Conferences

This paper analyses the European Union’s (EU) multi-level governance framework for
achieving zero-emission energy-intensive industries (EIIs). European EIIs face the dual challenge of
decarbonising in line with the EU’s climate targets while maintaining international competitiveness.
Addressing these challenges requires a comprehensive and coherent European industrial policy
approach. However, the development of thereof has been challenged by the EU’s complex multilevel governance structure, competing political interests, and a mismatch of competences. This
raises the question of how the governance of industrial transformation can be improved. To
address this question, this paper analyses how the existing governance framework interacts across
the EU and Member State level.

This official UNFCCC side event was hosted by Climate Strategies, Norway (Ministry of Climate and Environment), Chile (Scientific Advisory Committee on Climate Change), Wageningen University,  Instituto Torcuato Di Tella, and Wuppertal Institute for Climate, Environment and Energy.

Both the Paris Agreement’s ambition cycle and the Global Stocktake (GST) can strengthen and safeguard climate action amid current geopolitical fragmentation and increasing doubts in the multilateral system. This official UNFCCC side event at SB64 explored how the Paris Agreement’s ambition cycle can continue to drive climate ambition in an increasingly fragmented world, drawing on new research and country experiences to assess how GST outcomes and successive rounds of Nationally Determined Contributions (NDCs 3.0) are shaping ambition and implementation.

Background 
After over a decade since its adoption, the Paris Agreement remains the backbone of global climate cooperation. Its near-universal participation and iterative ambition cycle have proven remarkably resilient. Yet confidence in the multilateral system it created is increasingly under strain. Geopolitical tensions, shifting power dynamics and economic uncertainty are challenging international cooperation at a time when accelerated, collective action is critical to meet the Paris goals.

However, climate ambition does not develop in isolation. Recent evidence from the project The Pulling Power of Paris (PullP) project shows that climate ambition is highly interdependent across countries, particularly among peer groups with shared political systems, regional proximity, and other geopolitical convergences. At the same time, analyses of NDCs 3.0 reveal a more nuanced picture of ambition. Delays in the submission of NDCs raise important questions about the functioning of the cycle and the factors that constrain timely action. Beyond political ambition, domestic and procedural complexities, including coordination challenges and planning processes, play a critical role in shaping outcomes. Understanding how NDCs have evolved in depth and direction over time, and whether they are collectively aligned with long-term goals, remains a key priority.

On the other hand, emerging research from the ACCLIMATE project, shows that lessons from the GST can help clarify the collective ambition gap. The pressing policy challenge now is how global signals from the GST can be translated into credible and actionable domestic policies, and how these signals can be meaningfully integrated into national planning cycles and NDC updates.

This official side event brought together research and policy perspectives to reflect on the evolution of climate ambition across successive rounds of NDCs, focusing on practical levers to better align NDC and GST processes and improve coordination between global and national climate action. It explored how peer learning, regional dynamics, and international cooperation can sustain ambition over time, combining analytical insights with policy experience. The event aimed to generate forward-looking insights for the future of Paris Agreement cooperation, supporting more ambitious climate action and renewed confidence in multilateral governance.

The poster presentation "𝘈𝘥𝘷𝘢𝘯𝘤𝘪𝘯𝘨 𝘱𝘢𝘳𝘵𝘪𝘤𝘪𝘱𝘢𝘵𝘰𝘳𝘺 𝘮𝘰𝘥𝘦𝘭𝘭𝘪𝘯𝘨 𝘧𝘰𝘳 𝘤𝘭𝘪𝘮𝘢𝘵𝘦 𝘱𝘰𝘭𝘪𝘤𝘺 𝘢𝘴𝘴𝘦𝘴𝘴𝘮𝘦𝘯𝘵𝘴: 𝘵𝘰𝘸𝘢𝘳𝘥 𝘱𝘰𝘭𝘪𝘤𝘺-𝘳𝘦𝘭𝘦𝘷𝘢𝘯𝘵, 𝘤𝘰𝘯𝘷𝘦𝘳𝘴𝘢𝘵𝘪𝘰𝘯-𝘥𝘳𝘪𝘷𝘦𝘯 𝘤𝘭𝘪𝘮𝘢𝘵𝘦-𝘦𝘤𝘰𝘯𝘰𝘮𝘺 𝘮𝘰𝘥𝘦𝘭𝘭𝘪𝘯𝘨" narrates how co-authors structured an iterative, participatory process intended to integrate stakeholder inputs in IAM-based research to strengthen legitimacy and transparency of the scientific process, as well as the desirability of its results, and documents the outcomes, the challenges they faced, and possible ways forward.

