COP31 in Antalya is searching for a way to accelerate the green transition. But a new climate report from Belgium exposes the growing gap between political promises and action on the ground.
After a year marked by extreme weather events, world leaders are gathering in the Turkish resort of Antalya for the 31st UN Climate Change Conference (COP31). The summit opens at a time when the prospect of limiting global warming to 1.5°C above pre-industrial levels, as set out in the Paris Agreement, is looking increasingly difficult to achieve.
Hundreds of world leaders, scientists, parliamentary delegations and representatives of European institutions will be seeking answers to two fundamental questions: how can the world curb climate change, and who will pay for it? For more than two weeks, Antalya will become an arena for competing political interests, economic lobbies and sharply differing visions of the future of global energy. The agenda includes not only cutting greenhouse gas emissions, but also financing the climate transition and delivering on commitments already made.
According to the UN Environment Programme (UNEP), even under the most favourable scenario, the world is heading towards warming of between 1.7°C and 1.8°C. Meeting the 1.5°C target will require much faster emissions cuts and large-scale carbon dioxide removal from the atmosphere. Yet a substantial gap remains between national climate plans and the action needed to deliver them.
This year's conference is expected to focus less on negotiating new landmark agreements and more on implementing existing commitments. These include phasing out fossil fuels, accelerating the shift to clean energy and providing climate finance to developing countries. But these are precisely the issues on which the sharpest disagreements are emerging.
The EU is looking for allies among developing nations
The Netherlands is among the countries spearheading a coalition calling for a gradual phase-out of fossil fuels. Until the COP28 summit in Dubai, the issue had traditionally remained on the margins of formal climate negotiations, Margaretha Wewerinke-Singh, a professor of sustainability law, told Dutch news website NU.nl.
That is particularly significant given that burning fossil fuels remains the main source of the emissions driving climate change. Major oil and gas producers, including Russia, Saudi Arabia and India, continue to resist more ambitious agreements. The United States, under Donald Trump's administration, has also stepped back from a number of international climate forums as Washington places greater emphasis on fossil fuels.
Despite this resistance, the European Union wants to stand by the goal of limiting global warming to 1.5°C. Brussels is seeking support from small island states, which are particularly vulnerable to rising sea levels and the threat of flooding.
Other developing countries are already bearing the brunt of climate change, despite having contributed relatively little to the world's historical emissions. Many want to build more resilient infrastructure and prepare for climate risks, but lack the financial resources to do so. They are therefore demanding that wealthier nations shoulder a greater share of the cost.
African countries hope to put a new issue on the conference agenda, although it remains unclear whether other participants will back the proposal.
Electrification as an answer to energy insecurity
For Turkey and Australia, which are jointly hosting the conference, one of the main priorities will be to secure support for a plan to accelerate the electrification of the global economy. The goal is for electricity to account for at least 35% of global energy consumption by 2035.
Where electricity is generated from renewable sources, the potential for cutting emissions is substantial. Electrification could also reduce dependence on oil and natural gas — an increasingly important consideration for countries that rely on imported energy.
This is also the first climate summit since the energy crisis triggered by the war in Iran, which has once again exposed the vulnerability of global energy supplies.
But there is an obvious contradiction. The hosts themselves continue to rely heavily on fossil fuels. Solar and wind power generation in Turkey is growing rapidly, but has yet to displace traditional energy sources on a sufficient scale. Australia, meanwhile, is one of the world's largest coal exporters and is planning to expand mining operations.
Every country has a place at the negotiating table
COP31 is opening amid deeply strained international relations — hardly an ideal backdrop for global cooperation. At the same time, more countries are recognising the need to reduce their dependence on oil and natural gas.
There are also political developments that could shape the climate agenda. In Brazil, President Luiz Inácio Lula da Silva is continuing efforts to curb deforestation in the Amazon. In the United States, the results of the midterm elections have shifted the balance of power in Congress, limiting Donald Trump's room for manoeuvre in reshaping US climate policy.
Yet questions are increasingly being raised about whether international climate conferences are delivering enough. Negotiators and environmental organisations continue to defend the need for this format.
“This is the only place where all countries negotiate on an equal footing,” says Hilde Strut, a climate expert at Oxfam Novib.
Progress may be slow and difficult, she argues, but the international process remains essential. She points to the forecasts made before the Paris Agreement was signed in 2015. At the time, projections suggested global warming could reach around 4°C. Under current policies, the figure is now estimated at approximately 2.8°C.
“Without climate conferences, we would be much further away from the goal,” Strut says.
Belgium: climate promises, rising emissions
While the world searches for common ground on decarbonisation in Antalya, a different reality is taking shape just outside the doors of the European institutions in Brussels. An increasing number of countries are at risk of missing the European Union's ambitious target of cutting net greenhouse gas emissions by 90% by 2040.
Belgium is among those sending a particularly worrying signal. On 12 November, the country's Federal Climate Service published its annual report, warning that Belgium is not cutting greenhouse gas emissions fast enough. The biggest obstacle is the continued growth of the vehicle fleet powered by internal combustion engines, coupled with a lack of meaningful change in people's transport habits.
