The term COP is often thrown around when discussions turn to global issues around sustainability, environmental politics and climate change. But what does it actually mean? COP stands for Conference of Parties and refers to the regular international meeting of Parties (countries) that are signatories to a convention on a specific issue. The Conference of Parties is the main decision-making body for a Convention; it serves as an opportunity to review progress in relation to agreed targets and to release a statement or binding agreement on further action in the end. Perhaps the most famous example of such a treaty that was reached during a COP is the Paris Agreement. This treaty was adopted by 196 countries as a result of the 21st COP on the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC) in 2015. The climate COP is, together with the biannual COP on the Convention on Biological Diversity, the most important international meeting concerning the protection of the planet.
In 2024, the 29th Climate COP was held in Baku, Azerbaijan. Hosting the largest climate conference in a country focused on the oil industry and with a more than questionable human rights record raised concerns in advance of the conference, especially in connection with three consecutive summits in the last years that had less than mediocre outcomes. Papua New Guinea boycotted the conference completely and called it
“a waste of time”
The sluggish and unrestful negotiations were accentuated by scandals ranging from the lack of plant-based food to secretly recorded discussions on oil investment by Elnur Soltanov, a senior official on Azerbaijan’s COP team. Negotiations almost collapsed when numerous delegates stormed out of a meeting. All the while, Saudi Arabia attempted to water down the last COP’s promises to move away from fossil fuels. In the end, Parties compromised on a climate financing deal, with wealthier countries pledging US$300 billion annually to emergent nations in support of climate mitigation and adaptation, a far cry from the US$500 billion that was proposed and the US$1.3 trillion that is needed.
Disappointments about the negotiations and the resulting deal greatly overshadowed smaller accomplishments, like Indonesia’s announcement to phase out coal. Many delegates, especially from the global South, shared the feelings India expressed in a final statement: “We are very unhappy, disappointed with the process and object to the adoption of this agenda”. Climate scientists described the results as
“stopping a diplomatic disaster at best”
and emphasised the need for realistic plans to connect emission reduction with explicit steps to reach financial targets.
On the other side of the world, the 2024 Biodiversity COP took place in Cali, Colombia. Hosting the conference in a country with the highest number of environmental activists being murdered every year definitely made a statement but also raised serious safety concerns for delegates. In combination with 85% of participating countries failing to submit their plans for their contribution to the global biodiversity targets in time, the summit seemed to be off to a bad start. Akin to the Climate COP, negotiations went back and forth over a detailed funding plan to halt the biodiversity crisis. Without reaching an agreement on the financial details, the most important topic of the summit, the conference was eventually suspended.
Nevertheless, the COP was able to present a number of positive results. Of the participating Parties, 119 submitted biodiversity targets and 44 countries submitted revised action plans by the end of the conference. The nations also established a new funding mechanism, sourcing some benefits from a rising biotechnical industry into Indigenous Peoples and local communities, as well as pledging an additional US$163 million into the Global Biodiversity Framework Fund (GBFF). In the two most important breakthroughs of this COP, Parties were able to agree on a new process to identify ecologically or biologically significant marine areas (EBSAs) and adopt a new Program of Work. This PoW is tasked with ensuring the rights, contributions and traditional knowledge of Indigenous Peoples and local communities in the conservation of biodiversity. Talks on funding plans will resume in the autumn of this year.
Both COPs had the same important mission: to develop a financing plan in which wealthy countries provided poorer states with the necessary funds to manage the climate transition and halt the biodiversity crisis. Both COPs failed in this regard. However, while the climate conference was unable to make any other major decisions, the biodiversity summit had at least a few positive outcomes. The year 2025 will show if the Parties can agree that the safeguarding of our planet is worth paying for.
