At COP31 in Antalya, climate diplomacy faces a practical question: how can national commitments become programmes that cut emissions, strengthen resilience and improve livelihoods? Negotiations on finance, adaptation, mitigation and just transition remain central. Alongside them, Türkiye’s COP31 Presidency, with Australia’s Chris Bowen serving as President of Negotiations, is emphasising implementation, not as a substitute for stronger ambition but as the means of delivering it.

The Presidency’s ten-theme Action Agenda spans clean energy and electrification, green industry, resilient cities, food security, health and more. Its voluntary ‘35-by-35’ pledge aims to increase electricity’s share of global final energy consumption to 35 percent by 2035. This is not a binding COP31 decision; achieving the goal also depends on clean generation, resilient grids and finance for countries with constrained capacity.

The challenge extends beyond technology. Nationally Determined Contributions (NDCs) and National Adaptation Plans (NAPs) require enabling policies, procurement capability, credible financial management, project preparation and meaningful local participation. A programme may be attractive on paper yet stall if delivery institutions lack staff, data, financing arrangements or authority to act. The development test is not just whether an investment closes a financing gap, but whether it reaches people, protects livelihoods and remains effective over time.

At INTDEV Connect, our focus is on connecting strategy, partnerships, financing and delivery. Climate responses should be tailored to local needs, supported by capable institutions and designed for measurable outcomes. This is as relevant to adaptation and food systems as to energy and industry; no single model of implementation will suit every country or community.

One initiative worth following is the Presidency’s Climate Implementation Bridge (BRIDGE). It is designed to link country-owned priorities and project pipelines with technical partners and appropriate financing; it is not a new climate fund. Five pilot countries have been announced, but results remain to be demonstrated. Its credibility will depend on well-prepared projects and stronger national capacity.

From an innovative-finance perspective, mobilising private capital is valuable where the investment case supports it. But blended finance should demonstrate additionality, proportionate risk-sharing and value for money, not simply maximise leverage. Grants and public investment remain essential where social benefits are substantial but commercial revenues are limited.

For INTDEV Connect, the measure of progress beyond Antalya will be the quality of delivery: institutions better equipped to act, investments with workable financing and implementation arrangements, and climate benefits that communities can see and sustain.