With COP30 underway, the global community must decide whether to treat climate change as a top-tier priority or continue to sideline it
As the world moves towards COP30, the urgency of climate change emerges larger than ever. Rising emissions, melting glaciers, and record-breaking disasters underline the scientific consensus; climate change is real and its impacts are accelerating. Yet, the global political mood suggests it may be slipping down the ladder of priorities.
At the United Nations General Assembly in September, U.S. President Donald Trump called climate change a "con job," labeled green energy a "scam," and described carbon footprints as a hoax. Such rhetoric reflects scepticism still present in parts of U.S. politics. Given that the US is the second-largest global emitter (11.1%) and a key geopolitical player, these statements matter. News is coming in that the Trump administration won't send "high-level" representatives to the COP30 climate summit.
However, science is clear. Over 97% of climate scientists agree that global warming is driven by human activity and poses serious risks. The Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) is preparing its Seventh Assessment Report (AR7), further emphasising climate change as a global issue. The contrast between political rhetoric and scientific consensus highlights a growing divide, while the evidence intensifies, the political response remains mixed.
Paradoxically, the global clean energy transition is advancing faster than ever. The International Energy Agency (IEA) reports that renewables made up around 40% of global electricity generation in 2024. In the U.S., they now provide about 20%. This growth is not driven by ideology, but by economics. The cost of solar, wind, and battery storage has dropped dramatically, making clean energy increasingly competitive with fossil fuels.
This indicates that markets and technology are often outpacing politics. Households, investors, and corporations are adopting renewables for both environmental and economic reasons. Still, while the shift is promising, it still requires stronger policies and international cooperation to achieve the scale and speed necessary to meet global targets.
China, responsible for 29.2% of global emissions in 2024, pledged at the UN climate summit in New York to reduce greenhouse gas emissions by 7-10% below peak levels by 2035. While a step forward, this remains insufficient to keep global warming below 1.5°C.
The European Union continues to push through the Green Deal, though internal economic pressures test its unity. Meanwhile, many developing nations face competing demands: economic growth, energy access, and debt, making climate action difficult to prioritise.
CarbonBrief reports that current pledges only cover about half of global emissions by 2035. This means the other half remains outside formal commitments. Nearly all countries (95%) has missed the February 2025 deadline to submit updated climate plans (NDCs). A second deadline in September also passed with few submissions. Many countries now say they will submit their targets by or during COP30 in November.
For climate-vulnerable nations like Nepal, climate change is not a distant policy debate, but a lived reality. The melting Himalayan glaciers threaten agriculture, water security, and millions of lives downstream. Nepal's Sagarmatha Sambaad earlier this year issued a "Call for Action", demanding stronger global cooperation.
Nepal's third Nationally Determined Contribution (NDC 3.0) commits to cut emissions by 17.1% by 2030 and 26.8% by 2035. The estimated cost of implementing these mitigation measures is $73.74 billion, with more than 85% expected from international climate finance. Adaptation alone could cost $20 billion between 2025 and 2035. These figures highlight the imbalance; the nations least responsible for climate change face the steepest costs, while richer nations fall behind on promised financial support.
Leaders today face numerous competing crises, wars, inflation, migration, and political instability, all of which can push climate down the agenda. But ignoring climate change doesn't maintain economic stability; it undermines it. From food systems to health and infrastructure, climate impacts touch every sector. Addressing it is not just environmental, it is essential for long-term prosperity and security.
So, are countries leaving climate change from their priority list? The picture is mixed. On the one hand, scientific work continues, renewable energy is growing, and nations are still submitting pledges under the Paris Agreement. On the other hand, political polarisation, economic pressures, and incremental targets suggest that climate often competes with, rather than defines, national priorities.
A more subtle threat is not denial, but deprioritisation. Leaders may accept the science, yet delay action. These delays may not look dramatic now, but they steadily undermine the chances of achieving meaningful progress.
To keep climate change as a top global priority, countries need to make three important changes. First, they should start seeing climate change as a major security issue that affects the economy, public health, and national safety, not just as an environmental problem. Second, more funding is needed, especially to help poorer countries deal with the effects of climate change. Third, big polluting countries must be held responsible.
The world stands at a crossroads. The clean energy transition is underway, and scientific evidence is stronger than ever. Yet political will remains divided. Countries are not entirely abandoning climate action, but many are quietly sidelining it.
With COP30 underway, the global community must decide whether to treat climate change as a top-tier priority or continue to sideline it. The consequences of delay will be measured not in speeches, but in human lives, economic losses, and the health of our planet.
Climate change is not leaving us off its priority list. The real question is whether we leave it off ours.
Dr Thakuri is an Associate Professor at the Central Department of Environmental Science, Tribhuvan University, Kirtipur
