COP31 adopted a standalone Climate Finance Work Programme, a key demand of developing countries, including India, despite objections from the EU.
Proposals for separate discussions on tripling adaptation finance and climate-related trade measures were dropped.
Developing countries face annual adaptation needs of $305 billion by 2035, while international public adaptation finance stood at just $28.2-31.7 billion in 2024.
India and other developing countries are pushing for predictable, accessible climate finance and greater accountability for developed countries' commitments.
The opening plenary of the 31st Conference of the Parties (COP31) to the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC) in Antalya, Turkey, on November 9 adopted a contentious agenda after negotiations, which included a standalone Climate Finance Work Programme (CFWP), a key demand of developing countries.
However, proposals for separate agenda items on tripling adaptation finance and climate-related trade measures were dropped, while funding for the Green Climate Fund (GCF) will be discussed under an existing agenda item.
The compromise averted a prolonged procedural dispute but exposed continuing differences between developed and developing countries over climate finance obligations, adaptation funding and unilateral trade measures.
The African Group had sought the inclusion of three issues, tripling adaptation finance, a dialogue on trade and climate change, and funding for the GCF. The COP31 presidency proposed leaving the first two off the agenda, while discussing GCF funding under the existing agenda item.
The compromise also provides for consultations on mountains and climate change, with the issue to be considered for a research dialogue alongside the 66th session of the Subsidiary Body for Scientific and Technological Advice. A proposal to establish regular dialogues on mountains will also be considered.
The inclusion of the CFWP was a key demand of developing countries, including India. The programme provides a dedicated space to discuss the implementation of Article 9.1 of the Paris Agreement, which requires developed countries to provide financial resources to developing countries for climate action.
The programme stems from the Global Mutirão decision adopted at COP30 in Brazil, which established a two-year work programme on climate finance, including Article 9.1 within the broader context of Article 9.
However, its inclusion as a standalone agenda item at COP31 drew objections from the European Union (EU).
The EU expressed deep concern, arguing that the COP30 decision had not established a separate agenda item. It maintained that the programme already had an agreed scope and mandate and should conclude within two years. The bloc nevertheless reiterated its commitment to climate finance and the New Collective Quantified Goal (NCQG).
India disagreed with the EU's interpretation, maintaining that COP30 had agreed to a standalone agenda item. It also expressed regret that the proposal to discuss tripling adaptation finance had been excluded.
The NCQG, agreed at COP29 in Baku in 2024, calls on developed countries to take the lead in mobilising at least $300 billion annually for developing countries by 2035. It also calls on all actors to scale up climate finance from public and private sources to at least $1.3 trillion annually by the same year.
Developing countries argue that the mobilisation target does not replace developed countries' obligations to provide finance under Article 9.1. They have also called for predictable, accessible funding, largely through public finance and concessional support, rather than loans that add to their debt burdens.
Welcoming the adoption of the CFWP, Avantika Goswami, programme manager, Climate Change and Green Economy at Delhi-based think tank Centre for Science and Environment (CSE), said: “This should provide a space within the COP political process to scrutinise not just the quantity of finance flowing in under existing pledges, but also the quality and predictability. We have to make sure that the pledges committed, despite being meagre, deliver real change.”
The programme gives developing countries an opportunity to examine not only how much climate finance is being mobilised but also its quality, predictability and accessibility. This is particularly important after the Baku outcome, which developing countries criticised for falling short of their expectations.
The exclusion of a standalone agenda item on tripling adaptation finance comes as developing countries face a widening gap between available funding and the cost of responding to climate impacts.
According to the United Nations Environment Programme's (UNEP) Adaptation Gap Report 2026, international public adaptation finance from developed to developing countries reached $28.2 billion to $31.7 billion in 2024, against estimated annual adaptation needs of $305 billion by 2035.
Even achieving the COP30 aspiration to triple adaptation finance would cover only a fraction of estimated needs.
Trade-related concerns also remained unresolved. The EU maintained that the existing three-year platform on trade and climate change, which provides for annual dialogues, should remain the forum for such discussions. The African Group, however, had sought a dedicated agenda item.
The COP31 presidency said the subsidiary body chairs would invite submissions for the next dialogue in Bonn.
This is particularly significant for emerging economies such as India, which have raised concerns about unilateral trade measures, including the EU's Carbon Border Adjustment Mechanism (CBAM).
Such measures can increase compliance and production costs for exporters in developing countries, particularly where access to finance and low-carbon technologies remains unequal.
On the GCF, the presidency proposed discussing the funding needed and available for the fund under its existing agenda item. The seventh review of the financial mechanism was deferred to COP32.
India played a significant role in defending the inclusion of the CFWP and pressing for discussions on adaptation finance. Ahead of COP31, Union Environment Minister Bhupender Yadav had identified predictable climate finance, country-led mitigation and adaptation outcomes, technology transfer and a just transition as India's key negotiating priorities.
India has said it will work with the G77 and China, the Like-Minded Developing Countries group and BASIC (Brazil, South Africa, India and China) to advance developing countries' interests.
Other interventions highlighted concerns about preserving the broader political and scientific aspects of climate negotiations.
The Environmental Integrity Group called for the COP31 cover decision to reflect a consensus-based political outcome rather than being determined by the proposed agenda items.
Nepal urged the presidency to ensure that consultations on mountains reflect the urgency of limiting warming to 1.5°C, alongside a dedicated work programme, adaptation indicators and climate finance.
The plenary also heard a presentation on the 2026 Ocean and Climate Change Dialogue. Its co-facilitators highlighted ocean-based climate action as essential to achieving the Paris Agreement's long-term goals and limiting warming to 1.5°C, while minimising the extent and duration of any temperature overshoot.