Climate Change Center

 

 CCC Belém Report 

Key Takeaways from COP30 in Belém
PART 1. Transition Finance

 

 

From 10 to 21 November 2025, Belém, in the Brazilian state of Pará, hosted the 30th Conference of the Parties (COP30) to the UNFCCC, bringing together government delegations from 198 countries, international organizations, businesses and civil society to discuss solutions to the climate crisis.

 

The Climate Change Center (CCC) participated onsite, organizing a session at the Korea Pavilion and co-hosting an official UNFCCC side event. Through these events, CCC contributed to the global conversation on transition finance and Article 6 of the Paris Agreement, with a focus on industrial transformation and high-integrity carbon markets. In this report, we share what CCC witnessed and discussed in Belém: the atmosphere on the ground, the main outcomes and insights from our Korea Pavilion event and Article 6 side event, and the perspectives of CCC’s Policy Research and Developing Countries Cooperation teams who led the discussions.

 

 

 

Rain, Chants, and COP30 — What Belém Revealed
Throughout COP30, Belém vividly embodied what it means to stand on the frontlines of the climate crisis. From the first day, heavy tropical showers, fragile infrastructure, Indigenous protests in the streets, and the visible presence of security forces all underscored that this was not just a technical conference, but a site where climate, justice and survival directly intersect.

 

The official COP30 slogan, “For the People, For the Planet”, hung across the city as delegations from 198 countries moved tensely between meeting rooms. The urgency of the climate crisis — and the international community’s struggle to respond — was felt everywhere.  

 

 

---

 

 

 

On 14 November, CCC hosted a session on transition finance at the Korea Pavilion. The discussion focused on how to finance the structural transformation of high-emitting sectors such as steel, petrochemicals and cement, and how these efforts can be aligned with Korea’s forthcoming transition finance guidelines. The session confirmed that the decarbonization of heavy industry — with all its technological, economic and social implications — sits at the heart of the broader negotiations at COP30.

 

 

Opening Remarks | Chairman Jai-chul Choi, Climate Change Center - “Transition finance is not just about money.”
In his opening remarks, Chairman Choi stressed that transition finance should be understood as an integrated approach that simultaneously addresses industrial competitiveness, just transition and energy goals. He argued that transition finance should not be about “excluding” high-emitting sectors from access to capital, but about accompanying them through the full transition along science-based pathways. If national policies, industrial strategies and regional protection are not designed together, he warned, “transition” risks being interpreted as de-industrialization rather than transformation.

 

 

Presentations | A 360° View of Transition Finance
The session featured four presentations offering perspectives from: global policy and public finance, global energy and investment systems, Korean industry and policy, and local and regional-level practice. Together, they provided a multidimensional view of what effective transition finance looks like in practice.

 

 

 Presentation 1  Decarbonizing Hard-to-abate Industry and the Role of Global Standards
Deger Saygin, Head of Industry Programme, OECD

Saygin underlined that steel, cement and petrochemicals are among the core sources of global direct and indirect emissions, and that “without decarbonizing these sectors, neither NDCs nor industrial competitiveness can be secured.” He emphasized that transition finance is not a single solution but a toolbox that combines multiple technological and financial instruments. In capital-intensive areas such as hydrogen-based steelmaking, he highlighted the need for instruments such as performance-based funds and de-risking mechanisms.

 

Drawing on examples from Mexico, China and India, he described transition finance as both climate policy and industrial/development strategy. Without clear plans, technology choices, KPIs and financing structures, he noted, capital will not flow into projects that deliver real emissions reductions. He also flagged the forthcoming OECD Transition Finance Toolkit, designed around these principles.

