The 30th Conference of the Parties to the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (COP30) in Belém, Brazil, has concluded, leaving the world with a mix of hope, frustration, and renewed calls for action. From November 10 to 21, 2025, nearly 200 nations gathered in the heart of the Amazon to debate, negotiate, and—at times—clash over the future of global climate policy. The stakes couldn’t have been higher, with the United Nations and climate advocates warning that the world is running out of time to avert catastrophic warming.
According to BusinessDesk, the conference issued a wake-up call, urging business leaders to step up and take a more active role in climate and nature initiatives. While political wrangling often steals the spotlight at these summits, this year’s event put a new emphasis on the private sector’s responsibility to drive meaningful change.
Yet, as reported by GreenChristian, the sense of urgency was palpable in Belém’s conference halls. Ministers and senior officials shifted negotiations from technical details to high-stakes political decision-making, with the fate of climate justice hanging in the balance. The themes of stewardship—of both the planet and communities—were front and center, highlighting forests, oceans, biodiversity, and the vital contributions of Indigenous peoples, local communities, and youth. The last two thematic days, as noted in the GreenChristian prayer guide, focused on food systems, agriculture, equity, and the roles of women, gender minorities, and Afrodescendants.
Despite these ambitious themes, the conference’s progress on phasing out fossil fuels was, by most accounts, underwhelming. President Luiz Inácio Lula da Silva of Brazil, who hosted COP30, met with key negotiators on November 19 in a bid to land early deals on divisive issues like fossil fuels and climate finance. According to MSN, Lula made it clear that, “the path to phasing out fossil fuels would not involve imposing anything to anyone nor determining deadlines for countries to stop burning fossil fuels. We need to reduce greenhouse gas emissions [and so] we need to start thinking about how to live without fossil fuel, and build the way to live [without it].”
However, as The Guardian reported, the final decision from COP30 did not mention fossil fuels at all. This omission came despite the efforts of a coalition of 80 developing and developed nations, alongside 70 organizations representing thousands of businesses, who pushed hard for a clear commitment to a fossil fuel phase-out roadmap. Petrostates such as Saudi Arabia and Russia, however, fought fiercely to block any such language. The negotiations dragged late into the night on November 21, with countries still far apart on even the most basic agreements for transitioning away from fossil fuels.
The frustration was evident among delegates. Representatives from developing countries voiced their exasperation, with one saying, “There are countries who don’t listen. They don’t want to listen.” Another lamented, “I get very frustrated with the developed countries’ positions,” and a third asked, “Why even come to Cop?”—as quoted by The Guardian.
Outside the negotiation rooms, thousands of youth activists from around the world staged protests, demanding a “full, fast, fair fossil phase-out.” Their message was stark and emotional: “Our future is being burnt down.” These demonstrations underscored the generational divide on climate action, with younger voices calling for bolder, faster change.
Beyond the fossil fuel debates, COP30 did achieve some notable outcomes. As highlighted by Elyssa Kaur Ludher and Paul Teng in an analysis for the ISEAS – Yusof Ishak Institute, the conference marked a turning point for the agri-food sector’s role in climate action. Historically, agriculture and food systems—responsible for up to one-third of global greenhouse gas emissions—have received only 4% of climate-related development finance. COP30 sought to change that, launching several major financing initiatives for mitigation and adaptation.
The so-called Belem Package, approved by 195 countries, introduced new funding streams for reversing cropland degradation, promoting agroecology and agroforestry, supporting decarbonization innovations, and encouraging knowledge sharing. For Southeast Asia, these initiatives are particularly relevant. The RAIZ Accelerator aims to restore degraded farmland, TERRA supports family farmers and cooperatives, while the Tropical Forest Forever Facility (TFFF) has mobilized US$5.5 billion—including US$1 billion from Indonesia—to incentivize tropical forest conservation. Additionally, the Global Methane Hub’s Rice Methane Innovation Accelerator has committed US$30 million to reducing methane emissions from rice cultivation.
Yet, as Ludher and Teng point out, ASEAN member states’ current climate commitments (known as Nationally Determined Contributions, or NDCs) are thin on specific actions for the agri-food sector. The authors argue that these countries should “prioritise and develop comprehensive national actions for the agri-food sector that are aligned with the ASEAN Strategy for Carbon Neutrality and harmonised with the NDCs.” Such alignment could unlock a pipeline of “bankable and fundable projects,” as exemplified by Vietnam’s ambitious project to cultivate 1 million hectares of low-carbon rice, which has attracted international financing and technical expertise.
COP30 also introduced the concept of Global Mutirão—loosely translated as “global collective solidarity.” ASEAN, with its cultural tradition of Gotong-Royong (mutual help and community action), is well-placed to embody this spirit. The region’s increasing cooperation through mechanisms like the Senior Officials Meeting and the ASEAN Ministers of Agriculture and Forestry offers hope that collective action can deliver meaningful results.
Meanwhile, the European Union found itself under fire at COP30 for its new carbon tariff scheme, with some developing nations accusing the bloc of protectionism. According to Politico, diplomatic frictions over the carbon levy reached a boiling point, showing just how contentious climate-related trade measures have become on the world stage.
Amid the heated debates and protests, there were also glimmers of progress. MSN reported that Britain’s National Energy System Operator set a new wind energy record, generating enough electricity from turbines to power 22 million homes—a reminder that technological advances can deliver real-world results.
But COP30 was not without its symbolic setbacks. As negotiations neared their climax, a major fire broke out at the conference center, an event that many saw as a metaphor for the world’s burning climate crisis and another missed opportunity to douse the flames.
Simon Stiell, Executive Secretary of the UNFCCC, tried to strike a note of optimism in his closing speech: “We knew this COP would take place in stormy political waters. Denial, division and geopolitics has dealt international cooperation some heavy blows this year. […] COP30 showed that climate cooperation is alive and kicking, keeping humanity in the fight for a liveable planet, with a firm resolve to keep 1.5C within reach. I’m not saying we’re winning the climate fight. But we are undeniably still in it, and we are fighting back. Here in Belém, nations chose solidarity, science, and economic common sense.”
As the dust settles on COP30, it’s clear that the world remains divided on how to tackle the climate crisis. The conference delivered important steps for the agri-food sector and showcased the power of youth and civil society. Yet, without stronger commitments from major emitters and more unity on fossil fuel phase-out, the clock will keep ticking—and the planet will keep warming.
