Increasingly, the Bonn Conference is proving to be less of a technical meeting and more of a political one, where attempts at trade-offs, threats, and blocking of discussion are beginning to hinder the process, starting with clashes over the adoption of the meeting's agenda itself. This has made it a meeting with more procedural decisions that fail to reach consensus on technical aspects that will facilitate things during the two weeks of negotiations in Dubai. Unfortunately. But on many items on the negotiation agenda, it is possible to see the discussion progressing, with the parties expressing their positions and the elements of a COP decision somewhat more clearly outlined in an "informal note," which is a way of recording a "memory of the meeting," so we spend less time listening to repeated speeches at the COP.

The Bonn Conference could have done much more to pave the way for COP 28, but perhaps this is also a sign of the times, that climate discussions are becoming increasingly complex and politicized. In this new phase of implementing the Paris Agreement, the conversations are becoming real and difficult: what to do with NDCs that don't work for the necessary level of ambition? Who will foot the bill for implementing the Paris Agreement? These are the discussions permeating all instances and all rooms of negotiations, from workshops to technical dialogues.

Mitigation and Agenda Adoption: Once again, the Bonn Conference is plagued by agenda clashes! This time, the consequences were almost disastrous, potentially rendering the two weeks of work in Bonn practically useless. As you know, the first thing to do before starting a working meeting is for everyone to agree on the agenda, the list of issues to be discussed. The European Union requested that the discussion of the Mitigation Work Programme be included on the agenda, although there was clearly no mandate from the previous COP for the topic to be addressed at this Bonn interim meeting, but only directly at COP 28 and other workshops throughout the year. For the EU, however, discussing the issue now, in preparation for the COP, was fundamental. The group of developing countries (G77) argued that there are other priority agendas, and, in response, proposed bringing in a new agenda item on financing, complaining that the issue of financing is also fundamental and was not properly included on the agenda. Only on the eve of the conference's end did the parties decide to compromise and ultimately adopt the agenda without the new mitigation and financing items. Despite the lack of agreement among the countries on the meeting's agenda, four rounds of negotiations were held on the Mitigation Program. The topic of mitigation was also addressed incidentally in other agenda items, such as Just Transition, response measures, and the global assessment of the Paris Agreement.

Adaptation: Within the theme of adaptation, there were at least 4 agenda items, but the highlight was the discussions on the global adaptation target. A program initiated at the Glasgow COP established a deadline of 2024 for defining a Global Adaptation Target. However, progress in reaching this definition, the metrics to be considered, and how to measure the achievement of this target over time has been very slow. At the Bonn Conference, developing countries brought more concrete proposals on how to measure this adaptation objective, but encountered much resistance from developed countries. It was only on the closing day of the Conference that the parties managed to reach an agreement to take an informal document containing the views expressed by the countries during the meeting to COP 28, to serve as a starting point for discussions in Dubai. This informal text includes, among other things, proposals on how to develop the global adaptation target, its indicators and metrics, and global adaptation priorities.

Loss and Damage: The only item on the formal negotiation agenda regarding loss and damage at the Bonn Conference was the operationalization of the so-called Santiago Network on Loss and Damage, a platform that will connect and catalyze technical assistance from different stakeholders to help countries and communities suffering climate loss and damage. The biggest point of discussion within this agenda was the question of who would assume the secretariat of this initiative, which will have the role of coordinating the Network. The candidates were, on one side, the proposal presented by the Caribbean Development Bank – a request from the Latin American and Caribbean region, which does not usually receive or host bodies and agencies linked to the UN or the UNFCCC specifically – and, on the other, the proposal from the consortium between two organizations of the UN system: UNDRR and UNOPS. It was also expected that the parties would discuss the arrangements necessary for the operationalization of the Network, and define paths to be followed from there. Until literally the last minute, this was a very divisive issue, and unfortunately, it was not possible to reach a consensus. The continuation of this discussion and decision-making was postponed to COP 28, with reference to the draft document reflecting these discussions in the footnote.

Just Transition: The discussion on the newly created Just Transition Work Programme was productive, with much engagement from the parties, but still with very different positions on the very definition and scope of just transition work within the UNFCCC. The topic ends up being somewhat confused with the "response measures" agenda, which deals with the impacts resulting from the implementation of policies, programs and mitigation actions by the Parties to combat climate change, which can often cause economic and commercial losses to developing countries. Thus, this is an agenda that could also be understood as related to a right of developing countries to a just transition, recognizing the gradual nature of their economic diversification process. This agenda includes issues such as recent initiatives for border carbon taxes, such as the European Union's CBAM. Regarding the agenda item on Response Measures, it was decided that any overlaps between activities related to the topic of response measures – including within the Katowice Response Measures Committee – and activities in the Just Transition Work Programme will be addressed within the agenda of the response measures work plan at COP28. Finally, the discussions were recorded in an informal note, which will serve as the basis for the start of negotiations for the adoption of a decision at COP28. In addition, another workshop will be held the week before COP28, involving parties and observers.

