As the world braces for another pivotal moment in the fight against climate change, the lead-up to COP30 in Belém, Brazil, is already marked by urgency, logistical headaches, and a deepening divide between ambition and reality. With the United Nations General Assembly (UNGA) and a high-level Climate Summit just around the corner in New York City, global leaders are under mounting pressure to bridge the gap between climate science and action—a chasm that, if left unaddressed, could have catastrophic consequences.
This year has already seen climate-fueled disasters dominate headlines and devastate communities. According to Backchannel, 2025 brought “devastating floods in Pakistan, catastrophic wildfires in Spain, and extreme heatwaves across Europe and the United States.” The science is equally unambiguous. Experts warn there’s a high likelihood the world will breach the critical 1.5°C global temperature rise threshold on a long-term basis within the next decade. Alarmingly, 2024 already saw this mark crossed for a full year, and if emissions continue on their current trajectory, the planet could be heading for over 3°C of warming above pre-industrial levels. Such an outcome, scientists argue, would be “unacceptable, unforgivable.”
Against this backdrop, the United Nations Secretary General is set to convene a high-level Climate Summit on September 24, 2025, as part of a broader Climate Week running from September 21 to 28. These gatherings offer world leaders a chance to show they’re serious about the climate crisis. But will they seize it? Or will this be another missed opportunity in a string of underwhelming international efforts?
The stakes are especially high this year because countries’ next round of emission reduction commitments under the Paris Agreement—known as nationally determined contributions (NDCs)—are due before COP30. The world needs “significantly higher ambition to have any chance of keeping 2°C within reach, let alone 1.5°C,” Backchannel reports. That means not just vague promises, but concrete plans to transition away from fossil fuels, including sharp cuts within this decade.
Yet, the road to meaningful action is littered with obstacles. Fossil fuel interests and their political allies continue to wield enormous influence, shaping national policies and showing up at international climate talks in ever-larger numbers. In the United States, the government in 2025 is described as “increasingly authoritarian and anti-science, shredding clean energy and climate policies, stymying progress on emissions reductions, and pushing fossil fuels while invoking a fake ‘energy emergency.’” The U.S. remains a lynchpin—there’s “no pathway to meeting global climate goals that doesn’t require serious action from the US”—but its current trajectory is a source of global anxiety.
Meanwhile, the architecture of global climate diplomacy is shifting. The era when a handful of wealthy nations could dictate the terms is over. A new multipolar world order is emerging, with China, India, Brazil, and the BRICS nations playing outsized roles. China’s capacity to manufacture and export clean energy technology, and its willingness to curb coal use, will be decisive. India, for its part, has already met its 2030 target of 50% non-fossil electricity capacity five years early—a rare bright spot—though it needs “significant investment to further accelerate that momentum.”
Brazil, as host of COP30, is pushing for more than platitudes. The country’s leaders are urging nations to “follow through on actual implementation of climate commitments, not just vague, empty promises to do something in the future.” But even as Brazil talks up the importance of inclusivity and ambition, practical challenges threaten to undermine the summit’s legitimacy.
One of the most glaring issues is the cost and logistics of simply attending COP30. According to Climate Home News, the UN recently raised the daily subsistence allowance (DSA) for diplomats from most developing nations traveling to Belém—from $144 to $197 per day—in response to complaints about soaring accommodation prices in the remote Amazonian city. The payment is designed to help cover lodging and meals for two delegates from each of 144 eligible developing countries, with extra support for small island states and least developed nations.
But there’s a catch: current funding levels are woefully inadequate. By the end of August 2025, the trust fund for participation had received just $2.1 million in voluntary contributions—most of it from Denmark. That’s far short of the nearly $8 million the UN climate body budgeted for 2025, and unless more money is raised, fewer people will be able to receive the higher allowance. Brazil’s COP30 presidency called the DSA increase “a step forward” but added that it “does not fully cover local costs.” The hosts are now urging the UN climate body to consider an “emergency supplement” for delegates from developing nations, though a UNFCCC spokesperson declined to comment on the feasibility of such a request.
The accommodation crunch is acute. During COP30, hotels in Belém are charging up to 15 times their regular rates. The COP30 presidency has set aside a number of rooms at fixed prices for poorer countries, but the supply is limited. As of mid-September, 79 countries had confirmed accommodation in Belém, while 70 others were still negotiating. Rooms on the official platform are going for $420 a night—more than double the new daily allowance. Valter Correia, Brazil’s special secretary for COP30, said the hosts have maintained “active dialogues” with delegations and “have shown flexibility in addressing their concerns,” including supporting them in negotiations with hotels and rental providers.
Still, not everyone is satisfied. Richard Muyungi, chair of the African Group of Negotiators, told Climate Home News, “Still the problem is there – it hasn’t been solved as we had expected.” He pledged to keep pressing for more support, particularly for African countries. Ilana Seid, chair of the AOSIS group of small island states, echoed those concerns, saying the cost of rooms “needs to match the daily allowance rate.” She added, “There are still quite a few things that need to be ironed out, and we are working with Brazil.”
The logistical headaches are symptomatic of deeper issues. In recent years, the UN climate body has struggled for funding, as government and donor contributions have failed to keep pace with the expanding list of activities countries are asking it to carry out. The UNFCCC Secretariat warns that unpredictable contributions can force the cancellation of important events and limit options for inclusive participation. That’s a serious problem for a summit Brazil has vowed will be “the most inclusive” in history.
For millions of people around the world, the stakes couldn’t be higher. Their livelihoods, their ability to escape poverty, and their right to live in healthy, thriving communities are increasingly threatened by climate change—a crisis driven largely by emissions from richer nations. The continued refusal of these countries to meet their responsibilities on climate finance is, as Backchannel notes, “a festering injustice that directly damages the trust and goodwill needed to reach and deliver on ambitious global agreements.” In response, communities across the Global South are increasingly turning to the courts in search of justice.
As the UN Climate Summit approaches, the world is watching. Will leaders step up and isolate bad actors? Will they deliver on the promises of the Paris Agreement—not just for the rich and powerful, but for the global majority? The outcome remains uncertain, but the need for decisive action has never been clearer.