 

 

 Presentation 2  The USD 45 Trillion Transition Investment Gap and the Problem of Definition
Luca Lo Re, Head of Climate & Carbon Markets, International Energy Agency (IEA)
Lo Re estimated that around USD 45 trillion in transition investment will be needed over the next decade, while current financial flows fall far short of that figure — a “severe gap.” A core obstacle, he argued, is the lack of a clear and shared definition of transition finance. Without clarity, greenwashing risks increase, and policymakers, markets and investors have no common language for KPIs and verification systems. He also pointed to the existence of “left-out” groups — such as emerging economies and SMEs — and “out” groups who are excluded from current discussions. “Transition finance that is not inclusive is bound to fail,” he said, warning that rapid divestment from high-emitting assets can, in the short term, undermine global decarbonization efforts.

 

Transition finance, he stressed, must be designed as “finance that walks alongside transition, not finance that exits”, and must be embedded within energy, industrial and trade policy frameworks that address system-level constraints such as grid capacity and supply chain risks.

 

 

 Presentation 3  Transition Risks in Korea’s Industrial Structure and the Need for ‘Investable’ Transition Plans
Jiwon Choi, Director-General, Climate Change Center
Choi highlighted the realities of Korea’s manufacturing-based economy, including constraints relating to power supply, transmission networks and energy costs. Industrial transition, she argued, is not a peripheral agenda but central to Korea’s economic strategy. The three major sectors — steel, petrochemicals and cement — are deeply intertwined with regional economies, employment and infrastructure. Poorly designed transition pathways could therefore harm both climate goals and regional development.

 

She stressed that transition finance is not merely about subsidizing investments, but about creating transition plans that capital can actually invest in. She identified three key risks for Korean industry:
1. very high upfront capital costs,
2. uncertainty about the profitability of low-carbon products, and
3. constraints in electricity prices and grid capacity.

 

To address these, Korea needs integrated design across definitions, roadmaps, verification frameworks, electricity and supply chain policy, she concluded.

 

 

 Presentation 4  The Reality of a Steel City and Local/Labor-Centred Transition Strategies
Gang-duk Lee, Mayor of Pohang
Mayor Lee introduced Pohang as one of Korea’s major steel cities, generating around 35 million tonnes of CO₂ emissions per year, and noted that transition is already a pressing reality, not a distant concern. He shared concrete initiatives under the city’s “Greenway” projec since 2016t:
- smart and green upgrades of industrial complexes,
- energy-saving smart manufacturing,
- CCU projects capturing and utilizing 16,500 tonnes of CO₂ annually,
- experimentation with hydrogen-based steelmaking called HyREX,
- circular industrial clusters, and
- investments worth USD 740 million from seven companies.

 

At the same time, he candidly outlined challenges such as high technology costs, supply chain reconfiguration, local fiscal constraints and CBAM-related pressure. For Pohang, he said, transition finance must function as a lever that supports not just companies but also cities, workers and local communities. He stressed the need for collaborative governance linking central and local governments, industry, finance and civil society.

 

 

 Panel Discussion Summary  From Definitions to Social Acceptance: The Real Debates on Transition Finance
The panel, moderated by Tuuli Kaskinen (CEO of Climate Leadership Coalition) and joined by ResponsibleSteel, Japan’s GX Agency, The Climate and Society Institute (iCS) Brazil and the UNDP Sustainable Finance Hub, moved beyond theory to share real-world challenges and success conditions encountered in implementing transition finance.

 

1. Definition and Context – “No Single Global Standard” : Panellists agreed that a universal definition of transition finance is unrealistic. UNDP stressed the need for a development narrative, while Japan highlighted the GX framework as an example of a whole-of-society transition storyline.

 

2. Standards and Investor Priorities – “Progress, Not Labels” : ResponsibleSteel underscored that investors prioritize credible data and stepwise progress, not a simplistic “green vs. brown” label. Without trustworthy standards and verification, markets will not move.

 

3. Policy–Finance–Industry Alignment – “KPIs, Verification, Governance” : Effective transition finance requires clear KPIs, legal definitions and independent verification, applied across entire value chains. Well-designed incentive and disincentive systems are essential for execution.

 

4. Trade, CBAM and Interoperability – “Standards Are the Language of Negotiation” : With CBAM reshaping competitiveness, interoperable transition standards across jurisdictions are critical to avoid fragmentation and undue burdens on emerging economies.

