Delegates from more than 50 countries are gathering in Santa Marta, Colombia, from April 24 to 29 at the first-ever Conference on Transitioning Away from Fossil Fuels.
The conference’s stated aim is to “initiate a concrete process through which a coalition of committed countries, subnational governments, and relevant stakeholders can…implement a progressive transition away from fossil fuels creating sustainable societies and economies.”
Emissions from fossil fuels are at the heart of the climate crisis. Coal, oil and gas are the largest contributors to climate change by a wide margin. This has been well understood throughout the three decades of multilateral negotiations at annual Conferences of the Parties (COPs) to the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC).
Yet, the words “fossil fuels” do not appear in the text of the 2015 Paris Agreement — the global pact meant to steer the world to a cleaner and safer future. Petrostates and fossil fuel lobbyists have been effectively blocking serious consideration of fossil fuel phaseouts in global talks for decades.
Can the coalition of governments and other stakeholders gathering in Santa Marta make progress where other international efforts have failed? That is the key question for those attending the conference.
How did we get here?
The first mention of fossil fuels in an official UNFCCC output did not arise until the 2023 COP28 conference. The call to transition “away from fossil fuels in energy systems, in a just, orderly and equitable manner” was heralded as the “beginning of the end” of the fossil fuel era.
However, there was backsliding at COP29 in Azerbaijan, marked by controversies over the host’s promotion of fossil fuels. In the end, governments could not even agree to reaffirm the commitment to transition away from fossil fuels made the previous year. Frustration at the lack of progress boiled over at the most recent conference, COP30 in Brazil.
This led a group of countries to sign the Belém Declaration on the Transition Away from Fossil Fuels, with Colombia and the Netherlands co–hosting the first conference to further this initiative.
(AP Photo/Andre Penner)
What should we expect from Santa Marta?
Unlike UN-organized COPs, the conference in Santa Marta is a smaller gathering of 53 countries and the European Union with no official negotiations. It includes an academic conference, a people’s summit and two days of high-level government meetings. Private sector representatives can attend, but only if they are “aligned” with the conference’s objectives and principles.
The main output from Santa Marta will be a report from the co-hosts, based on discussions structured around three pillars. The first pillar focuses on overcoming economic dependence on fossil fuels. It’s particularly relevant for countries in the Global South that face high debt, higher costs of capital and limited capacity to finance their energy transitions.
Many of these countries, including Colombia, rely on fossil fuels as a critical source of revenue to fund social programs. This pillar is essential to ensuring the energy transition is feasible and fair.
The theme of the second pillar is “transforming supply and demand.” On the supply side, the most contentious issue is the phaseout of fossil fuel production. Fossil fuel subsidies, which may increase as governments respond to the current energy crisis, are also up for discussion.
On the demand side, discussions revolve around scaling up renewable energy while ensuring energy security and universal access to energy. The petrochemical sector is also highlighted for its problematic role in driving future demand for oil and gas, which is supported by recent research.
The third pillar covers “international co-operation and climate diplomacy.” One issue where concrete progress could be made is on investor-state dispute settlement (ISDS). This mechanism in many international treaties allows foreign investors to sue governments for policies they see as harming their investments.
The conference hosts have identified ISDS as a legal barrier to the energy transition because companies use it to undermine climate action.
In late March, more than 220 experts — including Nobel Prize-winning economist Joseph Stiglitz — sent a letter to Colombian President Gustavo Petro urging him to use the opportunity in Santa Marta to build “a coalition of countries working towards a world free of ISDS.” Soon after, Petro announced that Colombia would pull out of the system.
What does it mean for future climate talks?
(AP Photo/Joshua A. Bickel)
The Santa Marta co-hosts have stressed that the conference is not meant to be an alternative or replacement for multilateral negotiations. Instead, it’s envisioned as complementary.
The Brazilian COP30 presidency, which is running a parallel process to create a road map for fossil fuel phaseouts that will be delivered at COP31 in November 2026, has indicated that it will consider the outcomes from Santa Marta.
This isn’t the first time governments have experimented with “minilateralism” in the climate policy sphere. Initiatives like the Clean Energy Transition Partnership have proven to be successful. Canada is a member of this partnership and a leader in the Powering Past Coal Alliance, another group of “early movers” coming together on a key issue.
Prime Minister Mark Carney has indicated he values these kinds of coalitions. In a speech to the World Economic Forum in January, he laid out a vision for middle powers like Canada to play a key role in building a new values-based global order.
Santa Marta is a critical moment for the government to begin enacting this vision. The closure of the Strait of Hormuz has shown just how fragile global dependence on fossil fuels can be. Accelerating the energy transition could decouple our daily lives from volatile international markets.
Joining the efforts in Santa Marta is an opportunity for Canada to commit to transitioning away from fossil fuels while building environmental and economic resilience.
