The opening of the COP30 climate summit in Belém, Brazil, has laid bare an uncomfortable truth for the global community: the industrialised world’s enthusiasm for tackling the climate emergency is fading just as the planet’s temperature and geopolitical tensions continue to rise. The conference’s president, Brazilian diplomat André Corrêa do Lago, issued a pointed critique of rich nations, warning that the “global north” has lost momentum and moral clarity, while the “global south” — led by emerging economies like China — is now advancing tangible climate action and technological solutions.
Global power shift in climate momentum
For much of the past three decades, the global climate narrative has been shaped by the industrialised North — home to the wealthiest economies and the largest historical emitters. Yet at COP30, the tone has changed dramatically. Corrêa do Lago observed that while many Western governments appear to be losing their appetite for costly decarbonisation policies, several developing countries are stepping up, investing heavily in renewables and driving down the cost of clean-energy technologies. He described this as a “paradigm shift in motion,” where progress is emerging not from those who once led the charge, but from those who were long expected to follow.
China has become the clearest illustration of this reversal. Once criticised as an obstacle to global climate progress, Beijing is now the world’s largest producer and consumer of renewable-energy equipment. Its mass production of solar panels, batteries, and electric vehicles has redefined global supply chains and lowered the cost of clean power worldwide. According to Corrêa do Lago, “China is coming up with solutions that benefit everyone.” The availability of affordable solar power, he said, has become one of the few bright spots in an otherwise stalling global transition.
This dynamic, however, carries an ironic twist. The very success of the developing world is triggering defensiveness in richer economies. Instead of accelerating their own transitions, many industrialised nations are complaining about being “outcompeted.” Corrêa do Lago’s message was simple: global leadership in climate action should not be treated as a zero-sum race. If the South is advancing, the North should celebrate, not retreat.
Why enthusiasm is fading in the Global North
Several overlapping forces explain why enthusiasm among rich nations has dimmed in recent years. One of the most significant is political fatigue. After nearly three decades of climate diplomacy and countless pledges, voters in many Western countries have grown weary of promises that seem to demand sacrifice but yield little visible reward. Domestic politics — from the resurgence of populism to inflation anxiety — has made long-term climate planning a difficult sell. As governments change hands, so too do their priorities, leaving climate policy swinging like a pendulum.
Another reason is economic self-interest. Energy transitions in wealthy economies have reached the “hard part”: decarbonising heavy industry, aviation, agriculture, and housing. These sectors are politically sensitive, expensive to reform, and often dependent on legacy infrastructure. Unlike earlier phases of transition — where renewables could be presented as “win-win” investments — today’s measures involve politically risky trade-offs, such as carbon taxes or industrial closures. This has led to cautious backtracking, particularly in Europe and North America, where governments fear backlash from industries and consumers alike.
The fading enthusiasm also reflects a breakdown in global trust. Developing countries have long argued that industrialised nations, which built their prosperity on fossil fuels, have failed to honour their commitments to provide climate finance and technology transfer. The long-promised USD 100 billion annual fund to help poorer countries adapt was met only belatedly, and even then, through complex accounting rather than new cash flows. This credibility gap has weakened the moral authority of the North and fuelled resentment across the South, where climate impacts are already severe.
The growing urgency of a 1.5°C world
The stakes of this fading commitment could not be higher. The latest assessments show that current national emissions plans would lead to approximately 2.5°C of warming this century — far beyond the 1.5°C limit enshrined in the 2015 Paris Agreement. For small island states and low-lying coastal nations, such a trajectory spells existential danger. Ilana Seid, ambassador of Palau and spokesperson for the Alliance of Small Island States, warned that the world is “falling short of its north star” and must urgently find a way back to the 1.5°C pathway.
At COP30, the emphasis is shifting from negotiating new targets to implementing existing ones. Brazil’s presidency has framed the conference around delivery — operationalising commitments to triple renewable energy capacity and double energy efficiency by 2030. Yet for vulnerable nations, implementation without greater ambition will not suffice. They insist that only deeper and faster emissions cuts can prevent irreversible harm. The sense of urgency is palpable in Belém: the science is no longer debated, but the collective will to act appears to be slipping.
Behind the numbers lies a deeper moral dilemma. Wealthy nations possess the technology and capital to drive the transition, but their political appetite is waning. Meanwhile, developing countries, though constrained by limited resources, are demonstrating growing determination. The imbalance is not just economic but ethical. As Corrêa do Lago noted, “The South is moving forward because it must — survival is the greatest motivator.”
Broken promises and financial disillusionment
One of the most visible symptoms of the North’s declining enthusiasm is the unfulfilled promise of climate finance. At successive COP summits, rich countries have pledged to mobilise billions to help poorer nations adapt to floods, droughts, and rising seas. Yet delivery has consistently fallen short. Instead of predictable grants, developing nations have received a patchwork of loans, investments, and rebranded aid. The result is mounting frustration, particularly in Africa and the Pacific, where adaptation costs already exceed local GDP growth.