Since 2024, experts at the Federal Public Service for Health have been publishing an annual assessment known as the Transition Barometer. It measures Belgium's progress towards climate neutrality and examines the policies being implemented to achieve that goal.
The assessment tracks indicators including new registrations of electric cars, heat pump installations and newly commissioned renewable energy capacity. Speaking to public broadcaster VRT, experts acknowledged that some indicators have actually deteriorated. Transport is the clearest example. There are positive signs in the climate transition, but they remain insufficient to deliver the overall objective.
In 2024, Belgium's emissions were 32% lower than in 1990. The expansion of wind and solar power has made a significant contribution to that reduction. Progress has also been recorded in industry and in the energy efficiency of buildings, although at a more modest pace.
Industrial emissions have fallen by 42%. Researchers warn, however, that some of this reduction may reflect not only technological improvements, but also lower production or the relocation of businesses abroad.
Heat pumps are still not widespread enough to meet the needs of the country's building stock, while the pace of building renovation remains far below what is required. Agriculture is also lagging behind. Over the past decade, the sector has failed to achieve any substantial reduction in greenhouse gas emissions.
The most worrying picture, however, is in transport. Researchers describe developments in the sector as “alarming”. Despite cleaner engines and fuels, and the growing presence of electric vehicles, transport emissions in 2024 were 19% higher than in 1990.
The reason is the continued expansion of the vehicle fleet, in which petrol and diesel cars remain dominant. Nor is there evidence of a structural shift towards greater use of public transport, rail or inland waterways, the researchers note.
Aviation and shipping are performing even worse. Emissions from these activities have risen by 67% compared with 1990 — an increase of almost two-thirds.
Planting trees will not be enough to offset the problem either. In 2024, Belgium's natural ecosystems absorbed just 0.6% of the country's total territorial emissions.
The carbon footprint of the average Belgian also extends beyond national borders. It includes emissions generated abroad in the production of clothing and other goods consumed in Belgium. Those emissions, however, are not included in the report.
“The transition has begun, but it needs to accelerate,” the researchers conclude. They argue that the progress already made must be protected, but that transport and land use require “a genuine reversal of the trend”.
“We can no longer afford to continue at the same pace. We need everyone's commitment,” says federal Climate Minister Jean-Luc Crucke of the Les Engagés party.
“Businesses, citizens, and regional and federal governments must work together to turn our next climate plan into a genuine accelerator of the transition. It offers opportunities, but it also demands efforts that everyone must be prepared to make,” the minister adds.
Flanders: green promises meet political reality
Belgium has a popular slogan that seems to capture the country's aspirations for the future: “Here grows our future” (Hier groeit onze toekomst). It brings together concerns about home, health, nature and the generations to come. The message is simple: more trees, more green spaces, a smaller climate footprint and a healthier environment.
For the Flemish government, afforestation and the expansion of green spaces are important elements of its efforts to reduce the region's climate footprint. But they cannot compensate for the absence of broader, long-term measures.
Coordination between Belgium's three regions — Flanders, Wallonia and Brussels — is essential, as the country's current trajectory makes compliance with European climate requirements increasingly difficult.
According to projections cited in regional assessments, Flanders is expected to cut its emissions by around 34% by 2030, falling short of its targets.
Under Belgium's final National Energy and Climate Plan, adopted in the summer of 2025, the country has committed to reducing its CO₂ emissions by 47% by 2030 compared with 2005 levels.
On paper, the plan promises to accelerate the transition. In practice, however, decisions taken by regional and federal authorities are raising questions about how consistent that policy really is.
Brussels promises one thing. Government policy delivers another.
While the national climate plan envisages more incentives for businesses and households to switch to cleaner vehicles, decisions by Bart De Wever's government point in a different direction.
In early October 2025, the government announced a measure that is difficult to reconcile with the climate objectives it has pledged to pursue. From 1 January 2026, owners of electric cars in Flanders are required to pay an annual road tax and the applicable vehicle registration tax.
The change also affects people who inherit an electric car and intend to use it. The tax is calculated according to the vehicle's age and power, much like the system applied to conventional cars.
Until now, exemption from these charges had been one of the tools used to encourage the shift to electric mobility. The government is now justifying its removal by arguing that electric cars have become sufficiently widespread and that public finances need additional revenue.
But the contradictions surrounding financial incentives for green mobility do not end there.
Since last year, the Finance Ministry has been sending letters to people who received grants when purchasing environmentally friendly vehicles, demanding that they repay the money retrospectively.
I, too, had the opportunity to receive one of these unwelcome surprises in the post — as the owner of an eco-friendly scooter and a consistent advocate of cleaner urban transport.
This turns the policy of promoting green mobility into something more than an abstract debate about taxes and budget revenues. It becomes a very personal experience for people who have already made a choice in favour of cleaner transport.
Ultimately, Belgium finds itself facing the same contradiction that COP31 is putting before world leaders: climate targets have been set and commitments have been made, but real-world decisions do not always follow the direction promised.
While countries in Antalya are searching for common ground on the planet's future, Brussels and Belgium's regional capitals are still grappling with a fundamental question: can political will, economic interests and everyday decisions be brought into line with climate ambitions?