Daily report for 1 December 2023

UN Climate Change Conference - United Arab Emirates Nov/Dec 2023

The World Climate Action Summit gathered Heads of State and Government. There were several new financial pledges for loss and damage, notably Italy and France pledging up to EUR 100 million each. In the negotiations, finance and Global Stocktake (GST) discussions convened throughout the day, alongside a range of other consultations.

World Climate Action Summit

President Mohamed bin Zayed Al Nahyan, UAE, underscored the UAE’s commitment to achieving net zero by 2050. He announced the establishment of a USD 30 billion fund for climate solutions, designed to bridge the finance gap and stimulate clean energy investments by 2030.

UN Secretary-General António Guterres called for the GST to spur drastic emissions cuts, end fossil fuel use, and accelerate a just, equitable transition. He also underscored the GST should support multilateral development bank reform and show how developed countries will double adaptation finance.

King Charles III, UK, called for combining public and private finance with innovative tools like risk guarantees and ensuring that resources flow to the most sustainable solutions. He advised forging an ambitious 100-year vision built on diversity and coherent long-term solutions.

President Luiz Inácio Lula da Silva, Brazil, lamented that inequalities compound the broken trust in multilateralism and the effects of climate change. He signaled Brazil’s commitment to turn the tide at COP 30, including leading by example in setting ambitious national climate goals like achieving zero deforestation by 2030.

Isabel Prestes Da Fonseca, Co-Founder, Instituto Zág, called for protecting nature and Indigenous Peoples through nature-based solutions.

UNFCCC Executive Secretary Simon Stiell stressed that, in this hottest year ever, climate change is on everyone’s doorstep and transcends the cycles of electoral politics.

Prime Minister Narendra Modi, India, said India is one of the few countries on track to meet its nationally determined contribution (NDC) targets. He urged fairly sharing the global carbon budget.

Dennis Francis, President of the UN General Assembly at its seventy-eighth session, relayed the realities of sea-level rise for small island states, as an “indisputable result of our actions or inactions.” He stressed that the tools to address the crisis are already available.


Sharm el-Sheikh Mitigation Ambition and Implementation Work Programme: In informal consultations, co-facilitators Kay Harrison (New Zealand) and Carlos Fuller (Belize) invited parties’ views.

Parties said the decision should reflect on the first year of the work programme and identify areas for improvement, such as the participation of experts and expansion of the scope of the dialogues to include additional sectors. Some parties called for organizing regional dialogues. Others said the work programme was designed to be global, and although regions can organize regional dialogues, they should not form part of the work programme or be included in its reports.

Regarding the way forward, many parties called for text that identifies opportunities to increase mitigation ambition in line with 1.5°C Paris Agreement temperature goal, as well as actionable solutions to help parties implement this increased ambition. Several called for a “strong outcome” that provides a clear plan for staying within 1.5°C.

Some parties requested including calls to transition from fossil fuels to renewable energy, eliminate fossil fuel subsidies, peak global emissions by 2025, and achieve net-zero emissions by 2050. Other parties opposed this approach, noting that the work programme is in its infancy. They suggested the decision focus on reflecting on the first year of implementation and how to improve the work programme. Several also opposed attempts to use the work programme to impose new targets on developing countries, pointing to the agreed language of the decision that established the work programme.

Many parties highlighted links between the work programme and the GST, and said the work programme can be used as a GST follow-up mechanism. Other parties encouraged avoiding duplication.

Parties could not agree to mandate the Co-Facilitators to produce draft text. The Co-Facilitators will report the discussions to the SB Chairs and seek their guidance on the way forward.

Work Programme on Just Transition Pathways: In informal consultations, co-facilitated by Selam Abeb (Ethiopia) and Luisa Roelke (Germany), several parties expressed a desire to launch the work programme at this meeting. Views diverged on whether the work programme should address just transition pathways, or if there are multiple just transitions to consider. While some stressed the importance of national-level or nationally-determined actions, others called for considering international aspects. There was wide support for a broad scope, with many developing countries highlighting their national circumstances and one group calling for equity and common but differentiated responsibilities and respective capabilities (CBDR-RC) and unilateral measures to be addressed.

On timelines, views included a two- or three-year programme, potentially with the opportunity to renew, and an indefinite programme. Many ideas for modalities were suggested, including workshops and technical papers. Many supported the work programme to convene jointly under the SBI and SBSTA. Many observed that this work programme could inform the next GST and, depending on the programme’s timelines, subsequent GSTs. Informal consultations will continue.

