COP30 climate deal in Belem pushes a ‘just transition’ roadmap and funding pledges, drawing praise from the UN and criticism from activists and some heads of state
The COP30 climate deal that closed in Belém has prompted a mix of relief and frustration across the world. Delegates left the conference with an agreement that asks countries to “significantly accelerate and scale up climate action worldwide,” while also urging developed nations to increase support for poorer countries. Yet, for many observers and campaigners, the deal fell short because it did not endorse a clear phase-out of fossil fuels, a central demand from dozens of states and civil society groups.
What the agreement contains
The COP30 text lays out a series of measures, including a prominent call for developed countries to triple their funding to help poorer nations adapt to climate impacts, a goal framed to be met by 2035. The package also establishes mechanisms aimed at a just transition from fossil fuels, and calls for roadmaps to halt and reverse deforestation. Those provisions were described by organizers as steps forward, even if they did not satisfy everyone.
COP30 President Andre Aranha Correa do Lago acknowledged the limits of the outcome during the closing session, saying, “We know some of you had greater ambitions for some of the issues at hand. I know that you, civil society, will demand us to do more to fight climate change. I want to reaffirm that I will try not to disappoint you during my presidency.” He added that he would create two roadmaps, “One on halting and reverting [reversing] deforestation and another to transitioning away from fossil fuels in a just, orderly and equitable manner.”
Leaders and rights groups weigh in
United Nations Secretary-General Antonio Guterres struck a cautiously positive tone, saying, “COP30 has delivered progress,” and he highlighted the finance pledge and the frank recognition by negotiators that “the world is going to surpass the 1.5 degrees Celsius (2.7 degrees Fahrenheit) target” set under the Paris Agreement. Still, Guterres warned of the remaining gap, saying, “I cannot pretend that COP30 has delivered everything that is needed. The gap between where we are and what science demands remains dangerously wide,” and he acknowledged the disappointment of many, noting, “I understand many may feel dissapointed [sic] – especially young people, Indigenous Peoples and those living through climate chaos.”
European Union climate commissioner Wopke Hoekstra said, “We’re not going to hide the fact that we would have preferred to have more, to have more ambition on everything,” adding, “It is not perfect, but it is a hugely important step in the right direction.” China’s delegation head Li Gao told AFP, “I’m happy with the outcome,” and framed the text as a sign the international community was willing to cooperate in difficult circumstances.
At the same time, several leaders and advocacy groups voiced strong criticism. Colombian President Gustavo Petro wrote on social media, “I do not accept that the COP30 declaration does not clearly state, as science does, that the cause of the climate crisis is the fossil fuels used by capital. If that is not stated, everything else is hypocrisy.” Amnesty International’s climate justice adviser Ann Harrison said the host country had “made strenuous efforts to broaden participation,” but she warned that “the lack of participatory, inclusive, and transparent negotiations left both civil society and Indigenous Peoples, who answered the global mutirao [working together] call in large numbers, out of the real decision making.” Still, Harrison noted that “people power” had helped secure “a commitment to develop a Just Transition mechanism that will streamline and coordinate ongoing and future efforts to protect the rights of workers, other individuals and communities affected by fossil fuel phase out.”
Oxfam Brasil’s Viviana Santiago captured the mixed sentiments of many campaigners, saying COP30 “offered a spark of hope but far more heartbreak, as the ambition of global leaders continues to fall short of what is needed for a liveable planet.” She urged that those who built fortunes on fossil fuels must “move first and fastest” and stressed that finance must come as grants, not loans, warning that without rich-country funding, “the just energy transition risks becoming stalled in many countries.”
A group representing 39 small island and low-lying coastal states described the deal as “imperfect,” while noting it still represented a step toward progress. Cuba’s foreign minister highlighted the outcomes that mattered for developing nations, including the call for developed countries to provide adaptation finance, the creation of a mechanism to support just transitions, and “the commitment from developed countries to fulfill their obligations under the Paris Agreement.”
Why a fossil fuel phase-out was not included
The absence of explicit language endorsing a fossil fuel phase-out reflected deep divisions among negotiating states. Several countries that rely heavily on oil, gas, or coal pushed back on calls to set a global timetable to wind down those industries. That resistance made consensus on a clear fossil fuel phase-out impossible in the consensus-based COP process.
For many advocates, the omission undermines the urgency of the overall package. For negotiators and some national leaders, the compromise was the only viable path to secure other deliverables, such as strengthened finance commitments and a framework for just transitions. COP30 President do Lago sought to address the tension by promising a roadmap specifically aimed at an “orderly and equitable” move away from fossil fuels, but for critics that falls short of the explicit, science-aligned language they sought.
What comes next
Delegates left Belém with a mix of concrete commitments and unresolved tensions. The conference produced a clear call to triple climate adaptation financing from developed countries, plus the establishment of mechanisms, like the proposed Belem Action Mechanism and a new Just Transition mechanism, which advocates hope will channel support to affected workers and communities.
Still, the road ahead will require follow-through. Governments must now convert the COP30 ambitions into finance plans, national policies, and international cooperation that meet the scale of the crisis. As Guterres warned, the gap between current action and what science demands remains “dangerously wide,” and many observers, including youth, Indigenous Peoples, and frontline communities, will continue to press for faster, clearer moves away from fossil fuels.
The COP30 climate deal leaves a clear test for leaders, negotiators, and donor countries: deliver the promised finance, operationalize the just transition commitments, and produce measurable steps toward limiting warming, while responding to the criticism that the pledge did not go far enough on the fossil fuel question. For now, the agreement is a stepping stone, not a finish line, and it has sharpened the debate over how fast, and how fairly, the world will try to limit warming beyond the 1.5 degree threshold.
