A summary of WTO jurisprudence on "arbitrary or unjustifiable discrimination" and "disguised restriction" that may inform how this text is interpreted: www.wto.org/english/trat...

COLOMBIA: "[We] raised a point of order before the mitigation work programme (MWP) was gavelled and that point of order was ignored."

HOLY SEE gets booed for its statement on gender and climate.

"...any reference to gender-related terms in any document that has been or that will be adopted by the COP or its subsidiary bodies is to be understood as grounded on the biological sexual identity that is male and female."

PANAMA: "Saying these indicators create no financial obligations when we all know that the GGA and adaptation plans cannot move w/o finance makes the entire exercise meaningless.

We do not accept the decision. We understand that maybe our hand was not seen, but we raised our 🇵🇦 before the decision."

PANAMA: "We spent weeks being paralyzed over issues, and now in this plenary, process is not being followed. We cannot endorse a GGA (adaptation) outcome that takes us backwards."

In a year when:
- tariffs, taxes dominated headlines
- countries reported impacts
- Brazil – part of BASIC that tried to get trade measures on the COP agenda 2yrs in a row – is host...

...countries could finally get a bigger stage to talk trade in the UNFCCC, outside the "response measures" forum.

It also requests the UN's subsidiary bodies to:

- to hold 3 dialogues on trade barriers, opportunities and challenges between 2026-28, with countries + WTO, UNCTAD and ITO.
- AND 🆕 a high-level event in 2028 for countries to exchange experiences and views on climate, trade and cooperation.

The mutirão text 3.0 text (L):

- retains a reference from the previous draft to Article 3.5 of the original climate convention (R).
unfccc.int/files/essent...

+ @brandoncwu.bsky.social on mutirão 2.0:

"We don’t even know what 2025 levels are. We won’t know that for 2 yrs. Already estimates from Oxfam + others that because of foreign assistance cuts, adaptation finance levels are going to be significantly lower in 2025 than they have been in years past."

On the key "tripling adaptation finance" pledge – the target is now for 2035, not 2030.

Also, as Aruna notes – from what levels?

The previous text specified that this was from a 2025 baseline, but that has been deleted... Now this is possibly open to interpretation?

bsky.app/profile/arun...

HT and follow @mollylempriere.carbonbrief.org – who has been following adaptation negotiations from day 0 – for clearer takes and reactions to the texts.

"urges developed country Parties to increase the trajectory of their collective provision of climate finance for adaptation"

- "urges" might be strong, but runs up against "calls for efforts"
- doesn't necessarily mean developed countries *have to* 3x adaptation finance under the $300bn goal

On "calls for efforts to at least" 3x adaptation finance/2035:
- "calls for efforts" is weak
- from what levels?
- "in the context of" the new climate finance goal, goalpost for tripling just got shifted to 2035 from 2030
- *para 16 NCQG: increase public resources to UN funds, 3x outflows