COP31 hangs on a single spoiler. Despite backing from 23 of 28 Western Europe and Others Group (WEOG) nations, Australia’s bid remains blocked by Türkiye’s refusal to withdraw. Prime Minister Anthony Albanese is set to meet with President Erdoğan in New York this month to break the deadlock—and test the credibility of global climate governance.
Erdoğan is not acting out of climate ambition. Türkiye’s record on climate is among the weakest anywhere, rated “critically insufficient” by leading independent analysts. Instead, Ankara is using procedural brinkmanship to extract climate financing concessions and/or upgraded UNFCCC status. With UN host rules requiring consensus, even a solitary holdout like Türkiye can wield disproportionate power and block the clear will of the majority.
If this sounds like “hostage diplomacy,” that’s because it is. The danger is not merely bureaucratic delay; it sets a chilling precedent where global summits become bargaining chips rather than engines for ambition. The UN’s climate leadership has already described this stand-off as “unhelpful and unnecessary,” mirroring the frustration of delegates who want to see COP31 awarded on merit.
Australia’s own climate credentials are rightly scrutinised, particularly regarding fossil fuel exports. Yet its COP31 bid represents a formal co-hosting partnership with Pacific nations, offering them a direct global platform to highlight their existential struggle with rising seas. This bid enjoys broad support and aligns with WEOG and Pacific Island expectations.
Preparations for COP30 in Belém this November are already beset by controversy, including a major accommodation crisis forcing UN staff and delegates to scale back, and public outrage over Amazon deforestation linked to summit infrastructure. All this unfolds against a backdrop of global climate leadership fragmenting amidst geopolitical shifts, shifting policies, and mounting mistrust.
This past week, I’ve joined two public conversations that cut to the heart of what’s at stake: If COP hosts aren’t chosen for genuine leadership and partnership, the world’s biggest climate summits risk losing both ambition and credibility.
Contents
The Edelman Controversy: A Crisis of Trust
The crisis of climate leadership isn’t confined to geopolitics. It’s also about trust—and right now, that trust is on the line in Belém. Last week, I spoke to Valori, an Italian newspaper focused on finance and the environment, about the necessity of integrity in climate action.
The case in point: the UN has hired Edelman as lead communicator for COP30, even as Edelman maintains lucrative contracts with Shell, Chevron, and Brazil’s soy lobby—exactly the corporations fuelling the crisis COP30 is charged to solve.
To draw on a great Aussie phrase, this doesn’t pass the pub test. An organisation can’t credibly run the world’s most important climate summit while its PR partner profits from polluters. Edelman, recently awarded an $835,000 contract by the UNDP, has been called “Big Oil’s PR agency” by campaigners, and is currently managing reputation work for fossil fuel clients, including Shell, which is actively expanding extraction in Brazil.
Integrity isn’t just about optics—it’s essential for effectiveness. Trust is foundational. Paris proved that COP summits can catalyse historic change, but you can’t build that trust if your official storyteller works for Big Oil and agribusiness. Narrative capture is inevitable: PR firms with major fossil accounts will always be tempted to soften language and tilt campaigns to protect their existing clients’ reputations. Most critically, it’s moral hypocrisy to talk climate justice while outsourcing the summit’s moral voice to an agency profiteering from fossil expansion.
As I told Valori: “If your client mix contradicts your values, you lose credibility with customers, employees, regulators and investors. In sustainability, integrity is an asset class: you either compound it or you discount it. ‘Chinese walls’ rarely withstand incentives. If one Edelman unit expands fossil supply while another scripts COP speeches, the market reads the whole firm’s signal.”
UN Secretary-General António Guterres has called for PR and ad agencies to cut fossil fuel ties—yet his own organisation handed Edelman this contract. If the UNFCCC wants a credible summit, it should adopt basic vendor standards: public disclosure of fossil mandates, exclusions for expansion contracts, full conflict audits, and weighting for independence alongside scale. Credible alternatives exist—consortia of values-aligned firms with deep climate expertise. They deliver better work and uphold the summit’s integrity.
Fossil fuel clients are the new tobacco. Agencies wanting a seat at the table must cut those ties or forfeit credibility—theirs and ours.
→ Read the full Valori article (in Italian)
What This Means for Australia
The Edelman controversy exposes a fundamental problem: when climate summits compromise on integrity, they undermine their own mission. As Adelaide prepares to potentially host COP31, this offers both a warning and an opportunity.
The warning: Process hypocrisy kills credibility faster than policy failures. Every vendor, partnership, and communication strategy will be scrutinised for conflicts that undermine the summit’s moral authority.
The opportunity: Australia can differentiate its bid by committing to unprecedented transparency and integrity standards. This means adopting the vendor integrity standards outlined above—full disclosure of fossil fuel mandates, exclusions for companies actively expanding fossil infrastructure, and independent conflict audits.
Australia remains one of the world’s largest fossil exporters—a contradiction it cannot wish away. But hosting COP31 offers a chance to demonstrate that climate leadership isn’t about purity—it’s about transparency, accountability, and courage to draw clear ethical lines.
In a world where climate leadership is fragmenting, credibility has become the scarcest resource. Countries that compound their integrity will earn social licence and strategic influence. Those that discount it will be sidelined.
If Adelaide proves integrity still matters in a fractured world, COP31 won’t just be another summit. It will be the moment trust returned to climate diplomacy.
We’d love to hear your thoughts – email luke@bwdstrategic.com or message him on LinkedIn if you’d like to continue the conversation.
About the Author
Luke Heilbuth is CEO of sustainability strategy consultancy BWD Strategic, and a former Australian diplomat.