As world leaders gather in Antalya, fresh commitments to tropical forest protection and renewed calls for ocean investment are putting nature-based solutions at the centre of climate diplomacy. But for vulnerable countries, the real test will be whether the money reaches the communities on the frontline.
The future of the world’s forests and oceans is emerging as a defining issue at COP31, with world leaders using the Antalya summit to push for a new generation of climate financing that recognises nature not merely as a casualty of global warming, but as a critical part of the solution.
At the centre of the discussions is a familiar but increasingly urgent question: How can countries protect the ecosystems that sustain the planet when many of those most responsible for safeguarding them lack the financial resources to do so?
The answer being advanced in Antalya combines international climate finance, carbon markets, investment in tropical forests, ocean-based economies and stronger recognition of Indigenous Peoples and local communities.
The latest momentum came during a high-level forest event convened by Brazil, Guyana, Norway, the Republic of the Congo and the United Kingdom through the Forest & Climate Leaders’ Partnership.
One of its most significant announcements was a planned philanthropic commitment of US$88 million to the Tropical Forest Forever Facility (TFFF), a financing mechanism designed to provide long-term financial incentives for countries that preserve their tropical forests.
The announcement, involving nine philanthropic organisations and a private family office, comes as the facility seeks to achieve its US$10 billion capitalisation target by the end of 2026. The fund still faces a reported US$2.1 billion financing gap.
The Netherlands has separately announced an investment of up to US$500 million over ten years, giving the initiative additional momentum.
Together, these developments suggest that the debate around forest conservation is increasingly shifting from short-term pledges towards the creation of more predictable financing arrangements. But the question of whether these arrangements will deliver equitable benefits remains central.
Forest protection moves from promises to financing
For Brazilian President Luiz Inácio Lula da Silva, the forest agenda cannot be separated from the broader transformation of the global economy. Reflecting on the COP30 roadmaps, Lula called for climate financing to reach US$1.3 trillion annually, alongside efforts to transition away from fossil fuels and halt and reverse deforestation.
He also urged Turkey and Australia to ensure that the recommendations contained in the roadmaps are carried into the next Global Stocktake, the Paris Agreement’s mechanism for assessing collective progress towards climate goals.
Brazil, he said, would play its part by adopting national roadmaps to reduce dependence on fossil fuels and eliminate deforestation and forest degradation.
The significance of this position lies in its recognition that forest protection cannot succeed in isolation from energy policy, national development priorities and the availability of finance.
The TFFF is an attempt to address that challenge by making standing forests economically valuable to the countries that preserve them.
Its supporters argue that tropical forest nations should receive sustained financial returns for maintaining these ecosystems rather than being forced to choose between conservation and economic development.
Norwegian Prime Minister Jonas Gahr Støre emphasised that carbon markets and the TFFF could help scale up and sustain forest protection initiatives, while cautioning against treating every hectare of forest simply as a commercial asset.
The United Kingdom’s Ed Miliband offered an equally important reminder: Forests are protected not by declarations, but by people, particularly Indigenous Peoples and local communities.
That distinction matters. The success of forest finance will ultimately depend not only on how much money is mobilised, but also on who controls it, who benefits and whether those who protect forests are recognised as essential partners.
Africa wants a bigger voice in the climate finance conversation
While the forest financing announcement attracted considerable attention, African leaders used the summit to underline another critical dimension of the climate crisis: The need for financing mechanisms that respond to the continent’s particular vulnerabilities and development priorities.
The Nairobi Declaration has provided a common platform for African countries to articulate their demands for a reformed climate finance architecture. For the Comoros, that conversation is inseparable from the health of the world’s oceans.
President Azali Assoumani reaffirmed his country’s commitment to the Moroni Declaration for Ocean and Climate Action in Africa, which places island and coastal states at the centre of the continent’s climate agenda.
His message was particularly pointed: The ocean should not be viewed solely as a source of vulnerability, but as an economic and environmental asset. Sustainable fisheries, marine ecosystem protection, renewable energy, responsible tourism and the broader Blue Economy are all part of the Comoros’ development strategy.
Yet these ambitions require investments that many African island and coastal states cannot independently provide. “The ocean is not just our vulnerability; it is our future,” Assoumani told the summit.
