From fossil-fuel phaseout to shipping and cities: how Santa Marta can build a credible transition coalition
Why Santa Marta matters now
Roughly 60 countries are converging on Santa Marta, Colombia, for what organizers are billing as the first global summit dedicated to transitioning away from fossil fuels. After a lacklustre outcome at COP30, this meeting aims to rebuild momentum and stitch together a coalition capable of driving a real-world phaseout, not just rhetorical alignment. The opportunity is to make Santa Marta a practical model: link top‑down diplomacy to bottom‑up delivery, shield the process from fossil‑fuel capture, and incubate sector deals—starting with shipping—that can withstand geopolitical pushback.
Done right, the summit could mark a pivot from sprawling declarations to focused delivery. Three features would define success: centering cities as engines of execution, adopting a firewall against fossil‑fuel influence, and advancing a durable green shipping pathway that redistributes revenues and benefits fairly.
Put cities at the center of delivery
Cities are where energy systems, transport, buildings, and public services intersect—and where climate policies immediately touch lives. Urban areas account for the majority of global CO2 emissions and economic activity. Crucially, they control or influence many of the levers needed for a fossil‑free trajectory: building codes, transit fleets, land‑use planning, and distributed energy rules.
That is why the emergence of a city‑led agenda around Santa Marta is pivotal. Networks such as C40 have already committed member cities to cut fossil‑fuel use by around half by 2030. Translating that ambition into bankable, replicable projects is the test.
What would it look like to put cities at the center?
A Cities-First pillar of the Santa Marta coalition. National leaders should formalize a standing track where mayors table procurement and regulatory commitments aligned with national pathways. For example, “100 cities, 100,000 zero‑emission buses” by 2030 is credible because the tools—competitive tenders, viability gap funding, and pooled finance—exist. The model is familiar: Shenzhen electrified more than 16,000 buses within a decade; Bogotá and Santiago have each deployed large e‑bus fleets numbering in the thousands, proving Latin American megacities can scale quickly when contracts, depots, and power upgrades line up.
Subnational finance windows. Many cities lack access to affordable capital and project‑prep support. A Santa Marta package could establish a dedicated window within multilateral development banks and green funds for municipal decarbonization, with standardized term sheets and technical assistance. Even modest project‑preparation grants (hundreds of thousands of dollars) unlock feasibility studies for building retrofits, district energy, and distributed solar—programs that then mobilize tens to hundreds of millions in private and concessional finance.
Policy alignment compacts. National governments can commit to repealing barriers that hold back city action—such as restrictions on power purchase agreements or heat‑pump incentives that exclude multi‑family buildings—while cities commit to enforceable measures like performance‑based building codes or zero‑emission zones.
If Santa Marta delivers a cities‑first architecture, the summit immediately becomes a catalyst for implementation, not just negotiation.
Build a firewall against fossil‑fuel capture
The credibility of any transition forum depends on who is in the room and under what rules. The UN climate process has been dogged by concerns over industry influence: watchdogs estimated that more than 2,400 fossil‑fuel lobbyists attended COP28, a record. Santa Marta can—and should—draw a sharper line to avoid repeating those mistakes.
Key design choices to lock in credibility:
A conflict‑of‑interest policy based on the World Health Organization’s tobacco convention model. Participants directly tied to fossil fuel production or lobbying should be barred from agenda‑setting roles and sponsorships. Observers can be heard under strict transparency rules, but they should not chair sessions or draft text.
A public transparency register listing affiliations, funding sources, and meeting calendars with negotiators—updated in real time.
A no‑sponsorship rule for fossil fuel companies and their trade associations, coupled with an independent funding mechanism for the summit secretariat.
Balanced representation: formal seats for cities, labor, Indigenous peoples, and climate‑vulnerable states to ensure that those most affected by the transition shape decisions.
These steps do not silence affected industries; they simply guard against conflicts of interest that have repeatedly diluted outcomes. The payoff is trust—with the public and among countries—that Santa Marta’s coalition is built to deliver the public interest.
Shipping as the proving ground for durable sector deals
Decarbonizing international shipping is a stress test of multilateralism. The sector produces nearly 3% of global CO2 emissions, yet it sits outside national inventories and is governed primarily by the International Maritime Organization (IMO). Recent talks have been buffeted by geopolitical headwinds, with reports that pressure from major economies—including the United States and Saudi Arabia—softened elements of the sector’s emissions‑reduction trajectory. Even so, analysts suggest a recent US tariff ruling could reduce Washington’s leverage to derail a global green shipping deal, opening a window for progress.