 

5. Financial Instruments and Social Acceptance – “Transition Is About People” : Blended finance, guarantees, insurance, staged investments and offtake agreements emerged as key tools. Panellists stressed that the ultimate beneficiaries of transition finance must be workers, communities and cities, not only corporations.

 

 

What COP30 Clarified | Four Strategic Directions for Transition Finance
1. Transition finance is strategic policy finance, enabling emissions reduction, industrial competitiveness and a just transition simultaneously.

2. A credible framework—definitions, roadmaps, KPIs, verification, standards—is essential to prevent greenwashing and align governments, markets and investors.

3. Collaborative governance involving national/local governments, industry, finance and civil society—and strong social acceptance—determines the pace and quality of transition.

4. End-to-end financial mechanisms (blended finance, guarantees, PPA/offtake structures) are crucial to strengthen real-economy execution.

 

 

The Climate Change Center will incorporate these insights into its work on 2035 NDC implementation, advancing transition finance and just-transition pathways in partnership with industry, local governments and international actors.

 

 

 

 

 

---

 

 

 CCC Belém Interview 
“Belém was a city that delivered its own answer.”
- Heewon Seo, Manager of Policy Research Team, Climate Change Center -

 

 

Q1. During your time on the ground, what atmosphere or moment struck you most?
In the lead-up to COP30, the question I heard most often was, “Why Belém?” But after flying more than 40 hours and finally looking out the airplane window, that question instantly disappeared. The vast Amazon River and endless rainforest came into view, and it immediately felt like we had stepped right into the heart of the climate crisis.

 

When we arrived, the entrance to the COP venue was closed. We later learned it was because Indigenous groups were staging protests for their survival. On one side were Indigenous people in traditional dress shouting for their rights; on the other were heavily armed soldiers watching tensely. Seeing those two realities coexist in the same frame was incredibly powerful. It made clear, right in front of my eyes, that climate change is fundamentally about life, land and rights.

 

A brief visit to the Belém Museum of History added another layer. There was a photo exhibition on Indigenous community life—images of people living closely with nature. It overlapped in my mind with our own daily lives, which depend on consuming those very resources. It made me realise that climate negotiations ultimately ask a simple question: “Whose lives are we protecting, and what future are we choosing?” At moments, it felt almost like the world of Avatar—except this was not fiction, but the reality unfolding here.

 

 

Q2. How did the transition finance discussions at COP30 fit into the broader context? And what will CCC focus on moving forward?
If the past few years were about countries and companies setting net-zero targets and organizing internally, COP30 was the moment when everyone asked, “So where exactly are we stuck?” Post-pandemic supply chain shocks, energy price volatility and geopolitical tensions have made even proactive companies feel the strain. That’s why many argued that simply telling hard-to-abate sectors to “take responsibility and reduce emissions” is no longer enough to keep the transition moving. This is precisely the gap that transition finance is meant to fill, and the Korea Pavilion’s session captured that point very clearly.

 

Based on these discussions, the Climate Change Center plans to focus on three priorities:
① Developing realistic ‘mid-term transition roadmaps’ for Korea’s major emitters : For industries that form the backbone of Korea—steel, petrochemicals, cement—it is essential to outline practical, near-term pathways for the 2035–2040 horizon: the technologies, investments and policies that can actually be deployed now.

② Linking transition finance with the realities of electricity supply and grid constraints : Industrial decarbonization ultimately hinges on how much electricity is available, how reliable it is and at what price. Transition finance cannot be discussed in isolation from power market reform. We need policy packages that link the two.

③ Shifting the lens: transition is not about “companies” but about “people and regions” : Transition finance should support not only factories, but also the workers, communities, youth and local economies that depend on them. This requires stronger cooperative governance involving national and local governments, industry and civil society.

 

 

In the end, I believe that transition is not about the goal itself, but about how we move together. And the CCC’s Climate Policy Research Team will continue working to make this “way of moving together” a concrete reality in Korea—through institutions, partnerships and a shared culture of transition.