COP31 at the Crossroads: Security, Development and the Fight over Fossil Fuels

Why COP31 Feels Different

The center of gravity for global climate talks is shifting. In the span of a week, the UN’s climate chief framed climate action as a security instrument in a turbulent world; Türkiye, chairing COP31, pledged to protect developing-country priorities while spotlighting waste-sector emissions over a fossil-fuel–centric agenda; and EU ministers debated a more tactical, less idealistic approach after a disappointing COP30. Meanwhile, Switzerland laid out a technocratic but ambitious roadmap to turn a “transition away” from fossil fuels into specific, time-bound actions.

This convergence of security framing, development-first politics and tactical diplomacy will shape what is possible at COP31. The question for negotiators and advocates is not whether the talks will address fossil fuels—they will—but how to land supply-side measures that are politically passable, financeable and trackable in a forum led by a host that resists a single-issue focus and a European Union that vows to be more pragmatic.

The New Negotiating Terrain: Security, Development, Pragmatism

• Security lens: UN climate chief Simon Stiell argued that accelerated climate cooperation reduces shared risks—displacement, resource conflict, and economic shocks—that now drive instability. That case is empirically sound: fuel price spikes have amplified inflation and unrest across multiple regions since 2022, while climate extremes have intensified humanitarian costs and migration pressures.
• Development guardrails: Türkiye’s COP31 presidency has signaled it will safeguard development priorities and elevate waste-sector abatement (via its “Zero Waste” initiative) as a flagship. That steers attention to methane from landfills—part of the waste sector that accounts for roughly one-fifth of anthropogenic methane emissions globally. Because methane’s 20‑year warming impact is about 80 times that of CO₂, cutting waste methane delivers near-term cooling and public‑health co‑benefits.
• EU tactical reset: After an underwhelming COP30, EU capitals are discussing a “less naive” posture—less grandstanding, more coalition‑building and sectoral bargains, and a greater readiness to trade for concrete wins.

These moves create a plausible pathway: anchor the COP31 narrative in security and development; land near‑term methane and waste wins; and hardwire longer‑horizon fossil fuel transition elements through finance, transparency and just‑transition mechanisms rather than headline-only declarations.

Switzerland’s Technical Blueprint—and Its Political Reality

Switzerland’s lead negotiator has outlined six ingredients for a credible fossil-fuel transition roadmap: clear phase‑out timelines including supply-side measures; robust finance with just‑transition support; strong transparency rules; enforceable milestones; and accountability mechanisms. The technical logic is airtight. The political lift is not.

Assessing feasibility across supply‑side measures:

1. Coal power phase‑out and no‑new‑coal licensing

• Feasibility: Medium. Over 80 countries have some form of coal phase‑out or no‑new‑coal stance, and power‑sector coal is increasingly uneconomic against renewables plus storage. But domestic politics in coal‑reliant regions and emerging market energy security concerns still complicate timing.
• Negotiation lever: Expand Just Energy Transition Partnerships (JETPs) 2.0 with clearer closure schedules, grid upgrades, and social protections. Target middle‑income coal users (Southeast Europe, parts of Asia) with country platforms that swap coal retirement for concessional capital and de‑risking.

2. Oil and gas methane abatement and flaring elimination

• Feasibility: High. The IEA has shown the majority of methane abatement in oil and gas can be done at low or even negative cost with existing technology. Dozens of governments and companies already endorse eliminating routine flaring by 2030.
• Negotiation lever: Buyer‑seller clubs that set verifiable methane‑intensity standards for traded gas and oil, backed by satellite monitoring (e.g., MethaneSAT, Sentinel‑5P, GHGSat) and procurement preferences from major importers.

3. New field licensing transparency and production caps

• Feasibility: Low‑to‑Medium. “No new oil and gas fields” remains toxic for many producers. But transparency on licensing rounds, asset‑level data and scope‑1/2 emissions is achievable and can erode the case for expansion without outright bans.
• Negotiation lever: A UN‑recognized registry of fossil fuel reserves, production and licensing (building on the Global Registry of Fossil Fuels) with opt‑in expansion to reporting requirements embedded in NDC updates.

4. Fossil fuel subsidy reform

• Feasibility: Medium. Consumer subsidies topped $1 trillion globally in 2022 and remained elevated in 2023 amid price shocks. Reforms are politically fraught but fiscally necessary.
• Negotiation lever: “Subsidy swaps” that redirect a defined share of subsidy outlays into universal energy access, targeted bill support and clean infrastructure, tracked via IMF/World Bank reporting.

Where Türkiye and the EU Could Converge

Türkiye’s presidency can credibly deliver a development‑forward “action agenda” that emphasizes quick wins with visible domestic gains—waste methane, municipal resilience, and air quality—while keeping doors open to technical supply‑side steps. The EU, seeking results over rhetoric, can back this with financing and import‑standard diplomacy.

• Waste methane as a flagship: Cutting landfill methane by 30–50% this decade is technically feasible using capture systems, organics diversion and improved collection. A dedicated COP31 initiative could combine concessional finance, standardized contracts for landfill gas‑to‑energy projects, and satellite‑enabled MRV so cities can quantify reductions and monetize credits.
• Import‑standard diplomacy: The EU is already moving toward methane performance rules for energy imports and has launched a carbon border mechanism for energy‑intensive materials. If framed as security and consumer‑protection measures (not trade punishment), these standards can pull suppliers into better practices without forcing an explicit “no new fields” clause into COP decisions.
• Energy access and price stability: Packaging methane abatement and renewables scaling as tools to cut import bills and stabilize prices will appeal to Türkiye’s development framing and to many emerging economies managing inflation risks.

