Seven Key Issues to Watch at The Bonn Climate Conference

Last year, tensions ran high, with persistent squabbles and negotiations stalling until the penultimate day of the conference. What’s at stake this year, at the halfway point to COP 29 in Azerbaijan?

Our experts Anne Hammill, Emilie Beauchamp, Jonas Kuehl, Natalie Jones, Claire McConnell and Angie Dazé weigh in on seven key issues:

• public finance
• national adaptation plans assessment
• fossil fuel phase-out
• gender action plan
• just transition
• UAE-Bélem work program
• food systems

Public Finance 

At COP 21 in 2015, parties agreed to negotiate a “new collective quantified goal” (NCQG) on climate finance to replace the USD 100 billion a year goal pledged at COP 15 in 2009. Negotiations on the NCQG are expected to wrap up at COP 29 in Baku.  

Many issues remain contentious. What should the quantity, or quantum, of the goal be? Will there be thematic sub-goals? Who should be the contributors? What should the time frame be, and what are the processes for revision? What about the transparency arrangements? One key factor is the relationship of the new goal to Article 2.1(c) of the Paris Agreement, which focuses on the long-term objective of making finance flows “consistent with a pathway towards low greenhouse gas emissions and climate-resilient development.” While many developed countries are eager for there to be a link, developing countries are wary of distracting from the Global North’s obligation to take the lead in providing finance.  

A second key issue is where the money comes from. Developing countries have stressed that the goal should be centred on the provision of public finance by developed countries. However, this is unlikely to suffice for the trillions of dollars needed. The EU and some other developed countries have argued that all sources of finance are needed: public and private, international and domestic. Discussing financial instruments is also on the table, with developing countries calling to prioritize grant-based finance for adaptation and loss and damage so climate actions aren’t funded at the expense of further debt. All of this is still up for debate. IISD will be watching the conversations closely. 

National Adaptation Plan Assessment  

The National Adaptation Plan (NAP) process was established under the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC) in 2010. Since then, technical guidelines have been developed, extensive capacity building undertaken, dedicated funding windows opened, and various support initiatives—such as the NAP Global Network—launched. As global temperatures rise, NAPs remain the main vehicle for countries to systematically build resilience, enhance adaptive capacity, and reduce vulnerability to climate change. 

At SB 60, countries will conduct a mini-global stocktake of the NAP process. The assessment will also highlight adaptation efforts and achievements of developing countries over the last decade, as well as key challenges and learnings. Based on this, recommendations on the process to formulate and implement NAPs will be drafted for consideration and adoption by COP29. This is an important mandate to fulfill, given it was postponed at COP 21 and again at COP 24 because not enough NAP documents had been submitted. However, as of May 2024, over 50 multi-sector NAP documents have been completed by developing countries, with even more undertaking the process domestically. Countries have made important progress on adaptation planning, so it is time to understand what’s working and what needs critical attention. 

In a finance-focused year and with a nationally determined contribution (NDC) update on the horizon, the NAP Assessment may seem low stakes. Nevertheless, achieving a robust outcome at COP 29 is critical, as it sends an important signal of progress and support for adaptation in developing countries.

If we’re serious about accelerating efforts to mainstream adaptation and invest in the transition from adaptation planning to implementation, we can’t let the NAP Assessment be relegated to a bargaining chip for other, higher-profile agenda items.

Fossil Fuel Phase-Out 

COP 28 made history by calling on parties to “transition away from fossil fuels.” While the stronger “phase-out” language that many states favoured did not make it into the text, the landmark compromise placed fossil fuels firmly on the negotiating agenda.  

But what comes next for fossil fuel phase-out in the UNFCCC process? The “transition away from fossil fuels” language was included in the global stocktake decision, suggesting that it should inform the next round of NDCs. There are several elements relating to fossil fuel production that parties should include in their NDCs: background information on fossil fuel reserves and production, pathways and targets to phase out production, policies and measures to constrain or disincentivize production, just transition, economic diversification measures, equity, and international support. While countries are not expected to submit their third-generation NDCs as soon as Bonn, conversations will no doubt be happening behind the scenes regarding what they should include.  

Ambition on fossil fuel phase-out within the UNFCCC process will also be discussed. One option is to refocus the conversation to the logical next step: ending new fossil fuel infrastructure, in particular new oil and gas fields and new coal mines (which IISD research has shown no credible Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change 1.5°C pathway can accommodate). It would be a powerful signal if the COP 29 cover decision were to call on parties to end all licensing for new oil and gas fields and permitting for new coal mines. While these conversations are not expected to emerge officially at Bonn, unofficial discussion can be expected. 

