Thursday 26th June
The final day of the 2025 Bonn Climate Change Conference (SB62) closed with cautious optimism on carbon markets but underscored persistent flaws that threaten their credibility. While the first ‘Article 6.2 ambition dialogue’ showcased success stories and capacity-building efforts to scale up cooperative carbon trading, critical issues such as lack of transparency, low credit quality, and questionable sustainable development benefits were downplayed 1. The dialogue notably failed to address the responsibility of buyer countries—mostly developed nations with large emissions—to have ambitious domestic mitigation targets aligned with the Paris Agreement goals, raising concerns that these countries may use carbon credits to offset rather than reduce emissions, thereby weakening global climate ambition 2. Meanwhile, debates continued over the future of the Clean Development Mechanism (CDM) funds, with most developing countries calling to channel the remaining $45 million to the Adaptation Fund to support vulnerable nations, contrasting with developed countries’ preference to bolster carbon market mechanisms 3.
Alongside carbon market discussions, nearly 200 countries agreed to increase the UNFCCC core budget by 10% for 2026–2027, raising it to about €81.5 million ($95.3 million), with China increasing its contribution share and Bloomberg Philanthropies covering the share lost after the United States’ withdrawal 4. Despite this effort, budget constraints remain, as some countries previously blocked larger increases, potentially limiting the secretariat’s capacity to fully support climate governance and adaptation efforts 5. The conference also advanced the Just Transition Work Programme (JTWP), with negotiators agreeing on a pathway toward establishing a Belém Action Mechanism at COP30 to support just climate policies 6. However, adaptation finance and Loss and Damage remain controversial items, with developing countries, farmers coalitions, civil society and indigenous peoples groups warning that without clear, adequate, and accessible finance linked to these goals, COP30 will fail to deliver meaningful outcomes at this critical time of the climate crisis and geopolitical turmoil 7.
Brazil’s Environment Minister Marina Silva proposed a bold COP30 roadmap to end fossil fuel production and consumption, fulfilling the Dubai COP28 promise by establishing a mandated group to design a “planned and just transition,” ending deforestation by 2030, and scaling up renewables and energy efficiency 8 13. The conference spotlighted the urgent need to curb fossil fuel industry influence in UN climate negotiations, with calls for transparency, conflict-of-interest safeguards, and exclusion of fossil fuel lobbyists from decision-making to restore trust and ambition 9 10. Groups such as the Alliance of Small Island States (AOSIS) and the Least Developed Countries (LDCs) stressed that progress on adaptation, mitigation ambition, and Loss and Damage is too slow and called for COP30 to be an “Adaptation COP” with robust finance and rights-based approaches 11 15. As Tasneem Essop, Executive Director of Climate Action Network International, said: “Enough is enough. While bombs get billions and polluters are increasing their record profits, Bonn has once again exposed a system rigged to protect polluters and profiteers – complicit in a global order that funds destruction but balks at paying for survival” 12. With those powerful remarks and as we wrap up this segment of reporting from the Bonn Climate Conference (SB62), one thing remains crystal clear – COP30 must deliver decisive political will, enhanced climate finance, and a rights-based, equitable approach to secure a just and effective global climate transition amid accelerating climate impacts and geopolitical challenges 14. As we journey together towards Belem in November, we invite you to remain engaged with the Jesuits for Climate Justice: Faith Action at COP30 Campaign, your participation is key to ensuring a future fit to care for our common home!
Wednesday 25th June
The second to last day of SB62 was marked by decisions made in largely informal negotiations across multiple climate action tracks, with minimal transparency due to many sessions being closed to observers 1. Discussions continued on the Global Goal on Adaptation (GGA) where differences remain over the scope and structure of the indicators proposed, especially regarding the inclusion of Means of Implementation (MOI) metrics 2. The EU and several developed countries proposed to delete sections on the Baku Adaptation Roadmap draft due to insufficient discussion, while the G-77+China opposed this and preferred to retain all options for discussion at SB63 3. As a compromise, the EU, supported by Australia, suggested capturing progress on these sections in an informal note (this does not represent formal agreement) 4.
