TWN Antalya Climate News Update No. 3
10 November 2026
Published by Third World Network

---

ENHANCED CLIMATE FINANCE NEEDED TO RAISE AMBITION – SAYS G77/CHINA

Antalya, Nov 10 (Jinghann Hong and Eqram Mustaqeem) – “Enhanced, predictable and accessible support on finance is essential to enable developing countries to raise ambition and accelerate action across mitigation, adaptation and responses to loss and damage,” expressed the Group of 77 and China at the opening day of the Antalya climate talks on Nov 9, which is set to end on 20 Nov. These remarks were made when Parties were invited to deliver their statements following the launch of work. 

Uruguay for the G77 and China expressed deep concerns with the insufficiency, inaccessibility and very low availability of climate finance, as well as the lack of accountability by developed countries in the provision of finance in meeting their commitments under the Convention and the Paris Agreement (PA). It said that financial support provided by developed countries, in accordance with Article 4.3 of the UNFCCC and Article 9.1 of PA must be commensurate with the needs, and the level of ambition formally announced by developing countries in their respective Nationally Determined Contributions (NDCs).

As there is a need to ensure that COP31 outcomes reflect the importance of quantities and quality of finance, as well as public and grant-based finance, the G77 and China stressed the importance of the Climate Finance Work Programme (CFWP) and said that it was committed to seeing successful outcomes on this agenda item. Further, there is a need to ensure that the Adaptation Fund (AF) reaches successful outcomes at COP31, and that the missing elements regarding the operationalisation of the goal to triple adaptation finance are addressed.

On the Global Goal on Adaptation (GGA), the Group reaffirmed that the principles and provisions of the Convention and the PA must guide all GGA work, and that every element of the GGA, including means of implementation (MOI), deserves equal and balanced attention. It stated that the Belém-Addis Vision (BAV) should deliver on its mandate, including the policy alignment process and the establishment of the technical task force that is responsive to developing countries’ needs. On the Baku Adaptation Roadmap (BAR), it said that it must stay true to its agreed mandate in para 28 of decision 12/CMA.7, without reinterpretation or new obligations for developing countries. It also added that National Adaptation Plans (NAPs) also remain one of the most important agenda items for the Group.

On the operationalization of the Just Transition Mechanism (JTM), the Group called for a Party-driven Mechanism, accountable to the CMA, with a clear governance and implementation structure, capable of identifying developing-country needs and facilitating access to finance, technology and capacity-building, while fostering the adequate support for countries to pursue their nationally determined just transition pathways, as well as in addressing the barriers and challenges that hinder the development of developing countries. It also said that the JTM must reflect the comprehensive and multidimensional nature of just transitions, addressing the realities and priorities of developing countries across sectors and economies, in the context of sustainable development and poverty eradication.

The G77 and China also underscored the importance of adequate, predictable and timely financial and technical support, as mandated, to enable all developing countries to implement the Enhanced Transparency Framework (ETF) and build sustainable national reporting systems. It also called for simplified access to financial resources, reduced administrative burdens and accelerated disbursement of funding and noted with concern the delays in completing the reporting cycle of the first Biennial Transparency Reports (BTRs), which leave many developing countries unable to implement improvements before submitting their next reports.

The Group also looked forward to a substantive outcome on the 2026 Annual Technical Progress Report of the Paris Committee on Capacity-building (PCCB), and the report of the 15th Durban Forum on Capacity-building. Underscoring the critical importance of research and systematic observation, it also welcomed the Earth Information Day (EID) as an important opportunity to gain comprehensive insight and enhance understanding on the state of the climate and systematic observations and emphasised the importance of systematic observation systems in supporting multi-hazard early warning systems, and reiterated the need for equitable access to and sharing of observational data.

The Group also highlighted resolving the Climate Technology Centre and Network’s (CTCN) host arrangement as particularly urgent. It also called for forward-looking guidance to strengthen the Technology Mechanism’s delivery, while remaining mindful of persistent challenges. 

India, for the Like-Minded Developing Countries (LMDC) observed that Parties continue to meet in a difficult economic context and the suffering is “not distant or abstract” but “the lived reality of climate impacts for our nations.” As such, adaptation and addressing loss and damage are no longer choices, where developing countries are spending their own resources to adapt to the impacts and address loss and damage. It emphasised that it has become vital to resolve the long-standing issue of lack of ambition by developed countries on mitigation and MOI, as well as to address the challenge of unilateralism and protectionism, which pose barriers for collective efforts and international cooperation. It also noted that finance will flow from the developing to developed countries because of some unilateral trade measures, instead of the opposite, and called this “quite unacceptable.”

