The 31st United Nations Conference on Climate Change (COP31) begins this Monday, November 9, in Antalya, Turkey, with an unusual structure. For the first time, the main responsibilities of the summit are split between two countries: Turkey will host and will hold the formal presidency, while Australia will lead the negotiations among the nearly 200 participating countries.
This is not co-presidency in the strict sense. The agreement assigns each country differentiated powers and states that both must consult with each other to coordinate their decisions. The objective is to resolve the standoff that their bids for hosting the conference maintained, while also incorporating the climate priorities of the small Pacific island states.
The summit will be held from November 9 to 20 at the Antalya Expo Center. The meeting of world leaders will take place on November 11 and 12. UNFCCC.
An agreement to unlock two bids
The formula was born out of the dispute between Turkey and Australia over securing the venue for COP31. Both countries kept their bids through COP30, held in November 2025 in Belém (Brazil), which brought the process to a standstill. After a week of talks, they reached a compromise that allowed them to close the election without either having to give up their aspirations entirely.
The agreement, announced on November 23, 2025, established that Turkey would physically host the conference in Antalya and assume the COP presidency. Australia, for its part, would obtain leadership of the official negotiations. The formula also reserved a specific role for the Pacific island countries, which would participate in the preparation of the summit and have their own space to place their climate concerns on the international agenda. Government of Australia.
The solution made it possible to prevent the choice of venue from being blocked by competition between the two bids. It also addressed one of Australia’s priorities: increasing the international visibility of a region particularly vulnerable to sea level rise and the effects of global warming.
What Turkey will do and what powers Australia will have
The division of responsibilities affects both the organization and the political development of the conference.
Turkey will be responsible for the infrastructure and logistics of COP31, for general communications, and for the climate action agenda, which brings together initiatives and commitments to translate international goals into concrete measures. It will also organize the summit of world leaders and designate the Turkish representative who will exercise the formal chair of the conference: the Minister of Environment, Urbanization and Climate Change, Murat Kurum.
Australia will have a different and decisive responsibility: to lead the official negotiations. Its Minister for Climate Change and Energy, Chris Bowen, will be the chair of the negotiations and will have exclusive authority over that process, in accordance with the modalities agreed upon by both governments.
Among its responsibilities are convening consultations and meetings during the year, selecting the ministers and other representatives who will facilitate the conversations, conducting the negotiating agenda, and drafting the texts that will be submitted for discussion. It will also be the main interlocutor before the UN on matters related to the negotiations.
The agreement also states that Australia will be vice president of the COP during the conference and that the two countries must consult each other if differences in judgment arise. Modalities of the partnership between Turkey and Australia.
The Pacific gains ground on the climate agenda
Australia’s participation in leadership of COP31 is linked to its goal of giving greater visibility to Pacific island countries. For many of them, climate change is not a future issue: sea level rise, coastal erosion, and extreme weather events are already affecting their territories and communities.
The agreement provides for a special preparatory meeting, known as Pre-COP, in a Pacific island country. Australia and the countries of the region themselves will be responsible for organizing and presiding over it. The intention is for international leaders and representatives to see firsthand the climate impacts and the responses that these communities are developing.
It has also been planned that COP31 include a session devoted to the financing needs for climate of small developing island states. The event will serve as a platform to promote commitments with the Pacific Resilience Facility, a fund driven by the Pacific countries themselves to support their responses to the climate crisis.
This regional dimension adds to the general priorities of the conference, including climate financing, adaptation, the energy transition, and the implementation of the commitments set out in the Paris Agreement.
Two countries at the forefront, but decisions still remain multilateral
The distribution of responsibilities does not mean that Turkey or Australia can on their own impose the outcome of the summit. The COPs are multilateral meetings in which the decisions correspond to the countries that are party to the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change.
Australia may lead the talks, organize consultations, and prepare the negotiating texts, but the agreements must be built among the parties in accordance with the rules of the United Nations process. The presidency of the negotiations has the power to order and facilitate dialogue, not to replace the collective decision of governments.
Therefore, the Antalya model introduces an institutional novelty, but it does not alter the nature of the COPs: the outcome will depend on the countries’ capacity to reach consensus on issues such as emissions reductions, adaptation to climate impacts, and financing for developing countries.
The conference agenda itself puts the focus on moving from commitments to their implementation. The UN identifies as central areas the energy transition, resilience to droughts and floods, and financial support for the most vulnerable countries. The challenge will be to see whether shared leadership succeeds in facilitating progress in those areas without adding difficulties to a process that requires the agreement of almost 200 parties.