Continued negotiations on the Mitigation Work Programme (MWP) highlighted concerns from AOSIS and allies about the proposed “Belém platform” 2. Meanwhile, parties reconvened for a rushed 30-minute session, to try to finalize a draft text on the third review of the Warsaw International Mechanism for Loss and Damage (WIM) for COP30 5. The Co-Facilitators presented an informal note to serve as a basis for continuing discussions at the next session in Belem, and after opening the floor, the G77+China agreed to this approach. Consequently, work on the third review of the WIM will continue in Belem, building on the progress made here in Bonn 1. Conversely, the Just Transition Work Programme (JTWP) continued to expose divisions over institutional arrangements, rights-based framing, and the handling of unilateral trade measures. Developing countries, including SIDS and the G77, advocated for inclusive, equity-centered approaches and warned against weakening rights language, while debates over trade-related impacts remain politically delicate 3.
Stocktake-related negotiations, including the modalities of the UAE Dialogue and the Global Stocktake (GST) technical assessment timeline, grappled with unresolved design issues. While there was consensus on synchronizing assessments with COP timelines and allowing flexibility, disagreements persisted on the number of dialogues, end dates, and the incorporation of new IPCC data 4. SIDS emphasized the need for these processes to remain responsive and anchored in the 1.5°C goal, cautioning that resistance could limit their ability to leverage scientific findings in negotiations 1. Overall, Parties continued to underscore the urgent need to connect adaptation indicators with finance flows to avoid further fragmented efforts 6. Many stressed that the New Collective Quantified Goal on Climate Finance must align more closely with the GGA 7. Without this integration and the active participation of civil society, indigenous and farmers groups – there is a risk that adaptation efforts will be meticulously monitored but insufficiently funded. This gap will continue to impact already vulnerable communities in a disproportionate manner without holding parties accountable to their commitments 8. Furthermore, Civil Society and Indigenous activists continued to highlight the inequalities in access to protection and rights from extractivist entities, stressing the need for recognition of the legal statutes behind these negotiations – a discussion which has caused a lot of tension throughout these last days but is desperately needed 9. We continue monitoring and reporting on these important and decisive topics on the last day of the Bonn Climate Conference. Stay tuned, the bulk of the work begins now!
Tuesday 24th June
On the eighth day of the Bonn Climate Conference, JESC held its side event, holding a timely discussion on climate related mobilities, with a focus on climate related migration, a topic not really mentioned throughout the week but deeply important to the ongoing discussions. To watch the event, please follow this link: JESC YouTube.
Adaptation (GGA) continued taking center stage in the negotiations, as developing countries, led by the Least Developed Countries group chair Evans Njewa, intensified calls for developed nations to triple adaptation finance by 2030 relative to 2022 levels, describing adaptation as a “lifeline” for vulnerable communities 1. This builds on the COP26 commitment to double adaptation finance by 2025, which remains unfulfilled and will only be tentatively assessed in 2027 2. Even tripling finance would provide less than $100 billion annually—far below the UN’s estimated $160–340 billion needed by 2030. Meanwhile, major donors including France, Germany, the Netherlands, and the UK plan cuts in adaptation funding for 2026, and with the added loss of the United States, who will not contribute to adaptation finance in either 2025 or 2026 – the prospect of meeting the goals only seems less plausible 4. Visa restrictions and limited interpretation services continue to hinder equitable participation of developing country delegates, complicating negotiations and trust-building ahead of COP30 5.
Informal consultations on the Warsaw International Mechanism for Loss and Damage (WIM) saw agreement to forward the joint annual report to COP30, but Parties failed to agree on forwarding the third WIM review to SB63, raising concerns about stalled progress on finance and support for vulnerable countries facing unavoidable climate impacts. Furthermore, negotiations on the Global Goal on Adaptation (GGA) and Mitigation Work Programme (MWP) revealed both concurrence and strain 6. Most Parties, including the Alliance of Small Island States (AOSIS), supported streamlined, equity-focused indicators for the GGA, though differences remain on the number, structure, and inclusion of Means of Implementation metrics 6. The MWP discussions highlighted concerns over Brazil’s proposed “Belém platform,” with SIDS cautioning that digital tools must support—not replace—urgent climate ambition and be designed for low-capacity contexts. The Just Transition Work Programme (JTWP) exposed divisions on institutional arrangements, rights-based framing, and unilateral trade measures, with SIDS and the G77 advocating for inclusive, equity-centered pathways 1. Stocktake-related discussions grappled with modalities and timelines for the Global Stocktake, with vulnerable countries stressing the importance of anchoring processes in the 1.5°C goal and ensuring science-policy coordination remains inclusive and responsive 9.