Saying that the finance numbers do not inspire confidence, it highlighted the following:  the Global Environment Facility’s (GEF) 9th replenishment marks a 27% decline from the previous replenishment, with the climate change allocation dropping from 16% in GEF 8 to 9% in GEF 9; the Green Climate Fund has announced a total of USD 5.1 billion in cuts between 2025 and 2026; and adaptation finance remains woefully inadequate. In response to the proposal by developing countries on tripling adaptation finance that was not accepted as a standalone agenda item, the LMDC expressed its profound disappointment and pointed to a huge adaptation finance gap that is “staring us in our face”.

The LMDC shared the global concern at the prospect of the world crossing the 1.5° C threshold but said that there are fundamental problems in the manner in which the conversation is being held. It was concerned that Parties are not talking about how the world has got to this point, and that point of ‘overshoot’ speaks to a future decline in global warming based on land and resources of the global South. It called for a “more realistic solution” which is for the immediate, deep, and sustained mitigation by the developed countries. It added that given the historical overuse of the carbon budget (for limiting temperature rise), developed countries must reach net-zero in this critical decade and achieve net-negative emissions within their own borders. It called for “scientific, equitable, and fair climate action - not rhetoric”.

Ghana for the African Group said that “1.5 degrees C is not just a number” with impacts on Africa’s food, water and lives. It said that it came to Antalya to talk about delivery (of finance) but instead saw Parties “stepping back” from what has been agreed i.e., tripling adaptation finance and the Belém decisions. Calling agreements “the glue of this process”, it warned that “trust breaks” with unkept agreements and clearly urged Parties to keep their promises. On the tripling of adaptation finance by 2035, it pointed out that Parties need a baseline and a trajectory to keep track; and that the quality of finance matters as “Africa needs grants, not more debt.” On the BAI, it called for a group of experts, chosen by Parties, to take the work forward.  

On mitigation, Ghana contrasted Africa’s ambitious climate plans with the “little finance and technology reach our continent” and so, many of these plans remain on paper. As developed countries must take the lead, and that the Mitigation Work Programme ‘MWP’ must help countries get the finance to act and keep its supportive, non-prescriptive safeguards: “no new targets for sectors, no punishment, no one-size-fits-all rules.” On just transition, it said that it is about “development, shared prosperity, decent jobs and energy for all” and so Antalya must make the JTM work in practice, with finance as “a just transition without finance is not a just transition.” On climate and trade, it underscored that Africa wants to process its minerals at home and so trade rules must not lock Africa into exporting raw materials. 

Warning that “overshoot must not become the new normal” and that “every tenth of a degree costs African lives,” the African Group said that the second Global Stocktake (GST) which starts at COP 31 must close the gaps found in the first stocktake; face the overshoot of 1.5 C; be led by science and by equity; and protect the right of developing countries to development and to end poverty. 

Saudi Arabia for the Arab Group underscored that the report of the President of the COP 30 and the references to the two voluntary roadmaps [Roadmap Enhancing Efforts towards Halting and Reversing Deforestation and Forest Degradation by 2030, and Roadmap for Transitioning Away from Fossil Fuels] “do not enjoy consensus or agreement amongst Parties, and have no formal negotiating basis, and have no bearing on its process and outcomes.” As such, it said the Arab Group will not accept any outcomes that reference these roadmaps or related matters as well as the top-down approaches or targets.  

Instead, it said that Parties work must be grounded in the principles and provisions of the Convention and the PA and respect the national circumstances and development priorities. It called for a “clear separation between negotiations process and voluntary initiatives under the Action Agenda”, the latter of which reflect the priorities of certain countries, and are not legally binding and do not enjoy consensus amongst Parties who do not agree on their incorporation in negotiation process and consideration of them as agreed outcomes. 

It emphasised for the need for tangible progress on the finance agenda items including the CFWP, strengthening the replenishment of the GCF, adequate and sustainable funding for the Fund for addressing Loss and Damage (FRLD), sufficient resources for the Santiago Network on Loss and Damage, and for the transition of the Adaptation Fund to serve the PA exclusively, free from politicisation. It also said that developing countries must be enabled to build industrial capacity, enhance value addition and create decent employment opportunities through adequate finance and technology transfer on preferential terms, and that the group is against unilateral trade measures, and outcomes on this COP must include international commitments to get rid of these measures and ensure climate action is not used to impose restrictions on development.

