🔗 Share this article

Well. From one perspective, Australia's protracted campaign to host the Cop31 next year has concluded unsuccessfully.

The effort ran for more than three years for the privilege to put on the world's biggest environmental conference and sustainable business expo, which would have attracted tens of thousands of delegates to the South Australian capital next fall.

This won't occur. Rather, the conference known as the UN climate meeting is headed to the resort city of Antalya, on the Mediterranean coast of Turkey.

Disappointment and Conflicting Signals

This outcome will be a major let down to many people who had hoped hosting the climate carnival could help speed up the country's shift from being a fossil fuel economy to a renewable energy superpower, and bring international focus to the existential plight facing island countries in the Pacific, who would have been co-hosts.

The procedure that led to failure has been an unclear situation. In recent days, there have been questions that Anthony Albanese and other high-ranking officials really wanted the proposal to succeed. His statements were ambiguous at best. This led to reports in the Australian and international media saying the government was walking away.

This contrasted with the communication being relayed at the Cop30 talks in the Brazilian city, where the environment minister, Chris Bowen, had just declared the country was "in it to win it".

Uncertain support is not a new issue for the hosting proposal. Although Bowen championed it, other high-level figures of the government have only occasionally appeared to be interested.

The Department of Foreign Affairs and Trade, usually in charge for global environmental talks, has been disengaged and at times completely against.

There is little sign Albanese has viewed international climate meetings a important focus. He hasn't attended one since becoming prime minister in 2022. It's uncertain, but many may question if additional efforts were possible to get the bid over the line.

A Different Perspective

That's the negative take. But there is another way to look at it.

Considering the climate discussions this week in Brazil – and from an global viewpoint – the announcement on this week may, perversely, have been the most favorable outcome possible.

Bowen set out on Wednesday an unprecedented deal that he was developing with his colleague from Turkey, the Turkish minister. Turkey would be the conference leader, host and effective event manager, and Australia – the climate minister – would assume a role as "chief negotiator", managing nearly 200 countries on the matters that the countries actually turn up for – the discussions on how to together address the climate crisis.

There would also be a increased emphasis on the Pacific region, including a preliminary meeting on an Pacific island.

Grounds for Scepticism

Multiple reasons exist for doubt. The two nations do not have a close relationship. The details of the agreement had not been completed at the moment of announcement. The whole thing could collapse before it gets started.

But it could also be a way to recover value from what appeared to be an impending disaster for the multilateral work on global warming.

Turkey is widely seen in the global community as having been hellbent on creating disruption in the UN climate process. The system is designed to operate by unanimous agreement. Usually, that means if there are multiple countries in the race those with weaker backing either withdraw gracefully, or a compromise is quietly done to persuade them to step aside.

The Turkish bid clearly had weaker endorsement than Australia and Pacific islands to host Cop31. At least 24 of the 28 countries responsible for selecting next year's host had backed the southern pitch.

But, exceptionally, Ankara refused to yield. The term "disruption" has been used frequently in the past week, and not just by Australians.

Geopolitical Context

Ankara's stubbornness can be interpreted as a manifestation of the fracturing geopolitical climate. With the US absent under Donald Trump, there has been no dominant nation with the influence to confront the petroleum exporters that offered the Turkish government with certain protection.

The Turkish president is seen as aligned with the Russian leader. Several nations worried about a conference hindered from the leadership if his government managed the discussions. Germany did not want to have to organize an underprepared Cop31 at the UN environmental office in the German city, which is what would have occurred under UN rules if the deadlock wasn't resolved.

An Innovative Approach

A path through was needed. International frameworks is imperfect and often disconcerting to watch, but global cooperation has demonstrably had an impact in the battle with climate change. This joint approach is a innovative solution that keeps that going when it is needed more than ever.

Notwithstanding understandable criticism of the federal administration over its hypocritical support for increasing carbon-based exports, environmental advocates who participate in international meetings see the minister as a positive influence in the negotiations. He has been asked to lead negotiation streams at each of the four conferences he has attended.

This is significant. Although some have dismissed the role of a "chief negotiator", experts from academic institutions and veteran observers at environmental negotiations say it is crucial to their success.

"Every successful Cop has been shaped by a leader holding the pen who can understand, build consensus and achieve an ambitious outcome. We saw that in the German capital in 1995, in Cancún in 2010 and the French capital in 2015. The reverse happened in the Danish city in 2009," they note. "It's the most important role at the Cop except for making sure that delegates are fed."

Remaining Concerns

There are plenty of unanswered questions. As an illustration, non-governmental organizations is essential at environmental summits. What, if anything, can the federal administration do to prevent a restriction on civil society by the host government?

Possibly little. But that doesn't stop this deal looking like the most promising opportunity possible to have a conference that may provide benefits for the Pacific, Australia and the world. It's worth a try.