COP in the Amazon – Symbolism or Hypocrisy?
With COP30 set to take place from November 10th to 21st in Belém, Brazil — perched at the mouth of the Amazon — the location seems, at first glance, a poetic choice. What better setting for a climate summit than in the shadow of the world’s largest rainforest and second-largest carbon sink? Few places offer such a stark reminder of the urgency of human harmony with the planet. Yet beneath this symbolism lies a troubling contradiction.
Carving through paradise
A large area of discussion regarding this year’s COP is that of the destruction of tens of thousands of acres of land have been cleared to build a four-lane highway for the conference. The state government of Pará first proposed the highway in 2012 but shelved it due to environmental concerns. Now, with COP30 on the horizon, those concerns have been side-lined — hardly a good look for a climate summit.
It can be argued due to the 60,000 people expected to show up for the event, and the already clustered highways and roads of Belém, that building the highway was inevitable and so it being built now is just a matter of increased government funding in light of hosting COP, and doesn’t undermine the intentions of the ambitions of this COP.
The state government reaffirmed the highway’s sustainability claim but many feel that it is not doing enough to protect the environment.
This highway isn’t just an environmental footnote; it offers a window into how COP30 is reshaping everything from ecosystems to local economies. Work elsewhere in the city sees the construction of an urban park, accommodation and upmarket areas including restaurants and shops, important gentrification and investment for the city, no doubt, but for a city once known as the city of mango trees, it will see the removal of 247 acres of urban greenery, in its place stands metals husks of what once was, artificial trees made of recycled steel where officials confirmed the soil was not good enough to plant real trees.
A crushing reality of the state of cities in the tropics, that once existed in harmony with nature, now echos that of many modern cities: rapid soil degradation, manmade parks and artificial nature.
This is a common occurrence, so cannot be fully attributed to the COP event as hosting international conferences draws in investment into poorer regions and so is a brilliant chance to create jobs for locals, rejuvenating the economy.
In an interview with the BBC a local said “The city as a whole is being improved, it is being repaired, and a lot of people are visiting from other places. It means I can sell more and earn more.”
You can’t help but feel bitter when the Brazilian president and environment minister stated this summit will be historic as it is “a COP in the Amazon, not a COP about the Amazon”. Then to see the Amazon be torn down in the name of sustainability and progress.
The role of indigenous people and their exclusion
In poorer regions surrounding the tropics, including Central America and the Sahel, higher rates of warming and unreliable rain cycling due to changes in gyres and La Niña affect farming. With 70% of these populations reliant on farming, the World Bank has predicted upwards of 20 million people could be internally displaced in these Central America alone by 2050.
Today just 1% of the world is deemed too hot to live, yet we can expect this to increase to 19% by 2070, home to 3 billion people. So, the role to play for indigenous populations cannot be understated, as they are disproportionately affected.
This COP could prove one of the most consequential summits in recent memory, largely because of the role indigenous and local communities are poised to play. Climate change is often framed as a universal crisis – “We’re all in the same boat” – however, it is quite the opposite. We are not in the same boat; in fact, we’re not even in the same ocean!
For too long the Global North have capitalised on their early industrialisation and pumped out emissions at much faster rates than their poorer counterparts, yet now we see a shift where they take a stance of sharing the responsibility to all nations.
The fact that 90% of the carbon budget for us to have a 67% chance of hitting the 1.5°C target has already been used shows the role that the Global North has played. We have used up the resources, we are largely responsible and yet we see the least of its effects.
“Transitioning away is a responsibility of everyone, not only producing countries, consumer countries – many countries in the north don’t produce fossil fuel, but they consume fossil fuel. We’ve gone to this era of finger pointing on countries. We need to find solutions for producer countries that depend financially on that income.”
– Chief Executive of COP 30, Ana Toni
The top-down approach of the UN has seen the voices of those most vulnerable forgotten; this COP has a chance to change that. Not only is it being hosted in the shadow of perhaps the largest reminder of the toll capitalism and industrialisation have taken on indigenous populations, but also this COP will be holding a “People’s Summit” hosting 15,000 activists, academics and people of indigenous communities from some of the most vulnerable areas in the world.
The importance of indigenous people cannot be understated. Representing just 5% of the global population, they occupy 80% of the biodiversity, their role in protecting it and working alongside it acts as a beacon of hope and sustainable living for us all. Yet we have seen resource exploitation disproportionately destroy indigenous lands, so to have their voices finally represented at this year’s COP is a sign of progress.
Take the situation in Tuvalu for example, a country responsible for 0.01% of emissions is expected to disappear due to rising sea levels and so a climate refugee initiative has been set up with Australia and has seen 80% of their population already apply for this program.
These small populations are feeling the effects of climate change far greater than the Global North are. Despite signs of progress without official procedures to implement this societal pressure, these separate summits are of little use and risk being another form of greenwashing.
Some mechanisms have already been set up to help this situation, such as the Green Climate Fund set up in 2010 by COP16 which is used to fund climate relief programs in smaller countries that can’t afford the effects of climate change. It has seen $30 billion raised, with the majority of funding coming from rich nations. While a good sentiment, the fund has fundamentally failed to address the core issue, taking a top-down approach that excludes the voices of those affected and acts as mitigation, not prevention.
Prospects looking forward to COP30
The instability of today’s geopolitics has pushed the climate crisis to the bottom of the agenda. With just 3 months left until the summit, only 30 countries have submitted their Nationally Determined Contributions (NDC) for this year’s COP, a poor response rate that undercuts the summit’s urgency.
In 2024, global temperatures were 1.5°C above pre-industrial levels, the aim set by the Paris Agreement has already been hit and we seem to show so little urgency. If countries feel that reducing heating to 1.5°C is now unrealistic, we risk pushing back targets to 2°C.
Heating beyond 1.5°C will see the passing of tipping points and irreversible damage that even the most pessimistic projections cannot foresee. This delaying of targets undermines the power and influence of these COPs, as there is no enforcement of NDC targets.
“They divert the direction and the attention from climate.”
– Ana Toni addressing the Guardian about the effects of geopolitical turmoil on climate diplomacy
China is still reliant on coal, and during COP29 softened the phrasing of “phasing out coal” to “phasing down coal.” However, they are also the largest producer of solar panels and have rapidly increased their renewable capacity.
The US, once a beacon of progress, is rapidly regressing. President Donald Trump has withdrawn from the Paris Agreement again which, as the world’s largest economy and second largest polluter, sets a dangerous precedent for other nations and risks being a catalyst that prevents further progress.
Paul Bledsoe, former White House climate adviser for Clinton, stated: “Tragically, Trump’s re-election will not only mean the temporary curtailment of US climate ambition, but it will take some pressure off China, Russia, Saudi Arabia and other major traditional scofflaw emitters.”
The EU’s president, Ursula von der Leyen, has seen her headline ‘Green New Deal’ attacked from all sides of the political spectrum, we saw widespread farmers’ protests and the watering down of the proposal.
This, alongside the greens losing the most seats in the European election, symbolises the seismic shift in public attitude towards the climate crisis. COP 30 must decide: will it reinforce the status quo, or will it demand accountability? With lives and entire ecosystems hanging in the balance, the answer cannot wait.
