Last month our delegation attended the UN Climate Change Conference in Bonn (SB60). The Subsidiary Bodies (SBs) convene twice every year- once in Bonn and again during COP- to discuss and negotiate various climate change-related issues. The Bonn climate talks are generally less tense than COPs as they aim to establish the technical groundwork for the final political decisions made later in the year during COP. Ever wondered what it’s like to attend a UN climate conference? Delve into the honest reflections of our COP Project Leads. 

 

What were your initial thoughts from the first day of the UN climate change conference (SB 60)?

“One of the first things you notice at such conferences is the sheer number and diversity of participants, over 7000 attendees from various nationalities, ages, ethnicities, occupations, etc. This is not to say, however, that this representation is adequate or truly meaningful. The conference was buzzing with energy with countless events, negotiation sessions, meetings, press conferences and advocacy actions going on at the same time, making it impossible to follow everything. 

One aspect that we had to remind ourselves of very soon after the beginning, was the highly political nature of this forum (inherent in every UN conference). The opening plenary was suspended two times. Once due to a pro-Palestinian protest by an activist, holding the Palestinian flag on stage, and a second time when the Russian Federation objected to adopting the agenda because some members of its delegation were denied visas to enter Germany. After the issues were resolved, the session continued but the geopolitical and ideological tensions between countries could be felt throughout. One could also sense the hypocrisy of some countries, speaking about climate commitments and human rights, while domestically often disregarding both.”

 

“As this was my first time attending any UN conference, I was both excited and a bit overwhelmed on my first day of the SB60. The scale of the event was immediately apparent, with the vast conference center bustling with state representatives and observerving organizations from around the world. In my mind, the sheer number of NGOs, each representing diverse perspectives and regions, highlighted the global commitment to tackling climate change.

Due to time constraints, I was only able to attend a few days of the conference, which made the overwhelming number of simultaneously happening events even more daunting. I wanted to make the most of my limited presence, so navigating and prioritizing sessions was a challenge at first. Fortunately, with time I managed to prioritize what was of the most interest to me and in the end managed to deepen my knowledge on many discussed topics.”

 

Did the conference meet your expectations? Why or why not?

“The outcomes from SB 60 were underwhelming, to say the least. There was little progress on most negotiation tracks, with Parties (i.e. countries) arguing about procedural matters instead of having a constructive dialogue about substantive issues. I am aware that a certain degree of dysfunctionality is intrinsic to every UN process but given the more technical nature of SBs, as opposed to COPs, I did not expect to witness how countries debate for hours issues such as whether or not to produce an informal report of the pre-conference dialogues to inform the negotiations. Observing this, in light of the scale and urgency of addressing the triple planetary crisis and human suffering in general, really makes you doubt the ability of international institutions to adequately address global issues. Also, it is important to note that, in general, the decisions from COP are not legally binding and there is no enforcement mechanism to ensure that countries comply with and implement these commitments. That said, I don’t want to underestimate the potential of these global climate summits to produce meaningful results, such as the Paris Agreement or the Loss and Damage Fund. However, the effectiveness of the UNFCCC consensus-based process is a topic for a different discussion, which we plan to explore in another blog post so stay tuned.”

“The conference largely met my expectations by providing a platform for extensive technical discussions and showcasing a diverse array of perspectives from across the globe. The scale of the event was impressive, allowing for valuable exchanges of ideas and knowledge. Despite the positive aspects, the pace of progress made by state representatives during the negotiations was slower than I had hoped, with many critical decisions left unresolved. This highlighted the inherent challenges of achieving consensus among such a diverse group of stakeholders. While the conference was successful in facilitating dialogue and collaboration, the lack of concrete decisions underscored the need for continued efforts and more decisive action in future sessions.”

What are your main takeaways from the conference?

“One thing I noticed is that regardless of the negotiation item (mitigation, adaptation, finance, just transition, global stocktake, etc.) the same debate emerges in the room between developed and developing countries about the means of implementation (i.e. finance, technology development and transfer and capacity-building). Developing nations demand support to implement 1.5 °C -aligned climate policies and adapt to the consequences of climate change, for which they are historically less responsible. In contrast, negotiators from developed countries often try to divert the conversation towards measuring progress and exchange of best practices. The topic of climate justice and equity is thus at the heart of many UNFCCC negotiations. Unfortunately, citizens from developed countries are often unaware of the importance and benefits of providing international climate finance. Addressing the challenge of “implementation” within the negotiations is likely to be a main sticking point at COP29.

It goes without saying that there are also divisions within both the Global South and Global North countries, with the USA and the Arab Group, among others, (unsurprisingly) often standing out as blockers of negotiations progress. At the same time, there was one thing that Parties could largely agree on, and I think it is nicely summarized in the informal note of the Mitigation Work Programme, which highlights that the negotiation outcomes should be “non-prescriptive, non-punitive, facilitative, respectful of national sovereignty and national circumstances, take into account the nationally determined nature of NDCs and not impose new targets or goals”. The number of times the word “national” was mentioned in this short excerpt underscores the voluntary nature of cooperation within the UNFCCC and indicates that any form of supranational governance mechanism is currently far off the table.”

