30/06/2026
Caritas Zambia staff attended the 64th Session of the UNFCCC Subsidiary Bodies (SB64), which was held in June 2026 in Bonn, Germany. The conference served as the primary negotiating session ahead of COP31 in Antalya, Tรผrkiye, and was intended to translate the political outcomes of COP30 in Belรฉm into implementable decisions. Caritas had great expectations for the SB64, which produced modest technical progress but limited political breakthroughs. While negotiations advanced on several institutional issues, major disagreements over adaptation, finance, mitigation, and equity meant that many of the most important decisions were postponed to COP31 in November 2026
Implications for Africa and Zambia
For African countries, including Zambia, several issues emerging from SB64 were particularly significant:
1) Global Goal on Adaptation (GGA) finance: Consideration of adaptation financing has been the cry of African countries, particularly Zambia. However, there has been limited progress, which means continued uncertainty over resources for climate-resilient agriculture, energy, water management and disaster preparedness.
2) Just transition: Caritas Zambia hoped to have clear conclusive agreements on how Just Transition Mechanism (JTM) will address structural challenges by supporting transitions across key sectors such as energy, agriculture, transport, and mining; ensuring labour rights and social protection; Recognizing and redistributing unpaid and under paid work, largely carried by women; advancing equitable access to land, territories, and natural resources, including through agroecology and redistributive policies; therefore there is need to ensure that there is progress that offers an opportunity to advocate for financing and support for workers and communities affected by the transition from carbon-intensive sectors.
3) Climate technology: Continued operation of the Climate Technology Centre provides ongoing access to technical assistance and technology transfer.
4) Loss and Damage: The absence of major decisions underscores the need for African negotiators to continue pressing for adequate capitalisation and operationalisation of the Loss and Damage Fund. This makes African countries more vulnerable to any form of shocks related to climate change despite being the least contributors to the effects.
5) Climate finance: The persistent gap between commitments and delivery reinforces African demands for increased, accessible and grant-based climate finance to implement Nationally Determined Contributions (NDCs) and National Adaptation Plans (NAPs).
6) Paris Agreement Article 6.8 (non-market approaches, NMAs): Article 6.8 defines a framework for NMAs, which aim to assist Parties in the implementation of their NDCs and to promote mitigation and adaptation ambition, in the context of sustainable development and poverty eradication. Unfortunately, no clear roadmap was reached during the SB 64 on how NMAs will help vulnerable countries to implement NDCs so as to achieve mitigation and adaptation ambitions.
In short, the SB64 succeeded in preserving momentum on technical and institutional mattersโparticularly just transition, technology and capacity-buildingโbut it did not resolve the core political disputes over climate finance, adaptation and mitigation. Those unresolved issues have now become central priorities for negotiations at COP31 in Antalya.
