COP30 brings ocean and water to the center of climate policy

CCB • December 5, 2025

In Belém, in the heart of the Amazon, the 2025 UN Climate Change Conference COP30 immediately set the bar high. In his opening speech, Brazilian President Lula da Silva stressed that climate change is no longer a "threat to the future", but a tragedy that the world is already experiencing here and now, and called on countries to accelerate actions rather than limit themselves to promises.


However, as is often the case in COP meetings, the political reality turned out to be more complicated than ambitions. Negotiations were difficult: the countries could not agree on a clear and binding plan to phase out fossil fuels. It is important to note that the Global Action Plan has provided a platform for discussing the development of a roadmap for phasing out fossil fuels, the main driver of climate change. At the same time, COP30 has brought tangible progress in other areas: the countries agreed to triple the amount of adaptation funding for developing countries by 2035, strengthened the forest and ocean agenda, and expanded the range of practical initiatives under the Action Agenda. COP30 consolidated the trend: from "water at the center of the climate crisis" to a holistic ocean agenda closely related to energy, food, biodiversity and sustainable coastal development.


From the COP29 Water Declaration to the COP30 Enhanced Ocean Water Program

At COP29 in Baku, the Declaration on Water for Climate Action was adopted, with the aim to applying comprehensive approaches to combating the causes and consequences of climate change for water basins, emphasizing also the need to integrate water-related mitigation and adaptation measures into national climate policies, including Nationally Determined Contributions (NDCs) and National Adaptation Plans (NAPs).

COP30 did not reverse this logic, but expanded it towards the ocean and coasts. Both processes "aquatic" and "oceanic" are moving in the same direction: 

  • integration of water, coasts and ocean into the climate plans of countries;
  • development of nature-based solutions;
  • strengthening transboundary management of water and marine systems;
  • recognizing adaptation as an equal part of climate policy, rather than an "adjunct" to emissions reduction.


Task Force on Oceans and the Blue NDC Challenge


The international
Task Force on Oceans, led by Brazil and France, was officially presented at the high-level ministerial meeting "From Ambition to Implementation: Delivering on Ocean Commitments" on 18 November, integrating oceans into a global mechanism to accelerate the incorporation of marine solutions into national climate plans.

The Blue Nationally Determined Contributions (NDC) Challenge encourages countries to set ocean protection targets when updating their NDCs. The goal is to transition the Blue NDC Challenge into an Implementation Task Force. Members of the Blue NDC Challenge, currently 17 countries, can adopt a broad set of actions aimed at the protection and sustainable use of the oceans.These measures include the sustainable management, conservation, and restoration of coastal and marine ecosystems, supported by tools  such as marine spatial planning, integrated coastal zone management, and climate-aligned marine protected areas. Countries are also encouraged to support sustainable and climate-resilient fishing and aquaculture, ensuring ocean health and long-term food security.


Brazil has set a clear example: its updated NDC includes a separate chapter on the ocean and coastal zones. For the first time, the national climate plan (Plano Clima) until 2035 includes a thematic adaptation plan for these areas. Priorities include the completion of national Maritime Spatial Planning (MSP) by 2030 and major programs for the conservation and restoration of mangroves and coral reefs (ProManguezal, ProCoral).

Blue Package and «Ocean Breakthroughs»


The Blue Package, part of the COP30 Action Agenda, provides a roadmap for how countries can:

  • Protect and restore coastal and marine ecosystems;
  • Integrate marine solutions into climate mitigation and adaptation;
  • Scale marine protected areas aligned with climate goals;
  • Deploy tools such as marine spatial planning (MSP) and integrated coastal zone management.

This is the first time an Action Agenda includes a dedicated ocean implementation track. It builds on the Ocean Breakthroughs, which are science-based "breakthroughs" formulated up to 2030 in five interconnected sectors:


Marine Conservation: by 2030, investments of at least USD 72 billion secure the integrity of ocean ecosystems by protecting, restoring, and conserving at least 30% of the ocean for the benefit of people, climate, and nature;


Ocean Renewable Energy: by 2030, at least 380 GW of offshore capacity should be installed, while establishing targets and enabling measures for net-positive biodiversity outcomes. USD 10 billion in concessional finance is advocated for developing economies to reach its goal.


