COP30 Faces Backlash Over 1,900 Fossil and Agribusiness Lobbyists

More than 1,600 fossil fuel lobbyists and over 300 representatives from industrial agriculture gained access to the COP30 climate negotiations in Belem, Brazil, raising concerns from civil society and climate advocates that the summit is increasingly being shaped by industries whose operations directly contribute to global emissions and deforestation. These concerns come after COP30’s final declaration omitted any mention of fossil fuels, while also refusing to integrate Brazil’s Tropical Forests Forever Facility (TFFF), a forest conservation financing initiative. 

At COP30, the combined presence of oil, gas, meat, dairy, grain, and pesticide interests surpassed the delegations of most individual nations, positioning corporate actors to influence negotiations that could impose stricter climate obligations on their sectors. According to new analysis from the Kick Big Polluters Out (KBPO) coalition, one in every 25 attendees at COP30 is a fossil fuel lobbyist, a 12% increase compared with the previous conference. Although total attendance in Belem is lower than at recent summits, the proportion of fossil fuel representatives is the highest recorded since KBPO began tracking participation in 2021. Over the past five years, approximately 7,000 fossil fuel lobbyists have been accredited at UN climate summits.

The influence of the agribusiness has also displayed a marked jump. A joint investigation by DeSmog and The Guardian found 302 industrial agriculture lobbyists at this year’s summit—a 14% increase from COP29 and equivalent to the size of Canada’s delegation. Meat and dairy companies sent the largest bloc, with 72 delegates, followed closely by 60 representatives from the pesticide and synthetic fertilizer industry and 38 from biofuels firms.

The scale of participation has sparked renewed warnings about the “corporate capture” of UN climate negotiations. “Another COP, same playbook. This is corporate capture, not climate governance,” said Lien Vandamme, senior campaigner at the Center for International Environmental Law. KBPO found that fossil fuel lobbyists received nearly 60% more passes than the combined delegations of the 10 most climate-vulnerable nations.

Fossil Fuel Influence Remains Dominant

Brazil’s President Luiz Inácio Lula da Silva opened COP30 by calling it the “COP of truth,” yet the representation figures underscored the enduring influence of oil and gas interests. Large delegations are present through major trade associations, including 148 lobbyists affiliated with the International Chamber of Commerce and 60 with the International Emissions Trading Association, which includes representatives from ExxonMobil, BP, and TotalEnergies. Several European governments also included fossil fuel executives within official national delegations.

The imbalance is stark for nations already facing severe climate impacts. The Philippines, hit by 21 major storms this year—including two deadly typhoons in the weeks before the talks—has a delegation outnumbered by fossil fuel lobbyists by nearly 50 to 1. Jamaica, still reeling from roughly US$10 billion in damages from Category 5 Hurricane Melissa, faces a 40-to-1 ratio. Iran, confronting acute drought, faces a 44-to-1 imbalance.

The participation surge continued despite a landmark advisory opinion issued in July by the International Court of Justice (ICJ), which found that expanding fossil fuel production could constitute an internationally wrongful act. “States at COP should recognize the irreconcilable conflict of interest of the fossil fuel industry,” said Elisa Morgera, the UN special rapporteur for climate change, comparing the sector’s presence to tobacco lobbying in global health negotiations.

Industrial Agriculture Deepens Its Role in Climate Talks

Industrial agriculture lobbyists are also becoming increasingly prominent at COP. Although food systems were not a core negotiating theme this year, agribusiness stood to benefit from discussions on biofuels, climate finance, land-use rules, methane strategy, and the future of carbon markets. This comes as scientists have repeatedly warned that agriculture is responsible for between 25% and 33% of global greenhouse gas emissions, and meaningful climate progress is impossible without major changes in land use, methane management, and food consumption. Yet, agribusiness representation at COP has grown steadily—up 71% since COP27—and many delegates are pushing frameworks that critics say obscure the sector’s climate impacts.

Meat and dairy companies—responsible for the highest share of agricultural emissions—accounted for nearly one quarter of all agribusiness delegates. JBS, the world’s largest meat company, sent eight lobbyists including CEO Gilberto Tomazoni. According to research from the Institute for Agriculture and Trade Policy (IATP), JBS alone is responsible for roughly 24% of global meat and dairy emissions. 