Civil society groups, including Climate Action Network (CAN), called for urgent climate action ahead of COP30, demanding an end to fossil fuel subsidies by 2025 and stronger alignment of Nationally Determined Contributions with Global Stocktake outcomes 5. Concerns grew over the failure of the world’s largest carbon offset projects to deliver promised emissions reductions, with research showing that about 80% of offsets retired in 2024 by 43 large projects—mostly in the Global South—were unlikely to represent real emissions cuts 11. Experts from WHO, FAO, and WFP urged urgent reform of agricultural subsidies to prioritize crop inputs, boost yields, and reduce malnutrition, especially in low-income countries like Uganda, noting that over 70% of global subsidies currently favor livestock, sugar, and rice rather than nutrient-rich crops 12. Procedural challenges and political tensions—exacerbated by closed-door informal negotiations without access to reporters or other observers—highlight the complex and high-stakes nature of SB62 as we near the closing of the conference.
Monday 23rd June
Negotiations at SB62 intensified across multiple tracks on the seventh day of the conference, with many sessions held as informals largely closed to observers, limiting detailed reporting 1. Discussions focused primarily on accountability, coherence, and political will to meet climate obligations 2. Key debates centred on structuring the technical phase of the second Global Stocktake (GST2), including timelines, the role of IPCC inputs, and reconciling COP28 decisions with the Paris Agreement 3. While there was agreement to launch GST2 from COP29 with intersessional flexibility, tensions remain over data management and sequencing 4. Developing countries expressed concerns about potential duplication of efforts, emphasizing the GST’s role in implementing Decision 1/CMA.5 and addressing finance barriers, reflecting a core fault line between deepening implementation focus and fears of shadow targets outside the Paris framework 1.
Climate finance dominated political discussions, especially consultations on Article 9.1 of the Paris Agreement, as in previous days. Developing country groups continued advocating for a dedicated work programme on Article 9.1, highlighting its legal nature and linking unmet finance commitments to rising adaptation and loss and damage needs 5. They criticized the dominance of loans over grants and the lack of political will from developed countries, who resisted a standalone agenda item and preferred integrating 9.1 discussions into broader finance topics. Loss and Damage finance continued to be a prominent theme, with calls for sustainable funding of the Loss and Damage Fund, though developed countries largely avoided explicit acknowledgment 6.
New data presented at SB62 revealed that private finance, especially blended finance, is falling far short of meeting the Global South’s energy transition needs, with only 38% of the $5.7 trillion annual investment required currently flowing 7. Civil society was persistent in calling for a shift toward public, grant-based climate finance and debt cancellation to enable just and equitable transitions through the JTWP 8. Agriculture and climate impacts also featured prominently within the groups representing farmers coalitions, with Indian farmers suffering severe crop losses due to erratic monsoons and wildlife damage far exceeding government compensation 9. Experts urged the creation of fair, timely compensation mechanisms and integrated conservation approaches to protect vulnerable livelihoods amid escalating climate risks 10.The overall negotiation atmosphere was tense, marked by procedural delays and political disagreements threatening trust and ambition heading into COP30 in Brazil 11. Equity, finance, and accountability remain core battlegrounds for this last week of negotiations. Civil society and Indigenous Peoples are urgently demanding for reforms to the UNFCCC process, calling for greater transparency, majority-based decision-making, and protection from corporate influence 12. Complementing these efforts, the Jesuit European Social Centre (JESC) will host an event on the 24th, exploring the role of climate change in forced migration. We hope to see you there!
Friday 20th & Saturday 21st June
The first week of the Bonn Climate Conference (SB62) revealed slow progress across key climate issues, reflecting persistent tensions between developed and developing countries on finance, adaptation, mitigation ambition, and loss and damage 1. Ongoing discussions and negotiations on the Global Stocktake (GST) showed broad support for advancing timelines, but disagreements remain over the scope of the UAE Dialogue, with some Parties favoring a narrow focus on finance and implementation, while others call for a comprehensive approach 2. Polarization was also evident in the Mitigation and Just Transition Work Programme, with developing countries resisting rigid language and developed countries pushing for alignment with the 1.5°C target 3.
