Negotiations over the strengthened Gender Action Plan (GAP) have entered a tense phase at the COP30 climate summit after disputes broke out on how to define gender. A conservative bloc is seeking to reduce the definition to biological sex — a shift that would erase trans and non-binary people from a central climate policy tool designed to ensure gender justice. 

The updated GAP, widely seen as one of the key deliverables of COP30, was expected to pass smoothly at the summit now in progress at Belém in Brazil. But opposition has come from Argentina, Russia, Saudi Arabia, and the Vatican, among others. 

Advocates for a more inclusive definition now warn that the pushback could undo decades of updates to the UN’s language and weaken the very foundations of inclusive climate action. The fight, they say, is really about power, patriarchy and who gets to influence climate policy. 

They also argue that certain governments fear that a truly inclusive definition could threaten entrenched hierarchies and force political systems to share space with women, indigenous communities and gender-diverse groups who are rarely given meaningful participation.

What is the controversy? 

The Gender Action Plan or GAP is a practical guide designed to make climate action inclusive. It explains how to integrate gender perspectives into all areas of climate work. Its goal is to ensure that policies on mitigation, adaptation, finance, technology, capacity-building and transparency support, rather than restrict, women’s participation and leadership.

The first GAP was adopted in 2017. The Lima work programme on gender, created in 2014, aimed to strengthen gender balance and weave gender considerations throughout UNFCCC processes. It was later extended, reviewed and ultimately paved the way for the first GAP at COP23. Following its scheduled review at COP29, countries agreed to extend the enhanced Lima work programme for another ten years and to produce an updated GAP at COP30.

Article 7(5) of the Paris Agreement states that adaptation efforts should be country-driven, gender-responsive, participatory and transparent, and grounded in the best available science as well as traditional, indigenous and local knowledge.

At COP 30, countries are expected to adopt a new plan that ensures women’s experiences meaningfully shape climate decisions, but negotiations have become strained.

However, several governments are pushing to narrow the term 'gender' to biological sex and conservative binaries of male or female.

The UN has already affirmed that climate change is not gender-neutral. Yet Argentina, Paraguay and the Vatican want ‘gender’ to refer only to biological sex, while Saudi Arabia, Russia, Iran and Egypt have long opposed broader definitions, often to exclude trans and non-binary people.

Speaking to TNM, Margareta Kolta, policy advisor at Act Church of Sweden, said, “There are six footnotes, which is new in the history of the conference. You start to redefine concepts that were already agreed upon. It's like having a footnote asking what we mean by adaptation, even though we have the Global Goal on Adaptation … It's a shocking experience, to be honest.” 

 Act Church of Sweden is part of Act Alliance, a global network of churches and church-related organisations working on disaster relief, development and advocacy.

On the opening day of COP30, 92 countries and groups, including the Independent Alliance of Latin America and the Caribbean (AILAC), the Alliance of Small Island States (AOSIS), Australia, Canada, Chad, the European Union, the Environmental Integrity Group, Guinea, Iceland, Japan, Moldova, New Zealand, Norway, San Marino, the United Kingdom and Uruguay, issued a ‘Global Statement on Gender Equality and Climate Action Ahead of COP30’.

This signals broad support, but whether that momentum can overcome the resistance of a few powerful holdouts will determine if COP30 delivers a plan capable of shaping inclusive climate policy for the decade ahead.

‘Hurting patriarchy’

“There is actually quite a majority backing for the GAP, which is quite historic,” Margareta noted. “Even regions that have not been too concerned with gender have been backing the action plan. But it's a few countries who are now actually making big obstacles.”

“Countries have started to add footnotes, as they don't want to accept the agreed language which is already there in the gender programme. Which is really strange. They have already agreed to something, and then they start unpacking it with their own definitions,” she said.

Pointing to “patriarchal and conservative rules”, Margareta added, “And some women are actually saying this is a sign that now they (patriarchal countries) are starting to be scared. It's the power of their interests. Because what is the gender action plan saying? There should be a higher representation of women and indigenous people. Those at the frontline of the climate crisis should have more influence and more representation in the meeting. It means you need to share power.”

One of the negotiators who sought anonymity told TNM, “It is both money and power. Countries like Saudi Arabia, Russia and many others cannot tolerate the idea of sharing their power and their wealth with gender minorities. That would shake their very existence in patriarchy.”

Margareta echoed the same opinion, saying that for some rich countries, it can also be a matter of sharing their wealth, which is actually built upon fossil fuel, while the whole idea of COP is to move away from fossil fuels.

Speaking to TNM, Maria Susana Muhamad, former environment minister of Colombia and a renowned political scientist, said, “Some countries are trying to block the advances in language and inclusion and are trying to block the advancement of the programme for women and gender [policies].”

Calling it an “ideological battle”, the opposition to the updated GAP, is also a bid to protect fossil fuel capital. 

“For them, social issues that are fundamental to change are not important. What is seen as important is protecting fossil capital. But our struggle is to advance science-based measures that will phase out fossil fuels and help us resist the power of fossil capital.”

This report was republished from The News Minute as part of The News Minute-Newslaundry alliance. Read about our partnership here.

If the government can hike print ad rates by 26 percent, we can drop our subscription prices by 26 percent. Grab the offer and power journalism that doesn’t depend on advertisers.