COP31 Day 3: Negotiations, Green Insutry and Climate Finance

The second day focused on how the UAE Just Transition Work Programme (JTWP) should continue beyond 2026 and how it should relate to the Just Transition Mechanism (JTM). There was broad agreement that the work programme had provided a valuable space for sharing experience and holding policy dialogue. Many interventions pointed out that the knowledge generated had yet to translate sufficiently into national policies and implementation support. The main difference concerned whether the dialogue function should remain under a distinct work programme or be incorporated into the mechanism.

Areas of agreement and convergence

• Making dialogues more useful for implementation. The G77 and China, the African Group, AILAC, AOSIS, the EU and the UK called, with different emphases, for the knowledge and experience generated by the work programme to inform implementation more directly. AOSIS proposed that dialogue outputs include voluntary tools and policy options that countries could adapt to their circumstances. The African Group called for the programme’s effectiveness to be assessed by how well it supports implementation.
• Retaining the programme’s broad scope. The EU, AOSIS and the Arab Group supported retaining the existing scope and addressing its elements in a balanced manner. The G77 and China, the African Group and AILAC called for more systematic attention to economic diversification. The African Group also pointed to insufficient attention to industrialisation, poverty eradication, equitable participation in value chains, adaptation and resilience, and international cooperation.
• Producing more timely and usable outputs. The G77 and China and AILAC proposed a more standardised approach to note-taking to capture views in a balanced manner. AILAC said delays in publishing dialogue summaries made them harder for Parties to use in negotiations. AOSIS called for reporting templates and stronger follow-up, while the UK called for timely, action-oriented outputs.
• Improving the quality of participation. The G77 and China and the African Group stressed that participants from the Global South should be able to help shape the agenda and contribute meaningfully to discussions. AILAC highlighted small-group formats and giving participants time to prepare for their roles. The UK emphasised hybrid formats and participation by non-Party stakeholders.

Main areas of divergence

• Institutional relationship between the work programme and the JTM. The G77 and China, the African Group, AILAC and AOSIS supported continuing the work programme beyond 2026. The African Group and AOSIS advocated distinct but complementary mandates, with the JTWP continuing policy dialogue and knowledge exchange and the JTM focusing on implementation support. The EIG favoured proceeding under the JTM to avoid creating two institutional structures. Norway also proposed anchoring the work programme within the JTM. The EU proposed retaining the programme’s scope within the JTM and proceeding through a single joint contact group under the subsidiary bodies.
• Duration of the programme and frequency of dialogues. The African Group proposed extending the work programme for three years, taking into account progress in operationalising the JTM. Norway proposed one annual global dialogue in place of two shorter meetings, with two co-chairs, one from a developed country and one from a developing country. The EU supported retaining two dialogues per year. The notes and transcript did not establish a definitive end year for Norway’s longer-term proposal.
• Links to Global Stocktake outcomes and sectoral transitions. AOSIS called for stronger links to the 1.5°C goal and greater attention to implementing the outcomes of the first Global Stocktake (GST), particularly transitioning away from fossil fuels in a just, orderly and equitable manner. The EIG proposed that the programme inform the second Global Stocktake (GST2), including its technical dialogue. The UK highlighted the value of sectoral dialogues. The EU called for transitions in industry, transport, buildings and food systems to be considered alongside employment, skills, labour rights and social protection. The Arab Group opposed prioritising specific sectors or energy pathways and using the programme as a separate channel for implementing GST outcomes. It called for preserving the diversity of nationally determined pathways.
• Treatment of trade measures. The EU objected to characterising climate policies aimed at addressing carbon leakage as trade measures. The Arab Group argued that the JTWP could examine how measures with cross-border effects affect workers, communities and developing countries’ policy space, alongside discussions on trade in other forums. Uruguay identified trade conditions and the cost of capital as factors shaping countries’ ability to finance their transitions.
• Implementation support and the role of finance. The African Group said many barriers, including high capital costs, debt, infrastructure constraints and limited access to technology, were beyond the reach of domestic policy alone. Nigeria stressed that the JTM should deliver tangible results on access to finance alongside its coordination role and address both the quantity and quality of support. The Arab Group argued that the JTWP review should avoid prejudging the JTM’s mandate.

