SDG News’ Heeta Lakhani interviews IISD Policy Advisor Jeffrey Qi on stalled adaptation negotiations, the global goal on adaptation and why hallway diplomacy may decide this COP’s outcome.
Belém — By mid-afternoon on Wednesday, the summit’s pace had shifted. Negotiators were walking faster, conversations were sharper, and the COP30 Presidency had begun taking control of the agenda items that failed to conclude in Week 1. In the middle of this pressure, SDG News Chief Correspondent Heeta Lakhani spoke with Jeffrey Qi, a Policy Advisor with the International Institute for Systemic Development (IISD), who has been following adaptation negotiations minute by minute.
The assessment he offered was direct: the world’s adaptation finance gap remains enormous, negotiations are stuck, and the outcome of COP30 may depend less on formal sessions than on what happens in the hallways.
“This is the COP Presidency Show now”
Asked where things stand at the midpoint of Week 2, Jeffrey Qi described the handover that happens at every COP — but with higher stakes this year.
“We’re now in what we call the COP week. This is the COP Presidency Show,” he said.
With unresolved files piling up, the presidency has taken over all the agenda items that didn’t finish in Week 1, pulling them into a compressed, high-pressure negotiation track.
Jeffrey Qi has been following two key areas:
- Indicators for the Global Goal on Adaptation (GGA)
- Assessment of progress on National Adaptation Plans (NAPs)
Both, he said, are facing “long-standing divergence of views” between countries that has now become visible inside the rooms.
“The COP Presidency is trying to find compromises, bridging proposals, and trying to make sure countries can agree on a consensus before the end of the week.”
Where the negotiations are stuck
When asked where the deadlock lies, Jeffrey didn’t hesitate:
“The main issue right now for adaptation is adaptation finance.”
He cited the latest UNEP Adaptation Gap Report (with the caveat that numbers should be verified directly), which puts the global adaptation finance gap at $280 to $319 billion per year.
The divide between countries is familiar but sharp:
- Developing countries stress the need for sufficient, accessible and predictable finance for national adaptation planning and implementation.
- Developed countries argue that public finance cannot fill the entire gap, and that private sector and innovative sources must be counted.
This tension affects how decisions are drafted on:
- finance
- capacity-building
- technology transfer
- and how responsibilities are framed
Jeffrey summed it up bluntly:
“How to ensure finance, capacity building and technology transfer language is in the decision — but also how those conversations are framed: is it only developed countries providing money? Or are there other sources that could support this adaptation finance gap?”
Linking adaptation to the new climate finance goal
Lakhani pressed further: how does last year’s New Collective Quantified Goal on Climate Finance (NCQG) shape adaptation outcomes?
Jeffrey Qi explained:
“The NCQG provided a public finance goal of $300 billion per year… from developed country to developing country directly.”
This pot of money, he said, could support:
- Nationally Determined Contributions (NDCs)
- National Adaptation Plans (NAP)
- Both planning and implementation
Beyond this, he noted the wider $1.3 trillion per year mobilisation goal, which includes private finance.
Here, insurers play a central role:
“Climate risk is investment risk,” he said.
And because of this, private capital — especially insurance — is increasingly relevant to resilience-building, livelihoods protection and biodiversity protection.
Why the number matters
Returning to the gap of $280–$319 billion, Jeffrey emphasized that this figure reflects:
- The amount of available public adaptation finance,
- Minus the actual adaptation needs of developing countries.
The result is stark:
many developing countries cannot complete their NAPs, and many adaptation actions already outlined remain unfunded.
Waiting for new text — and relying on the hallways
As the interview wrapped, the presidency was preparing to release another draft. Jeffrey was clear about what comes next:
“Negotiators should take a look to see if their positions are being reflected… and reiterate their positions to the presidency to make sure that at the end, everyone is able to find a compromise.”
But he added a reality that every seasoned negotiator recognizes:
“A lot of the main negotiation won’t really yield a lot of results. Countries need to talk to each other in the hallways to find a common ground they can actually land.”
In the world of climate diplomacy, this is often where breakthroughs occur — not in the formal sessions, but in the informal, unplanned conversations between delegates searching for landing zones.
IISD’s role at COP30
Heeta closed by asking about IISD’s work on the ground.
Jeffrey Qi explained that IISD supports countries’ National Adaptation Plan (NAP) processes through the NAP Global Network, offering:
- capacity-building
- technical support
- monitoring, evaluation and learning system development
IISD also follows the indicator work on the Global Goal on Adaptation, ensuring countries’ domestic systems can align with global expectations.
“We’re here to understand the global conversation on national adaptation plans,” he said, “and gently push countries toward a more ambitious and more robust decision at the COP summit.”
RELATED CONTENT:
Follow SDG News on LinkedIn
