" /></a>

<div class="content mh">
<p class="text-header-s content"><a href="https://www.carbonbrief.org/webinar-carbon-briefs-third-ask-us-anything-at-cop30/">Webinar: Carbon Brief’s third ‘ask us anything’ at COP30</a></p>
<div class="meta-info d-flex justify-content-start align-items-center">
<p class="text-tag-s">COP30 Belém</p>
<span class="pipe-spacer">|</span>
<p class="text-tag-meta">25.11.25</p>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>

<div class="col-xs-12 col-sm-3">
<div class="card card-category">

<a href="https://www.carbonbrief.org/cop30-key-outcomes-agreed-at-the-un-climate-talks-in-belem/"><img src="https://www.carbonbrief.org/wp-content/uploads/2025/11/UNFCCC-COP30-MM-0354_1-300x200.jpg" /></a>

<div class="content mh">
<p class="text-header-s content"><a href="https://www.carbonbrief.org/cop30-key-outcomes-agreed-at-the-un-climate-talks-in-belem/">COP30: Key outcomes agreed at the UN climate talks in Belém</a></p>
<div class="meta-info d-flex justify-content-start align-items-center">
<p class="text-tag-s">COP30 Belém</p>
<span class="pipe-spacer">|</span>
<p class="text-tag-meta">23.11.25</p>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>

<div class="col-xs-12 col-sm-3">
<div class="card card-category">

<a href="https://www.carbonbrief.org/debriefed-21-november-2025-cop30-debriefed-mutirao-text-latest-roadmaps-explained-cop-finish-times-plotted/"><img src="https://www.carbonbrief.org/wp-content/uploads/2023/06/debriefed_HERO_BLANK-1550x1033-1-300x200.png" /></a>

<div class="content mh">
<p class="text-header-s content"><a href="https://www.carbonbrief.org/debriefed-21-november-2025-cop30-debriefed-mutirao-text-latest-roadmaps-explained-cop-finish-times-plotted/">COP30 DeBriefed 21 November 2025: ‘Mutirão’ text latest; ‘Roadmaps’ explained; COP finish times plotted</a></p>
<div class="meta-info d-flex justify-content-start align-items-center">
<p class="text-tag-s">COP30 Belém</p>
<span class="pipe-spacer">|</span>
<p class="text-tag-meta">21.11.25</p>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>

<div class="col-xs-12 col-sm-3">
<div class="card card-category">

<a href="https://www.carbonbrief.org/cop30-carbon-briefs-second-ask-us-anything-webinar/"><img src="https://www.carbonbrief.org/wp-content/uploads/2025/11/Second-webinar-scaled-1-300x200.jpg" /></a>

<div class="content mh">
<p class="text-header-s content"><a href="https://www.carbonbrief.org/cop30-carbon-briefs-second-ask-us-anything-webinar/">Webinar: Carbon Brief’s second ‘ask us anything’ at COP30 </a></p>
<div class="meta-info d-flex justify-content-start align-items-center">
<p class="text-tag-s">COP30 Belém</p>
<span class="pipe-spacer">|</span>
<p class="text-tag-meta">17.11.25</p>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>

</div>

</div>
</div>

<p>The post <a href="https://www.carbonbrief.org/cop30-key-outcomes-for-food-forests-land-and-nature-at-the-un-climate-talks-in-belem/">COP30: Key outcomes for food, forests, land and nature at the UN climate talks in Belém</a> appeared first on <a href="https://www.carbonbrief.org">Carbon Brief</a>.</p>

📝 RSS Summary Only

COP30: Key outcomes for food, forests, land and nature at the UN climate talks in Belém

AI Analysis

Summary

More from Carbon Brief

UK budget 2025: Key climate and energy announcements

Webinar: Carbon Brief’s third ‘ask us anything’ at COP30

COP30: Key outcomes agreed at the UN climate talks in Belém

COP30 DeBriefed 21 November 2025: ‘Mutirão’ text latest; ‘Roadmaps’ explained; …

Cropped 19 November 2025: COP30 edition