This financial shortfall is compounded by the erosion of earlier pledges. For instance, the 2021 Global Methane Pledge — which sought a 30% cut in methane emissions by 2030 — has failed to materialise. Recent satellite data show that emissions from some of the biggest signatories, including the U.S. and Australia, are actually rising. The data exposes a deeper problem: voluntary commitments without enforcement mechanisms are politically convenient but practically toothless.
Developing nations have grown weary of symbolic gestures. For them, every broken promise translates into tangible loss — of crops, coastlines, livelihoods, and lives. At COP30, their demand is clear: funding must become reliable, accessible, and equitable. Rich nations’ inaction, they argue, is no longer a matter of diplomacy but of justice.
The moral and geopolitical cost of complacency
The retreat of industrialised nations from climate ambition carries geopolitical and moral consequences. As the North falters, the South is seizing both the initiative and the moral high ground. Countries like China, India, Brazil, and Indonesia are positioning climate action as a vehicle for development, industrialisation, and strategic influence. Their growing dominance in renewable-energy manufacturing — from solar panels to electric vehicles — is shifting global economic power.
This evolution is redefining climate politics. What was once a donor-recipient relationship is evolving into a multipolar dynamic, where the South is both actor and innovator. Yet the transformation also risks further polarisation. Without a unified sense of purpose, climate diplomacy could fragment into competing blocs — each pursuing its own version of “green growth.” For Corrêa do Lago, that fragmentation would be disastrous. “The planet does not have room for rivalries,” he said. “It has room only for results.”
The political optics of COP30 reflect this tension. With the U.S. administration absent and European governments preoccupied with domestic crises, the spotlight has shifted firmly southward. Brazil’s hosting of the summit in the Amazon — a symbol of both ecological fragility and planetary hope — underscores that the frontlines of climate action now lie outside the corridors of traditional power.
The warning from Belém is both a critique and a call to renewal. If the wealthy nations that once led the climate charge have grown complacent, they must rediscover their sense of purpose. Restoring ambition means more than funding projects; it requires political courage to transform energy systems, enforce accountability, and redefine prosperity beyond carbon. It also means recognising that leadership is no longer a monopoly of the rich.
The COP30 chief’s message was not accusatory but urgent: the era of excuses has ended. The world’s poorest countries cannot wait for enthusiasm to return to the wealthy; they are already acting out of necessity. Whether the industrialised world chooses to match that urgency will determine not only the fate of the Paris Agreement but the credibility of global cooperation itself. The climate crisis is accelerating — and so must the world’s will to confront it, together.
(Source:www.tbsnews.net)
Global power shift in climate momentum
For much of the past three decades, the global climate narrative has been shaped by the industrialised North — home to the wealthiest economies and the largest historical emitters. Yet at COP30, the tone has changed dramatically. Corrêa do Lago observed that while many Western governments appear to be losing their appetite for costly decarbonisation policies, several developing countries are stepping up, investing heavily in renewables and driving down the cost of clean-energy technologies. He described this as a “paradigm shift in motion,” where progress is emerging not from those who once led the charge, but from those who were long expected to follow.
China has become the clearest illustration of this reversal. Once criticised as an obstacle to global climate progress, Beijing is now the world’s largest producer and consumer of renewable-energy equipment. Its mass production of solar panels, batteries, and electric vehicles has redefined global supply chains and lowered the cost of clean power worldwide. According to Corrêa do Lago, “China is coming up with solutions that benefit everyone.” The availability of affordable solar power, he said, has become one of the few bright spots in an otherwise stalling global transition.
This dynamic, however, carries an ironic twist. The very success of the developing world is triggering defensiveness in richer economies. Instead of accelerating their own transitions, many industrialised nations are complaining about being “outcompeted.” Corrêa do Lago’s message was simple: global leadership in climate action should not be treated as a zero-sum race. If the South is advancing, the North should celebrate, not retreat.
Why enthusiasm is fading in the Global North
Several overlapping forces explain why enthusiasm among rich nations has dimmed in recent years. One of the most significant is political fatigue. After nearly three decades of climate diplomacy and countless pledges, voters in many Western countries have grown weary of promises that seem to demand sacrifice but yield little visible reward. Domestic politics — from the resurgence of populism to inflation anxiety — has made long-term climate planning a difficult sell. As governments change hands, so too do their priorities, leaving climate policy swinging like a pendulum.
Another reason is economic self-interest. Energy transitions in wealthy economies have reached the “hard part”: decarbonising heavy industry, aviation, agriculture, and housing. These sectors are politically sensitive, expensive to reform, and often dependent on legacy infrastructure. Unlike earlier phases of transition — where renewables could be presented as “win-win” investments — today’s measures involve politically risky trade-offs, such as carbon taxes or industrial closures. This has led to cautious backtracking, particularly in Europe and North America, where governments fear backlash from industries and consumers alike.
