Written by Tony La Viña
The 30th Conference of Parties (COP30) the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change meets in Belém, Brazil from November 10-21, 2025. Although I have been to 25 of these conferences, I won’t be there but a five person delegation from the Klima Center of Manila Observatory will be there, joining a hundred or so Filipinos who are in the official Philippine delegation as well as civil society observers.
I offer this reflection as someone who has been involved in climate diplomacy since the early 1990s. I write as a negotiator from the Philippines and from the broader developing world, and as an activist, government official, diplomat, facilitator, professor, and advocate of climate justice. My purpose is to provide institutional memory of the Philippines as a climate leader in the past and what we must do now as we enter another critical phase of the global climate effort.
Over thirty years, I worked in many capacities. I helped establish early climate institutions in the Philippines. I chaired the negotiations on land use, land use change, and forestry in Kyoto. I facilitated REDD plus discussions in Copenhagen and Durban. I contributed to efforts that secured human rights language, biodiversity considerations, climate justice principles, and the article on loss and damage in the Paris Agreement.
My most important contribution is mentoring many young negotiators and activists. Since stepping back from active negotiations in 2017, I have participated as an academic and policy expert, which has given me a clearer view of our achievements and shortcomings. I am also a advocate for climate justice and a global leader in developing climate litigation against developed countries and carbon majors.
Evolution of key issues and negotiation blocs
From the beginning, climate negotiations have focused on science, equity, and responsibility. Parties debated how to incorporate evolving scientific knowledge into decision making. They struggled with how developed countries should lead on mitigation and how their commitments should be monitored and verified. Developing countries stressed the principle of common but differentiated responsibilities and pointed to historical emissions. Climate finance and technology transfer were recurrent concerns.
As climate impacts intensified, adaptation became as important as mitigation. Finance became more urgent and contentious. REDD plus grew in importance as developing countries emphasized the role of forests.
Loss and damage and just transition has become the central expression of climate justice in recent years.
Filipinos were intellectual leaders as the agenda of the climate negotiations evolved, but we were also critical in the geopolitical dynamics of the climate process.
The positions of the United States, the European Union, China, and India have shaped every negotiation. Today, China is the undisputed leader, eclipsing the United States which has been paralyzed by climate denialism and the influence of the fossil fuel industry. Through the years, we have been in the frontlines of confronting these big countries to challenge them to step up.
The Philippines is an important member of the Group of 77 and China. We have also been active in new coalitions, such as the Like Minded Developing Countries (although we stupidly left it at some point) and the Climate Vulnerable Forum (CVF), which have brought sharper perspectives into the negotiations.
Civil society, youth, indigenous peoples, and business groups played constructive roles by providing evidence, ideas, and public pressure. Filipinos are well represented in these groups, especially the youth, indigenous peoples, and church groups.
The Philippines as a climate leader
The Philippines has at times been an influential developing country in climate negotiations. Filipino scientists contributed to IPCC assessment reports. Filipino diplomats served in leadership positions in the UNFCCC and within the Group of 77 and China.
Bernaditas Muller guided developing country positions on climate finance for two decades. Vice Yu continues to provide leadership on finance and loss and damage. Governor Joey Salceda helped shape the Green Climate Fund. Athena Ronquillo and Lando Velasco helped create the architecture of climate finance in and out of the convention.
Victoria Tauli Corpuz and I facilitated crucial forest negotiations. Fred Serrano and Yeb Saño contributed to discussions on adaptation, technology, and transparency. Red Constantino guided the CVF. More recently, Albert Magalang helped complete the rules on the sustainable development mechanism. In Belém, Cardinal Ambo David will be a powerful voice for climate justice.
Aside from Muller, many of our diplomats from the Department of Foreign Affairs have also contributed to our success in influencing the climate process. They are too many to mention here. Suffice to say I am honored to have worked with the best of them.
At COP1 in Berlin in 1995, the Philippines helped lead developing countries in crafting the Berlin Mandate, which recognized that the original UNFCCC was insufficient and that new mitigation commitments were needed for developed countries.
At COP2 in Geneva in 1996, the second IPCC assessment report guided negotiations and I was elected Vice President and Rapporteur of the UNFCCC Bureau.