Shipping: by 2030, zero emission fuels make up at least 5%of international shipping fuels (aiming for 10%) and 15% of domestic shipping fuels. 450,000 seafarers need upskilling and retraining, and 30% of trade should move through climate adapting ports. The impact of international shipping on marine biodiversity should be reduced by 30%.


Aquatic Food: by 2030, at least USD 4 billion per year will support resilient aquatic food systems that contribute to healthy, regenerative ecosystems and sustain food,and nutrition security for three billion people;


Coastal Tourism: by 2030, USD 30 billion per year should be  invested to halve emissions from coastal tourism. Additional investments are planned to build the resilience of local communities and to recover and protect ecosystems, supporting  sustainable tourism in island and coastal destinations most vulnerable to climate change.


Practical tools for achieving these goals were also launched at COP30:

  • Ocean Breakthroughs Implementation Dashboard is a public dashboard to monitor the progress of countries and industries in five areas (nature conservation, marine food, renewable energy, shipping, tourism);
  • Marine Biodiversity & The Ocean Health toolkit is a set of standards and methodologies for assessing the state of the ocean and integrating ocean based solutions into NDC/NAP (including ocean health indicators, recommendations for monitoring biodiversity, and templates for accounting and reporting).


Together, these tools enhance accountability and transparency, making it more difficult for countries to "speak beautifully" about the ocean without taking measurable actions.


One Ocean Partnership and Belém Ocean Declaration


The One Ocean Partnership is another framework initiative reinforced at COP30. It unites states, scientific organizations, NGOs and businesses around large-scale programs for the restoration and protection of marine ecosystems. By 2030, the partnership aims to mobilize at least $20 billion for the restoration of marine ecosystems, create up to 20 million jobs in coastal regions, accelerate the implementation of ocean-based solutions in national climate policies.


The Belém Ocean Declaration was presented at the Ocean Pavilion, calling on countries to:

  • Recognize the ocean as a central climate regulator and integrate it into national and global climate strategies;
  • Ensure accessibility and equity of ocean solutions, prioritizing small island states, least developed countries and coastal communities;
  • Accelerate ocean and coastal conservation by linking itto mitigation, adaptation, and sustainability goals;
  • Develop threat-monitoring technologies (e.g. sea level rise, acidification, biodiversity loss) and create reliable MRV (monitoring, reporting and verification) systems for ocean solutions;
  • Support global ocean surveillance and mapping systems.


 The declaration sets the political framework that underpins the practical goals and tools of the Blue Package and Ocean Breakthroughs.

At COP30, environmental organizations and scientific institutions also  raised concerns about  threats to the ocean that remain outside formal solutions. One of the key issues was deep-sea mining: NGOs warned about the risks of destroying unique deep-sea ecosystems and emphasized that commercial mining should not proceed without scientific data on its climatic and environmental consequences. Although COP30 did not make  formal decisions on deep-sea mining or restrictions on commercial fishing, pressure from NGOs, scientists, and coastal communities is growing, shaping global demand for stronger ocean protection in future climate negotiations.


Strengths of the COP30 water and ocean agenda

  • The ocean has been systematically integrated into climate instruments for the first time, including NDCs, the Action Agenda, and various coalitions and partnerships;
  • The Blue Package and Ocean Breakthroughs set specific benchmarks for sectoral goals, financing, and monitoring; 
  • New financial and institutional mechanisms are emerging, such as the Blue NDC Challenge, One Ocean Partnership, and ocean-focused parts of the Action Agenda, supporting national and regional blue projects.


Gaps and challenges

  • Most oceanic initiatives remain voluntary and are embedded in  binding COP decisions;
  • There is still no strong language in COP texts on limiting oil and gas production on the continental shelf or in deep-sea areas;
  • Freshwater ecosystems (rivers, lakes, reservoirs) receive noticeably less attention than ocean and forests, leaving the water agenda somewhat  "blurred" across forest, biodiversity, and Amazonian themes.


In summary, COP30 has significantly advanced the institutionalization of the ocean in climate policy, but has not addressed  the key political issue of the rapid,mandatory phase-outof fossil fuels. Without this, any "blue" agenda risks being compensatory rather than transformational.


The COP30 water agenda reinforces the integration of  seas and coasts intoclimate policy. For the Baltic States, this means coastal ecosystems will increasingly be included in national adaptation plans and climate strategies as natural protection against storms, erosion and sea level rise.


