At the heart of the global climate challenge lies a simple truth: you cannot separate the climate from nature. Trees absorb carbon, wetlands regulate water, and intact ecosystems, such as mangroves, slow routes to emissions and destruction. 

The role of COP30: where climate, nature and action come together

The opportunity to advance this integrated view is no greater than at COP30 in Belém, Brazil on the edge of the Amazon rainforest. Not just to talk about emission targets, but to place forests, ecosystems and nature centre-stage in global climate policy. 

The proposed Tropical Forests Forever Facility (TFFF) is a good example. This is a funding mechanism aimed at preserving tropical forests, not just in Brazil, as a climate mitigation and nature-protection tool. If COP30 successfully bridges carbon metrics and nature-based safeguards, it will push us beyond the tunnel vision on emissions and into the full complexity of what “climate action” really means.

The UK government’s stance: mixed signals

The UK government has publicly acknowledged the importance of forests and nature in climate action. For example, it pledged £239 million to help forest-rich nations halt and reverse deforestation in November 2024. Furthermore, a GOV.UK statement affirmed: “The programme will build on long-running UK initiatives to improve the governance of forests, support the trade of sustainable forest products and crackdown on illegal ones.” 

However, there are current tensions and criticisms. On the eve of COP30, the UK opted out of joining the TFFF, despite having helped design it. At a practical level this decision raises questions about how committed the UK is to nature-as-climate-action, not just emissions reductions. Civil society groups have flagged that while funding is pledged, strategy and prioritisation remain weak. 

One-time UK environment minister, Zac Goldsmith, elaborated that “We cannot protect nature unless we address climate change, and we cannot properly address climate change unless we restore nature.” And Goldsmith went on to criticise the UK government by saying “This government seems only interested in one-dimensional carbon accounting.” 

Why this matters

If climate policy focuses purely on emissions, for example switching from fossil fuels to renewables, and neglects the vital role of ecosystem health, we risk losing large potential sinks of carbon, under-valuing biodiversity and resilience, as well as losing the moral and practical link between nature protection and human livelihoods.

COP30 provides a moment to reconnect those dots. But progress depends on both ambition and coherent funding and strategy, from developed countries including the UK. The divergence between rhetoric and choice is becoming ever more evident.

Final thoughts

So as we watch COP30 unfold, a useful lens is this: Are forests, wetlands, biodiversity and ecosystems treated as side-notes to carbon, or as central, inseparable pieces of the climate puzzle? If nature remains secondary, we’ll struggle to deliver the deep transformation the planet needs. The UK may still contribute significantly to the solution, but its avoidance of the TFFF raises real questions about whether its climate-nature agenda is fully aligned, or too narrowly framed around emissions alone.

Explore more COP30 updates from RMetS