COP30, hosted in Belém at the edge of the Amazon, closed with a mixed but meaningful package: countries agreed to scale climate finance, advance adaptation, and launch new implementation initiatives—yet they stopped short of a formal commitment to transition away from fossil fuels.

Brazil’s leadership brought forests, land use and inclusion to the fore, underscoring the Amazon’s centrality to global climate stability.

“Climate action is urgent, and yet you leave the conference with reservations,” notes Felipe Borschiver, Partnerships for Forests (P4F) Head of Latin America, who attended the annual conference. That sentiment captured a widely reported reality: progress on finance and adaptation indicators, but no consensus on fossil fuel phaseout.

P4F, a UK-funded programme which mobilises investments into the protection and restoration of tropical forests, had a sizeable presence at the conference where the team officially launched their latest work in Latin America.

Holding the Line

COP30 unfolded during a tense geopolitical moment. The United States, along with several major emitters’ leaders absent were absent—the first time the USA had missed a COP. The outcome text (the “global mutirão” decision) emphasised multilateral cooperation, adaptation metrics and a just transition mechanism, while deferring the hardest energy decisions to voluntary “roadmaps.” “Outcomes were mixed… It could’ve been much worse. At least we held the line in some instances,” Borschiver adds.

“We won’t be able to get oil-producing countries to commit to a phase-out of fossil fuels unless we can offer them a reasonable development package. We're all in this together.”

That framing matches COP30’s focus on finance architecture, including calls to mobilise US$1.3 trillion annually by 2035, and to triple adaptation finance, alongside new Global Implementation Accelerator and Belém Mission to 1.5°C initiatives.

Pushing on Forest and Land Use Finance

A standout theme across the conference was Brazil’s climate finance leadership for forests and land use. The government formally launched the Tropical Forests Forever Facility (TFFF) to reward countries that keep forests standing, with early sponsor commitments—Norway ($3bn), Brazil and Indonesia ($1bn each)—and endorsements from dozens of forest nations.

“Brazil delivered a lot on new financial instruments and public resources are actually flowing,” he adds.

TFFF aims to mobilise up to US$125bn blending public and private capital, with satellite verified forest payments and a 20% share intended for Indigenous and local communities. Some reports note pledges are growing but still below full rollout needs, with estimates of US$6.7bn sponsor capital secured by the close of COP30.

Beyond TFFF, COP30 saw Brazil and partners advance land restoration finance, including the Resilient Agriculture Investment for Net Zero Land Degradation (RAIZ) accelerator to unlock investment in degraded farmland—building on Brazil’s Green Way and EcoInvest mechanisms.

“Programmes that matured over the last five to ten years are scaling, and investors are starting to realize the impact effectiveness they’ve been looking for,” he adds, reflecting broader coverage of value for money scrutiny in forest finance.

Bringing All to the Table

Belém was notable for record Indigenous participation and a visible presence of community cooperatives across both Blue and Green Zones. “The people of the Amazon were there and represented in the blue zone, green zone and the houses around Belém,” he notes.

Official reports cite ~5,000 Indigenous participants, new territorial protections, and multi country commitments on land tenure—including targets to strengthen or recognise 63 million hectares in Brazil and 29 million in Colombia by 2030.

“There was a lot of focus on social bioeconomy,” he adds. Which tracks along Brazil’s announcements to boost Amazon bioeconomy cooperatives and the launch of the Bioeconomy Challenge, now part of the COP Action Agenda. “Bioeconomy is part of the land use puzzle,” explains Borschiver. “As an industry, we’re still understanding how to deal with these projects and bring them to scale. but there are interesting initiatives that seek to plug them into more established value-chains, such as the Bioeconomy Park of the State of Pará.”

But bioeconomy is just a part of the puzzle. Any meaningful conversation around deforestation has to include agribusinesses. Borschiver adds that though ‘big agro’ was excluded from the Blue Zone, they had a sizeable presence in the unofficial areas of COP, with hundreds of industry stakeholders present, and a privately funded “Agrizone” near the venue. “There were good exchanges happening,” he adds. “Negotiators were able to see firsthand what regenerative agriculture systems look like and I think that has a huge impact on the way the land-use sector is perceived on the broader climate agenda.”

Markets Moving, Policy Lagging

Looking ahead, Borschiver expresses pragmatic optimism. “It’s hard to be hopeful on the policy side, especially with multilateralism under threat.”
But, on the other hand, he says that the private sector’s role is changing.

“In some countries it’s cheaper now to generate energy from solar than any other way. Maybe we are in one of those moments where markets lead before policy follows.”

Bottom line: COP30 did not deliver sweeping fossil fuel commitments, but it advanced climate finance, adaptation, and forest-centered initiatives, amplified Amazonian voices, and signaled a shift toward investable land use solutions. As Borschiver concludes, “Energised? Yes, I’m sure that for everyone working in the land use sectors it was a positive experience.”