While there is a growing chorus of voices calling for just sustainability transitions, structural North–South
inequalities are still rarely addressed systematically, leaving several blind spots. Much of the literature
on just transitions from the Global North, for instance, focuses on protecting jobs in industrialised
countries and mitigating the local impacts of extractive activities in the Global South. Yet it often
overlooks a more structural concern: the broader development trajectories of entire countries in the
South. Likewise, there are concerns that green transitions in the Global North are exacerbating a rush
for natural resources and the installation of renewable energy infrastructures in the peripheries of both the Global North and the Global South.

By focusing on concrete case studies from Latin America, Africa, and the Arctic region of Finnmark,
this session takes a closer look at what sustainability transitions mean in peripheral territories along
the North–South divide. Some of the questions addressed include: What do sustainability transitions
look like in territories marked by persistent fragmentation, violence, and institutional “absence”? What
can we learn from struggles for environmental justice in these contexts? And how can international
governance frameworks better promote fairness and equity in the global green transformation?

During the 30th Conference of the Parties (COP30) to the UN Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC), the Wuppertal Institute is organising a series of side events to present its findings and stimulate discussions with delegates, practitioners, and academia.

A particular focus will be placed on various strategies for meeting the objectives of the Paris Agreement, especially on the mitigation of greenhouse gas emissions. Thematic priorities include the role of global partnerships for climate-neutral and socially just futures, strengthening opportunities for youth participation in the global energy transition, and international carbon markets

This study contributes to ACCLIMATE Work Package 4 (WP4) by assessing the impacts of policies that influence agricultural commodity trade and the distribution of land uses within the AFOLU (Agriculture, Forestry, and Other Land Use) sector. The EU Deforestation Regulation (EUDR), often criticized for its unilateral adoption, has been identified by stakeholders as a key policy likely to shape future agricultural commodity trade and sectoral dynamics in AFOLU. By examining the EUDR’s potential effects on deforestation patterns and the long-term mitigation potential of the AFOLU sector, the study provides valuable insights into how such policies may affect global cooperation and climate mitigation outcomes.

The work is the result of a collaboration between BC3 and Roma Tre University, led by postdoc Francesco Carciolari.

This study aims to examine the potential of recovery packages to bridge the long-term climate ambition gap. To enable such comprehensive assessment, first it develops an open-access database taking stock of all announced green recovery measures. Second, these measures are explicitly translated into three Integrated Assessment Models, allowing the assessment of their implications for energy systems, emissions, and technology development globally in a dedicated scenario exercise. Third, it quantifies the missed opportunity in global recovery spending in terms of accelerating the clean energy transition, by exploring a theoretical reallocation of funding from energy affordability measures towards green technologies. Results suggest that, while current recovery funding may not be sufficient to boost climate efforts with sustained effects post-2030, redirecting part of the recovery funds to clean technologies could accelerate decarbonisation and electrification trends in some sectors. With or without altering the global COVID-19 recovery portfolio to a synthesis that is more favourable in energy transition terms, however, recovery funds alone cannot ensure a just and inclusive transition unless complemented by systemic reforms, targeted sectoral strategies, and international collaboration.