At COP30 in Belem, discussions on the Global Goal on Adaptation focused on bridging political divides and establishing a framework of indicators.
Key priorities included finance, support and flexibility in measuring adaptation progress.
Developing countries emphasised the need for predictable, grant-based support, while debates continued over the implementation-related indicators and the role of public finance.
The first round of negotiations on the Global Goal on Adaptation (GGA) began in Belem, Brazil with countries seeking to bridge political divides and move toward adopting a framework of indicators at the 30th Conference of Parties to the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC). Parties signalled priorities on finance, support and flexibility in how countries measure and report adaptation progress.
Informal consultations on GGA took place on the second day of COP30 in Belem, where negotiating parties made submissions on the nature, structure and use of a proposed set of 100 indicators to track progress on adaptation. Discussions also covered the Baku Adaptation Roadmap (BAR) and the broader path ahead for the adaptation track.
Opening the interventions, the G77, represented by Sri Lanka, voiced concern over the limited focus on the Means of Implementation (MoI), highlighting the need to align them with Articles 9.1, 9 and 10 of the Paris Agreement, and to ensure that financial flows move from developed to developing countries.
Several groups of developing countries, led by the G77, Arab Group, least developed countries, like-minded developing countries and others, stressed that the GGA cannot be implemented without scaled-up, predictable, grant-based support from developed to developing countries. These groups also reiterated that public finance must remain central, rejecting shifts toward private or blended finance.
In the current draft list of 100 indicators, disagreements persist around the implementation-related indicators, including on how to reflect obligations and accountability in climate finance flows. Four alternative formulations have been proposed to capture these differing positions:
Developing countries also called for MoI indicators to be reflected across all thematic areas, such as agriculture, health, and water, rather than being housed separately under the implementation theme.
Across negotiating groups, both developed and developing, there was broad agreement that the indicators should remain non-prescriptive and voluntary, and must not be used as conditionalities for access to finance. Several also emphasised that the indicators should not serve as a basis for comparison between countries and must not create additional reporting burdens.
Developing countries stressed the need for the process to remain country-driven, with the Arab Group proposing that indicators should not imply global standardisation or impose a single methodology, keeping the framework flexible.
In general, developed countries appeared more ready to finalise the list. Japan captured this view clearly, reminding Parties that it was a collective decision to entrust experts with developing the indicators “precisely to avoid politicising the process”. Reopening the list now, Japan cautioned, “would run counter to that spirit and risk delaying implementation”.
Uruguay, on behalf of Grupo Sur (a UNFCCC negotiating group of like-minded Latin American and Caribbean countries), urged Parties to prioritise the adoption of the decision in Belem and refrain from restarting the political debate.
Calling for a post-Belem process, countries highlighted the need for technical improvements to the indicators and for knowledge-sharing sessions. Several developed countries also supported linking progress tracking under the GGA to the Global Stocktake, Biennial Transparency Reports and National Adaptation Plans.
Most parties see BAR as the mechanism to advance implementation of the United Arab Emirates Framework and continue refining indicators post-COP30. Some developing countries, however, cautioned that BAR should focus on supporting the implementation of the GGA and UAE Framework, not create new obligations or reporting requirements.
Finalising the indicators to track progress on GGA is among the top priorities of COP30 in Belem. At COP28 in Dubai, Parties agreed on a framework for GGA under Article 7 of the Paris Agreement, setting out thematic targets and launching a two-year UAE-Belem Work Programme to develop indicators to track them.
From over 5,000 indicators initially compiled, the Baku session last year called for the list to be streamlined to a maximum of 100. These are now grouped under 11 thematic areas: Water supply and sanitation; climate-resilient food and agriculture; climate-related health impacts; ecosystems and biodiversity; infrastructure and human settlements; poverty eradication and livelihoods; cultural heritage and knowledge; impact, vulnerability and risk assessment; planning; implementation; and monitoring, evaluation and learning.