Bonn Climate Change Conference

Climate change is increasing the occurrence of natural disasters and is a significant factor in many conflicts. It is also becoming a major driver of migration and displacement. In many of the countries where Concern works, people rely on the food gained from their land to survive. Extreme weather events such as drought and flooding, and associated threats such as locust invasions, can decimate these crops and have a devastating impact on people's ability to feed their families.

Concern’s approach to environmental protection aims to conserve natural resources and, where possible, to repair damage and reverse trends. As well as meeting immediate needs such as food and livelihood support, we also work with farmers to help them adjust to climate change and build resilience for the future.

Climate change impacts are likely to play out disproportionately across countries, exacerbated by pre-existing inequalities. Those living in fragile and conflict-affected states are hit hardest because they are more vulnerable to the damaging effects of a hazard and have lower coping capacities and supports. In addition, those hardest hits by the effects of climate change are often those least responsible for emissions.

Bonn provides a place where organisations like Concern, alone or through both the Zurich Climate Resilience Alliance and Climate Action Network, can input into the consultation processes, (known as interventions) and also discuss with negotiators, other actors, and government representatives, on their positions, influencing the outcomes on the UNFCCC process.

Amid aid cuts, fossil fuel expansion, climate backsliding, geopolitical tensions, and a deepening debt crisis in the Global South—while climate emergencies intensify and planetary boundaries are breached—SB62 aimed to advance Paris Agreement implementation through over 50 negotiating tracks and more than 30 mandated UNFCCC events.

SB62 began with a two day “agenda fight” as Bolivia, on behalf of the Like-Minded Developing Countries (LMDCs) – a negotiating block that includes China, India and Saudi Arabia – fought to include two new agenda items to conference. One specifically supported by the developing-country coalition of the G77 and China—a coalition of 134 developing countries- the initiative emphasized the need for developed countries to increase climate finance contributions from public funds. 

Additionally, the Brazilian Presidency released the 4th letter from the Presidency outlining their intention as hosts of COP30. Highlighting the need for a “Action Agenda” calling for COP30 to put “into practice what we have collectively agreed so far.”  Outlining the need to strengthen multilateralism, and to connect “the UNFCCC to peoples’ lives and accelerating the Paris Agreement implementation.” 

However, despite the delay, SB62 did make some progress, although in some cases limited, towards progressing decision text and progressing work that will continue as we move towards the November COP30 in Brazil. 

Progress on the Global Goal on Adaptation (GGA) had two specific work streams, one the formal negotiations, a mandated event, a full day workshop and the second the formal negotiations. 

The GGA workshop highlighted progress made following COP29, where six expert groups delivered presentations on specific thematic areas—water, health, biodiversity, food, infrastructure, poverty, and heritage. These efforts helped narrow down the original list of over 9,000 indicators to 490. However, the presenters acknowledged that significant work remains, particularly in improving cross-group comparisons and engaging with external stakeholders—such as those involved with the SDGs and the Sendai Framework—to assess existing data sources and determine the practicality of the proposed indicators for tracking global progress toward what is referred to as “transformational adaptation.”

Following the workshop, official negotiations focused on reviewing and refining draft text submitted by the G77 + China. Parties began discussing three key sections of the text:1. Timeline and Structure of GGA Indicators: This section outlines a proposed timeline and the final structure for the Global Goal on Adaptation (GGA) indicators. 2. Baku Adaptation Roadmap: This component introduces a forward-looking pathway for advancing the GGA beyond COP30. 3. Transformational Adaptation: This section proposes defining transformational adaptation, providing examples, and developing a paper exploring various adaptation approaches across national contexts—from survival-oriented strategies to more transformative ones. This text will be further negotiated and finalized at COP30.

Negotiations on National Adaptation Plans concluded with discussions again pushed to the next meeting at COP30. No text was developed, but many developing countries noted within the discussions that without proper adaptation financing countries would continue to make little progress at home, towards the implementation of these plans. 