His intervention highlights a persistent imbalance in global climate discussions. Countries with extensive coastlines, fisheries and marine ecosystems have enormous responsibilities in protecting them, but often lack access to affordable, reliable and long-term financing.
For Africa, therefore, climate finance is not simply about securing additional funding. It is also about ensuring that financing instruments recognise the continent’s circumstances, economic priorities and right to sustainable development.
Tanzania’s carbon opportunity – and the demand for a fair deal
Tanzania’s intervention offers a particularly important perspective on the relationship between natural resources, climate finance and economic development.
President Samia Suluhu Hassan told world leaders that Tanzania has significant carbon opportunities across transport, waste management, renewable energy and forest conservation.
With approximately 48.1 million hectares of forest, the country has considerable potential to participate in international carbon markets.
However, she argued that participation must be underpinned by transparent mechanisms established under Article 6 of the Paris Agreement.
Her concerns are significant: carbon pricing must be fair, benefits must be shared equitably, and environmental integrity must not be compromised.
Crucially, revenues should support local communities and national development rather than disproportionately benefiting intermediaries and investors.
The Tanzanian position reflects a wider African concern that the continent must not become merely a supplier of carbon credits and natural resources to international markets without receiving a fair share of the economic returns.
There is also a pressing economic argument for stronger climate support. President Samia highlighted the cost of climate-related shocks to Tanzania, estimated at between 2 and 3 per cent of its gross domestic product annually.
Prolonged droughts, unpredictable rainfall and rising sea levels are placing additional pressure on livelihoods, infrastructure and national development.
Her appeal for increased grants, concessional financing, technology transfer and capacity building therefore goes beyond environmental protection. It is a call for climate finance that helps countries withstand shocks without undermining their development ambitions.
From Central Asia to the Pacific, climate vulnerability has many faces
The summit’s interventions also demonstrated that climate change is creating interconnected challenges across regions with very different geographical and economic circumstances.
Uzbekistan’s President Shavkat Mirziyoyev drew attention to melting glaciers, water scarcity and increasingly severe droughts across Central Asia. He proposed developing a regional climate integration model to strengthen cooperation among countries confronting shared environmental threats.
His call for new financing instruments, including concessional grants and innovative blue and arid financing mechanisms, highlights the need to move beyond conventional climate funding models.
For Central Asia, the security of water resources is inseparable from food production, economic stability and regional cooperation.
Meanwhile, Palau’s President Surangel Whipps Jr delivered one of the summit’s most emotionally powerful interventions. Drawing on his country’s relationship with the natural environment, he described land as a mother and the ocean as a father, emphasising the responsibility of humanity to protect both.
His warning that the 1.5°C temperature goal is slipping away was a reminder that climate change is not an abstract negotiating issue for small island states. It threatens homes, livelihoods, cultural heritage and the continued existence of communities that have contributed relatively little to the emissions driving global warming.
Whipps called for urgent action, arguing that the climate crisis cannot be resolved through declarations alone. His intervention reinforced the urgency of ensuring that countries on the frontline of climate change have access to the resources needed to protect their people.
The real test: Making climate finance work
Although the US$88 million philanthropic announcement is encouraging, the larger significance of the TFFF lies in its proposed financing structure.
Unlike conventional short-term conservation grants, the facility is designed to mobilise public, private and philanthropic capital, invest the money and use the returns to make performance-based payments to tropical forest countries.
Payments are linked to verified forest conservation and restoration, with satellite-based monitoring used to assess forest cover.
Importantly, at least 20 per cent of forest payments must be allocated to Indigenous Peoples and local communities.
This provision recognises that the people living in and around forests are not peripheral stakeholders. They are among the most important custodians of these ecosystems.
The World Bank, which serves as trustee of the facility’s Financial Intermediary Fund, describes the mechanism as a way of creating predictable, long-term finance for tropical forest conservation.
However, the model’s success will depend on credible monitoring, effective governance, transparent allocation of resources and the ability to attract sufficient investment.
It will also need to demonstrate that forest protection does not come at the expense of the rights and livelihoods of communities whose lives are closely connected to these landscapes.
These are important considerations as the facility moves towards full operationalisation.