As the 30th Conference of the Parties (COP30) to the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC) moves into its decisive final stretch, with the summit slated to officially conclude shortly, the revised Global Mutirão text signals a clear shift from negotiation to consolidation. The COP30 Presidency has stripped out most bracketed options, softened earlier finance obligations, and narrowed language on trade and energy, steering the talks toward a more politically workable package designed to keep 1.5°C “within reach” during what it calls the “critical decade.”
Stripped of earlier political options, the new draft lays out a unified, consensus-oriented roadmap blending equity, urgency and international cooperation. It frames COP30 as a “COP of Truth,” acknowledging the rapidly shrinking carbon budget and asserting that the transition to low-emission, climate-resilient development is “irreversible.”
Notably, the Presidency has deleted the previously floated roadmap to “transition away from fossil fuels,” a prominent political marker in the November 18 draft — a removal that underscores the sensitivity of energy language and the difficulty of securing convergence on fossil-fuel commitments.
“Mutirão” is a Brazilian tradition of collective, community-driven mobilisation — a spirit the Presidency seeks to translate into global climate action. The proposal aims to close the gap between pledges and delivery and serves as Brazil’s high-stakes blueprint for COP30, centred on accelerating progress in energy, finance and trade.
At the centre of the document are two flagship Presidency initiatives:
• Global Implementation Accelerator (GIA): A cooperative platform intended to help countries execute their nationally determined contributions (NDCs) and national adaptation plans (NAPs), enhance international cooperation, and share implementation support across actors.
• Belém Mission to 1.5°C: A coordinated push through COP31 to accelerate mitigation and adaptation, backed by targeted investment and strengthened technical collaboration.
One of the most consequential changes in the November 21 draft is the complete removal of the roadmap to “transition away from fossil fuels,” a politically charged phrase that featured prominently in the November 18 version, though it was not a part of the COP30 agenda. The deletion, despite support from over 80 nations across Asia, Africa, Latin America, and the Pacific, signals the sharp limits of consensus on energy at COP30.
While many Parties — particularly vulnerable nations and several major economies — had pushed for clear language on the phase-down or phase-out of fossil fuels, opposition from others forced the Presidency to strip out the reference entirely. The omission highlights both the sensitivity of energy-sector commitments and the deep divide that continues to shape global climate negotiations. With the fossil-fuel section now absent, the Mutirão outcome pivots firmly toward implementation tools and cooperative mechanisms, leaving the future of explicit fossil-fuel commitments to subsequent COPs.
The proposal for a roadmap to transition away from fossil fuels (TAFF) was not on the official agenda, but was inserted at a crucial moment in the second week when G77 pressure on items like finance and unilateral trade measures was escalating. “The criteria, boundaries and conditions of the roadmap need to be discussed and means of implementation along with it must be identified. Until that happens, it cannot be the headline message of this COP,” says Avantika Goswami, Programme Manager–Climate Change at the Centre for Science and Environment (CSE).
On finance — historically the most contested pillar of climate negotiations — the text calls for mobilising at least $1.3 trillion annually for developing countries by 2035, including $300 billion for climate action, while avoiding the divisive debates that defined the November 18 draft. It welcomes the creation of a replenishment cycle for the Loss and Damage (L&D) Fund and urges a manyfold increase in support for developing countries to implement the Paris Agreement’s enhanced transparency framework (ETF).
The new draft also proposes a two-year work programme on Article 9.1, explicitly framed “in the context of Article 9 as a whole,” and clarifies — through a footnote — that the Mutirão decision does not prejudge how the New Collective Quantified Goal (NCQG) on climate finance will be implemented. Crucially, it drops earlier language on “operationalising Article 9.1,” merely taking note of the Baku-to-Belém Roadmap toward $1.3 trillion and acknowledging the need to mobilise $300 billion under the NCQG.
Adaptation finance is substantially softened. The new text states that adaptation finance for developing countries should be “primarily public, grant-based and highly concessional” and “highlights the need to triple adaptation finance by 2030 compared to 2025 levels.” However, it omits any reference to who must deliver this tripling.
This is a major departure from the November 18 draft, which contained three competing options naming developed countries, multilateral development banks (MDBs), international financial institutions (IFIs), or “Parties in a position to do so” as those responsible for scaling up adaptation finance — all deleted in favour of an actor-neutral formulation.
The latest text retains the Presidency’s core implementation architecture, including the proposal to establish a Global Implementation Tracker (GIT) — referenced in the mandate to launch “an annual consideration of the NDCs synthesis report and the BTR synthesis report … including through the establishment of a Global Implementation Tracker” — to monitor collective progress. It also confirms the launch of the Belém Mission to 1.5°C, with Parties deciding to initiate the initiative “aimed at enabling ambition and implementation of nationally determined contributions and national adaptation plans,” and noting that it will “reflect on accelerating implementation and international cooperation and investments,” with a report due to CMA8. Together, the GIT and the Belém Mission form the backbone of Mutirão's push to move the regime from negotiation to delivery.
On Unilateral Trade Measures (UTM), the November 21 text selects a single, minimal option from the previously contentious set. The adopted formulation creates a recurring dialogue under the UNFCCC:
“Requests the Subsidiary Body for Scientific and Technological Advice (SBSTA) and Subsidiary Body for Implementation (SBI) to hold a dialogue on the sidelines of their sessions for the next three years starting in 2026, among Parties and relevant stakeholders, including the World Trade Organisation (WTO), United Nations Trade and Development (UNCTAD), [and the] International Trade Centre (ITC), to discuss issues related to unilateral trade measures.”
The November 18 draft had laid out four divergent proposals — including a permanent platform and a United Nations Secretary-General–convened summit. By collapsing these into a single procedural dialogue, the Presidency signals that Parties could not converge on stronger or more politically charged language.
The November 21 text encourages countries to:
Strengthen enabling environments for climate investment through improved governance and policy clarity.
Align NDCs with long-term net-zero strategies and integrate them into economic planning.
Enhance cooperation to remove systemic barriers and improve access to finance.
Accelerate domestic mitigation and use Article 6 cooperation mechanisms where appropriate.
Prepare detailed implementation and investment plans for NDCs.
It also “calls on all actors” — from businesses to cities and financial institutions — to scale up multilevel action and support the global mutirão (collective mobilisation).
Civil society groups say the new iteration weakens ambition. “This is outrageous,” says Bronwen Tucker, Public Finance Lead at Oil Change International (OCI). “We came here to secure a COP30 package for justice and equity. The Presidency has presented a shamefully weak text that fails to mention fossil fuels, fails to deliver accountability towards rich countries’ finance obligations, and only makes vague promises on adaptation.”
The fortnight-long negotiations in Belém, originally due to conclude on Friday evening, have been pushed into the weekend after a fire at the venue — which caused some damage but no injuries — disrupted proceedings. As the talks enter their closing phase, the debate over whether and how to commit to a transition away from fossil fuels is expected to dominate. But several other fault lines also remain unresolved: how to respond to the clear insufficiency of national climate plans to keep warming to 1.5°C under the 2015 Paris Agreement, the scale and structure of climate finance, contentious trade provisions, transparency requirements, and the critical question of how much support developing countries will receive to adapt to escalating climate impacts.