Skip to main content

Lack of transparency over lobbying at UN climate talks undermines public trust – new analysis

Transparency International is calling on Brazil’s COP30 Presidency to lead on integrity reforms to UNFCCC to protect against conflicts of interest and help drive ambitious climate action

Berlin — New analysis from Transparency International published today reveals how weak access rules and poor transparency safeguards at the UN climate change body (UNFCCC) allow fossil fuel lobbyists to participate in global climate negotiations without disclosing their affiliations, threatening the integrity and ambition of the process.

The research Behind the Badge: Understanding the roles, reach, and risks of fossil fuel industry participation in UN climate talks comes as negotiators meet at the Bonn Climate Conference to lay the groundwork for outcomes at the upcoming COP30 in Brazil.

Drawing on previous COP participant lists and data from KBPO, a coalition of groups campaigning to Kick Big Polluters Out, Transparency International researchers found that nearly 70 per cent of the 1,773 fossil fuel lobbyists who attended previous climate talks in Baku did so as part of state delegations, wearing either “Party” or “Party overflow” badges. Among them, 339 were officially registered as state negotiators - highlighting the scale of industry access to the heart of international climate decision-making. The analysis also finds that 6,209 participants - around 15 per cent of all attendees - chose not to disclose their affiliations, despite a new transparency mechanism introduced for COP28. Notably, over 90 per cent of these individuals held official national badges.

Brice Böhmer, Climate Lead at Transparency International, said:

"We cannot expect just and effective climate action if polluting industries have golden access to the negotiating table while communities most affected by the climate crisis remain sidelined. Fossil fuel lobbyists must no longer be allowed to shape climate decisions behind closed doors. To ensure parties’ trust and the public’s confidence in the UN’s global climate process, the UNFCCC Secretariat must strengthen accountability and establish robust integrity safeguards to prevent conflicts of interest."

Many lobbyists are believed to attend COP via “Party overflow” badges – government-issued accreditation allowing additional delegates to join national delegations. While not inherently problematic, the unlimited issuance of these badges by some countries has led to overcrowding, often at the expense of accredited observers and civil society groups. Azerbaijan, Russia, and Brazil registered among the highest numbers of Party overflow delegates at COP29. The lack of disclosure around affiliations raises questions about transparency and fair participation, in light of the frequent use of these badges by industry lobbyists.

Transparency International is urging Brazil to use its influence as COP30 President to introduce stronger integrity measures into the COP process, including initiating a dialogue on conflict-of-interest policies within the Global Ethical Stocktake, which is a mechanism for countries to report on their climate action. We are also calling on UNFCCC parties and the Secretariat to limit the influence of fossil fuel and other polluting industries in delegations. These steps are vital to protect the credibility of global climate negotiations.

Transparency International recognises the importance of inclusive dialogue but is warning that meaningful inclusion must be built on transparency, accountability, and the public interest. When nearly half of national delegates do not disclose who they represent, and hundreds of lobbyists gain access without clear affiliations, the legitimacy of the climate process is at risk.

Note to editors:

  • March 2025 open letter signed by 250+ civil society organisations calling for fossil fuel lobby exclusions at COP
  • Notes from Transparency International and Climate Strategies’ side-event at Bonn SB62: “Can Just Transitions Help Rebuild Trust in Climate Negotiations?” (available upon request)