Matters Relating to Article 6: Guidance on Paris Agreement Article 6.2 (cooperative approaches): In informal consultations, Co-Facilitators Maria Al Jishi (Saudi Arabia) and Peer Stiansen (Norway) invited comments on the SBSTA Chair’s informal document and asked parties to identify if and where their views were not captured in the document. Parties highlighted issues related to the special circumstances of least developed countries (LDCs), the need to define “cooperative approaches,” and the timing and content of annual submissions and authorizations.

Loss and Damage

Report of the Warsaw International Mechanism for Loss and Damage associated with Climate Change Impacts (WIM): Co-facilitated by Cornelia Jäger (Austria), delegates began their informal consultations, focusing on the report of the Executive Committee of the Warsaw International Mechanism (WIM). One delegate highlighted this day marks ten years since the establishment of the WIM. Many delegations expressed support for the report and interest in welcoming it. During the session’s final minutes, one country opposed welcoming the report and stated she would provide further comments on her concerns later. The group will continue deliberating the Co-Facilitators’ draft conclusions at the next session.

Santiago Network: Co-facilitated by Lucas di Pietro (Argentina), delegates were tasked with completing the mandate left unfulfilled at SB 58 to recommend a host for the Santiago Network. Several developing country delegations noted they are working on a unified draft submission they wish to use as the basis for discussions. A few developed countries preferred the SB 58 informal note. Informal consultations will continue.


Long-term Finance: Discussions opened in a contact group co-chaired by Carlos Fuller (Belize). Delegates agreed on the importance of tracking the fulfillment of the USD 100 billion commitment until 2027, considering the two-year time lag in data availability. Developing countries lamented that the goal was not met in 2021. Many developed countries called for recognizing recent assessments on the positive trajectory of climate finance and pledges made in Dubai. Several developing country groups acknowledged positive trends and welcomed pledges, but underscored decisions should not be based on estimates. SWITZERLAND and the EU noted they respectively exceeded and contributed their fair share in climate finance, with the AFRICAN GROUP noting the relevance of information on burden sharing. Other points related to a placeholder on defining climate finance and facilitating access to bilateral and private finance. Co-Chair Fuller invited written submissions to prepare draft text. Discussions will continue in informal consultations.

Standing Committee on Finance (SCF): Discussions opened in a contact group co-chaired by Ali Waqas (Pakistan) and Apollonia Miola (EU), who recalled the objective for the group not only to discuss various SCF reports, but also to consider three issues that parties decided not to include on the agenda. Several developing country groups urged sufficient time and a clear schedule to discuss all reports and issues, with the AFRICAN GROUP underscoring the need for discussions rather than submissions, especially on Paris Agreement 2.1(c) (making financial flows consistent with a pathway towards low-GHG emissions and climate-resilient development).

On a climate finance definition, the ARAB GROUP and the LIKE-MINDED GROUP OF DEVELOPING COUNTRIES (LMDCs) called for the SCF to update its operational definition. The INDEPENDENT ALLIANCE OF LATIN AMERICA AND THE CARIBBEAN (AILAC) emphasized consideration of adaptive capacity.

On doubling adaptation finance, the ENVIRONMENTAL INTEGRITY GROUP (EIG) highlighted language on baselines, with LDCs also pointing to sources of information and target values. The ARAB GROUP called for a work programme on doubling adaptation finance.

On 2.1(c), the ARAB GROUP expressed concerns over, among others, increased costs of capital related to climate risk assessment. AILAC lamented the imbalance between mitigation and adaptation. EIG called for establishing a work programme to, among others, develop recommendations on facilitating access to capital and avoiding greenwashing.

Second Review of the SCF’s Functions: Parties addressed this matter in informal consultations, co-facilitated by Ali Waqas (Pakistan) and Apollonia Miola (EU), but could not agree on a way forward. Disagreement related to whether the CMA is to affirm the COP decision or to elaborate distinct substantive points, with several developing countries objecting to the idea of a parity of the two governing bodies over the SCF.