The informal consultations on the Baku to Belém: A roadmap to $1.3 trillion exposed deep divisions between developed and developing countries on climate finance priorities. Developed countries emphasized private sector mobilization, enabling environments, and innovative financing tools, while developing countries and stakeholders focused on the quality and accessibility of finance, debt burdens, and unmet commitments—especially the overdue $100 billion pledge and the $300 billion needed for adaptation. A key concern raised was that over half of climate finance is debt-based, exacerbating vulnerability, with only 15% reaching developing countries due to risk-averse investment patterns. Least Developed Countries, SIDS, and African nations argued that climate finance must prioritize grants, concessional funding, and direct access mechanisms to uphold climate justice, equity, and historical responsibility. They called for a rights-based, country-driven approach aligned with NDCs and NAPs. In contrast, developed countries framed the roadmap as an implementation strategy focused on leveraging private capital and improving financial instruments. Stakeholders also highlighted systemic access barriers, high transaction costs, and a financial system shaped by colonial legacies and fiscal austerity, stressing that the core issue is not capacity but a lack of political will to reform this architecture. Now we must wait for the report – by the COP29 and the COP30 presidency- due in September to understand what the shape of this roadmap will be. 

The Sharm el-Sheikh Dialogue was established at COP27 to help countries explore the scope of Article 2.1(c) of the Paris Agreement (making financial flows consistent with low-emission, climate-resilient development) and how it complements Article 9 (climate finance provision from developed to developing countries). The first workshop under this dialogue took place at SB62 in 2025. Within these discussions, developing countries and civil society are pushing for a mandate to radically reform the international financial architecture so that it genuinely serves climate-resilient development. They are calling for time-bound targets that would shift financial flows away from fossil fuels, address debt distress, and link climate finance to broader UN debt reform processes. Additionally, there are demands to tax major polluters—such as the fossil fuel industry, aviation sector, and the ultra-wealthy—under a proposed UN tax convention.

However, much of the discussion time was dominated by the private sector, with presentations from financial institutions, insurance companies, asset managers, and industry lobbyists. These actors offered tailored examples of how the private sector could contribute—often emphasizing profit-driven solutions over people-centred approaches and promising short-term macroeconomic stability instead of long-term climate justice. As a result, developing countries are justifiably concerned about the direction of the Article 2.1(c) discussions. A formal report will be produced ahead of COP30, but many fear it may prioritize private sector interests and macroeconomic narratives over equitable, public-centred climate finance solutions.

The Bonn Climate Change Conference (SB62) is not the platform to deliver final decisions however it played a critical role in shaping what those decisions could look like. One of the most striking takeaways was the absence of a formal space within the UNFCCC to negotiate adaptation finance. Yet this gap didn’t sideline the issue; instead, it brought adaptation funding into sharper focus across multiple tracks.

Finance discussions highlighted growing urgency, with the Least Developed Countries (LDCs)—a group of 44 nations spanning Africa, Asia, the Pacific, and the Caribbean—proposing to triple the adaptation finance commitment originally made in Glasgow by 2030. This proposal reflects not only the escalating climate impacts but also the increasing demands from the most vulnerable countries for predictable, scaled-up support.

While progress was made in surfacing the issues, there is still a lot of work to be done. Clear and concrete advances on both adaptation and climate finance are essential in the lead-up to and at COP30. Hopes are high that the Baku to Belém Roadmap will offer a practical and ambitious path forward for implementing the new climate finance goal, with a strong focus on quality and urgency, especially when it comes to adaptation.

The Global Goal on Adaptation (GGA) must also evolve into a tool that allows for meaningful tracking of global adaptation progress—particularly in how climate finance is enabling that progress. Right now, there is no dedicated space within the UNFCCC process to discuss the timely and effective delivery of finance to countries hit hardest by climate change. This institutional gap must be addressed if we are to meet both the scale and urgency of the adaptation challenge.

With Brazil championing an action agenda as COP30 host and the Glasgow adaptation finance commitment nearing its expiry, the moment is ripe for transformative action. Negotiators now face a clear imperative: to deliver a new commitment that is ambitious, equitable, and grounded in the realities faced by vulnerable communities. Public finance must form the backbone of this effort—and the outcomes of SB62 have made it clear that the time to act is now.

The intersessional UN climate conference provides a place where organisations like Concern, alone or through both the Zurich Climate Resilience Alliance and the Climate Action Network, can input into the consultation processes, speak as part of civil society, and discuss with negotiators, other actors, and government representatives, on their positions, influencing and informing the outcomes on the UNFCCC process.

As the outcomes of the above processes for climate finance become clear, Concern alongside strong civil society actors will again engage in COP30 and continue to push for dedicated funding for adaptation to reach those in least developed countries. Bringing examples from Malawi, Kenya, Bangladesh and Pakistan to the forefront through side events at COP30, showing that when communities receive adequate adaptation funding, they are resilient and powerful to decide their own paths to climate- resilience.