The annual Conference of Parties (COP) conference outcomes are drawing mixed reaction from the sustainability and diplomatic communities. Hosted in Belem, Brazil COP resulted in “global mutirão,” or ‘collective efforts’ package, which called for tripling adaptation finance by 2035. Participating nations also adopted a formal just transition mechanism, and launched voluntary initiatives to strengthen climate targets and limit overshoot of 1.5°C.
However, the negotiations fell short of agreeing on a binding roadmap to phase out fossil fuels or reverse deforestation. This conclusion reflects hesitancy among many nations to adopt steep commitments. Despite progress on adaptation and equity measures, there remain continued divisions on ambition.
The conference agenda also included some logistics; namely, who would host next year’s COP31? After a battle between delegations from Türkiye and Australia, it was announced that Türkiye will host, with Australia leading discussions.
Hosting as a Bid for Soft Power
The debate about hosting COP is about much more than logistics; it is a strategic move to protect and grow soft power through perceived sustainability leadership. Growing competition to host COP reflects the reputational and economic stakes for nations and their cities.
COP is seen as one of the most visible multilateral platforms for dialogue. Participants contribute to the global climate action narrative, build diplomatic alliances, and attract investment and coverage. These benefits are especially pronounced for the host country and city. Being a COP host serves as a stamp of influence and credibility as a player in sustainability discourse.
Brand Finance’s 2025 Global Soft Power Index found that sustainability-related attributes (environmental-, social- or governance-related) were responsible for driving 37% of national reputation. Perceived sustainability is also strongly correlated with strength in trade and international relations. Similarly, Brand Finance’s Global City Index finds an influential role for items like clean air, green spaces, renewable energy, liveability, and cultural appeal in determining city reputation. Notably strong performers include Copenhagen, Geneva, and Melbourne, which stand out for supporting a sustainability-influenced brand positioning with a broad range of actual commitments.
This contrasts with some of the cities who have bid to host COP where actual sustainability practice may not match the ambition for reputational improvement.
The competition for COP31 hosting rights narrowed down to Türkiye and Australia. In Australia’s case, there may have been a desire to reframe its climate reputation after years of criticism, particularly on energy diversification. The city of Adelaide bid for the hosting opportunity to signal domestic progress and a willingness to engage on climate globally.
For Türkiye, the nation could position itself as a bridge between the European and Asian approaches. Hosting COP in Antalya would strengthen regional leadership and diplomatic influence, and it could also be a way to showcase progress on the energy transition amid fossil fuel reliance.
Significance of a Bidding War
As climate finance and governance increasingly dominate the COP agenda, host cities have the chance to be viewed as the place where decisions are made about significant investment flows and where those investments grow.
At the same time, the outcomes of each year’s conference tend to be variable. COPs have their own reputation for being performative, when a large gathering and a lot of buzz do not amount to many tangible, concrete outcomes. Copenhagen is a standout example of where hosting COP may have had a detrimental impact on location brand given that the talks there have become a byword for discord and delay.
Given this, hosting a COP does not come without risk. Indeed, the jury is still out as to whether Belem and Brazil will have improved their reputations for sustainability via this year’s COP, given the relatively limited concrete outcomes and widely publicised criticisms of the sustainability of the preparation process.
Conclusion
30 years of COPs have enabled the accumulation of sustainability-based soft power. Participants attend and declare their views to assert themselves as relevant players in global climate discourse, but also to project influence on the world stage. The intense contest for COP31, which saw a first of its kind mismatch between geographic and diplomatic host, indicates that sustainability branding continues to be important to cities and nations.