COP in cop out time

From Paris to Belem: A decade of Hiatus

The 30th UN Climate Change Conference in Belem, Brazil, is taking place against the backdrop of a major pushback against climate action. The United States has withdrawn from the Paris Agreement. The European Union has diluted its 2040 climate target. Some of the world’s largest banks—J.P. Morgan, Bank of America, and Morgan Stanley—have walked away from their net-zero alliances. Even Bill Gates, a champion of climate innovation, now argues that the world should prioritise health and development over climate goals—ignoring that prosperity and public health depend on a stable climate.

But let us ask a simple question: is the world really doing so much on climate that we need a pause? A decade after the signing of the Paris Agreement, it’s time for a reality check.

The Emissions Gap

Since the signing of the Paris Agreement in 2015, governments have announced countless new pledges, policies, and net-zero roadmaps. Yet, greenhouse gas (GHG) data tell a very different story.

Each year since 2010, UNEP’s Emissions Gap Report has projected where global emissions are heading under different scenarios. In 2015, UNEP projected that under the current policies scenario—which estimates emissions based on existing measures taken by countries—global emissions in 2030 would reach 60 gigatonnes (Gt) of CO₂ equivalent. However, to stay within the 2°C pathway, emissions would need to be 42 Gt by 2030, leaving an 18 Gt gap.

The report also projected that if countries meet their pledges under their Nationally Determined Contributions (NDCs), emissions could drop to 54–56 Gt, depending on whether they meet their conditional pledges (dependent on finance and technology support from developed countries) or unconditional pledges (to be achieved from their own resources).

Source: UNEP Emissions Gap Reports; emissions include land use changes and forestry.

A decade later, the numbers have barely shifted. The 2025 Report estimates that emissions under current policies will be 58 Gt in 2030, leaving a 16 Gt gap. Even if countries meet their Paris pledges, emissions would still be 51–53 Gt, leaving a gap of 9–11 Gt. In short, the world has spent a decade pledging and re-pledging—only to move the needle by a few gigatonnes.

The Uncomfortable Arithmetic

But the reality is emissions are growing faster than projected. In 2015, global GHG emissions stood at 51.5 Gt. By 2024, it had already reached 57.7 Gt—very close to the projected emissions for 2030 under the current policies scenario. This rapid growth in emissions is making the Paris targets much harder to meet.

Meeting the 2°C target now requires global emissions to peak immediately and then fall by about 4% every year until 2050. For the 1.5°C goal, the required annual decline is 7.3%. Such reductions have never been achieved outside major economic collapses or pandemics. During the 2020 COVID-19 lockdowns, for example, global emissions fell by 5.4%, only to rebound the following year.

In essence, to meet the Paris targets, the world would have to achieve a permanent, voluntary, global “COVID-level” drop every year for the next 25 years—without crashing economies or livelihoods. That is the scale of transformation now required. And it explains why some political and corporate leaders are quietly retreating from ambition.

But retreat is not an option. Failure to close the emissions gap will be catastrophic—not the end of civilisation, a poorer, unhealthier, and more dangerous world. Vast regions will become unliveable; food systems will strain; and economies will stagger under the weight of disasters and displacement. History warns what happens when climate change outpaces adaptation. The end of the Indus Valley civilisation did not end humanity in South Asia—but it certainly depopulated vast regions.

From Paris to Belem

Today, even as science demands urgent action, political and corporate will is eroding. Global elites are, in effect, normalising failure—claiming the climate agenda has gone “too far, too fast.”

But this narrative is not just defeatist—it is false. The world has barely begun to act. Despite all the pledges, global energy use remains 80% fossil-fuel-based. The share of renewables, though rising, is expanding too slowly to offset surging demand. The problem, therefore, is not too much climate action—it is the chronic lack of it.

As the world gathers in Belem, the task is not to lower ambition but to restore credibility. It is time to build a Coalition of the Willing—a group of nations committed to implementation, not rhetoric. Emerging economies like India, which will soon hold the BRICS presidency, must lead this effort.

For developing countries, climate action is not a moral burden—it is an opportunity to drive green growth, ensure energy independence, create millions of new jobs, and protect citizens from escalating climate risks. Their interests and survival are aligned.

Ten years after Paris, the world stands at a dangerous crossroads. Yet this is not the time to despair—it is the time to fight back.