The first conference on transitioning away from fossil fuels marks a move from process to implementation

While much of the global climate discourse remains focused on commitments, a smaller group of countries is beginning to shift attention towards implementation. Co-hosted by the governments of Colombia and the Netherlands, the First Conference on Transitioning Away from Fossil Fuels will take place in Santa Marta, Colombia, from April 24 to 29, 2026. 

The conference follows discussions at the 30th Conference of the Parties (COP30) to the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change in Belém, Brazil, last year.

After the Mutirão decision or the main outcome of COP30 failed to include any reference to fossil fuels, a group of 24 countries came together to issue the Belém Declaration on the Just Transition Away from Fossil Fuels. Through this, they called for countries to work collectively to move away from fossil fuels, while keeping climate action grounded in science and equity.

Why the meet is important

Unlike many climate summits that span a wide range of topics, this conference focuses solely on fossil fuels. While the energy transition has long been discussed in global climate forums, there have been relatively few international forums dedicated specifically to moving away from fossil fuels. 

This focus matters because fossil fuels remain the largest contributors to global climate change, accounting for roughly 68 per cent of global greenhouse gas emissions and nearly 90 per cent of all carbon dioxide emissions. Without clear efforts to reduce both production and use, keeping global warming within 1.5 degrees Celsius (°C) will become increasingly difficult.

The conference is structured in two main segments to allow for broad participation. The first consists of stakeholder-led dialogues from April 24 to 27, bringing together academia, civil society organisations, the private sector, workers, subnational governments, and a People’s Assembly. 

This will be followed by a high-level segment on April 28 and 29, where ministers, senior representatives from subnational governments, and spokespersons from different stakeholder groups will come together. Discussions are organised around three thematic pillars: overcoming economic dependence on fossil fuels, transforming supply and demand, and advancing international cooperation and climate diplomacy.

As of March 30, 2026, 45 countries, along with Colombia and the Netherlands, have confirmed their participation in the conference and in the launch of a coalition on transitioning away from fossil fuels. In addition, more than 2,600 organisations have expressed interest in being part of the process. Notably, while a few organisations from India are expected to engage, India itself — one of the world’s largest coal producers — does not feature among the participating countries. 

This absence is striking, particularly given India’s current energy trajectory. Even as non-fossil fuel capacity has expanded rapidly, investment in fossil fuel-based power generation continues. Its reported decision to step back from bidding to host COP33 further suggests how development priorities are shaping its engagement with global climate processes.

Ground realities of transition

The process leading up to the conference has been underway since February and will continue until the in-person meetings at the end of April. It includes written submissions, sectoral position papers, and a series of virtual dialogues for different stakeholder groups. These are designed as spaces for discussion and input, feeding into reports and sectoral submissions that will be further refined during the in-person meetings and presented in the high-level segment.

In this context, the discussion around Thematic Pillar 1 — overcoming economic dependence on fossil fuels — becomes particularly important. Insights from coal-dependent regions such as Chandrapura in India highlight how deeply local economies are tied to fossil fuel industries, and how the impacts of disruption are already being felt on the ground. Issues such as unresolved compensation, lack of stable employment, and the dependence of informal and ancillary livelihoods on coal underline the complexity of transition in these regions.

A key barrier lies in the structural reliance of many regional economies on coal mining and fossil fuel-based power generation. In several areas, these industries are not just one part of the economy but form its backbone — providing employment, supporting ancillary businesses, and contributing significantly to local revenues. This deepens dependence on fossil fuels and makes it harder, both economically and politically, to move towards transition without clear and viable alternatives.

Who gets left out

Employment linked to the coal economy is also far more complex than official statistics suggest. A large share of workers are engaged through contractual arrangements across mining, transportation, maintenance, and related services. Alongside this are extensive informal economies, like small vendors, transport workers and local service providers, that depend on coal operations. Because such work rarely appears in formal labour data, many livelihoods risk being overlooked in transition planning.

In this context, transition planning must move away from one-size-fits-all approaches and instead adopt bottom-up, place-based strategies that reflect regional realities. While diversification away from fossil fuels is clearly necessary, decisions about what to diversify into — and how — must emerge from the priorities and aspirations of affected communities. Processes that enable local dialogue, such as regional platforms or “people’s conferences”, can help bring these perspectives into decision-making.

By involving workers and communities from the outset, such approaches can foster a sense of ownership and make transition pathways more grounded, inclusive and sustainable. They can also help capture realities that might otherwise be excluded from formal processes, and create a more structured and accountable interface between affected communities and decision-makers. This matters for another reason: transitions designed without local participation risk reproducing older forms of exclusion and exploitation under a new label. 

Experiences with large-scale renewable energy expansion in India, for instance, have raised concerns around land acquisition and “green grabbing”, where projects move ahead without adequately accounting for local livelihoods and rights. Bringing communities into decision-making from the outset can help avoid such outcomes and ensure that the transition is not only low-carbon, but also fair.

From dialogue to action

The conference process appears to make a deliberate effort to include a wide range of stakeholders, even within the high-level segment. Participation is not limited to ministers and government representatives, but extends to academia, the scientific community, workers, civil society organisations, and frontline groups, including Indigenous and Afro-descendant communities. These groups are expected to contribute through designated spokespersons at different stages of the dialogue, with an emphasis on geographical balance and representation across sectors and perspectives.

While this effort to create a more inclusive and structured platform is a positive step, the real test will lie in how these inputs are taken forward. Multilateral processes have often struggled to translate discussion into concrete outcomes. At the same time, the emergence of smaller coalitions raises broader questions about the future of global climate cooperation. Issue-specific or ‘minilateral’ initiatives may be more agile, but they also risk fragmenting efforts that would otherwise be coordinated through multilateral frameworks.

The conference co-hosts have emphasised that this initiative is intended to complement, rather than replace, the COP process, with the participation of the COP30 and COP31 presidencies signalling an effort to remain aligned with the broader multilateral framework. Even so, whether such parallel efforts ultimately strengthen collective action or pull it in different directions remains an open question. It also remains to be seen whether the outcomes of such conferences will shape negotiations within wider multilateral processes, or remain confined to parallel tracks.

For now, the conference represents an encouraging attempt — but its real value will lie in whether it can move from dialogue to action, and feed meaningfully into broader global efforts.

Rohit Patwardhan is a researcher at the Centre for Financial Accountability, working on energy policy, finance, and their intersection.

Views expressed are the author’s own and don’t necessarily reflect those of Down To Earth