A major focus was placed on the review of the draft text for the Global Goal on Adaptation (GGA), where Parties debated the number and features of adaptation indicators, methods of implementation, and integration of cross-cutting themes with an emphasis on gender, ethnic and persons with disabilities. While there was an overall agreement to use the current draft as a basis, disagreements remained on consolidating implementation modalities and managing the expert group’s role. An informal session was called to reconcile these differences ahead of COP31 4.
Consultations on the Baku to Belém Roadmap continued, with participation from Parties, civil society, and Indigenous peoples 5. Although there is consensus on the need for scaled-up finance, sharp divergences remain over the balance between grant-based public finance and private sector mobilization. Additionally, the roadmap points out key deficiencies in transport sector funding and advocates for changes in multilateral development banks and concessional finance arrangements 6. The Brazilian COP30 Presidency aims for a “COP of Implementation,” leveraging finance ministers’ engagement to drive progress 7.
The Warsaw International Mechanism (WIM) review on Loss and Damage saw multiple informal consultations but no final agreement. Discussions covered the State of Loss and Damage Report and potential guidelines for integrating Loss and Damage into NDCs. The review is vital for operationalizing the Loss and Damage Fund and supporting vulnerable countries, but its delay means decisions will likely be deferred to COP30. Meanwhile, the IPCC launched an updated framework of 409 adaptation indicators, modernizing the 1994 guidelines and providing a robust scientific basis for the Global Goal on Adaptation.Finally, the conference was shadowed by the growing influence of sophisticated climate misinformation campaigns that undermine trust in climate finance and solutions, complicating negotiations and public discourse 8. Civil society highlighted shrinking spaces at high level events, such as SB62 and COP30 – especially for citizens of the Global South – and called for greater transparency, justice, and inclusion in the UNFCCC process 9. A meeting with the Holy See delegation and other faith-based groups opened much needed dialogue and information sharing, which could guide the strategy and cohesion at COP30 for these groups 12. As we enter the second week of the SB62 and prepare for the final stretch to COP30 in the coming months – the challenge remains to bridge entrenched divides 10. The urgency needs to be visible through enhanced ambition and consistent and intentional translation of institutional tools into effective, equitable climate action that responds to the urgency of the climate crisis at this opportune moment 11.
Thursday 19th June
Many have asked, why is SB62 so important? We can deduct a large part of the importance of this conference from the updates on the negotiations from the fourth day. Marked by intensive technical and political mediations, the conference continues to serve as a crucial checkpoint on the climate crisis. Engagement with non-Party stakeholders, including civil society and Indigenous Peoples, centered on the Baku to Belém Roadmap under the New Collective Quantified Goal on Climate Finance (NCQG) 1. Civil society reiterated calls for a concrete plan to massively scale up Loss and Damage finance and ensure the Loss and Damage Fund is fully resourced 2. The COP30 presidency introduced a “circle of finance ministers” to guide efforts toward the annual finance target, but concerns about transparency and inclusiveness were consistently raised as in prior days regarding the topic.
Meanwhile, technical work on adaptation drew in key insights, with negotiators focusing on refining a shortlist of indicators for the Global Goal on Adaptation (GGA) and implementing the UAE-Belém Work Programme, reflecting the COP30 presidency’s emphasis on adaptation as priority for November 3. Discussions also focused on the modalities for the dialogue mandated in paragraph 97 of decision 1/CMA.5, intended to facilitate implementation of the global stocktake (GST) outcomes. Several parties, including India, recalled the challenging negotiations in Baku, where divergent views prevented consensus. While the dialogue aims to support GST implementation, parties remain divided on its scope and function, highlighting the growing challenge of balancing equity, access, and national interests 4.
In parallel, the third review of the Warsaw International Mechanism for Loss and Damage (WIM) saw progress on proposals for a State of Loss and Damage Report and improved institutional coordination, although observer access issues persisted despite previous commitments to inclusivity, which continues to be a recurring theme across all major agenda points 5. The Sharm el-Sheikh Dialogue on Article 2.1(c) further revealed the fractions between developed and developing countries over aligning financial flows with climate goals 6 . Developed countries advocated for clearer metrics, regulatory frameworks, and private sector engagement, while developing countries, including the G77, LMDCs, AGN, and AOSIS, stressed that alignment must not introduce new burdens or conditionalities and must be linked to the provision of finance under Article 9, safeguarding the equity and national policy spaces 7 8.
