As Brazil braces to welcome around 50,000 people to the Amazonian city of Belém for COP30, the United Nations’ annual climate conference, a rising tide of diplomats, scientists, and activists are asking an uncomfortable question: have climate summits become too large, too corporate, and too contradictory to drive real progress?
From landmark accords to logistical headaches
The Conference of the Parties (COP) began modestly in Berlin in 1995, uniting nations under the U.N. Framework Convention on Climate Change to forge agreements aimed at cutting greenhouse gas emissions. Over the years, the process has delivered pivotal moments—most notably the Paris Agreement of 2015, a global pact binding countries to set and pursue emissions reduction goals.
But as the world edges closer to climate tipping points, frustration has mounted over what many see as COP’s bloated scale and waning effectiveness. COP28 in Dubai drew a record-breaking 85,000 accredited participants, more than double the number who attended Paris. This year’s conference, to be held from November 10–21, expects over 55,000 attendees in a city with only 18,000 hotel rooms.
“The feeling is that this has become too mega,” remarks Benito Müller, Managing Director of Oxford Climate Policy and co-author of a paper proposing a COP redesign. “We have so many distractions from the actual negotiations and knowledge sharing.”
Belém’s unequal burden
Chosen for its symbolic proximity to the Amazon rainforest, Belém offers the world a powerful visual of both ecological wonder and inequality. The city of 1.3 million residents, one of Brazil’s poorest state capitals, lies at the frontline of climate injustice: those least responsible for emissions often bear the harshest consequences.
Yet, the scramble to prepare Belém has deepened local inequities. Reports of tenant evictions, tree cutting for highway projects, and sewage diversion into poor neighborhoods have sparked outrage among local activists.
“It’s anathema to everything the climate conference represents,” says Cláudio Angelo, Coordinator of International Policy at Brazil’s Climate Observatory. “In trying to showcase climate progress, we are repeating the same social and environmental harms we claim to fight.”
When the green stage becomes a corporate arena
Critics argue that COP’s growth has turned the event into a sprawling trade fair rather than a climate summit. Oil executives have presided over the last two conferences in autocratic petro-states, while corporate sponsorships raise eyebrows. At COP27 in Egypt, for instance, Coca-Cola—one of the world’s top plastic polluters—served as a sponsor.
Meanwhile, activists lament that behind the glossy pavilions and green branding, negotiations crawl along, producing few binding outcomes. The spectacle of thousands flying across the world to discuss carbon cuts feels paradoxical, especially as developing nations struggle to accommodate the influx.
Rethinking the model
Experts like Müller propose a structural overhaul. His plan: split COP into three parts—one for core negotiations, one for the heads of state summit, and another for the expo-style side events featuring civil society and corporations. These could be held separately or integrated into existing regional climate gatherings to reduce logistical burdens and emissions.
Some, like Cláudio Angelo, go further, suggesting that COP need not be annual at all, arguing that the focus should now shift from negotiating new agreements to implementing existing commitments at national levels.
Others in the movement, including Tobias Holle from the Global Campaign to Demand Climate Justice (DCJ), support slimming down the event but insist reforms must prioritize human rights protections for delegates and host communities alike. “We need fewer distractions and stronger guarantees,” he says.
“Make COP boring again”?
Among negotiators and civil society alike, there’s a growing sentiment—half-serious, half-strategic—to “make COP boring again.” As Flávia Bellaguarda, co-founder of the Latin American Climate Lawyers Initiative for Mobilizing Action (LACLIMA), puts it, “We need to return to substance, not spectacle.”
Bellaguarda, who has attended the last seven COPs, believes civil society’s presence remains crucial. “COP must not vanish,” she insists. “Its strength lies in convening diverse voices—from grassroots movements to policymakers—to push for accountability.”
Despite the disillusionment, many still see COP as indispensable. “It is much more efficient to get results if everyone meets in one place,” says Müller. “But we must remember why we meet in the first place—to act, not just to gather.”
A moment of reckoning before Belém
As the world’s eyes turn to the Amazon, COP30 faces a test of credibility. Can it prove that the largest gathering of climate negotiators on Earth still matters in a world hurtling toward ecological crisis? Or will it become another symbol of the climate movement’s contradictions—massive in scale, yet modest in results?
One thing is certain: the call for reform is no longer coming from the fringes. It’s echoing through the very halls of the summit itself.