Transparency: The agenda items on transparency at the Bonn Conference concerned the needs of developing countries to carry out their reporting under the Climate Convention and the Paris Agreement. The objective was to promote a discussion on the need to improve financial support, capacity building, and technology transfer so that developing countries can submit their reports, especially the Biannual Transparency Report (BTR), which is the new reporting modality introduced by the Paris Agreement, more robust and challenging for developing countries, and which must be submitted by the end of 2024. The Bonn Conference focused primarily on how to improve access, flows, and procedures for financing to ensure rapid and continuous access to these resources. No conclusions were reached on this topic at the Bonn Conference, and the matter was referred to COP28 without any formal progress.

Carbon markets: Discussions on Article 6 of the Paris Agreement at the Bonn Conference focused on highly technical aspects of designing the authorization, transfer, registration, and traceability process for ITMOs and Article 6.4 Emission Reductions; as well as the reporting process for these transactions and the corresponding adjustments, and how this information will be reviewed and made transparent. Specifically regarding the Article 6.4 Mechanism – which is intended to succeed the Clean Development Mechanism – the technical discussion is more contained within the work of the Supervisory Body, which approves projects, methodologies, and the issuance of Article 6.4 Emission Reductions. This body held its third meeting of the year a few days before the start of the Bonn Conference and is expected to present its recommendations on the development of methodologies and the consideration of GHG removal activities to the COP at the end of the year. The conclusion of the work in Bonn was marked by the definition of a series of additional technical activities in preparation for the adoption of decisions at the COP, including technical reports to be produced by the Secretariat, an online workshop, and accepted submissions from parties and observers on these topics, as well as the preparation of a guidance manual for completing the reports and the progress of the capacity-building program on Article 6 being developed by the UNFCCC Secretariat. Considering the relationships between the market instruments of Articles 6.2 and 6.4 – the authorization process, which occurs in both instruments; and the connection between the registration of Article 6.2 and the registration of Article 6.4 – it was decided that there will be joint sessions to discuss these topics from the perspective of both Article 6.2 and Article 6.4, before and during COP 28. The diverse opinions of the countries on how these flows and the content of the reports and review activities should function were incorporated into an informal note. Based on this note and the results of all this technical work, the president of SBSTA was asked to prepare an informal document outlining a proposed decision to be adopted at COP28. In other words, at COP28 the matter should be revisited with significant progress towards having a draft decision for negotiation between the parties.

Financing: The only item on the negotiating agenda specifically involving climate finance was the second review of the functions of the Standing Committee on Finance, whose main function is to assist the Conference of the Parties on climate finance, seeking to strengthen the body and identify opportunities for improvement. The UNFCCC Secretariat was tasked with preparing a report evaluating the Committee's structure and the work carried out to date. Discussions in Bonn aimed to consider possible additional recommendations for the work to be conducted by the Secretariat. Some additional recommendations included consideration of gender and geographic representation of Committee members; workload and delivery time; the Committee's interaction with other constituted bodies and stakeholders, as well as transparency in decision-making processes. In parallel, the 6th Technical Dialogue on the New Quantified Global Target for climate finance took place, the objective of which is to identify elements to establish the amount of climate finance needed to achieve the objectives of the Paris Agreement. A summary of the discussions will be reported and forwarded to COP 28 in Dubai for evaluation of the work. One of the main points of divergence in these dialogues was whether the target should consider the volume of financial resources originating from the private sector, with clear opposition between developed and developing countries. On the one hand, it was argued that the private sector is not a signatory to the Paris Agreement, which exclusively assigns the obligation to bear the burden of climate financing to developed countries. On the other hand, the regulatory power of the State to mobilize the private sector to contribute to international climate finance efforts was emphasized.

Global Stocktake: The Global Stocktake on the implementation of the Paris Agreement is a key topic on the UNFCCC agenda this year, as the first Global Stocktake will be concluded at COP 28, an unprecedented experience in the negotiations. The objective is to take stock of the collective progress of countries in implementing their commitments and to understand what else is needed. The results should inform future actions by countries within the Paris Agreement, including the updating of their NDCs. In Bonn, the last technical dialogue was concluded. These dialogues take place through roundtables, workshops, and various forms of engagement. At the same time, the Global Stocktake was an agenda item in the negotiations, to define the format of the outcome of this process and how it should be operationalized to effectively ensure that the Parties will consider the results of the Global Stocktake in updating their NDCs. One of the biggest points of divergence was how financing should be reflected in this draft, linking it to the objective of Article 2.1.c of the Paris Agreement, which deals more broadly with the transformation of financial flows towards decarbonization and climate resilience. Ultimately, the parties agreed to recognize a document with a preliminary indicative framework for the decision to be adopted at COP 28, including options on how the financing issue could be addressed.