New collective quantified goal on climate finance: Discussions opened in a contact group co-chaired by Gabriela Blatter (Switzerland). Delegates were broadly aligned in their expectations for the decision to be adopted by CMA 5. They called for recognizing work undertaken so far, especially by the 2023 Co-Chairs of the ad hoc work programme. Delegates further agreed on ensuring a shift to a negotiation mode while still emphasizing the importance of stakeholder input and openness to observers. Some suggested a role for the SBI, and delegates also emphasized the need to “sensitize” ministers, including through the early appointment of co-facilitating ministers. They agreed the decision should capture substantive progress, with groups and parties pointing to the goal’s timeframes, transparency arrangements, and multi-layered structure.

Global Stocktake

First Global Stocktake: During the contact group, Co-Facilitators Alison Campbell (UK) and Joseph Teo (Singapore) presented the “tool” developed overnight, saying it draws on existing agreed text where possible and includes placeholders for issues suggested by parties. The LDCs, ALLIANCE OF SMALL ISLAND STATES (AOSIS), EIG, the EU, the AFRICAN GROUP, BRAZIL, the US, JAPAN, and CANADA, among others, considered the tool as a workable basis for negotiations. The LMDCs suggested that future iterations, in the form of a compilation of views, might be a better basis for negotiations. BRAZIL recalled the understanding that the proposed, but deleted, agenda item on Mission 1.5 would be discussed here.

Parties then proceeded to identify elements they felt were missing or needed further elaboration. Some parties suggested “no text” options for issues identified for discussion but on which there may not be agreement, such as unilateral measures.

On the preamble, some groups of developing countries highlighted its importance for setting the GST’s context. They called for including the Sustainable Development Goals, 1992 Rio Outcome, and other sustainable development-related agreements. They stressed the need to include relevant principles and provisions of both the Convention and the Paris Agreement. Several developed countries disagreed, preferring a short preamble, with some suggesting that the GST is solely under the Paris Agreement.

On context and cross-cutting considerations, views diverged on how to represent the best available science, including from the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC). Countries suggested various additional references to human rights, Indigenous Peoples, gender, intergenerational equity, and the right to development. Some underscored that the section should clearly call for a “course correction.” Informal consultations continued.

High-level Ministerial on the GST Findings on Adaptation: Ambassador Wael Aboulmagd, Egypt, and Razan Al Mubarak, UN Climate Change High-level Champion, co-facilitated.

President Giorgia Meloni, Italy, pledged EUR 100 million to the loss and damage fund.

Prime Minister Xavier Espot Zamora, Andorra, noted the importance of mountains for economies and livelihoods and mountain ecosystems’ vulnerability to climate change. President Sadyr Japarov, Kyrgyzstan, with Tandi Dorji, Minister for Foreign Affairs of Bhutan, called for a global dialogue on mountains and climate.

Prime Minister Mark Rutte, the Netherlands, announced contributions of EUR 15 million for the loss and damage fund and EUR 25 million to enhance African LDCs’ disaster response capacity.

Prime Minister Pushpa Kamal Dahal, Nepal, underscored that the GST must prioritize adaptation and ensure simplified access to financial and technological resources for climate-vulnerable LDCs.

Prime Minister Robert Abela, Malta, warned that we cannot adapt to runaway climate change and called for deep, rapid, and sustained emissions reduction and finance to support climate action globally.

Prime Minister Andrej Plenković, Croatia, said adaptation should be integrated into national policies, strategic frameworks, and legislation and be locally tailored.

President Wavel John Charles Ramkalawan, Seychelles, called for high-income small island states to have access to concessionary loss and damage funding.

Prime Minister Russel Dlamini, Eswatini, called for reform of the global financial system and stressed the need to address poverty through strategic investment, efficient irrigation, carbon storage, and innovative technology.

Sade Rashel Fritschi Naranjo, Minister of Environment and Water, Ecuador, called for scaling up finance and adopting a multi-dimensional focus on adaptation.

Qu Donyu, Director-General, UN Food and Agriculture Organization, lamented the drastic decrease in agri-food systems financing.

Mwanahamisi Singano, Women’s Environment and Development Organization, called for including references to women in the GST text and making finance accessible to women.

Grace Balawag, International Indigenous Peoples’ Forum on Climate Change, called for the GST to address maladaptation and greenwashing projects used to justify rights violations and displacement.


Reporting from Non-Annex I Parties: Report of the Consultative Group of Experts: In informal consultations, Co-Facilitators Mausami Desai (US) and Xiang Gao (China) invited parties to consider the Consultative Group of Experts’ (CGE’s) report on its work in 2023 (FCCC/SBI/2023/20) and provide guidance for its 2024 work.

