E3G’s team in Bonn report back on the outcomes of the first week of talks, and what to expect from week 2.
Where are we at the end of Week 1?
The COP31 vision is still taking shape. Türkiye and Australia have signalled a focus on implementation and delivery, but Parties are still looking for clearer signals on how COP31 will accelerate progress on the Paris goals. In a world rife with conflicts and geopolitical tensions and a UNFCCC process with proliferating agenda items, it is essential to build greater clarity on what the main focus will be for Antalya — within both the negotiations and non-negotiations spaces.
Finance remained a key fault line in Week 1.
The Veredas Dialogue saw constructive discussions on aligning financial flows with climate goals, but the charged discussions on the new Climate Finance Work Programme exposed familiar divides over who should provide finance and how it should be scaled up. Questions remain over whether the Work Programme will become a meaningful COP31 process or even make it onto the Antalya agenda. Finance was also front and center in the negotiations over the Just Transition BAM (Belém to Antalya Mechanism), with developing countries calling for the BAM to mobilize the large amounts of finance needed to enable just transitions and developed countries insisting that finance is not part of the mandate for negotiations over the BAM.
Parties are missing an opportunity to elevate attention to adaptation.
Discussions across the rooms highlighted the gaps in adaptation finance and other means of implementation as key barriers, yet all adaptation rooms remain stuck on technicalities with ongoing uncertainty on how the tripling of adaptation finance agreed to at COP30 will be delivered.
While negotiations remain slow, the Action Agenda has become the centre of gravity on implementation.
Türkiye’s Action Agenda targets grabbed attention this week, but the proliferation of new initiatives, from the Global Implementation Accelerator to the Belém Mission to 1.5 and the Climate Implementation Bridge, is also raising a sharper question: does the system need more tools, or rather better alignment between the ones already on the table? Meanwhile, spaces already available in the UNFCCC for discussing implementation (such as the Facilitative Multilateral Consideration of Progress, which is aimed at spurring an open dialogue on Parties’ climate actions, successes, and challenges) drew less attention.
A Brazilian COP30 Presidency session on the Roadmap for Transitioning Away from Fossil Fuels took place.
In front of a packed room, Brazil outlined progress on the roadmap and framed it as an implementation tool for the COP28 fossil fuel transition decision. Türkiye and Australia signalled support as the roadmap moves towards consolidation ahead of its launch later this year. But more clarity is needed both on the substance of the roadmap and the process for moving it forward after Brazil’s presidency comes to an end in Antalya.
The inaugural climate and trade dialogue delivered a more constructive tone than expected.
Countries remain divided on key issues, particularly around trade measures such as carbon border taxes and tariffs, but the tone was pragmatic rather than confrontational. Developing countries warned that some climate-related trade measures risk unfairly burdening those least responsible for climate change, while developed countries focused on how trade can support stronger climate action but were clear that this dialogue is not the appropriate space to discuss specific measures of individual Parties. The test now is whether future dialogues can move beyond airing differences and identify concrete areas for cooperation.
Key announcements so far
Alongside this, the COP30 and COP31 presidencies consulted with Parties and non-Party stakeholders on the Global Implementation Accelerator and the Belém Mission to 1.5 initiatives that were included in the final COP30 decision and are seeking to bridge the gap between negotiated outcomes and implementation on the ground.
Australia, in partnership with the Pacific, is planning a declaration on climate finance access for the most vulnerable to land at COP31.
In week 2, we expect to see
The inaugural meeting of the Integrated Forum on Climate Change and Trade (IFCCT) will take place on 14 June bringing together participating officials to shape the Forum’s work programme and agree on two initial priority topics, with a stakeholder briefing scheduled for 15 June.
The Asia-Pacific regional group is meeting on 15 June to discuss its recommendation on the host country for COP33; there are no declared candidates thus far but there is pressure on the group to come to agreement on this issue by COP31 in Antalya.
On 16 June the Turkiye-Australian hybrid presidency will hold open-ended consultations on their COP31 vision and priorities; Parties and non-Party stakeholders alike are hoping to get more clarity from the presidency on this front.