South Africa, for the BASIC countries [Brazil, South Africa, India and China], said that COP 31 should focus on the implementation of all pillars of the Convention and the PA, i.e. mitigation, adaptation, MOI and the international enabling environment for cooperation. It also called for the operationalisation of the Belém decision to at least triple adaptation finance by 2035, with a clearly defined baseline. It also said that COP31 should complete the institutional arrangements that allow the Adaptation Fund to transition to exclusively serving the PA and to receive its share of proceeds from Article 6.4 of the PA and that it must not change the Adaptation Fund Board's membership or weaken climate finance obligations under the Convention and the PA, as the dispute over the Board membership is not among the arrangements that can trigger exclusivity and should not hold back the transition. On the FRLD and the Santiago Network, it stated that the scale of finance remains inadequate and that developed countries must turn pledges into actual contributions and commit to a robust, fast-tracked first replenishment of the Fund. On the CFWP, it underscored that Parties must focus on operationalising Article 9.1 and that CMA 8 should give clear guidance on scope and modalities towards a concrete outcome, through a Party-driven process.

On just transition, it also said that the priority now was to ensure that the governance, functions and modalities of the JTM are commensurate with the scale, scope and ambition of the task.  Supporting the continuation of the MWP with the essential aspects of the current mandate maintained, it said that its continuation should lead to the provision of support and effective match-making between project developers and financiers, so that mitigation projects and programmes in developing countries can actually be implemented. It also said that it was opposed to unilateral, punitive, discriminatory and protectionist measures that are not in line with international law, such as carbon border adjustment mechanisms, stating that these undermine the efforts of developing countries to address the adverse impacts of climate change and to build adaptive capacity and resilience.

Palau for the Alliance of Small Island States (AOSIS) said it will not relinquish pursuit of the 1.5 C goal as there is “simply have no other choice”, adding that looking to move focus to a higher number is “literally moving the goalpost”. It further said that a challenging geopolitical context cannot be used as an excuse for low ambition. It also said that countries must strengthen and implement their NDCs and that urgent implementation of the first GST’s energy commitments is needed viz. tripling renewable energy capacity, doubling energy-efficiency improvements, rapidly reducing methane, transitioning away from fossil fuels in energy systems, phasing down unabated coal and phasing out inefficient fossil fuel subsidies. 

Calling climate finance “indispensable”, it said that AOSIS is looking for an outcome which secures predictable, accessible loss and damage finance, including an early start to the FRLD’s next replenishment and securing a 50% allocation for Small Island Developing States (SIDS) and Least Developed Countries (LDCs). Success to AOSIS also means advancing implementation of the NCQG, including increased access to and outflows from climate funds, greater clarity on tripling adaptation finance, and accountability for developed countries’ finance obligations; and strengthening adaptation finance for NAP implementation. 

It also called for meaningful progress on the JTM, and a focused, robust and action-oriented MWP and CFWP. Success, it said, included ensuring that the Global Implementation Accelerator, Belém Mission to 1.5°C and wider Action Agenda deliver transparent, accountable and measurable implementation, including the SIDS’ Plan to Accelerate Solutions-2035. It also called for the delivery by the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) of its Seventh Assessment Report (AR7) in time to inform second GST. 

Timor Leste for the LDCs called it a “profound injustice” that countries that have contributed least to this crisis yet bear its gravest consequences and that “every fraction of warming matters” for countries that are losing “lives, hard-won development gains, ecosystems and communities.” Calling for increased grant-based, public finance, urging new pledges and ambitious replenishments of climate funds, it emphasised that COP31 must advance implementation of existing decisions and address the scale, quality and access to climate finance. On the tripling of adaptation finance, it said that the implementation of its unresolved elements relating to baseline, trajectory and tracking must be addressed. It also stated that CFWP must enable substantive deliberations, including on Article 9.1, and that outstanding issues relating to the Adaptation Fund's transition to serving the PA must be resolved in Antalya.

On adaptation, it highlighted that the GGA must advance without further postponement, and specifically the BAV must be advanced in all its dimensions, including the establishment of the Technical Taskforce and the policy alignment process.  On mitigation, it called for the strengthening of the MWP through a permanent mandate, effective governance, periodic reviews and clear linkages to the GST, including addressing the 1.5°C overshoot. On just transition, it said that operationalising the JTM is of great importance, and that the it should reflect the LDCs’ distinct socioeconomic contexts and address structural inequalities that hinder progress. On loss and damage, it called on developed countries to urgently fill the FRLD must also urgently establish rapid disbursement modalities to enable timely responses. It also emphasised that the IPCC's AR 7 cycle must be aligned with the GST, and that it must deliver timely inputs to GST2.