COP30 initiatives such as the Blue NDC Challenge, Blue Package, and One Ocean Partnership create the political and financial framework for scaling coastal ecosystem restoration projects. This opens  opportunities for projects aimed at strengthening coastal resilience, monitoring sea conditions, and implementing nature-based solutions. As a result, the COP30 water agenda creates both pressure and incentives to accelerate climate adaptation in the Baltic and highlight the need for more funding for "blue" and coastal projects.


***
Article written by Anna Ushakova, CCB Maritime Working Area Leader


By CCB March 30, 2026
Brussels, 30 March 2026 - Today, Fisheries Ministers from EU Member States meet with the European Commission for the AGRIFISH Council. On this occasion, Oceana, BLOOM, ClientEarth, Coalition Clean Baltic (CCB), Environmental Justice Foundation (EJF), Seas At Risk and WWF EU, handed a symbolic ''Pandora’s Box'' to the EU Commissioner Costas Kadis, sending a clear message as the European Commission prepares its 2026 evaluation of the Common Fisheries Policy (CFP). The box represents the risks of revising EU’s main fishery policy framework: once opened, competing demands from Member States, industry, small-scale fishers, and coastal communities could quickly spiral into division, regulatory delays and uncertainties. This would put at risk the hard-won progress made in restoring Europe’s fish populations and improving the profitability of the fishing sector. NGOs urge decision makers to build on the progress made to date and to prioritise the full and timely implementation of the existing rules. Reopening the CFP and its related provisions would undermine ocean health and the long-term future of Europe’s fishing communities. '' Europe's fisheries policy is facing a credibility test. The law is already there. The tools to rebuild our seas already exist. What's missing is the political will to deliver. Overfishing should have ended by 2020 at the latest. Reopening the CFP would signal that missed deadlines carry no consequences, erode trust, revert the progress made, and put the future of our fisheries and coastal communities at stake ’’, said the NGO coalition. *** Oceana: Vera Coelho, Executive Director and Vice President in Europe BLOOM: Claire Nouvian, Founder and General Director ClientEarth: John Condon, Lead of Marine Ecosystems Coalition Clean Baltic (CCB): Ida Carlén, Co-Chair Environmental Justice Foundation: Steve Trent, CEO/Founder Seas At Risk: Dr Monica Verbeek, Executive Director WWF EU: Ester Asin, Director
By CCB March 10, 2026
Uppsala, March 2026 - CCB has closely worked with the implementation of the EU Marine Strategy Framework Directive (MSFD) ever since its adoption and welcomed the opportunity to give feedback to this crucial directive for marine biodiversity and ocean health through the EU Call of Evidence . Evaluations conducted by the EU Commission previously found many positive effects for EU marine waters stemming from the directive, but also that the directive has some shortcomings. CCB however, maintains that the largest obstacle to fully implementing the directive and achieving Good Environmental Status (GES) is the lack of political will among Member States to do so. This forthcoming revision must therefore result in a framework directive that is more easily enforceable, measurable and implementable, accompanied by sufficient funding to carry out the measures. Furthermore, in order to achieve GES as fast as possible other key pieces of EU legislation must also support reaching it and focus on achieving the goals of the MSFD in their objectives. Seeing that European seas generally are in poor condition and under mounting pressure from human activities and that in the Baltic Sea the situation is especially dire there is an urgent need for truly ecosystem-based management of our seas and for reaching GES. The revised MSFD can help us achieve this, but only if it includes the points outlined below and the directive is fully and swiftly implemented: *** [Short version]*** Operationalise the overarching GES goal: EU sea areas were supposed to reach GES already in 2020, but due to low political ambition, sadly did not do so. Member States should therefore strive to reach GES as fast as possible now. Setting a new overall deadline for when to reach GES is not the answer on how to achieve this goal most efficiently, instead tools that address pressures and measure progress and ensure actual, timely implementation of ambitious measures must be included in the revised directive in order to operationalise achieving the overall GES goal. CCB therefore recommends making the existing and forthcoming threshold values for the descriptors and their criteria legally binding and part of the main directive. Improving regional coordination and implementation: To improve the coherence, coordination and effectiveness of MSFD implementation, assessment of GES, monitoring and the national PoMs the role of the Regional Seas Conventions (RSCs) must be clarified. CCB would welcome collating all the national PoMs into