By Ingrid Elena Manson González
If you have been following the news lately, you will have probably seen the latest update from the 29th Conference of the Parties (COP), a yearly United Nations convention where country leaders come together to address climate action at an international scale. This year, the COP was hosted in Azerbaijan, a controversial pick due to its oil-based economy. The theme for this COP was climate finance, with the goal of establishing a new annual climate finance commitment for the global south. The outcome of these negotiations was not ideal and caused great discontent among the parties. To learn more about the COP negotiations read this World Resources Institute article.
When I learned I would be attending COP 29 as a student delegate for Tufts University, I was filled with excitement. As a microgrids and outreach intern at Climable, I wanted to see how issues we focus on daily–climate resilience, community engagement, environmental justice, and energy democracy–at a grassroots scale operated at an international level.
My time at the COP was a whirlwind of new experiences. It made me realize how important international cooperation is, especially when facing the effects of climate change. A feeling of determination stuck with me throughout the conference. I was full of hope, despite the unlikely success of the multiparty negotiations at an international scale.
My time at the COP was a whirlwind of new experiences. It made me realize how important international cooperation is, especially when facing the effects of climate change. A feeling of determination stuck with me throughout the conference. I was full of hope, despite the unlikely success of the multiparty negotiations at an international scale.
That is, until my final event when the panelist Alejandro Alemán, coordinator for Climate Action Network Latin America, mentioned the restrictions and surveillance at COP29.
All material contributed by participants was reviewed beforehand for mention of fossil fuel phase-out—a phrase banned at the COP. To me, this felt like the freedom of expression and the right to truth required for climate activism were under constant threat. Under the direction of oil-producing host countries, badges were widely available to corporations but limited to academia and civil society. The influence of oil and gas corporations in this space was especially clear to me when Alemán explained how, alongside the negotiations, fossil fuel companies were signing contracts to further expand their operations.
This really bothered me. It made me question the purpose of the COP; a space once designed to place civil society alongside party leaders on the frontlines of global decision-making had now turned into an event that prioritized private interests over public ones despite their grave environmental and social costs.
Bit by bit, my hope was renewed by the tangible proposals given by the panelists. The path is challenging but clear. Leaders across disciplines need to come together, not by signing agreements but by sharing a vision for the future. To form the common goal of a just and sustainable future, it is necessary to include a variety of perspectives, especially from those who are on the frontlines of climate disasters. In this process, civil society plays a critical role in highlighting different realities, connecting otherwise separate actors, and implementing a bottom-up approach to influence the design and implementation of climate policy.
Civil society can revitalize this space that once welcomed its influence. To do so, however, we must show just how powerful this influence is. United, our work can have a much bigger impact. I was heartened to note that while party leaders negotiated and oil companies signed contracts, there was a much more subtle but powerful movement in COP29: the constant formation and strengthening of a civil society network.