The failure of climate policy became undeniably clear at the COP 30 climate conference in Belém, as the gap between aspiration and reality continues to widen. While the European Union remains steadfast in its pursuit of climate neutrality, other countries are pursuing pragmatic energy and economic policies. COP 30 made it clear that global climate policy is no longer driven by shared priorities. German climate policy, in particular, stands isolated, despite its high costs. At the same time, the EU emissions trading system and its steering effect are coming under increasing pressure because national deviations are undermining it.
The Failure of Climate Policy as a Structural Problem
The failure of climate policy is not a short-term phenomenon, but rather an expression of deep structural contradictions. Climate protection is considered a global common good, yet political decisions are made nationally. Therefore, everyone benefits from individual countries’ emissions reductions without having to take action themselves. This logic shapes global climate policy, which has suffered from coordination problems for years, even though international meetings suggest otherwise.
COP 30 confirmed this finding, as binding commitments were lacking. While delegations discussed new financial instruments, no consensus was reached on concrete steps to reduce fossil fuels. This repeated a pattern that observers have long described as political failure.
Power Shifts and National Interests
It was striking that key emitters were represented only at a low level. China, the USA, and India are avoiding clear commitments, even though they are responsible for the majority of emissions. This reluctance weakens global climate policy because effective progress is impossible without the largest players. At the same time, countries like Canada and Australia are tempering their targets, as economic growth takes priority.
This creates a problematic situation for Europe. German climate policy pursues ambitious targets, while other countries react flexibly. This asymmetry exacerbates the failure of climate policy because costs and benefits remain unevenly distributed, and industrial value creation migrates elsewhere.
Economic Consequences and Political Illusions
The economic consequences are already visible. High energy prices, increasing regulation, and uncertain investment conditions are putting pressure on companies. This undermines the credibility of the EU Emissions Trading System, as additional national measures undermine its market-based logic. Instead of efficient price signals, interventions that tie up resources dominate.
At the same time, COP 30 fails to recognize that climate neutrality incurs enormous marginal costs. Economic models show that complete emissions reduction is hardly achievable without risking a decline in prosperity. This imbalance exacerbates the failure of climate policy because targets are formulated without practical instruments.
Financial Transfers and Political Priorities
Another focus was on international financial commitments. Industrialized countries are expected to significantly increase their contributions to finance adaptation measures. Germany plays a central role in this, even though it lacks the necessary funds domestically. This redistribution is justified by historical responsibility, but it does not solve the structural problems of global climate policy.
Instead, there is a growing recognition that technological innovation would be more effective. Research, development, and open competition could reduce emissions without jeopardizing economic stability. The EU Emissions Trading System could also be effective if political interventions were reduced.
Necessary Course Corrections
The failure of climate policy therefore demands a fundamental reorientation. Realistic goals, international cooperation, and cost transparency must be given greater weight. German climate policy needs more openness to technologies and less moral symbolism. Only in this way can trust be regained.
COP 30 thus marks a turning point, as it reveals the limitations of previous strategies. Without adaptation, climate policy risks losing its public acceptance. A rational economic policy, on the other hand, could enable progress if it creates global incentives and limits unilateral national actions. (KOB)