Suggestions included separating metrics on submissions of biennial transparency report (BTR) from submissions of national communications and biennial update reports, and highlighting ongoing capacity constraints. A country called for equal access to participate fully in the CGE as chairperson or rapporteur.

On 2024 work, some suggested focusing on: supporting developing countries in preparing BTRs to fulfill obligations under the Paris Agreement’s Enhanced Transparency Framework (ETF); supporting the Secretariat in training parties to use new reporting tools; addressing imbalances in sectoral, gender, and geographical representation; and identifying and closing ongoing support gaps.

The Co-Facilitators will prepare draft conclusions.

Provision of Financial and Technical Support for Reporting under the Paris Agreement: In informal consultations, Co-Facilitators Sandra Motshwanedi (South Africa) and Julia Gardiner (Australia) invited parties to share their views on the informal note. One developing country group underscored the lack of capacity to complete BTRs. Another developing country group supported, emphasizing the need for more targeted capacity building and addressing gaps.

Some developing countries lamented that some matters taken up during COP 27 were not addressed in the informal note and called for the Co-Facilitators to draft a decision text before discussions go forward. A few developing country groups agreed, with one group proposing the Secretariat also present what other kinds of support it can provide. Discussions will continue in informal consultations.

Capacity Building

Capacity building under the Convention, Kyoto Protocol, and Paris Agreement: Catherine Goldberg (US) and Gonzalo Guaiquil (Chile) co-facilitated informal consultations. Parties welcomed the annual technical progress report of the Paris Committee on Capacity-building. They mandated the Co-Facilitators to prepare first drafts of COP and CMA decisions. Key issues raised by parties included addressing implementation gaps and emerging needs, identifying synergies, and ensuring equitable geographic representation in capacity-building efforts.

Social Considerations

Gender: In informal consultations, Co-Facilitators Marc-André Lafrance (Canada) and Angela Ebeleke Ibenge (Democratic Republic of the Congo) invited parties to share their views on the reports presented by the Secretariat (FCCC/SBI/2023/13, FCCC/SBI/2023/4). Several developing and developed country groups lauded the reports. They proposed postponing the deadline for submissions to March 2024, to give parties sufficient time to review and provide comments before COP 29. One developed country underscored the importance of financial resources to implement the gender action plan. Several developing country groups also proposed conducting an in-session workshop to help guide countries.

Discussions will continue in informal consultations.


Sharm el-Sheikh Joint Work on Implementation of Climate Action on Agriculture and Food Security: In informal consultations facilitated by Una May Gordon (Jamaica), delegates debated the basis for their discussions, with divergent views on whether to use the informal note from SB 58, or start from scratch. Many developing countries stressed that they could not give the Co-Facilitators a mandate to develop a new text at this time. Delegates were also unable to agree on whether they should begin by addressing the text’s elements or the topics of future workshops. Co-Facilitator Gordon encouraged delegates to continue their discussions along the margins ahead of the next informal consultations.

In the Corridors

Somehow two different worlds co-existed in the sprawling Expo 2020 venue. World leaders adopted the UAE Declaration on Sustainable Agriculture, Resilient Food Systems, and Climate Action. Some announced additional loss and damage funding, notably Italy’s EUR 100 million pledge. They tried their best to show unity in the face of the climate crisis.

In their own world, negotiators struggled to achieve even surface-level harmony. Negotiations on long-term finance and the review of the functions of the SCF revealed little trust among parties. They still strain to find common ground on how to count and consider climate finance in terms of definitions, methodologies, and negotiation processes. Talks of the new collective quantified finance goal were more amenable. All agreed on one thing: not to replicate what one called “the mistakes” of the GST, namely, having a lengthy technical process that is largely disconnected from a short political process.

The GST delegates wouldn’t have heard their colleagues’ remarks but may have agreed. Throughout the day, ideas were proposed and rejected. A “legal and philosophical” discussion on the relationship between the Paris Agreement and the Convention circled. Some civil society delegates who had to leave the overfilled room, only to find the consultations were not available online, drew parallels between the “overcapacity room and the overcapacity text.” With further interventions by world leaders tomorrow, perhaps one world’s positivity can spill over into the next.

Further information