Belem, Brazil. With COP30 entering its final hours, African climate advocates say the summit risks ending in failure after two weeks of negotiations produced draft decisions that fall “dramatically short” of what vulnerable nations need.
Mohamed Adow, the Founder and Director of Power Shift Africa, issued a sharp assessment of the proposed texts, warning that the outcomes neither reflect scientific urgency nor respond to the realities faced by communities already experiencing climate devastation.
“After two weeks of talks, COP30 is drawing to a close with proposed final texts that fall dramatically short of what the world needs,” Adow said.
“What was meant to be a flexible climate agreement designed to ratchet up ambition has instead been whittled down through horse-trading to the lowest common denominator.”
Adow said negotiators, in their push to show that multilateralism still works, have ended up with outcomes that “do little to demonstrate that claim,” producing a package that fails both the science and the world’s most climate-vulnerable communities.
According to Adow, climate finance, long the most divisive issue has once again exposed the deep rift between developed and developing nations.
“Developed countries have resisted making concrete commitments, undermining attempts to secure the resources that developing nations need to act,” he said.
The Just Transition mechanism, which many had hoped would anchor the Belém talks, has been pushed into future negotiations and stripped of the coordination function that would make it effective.
“The Presidency opened the conference by calling it a ‘COP of truth’, yet two weeks on, negotiations remain stuck in a deadlock that threatens any prospect of genuine progress,” Adow said.
African priorities overlooked
Adow said Africa and other vulnerable regions arrived in Belém with clear priorities shaped by escalating climate impacts—prolonged droughts, violent cyclones, floods and mounting food insecurity.
“For Africa and other vulnerable regions, the disappointment is acute,” he said. “Instead of concrete support, what we have now is watered-down language shaped more by politics than by the severity of climatic impacts.”
He warned that the “biggest catastrophe of our times is not waiting for governments to gather courage,” adding that frontline communities cannot continue paying the price for global hesitation.
Adaptation finance text ‘weaker than Glasgow’
One of the biggest concerns for developing nations is the proposed adaptation finance goal. Adow said the draft text “falls far short” of closing Africa’s widening adaptation gap.
“Vulnerable countries came to Belém demanding an adaptation finance goal capable of meaningfully advancing delivery of the Global Goal on Adaptation,” he said. “Instead, the proposed text offers diluted language that calls only for ‘efforts’ to triple adaptation finance by 2030 relative to 2025, a baseline that is too low.”
He noted that the text places no obligation on developed nations, making it even weaker than the Glasgow pledge to double adaptation finance a commitment that at least referenced the legal responsibilities of richer nations.
According to Adow, the text also fails to address the quality of finance, omits grant-based requirements, ignores the need for balance between mitigation and adaptation, and disconnects finance from the achievement of the GGA. This approach, he said, cannot address the adaptation finance gap, projected to reach between $310 billion and $365 billion by 2035.
While some problematic GGA indicators were removed, Adow said the remaining framework “amounts to political compromises rather than instruments that can deliver resilience for the communities most at risk.”
Broader finance package ‘skirts responsibility’
Adow criticised the broader finance package for echoing many of the weaknesses seen in last year’s COP29 negotiations.
“We asked for commitments that matched the scale of the crisis; instead, the text skirts around responsibility,” he said.
The proposed Article 9.1 text establishes a two-year work programme on climate finance, but Adow warned it risks becoming “yet another discussion platform without concrete delivery” and offers no accountability mechanism or binding action plan by 2026.
“It reflects developed-country positions almost entirely, leaving developing countries back at the drawing board,” he added.
Just transition work stalled
Adow said the outcome on Just Transition acknowledges the importance of establishing a global mechanism, but fails to set it up in Belém or give it the coordination mandate needed to support workers and communities.
“Delaying its creation leaves millions of workers, especially those in Africa’s and the Global South’s informal sectors, without the support they urgently need,” he said.
He also criticised the removal of references to critical minerals from the Just Transition Work Programme, calling it “a serious setback”. He pointed to the deaths of more than 30 artisanal cobalt miners in the Democratic Republic of Congo earlier in the week as evidence of the urgent need to confront the human cost of mineral extraction.
“Excluding these issues glosses over the dangers faced by communities who supply minerals indispensable to the global shift toward renewable energy,” he said.
Mitigation talks also struggling
Mitigation discussions have been equally contentious. Adow said developed countries are pushing to reaffirm the commitments outlined in last year’s Global Stocktake, despite their own emissions pledges falling far below required levels.
“They have pointed to the Like-Minded Developing Countries as the source of delays, yet it is developed countries who arrived in Belém without the finance and means of implementation necessary to enable ambition,” he said.
“Until they come forward with genuine commitments, the LMDCs remain convenient scapegoats for inaction by those most responsible for the crisis.”
‘A narrow window for leadership’
Despite the bleak outlook, Adow said there is still a small chance for COP30 to produce meaningful outcomes.
“There is still a narrow window for leadership,” he said.
“If developed countries step forward with real, grant-based finance, credible timelines and mechanisms capable of coordinating support, COP30 could yet deliver something more than disappointment.”
He urged leaders to show clarity, coordination and solidarity.
“The world needs clear commitments, not rhetorical flourishes; coordination, not delay; solidarity, not strategic ambiguity,” Adow said. “In the next few hours, there is still time to be ambitious and sincere, and the stakes for vulnerable communities could not be higher.”