As the dust settles in Belém, Brazil, after the conclusion of COP30, the world is left to reflect on a climate summit marked by both unprecedented engagement and persistent discord. The event, which took place in November 2025 at the mouth of the Amazon River, drew nearly 200 countries and a record number of stakeholders—but also exposed deep rifts over the future of fossil fuels, the role of industrial agriculture, and the voices that should shape our planet’s path forward.
Brazil, the host nation, cast the summit as a pivotal moment for international cooperation on climate action. COP30 President André Corrêa do Lago, addressing delegates in a tense plenary session, implored, “This cannot be an agenda that divides us. We must reach an agreement between us.” His words captured both the urgency and the frustration that would come to define the days that followed.
Yet, unity proved elusive. A draft agreement released before dawn on November 21 omitted any mention of fossil fuels—an omission that set off a firestorm of protest among climate advocates and a bloc of nations eager for more decisive action. According to Reuters, about 80 governments supported including language on fossil fuels, while others, including the influential Arab Group of 22 oil and gas-producing countries led by Saudi Arabia and the United Arab Emirates, staunchly objected. The group warned that targeting their energy industries would “collapse the negotiations,” as reported by Reuters. The European Union’s climate commissioner, Wopke Hoekstra, was equally blunt: “We need to make sure that the shift from fossil fuels to clean energy is real and in the text.” Without such commitments, he said, the draft deal was simply “unacceptable.”
The standoff forced the summit past its scheduled end, with negotiators working late into the night in a bid to salvage consensus. As DeSmog and The Guardian revealed, these high-stakes debates were taking place against a backdrop of powerful interests: more than 300 industrial agriculture lobbyists attended COP30, a 14 percent increase from the previous year. One in four of these lobbyists gained access as part of official country delegations, and six secured privileged entry to closed-door negotiations on future climate policies.
The presence of these lobbyists was not just a matter of numbers. JBS, MBRF, and Minerva—Brazil’s largest meat companies—brought 13 delegates between them, eight of whom were part of the Brazilian government’s official delegation, according to DeSmog. The emissions from just these three companies, Friends of the Earth found in October, match those of BP, the British oil and gas giant. Even more startling, JBS alone emits more methane than ExxonMobil and Shell combined.
For many observers, the influence of industrial agriculture at COP30 was impossible to ignore. Raj Patel, a research professor at the University of Texas, told The Guardian, “What’s happening in Belém is not a climate conference but a hostage negotiation over the future of the planet where those holding the detonators—the soy barons, the beef cartels, the pesticide peddlers—are somehow seated at the table as honest brokers.” According to The Guardian, agriculture is responsible for up to a third of global emissions, with animal farming accounting for almost 60 percent of food-related emissions. In Brazil, animal agriculture remains the leading driver of deforestation in the Amazon—an irony not lost on critics of the summit’s guest list.
Yet, amid the controversy, COP30 also made history for a very different reason: the largest-ever presence of Indigenous delegates. Estimates ranged from 2,500 to more than 3,000 representatives from around the world. Brazil responded to this groundswell by creating 10 new Indigenous territories, a move widely seen as a step toward recognizing the crucial role Indigenous peoples play in protecting forests and curbing emissions. Still, many activists were quick to point out that presence does not equal power. “At COP30, more than 300 agribusiness lobbyists occupied the space that should belong to the forest peoples,” said Vandria Borari, an Indigenous leader from the Borari territory of Alter do Chão, as quoted by DeSmog. “Nothing about the Amazon can be decided without listening to those who live in it.”
Thalita Silva, an Indigenous activist and program coordinator for the Global Fund for Children’s Climate Justice and Youth in Brazil, told Edie that while Indigenous peoples had an “increased physical presence” at COP, they still lacked meaningful “decision-making power.” The week was punctuated by “joyous and defiant” protests, including a blockade highlighting the ongoing struggles of Indigenous communities. “We were never listened to,” one protestor lamented, as reported by The Guardian.
Meanwhile, the conference’s official agenda was bogged down by disputes over climate finance and trade. The draft deal called for global efforts to triple financing for climate adaptation by 2030, compared to 2025 levels. However, it stopped short of specifying whether these funds would come from wealthy nations, development banks, or the private sector—a detail not lost on poorer countries demanding stronger guarantees of public support. Adaptation investments, such as infrastructure improvements to withstand extreme weather, are critical for vulnerable nations but often fail to attract private capital due to low financial returns.
The draft also proposed launching a “dialogue” on trade at future U.N. climate talks, involving governments and organizations like the World Trade Organization. This was seen as a win for countries like China, which have long advocated for trade issues to be included in climate discussions. But it also raised eyebrows among European leaders, whose carbon border levy has faced criticism from emerging economies such as India, China, and South Africa.
Adding to the complexity, the United States—under President Donald Trump, who has repeatedly called global warming a hoax—declined to send an official delegation. COP30 President Corrêa do Lago warned that the absence of the world’s largest economy made it all the more vital for the remaining nations to unite. “The world is watching,” he declared.
As the summit finally drew to a close, there was no escaping the sense of unfinished business. The deadlock over fossil fuels, the outsized influence of industrial agriculture, and the ongoing fight for Indigenous voices to be heard left many wondering whether COP30 had moved the world closer to climate solutions or merely exposed the obstacles ahead. Still, the sheer scale of participation and the passionate advocacy on display offered a glimpse of what is possible when the world comes together—however imperfectly—to confront its greatest challenge.
