From Belém to Antalya: Which Agendas Did COP31 Inherit?

The Conference of the Parties, or COP, is the annual decision making body of the countries that are parties to the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change. Some decisions taken at each summit take effect directly, while others are carried forward to the following year. Work programmes are established for certain issues, and their outputs are reported at the next summit.

This structure explains why summits should be understood as a continuing process. Much of the decade following the 2015 summit, at which the Paris Agreement was adopted, was spent writing its implementation rules. The loss and damage fund was established after years of discussion, and making it operational required a separate process. Several summits often pass between an issue appearing on the agenda and producing results.

The presidency’s formal authority is limited by the parties’ collective decision making power. It cannot determine the outcome of negotiations. It does, however, chair meetings, facilitate consultations, seek common ground and give certain issues political visibility through its presidency letters and action agenda. This ability to guide the process has a significant effect on a summit’s character and priorities.

Several strands of the broad package of decisions adopted in Belém are directly relevant to Antalya.

The first is adaptation finance. COP30’s Mutirão Decision called on developed countries to make efforts to at least triple adaptation finance for developing countries by 2035. Because the decision did not specify a dollar amount, reducing the target to a single annual figure could be misleading. In Antalya, attention will focus not only on the volume of finance but also on access to it, the balance between grants and loans, and how it is channelled into national adaptation plans.

The second is the Global Goal on Adaptation. COP30 adopted the Belém Adaptation Indicators to track progress on adaptation and launched the Belém Addis Ababa Vision on Adaptation. Simplifying technical details, supporting countries with limited data capacity and adapting indicators to local contexts are important parts of the 2026 agenda.

The third is just transition. The decision adopted in Belém established a framework to strengthen just transition through international cooperation, technical support, capacity building and knowledge sharing. Its real impact depends on how it is applied for workers, women, young people, local communities and regions affected by the transition.

The fourth is implementation. The Mutirão Decision established the Global Implementation Accelerator and the Belém 1.5°C Mission. These initiatives aim to accelerate the implementation of nationally determined contributions and national adaptation plans.

COP30 established a new climate finance work programme under Article 9 of the Paris Agreement and launched the Veredas Dialogue on aligning financial flows with low emission, climate resilient development. Who provides the resources, through which instruments, and on what terms developing countries can access them remain central tensions in climate diplomacy.

You can read our article for more information about COP31.

At COP30, parties did not agree on a detailed roadmap that would translate a just, orderly and equitable transition away from fossil fuels into concrete steps. A roadmap to stop and reverse deforestation and forest degradation by 2030 was also absent from the decision texts adopted by the parties at the summit.

The Brazilian COP30 Presidency subsequently launched consultation processes on both issues, inviting contributions from countries and other stakeholders. The roadmaps being developed, however, are not, in their current form, decisions negotiated and adopted by parties under the UNFCCC. They are presidency-led efforts intended to support implementation and international cooperation. How these efforts are treated in Antalya will show how COP31 links the formal negotiation process with implementation initiatives led by the presidency.

The largest item in the inherited agenda is the distance between targets and progress on the ground. By the close of COP30, parties had submitted 122 nationally determined contributions, and 72 developing countries had submitted national adaptation plans. The growing number of documents is an important sign of preparation, but it does not by itself show that emissions are falling or that communities are prepared for risks.

The Global Implementation Accelerator, a voluntary cooperation initiative of the COP30 and COP31 presidencies, seeks to address this gap. It aims to help countries implement their nationally determined contributions and national adaptation plans and connect them with actors in the Action Agenda. The credibility of these structures will depend on who benefits, what finance and technical support are provided, and how transparently the results are reported.

Türkiye’s COP31 Action Agenda is organised around ten areas: zero waste; oceans and seas; food security; climate resilient cities; the Climate Implementation Bridge; youth and education; green industrialisation; the clean energy transition; Rio Synergy; and resilient health. Together, they provide a broad framework that extends the call for implementation from Belém across energy, cities, nature, health and social issues.

The Climate Implementation Bridge aims to strengthen the connection between national plans and actors on the ground. Resilient cities, food security and health are linked to the adaptation agenda. Youth and education, along with green industrialisation, bring the skills, employment and participation dimensions of a just transition into focus. Rio Synergy calls for climate decisions to be considered together with biodiversity and land management.

Targets associated with the COP31 Action Agenda also include increasing electricity’s share of final energy consumption to 35 percent, halving the projected increase in municipal solid waste generation, reducing the energy intensity of buildings by 25 percent and raising the circular material use rate to 15 percent.

The breadth of the agenda also creates a need to set priorities. It is not easy to pursue all ten areas with equal depth. The experience of previous presidencies shows that concrete progress in selected areas can strengthen a summit’s impact. Which issues take priority in Antalya will largely determine the mark COP31 leaves.

You can read our detailed article on the COP31 Antalya roadmap.

The issues on the negotiating table may at first seem distant from the tourism sector. Yet the decisions have very concrete implications for destinations.

These include water efficiency, management of flood and erosion risks, the resilience of public spaces to extreme heat, wildfire preparedness and ecosystem restoration. When planning investments, it is also important to consider possible effects on local people’s access to essential services, livelihoods and natural assets.

Click here for more information about green tourism.

Because the cost of the energy transition can be challenging, especially for small businesses, suitable finance and support mechanisms may prove decisive. Over time, the Belém Adaptation Indicators may also inform the measurement frameworks destinations use for water, health, ecosystems and infrastructure. At this stage, however, there is no direct or automatic reporting obligation for destinations. How the indicators will be incorporated into national and local systems remains to be determined.

A summit’s success cannot be judged solely by its closing text. Will adaptation finance become easier to access? Can the Belém indicators be applied with due regard for countries’ different capacities and circumstances? Will progress on just transition be reinforced with technical support and finance? Will implementation initiatives produce measurable results? How will the fossil fuel and forest roadmaps relate to the formal process? The answers to these questions will show COP31’s impact.

The agenda inherited from Belém gives Antalya both considerable responsibility and an opportunity to make progress. COP30 opened the way for new tools on adaptation, just transition, finance and implementation, while carrying debates in areas where agreement is difficult, such as energy and forests, into COP31. Antalya’s contribution will be judged not only by the addition of new issues to the agenda but also by whether it makes existing tools more accessible, trackable and practical. If it becomes clearer after the summit what support countries, cities and sectors have been able to use, the emphasis on implementation will have gained concrete meaning.

​