Launch of Just Transition Mechanism Anticipated at COP31 in Antalya
Among the significant outcomes expected from the forthcoming COP31 climate summit in Antalya, Turkey, is the introduction of a “just transition mechanism.” This initiative arises from ongoing advocacy by civil society for equitable support as nations transition to low-emission energy systems and reduce reliance on fossil fuels.
At last year’s COP30 climate conference in Belém, Brazil, parties reached an agreement to create the “Belém-Antalya mechanism” (BAM) aimed at facilitating this transition. Advocates envision the BAM as a pivotal hub for just transition efforts, offering essential support to workers and communities globally.
Despite the enthusiasm, the specific details regarding the BAM’s structure and functions remain unclear, with ongoing disagreements among developed and developing nations about its purpose and operation. Tensions were evident at the UN climate discussions held in Bonn in June 2026, particularly concerning financing options for the mechanism.
This report will examine the origins of the BAM, its potential role in supporting just transitions, and what stakeholders can expect during COP31.
Historical Context of Just Transition in UN Climate Talks
The concept of a “just transition” advocates for the fair treatment of workers and communities affected by the shift to a low-carbon economy, emphasizing climate justice. While it often highlights those employed in the fossil fuel sector, the term also encompasses transitions in agriculture, heavy industries, and other sectors.
Rooted in the 1980s, the idea gained traction as labor unions collaborated with environmental justice movements, evolving into a significant element of international climate negotiations. The preamble of the 2015 Paris Agreement acknowledges the need to consider a “just transition of the workforce” while fostering decent work and quality jobs as aligned with national development priorities.
Bert De Wel, a policy officer at the International Trade Union Confederation (ITUC), remarked that the labor movement is encouraged by widespread political support for this concept since its inception. The acknowledgment in the Paris Agreement is viewed as a pivotal achievement, although continued emphasis on the labor aspect of just transitions remains crucial.
During COP24 in Katowice, Poland, discussions centered on just transitions, culminating in the “Silesia declaration,” which underscored the necessity for policies that promote decent work and quality jobs. Despite being signed by only 50 countries, the declaration garnered attention in the final conference outcomes and laid the groundwork for future engagements, including a formal agreement at COP27 in Egypt to initiate a “work programme on just transition” (JTWP).
Although the JTWP has made progress, it has faced significant disagreements regarding its intended focus and scope. While developed nations favor concentrating on local workforces, other nations call for a broader global perspective, especially concerning transitions in developing countries. Negotiations at COP29 in 2024 concluded without consensus, leading observers to express disappointment. Nonetheless, COP30’s agreement to establish the BAM was celebrated as a notable success for civil society.
Origin of the Just Transition Mechanism
Leading up to COP30, civil society advocated for the creation of an institutional framework to advance the JTWP from theoretical discussions to tangible actions. Initially dubbed the “Belém action mechanism,” it was later updated to the “Belém-Antalya mechanism” following COP30’s outcomes. The JTWP’s official documentation refers to it simply as a “mechanism,” also described informally as the “just transition mechanism.”
Anabella Rosemberg, a senior advisor on just transition at Climate Action Network (CAN) International, emphasizes that the mechanism arose from collaboration among various grassroots organizations—including trade unions, youth groups, and Indigenous communities—focusing on broadening just transition strategies. The ongoing JTWP activities indicated that dialogues alone could not effectively implement practical just-transition strategies, prompting calls for a new, actionable framework.
Dr. Leon Sealey-Huggins, a senior campaigner with War on Want, noted the substantial efforts undertaken by civil society to enhance the mechanism’s profile, ranging from policy proposals and joint letters to the creation of promotional materials. As a result, the Bonn climate negotiations in June 2025 saw the introduction of the idea for a new institutional arrangement, potentially encompassing a variety of supportive functions.
The eventual approval of the BAM during COP30 highlights its significance for civil society, even as the parties acknowledged the need for further development of its structure and objectives. Ongoing advocacy efforts included public demonstrations and promotional materials at the conference, emphasizing the urgency for implementing the BAM.
Potential Functions of the Mechanism in Supporting Just Transitions
Proponents of the BAM argue it can effectively address the fragmented landscape of just transitions by centralizing support and facilitating cooperation among various stakeholders. Rosemberg asserts that the BAM’s potential lies in bringing together diverse actors to identify barriers, foster collaboration, and improve support systems for just transitions.
Recommendations from civil society outline a mechanism with three core components: a steering body, a “knowledge arm,” and an “implementation arm.” The steering body would oversee the coordination of ongoing efforts under the JTWP and recommend necessary negotiation topics to address identified gaps.
The implementation arm would serve as a hub for providing technical, financial, and knowledge-based support for just transition initiatives. Rosemberg envisions a system that goes beyond negotiations, enabling rapid resource mobilization and establishing dedicated groups to identify funding opportunities. Furthermore, the BAM could facilitate discussions that are informed by practitioners at the ground level, asserting that implementation need not be confined to the UNFCCC framework.
Alternate proposals for the BAM emphasize key functions such as coordination, knowledge generation, and fostering international cooperation. According to Sealey-Huggins, if effectively realized, the BAM could herald a significant wave of just-transition policies, aligning various sectors on a transformative path for equitable climate action.
Financial Considerations Surrounding the Mechanism
The discussion surrounding potential costs for the BAM raises concerns within UN climate negotiations. This initiative coincides with the UNFCCC’s struggle to address funding gaps following the withdrawal of significant contributors, prompting worries about the sustainability of new mechanisms. Some parties have expressed reservations about introducing another funding-dependent initiative within the existing climate architecture.
Advocates for the BAM assert that the costs associated with establishing it could be manageable, leveraging existing climate finance mechanisms. Rosemberg pointed out that similar institutions operate at relatively low costs, suggesting that a well-coordinated effort could efficiently utilize existing resources to implement just transitions without excessive financial burdens.
While emphasizing potential efficiencies, it has been argued that the benefits of such a mechanism warrant the investment, as evidenced by Sealey-Huggins, who highlighted that the prospective advantages far outweigh the establishment costs of the BAM.
Expectations for COP31 in Antalya
Despite the acknowledgment of creating a just-transition mechanism in Belém, climate negotiations in Bonn quickly encountered obstacles. Although a foundational draft text was produced, several critical details regarding the BAM’s functioning remain unresolved as the parties head to Antalya.
De Wel cautioned that promptly approving COP31’s agenda would be crucial for facilitating constructive negotiations. He stressed the urgency for collaborative action among major country blocs to ensure progress. Submissions to the UNFCCC have called for a series of initial meetings to establish a “just-transition committee,” which is essential for the BAM’s functioning.
Support has emerged from various negotiating groups, including the Alliance of Small Island States (AOSIS) and the least developed countries (LDCs), advocating for a mechanism focused on implementation. The EU has expressed backing for the BAM while emphasizing the need for it to complement existing frameworks.
As calls for finance-centric discussions continue to resonate, Sealey-Huggins articulated an ideal scenario for COP31, where the mechanism garners equitable resources and effectively includes stakeholder participation. He envisions immediate implementation to commence post-COP31, establishing the groundwork for tangible action in achieving just transitions.
However, Rosemberg expressed reservations about the forthcoming presidencies’ ambition levels, emphasizing the necessity for parties to engage in meaningful dialogues to ensure the mechanism meets its intended objectives.
Discussion about this post