“The Bonn Climate Change Conference concluded with notable outcomes and challenges. Key takeaways include the unresolved issues around the New Collective Quantified Goal (NCQG) on climate finance and the outcomes of the First Global Stocktake (GST), both critical for future climate finance and national commitments under the Paris Agreement. Discussions on the Mitigation Work Program (MWP) also faced challenges in achieving consensus. The negotiations on Article 6, focusing on carbon market mechanisms, highlighted divisions over definitions like “emission avoidance” and the structure of registries. While progress was made in drafting clearer texts and planning technical workshops, significant hurdles remain, underscoring the complexity and urgency of these issues to be addressed at COP 29 in Baku later this year.”

How would you summarize your overall experience at the conference?

“It was definitely an enriching experience, both personally and professionally. Being in such a place makes you reflect on your own privilege; historical and structural injustices; the myopia of self-interested actors and on our collective willingness to bring about sustainable development to communities across the globe. I was able to meet some incredibly inspirational people from all over the world, who have really dedicated their lives to improving the well-being of our planet and societies. This is partly where the power of such conferences lies. They provide crucial spaces for a range of public and private stakeholders to meet, deliberate and develop new initiatives to advance the just transition. At any given moment, somewhere in the venue, meaningful connections are being made and transformative conversations are taking place. 

It was also great to see so many incredibly motivated and talented young people at the conference. Youth engagement in international climate policy is increasing, albeit with varying degrees of effectiveness. There are several opportunities for young people to express their position in such summits e.g. engaging with the official youth constituency of the UNFCCC “YOUNGO” and contributing to interventions in the various negotiations; making submissions; organizing or taking part in demonstrations (aka actions); participating in closed meetings with Party delegations (aka bilaterals); organizing or participating in side events, etc. However, the impact of these participation opportunities depends on the willingness of decision-makers to actively listen and proactively engage youth and other marginalized communities in the process. To this date, there is a noticeable deficit in this area, signalling the need to increase our advocacy efforts and outreach. Because maybe you make a negotiator think about your suggestion, maybe they pass it on to their national department and just maybe… a small change happens. It is far from a perfect system but it is the best that we have collectively come up with to address climate change and its impacts on the international level.”

“My overall experience at SB60 was enlightening and thought-provoking. As a participant, I witnessed firsthand the intricate negotiations and diverse perspectives that shape global climate policy. The conference highlighted the critical issues surrounding climate finance, with discussions on the New Collective Quantified Goal (NCQG) revealing both the urgency and complexity of financial commitments from developed to developing countries. Sessions on adaptation, mitigation, and the operationalization of international carbon markets under Article 6 underscored the challenges ahead. The voices of small island developing states (SIDS) resonated deeply, emphasizing their disproportionate vulnerability to climate impacts despite minimal contributions to global emissions. The conference also addressed broader themes such as just transitions and gender equality in climate action, showcasing the interconnectedness of environmental and social goals. All in all, the progress was modest and many critical decisions were deferred to COP 29 in Baku. Now, I am looking forward to participating in the upcoming Conference of Parties to determine whether state representatives will manage to reach consensus on the topics introduced during SB 60.”

How do you think the knowledge and experiences gained at the conference will influence your advocacy efforts at YES-Europe?

“Thematic-wise it helped us set our priorities for COP29. The negotiations around the Mitigation Work Programme (MWP) at SB60 did not lead to any substantive outcome, with Parties agreeing to continue the discussions in November. As this is one of the few spaces within the UNFCCC where issues such as fossil fuel phase-out and energy transition could be addressed, we decided to focus our advocacy efforts there. The transition to carbon neutrality, however, cannot succeed unless it is done in a just and equitable manner. Therefore, we will also advocate for a just transition and for empowering young people to actively participate in it. Significant public attention and pressure are needed to ensure that the commitments of the global stocktake do not turn into empty words and that the MWP lives up to its mandate to “urgently scale up mitigation ambition and implementation in this critical decade in a manner that complements the global stocktake”.

The conference also made us reconsider our role in the UNFCCC process and how we can make a worthwhile contribution. Given the challenges of achieving international consensus, national and subnational efforts can be just as impactful, despite their smaller scope. Successful local initiatives can have far-reaching effects when disseminated to a broader audience. The UNFCCC conferences provide a unique platform to spotlight regional best practices on the global scale. Positive change can also start at the local level as embodied by the mission and vision of YES-Europe. We will harness this “YES” spirit to champion the role of young people in driving and shaping the sustainable transition worldwide.”

“The knowledge and experiences gained during SB60 will significantly influence our advocacy efforts at YES-Europe. By observing the negotiations firsthand, we identified which tracks were most challenging for parties to agree on, providing us with crucial insights into where our advocacy efforts can make the most impact. From a youth perspective, which YES-Europe stands for, we recognize the importance of focusing on initiatives like the Mitigation Work Programme and the Just Transition Work Programme. These areas are pivotal for ensuring that climate actions are equitable, inclusive, and sustainable for future generations.

Further, meeting numerous like-minded individuals from other observer organizations across the Global North and Global South was invaluable. It allowed us to compare our perspectives on these critical topics and identify common ground where joint advocacy efforts could be effective. We initiated discussions on these issues during the conference and are committed to advancing them further leading up to COP 29. By collaborating with stakeholders from diverse backgrounds, we aim to amplify our voices and advocate for policies that prioritize youth involvement, equitable climate action, and a just transition to a net-zero future.”