Stakeholder interventions

• Indigenous Peoples’ rights and participation. Indigenous Peoples’ Organisations (IPO) drew attention to the rights of Indigenous Peoples living in voluntary isolation and in initial contact. They called for self-determination and free, prior and informed consent to guide the operationalisation of the JTM. They also stressed full and effective participation and direct access to support for Indigenous Peoples’ priorities.
• Local and regional governments. The Local Governments and Municipal Authorities constituency (LGMA) called for national transition pathways to reflect local needs and circumstances. It proposed explicitly recognising the local and regional dimensions of the transition within the mechanism and strengthening cooperation across levels of government.
• Business and farmers. Business and Industry NGOs (BINGO) proposed that the JTM serve as a coordination platform that complements national efforts and supports open access to case studies and peer learning. Farmers’ representatives called for national transition pathways to be designed with farmers, including smallholders and family farmers, and for agriculture to receive dedicated attention in international cooperation and climate finance.

Next steps

In closing, the co-chairs returned to the JTM discussions from the first two days. They noted emerging convergence around a Party-driven policy arm and an implementation-oriented arm. Facilitating access to means of implementation, coordination, the role of the Secretariat and civil society participation also featured prominently. The G77 and China and the African Group requested an updated informal note before the end of the first week to prepare for the second week. The co-chairs said they would hear the remaining interventions the following day.

The clearest convergence was on procedural elements of the decision. The main disagreement was whether the decision should be limited to procedural matters or also reflect key messages from the annual dialogue. If substantive messages are included, Parties still need to agree on which ones to capture and how they would relate to nationally determined contributions (NDCs) and the second Global Stocktake (GST2). UNFCCC meeting schedule

Areas of convergence

• Procedural elements. The closing summary noted convergence on several procedural points. The discussion covered general reflections on the annual dialogue, lessons learned and how these could inform preparations for GST2.
• Barriers to implementation. Several interventions highlighted gaps in access to finance, technology and capacity-building support. The African Group identified insufficient means of implementation as the biggest barrier. Landlocked developing countries (LLDCs) stressed that implementing their NDCs depends on predictable access to climate finance, technology transfer and capacity-building. Panama highlighted barriers to accessing resources, while Grenada also pointed to institutional weaknesses. How these concerns would be reflected in the decision remained open.

Main areas of divergence

• Scope of the decision and the dialogue’s mandate. The Arab Group called for a strictly procedural outcome. Saudi Arabia stressed the need to stay within the mandate, and the African Group said the dialogue was not designed to send policy signals. Tuvalu argued that a minimal decision would fail to reflect the value of the dialogue and called for including some of its key messages. Grenada also called for the decision text to reflect implementation challenges. Points of order involving the EU, China and Switzerland underscored the dispute over scope. The notes do not establish each delegation’s position.
• Implications for NDCs. Panama supported Colombia’s intervention, pointed to persistent ambition and implementation gaps and noted that countries could update and strengthen their NDCs. The Philippines questioned whether Parties were expected to revisit NDCs they had just submitted and how the dialogue’s output would feed into the agenda item. Iraq stressed that the outcome should be fully consistent with NDCs and the Paris Agreement.
• Which messages to include. The Philippines questioned the merits of selectively capturing key messages in the decision and raised the role of the technical dialogue and assessment phase. Grenada highlighted implementation barriers, while Bolivia raised deforestation and forest degradation, nature-based approaches, carbon markets, technology and capacity-building. The closing summary identified two unresolved questions: whether to include substantive messages at all and which messages to include if Parties agreed to do so.

Stakeholder perspectives on GST2

• Science and Indigenous Peoples’ knowledge. YOUNGO called for GST2 to draw on the best available science, including the IPCC’s Seventh Assessment Report (AR7), and to recognise Indigenous Peoples’ knowledge as central to climate action. Indigenous Peoples’ representatives referred to the Bonn discussions and raised the protection of Indigenous Peoples’ rights.
• Gender equality and who receives climate support. The Women and Gender Constituency called for GST2 to assess whether climate support is reaching people and to be anchored in implementation of the Belém Gender Action Plan. It highlighted more granular data, gender-transformative approaches to adaptation and finance that reaches disadvantaged groups.

