Fletcher experts offer insights into the key topics driving climate talks
The 31st United Nations Climate Change Conference (COP31) is officially set to begin in Antalya, Türkiye on November 9, but discussion about the world's most pressing climate challenges is already well underway.
From green industrialization and climate resilience to climate finance and technological innovation, COP31 will host critical conversations between nations, hoping to advance the goals of the Paris Agreement. This page, featuring commentary from Fletcher's Center for International Environmental & Resource Policy (CIERP), Climate Policy Lab (CPL), faculty, students and other leaders in the Fletcher community, unpacks and furthers the discussion on the core issues driving global climate negotiations.
A delegation from Fletcher will be attending COP31 in Antalya. More information on the delegation will be available soon.
For media interview opportunities with Fletcher faculty and experts, please contact Katie Coleman at katie.coleman@tufts.edu.
Green Industrialization After Belém
By Renato H. de Gaspi, Postdoctoral Scholar at the Climate Policy Lab
(October 15)
As priorities for COP31 in Antalya are still to become clearer, moving towards action points in coordinated green industrialization should build on the commitments COP30 already left on the table. The Belém Declaration on Global Green Industrialization committed signatories to launch a coordination mechanism, hosted by UNIDO, in time for COP31. Antalya is the moment to give it substance.
Securing demand is a priority, both at home and across borders. Governments can create firm markets for low-carbon steel, cement and clean technologies through standards and public procurement, giving investors the certainty they need to commit. A companion Belém declaration on sustainable public procurement already points in this direction, and Antalya could build on it to set out a clearer roadmap and shared best practices. Abroad, demand depends on market access. Ending climate protectionism outright is unlikely, but common, technology-neutral criteria for certifying green products would at least keep carbon border measures from shutting out producers in developing economies.
Among its priorities, the declaration also lists “mobilizing and aligning financial and technical assistance, which is essential to accelerate transitions.” Without that support, green industrialization will stay concentrated in the few countries that can already afford it. Paired with technology co-development, it can democratize the process, letting more countries take part according to their own needs and conditions (rather than someone else’s blueprint).
Trade fragmentation shows no sign of easing, which makes coordination more urgent. With global rules in flux, a secretariat that connects finance, technology and demand across countries could make green industrialization a shared project rather than a race among a few.
BTIP at One
By Zheng Cui, Junior Research Fellow at the Climate Policy Lab
(October 15)
At COP30, Parties adopted the Belém Technology Implementation Programme (BTIP) to strengthen support for the climate technology priorities developing countries identified. In Antalya, parties will review the first annual report of the Technology Executive Committee (TEC) and the Climate Technology Centre and Network (CTCN) that features BTIP implementation.
At the same time, technology priorities are shifting. In the 2025 NDC synthesis, nearly all Parties described technology needs, with an increasing emphasis on adaption technologies such as climate monitoring and observation systems. Artificial intelligence, gender, indigenous technology, and other cross-cutting themes also feature more prominently, as countries consider not only which technologies they need but also who designs, uses and benefits from them. The 2026 synthesis, to be published this month, are expected to hold similar trends.
On paper, the BTIP does aim to address these shifting needs. The decision already calls for strengthening national innovation systems, drawing on Indigenous and endogenous technologies, and gender-responsive delivery. Early implementation points the same way. CTCN, TEC, and the Secretariat have all moved to incorporate different elements of the BTIP into their agendas and work plans. What remains to be seen is how quickly these signals become practice and impact. COP31 offers the first chance for Parties to take stock and for the BTIP to show it can keep up with the countries it was designed for.
Science Diplomacy and the Urgent Need for Stronger International Ocean Governance
By Marcia Moreno-Báez, Research Professor
(October 13)
I don't think we can deny anymore the need for strong international ocean governance institutions that can translate scientific knowledge into effective decision-making. The ocean is now one of the main focuses of international interest, and this goes beyond climate change. As we know, ocean warming, acidification, dead zones, and sea level rise are among the consequences of climate change. However, while our scientific understanding of these processes continues to advance, the ability of international institutions to integrate ocean dynamics into governance and decision-making processes remains a major challenge.
Additionally, the growing international interest in high seas resources and deep-sea minerals is partly driven by the transition from fossil fuels to renewable energy sources. While this is turning the ocean into a geopolitical and ecological battleground, in January 2026, the High Seas Treaty (BBNJ Agreement) officially came into force, establishing a legal framework for the conservation and sustainable use of marine biodiversity in areas beyond national jurisdiction, including the creation of Marine Protected Areas in the high seas.
Historically, the ocean has not been sufficiently integrated into international climate negotiations and governance frameworks, even though it absorbs approximately 90% of the excess heat generated by greenhouse gas emissions, playing a central role in regulating the global climate system. This illustrates a broader gap between what science tells us about the ocean and how that knowledge is translated into international governance.
The main question, I guess, many of us have is: How can our growing scientific knowledge, geopolitical changes, and the urgent need to transition toward lower greenhouse gas emissions be translated into formal and effective international governance mechanisms?
We have the opportunity at COP31 to put science diplomacy into practice, where integrating the science of ocean-climate dynamics and marine resources plays a crucial role in developing science-informed governance policies, strengthening existing governance structures, and improving coordination among international institutions. Ultimately, the challenge is not only to generate more scientific knowledge, but to ensure that this knowledge informs decisions and translates into concrete actions that increase our opportunities for a more sustainable planet.
Senior Fellow Bethany Tietjen is quoted on American vulnerability during the Super El Niño.
Professor Nigel Purvis discusses what comes next as the world is projected to fail the 1.5 degree upper limit for warming set by the Paris Agreement.
Senior Fellow Bethany Tietjen writes about blind spots in preparation for the Super El Niño.
Research Fellow Tarun Gopalakrishnan examines the efficacy of the U.N.'s Loss and Damage Fund in the wake of the deadly flood in Nepal.
Senior Fellow Jennifer Morgan emphasizes the need for real climate action coming out of the United Nations General Assembly and COP31.