ECO 10, COP30
Time to keep BAMMING
We are approaching the end, and as usual, things are getting convoluted, so ECO wants to bring it back to the basics.
On Just Transition, ECO and all its many BAMbassador friends have been quite clear: we cannot leave COP30 without establishing the Belem Action Mechanism for a Global Just Transition, the purpose of which will be to coordinate, guide and enable support for Just Transition initiatives within and outside the UNFCCC and identify ways forward on international cooperation on Just Transition. It also means agreeing on inclusion, rights, and the need to apply Just Transition to all aspects of the energy transition and to other sectors that need to be transformed. The BAM is not an ideal (and by the way it is not a fund), it’s a fully fleshed-out proposal of an implementation mechanism that has all the needed safeguards and functions to actually execute a Just Transition that works for, and is backed by, workers and communities across the world.
The world needs to transition away from fossil fuels in a just, equitable and orderly way. To help achieve this, ECO welcomes the emerging conversation on a Transition Away from Fossil Fuels (TAFF) Roadmap. This new initiative needs the provision of finance and crucially, the BAM, the latter of which feels within touching distance here at COP30.
ECO also knows that we need at least US$120 billion in annual grant-based finance for Adaptation by 2030. Developed countries are all caught up showing support for indicators, but without grant-based and predictable finance, there is no implementation to track.
ECO has seen this before but never this early – closed-door talks which remove transparency, pave the way for backroom deals and we hope this isn’t the start of a slippery slope.
So, Parties, especially those developed countries blocking an implementation mechanism for Just Transition, get your priorities right and listen to the workers and communities of the world – a BAMtastic world awaits!
THE “AMAZÔNIA ADAPTADA” TASTING EXPERIENCE
For far too long, the main course “Adaptation” has been stuck in the kitchen while impacts keep arriving at the table. At COP30, diners deserve more than empty plates. A truly memorable experience requires a complete, coherent and ambitious menu.
This “Amazônia Adaptada” Tasting Menu is only served if every course is delivered. No substitutes. No omissions.
Stop the chop, COP of forests, are you in delulu?
This year at the door of Amazonia what has previously been a side discussion on deforestation took a welcome place on centre stage. But we’re not glad that the discussion is highly influenced by the hundreds of agribusiness lobbyists pushing their narratives that the industrial food system is the only way forward. They seek not only to justify their existence in this space but also to legitimize their destruction of forests. The fundamental delusion over Big Ag’s presence at COP is even expanding in Belém.
Meanwhile ECO hears rights holders chanting for their lives and livelihoods and demanding to stop industrial agriculture-driven deforestation. But somehow their voices never get past an informal consultation.
Despite the largest number of Indigenous Peoples ever attending COP30, the core negotiating text still treats their demands as afterthoughts. Crucial and well established rights such as free, prior and informed consent (FPIC) are kept in brackets rather than affirmed as binding commitments.
ECO is keen to see a roadmap to effectively end deforestation and degradation taking life in Belem, but Big Ag lobbyists are standing in the way. Evidence clearly shows that industrial agriculture has driven as much as 86% of global deforestation in the past decade. So any meaningful effort to tackle deforestation at COP30 must explicitly call for a phasing out of industrial agriculture – and a transition to healthy, resilient, equitable food systems.
Agribusiness in the forest remains, in effect, the elephant in the negotiating room. Industrial livestock and feed production stay politely unmentioned, despite being core drivers of forest conversion and climate emissions. As for biofuels, the projected 52 million hectares needed by 2030 don’t seem to bother anyone at the table; the current mandate prioritizes energy supply over environmental and social impacts.
So yes, we’re back to the same story: big promises, bracketed rights, softened targets, and the people living in the forest right outside the rooms demanding STOP THE CHOP. To fix deforestation, it’s imperative to fix agriculture / food systems.
What’s the cost of a pledge to the Adaptation Fund?
ZERO. Well, we can start with nothing, which is what dozens of countries have put on the table. That’s the wrong amount, clearly, as the cost is borne by those with the least power, the least ability to adapt, the least historical responsibility for this climate catastrophe wrecking their lives and landscapes.
$700,000. Then we can start with what a few other countries have put forth: six and seven-figure amounts that some individuals walking the halls here could conceive of making in their lives. Perhaps some of us should dump our retirement accounts into the Adaptation Fund to become a top-ten contributor! Could we get our own flags at the contributor dialogue next year? This is an amount that represents literal individual ambition and not collective commitment.
This is also the kind of numbers a GoFundMe campaign raises for one individual. This is the wrong scale for a planetary emergency.
Along those lines, we could consider another individual amount – the amount of an individual pavilion here, and the swag, the perks, the enticements that come with such outreach. Some countries have surely put forth a comparable amount for their pavilions and for their delegations to be here as they have contributed to the Adaptation Fund – and these numbers should be functioning on a different scale entirely.
Imagine if pledges were as generous as the budgets for some delegations, just to finesse their way out of obligations.
What can you buy with an Adaptation Fund pledge? and if you can buy it, this should not be your country’s pledge
| Adaptation Fund Pledge | The Comparison Cost |
| $0 | The world’s shame |
| $700,000 | What one average individual in a high income country could save in a lifetime |
| $1,200,000 | Customised country pavilion and delegation travel to COP30, depending on your delegation size (potentially more if you add free wine to your pavilion) |
| $5,000,000 | Less than 1/10 of 1% of your military “defense” budget |
COP30 President, we are anxious, scared and a bit tense!
ECO is happy to share this part of our publication with the Women and Gender Constituency(WGC) to help amplify their voice. This article reflects the views of the WGC.
From Bonn to Addis, we’ve given our best: we’ve consulted communities, we’ve brought in experts. We listened to science and explored all possible venues for ambition. We heard the voices of those in the frontline of the climate crisis – facing displacement, losing access to land and rights, surviving violence and floods, droughts and heat waves.
On Tuesday, the 41 page document containing all of this accumulated ambition and aspiration was handed over to you, and since then, the refrain we have heard has been “The presidency is consulting”. We are wondering: Will you consult us as well? Or , are we just the voices echoing in the background – feeding into an invisible process? Have you heard us in the rooms? Those claiming to call for human rights and for gender equality. Our loud voices echo across the halls: We are fighting for collective rights!
We don’t know whether those you are consulting have told you, but out here, we are anxious, scared, and a bit tense. We are worried that the consultations in closed doors will create an ambition gap – a bare minimum that will be the tragedy of your legacy and to the world.
WE STAND IN SOLIDARITY WITH ALL PEOPLES SUFFERING FROM GENOCIDE, WARS, OCCUPATION, AND GOVERNMENT VIOLENCE THROUGH CLIMATE CHANGE.
––
Download file: http://ECO-20-November-2025.pdf