The day also saw the launch of the second annual dialogue on Nationally Determined Contributions (NDCs), with Vanuatu presenting its NDC 3.0, which features 45 Loss and Damage commitments 8. These developments underscore SB62’s pivotal role in shaping the technical groundwork and trust-building necessary for meaningful outcomes at COP30, as well as the importance of transparent and inclusive multilateral processes for global climate action that are both inclusive and multilateral 9.
Wednesday 18th June
We are back with the highlights from the third day of the Bonn Climate Conference (SB62) underway. Despite significant setbacks, some progress and ongoing challenges emerged around several critical and timely agenda topics.
For starters, the Just Transition Work Programme (JTWP), and the Baku to Belém Roadmap for climate finance discussions brought to light a deep wedge in the dynamics between the parties. The continued push from grassroots organizations, indigenous peoples and the civil society blocs for the institutionalization of Just Transition principles through inclusive participation, dedicated finance, and integration into national climate planning led to interesting discussions. Concrete demands included the launch of the Belém Action Mechanism (BAM) to accelerate support and remove systemic barriers, reflecting a strong bottom-up momentum for a transition that is ambitious in the current global financial climate at the withdrawal of the United States from the Paris Agreement.
Complementing these efforts, the ambitious Baku to Belém Roadmap aims to mobilize $1.3 trillion annually by 2035 to support developing countries’ climate action 1, with a strong emphasis on grants, concessional finance, and addressing the severe shortfall in loss and damage funding. Despite ongoing disagreements on financing modalities and responsibilities, the roadmap represents an urgently needed framework for scaling up equitable, accessible climate finance, with a summary report expected at COP30 to guide future action. Furthermore, the UAE Dialogue Modalities revealed deep seeded divisions, with developed countries favoring a broad platform addressing all Global Stocktake outcomes, while most Like-Minded Developing Nations, led by the G77 2, insisted the dialogue focus specifically on finance under the Means of Implementation and Support agenda. No consensus was reached on the dialogue’s scope or modalities, reflecting ongoing tensions over implementation and accountability.
Advocates, scientists, civil society and human rights defenders stood alongside Indigenous peoples present in Bonn as they continue demanding that climate policies prioritize the needs and rights of frontline communities and workers in conflict zones 3, with an emphasis on the war unfolding in the Middle East and an end to arms use in the name of the environment. Ongoing backlash for the lack of support and clear intentions of parties in reaching those most affected by the climate emergency places a necessary pressure on the negotiations and talks underway 4 – calling clearly for a spirit of urgency in the name of climate justice 5.
Tuesday 17th June
Marking the second day of the 62nd session of the UNFCCC Subsidiary Bodies (SB62) in Bonn, the lack of agreement over the adoption of the agenda of the negotiations heightened tensions as the opening plenary session was delayed for several hours. The remarks made by the UN Climate Change Executive Secretary, Simon Stiell were clear, “And if we want COP30 to take us another global step forward, we need the next eight days to deliver concrete progress, across all aspects of the agenda” 1. Earlier in the day, ongoing disagreements—especially over climate finance and the obligations of developed nations to the Global South per Article 9.1—delayed substantive negotiations and highlighted persistent justice concerns by the “Like-Minded Developing Countries” blocs 2.
Civil society mobilized to urge parties to uphold and prioritize the commitment to urgent, equitable climate action, warning that procedural stalling undermines trust and ambition in the fight for climate justice. Many demonstrations by Indigenous groups also highlight ongoing humanitarian crises at the intersection with climate change and conflicts that exacerbate it which places further and necessary pressure on the proceedings. Meanwhile, Carbon Market Watch and other observers raised concerns about the need for human rights safeguards and transparency to protect marginalized communities, emphasising the implementation of Article 6.2 by the private sector and developed country parties 3.
The IISD and partners also reported similar feedback on just energy transition discussions 4, highlighting the importance of supporting workers and communities impacted by the fossil fuel phase-out, while actively advocating for agroecological and gender-transformative solutions in agriculture and the integration of indigenous and traditional practices to be implemented 5. Negotiators were consistently warned against diluted commitments, urging that both adaptation and climate finance reach those most in need and align with human rights principles 6. The persistent procedural and political tensions at SB62 will shape the path to COP30, with Blocs from the Global South and Civil Society actors remaining vocal in demanding justice, accountability, and meaningful action in these next two weeks of negotiations 7.