Despite decades of international climate diplomacy, global environmental crises continue to intensify. Agreements such as the Paris Accord and recent negotiations at COP28 have offered hope but have fallen short of delivering measurable impact. Moreover, climate-induced migration, now a stark reality, highlights the insufficiency of existing frameworks. While these global accords demonstrate progress in awareness and cooperation, their implementation often lacks urgency, equity, and enforcement. Therefore, by assessing successes and shortcomings - primarily through the lens of vulnerable populations and Global South realities - this editorial explores whether the world is truly moving toward climate justice or merely rehearsing it through diplomatic spectacle.
The Climate Crisis Unfolds: Displacement, Diplomacy, and the Global Response
To begin with, climate change is no longer a distant or abstract concern; it is an immediate and intensifying threat. Indeed, rising sea levels, prolonged droughts, intensified hurricanes, and wildfires have already forced millions to leave their homes. According to the Internal Displacement Monitoring Centre (IDMC), more than 32 million people were displaced in 2022 due to weather-related disasters. This number is projected to surge as climate shocks escalate. Furthermore, these migrants, often called “Climate refugees,” exist in a legal vacuum, as international refugee law - including the 1951 Refugee Convention - does not recognize environmental degradation as a basis for asylum. Therefore, this legal and humanitarian gap raises urgent questions about the adequacy of current climate agreements.
In addition, COP28 - held in Dubai in 2023 - was anticipated as a turning point in global climate negotiations. Notably, the summit came at a time when frustration with past climate conferences was mounting. It was especially significant for completing the first-ever “Global stocktake” under the Paris Agreement and operationalizing the long-awaited Loss and Damage Fund. Moreover, these developments were seen by many as long-overdue acknowledgements of responsibility by wealthier nations. However, while symbolically important, many commitments made at COP28 were either non-binding or deferred to future decisions. In an era of accelerating ecological collapse, such delays are thus not just bureaucratic but dangerous.
Uneven Progress: Where Climate Agreements Deliver and Where They Fail
1-COP28’s Symbolism versus Action: Progress in Words, Not Deeds
To start with, COP28 marked a historic shift by explicitly naming fossil fuels as the core driver of climate change. Previous conferences often avoided such direct language due to political sensitivities. Additionally, the establishment of the Loss and Damage Fund was celebrated as a long-awaited recognition of historical emissions responsibility by the Global North.
However, the effectiveness of these actions was significantly undermined by their lack of enforceability. For instance, the Loss and Damage Fund is entirely voluntary, with no binding obligations on contributing nations. Moreover, wealthy countries that pledged funds often failed to provide timelines or concrete mechanisms for distribution. Similarly, the vague commitment to “Transition away from fossil fuels” lacked the precision and urgency to drive change. In essence, the summit fell into the familiar trap of rhetorical ambition without binding accountability.
2-The Global Stocktake: A Warning Without a Way Forward
Furthermore, the 2023 Global Stocktake provided a necessary, though grim, assessment of where the world stands in its fight against climate change. It concluded that current national plans (NDCs) cannot meet the 1.5°C temperature limit. While this transparency was appreciated, the stocktake ultimately served as a diagnostic document rather than a strategic action plan.
In addition to highlighting collective shortcomings, the stocktake did little to compel countries - particularly major emitters - to enhance their commitments. Thus, developing nations, already enduring disproportionate climate impacts, were once again left to rely on uncertain promises rather than concrete support. Instead of immediate action, their calls for enhanced finance and faster emissions reductions were met with evasive diplomatic language.
3-Climate-Induced Migration: The Invisible Victims of Climate Injustice
Moreover, one of the most significant blind spots in international climate agreements remains the issue of climate-induced migration. Despite growing numbers of people being displaced by rising seas, desertification, and extreme weather, no legal recognition exists for these individuals as refugees. And the 1951 Refugee Convention excludes environmental displacement as grounds for protection, rendering millions effectively stateless.
Additionally, while COP28 acknowledged the displacement issue in informal discussions, it failed to produce binding commitments or frameworks to protect affected populations. This neglect reveals a disturbing moral gap. Sadly, the human cost, especially the plight of the most vulnerable, is often ignored. Hence, as long as global agreements fail to integrate legal protections for climate migrants, the international system remains morally and practically inadequate.
4-The Equity Deficit: Rich Nations Continue to Fall Short
Next, the persistent equity gap is another major failing of international climate agreements. Undoubtedly, developed nations are historically responsible for most greenhouse gas emissions, yet they continue to under-deliver on financial promises. The 100-billion-dollar annual climate finance pledge - announced in 2009 and due by 2020 - remains unfulfilled.
Moreover, the delivered funding often comes as loans instead of grants, further indebting countries already grappling with poverty and environmental collapse. At COP28, repeated calls for climate justice, including reparative finance and fair burden-sharing, were acknowledged rhetorically but ignored in practice. As a result, a deepening crisis of trust is emerging between the Global North and South. Thus, without equitable financial commitments, any notion of global solidarity in climate policy rings hollow.
5-Corporate Capture and the Rise of Greenwashing
Lastly, and perhaps most troublingly, COP28 revealed the growing influence of corporate interests in climate diplomacy. Reports confirmed that over 2,400 fossil fuel lobbyists attended the summit, exceeding the size of many national delegations from climate-vulnerable countries. This overwhelming presence casts doubt on the sincerity of negotiations and raises fears of greenwashing.
Furthermore, while some level of corporate engagement can contribute to technological solutions, the dominance of polluting industries in policy conversations risks watering ambition. It transforms critical climate summits into public relations stages rather than platforms for science-based action. Thus, until such conflicts of interest are meaningfully addressed, the credibility of international climate governance will remain under question.
A Human-Centered Critique of Climate Governance
Taken together, these shortcomings reveal a consistent pattern. Despite this recognition, growing awareness and increasingly dire warnings have not translated into meaningful action, as international climate agreements remain hampered by weak enforcement, inequitable commitments, and a failure to address human displacement. While COP28 offered symbolic victories, its legal and institutional limitations kept it from becoming a transformative milestone. Moreover, climate-induced migration - the most visible human cost of ecological failure - continues to be ignored in legal terms. In addition, the persistent influence of powerful polluters dilutes ambition. Therefore, it would continue to be more performative than transformative until climate diplomacy confronts these structural issues, which center on human survival, enforceable obligations, and historical accountability.
Climate Justice Cannot Wait for Another Summit
In sum, climate summits like COP28 reflect global urgency but fall short where it matters most the action. Sadly, legal blind spots for climate migrants, weak funding, and corporate sway continue to stall progress. So, the crisis would outpace solutions until climate governance prioritizes justice over politics. The time for symbolic promises has passed; only bold, inclusive action can avert irreversible loss.