Next step. Drafting of the decision text was set to begin, and Parties were invited to submit their interventions in writing.

The OECD and UNDP roundtable focused on turning national climate commitments into investment programmes and projects that can secure financing. Participants discussed the economic gains that faster electrification could bring, particularly for low- and middle-income countries. Figures presented at the session suggested that faster electrification could cut the global fossil fuel import bill by around USD 400 billion by 2035. Capturing those gains will require investment in grids and system flexibility alongside electrification in end-use sectors. Germany highlighted grid connections, permitting and the integration of variable renewables. The discussion also considered how to build supply chains and demand in heavy industries such as steel and cement, drawing lessons from the electric vehicle sector.

The OECD highlighted four priorities for mobilising investment:

• Predictable policy and regulation. Stable, consistent rules across the energy and industrial systems can give investors greater confidence to commit capital.
• Country-led investment platforms. Platforms can turn national priorities into pipelines of projects that can secure financing. Türkiye’s industrial decarbonisation investment platform was cited as an example.
• Public instruments that mobilise private finance. Guarantees and securitisation can help share risk and attract private investment. The OECD pointed to its blended finance toolkit as a resource for designing these instruments.
• Deeper local capital markets. Developing domestic capital markets can broaden the sources of finance available for climate investment.

The African Development Bank called for project preparation to begin earlier and for individual projects to be brought together into larger investment programmes. Project preparation facilities and grants could help countries develop programmes that integrate mitigation, adaptation and just transition priorities. The discussion on country platforms also highlighted the importance of clear governance, risk-sharing arrangements, standardised contractual terms and the ability to pool smaller projects to attract investment at scale.

Türkiye presented the Climate Implementation BRIDGE initiative as a way to coordinate support for countries as they translate national climate priorities into costed plans and investment pipelines. UNDP stressed the importance of reliable data, transparency and effective governance. It also called for helping countries understand what makes a project financeable before they build their pipelines. From a just transition perspective, the discussion pointed to assessing success through the amount of finance mobilised and the outcomes it supports, including resilience, employment and opportunities for small and medium-sized enterprises.

The session focused on turning international commitments to transition away from fossil fuels into national policies, investment plans and mechanisms for implementation. Drawing on the COP30 Presidency’s roadmap, participants proposed that countries develop national transition plans reflecting their dependence on fossil fuels, the structure of their energy systems and their development priorities. International cooperation, finance and technical assistance could support these efforts. New bilateral partnerships and financing commitments for electricity grid investments were cited as concrete steps towards implementation.

Participants stressed that finance should cover infrastructure investment as well as early-stage needs such as policy development, institutional capacity-building and project preparation. From a just transition perspective, the discussion considered reviewing incentives that sustain fossil fuel dependence, strengthening security of energy supply and aligning transition investments with national development priorities.

OECD, yatırımları artırmak için dört önceliği vurguladı.

• Öngörülebilir politika ve düzenlemeler. Enerji ve sanayi sistemlerinin genelini kapsayan istikrarlı ve tutarlı kurallar yatırımcıların uzun vadeli yatırım kararları almasını kolaylaştırabilir.
• Ülke öncülüğünde yatırım platformları. Bu platformlar ulusal önceliklerin finansmana uygun proje portföylerine dönüştürülmesini sağlayabilir. Türkiye’nin sanayide karbonsuzlaşmaya yönelik yatırım platformu örnek gösterildi.
• Özel finansmanı harekete geçiren kamu araçları. Garantiler ve menkul kıymetleştirme riskin paylaşılmasına ve özel yatırımın çekilmesine yardımcı olabilir. OECD bu araçların tasarımında kendi harmanlanmış finansman araç setine işaret etti.
• Yerel sermaye piyasalarının derinleştirilmesi. Yerel sermaye piyasalarının geliştirilmesi iklim yatırımlarına kaynak sağlayabilecek finansman kanallarını genişletebilir.

