# NEW: COP31 cover decision ‘reflections’ text

**URL:** <https://connect.carbonbrief.org/t/new-cop31-cover-decision-reflections-text/144>\
**Category:** Policy\
**Created:** [November 13, 2026, 5:55am UTC](https://connect.carbonbrief.org/t/new-cop31-cover-decision-reflections-text/144 "2026-11-13T05:55:28Z")\
**Posts on this page:** 2\
**Page:** 1

<div class="post-metadata">

**Author:** ![simon](https://yyz2.discourse-cdn.com/flex008/user_avatar/connect.carbonbrief.org/simon/32/61_2.png) [@simon](https://connect.carbonbrief.org/u/simon)\
**Post date:** [November 13, 2026, 5:55am UTC](https://connect.carbonbrief.org/t/new-cop31-cover-decision-reflections-text/144/1 "2026-11-13T05:55:28Z")

</div>

Today, Friday 13 November, the COP31 presidency published a “reflections” [text](https://unfccc.int/sites/default/files/resource/Reflections%20on%20Proposed%20Cover%20Decision.pdf) on consultations it has been holding with heads of national delegations on a potential “cover decision”.

This is not a fully formed draft text, but instead contains an organised summary of the issues that countries have said they would like to see being included.

 ![image](https://canada1.discourse-cdn.com/flex008/uploads/carbonbrief/original/1X/e223a3ef64bba812f3c45f0a4a4045ea2df74ac0.png)

The “reflections” include a “commitment to multilateralism” and the principles of the Paris Agreement, through to “respond[ing] to 1.5C overshoot”, as well as “gaps in mitigation, adaptation, loss and damage, finance…climate observation and data”.

Not surprisingly, the text also mentions “increas[ing] electrification globally to 35% by 2035” – a priority for the presidency – as well as methane, oceans, mountains and many other issues.

 ![image](https://canada1.discourse-cdn.com/flex008/uploads/carbonbrief/original/1X/3bd07175e18669d3a0a3064ce473b682ea01c9d5.png)

It lists developing country asks, such as “developed countries to deliver on the obligations under Article 9.1” [on providing public climate finance], as well as priorities for developed and vulnerable countries, such as “recognis[ing] the central role of best available science and the IPCC”.

Also in the document are references to the transition away from fossil fuels (“TAFF”), the Brazil-led roadmaps on TAFF and deforestation and the ICJ [advisory opinion](https://www.carbonbrief.org/icj-what-the-world-courts-landmark-opinion-means-for-climate-change) on climate change.

There is space to mention “accelerating research, development and deployment of CCUS and CDR”.

There’s even a surprise mention of a “third commitment period of the Kyoto Protocol”. This is the now largely defunct deal under which developed countries – and only developed countries – had binding carbon-cutting targets until the end of the “second commitment period” in 2020.

In short, it contains everything everyone has said they want a cover decision to include.

Remember the plea from Chris Bowen, president of negotiations, that the text not become a “lengthy political statement”? That always seemed optimistic.

Closed consultations with heads of national delegations are set to continue from 11:00-13:00 today here in Antalya.

We’re still expecting countries to be asked to make text submissions on the cover decision over the weekend, with a proper draft text emerging early next week.

---

<div class="post-metadata">

**Author:** ![li11](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/l/919ad9/32.png) [@li11](https://connect.carbonbrief.org/u/li11)\
**Post date:** [November 13, 2026, 6:58am UTC](https://connect.carbonbrief.org/t/new-cop31-cover-decision-reflections-text/144/2 "2026-11-13T06:58:30Z")

</div>

> [@simon](#):
>
> There’s even a surprise mention of a “third commitment period of the Kyoto Protocol”. This is the now largely defunct deal under which developed countries – and only developed countries – had binding carbon-cutting targets until the end of the “second commitment period” in 2020.

The mention of KP 3rd committment period in the document is a real surprise 🤔 In my impression, I cannot remember if any Party had mentioned this… I am suspecting this might be a misinterpretation of the Arab Group’s strongly worded intervention, in which it opposed any return to the Kyoto Protocol-era approach of assigning obligations…