Interactive: Who wants what at the COP31 climate change summit

COP31 is a round of United Nations climate negotiations. Delegates will gather in Antalya, Turkey, to seek agreement on how countries respond to climate change. The summit matters because its decisions can shape financial support, emissions cuts and protection from climate impacts.

Key debates include climate finance for developing countries and a global “just transition” towards a cleaner economy. Countries will also discuss adaptation, mitigation, national climate plans and the Paris Agreement’s global stocktake. Turkey is promoting wider action on electrification, oceans and “green industrialisation”.

The summit takes place during war, an energy crisis and climate extremes. Australia is leading the negotiations, while Turkey hosts the conference under an unusual joint presidency. The negotiating table tracks positions from countries and UN blocs, ranging from “priority” to “oppose”. It is a living document that may change during COP31.

A joint presidency means two countries have different leading roles at the summit. Australia is responsible for leading the negotiations, while Turkey provides the host country and conference setting. This division is unusual for COP31 and is one of its defining features.

The source gives a clear example of the split. Delegates will gather in Antalya, a Turkish resort city, while Australia leads discussions over climate finance, a just transition and other negotiating questions. Turkey is also advancing an action agenda covering electrification, oceans and “green industrialisation”.

However, the source does not state why Australia and Turkey are sharing the presidency. It only identifies the arrangement and each country’s role. The practical effect is that negotiation leadership and conference hosting are separated, while both countries help shape the summit’s wider direction.

Climate finance is a major divide because developing countries need money for climate action, while developed countries have traditionally been responsible for providing it. Developing countries want negotiations to focus on public funding from developed countries under Article 9.1 of the Paris Agreement.

They have pushed for a climate-finance work programme and some propose a “burden sharing” arrangement. They see this process as a way to pressure developed countries to provide more money from their public coffers. The debate also includes Article 2.1c, which concerns making global financial flows consistent with climate action.

Developed countries prefer a broader approach. They want to improve access to finance that already exists and expand the range of donors. Some developing countries, including small-island states, support those goals too. The dispute continues amid aid cuts and pressure on multilateral development banks to drop climate objectives.

A “just transition” is the move towards a low-carbon economy while addressing fairness. It recognises that climate policies affect countries, workers and communities differently. The goal is not only cleaner economic activity, but also a practical way to manage the changes involved.

At COP30 in Brazil in 2025, countries agreed to establish the Belém-Antalya mechanism, or BAM. It is also called the just transition mechanism. The mechanism is intended to help drive the transition. During June negotiations, parties agreed on some key aspects, but many details remained unsettled.

The main disagreements concern scope and finance. Countries have not agreed how wide the mechanism’s work should be or whether it should be tied to providing finance. Civil society groups regard making it operational at COP31 as a key expected outcome. Progress in the just transition work programme has created a basis for further decisions.

The supplied source does not provide the number of countries that submitted updated climate plans. It also does not give the share of global greenhouse-gas emissions represented by those countries. The available text ends during its discussion of the global stocktake and national climate plans.

The source does explain that the first global stocktake took place in 2023. It assessed the state of climate action and what needed to happen to put the world on course. It also says countries agreed on a package of mitigation measures, including “transitioning away from fossil fuels”.

Because the requested figures are missing, they cannot be reported accurately from this source. Supplying an exact number or emissions share would require another source or the omitted continuation of the article. The article instead focuses on COP31’s negotiation priorities and the positions of countries and UN negotiating blocs.

COP31 could affect countries that need resources to protect people from climate impacts or reduce greenhouse-gas emissions. Adaptation finance supports efforts to cope with climate change, while broader climate finance can support cleaner development and emissions reductions. The negotiations matter because developing countries say funding is central to both challenges.

For adaptation, countries are refining 59 indicators for the global goal on adaptation. Developing countries stress that finance must fund adaptation, not merely measure progress. They also want reassurances about a pledge made last year to triple adaptation finance. For wider climate finance, they seek stronger public contributions under Article 9.1.

An agreement could improve funding commitments, access or financial flows. It could also leave unresolved disputes over who pays and how much. The source notes aid-budget cuts and pressure on multilateral development banks to drop climate objectives, making COP31 outcomes especially consequential for countries seeking support.

Climate negotiations address mitigation, adaptation, finance and fairness together because they describe different parts of the same problem. Mitigation tackles greenhouse-gas emissions and future warming. Adaptation helps countries deal with impacts already occurring. Finance can make both actions possible, while fairness concerns responsibilities and unequal capacity.

The article shows these links in practice. Developing countries want finance for adaptation and emissions-reduction efforts. They also want developed countries’ responsibilities to remain central in discussions of financial flows. The proposed just transition mechanism adds another fairness question: how economies can become cleaner without ignoring the costs of change.

Negotiators therefore face connected choices rather than separate ones. A mitigation programme may need support, adaptation goals may require funding, and financial rules may depend on views about responsibility. At COP31, disagreements over finance, adaptation indicators, the mitigation work programme and the just transition mechanism all remain unresolved.