The fading enthusiasm also reflects a breakdown in global trust. Developing countries have long argued that industrialised nations, which built their prosperity on fossil fuels, have failed to honour their commitments to provide climate finance and technology transfer. The long-promised USD 100 billion annual fund to help poorer countries adapt was met only belatedly, and even then, through complex accounting rather than new cash flows. This credibility gap has weakened the moral authority of the North and fuelled resentment across the South, where climate impacts are already severe.
The growing urgency of a 1.5°C world
The stakes of this fading commitment could not be higher. The latest assessments show that current national emissions plans would lead to approximately 2.5°C of warming this century — far beyond the 1.5°C limit enshrined in the 2015 Paris Agreement. For small island states and low-lying coastal nations, such a trajectory spells existential danger. Ilana Seid, ambassador of Palau and spokesperson for the Alliance of Small Island States, warned that the world is “falling short of its north star” and must urgently find a way back to the 1.5°C pathway.
At COP30, the emphasis is shifting from negotiating new targets to implementing existing ones. Brazil’s presidency has framed the conference around delivery — operationalising commitments to triple renewable energy capacity and double energy efficiency by 2030. Yet for vulnerable nations, implementation without greater ambition will not suffice. They insist that only deeper and faster emissions cuts can prevent irreversible harm. The sense of urgency is palpable in Belém: the science is no longer debated, but the collective will to act appears to be slipping.
Behind the numbers lies a deeper moral dilemma. Wealthy nations possess the technology and capital to drive the transition, but their political appetite is waning. Meanwhile, developing countries, though constrained by limited resources, are demonstrating growing determination. The imbalance is not just economic but ethical. As Corrêa do Lago noted, “The South is moving forward because it must — survival is the greatest motivator.”
Broken promises and financial disillusionment
One of the most visible symptoms of the North’s declining enthusiasm is the unfulfilled promise of climate finance. At successive COP summits, rich countries have pledged to mobilise billions to help poorer nations adapt to floods, droughts, and rising seas. Yet delivery has consistently fallen short. Instead of predictable grants, developing nations have received a patchwork of loans, investments, and rebranded aid. The result is mounting frustration, particularly in Africa and the Pacific, where adaptation costs already exceed local GDP growth.
This financial shortfall is compounded by the erosion of earlier pledges. For instance, the 2021 Global Methane Pledge — which sought a 30% cut in methane emissions by 2030 — has failed to materialise. Recent satellite data show that emissions from some of the biggest signatories, including the U.S. and Australia, are actually rising. The data exposes a deeper problem: voluntary commitments without enforcement mechanisms are politically convenient but practically toothless.
Developing nations have grown weary of symbolic gestures. For them, every broken promise translates into tangible loss — of crops, coastlines, livelihoods, and lives. At COP30, their demand is clear: funding must become reliable, accessible, and equitable. Rich nations’ inaction, they argue, is no longer a matter of diplomacy but of justice.
The moral and geopolitical cost of complacency
The retreat of industrialised nations from climate ambition carries geopolitical and moral consequences. As the North falters, the South is seizing both the initiative and the moral high ground. Countries like China, India, Brazil, and Indonesia are positioning climate action as a vehicle for development, industrialisation, and strategic influence. Their growing dominance in renewable-energy manufacturing — from solar panels to electric vehicles — is shifting global economic power.
This evolution is redefining climate politics. What was once a donor-recipient relationship is evolving into a multipolar dynamic, where the South is both actor and innovator. Yet the transformation also risks further polarisation. Without a unified sense of purpose, climate diplomacy could fragment into competing blocs — each pursuing its own version of “green growth.” For Corrêa do Lago, that fragmentation would be disastrous. “The planet does not have room for rivalries,” he said. “It has room only for results.”
The political optics of COP30 reflect this tension. With the U.S. administration absent and European governments preoccupied with domestic crises, the spotlight has shifted firmly southward. Brazil’s hosting of the summit in the Amazon — a symbol of both ecological fragility and planetary hope — underscores that the frontlines of climate action now lie outside the corridors of traditional power.
The warning from Belém is both a critique and a call to renewal. If the wealthy nations that once led the climate charge have grown complacent, they must rediscover their sense of purpose. Restoring ambition means more than funding projects; it requires political courage to transform energy systems, enforce accountability, and redefine prosperity beyond carbon. It also means recognising that leadership is no longer a monopoly of the rich.
The COP30 chief’s message was not accusatory but urgent: the era of excuses has ended. The world’s poorest countries cannot wait for enthusiasm to return to the wealthy; they are already acting out of necessity. Whether the industrialised world chooses to match that urgency will determine not only the fate of the Paris Agreement but the credibility of global cooperation itself. The climate crisis is accelerating — and so must the world’s will to confront it, together.
(Source:www.tbsnews.net)