one regional PoM for the Baltic Sea, which should be aligned with, in addition to reaching the goals of the MSFD, with achieving the goals of the Baltic Sea Action Plan (BSAP). Land-sea interface: For the Baltic Sea to achieve GES it is key that land-based pressures, primarily nutrient runoff from agriculture causing severe eutrophication, is also addressed and that implementation of the MSFD goes hand in hand with the implementation of the Water Framework Directive (WFD). The goals of the MSFD and achieving GES should also be included when implementing and shaping the Common Agricultural Policy (CAP), as well as any synergies with implementing the EU Zero Pollution Action Plan which are also important to identify and utilise. The Baltic Sea also has a too high prevalence and level of other pollutants and hazardous substances affecting marine life. Fisheries and aquaculture: As one of the main pressure factors on the marine environment in general, as well as in the Baltic Sea, fisheries and aquaculture and the effects they have on the marine ecosystem and its biodiversity must be addressed in order to achieve GES. This is especially crucial when considering the MSFD descriptor for Biodiversity (D1), Fish and Shellfish (D3), Food webs (D4) and the one for Seabed integrity (D6). Climate change: Climate change is also affecting the Baltic Sea faster than other marine regions and must be factored in when managing the sea area and its resources to ensure EBM and the full implementation of the MSFD and achieving GES. The effects of the climate crisis should be accounted for when setting pressure reduction targets and threshold values for the descriptors and their criteria, in a way that when an effect cannot be measured nor predicted the precautionary principle must be used. Revising Art. 14 of the MSFD: Article 14 in the MSFD outlines the acceptable exceptions when reaching GES is not possible. The article needs to be revised in the forthcoming revision, since it contains too many and too broad in scope possibilities for exemptions (e.g. in Art. 14(4)), which jeopardise the implementation and fulfilment of the directive as a whole. A possible way of modifying it would be to introduce an obligation for Member States to demonstrate that they have taken all measures within their control nationally and that they have tried to address the problem and advance solving it on a regional level through cooperating with other Member States, before they can apply for a possible exemption. Make the Programme of Measures contain ambitious & concrete measures: One of the cornerstones of the MSFD is the national PoMs that are published every six years and are precluded by an assessment of GES in national waters and a monitoring programme. Unfortunately, the current approach to PoMs where Member States freely can choose measures has led to an overall too low level of ambition in the PoMs, and to large differences within regions and between neighboring countries in terms of which measures are included. In order to fully implement the directive and to achieve GES it is of paramount importance that the national PoMs have a high level of ambition and contain concrete, implementable measures and that there is regional coordination. Easing the reporting burden: One of the results from the evaluation of the MSFD was that the current reporting burden is considered to be too high and a possible way to address this is to align the reporting obligations of the MSFD to more reassemble those of the WFD, that has a more simplified 6-year cycle compared to the MSFD. The implementation cycle however should not be revised or at least not in a way that delays reaching GES. Improve coherence with other legislation: To ensure that the revised MSFD is fully implemented it is essential that coherence with other relevant legislation is improved. The MSPD (foundation for the forthcoming Ocean Act) is also currently being revised and to reach the goals for both the directives achieving GES needs to be a cornerstone of the Ocean Act. This is the only way to deliver truly ecosystem-based management of our seas, and the revision of both directives should therefore be coordinated and focused on achieving GES. CCB looks forward to continuing to provide input to the revision process of the MSFD as well as working with the implementation of the MSFD, especially in the Baltic Sea. CCB expects that the revision will result in a more enforceable directive that leads to the fast implementation of ambitious measures to improve the state of the Baltic and European Sea areas and to the achievement of GES. The full text of the submission is available here . *** Links to supplemental documents supporting our positions: CCB’s submission to the Call for Evidence for the Ocean Act Guiding Recommendations for Source-to-Sea Restoration in Riverine, Coastal, and Marine Ecosystems (Coalition Clean Baltic, 2025) Position Paper on Marine Protected Areas (Coalition Clean Baltic 2024) Don’t sink the Common Fisheries Policy – fulfil its potential (joint NGO Briefing 2025) Blue Manifesto (joint NGO paper)