Also on June 16 the Annual GST-NDC Dialogue will take place. It should be used by Parties to highlight lessons learned on how the GST has informed their NDCs and NAPs, as well as to help build a shared vision for how GST2 could help to support the scale up of climate action and prevent the worst effects of 1.5°C overshoot.
What needs to happen?
A shift from early framing and political signalling to more concrete convergence across key negotiation tracks. Parties must focus on narrowing options and identifying landing zones on issues such as the Global Goal on Adaptation, Just Transition and Mitigation Work Programmes, alongside continued exchanges on the implementation-related work under the Action Agenda, Global Implementation Accelerator, Belem Mission to 1.5, and UAE Global Stocktake Dialogue follow-up.
We need to see greater clarity on the vision for adaptation at COP31, and progress on the Belém Adaptation Indicators, the Baku Adaptation Roadmap, finalization of the transition of the Adaptation Fund to serve only the Paris Agreement, and on how the tripling of adaptation finance will be taken forward.
The SB Chairs need to signal that they will actively engage a broad range of stakeholders – not just negotiators – on the focus and expected outcomes of the second and third dialogues, as well as on how this UNFCCC process will complement trade and climate workstreams taking place in other spaces, including the IFCCT, WTO, OECD, ITC, and UNCTAD.
The Subsidiary Body Chairs will almost certainly need to convene consultations with Party heads of delegation this week on several issues where insufficient progress is being made in the negotiating rooms; these could include the Climate Finance Work Programme, the Adaptation Fund, and both the substance and timeline for standing up the Just Transition BAM.
It is too early to tell whether the closing SBI and SBSTA plenaries on Thursday will see consensus reached on forwarding draft text on these and other contentious issues to the SB65 sessions during the first week of COP30 in Antalya, or if some of them are blocked from capturing whatever progress was made here in Bonn.
Quotes
Cosima Cassel, Programme Lead, Climate Diplomacy & Geopolitics, E3G, said:
“Türkiye’s Action Agenda target announcements this week shone more light on its COP31 vision, reinforcing the shift from negotiation to implementation with a welcome focus on the clean energy transition. New initiatives such as the Global Implementation Accelerator, Belém Mission to 1.5, and the Climate Implementation Bridge also add further momentum to implementation in a rapidly expanding ecosystem. The COP31 Presidency must now turn its focus to strengthening the enabling conditions on the ground so targets become deliverable, and ensure new initiatives are designed in close alignment with existing UNFCCC architecture, wider delivery mechanisms, and each other to support coherent implementation at scale.”
Alden Meyer, Senior Associate, Climate Diplomacy & Geopolitics, E3G, said:
“While progress was made on some fronts during the first week of negotiations, there are sharp differences on several issues in the adaptation, mitigation, and finance spaces. Skillful leadership will be needed from both the Subsidiary Body Chairs and the Türkiye-Australian hybrid COP31 presidency to bridge these differences and ensure a successful outcome here in Bonn. Then it will be over to the COP31 presidency to work with ministers and leaders to narrow the options for issues requiring resolution at the political level and to identify potential landing zones for decisions in Antalya.”
Ana Mulio Alvarez, Senior Policy Advisor, Climate Diplomacy & Geopolitics, E3G, said:
“It is incredibly positive that countries have come to SB64 ready to move forward on the adaptation items which caused so much debate in COP30. With a lot of important technical details on the table, it is important that the outcomes respect science and support country driven approaches for adaptation. I believe there are enough areas of convergence among parties that with some political will and compromise we could deliver significant progress for resilience in this session. “
Lily Hartzell, Senior Policy Advisor, Public Banks & Development, E3G, said:
“It is encouraging to see the focus on access to climate finance for the most vulnerable at Bonn, but Australia must ensure that COP31 makes tangible progress and avoids making more lists of promises.”
Jordan Dilworth, Policy Advisor, Climate Diplomacy & Geopolitics, said:
“Many expected the first trade and climate dialogue to be a showdown, but Parties resisted trading blows and instead engaged constructively despite entrenched differences. The test now is for the chairs to ensure that Parties feel their positions are being adequately addressed in the next round of dialogues.”
Media briefing for your diary – Bonn wrap up
As we reach the end of week 2, join E3G’s experts for a briefing of expected outcomes on Thursday 18th June 2026 14.30-15.00pm CET and live streamed on the UNFCCC platform.