Pragmatic Levers to Translate the Swiss Elements into Outcomes

1. Coalitions that bind buyers and sellers

• Methane Abatement Club 2.0: A coalition of major gas buyers (EU, Japan, Korea) and producers (e.g., Algeria, Qatar, US, select African and Middle Eastern suppliers) commit to a methane‑intensity floor by 2027, verified by satellites and independent auditors. Access to concessional finance and export credit support is contingent on meeting the floor.
• No‑New‑Coal Power Compact: An expansion of “no new coal” commitments with enforcement via multilateral banks—no sovereign‑backed finance for new unabated coal, plus priority access to grid and storage funding for signatories. Include a pathway for already‑announced projects to convert to renewables or gas-plus-storage with defined timelines.
• Beyond Oil and Gas Alliance “Associate Pathway”: For countries not ready to ban licensing, create an associate tier focused on transparency: publish licensing calendars, environmental impact and methane plans; set flaring‑elimination dates; commit to leak detection and repair at national scale.

2. Finance packages that close the political economy gap

• Fossil Decommissioning Facility (FDF): A $25–30 billion blended‑finance window housed across MDBs and green banks. Instruments include contracts‑for‑closure that pay utilities for verified coal retirements; securitization of stranded asset write‑downs; and just‑transition funds for workers and municipalities.
• Waste Methane Quickstart: A $5 billion concessional pool for city‑level projects with standardized MRV, project‑prep grants, and revenue‑sharing templates. Tie it to the Global Methane Pledge (>150 signatories) and leverage philanthropic guarantees to de‑risk early projects.
• Subsidy‑Swap Compacts: Countries commit to redirect, for example, 20% of fossil consumer subsidies into targeted social protection and clean cooking/renewables, tracked by an IMF dashboard. In return, partners provide policy‑based loans and FX liquidity buffers to manage reform shocks.
• Debt and risk instruments: Climate‑resilient debt clauses, parametric insurance for utility revenues during climate shocks, and currency hedging facilities for clean‑energy PPAs reduce risk premiums that otherwise tilt choices toward fossil incumbents.

3. Transparency and accountability that make promises stick

• Supply‑side reporting annex: Require opt‑in Parties to file common‑tabular data on fossil licensing, production forecasts, and asset‑level methane emissions starting 2027, with third‑party satellite validation. Data flows into an expanded Global Stocktake dashboard.
• Milestone “tripwires”: Checkpoints in 2027, 2030 and 2035 for flaring elimination, methane cuts and coal retirement. Missing a milestone triggers automatic remedial plans and restricts access to some concessional instruments until corrected.
• Procurement‑linked enforcement: Development finance institutions and public buyers adopt minimum methane and flaring standards for offtake contracts and fuel procurement.

4. Just‑transition guarantees that protect people, not assets

• Social protection floors: Time‑bound cash support and benefits for affected workers; reskilling vouchers; and pension top‑ups. Benchmark packages can be co‑financed at roughly the cost of months, not years, of fossil subsidies.
• Local development deals: Ring‑fenced funding for coal communities—grid‑connected industrial parks, water restoration, SMEs—and participatory planning that gives municipalities a say in asset repurposing.
• Labor and community safeguards: Require collective bargaining, health and safety upgrades during decommissioning, and grievance mechanisms as conditions of finance.

A Realistic COP31 Outcome Package

Negotiators should aim for a dual‑track package that honors security and development priorities while locking in supply‑side momentum.

• Security‑anchored decision text: Recognize climate action as risk reduction for energy security, food prices and displacement. Frame methane and waste cuts as immediate stabilizers.
• Transition Away Roadmap (Annex): A technical annex embodying Switzerland’s elements—phase‑out milestones, finance pathways, MRV and accountability—designed as opt‑in but incentivized through finance and trade levers.
• Methane and flaring deal: Commit to eliminate routine flaring by 2030 and cut oil‑and‑gas methane by at least 30% this decade, with satellite‑verified MRV and buyer‑club support.
• Coal retirement accelerators: Country platforms that publish 2030/2035 coal retirement schedules, with FDF resources and just‑transition guarantees attached.
• Waste Methane Quickstart: A coalition of cities and countries committing to 30–50% landfill methane cuts by 2030, financed by a $5 billion facility and enabled by standardized contracts and digital MRV.
• Transparency upgrade: Launch a UNFCCC‑recognized supply‑side registry for licensing, production and methane data, aligned with NDC updates and the Global Stocktake.
• Finance signals: Pledge replenishments and policy changes at MDBs to prioritize decommissioning, grids and storage; announce a pipeline of subsidy‑swap compacts; open access to risk‑mitigation tools that crowd in private capital.

Bottom Line: Use Security to Unlock Supply‑Side Progress

Türkiye’s development lens and the EU’s tactical recalibration do not doom supply‑side ambition; they redefine the pathway. Anchor the politics in security and affordability. Deliver fast, visible wins on methane and waste. Convert Switzerland’s technical roadmap into a finance‑backed, transparency‑verified annex that countries want to opt into. And make just‑transition guarantees the non‑negotiable heart of any closure deal.

If COP31 can marry these elements—security framing, development priorities, pragmatic coalitions and hard accountability—it can turn contested rhetoric about “transitioning away” into measurable declines in coal generation, methane emissions and future fossil lock‑in. In an unstable world, that is what real climate security looks like.