Survival, Not Strategy

Conference of Parties (COP) is an annual summit held in different countries to address various aspects of climate change under the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC). For the next edition of the Conference of Parties (COP30), the community of nations will descend for a huddle at Belem, Brazil, in November 2025, with the centre of gravity likely to revolve around “Adaptation and Climate Justice.” Being located in the Amazon, the conservation of the Amazon forests — and forests around the world — will also assume centrality among the proposed themes.

Adaptation versus Mitigation has always been a subject of discourse among climate warriors and experts. The United Nations Disaster Risk Reduction (UNDRR) defines adaptation as a process of adjustment to actual and expected climatic conditions, whereas mitigation is a process aimed at preventing new and reducing existing disaster risk while managing the residual risk. Though much has been thought and done by successive COPs on mitigation — be it building consensus among nations, generating funds (though sluggishly), and running various programmes — very little has been achieved on the adaptation front. Adaptation, rightly argued as a survival need of poorer nations today, contrasts with mitigation, which has long-term ramifications. India, as a frontrunner in mitigation, has allocated in excess of ₹32,000 crore to states for various mitigation schemes over a period of five years, commencing 2021–22, in its 15th Finance Commission Report. Prime Minister Narendra Modi’s commitment to “Panchamrit” at Glasgow’s COP26 reflects national gravitas in mitigation efforts. On that account, the theme of “Adaptation and Climate Justice” is a welcome initiative at COP30.

COP30 may also draw global attention as a realisation by the developed world of its historical emissions — perhaps in a more sincere way than before. Today, many African countries do not have access to electricity, clean water, or food but are subjected to the vagaries of climate change many times more than the historical polluters. For instance, countries like Zambia in Africa are frequently subjected to failing crops, while Tanzania in East Africa faces severe flooding. Mozambique accounts for only 0.02% of global CO₂ emissions (Worldometer and International Energy Agency) but faces the wrath of climate change significantly — cyclones Idai in 2019 and Freddy in 2023, along with frequent floods and droughts. Despite low per capita emissions of 1.9 tonnes against the global average of 4.4 tonnes of CO₂, India faces the serious threat that, by 2050, some low-lying areas of Andaman, Lakshadweep, and Minicoy will become uninhabitable (IPCC Report 2015), thereby necessitating considerable adaptation efforts — and certainly not deserving to be branded a polluter by the developed West.

It is quite obvious that nations, for their survival, require support to adapt to changing climatic conditions and should not be put on the mat for seeking reports on “phase out” or “phase down” of fossil fuels. Is it not a matter of convenience for developed nations to bring poorer African countries under the ambit of mitigation? These nations also deserve the right to grow, even at the cost of burning fossil fuels to some extent, in their quest for livelihood — just as we in India need to grow rice even at the cost of emitting a certain amount of methane. These are not luxury emissions, as propounded by some, but rather a matter of global food security and the fight against global hunger (Sustainable Development Goal Two of zero hunger). India rightly declined to be a signatory to the Global Methane Pledge (GMP) spearheaded by the EU and the USA in 2021 (COP26, Glasgow, Scotland, UK).

The forthcoming COP at Belem, with adaptation as a theme, will be focused on the sufferings of Small Island Developing Countries (SIDC) and Least Developed Countries (LDC). The Fifth Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) also highlights the need for a strategy of “Adaptation and Mitigation.” This strategy encapsulates a differentiated approach — with developed nations more disposed toward mitigation and developing nations toward adaptation — both in their Nationally Determined Commitments (NDCs) as well as responsibilities to others.

Similarly, the Loss and Damage Fund was first conceived more than three decades ago under the UNFCCC in 1991 as a movement for climate justice, finally fructifying in 2022 (COP27). However, it is quite poignant that the United States has pulled out of its commitment to the Loss and Damage funding agreement at COP in 2025, which was essentially meant to empower the most vulnerable and those at risk. This arrangement is aimed at the recovery and rehabilitation of nations suffering from climate adversities. Rehabilitation is quite a complex process wherein communities need to adapt to changing physical, social, psychological, and economic dimensions. Therefore, COP30 at Belem, Brazil, could be seen as an extension of COP27 in more ways than one.

Having trudged so far, a few ponderables arise — firstly, the adequacy of funding efforts for adaptation vis-à-vis emerging needs. Having made a record raise in the Adaptation Fund in 2021 (COP26, Glasgow) of nearly USD 356 million, it has plummeted to a dramatic low of USD 132 million in 2024 (COP29, Baku, Azerbaijan). This needs major recalibration, especially when juxtaposed with adaptation requirements of developing countries amounting to USD 215 to 387 billion per year by 2030 (UNEP Adaptation Finance Gap Report) or the price tag in trillions for climate action (Times of India, October 27, 2025, quoting the Union Environment Minister). With the USA pulling out and some developed nations being tardy in their commitments, COP30 has its task well cut out. Secondly, assuming reasonable funding, maladaptation remains a looming threat when it comes to execution. The Synthesis Report by the IPCC under its Sixth Assessment Report highlights increased evidence of maladaptation in India, thereby compounding existing vulnerabilities. Flawed mangrove plantations under the Integrated Coastal Zone Management project of the Odisha government were cited as an example. Similarly, rehabilitation (India ranks third globally for internal displacement caused by disasters between 2015 and 2024, as reported by the Internal Displacement Monitoring Centre, IDMC) as an adaptation practice for affected communities is a complex process. Most state governments address the physical dimension of rehabilitation but give only peripheral attention to its social, livelihood, psychological, educational, and emotional aspects. Shouldn’t these also fall under the ambit of COP30?

COP30 at Belem carries a huge baggage of responsibility, very stringently fastened to the aspirations of developing nations, SIDs, and LDCs. Everyone on planet Earth will have their eyes glued to the proceedings of this latest edition of the Conference of Parties. Will this huddle unfold into a new era of climate action?

Views expressed are personal. The writer is a defence expert and a Former Senior Consultant with Uttar Pradesh Disaster Management Authority