Gender Action Plan 

Addressing gender equality and social inclusion leads to more effective climate action and more sustainable outcomes. It demands a focus on systemic change rather than short-term fixes, which requires new ways of working and better decision making at all levels.    

The Enhanced Lima Work Programme and its Gender Action Plan (GAP) have been the main entry point for advancing gender-responsive climate action within the UNFCCC process, and their second iteration—agreed to at COP 25 in Madrid—will be reviewed this year.  

This is why SB 60 matters. A 3-day workshop will be convened in Bonn to discuss what progress has been made over the last 5 years, as well as where we go from here. During this year’s negotiations, countries need to continue the progress being made under the Lima Work Programme and produce a new, higher-quality GAP with a longer timeframe for implementation, concrete targets and indicators, and more clarity on roles and responsibilities. SB 60 is an opportunity to move these talks forward, agreeing on elements of a decision to be finalized at COP 29.  

A renewed commitment to gender-responsive climate action is pivotal for the success of the Paris Agreement.  Mainstreaming gender equality and social inclusion considerations across all negotiation items will be crucial for establishing linkages between the GAP and other areas of climate action.  

Just Transition 

At COP 27, parties agreed to establish a work program on just transition for discussion of pathways to achieving the goals of the Paris Agreement. One year later, at COP 28, parties defined and adopted the programme’s objectives.  

According to this decision, these pathways should be multi-faceted (energy, socioeconomic, workforce, and other dimensions) but also be specific to country contexts by considering nationally defined development priorities. The decision further recognizes the importance of international cooperation, inclusive and participatory approaches, as well as social dialogue, social protection, and labour rights. 

The work program will be implemented through organizing two round table dialogues per year between now and 2026. The first of these dialogues will be held in Bonn right before the SB 60, focusing on achieving just transition pathways through NDCs, NAPs and long-term low-emission development strategies (LT-LEDS).  

These dialogues will show if the Just Transition Work Programme can define a clear set of global standards for just transition pathways. Although it is important to foster pathways tailored to local realities, creating a coherent framework through international cooperation could accelerate policy development. An early indication of success would be the degree and quality of how just transition will feature in the third round of NDCs as well as new LT-LEDS. Only 44 NDCs—from 70 countries, as the EU has a joint NDC—explicitly referenced just transition by November 2023. Despite slightly better results, there is also much room for improvement for the LT-LEDS. 

UAE-Bélem Work Programme  

At COP 28, parties adopted the UAE Framework for Global Climate Resilience (UAE FGCR), outlining the framework to assess collective progress on the Global Goal on Adaptation.  

As part of the same decision, the 2-year UAE-Bélem work program was launched to develop indicators across the 11 targets of the UAE FGCR. At SB 60, parties are expected to agree on modalities for work under this program toward the adoption of final indicators at COP 30. These indicators should help countries accelerate the implementation of the UAE FGCR and provide more robust information for the second global stocktake. They should also drive countries to better track, assess, and learn from their national progress on adaptation.  

This is why it’s critical for the outputs of the work program to provide incentives for countries to implement national monitoring, evaluation, and learning systems that can contextualize these global indicators.  

The indicators themselves should also systematically integrate gender equality and social inclusion considerations for countries and the UAE FGCR to assess and understand how adaptation actions address the root causes of inequality and aim for systemic change.  

Parties should think about integrating means of implementation to signal the importance of tracking and reporting on finance, technology transfer and capacity building for progressing adaptation. These can provide important links with the NCQG on Climate Finance. 

Food Systems 

COP 28 concluded with mixed results for food and agriculture. The Emirates Declaration on Sustainable Agriculture, Resilient Food Systems, and Climate Action formed the first leaders-level commitment on food and agriculture at a COP, but language on these issues in the global stocktake decision text was not as strong as it needed to be, and progress on the Sharm El Sheikh Joint Work on Agriculture (SSJW) continues to stall. Despite agreement of the work program at COP 27, there is still no progress on the content or on a governance structure for the work program.  

As we head into Bonn, we are looking for strong signals from countries that they will include food systems and agriculture in their updated NDCs and that—for countries who are also signatories to the Convention on Biological Diversity—this will be well integrated with their National Biodiversity Strategies and Action Plans. It is also vital that as the NCQG negotiations progress, there is recognition of the need to rapidly scale up climate finance available for the transition to sustainable food and agriculture systems, particularly for marginalized groups. Countries must focus on rebuilding trust and constructive dialogue to overcome work program governance disagreements. With just over half of the SSJW work program remaining, agreeing on how to implement commitments made at COP 27 is critical to the success of agricultural negotiations.