COP30 and the Limits of Gender-Responsive Climate Action
By Luisa Orozco
A milestone years in the making
The world’s most important climate meeting this year, COP30, took place in Belém, Brazil, from November 10–21. Feminist advocates followed the negotiations closely, including Tara Daniel, Associate Director of Policy at WEDO, and Niona Nakuya, Gender, Health and Environment Lead at Regenerate Africa.
At COP30, countries approved the Belém Gender Action Plan, a nine-year framework intended to finally operationalize the UNFCCC’s gender program. For feminist movements that have spent years pushing for gender-responsive climate policy, the decision marked a significant milestone.
The final text includes important advances. It recognizes communities historically excluded from climate decision-making, calls for safeguards to protect women environmental defenders, and allows governments to submit information on long-neglected issues such as care work, health, and violence against women and girls.
Where the agreement fell short
Despite these gains, the negotiations exposed persistent limitations.
One of the most contested issues was whether the plan would explicitly reference sexual and reproductive health and rights (SRHR). According to Tara and Niona, discussions were intense, but SRHR did not survive into the final text. What remained was a vague reference to “health,” softened by the familiar “as appropriate” language — wording that fails to reflect the lived realities of women and girls and weakens the connection between SRHR, public health, and climate adaptation.
There were also broader concerns about ambition. Even with clearer timelines and strengthened deliverables, many coalitions felt the agreement did not go far enough. “We didn’t achieve everything we wanted,” Tara noted.
National submissions: the next battleground
The approval of the plan opens an important next phase: national submissions. Governments are now expected to outline how they understand gender–climate linkages, what data they have, and which priorities they plan to pursue.
For civil society, researchers, and local movements, this stage offers a critical opportunity to bring forward both qualitative and quantitative evidence that shows how climate impacts are experienced differently across contexts — and whose realities are still being sidelined.
Progress beyond the negotiating rooms
Outside the formal negotiations, there were signs of movement. The COP30 action agenda continued the health-and-climate work initiated at COP28, where SRHR had been explicitly recognized.
Niona, who engaged actively in these spaces, stressed that embedding SRHR into national adaptation plans and sectoral strategies is essential. It is not an “add-on,” she argues — it is central to resilience.
Financing remains the missing piece
The most enduring obstacle remains climate finance. Several developed countries walked back from key commitments, leaving a system that still does not match the scale of implementation required. As Tara put it plainly: “Reforming the climate finance architecture is urgent. Without resources, there is no gender-responsive climate action.”
A shrinking political space
Both advocates emphasized that defending gender equality and SRHR is inseparable from demanding ambitious climate action. Yet the political environment is increasingly hostile. In Belém, conservative governments attempted to weaken even basic gender language — sometimes through footnotes or diluted phrasing. Countering this backlash, and naming it clearly, will be central to the work ahead.
Turning commitments into reality
Regenerate Africa, for example, is conducting new research across eight countries to document how gender, health, and climate intersect on the ground. The goal is to generate evidence that can support national policymaking and strengthen international advocacy.
COP30 delivered a gender action plan on paper. What comes next is the real test: turning commitments into policy, financing, and data, without replacing sexual and reproductive health and rights with euphemisms, and without ignoring the inequalities climate action claims to address.