The Paris Agreement elevated climate adaptation to a global priority through the establishment of the Global Goal on Adaptation (GGA). While momentum on this agenda was initially slow, COP28 marked a significant step forward when countries agreed on 11 thematic and dimensional targets to guide its delivery. Two years later another milestone was reached at COP30 with the adoption of the Belém Adaptation Indicators to track progress towards those targets. Both the targets and the indicators provide countries with a common reference for organising adaptation action, strengthening information flows, and supporting global assessment of progress towards the GGA.

However, to translate these developments into practical tools, Parties may seek clarity on key aspects when they meet in Bonn.

In Belém two related outcomes were adopted: the set of 59 Belém Adaptation Indicators, and the Belém-Addis vision, a two-year policy alignment processes intended to make the indicators operational. While this marked an important milestone, key questions persist regarding the indicators as well as the scope of the vision, how the work will be carried out, and what level of “policy alignment” is expected to be achieved in practice.

As a first step, Parties may wish to clarify how the indicators are to be operationalised. While technical work on data, metadata and methods is mandated, the decision from Belém rules out the establishment of a global standardised reporting system. This creates uncertainty about how reporting will function in practice, including what mechanisms will be used and which actors will be responsible for providing information.

A second issue concerns the intended function of the indicators. It remains unclear whether they are primarily designed to measure progress towards the GGA and inform global stocktakes of progress, or whether they are also expected to play a more operational role in guiding implementation and supporting access to finance, capacity‑building and technology transfer? Discussions among countries in the lead-up to COP30 suggest that expectations on this point vary. The limited treatment of enabling factors, including means of implementation, in the final set of indicators reflects this unresolved tension and points to the need for further political and technical clarification.

Getting the process right will also be important. A technical taskforce, yet to be established, has been tasked with developing metadata, methodologies and guidance needed to operationalise the indicators. While the taskforce can build on earlier work by a technical expert group that developed an initial proposed set of indicators, revisions to the final set of indicators mean that substantial additional work will be required. Close co-ordination between technical and political processes can help to ensure that the taskforce’s outputs are both technically robust and practically useful. To deliver on the Belém-Addis vision in time for COP32, the taskforce will need a clear mandate and agreed timelines by the conclusion of the Bonn negotiations.

In Belém, it was agreed that countries do not need to wait for the indicators to be fully operational. Early use and testing of the targets and indicators can help identify what data are already available, where gaps persist and which concepts or definitions may require further clarification. This is a process many countries have already started, generating valuable insights that can inform subsequent efforts to operationalise the indicators, including in the context of the Belém-Addis vision.

A natural starting point is countries’ existing reporting. In terms of the targets, nearly 90% of the first biennial transparency reports (BTRs) submitted by August 2025 already include information relevant to the 11 thematic or dimensional targets. Countries can build on this experience in the next round of BTRs, due at the end of 2026, without significantly increasing their reporting burden.

Some indicators are also better suited for early testing than others. Those related to means of implementation, for example, align well with existing reporting by countries and could be a practical place to start. Some dimensional indicators that are binary, quantitative or status-based may also be relatively easier for countries to test. That said, developing countries in particular will need targeted support to start engaging with the indicators.

The Bonn negotiations provide the first real opportunity to give shape and direction to this new phase of work on the GGA. Key priorities include agreeing a clear mandate and timeline for the technical work, clarifying what the Belém-Addis vision is meant to deliver and ensuring that early testing by countries can begin.

Decisions in Bonn will set the tone for the next couple of years leading up to COP32 in Addis Ababa. Done well, this process could provide a much clearer picture of how adaptation is progressing globally – in time for the second GST which will begin at COP31 in Antalya later this year.