WHAT THE FIRST SUMMIT ON THE FOSSIL FUEL PHASE-OUT PRODUCED

From 24 to 29 April 2026, Santa Marta, Colombia, became the first international laboratory dedicated specifically not to generic decarbonisation, but to transitioning away from fossil fuels—namely coal, oil, and gas. The Colombian city was a deliberate choice: Santa Marta is one of Colombia’s primary coal ports, located in a region deeply defined by biodiversity, Indigenous communities, fossil infrastructure, and an extractive economy.

While the conference did not produce a formal treaty or legally binding obligations, it successfully launched an ongoing process. This includes a second conference slated for 2027 in Tuvalu – co-hosted by Tuvalu and Ireland – alongside a new scientific panel and three operational workstreams.

Santa Marta: Climate diplomacy seeks a path beyond consensus

For climate policy analysts, the significance of Santa Marta lies primarily in its attempt to translate the phrase transitioning away from fossil fuels – now a staple of diplomatic vocabulary – into a concrete implementation agenda. After years of political conflict focused on merely acknowledging the problem, Colombia and the Netherlands are attempting to build a space where discussions can finally shift toward the tools, costs, alliances, and compromises required to make that transition viable.

As detailed in technical analyses, the Colombian conference did not deliver a fossil fuel treaty, open a formal negotiating mandate, or establish binding legal commitments. Those looking for a historic decision in the traditional sense might argue the summit fell short on “deciding.”

From this perspective, however, the conference marks a shift in the political geography of climate diplomacy. It was not a meeting of the G7, the G20, or the G77. The coalition rallying around Santa Marta is more hybrid: small island states, Latin American countries, several European nations, vulnerable economies, cautious fossil fuel producers, and energy-importing countries exposed to price shocks. It does not strictly mirror the traditional North-South divide or the binary split between fossil fuel producing and non-producing nations.

Energy security flipped on its head

This is where Santa Marta flips a traditional narrative. For decades, energy security has been invoked to defend new exploration, infrastructure expansion, and the continuity of fossil fuel supplies. At Santa Marta, numerous interventions argued the exact opposite: fossil fuel dependency does not guarantee security; it creates vulnerability.

As recent global events have demonstrated, it exposes importing countries to geopolitical shocks, conflicts, price volatility, and supply disruptions. In this framework, renewable energy emerges as genuine infrastructure for stability and independence.

For civil society and climate movements, Santa Marta must not devolve into a technocratic club focused solely on roadmaps and policy packages. Instead, it must serve as a stepping stone toward a deeper transformation of the economic and colonial dynamics that contributed to the climate crisis in the first place. This opens up a critical tension: governments require a gradual approach to keep cautious nations, fossil producers, and finance ministries on board, while movements demand radical action—because the climate crisis leaves no room for further decades of ambiguity. Santa Marta held these two competing pressures together without making a definitive choice, leaving the newly established process to move in two potential directions.

Key outcomes: The panel, workstreams, and subsidies

Beyond the political debate, the summit established several concrete work-tracks designed to sustain the process moving forward:

• The Global Energy Transition Panel: A new scientific body designed to assist governments in building national transition roadmaps. Affiliated with prominent scientists like Carlos Nobre and Johan Rockström, the panel aims to provide more agile, policy – applicable analyses compared to the extensive assessment cycles of the IPCC. Its purpose is not to replace the IPCC, but to help countries translate science into national and regional pathways, addressing scenarios, policy packages, barriers, technological solutions, economic assessments, and justice criteria.
• Three operational workstreams: Launched to drive practical implementation, these tracks will focus on managing fossil fuel demand and supply, securing the necessary international finance, and ensuring a just transition for workers and affected communities.
• Transparency on subsidies: The co-hosts announced that the COFFIS methodology (Coalition on Phasing Out Fossil Fuel Incentives Including Subsidies) will be shared with participating nations. This tool helps countries build national inventories of fossil fuel incentives and subsidies. It represents a vital technical step: to eliminate or redirect subsidies, governments must first accurately identify what they are, how much they are worth, who benefits from them, and what distributional impacts they produce.

The relationship with the UNFCCC and the role of Europe

The relationship with the UNFCCC will be critical: Santa Marta must remain autonomous enough to discuss issues currently blocked within the COPs, yet connected enough to the UNFCCC to avoid marginalization. The primary risk is that countries opposed to a phase-out might use Santa Marta as an alibi, arguing that “since the issue is being discussed there, it does not need to be addressed at the COPs.”

To prevent this, the co-hosts emphasized complementarity. The final report will be formally transmitted to the Brazilian COP30 Presidency, subsequent COP presidencies, and key negotiating spaces heading toward COP31. The objective is to inject the outcomes of these informal discussions back into the official UN process.

The summit also raises a political question for Italy and the European Union. While the EU was present via the European Commission and several member states, it did not participate as a unified negotiating bloc, as is standard practice at COPs. Moving forward, how Europe engages with these plurilateral spaces will heavily influence its leadership and credibility on the global stage.