Santa Marta can help craft a political landing zone that complements, rather than competes with, the IMO process. Three ingredients matter:
A global fuel standard + levy package. The IMO has already scoped a “basket of measures” combining a fuel greenhouse‑gas standard with an economic instrument. Santa Marta’s coalition could endorse an approach that sets a declining carbon‑intensity limit for marine fuels and pairs it with a carbon levy that starts modestly and ratchets up. For illustration, a $50 per ton CO2 levy applied to roughly 1 gigaton of annual shipping emissions would generate on the order of $50 billion per year. Earmarking a significant share for small island states and least developed countries—to fund port upgrades, resilience, and green corridors—turns a climate policy into a development policy.
Port‑state measures and green corridors. If consensus at the IMO stalls, a “coalition of the willing” covering major ports can still move markets. The EU has already brought shipping into its emissions trading system, and its FuelEU Maritime regulation will tighten fuel‑intensity rules for ships calling at European ports. Similar port‑state measures adopted by a club including the EU, UK, Singapore, Japan, and others would create de facto global standards, because carriers will not maintain separate fuel systems for different routes. Meanwhile, green shipping corridors—specific routes where zero‑emission fuels and infrastructure are deployed first—are scaling from pilots to early networks, aided by the Clydebank Declaration and early orders for methanol‑capable vessels.
A political compact that survives pushback. To weather future geopolitical shifts, the shipping deal needs built‑in stabilization features: automatic ratchets tied to cost or technology thresholds; revenue recycling to offset consumer impacts on staple goods; and a firm commitment that measures are non‑discriminatory and WTO‑compatible. A standing review body with representation from climate‑vulnerable states and labor can help adjust course without reopening the entire agreement.
By showcasing a robust, fair, and finance‑positive shipping package, Santa Marta can prove that sectoral decarbonization is still possible even when geopolitics turn rough.
From diplomacy to delivery: a credible coalition design
To make the summit a repeatable model rather than a one‑off, participants should leave Santa Marta with a compact that couples ambition to accountability. The following design elements would anchor that credibility:
Clear, near‑term milestones. Move away from vague end‑dates and commit to 2027 and 2030 checkpoints: number of zero‑emission buses procured, gigawatts of urban renewables permitted, square meters of buildings retrofitted, and percentage of port calls covered by clean‑fuel standards.
Implementation dashboards. A public, third‑party‑audited tracker—updated quarterly—should show progress against commitments by country and city. No glossy PDFs; just numbers and whether they are on or off track.
Just transition contracts. Communities tied to fossil fuel production need predictable support. The coalition can back “transition contracts” that package retraining, regional investment, and social protection in exchange for scheduled asset retirements, drawing on lessons from Europe’s coal phaseouts and South Africa’s Just Energy Transition Partnership.
Blended‑finance playbooks. Standardized term sheets, risk‑sharing facilities, and procurement templates make it easier for cities to finance clean buses, heat pumps, and distributed storage. Every dollar of grant finance should be tied to defined private co‑investment ratios.
Enforcement with consequences. Access to certain benefits—such as concessional finance windows or recognition schemes—can be contingent on verified delivery. If a participant backslides without cause, perks pause until performance resumes.
What success in Santa Marta looks like
Success is not a single line in a communiqué. It is a package that shows how international politics can translate to streets, buildings, and ports within 24 months. A credible outcome would include:
- A Cities‑First Transition Track, with at least 50 mayors signing time‑bound procurement and policy commitments tied to national plans.
- An Independence and Integrity Charter that bans fossil‑fuel sponsorships, mandates a conflict‑of‑interest policy, and publishes a live lobbyist registry.
- A Green Shipping Pathway that endorses a fuel standard and levy concept with revenue‑sharing for climate‑vulnerable states, plus a port‑state “club” ready to implement if IMO talks stall.
- A financing package that opens a subnational window at development banks and capitalizes a project‑prep facility for city decarbonization.
- A public dashboard and 12‑month review to lock accountability in place.
The bottom line
Santa Marta can be the moment when a coalition for fossil‑fuel transition proves it can do three things at once: keep national diplomacy moving, insulate decision‑making from fossil‑fuel capture, and deliver projects through the institutions closest to citizens—cities. By elevating urban delivery and advancing a resilient green shipping deal, the summit can chart a path that others can copy: pragmatic, shielded from capture, and measurable in buses on roads, heat pumps in buildings, and cleaner fuels at ports. That is how a phaseout stops being a slogan and becomes the organizing logic of the global economy.