General Introduction
The third day of the 30th Conference of the Parties (COP30) saw negotiations continue their course, with finance and the Just Transition Work Programme dominating the agenda. Discussions once again revealed deep fault lines among Parties, particularly concerning the Mitigation Work Programme and the annual dialogue on how the Global Stocktake (GST) informs the preparation of Nationally Determined Contributions (NDCs). Amidst this atmosphere, the Brazilian Presidency announced an extension of consultations to provide a safe space for Parties to co-create solutions, emphasizing that the process will remain Party-driven.
1. Stocktaking Plenary
In the afternoon, COP30 President André Corrêa do Lago convened a stocktaking plenary. He updated delegates on the Presidency consultations, which addressed pivotal issues including:
The Synthesis Report on NDCs
Biennial Transparency Reports (BTRs)
Implementation of Paris Agreement Article 9.1 (regarding the provision of climate finance by developed countries)
Unilateral Trade-Restrictive Measures (UTMs)
The President reported that Parties engaged in open and honest discussions in the spirit of “Mutirão” (a Portuguese term for collective effort), which enhanced mutual understanding of each other’s perspectives. In response to requests for more time, he announced that the Presidency consultations would continue to provide a “safe space” for Parties to co-create solutions, with another stocktaking plenary to be held on Saturday, 15 November.
2. Finance
Finance was a central focus of the discussions, with debates concentrated on several parallel tracks:
Standing Committee on Finance (SCF): Many delegations welcomed the steps taken towards monitoring the New Collective Quantified Goal (NCQG), while the African Group expressed concern over the SCF’s delay in starting the seventh review of the Financial Mechanism. The Arab Group and the Like-Minded Developing Countries (LMDCs) criticized the 2025 SCF Forum report for focusing on mitigation while glossing over adaptation and means of implementation.
Adaptation Fund: Developing countries expressed concern over the Fund’s limited resources and urged developed countries to scale up adaptation finance. While Switzerland emphasized the importance of diversifying funding sources, the African Group and the Alliance of Small Island States (AOSIS) called for mutual recognition of entities accredited under other funds.
Finance Flow Alignment (Article 2.1c): The Group of 77 and China (G-77/China) noted the lack of a common interpretation of Article 2.1c and its complementarity with Article 9 (climate finance). Developing country groups opposed a one-size-fits-all approach, with the African Group calling for a pathways approach with differing timeframes and instruments.
Seventh Review of the Financial Mechanism: The deadlock that began at COP26 continued. The African Group and the Arab Group insisted that developed countries must abide by the decision to initiate the review, while the EU, UK, and Australia stressed the need to reflect the role of the Conference of the Parties serving as the meeting of the Parties to the Paris Agreement (CMA) in the review.
3. Adaptation
Adaptation negotiations were marked by clear divergences, especially regarding the Global Goal on Adaptation (GGA):
Global Goal on Adaptation (GGA): Regarding the list of indicators, Australia and the UK warned that the text reads overly negative. On the indicator work programme, Grupo Sur, AILAC, Australia, the Environmental Integrity Group (EIG), and the UK favored adopting the list at CMA7, while other countries stressed the need for further work post-conference. A disagreement also emerged over defining a new adaptation finance goal, supported by Grupo Sur and opposed by the UK.
National Adaptation Plans (NAPs): Parties agreed to use the draft text from the 62nd session of the Subsidiary Body for Implementation (SBI) as the basis for discussions. The Arab Group stated that the language on Means of Implementation (MoI) should focus on the “provision and mobilization” of adaptation finance from developed countries and opposed language on “all sources of finance” and “private sector finance.”
4. Mitigation
Deep fault lines remained a prominent feature of the mitigation discussions:
Mitigation Work Programme (MWP): AOSIS, AILAC, and the EU supported linking the programme to the Global Stocktake (GST) outcomes and the 1.5°C goal, which the Arab Group and India rejected. Tuvalu called for an improved MWP that is more inclusive and ambitious. Views also diverged on the need for a process to continue the programme beyond its current mandate.
Emissions from International Aviation and Maritime Transport: The Subsidiary Body for Scientific and Technological Advice (SBSTA) heard reports from the International Civil Aviation Organization (ICAO) and the International Maritime Organization (IMO). The EU and Australia expressed concern over the adjournment of the IMO Marine Environment Protection Committee session, while the Arab Group welcomed the adjournment as an opportunity to build consensus.
5. Just Transition
Discussions in the Just Transition Work Programme (JTWP) centered heavily on the energy transition, revealing a clear split between two groups of nations:
Group A (led by the EU, AILAC, and AOSIS): Supported strong language calling for facilitating universal access to clean, sustainable energy, scaling up the deployment of renewable energy, phasing out fossil fuel subsidies, and linking decarbonization to the 1.5°C goal.
Group B (led by the African Group and LMDCs): Focused on clean cooking, emphasized that fossil fuels mean energy security, and stressed the importance of development and poverty alleviation.
Calls also emerged from Youth Non-Governmental Organizations (YOUNGO) and Indigenous Peoples Organizations to ensure labor rights, social protection, and the Free, Prior and Informed Consent of Indigenous Peoples
6. Cross-Cutting Issues
Gender: The revised draft Gender Action Plan (GAP) was discussed. Saudi Arabia, the Russian Federation, and Iran noted the presence of “controversial elements” in the text, while YOUNGO and the Women and Gender Constituency urged that the plan reflect a shared commitment to inclusivity, diversity, and intersectionality.
Capacity-Building: A disagreement arose over the continuation of capacity-building under the Kyoto Protocol after the end of its second commitment period. Japan argued for its conclusion, while the Arab Group considered it premature due to ongoing negotiations on the Article 6.4 mechanism.
Global Stocktake (GST): Disagreement persisted on whether to include substantive outcomes in a decision on the 2024 and 2025 annual dialogue reports and whether to continue the annual dialogue.
7. In the Corridors
The night of November 12 was tumultuous, as unbadged protesters stormed the Blue Zone and scuffled with UN Security. Delegate reactions varied, with some seeing the incident as “a sign that people want to be heard,” while others felt it “distracts from legitimate grievances.”
It was also noted that the lack of a dedicated space for key issues, such as tripling adaptation finance, caused the topic to surface in multiple negotiation rooms, sometimes at the expense of progress on other issues.