Panama for the Independent Alliance of Latin America and the Caribbean (AILAC) said that the Convention has one objective which is “to prevent dangerous interference with the climate system, not to win procedural battles.” Urging Parties to negotiate in a way that is not “detached from reality”, it called for good faith from Parties on “delivering on what we have already agreed”. It said that COP31 must respond to the imperative [of overshoot in the temperature], and minimise its magnitude and duration and that this means acceleration, enhancing resilience, and effective means of implementation, starting with a MWP that is fit for purpose.

Highlighting that climate finance is not “charity” but an “obligation”, it pointed out that Latin American countries “cannot borrow their way out of the crisis we did not create.” It also said that the commitment to triple adaptation finance by 2035 must become real, not “another unfulfilled promise”, and that the technical work under the BAV must start. It also rejected any attempt to weaken or delay the IPCC (reports) as science is “non-negotiable”. It also said that there is no just transition without the means to make it possible, including mobilising gender-responsive finance to implement the Belém Gender Action Plan (GAP).

Venezuela for the Bolivarian Alliance for the Peoples of Our America (ALBA) observed that recent climate disasters illustrate the escalating costs of delayed action and yet, the commitments made to developing countries remained largely unfulfilled. 
It said that the principles of equity, and common but differentiated responsibilities (CBDR) which underpin this Convention and its PA, are being systematically eroded. It noted that public adaptation finance from developed to developing countries was approximately USD30 billion in 2024 against estimated needs of more than USD300 billion annually by 2035; even tripling current flows would leave a substantial shortfall. Highlighting that adaptation finance must be delivered as public, grant based support, not in a manner that would exacerbate debt burdens, it urged developed countries to provide at least USD120 billion per year for adaptation, well before 2035. 
On loss and damage, it urged for the FRLD to be fully operationalised and replenished with new and additional resources.

On mitigation, it emphasised that developed countries must lead in accordance with their historical responsibility and shared the concern about exceeding the 1.5 C limit but said that it was wary of approaches that relied on future temperature reductions through the land and resources of the global South, rather than on immediate and deep emissions cuts by developed countries within their own borders. It said that the JTM should be established and made operational at COP31, with a clear roadmap for its full implementation before COP32. It also said that the JTM
 must have a defined scope, clear institutional framework, and inclusive participation that reflects local needs, as “a transition that leaves community behind is not a just transition.”

Paraguay, for Group of Sur [Argentina, Ecuador, Paraguay, Uruguay] highlighted adaptation as a priority, saying that it supported the establishment of a Party-led technical group of technical experts nominated by the Parties, with clearly defined functions and balanced regional representation. 
Regarding tripling adaptation finance, it said that this must be based on public sources, grants, and highly concessional sources. It also urged donor countries to make timely contributions to the replenishment process of both the GCF and the FRLD. Emphasising that proposals to align financial flows with climate targets must not become conditions, it called for the elimination of structural asymmetries, conditionalities, biased risk assessment and credit rating practices as they hinder access to international financing and limit access of developing countries to international financial resources, and to pursue their own sustainable development goal, in keeping with their national circumstances.

It also underscored agriculture as “a fundamental pillar for economies, livelihoods, and food security of developing countries” and said that it is “under great threat due to drought, floods, land and degradation, which is why adaptation must materialize and become a priority of climate action.” It called for a continuation of the work with a focus on implementation, adaptation, food security, productivity, and means of implementation for developing countries. On the FRLD, it said that eligibility and allocation criteria should not exclude countries from Latin America, because this region is particularly vulnerable to the extreme and slow onset events that affect communities and production. On unilateral trade measures, it pointed out that climate action must not lead to arbitrary or not justifiable discrimination or disguised restriction to international trade, where Parties must take measures to minimize the adverse effects of climate change and the impact of response measures, which includes social, environmental, and economic adverse repercussions on developing countries.

The European Union (EU) reaffirmed its commitment to multilateralism and the rules-based international order to address global problems. Calling access to the best available science as “the bedrock of our process”, it said that the upcoming IPCC AR7  must form the basis of the GST2 and called on all Parties to work together to address the impasse on timeline and budget. It encouraged Parties and “especially major emitters” to submit ambitious 1.5 aligned NDCs, which demonstrate how they will deliver on the commitments of GST 1.