At COP3 in Kyoto in 1997, developed countries finally agreed to quantified emissions reduction commitments, a symbolic 10% of their total emissions. The Clean Development Mechanism emerged as a compromise and became a central tool for global cooperation.
The Philippines was instrumental in concluding the Protocol, with US President Bill Clinton personally thanking President Fidel V. Ramos for our contribution.
In the early 2000s, after the United States left the Kyoto Protocol, adaptation gained importance.
The Philippines helped mainstream adaptation across COP6 to COP12, culminating in the Nairobi Work Programme.
COP13 in Bali in 2007 launched comprehensive negotiations on mitigation, adaptation, finance, technology, and long-term cooperative action.
COP15 in Copenhagen in 2009 did not deliver the expected outcome because many developing countries were excluded from the process. In that conference, the Philippines fielded a strong delegation, including its first youth representative Esperanza Garcia. Others will follow her in later COPs. I am privileged to have been their mentor.
COP16 in Cancun in 2010 restored trust. The Green Climate Fund was established and a comprehensive REDD plus framework was adopted. The Philippines played central roles in these outcomes.
COP17 in Durban in 2011 launched negotiations that would culminate in the Paris Agreement.
The typhoons that struck Cagayan de Oro in 2011 and the Visayas and Mindanao during COP 17, COP18 in Doha (2012) and COP19 (2013) in Warsaw made the Philippines a strong voice for loss and damage.
Yeb Saño’s iconic speeches in Doha and Warsaw reflected the urgency felt at home.
COP20 in Lima in 2014 advanced human rights language, with the Philippines and Chile playing leading roles. Our diplomats were instrumental in this effort.
COP21 in Paris in 2015 delivered a universal agreement that balanced ambition and flexibility. The 1.5 degree target was included, transparency frameworks were strengthened, and climate justice, human rights, and indigenous peoples rights were acknowledged. Philippine influence was strong, supported by coordination among government, academe, and civil society.
Subsequent COPs in Marrakech (COP22), Bonn (COP23), Katowice (COP24), Madrid (COP25), and Glasgow (COP26) worked on implementation rules. But political developments slowed progress.
The elections of Donald Trump and Rodrigo Duterte reduced participation from the United States and the Philippines. The United States withdrew from the process. Philippine credibility suffered because of human rights violations under Duterte.
Under the current administration, engagement has improved. At COP27 in Sharm El Sheikh in 2022, Parties agreed to establish a Loss and Damage Fund, a long-standing Philippine goal.
COP28 in Dubai in 2023 produced the first Global Stocktake, confirming that global efforts remain insufficient and calling for a transition away from fossil fuels. The Loss and Damage Fund became operational, with initial pledges, and the Philippines was selected as host of its Board.
COP29 in Baku in 2024 focused on climate finance but made limited progress. Philippine participation could have been stronger.
What next for a climate leader?
Leadership requires consistency between domestic action and international positions. The Philippines cannot claim climate leadership if it remains dependent on fossil fuels. A country that calls for global ambition must set a clear domestic path to transition its energy system. Without such action, credibility is weakened.
A real transition to clean energy will reduce vulnerability, support development, and strengthen negotiating leverage. Corruption also undermines leadership. It weakens institutions, diverts resources, and erodes trust. Climate leadership requires transparency, accountability, and effective governance. If corruption persists, vulnerability increases and influence in negotiations declines.
An imperative of climate leadership is an absolute adherence to human rights. We cannot claim this if environmental and climate defenders are always threatened in our country.
COP30 in Belém in 2025 will take place in the Amazon, a region that symbolizes both global risk and global opportunity. Parties must submit enhanced NDCs aligned with the findings of the Global Stocktake.
Belém should be a turning point. Countries must align their plans with the 1.5-degree temperature goal. Climate finance commitments must become predictable flows. The Loss and Damage Fund must become fully operational. Forest protection and the rights of indigenous peoples must be strengthened. Accountability must improve so commitments lead to action. A comprehensive just transition programme must be adopted.
The Philippines has played leadership roles in the past. It can do so again. To lead, the country must clean its energy system, confront corruption, strengthen institutions, respect human rights, and continue to advocate for climate justice.
Climate leadership begins at home.