Skip to content
Robert Schuman Centre for Advanced Studies - European University Institute - Florence School of Transnational Governance

What did COP30 really deliver? A look at the summit’s mixed outcomes

This year, COP30 unfolded in Belém against geopolitical tension, shifting priorities, and renewed questions about what meaningful climate progress looks like. EUI experts who attended the negotiations onsite and online reflected on the conference’s main outcomes and remaining challenges.

01 December 2025 | Policy dialogue - Research

COP30 (2)

The thirtieth UN Climate Conference carried particular significance: it marked both 30 years of COPs and 10 years since the adoption of the Paris Agreement. Held in the Amazon under the Presidency of Brazil, the summit brought symbolic milestones, contested negotiations, and new debates on climate finance, justice, and inclusion.

EUI members were involved in the discussions: Jacopo BenciniIelyzaveta Badanova, and Claire Debucquois, attended COP30 in Belém and later shared their reflections at an EUI Climate Workshop organised by the Florence School of Transnational Governance on 26 November 2025. Additional insights came from a dedicated Florence School of Regulation podcast episode with Simone Borghesi and Andris Piebalgs, who also attended the COP30 discussions.

Taken together, these observations set the stage for understanding the broader dynamics at play in Belém and show that the picture emerging from the discussions was far from straightforward progress. 

COP30 at a crossroads

Expectations going into COP30 were mixed. The Amazonian setting and the double anniversary raised hopes for renewed ambition on climate finance, justice, and inclusion. At the same time, geopolitical tensions and the absence of an official US delegation limited confidence that major breakthroughs would be possible.

According to the EUI participants, COP30 produced a broad 'Belém Package' of decisions on core pillars of the Paris Agreement, including climate finance, adaptation, just transition, and loss and damage. They also pointed to many new voluntary initiatives, such as a roadmap for a fossil-fuel phase-out, work on trade and deforestation, and proposals for cooperation under Article 6. While this surge of voluntary initiatives demonstrated political energy, it also reflected the slow pace of formal United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC) negotiations. Some of the voluntary approaches, such as more targeted carbon-market cooperation, may nonetheless become useful tools if well implemented.

Climate finance remained a central concern. The discussions in Belém, as reported to the Climate Chair, included reforms and proposals such as new approaches within the Green Climate Fund intended to ease political bottlenecks. Yet many mechanisms remain poorly defined, and a recurring concern was that numerous new funds and frameworks lack dedicated or sufficient financing.

During the discussion on the podcast episode, Simone Borghesi and Andris Pielbags highlighted key areas of focus including carbon pricing and carbon markets, particularly under Article 6 and the EU’s Carbon Border Adjustment Mechanism (CBAM), as well as the role of cities in local climate action. They outlined ideas for directing part of CBAM revenues toward supporting ecological transitions in the Global South and improving data sharing to reduce fragmentation in global carbon markets. Methane was also identified as an area requiring urgent attention, seen as a “sprint” relative to the “marathon” of CO₂ mitigation, with the summit ensuring a “decent” continuation of international efforts rather than a breakthrough.

Inclusiveness was another recurring theme. COP30 saw a record participation from Indigenous and civil society groups and the formal recognition of Indigenous knowledge alongside scientific expertise for the first time. This greater visibility was linked to the launch of the Tropical Forest Forever Facility, a new initiative to prevent deforestation and degradation of moist broadleaf forests. Yet it remains uncertain whether these gains will translate into concrete outcomes on the ground, especially in areas tied to Indigenous land rights.

Despite these advances, the overall diplomatic process was widely seen as unsatisfactory. The negotiation agenda was considered too broad to allow decisive progress on key files, and COP30 did not secure a binding commitment to phase out fossil fuels. The perception was that neither the EU nor China succeeded in compensating for the absence of the United States.

Looking ahead, concerns were expressed about the next COP, set to take place in Turkey under a joint Australian–Turkish arrangement. Whether a more targeted, coherent negotiation effort can emerge under this presidency remains unclear.

For further details on the discussions and contributions shared throughout the conference, explore the COP30 dedicated webpage.

Go back to top of the page