The core architecture of global climate governance is now well established: a climate finance goal; indicators to guide adaptation; agreement on the need to transition away from fossil fuels; and a cyclical process to ratchet up ambition in a nationally determined manner.  

Within that context, the COP30 Presidency stressed the need to “move from negotiations to implementation”. But implementation cannot just be led by national governments – it is important to ensure cities, states and regions are effectively involved: for, example, Denmark is close to becoming the first country where every municipality has a climate action plan; when aggregated, these are expected to deliver a 73% emissions reduction by 2030, surpassing its 70% target through thousands of local measures in energy, buildings, transport and land use. Nepal’s National Framework for Local Adaptation Plans similarly channels national priorities into community-led programmes, aiming to direct at least 80% of adaptation funds to the local level. Together, these cases show how effective national–local cooperation can turn climate goals into concrete action. 

Building upon the flagship COP30 Presidency and Bloomberg Philanthropies Local Leaders Forum, there was strong momentum on the role of subnational governments going into Belem. Still the interlinkage between such an implementation space and the negotiations needs rethinking. Rather than shifting from negotiations to implementation, we should be identifying ways for one to reinforce the other, creating a mutually beneficial architecture: 

  1. Create a formal multilevel entry point in the UNFCCC. The next phase of climate governance needs a structured space where Parties and constituencies can discuss frameworks and mechanisms for multilevel action. This does not mean turning subnational governments into Parties, but recognising that this level of government can regulate, tax, invest and design incentives, and are leveraging these powers to drive climate action.
  2. Build a coherent, non-mandated implementation forum. Drawing upon the Action Agenda and the COP30 Local Leaders and Business & Finance Forums, establish an implementation forum shaped by any incoming COP presidency. It would map finance needs and barriers, facilitate matchmaking between subnational governments, Parties and the private sector, and track progress in ways aligned with the Global Stocktake, producing an output statement for negotiators.
  3. Give new COP30 implementation initiatives clear mandates and a multilevel lens. The Global Implementation Accelerator and Belém Mission to 1.5°C will be most effective if their analysis of “enabling conditions” covers who drives implementation domestically. The Accelerator should build on the 117 Plans to Accelerate Solutions from the refined Action Agenda, focusing on the highest-impact solutions and treating national governments as “accelerators” charged with connecting non-state efforts to the right policy and regulatory levers. Whilst leveraging cross-border partnerships to further scale emission reductions.  

At COP30, the subnational community saw some of the strongest recognition of its work in the 33-year history of the process. If we want faster, fairer implementation, cities, states and regions cannot just be relegated to side-events and voluntary platforms. The COP30 outcome text stressed the importance of connecting the process with people on the ground, yet subnational actors – are still mostly “acknowledged” or “welcomed” rather than structurally enabled. The Paris Agreement will work best when its architecture and delivery infrastructure are aligned. 

Toby Walker, Senior International Policy and Advocacy Manager