As such, the company has focused its efforts on shaping methane accounting and deforestation policy. The company has played a leading role in a new UN-recognized private-sector platform known as the Sustainable Business COP, created by the Brazilian National Confederation of Industries. JBS also leads the platform’s Food Systems Working Group alongside Bayer, BASF, Nestlé, PepsiCo, and Bunge.

The group’s policy proposals, released ahead of COP30, emphasize productivity growth, voluntary farmer incentives, and increased financing for corporate-led sustainability programs. Critics argue that these approaches could sideline stronger methane rules and allow companies to promote growth while avoiding binding emissions targets.

JBS has supported the use of “Global Warming Potential Star” (GWP), a controversial metric that could significantly lower reported methane emissions without reducing cattle numbers. The company is also expected to present research in Belem claiming that Brazil’s cattle industry captures more carbon than it emits, though scientists sharply dispute such claims.

The scrutiny comes at a time when JBS faces multiple lawsuits and regulatory actions over deforestation, methane disclosures, and alleged greenwashing. In recent years, investigations have shown continued sourcing of cattle from illegally deforested land despite the company’s public commitments. In 2024, Brazilian regulators fined JBS for purchasing cattle from embargoed areas.

Biofuels, Fertilizers, and Pesticides Raise Additional Concerns

Beyond meat and dairy, agribusiness lobbying expanded across key subsectors, including 60 agrochemical lobbyists, 19 from pesticide manufacturer Bayer, and 38 biofuels lobbyists, which combined represent a 138% increase from COP29. The surge came as Brazil has pushed for a fourfold expansion in the global use of biofuels. Although marketed as a low-carbon energy source, a recent study found biofuels can emit 16% more greenhouse gases than fossil fuels when accounting for land-use impacts.

Food industry representatives also positioned themselves to influence climate-finance mechanisms. Critics argue that major agricultural polluters, which already receive substantial subsidies, could gain preferential access to global climate funds intended to support smallholder producers and vulnerable communities.

Corporate Access Widens as Transparency Gaps Persist

While all participants must now disclose their sponsors under new transparency rules, the requirement excludes official national delegations—where many industry representatives remain embedded. Transparency International found that more than half of all national delegates listed no organizational affiliation, obscuring the extent of private-sector involvement.

Countries including Russia, South Africa, Tanzania, and Mexico provided no information about the institutional affiliations of their delegates. Meanwhile, civil society groups have protested heightened restrictions on access for Indigenous peoples and frontline communities.

“While local Indigenous peoples struggled to enter the conference, fossil fuel lobbyists walked in freely,” said Pim Sullivan-Tailyour of the UK Youth Climate Coalition. “The UNFCCC is in need of rehabilitation.”

Negotiations Advance as Trust in the COP Process Faces Pressure

The influence of industrial lobbyists coincides with slow progress in several critical negotiation tracks. Discussions on carbon markets, methane reductions, adaptation finance, and national climate plans remained unresolved, while the COP30 final declaration refused to include language on a transition away from fossil fuels or deforestation. 

Advocacy groups say the presence of powerful corporate actors with clear financial stakes in the outcome is a barrier to progress. “This is a hostage negotiation over the future of the planet,” said Raj Patel, a professor at the University of Texas. “The companies holding the detonators—soy barons, beef cartels, pesticide firms—are seated at the table as honest brokers.”

The mounting presence of fossil fuel and agribusiness lobbyists has intensified demands for conflict-of-interest protections similar to those used in global tobacco control negotiations. While the UNFCCC has signaled only moderate steps toward additional transparency, civil society groups argue that reforms must go further. “COP will never deliver real climate action as long as industry lobbyists are allowed to influence governments and negotiators,” said Lidy Nacpil of the Asian Peoples’ Movement on Debt and Development.

With global emissions rising, 2025 projected to be one of the warmest years on record, and climate-driven losses accelerating worldwide, the stakes of every new COP summit continue to grow. For many participants, the question is whether the negotiations can advance meaningful climate solutions while the industries most closely linked to the crisis maintain an unprecedented presence inside the process.