Blog Non-market approaches at the crossroads: Expectations for the Bonn Climate Conference
In June 2026, the next climate meeting (SB64) will take place in Bonn, where discussions on Article 6.8 of the Paris Agreement and Non-Market Approaches (NMAs) will enter a decisive phase.
This year marks the formal review of the Article 6.8 Work Programme, making SB64 a critical moment to assess whether NMAs are delivering on their promise or risk becoming an underdeveloped pillar of the Paris Agreement architecture.
Article 6.8 was conceived to promote cooperative climate action, emphasizing an approach that integrates mitigation, adaptation, finance, technology transfer, and capacity-building. It offers a framework for more holistic, equitable, and development-oriented climate cooperation to bring about systemic and lasting change. However, in practice, NMAs have struggled to gain traction, with many state actors preferring to emphasize transactional market-based approaches to address climate change. Many parties still claim to lack clarity on what constitutes an NMA and how they connect to national climate strategies.
Against this backdrop, SB64 represents an opportunity to review lessons learned during the first phase of the work programme and provide both conceptual and operational clarity.
Shaping the review
The 2026 review of the NMA Work Programme will not be merely procedural. It will provide opportunity for Parties to ask fundamental questions. Developing countries are likely to emphasize the unmet potential of NMAs as tools for finance, technology access, and sustainable development, while also pointing to the lack of dedicated support structures. Developed countries, on the other hand, may continue to push for greater clarity, measurability, and alignment with existing mechanisms.
Defining NMAs
One of the most persistent challenges in Article 6.8 discussions has been the lack of a clear and shared understanding of what NMAs actually encompass. At SB64, Parties are expected to revisit this question. Without greater conceptual clarity, it will remain difficult to scale up implementation or mobilize support.
Despite being operational since 2022, there is still limited evidence of operational NMA initiatives under the UNFCCC framework. Negotiations at SB64 are likely to focus on why implementation has been slow, what barriers countries face in developing NMAs, and how these barriers can be addressed through the work programme
Finance
If there is one issue that could define the future of Article 6.8, it is finance. But, so far the 6.8 negotiations have focused on the NMA Platform being a repository of everything related to NMA and the matchmaking tool to facilitate dedicated financial support. At SB64, the review should cover
- Whether dedicated funding windows for NMAs are needed;
- How NMAs can be linked to existing financial mechanisms under the UNFCCC; and
- The role of multilateral development banks and climate funds.
Without progress on finance, NMAs risk remaining aspirational rather than actionable.
NMAs and Nationally Determined Contributions
A key discussion expected from SB64 is greater alignment between NMAs and Nationally Determined Contributions (NDCs). Parties may explore how NMAs can:
- Support NDC implementation;
- Enhance ambition in future NDC cycles; and
- Contribute to broader goals such as the Global Stocktake (GST) outcomes and just transitions.
Enhancing NMAs effectiveness as practical tools for achieving national climate goals could significantly boost their relevance and incentivise more engagement.
NMAs and land sector
We have seen ongoing debates over the prominence of land use sector actions, as NMAs offer equitable and rights based pathways to address forests and biodiversity in a more integrated way linking mitigation, adaptation, biodiversity, and livelihoods. The UNFCCC Local Communities and Indigenous Peoples Platform has already expressed their strong opinion on recognition of Indigenous Peoples’ rights, strengthening community land tenure and governance, and ensuring equitable participation and benefit-sharing.
As this review of NMAs will take place in parallel to the ongoing developments of the Roadmap to Halt and Reverse Deforestation and Forest Degradation by 2030 , led by the COP30 Presidency, it will be important consider how NMAs can contribute to achieving this critical goal and complement efforts to be made through the implementation of the Roadmap and enhanced accountability.
Governance review
The Glasgow Committee on Non-Market Approaches (GCNMA) has been tasked with advancing the work programme, but its role remains largely facilitative. SB64 may review the current institutional arrangements, discuss whether GCNMA’s mandate should be strengthened or a new institutional mechanism may be required.
Conclusion
SB64 comes at a time when 2030 is not far away and the urgency of climate action demands solutions that are integrated, inclusive, and grounded in sustainable development. While Article 6.8 was designed to meet this need, its potential remains largely untapped. The 2026 review offers a rare opportunity to reset the trajectory and improve the effectiveness of the mechanism. Whether Parties seize this moment will determine whether NMAs evolve into a meaningful pillar of international climate cooperation or continue to operate at the margins.
As negotiations unfold in Bonn, one thing is clear: The future of non-market approaches will depend not just on technical discussions, but on political will to invest in cooperation beyond mere transactional markets and seek truly systemic transformational change.
As in the past, the Alliance will follow the discussions on Article 6.8 and share insights from Bonn.
