CAN were one of many activist groups who were prominent at COP30. We attended one of their daily briefing sessions. It was a useful insight into how activist groups saw the COP process – not necessarily expecting to have a seat at the top table, but aiming to make enough noise, and build momentum, to be noticed and listened to.

 

The key demand for COP30 was the Belem Action Mechanism, a just transition framework which CAN and others hoped to see implemented. At the time we were there, many were hopeful that this might result in firm commitments by the end of the conference. It is debatable whether that actually happened.

 

Much of the activist-led activity was fronted by young, enthusiastic people, from many different countries. It could be argued that idealism sometimes trumped pragmatism in this setting. Some of it felt slightly performative, with a bewildering array of acronyms sprinkled into every session, and what can only be described as paranoia (perhaps justified) around corporate interests.

 

A few snippets from this session, however – there were more civil society registrants at Belem than there had been in Baku, but also many more lobbyists. On the ground, it was difficult to identify who these lobbyists were, or what they were doing. Were Verture “lobbyists?” It was also clear that China was trying to step into the vacuum left by the USA – for good, or ill.