Afrika Kalkınma Bankası, proje hazırlığının yatırım döngüsünün daha erken aşamalarında başlamasını ve tekil projelerin daha büyük yatırım programları altında bir araya getirilmesini önerdi. Proje hazırlama fonları ve hibeler, azaltım, uyum ve adil geçiş önceliklerini bütünleştiren programların geliştirilmesini destekleyebilir. Ülke platformlarına ilişkin tartışmada yönetişim yapısının netleştirilmesi, risk paylaşımı, sözleşme koşullarının standartlaştırılması ve küçük projelerin finansmana erişim için bir araya getirilmesi de öne çıktı.

Türkiye, Climate Implementation BRIDGE girişimini ülkelerin ulusal iklim önceliklerini maliyetlendirilmiş planlara ve yatırım projelerine dönüştürürken ihtiyaç duydukları desteği koordine edecek bir girişim olarak sundu. UNDP güvenilir veri, şeffaflık ve etkin yönetişimin önemini vurguladı. Ayrıca proje portföyleri oluşturulmadan önce bir projenin hangi koşullarda finansman bulabileceğinin belirlenmesi için ülkelere destek verilmesini önerdi. Adil geçiş açısından başarı, harekete geçirilen finansmanın miktarıyla birlikte bu finansmanın dayanıklılığa, istihdama ve küçük ve orta ölçekli işletmeler için yaratılan fırsatlara katkısı üzerinden değerlendirilebilir.

The Global Green Industrialisation Agenda (GGIA) on the COP31 agenda aims to put the commitments of the Belém Declaration adopted at COP30 into practice. It seeks to decarbonise existing industries, expand clean technology manufacturing, develop new green industries and create quality jobs. The dialogue explored the opportunities green industrialisation offers for industrial competitiveness and economic growth, as well as how to finance the investments it requires.

Only around one in five of the more than 1,000 clean industrial projects identified worldwide has reached the final stage of investment planning, highlighting gaps in project readiness and access to finance. Public procurement, carbon pricing, affordable finance and matching projects with funding sources were discussed as ways to accelerate industrial transformation. Participants also considered how the Climate Implementation BRIDGE initiative and industrial decarbonisation investment platforms can help turn climate targets into concrete investments.

From a just transition perspective, participants stressed the importance of ensuring that the economic and social benefits of green industrialisation reach workers, women, young people and businesses. They also highlighted the need to create quality jobs in emerging sectors and support countries with different economic circumstances as they pursue industrial transformation. Country representatives shared the progress they had made on green industrialisation at home.

The session emphasized that phasing out fossil fuels is not only a technical transition to reduce emissions but also a process grounded in climate justice, historical responsibility, and financial capacity. In this context, the Belém Readiness Index was introduced as a framework for assessing countries’ preparedness to transition away from fossil fuels. The index examines countries’ exposure and implementation capacities across three dimensions: fossil fuel supply, demand, and economic transition. Discussions highlighted that countries’ dependence on fossil fuels, alongside their financial, institutional, and technological capabilities, plays a critical role in ensuring an equitable transition. Findings indicated that high-income countries are generally better prepared for fossil fuel phase-out, although significant differences remain depending on countries’ structural conditions. The session also reviewed developments in net-zero commitments among national and subnational governments and companies, drawing on the Net Zero Tracker 2026 findings. Discussions focused on the COP30 Presidency’s roadmap for transitioning away from fossil fuels (TAFF), the Santa Marta process, and their potential contributions to COP31 negotiations. Panelists emphasized that COP31 should encourage more countries to commit to developing national TAFF roadmaps and taking concrete steps toward implementation. In this context, actors with higher historical emissions and stronger financial capacity should assume greater responsibility, while international finance and capacity-building should support developing economies’ transition.

Only around one in five of the more than 1,000 clean industrial projects identified worldwide has reached the final stage of investment planning, highlighting gaps in project readiness and access to finance. Public procurement, carbon pricing, affordable finance and matching projects with funding sources were discussed as ways to accelerate industrial transformation. Participants also considered how the Climate Implementation BRIDGE initiative and industrial decarbonisation investment platforms can help turn climate targets into concrete investments.

From a just transition perspective, participants stressed the importance of ensuring that the economic and social benefits of green industrialisation reach workers, women, young people and businesses. They also highlighted the need to create quality jobs in emerging sectors and support countries with different economic circumstances as they pursue industrial transformation. Country representatives shared the progress they had made on green industrialisation at home.