On mitigation, it said that “an adequate space” is needed to discuss efforts and called for a strengthened MWP that contributes to NDC implementation and preparation, not merely be extended in its current form, but aligned with the GST cycle. On just transition, the JTWP and operationalization of the JTM should provide the insights and guidance to enable ambitious and socially just and inclusive pathways to 1.5 C rather than a venue for duplicating discussions on finance structures or adding procedural burdens. On adaptation, it said that Parties must finalize robust and scientifically-grounded GGA indicators and finalise the need to transition the Adaptation Fund to the PA, unlocking much-needed adaptation funds.

On climate finance, it emphasised that priority must be to deliver on already agreed commitments, saying that it stands ready to discuss the implementation of the New Collective Quantified Goal on Finance (NCQG) and within these efforts, triple adaptation finance. It also said that progress must be made on access to finance particularly for LDCs and SIDS. It also looked forward to consultation on oceans, recognising the critical role of the ocean and its close interlinkages with climate change.

Warning that global warming will cross 1.5 C within a few years, Switzerland for the Environmental Integrity Group (EIG) stated that exceedance is neither safe nor acceptable and so COP 31 must respond, and we must commit to limit both the magnitude and duration of the overshoot. It also said that while we are not where we need to be, the PA is working and making a real impact, having bent the emissions curve away from the 4-degrees projection before Paris, and having provided Parties with a framework for NDCs, transparency and reporting, and a common direction. It encouraged the international community to be guided by independent and best available science; reaffirming the crucial role of the IPCC, and called for all AR7 reports to be published in time for GST2.

It also said that the entire financial system must support Parties’ objectives and so Parties have to improve the visibility of national action, to effectively align financial flows with the objectives of the PA. It appreciated that Parties could agree on a way forward with the CFWP, after the first year of its operations. It also said that it supported the transition of the Adaptation Fund to the PA, and supported the call for efforts of tripling adaptation finance for developing countries by 2035 in the context of the NCQG. It stated that access to climate finance for all developing countries must be further improved, as must the capacity to absorb it. On adaptation, it encouraged testing of the Belem Adaptation Indicators and said that Parties need to advance their ability to measure collective progress towards a GGA. On loss and damage, it said that it recognised the need for urgent action as climate impacts intensify, and that “great coherence and complementarity across existing efforts is key.”

The United Kingdom for the Umbrella Group (UG) wanted the IPCC as “the global authority on climate science” and “the most robust source of scientific information to inform climate action” to reach an agreement as soon as possible on its budget and AR7 timeline. To respond to this moment of overshoot, the UG said that the Paris fundamentals must deliver: “NDCs of the highest possible ambition, and Biennial Transparency Reports”. It also said that Parties must accelerate the energy transition, and appreciated the efforts of the incoming Presidencies on this issue. It urged for an ambitious outcome for the review of the MWP, “not mere continuation, but a strengthening, so it can fulfil and maintain its balanced mandate to urgently scale up ambition and implementation, and expand its modalities.”

Stating that overshoot puts the onus to redouble efforts on early warning systems, the UG said that the GGA needs to deliver progress at the technical level, including the task force. It also said that it wanted full discussions on adaptation finance and to ensure that the CFWP picks up these discussions, noting that the COP 30 outcome last year was an important step forward in calling for efforts to triple adaptation within the context of the NCQG. The UG urged for the conclusion of the transition of the Adaptation Fund to serve the CMA with Board membership terminology that is aligned with the PA, saying that adaptation finance is also an issue of access which must be scaled up and improved.

The UG said that the NCQG is “our guiding framework” and “all of our work here should build on that agreement.” On the CFWP, the UG said that it wanted constructive and substantive discussions and recognized that Article 9.1 is being delivered in the context of Article 9 as a whole. Clarifying that per the COP 30 decision, the UG stressed that the CFWP “has been established, runs for two years, and is guided by 1/CMA.7 paras for 54 and 55.” It also said that building a net-zero climate resilient future requires shifting financial flows both at the domestic and international levels and so progress on Article 2.1(c) of the PA is needed to advance this.

On just transition, the UG said that the review of the JTWP needs to conclude and that Parties need to conclude on a practical Mechanism that supports implementation. Additionally, the JTM should “have clear functions, work in alignment with the JTWP, and support inclusive and nationally determined transitions aligned with 1.5 C.”

It also recognized the importance of agriculture and food security, and said that Parties need to send a clear signal on nature and ocean-based action as “the natural infrastructure on which we rely …  is both threatened by and plays a key role in supporting our ability to cope with a changing climate.”