The First Conference on Transitioning Away from Fossil Fuels, hosted by the governments of Colombia and the Netherlands, will take place April 24 to 29, 2026, in Santa Marta, Colombia. (Photo: Transition Away conference)
From April 24 to 29, the governments of Colombia and the Netherlands will convene in Santa Marta, Colombia, the first international conference dedicated to transitioning away from fossil fuels. This gathering is a result of the failure of the 2025 COP30 climate summit in Brazil to secure any meaningful advancement on phasing out oil and gas.
It aims to rebuild momentum by convening states, Indigenous rights holders and civil society to chart concrete pathways toward renewable, regenerative economies. At its core, this effort also speaks to the reality that today’s global economy shaped by fossil fuel billionaires and war profiteers leaves ordinary people facing rising costs, political instability and an increasingly precarious quality of life.
For over three decades, global climate cooperation under the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change has been undermined by delay, fossil fuel industry encroachment into the negotiations and persistent refusal of petro-states to commit to a phase-out. These dynamics are worsening today amid geopolitical instability and the rise of right-wing governments. Climate action is no longer merely stalled or delayed; it is being actively reversed.
Climate action is no longer merely stalled or delayed; it is being actively reversed.
In Canada, this regression is blatant. Environmental law and climate policies are increasingly being framed not as safeguards for healthy communities and ecosystems but as barriers to economic growth and the ability of big firms to push through their favoured projects. New oil and gas projects, including pipelines, are being advanced as matters of “national interest” and may be facilitated through legal reforms that concentrate executive decision-making powers while sidelining democratic scrutiny and downplaying international climate obligations.
Momentum in Canada toward a just transition — driven by improved technologies and ever lower costs and reflected in now abandoned proposals like an oil and gas emissions cap and strengthened clean transportation standards — is giving way to renewed expansion of fossil fuel production. Legal shortcuts are promising to accelerate project approvals while eroding environmental protections and limiting government accountability, even as market risks deepen.
The consequences are particularly acute for Indigenous Peoples.
The consequences are particularly acute for Indigenous Peoples. Many proposed and ongoing fossil fuel projects affect unceded lands and waters, raising serious concerns about the violation of constitutionally protected rights and the principle of free, prior and informed consent, as affirmed under international human rights law. These are the populations that will be left with abandoned oil and gas infrastructure or a tanker spill to clean up. Local protein supplies will also be at risk, as fisheries must be shut down.
These domestic developments are reinforced by international economic law. Several trade and investment agreements signed by Canada continue to prioritize investor protections, including through investor-state dispute settlement mechanisms that allow corporations to challenge public interest regulations. The result is a chilling effect, where governments face financial and legal risks when attempting to phase out fossil fuels. Domestic laws that fast-track projects signal stability to investors, while international agreements essentially make reversal costly and complex.
This imbalance between enforceable economic law and largely aspirational climate commitments is increasingly untenable. The recent advisory opinion of the International Court of Justice underscores that states have binding obligations to prevent climate harm. Meeting those obligations requires more than setting targets; it demands dismantling the legal and economic systems that make fossil fuel expansion the default.
In this context, Santa Marta represents a new horizon. It reflects a growing recognition that consensus-based forums alone cannot deliver the speed or scale of change required.
In this context, Santa Marta represents a new horizon. By bringing together a coalition of willing states alongside Indigenous leaders and front-line communities, it creates a space less constrained by the conflicts of interest that have long plagued global climate negotiations. It reflects a growing recognition that consensus-based forums alone cannot deliver the speed or scale of change required.
What is emerging is a form of targeted, coalition-based cooperation, smaller in scope but potentially more effective. These “clubs” of ambitious actors can move faster, align policies across sectors and begin reshaping trade and investment rules to support, rather than hinder, climate action. They offer an opportunity to centre Indigenous leadership and rights in the design of transition pathways, ensuring that solutions are grounded in justice as well as science.
They offer an opportunity to centre Indigenous leadership and rights in the design of transition pathways, ensuring that solutions are grounded in justice as well as science.
The gaps between what science demands, what international law requires and what governments are doing continue to widen. In Canada and beyond, climate ambition is being rolled back while democratic space contracts. In this moment, innovation and experiments in global cooperation are necessary to counter widespread climate regression and shrinking of democratic space.
Our work
Always grounded in sound evidence, the David Suzuki Foundation empowers people to take action in their communities on the environmental challenges we collectively face.
