There was a time when COP summits were all about promises. Paris 2015 was such a moment: a historic agreement, a common dot on the horizon and the feeling that with global agreements we could curb the climate problem. Ten years later, December 2025, that horizon is still there, but the road to it is proving bumpier than imagined. Emissions drop too slowly, raw materials become scarcer and geopolitical dependencies sharper.
Circularity as a precondition for the raw materials transition
The fact that circularity was explicitly placed on the agenda at COP30 shows that awareness is growing: without fundamental changes in how we extract, use and reuse raw materials, climate goals are unachievable. The raw materials transition is thus no longer an afterthought, but a precondition for both climate policy and economic stability.
For companies, this means a clear shift. Circularity is shifting from a sustainability ambition to a strategic instrument to reduce risks in raw material supply and to operate future-proof.
What was discussed about circularity and raw materials transition?
That circularity was given its own place at COP30 was no coincidence. The relationship between climate change and resource use is becoming increasingly clear: more than half of global greenhouse gas emissions are directly or indirectly linked to the extraction, processing and use of materials. The raw materials transition was therefore increasingly mentioned at COP30 as a necessary lever to keep climate goals achievable.
An important substantive anchor was the introduction of the Global Circularity Protocol, announced by the
World Business Council for Sustainable Development (WBCSD) and the
One Planet Network of UNEP. This protocol attempts for the first time to break down the fragmentation in circular measurement methods.
Developed by more than 150 experts from more than 80 organizations, the protocol provides companies with a global, science-based framework to concretize their role in the resource transition. Not by focusing on a single indicator, but by looking at material flows in conjunction with climate impact, nature and business value. The step-by-step approach from defining value chains and material flows to analyzing hotspots and steering for impact,makes circularity manageable instead of abstract.
Importantly, the Global Circularity Protocol is explicitly linked to existing standards such as ISO standards and the GHG Protocol. This does not position circularity as "yet another reporting requirement," but as a logical part of existing sustainability and business reports. For companies, this means that the resource transition can be better integrated into strategic decision-making, investment choices and risk management.
During COP30, there was also wider recognition that circular strategies make a direct contribution to climate mitigation as well as adaptation. Using fewer primary raw materials not only reduces carbon emissions, but also the pressure on ecosystems and dependence on vulnerable international supply chains. Circularity was thus tentatively positioned as a response to multiple global challenges simultaneously: climate, biodiversity and geopolitical stability.
At the same time, the focus remained on voluntary instruments and collaborative initiatives. There was talk of the importance of comparability, transparency and scaling up, but without binding targets or obligations. In doing so, the resource transition was recognized as essential, but not yet entrenched as a hard condition for international climate policy.
That is precisely what makes this part of COP30 ambiguous. The substantive direction is clear: measuring, steering and cooperating in chains are indispensable for circularity and the raw materials transition. But as long as these insights are not translated into concrete, enforceable agreements, the impact remains dependent on the willingness of forerunners and system change will proceed too slowly.
European ambitions: focus on climate, less on raw materials transition
During COP30, the European Union also positioned itself as a champion of ambitious climate policy. The EU presented tightened targets towards 2035 and emphasized the importance of market mechanisms, climate finance and nature conservation. This commitment is reflected in the official communication of the
Council of the European Union.
Yet the resource transition remained underexposed in these plans. The focus was mainly on energy and emissions, while it is precisely the use of primary raw materials that makes a major contribution to CO₂ emissions, environmental pressure and strategic dependence. Without structural attention to materials, climate policy remains incomplete.
What is missing to accelerate the raw materials transition
Despite the attention to circularity, COP30 lacked hard agreements needed to truly accelerate the raw materials transition. There are no global targets for reducing primary raw material use, no binding agreements on waste prevention and no obligation for companies to make their material impact transparent.
As long as circularity remains a theme day and not a structural pillar of the COP, the commodity transition will remain fragile and slow. This is not only a climate risk, but also an economic risk in a world of increasing scarcity and geopolitical tensions.
How, after COP30, we do get on with the raw materials transition
The next step in the raw materials transition is not a new vision, but implementation. Companies must stop pilots that do not scale up and switch to structural management of material flows. Without reliable material data, there is no grip on raw material use and no basis for strategic choices.
In addition, the raw materials transition requires ecosystem thinking. No company can realize this transition alone. Collaboration in chains, integration of CO₂ and materials policies and making transition plans mandatory are essential to move from intention to impact.
A COP that takes the resource transition seriously
A COP that takes the resource transition seriously makes circularity a pillar in its own right alongside mitigation and adaptation. That calls for an international circular agreement with binding agreements on resource use, reuse and waste prevention.
Global standards for material passports and transparency make circular performance comparable and ensure a level playing field. Material stability must be recognized as the ultimate goal, with an international commitment to a regenerative economy. Only then can the COP evolve into a true guiding mechanism for the resource transition.
From COP30 to concrete action
COP30 made it clear that circularity can no longer be ignored. But it also made it clear that voluntariness alone will not get the resource transition going fast enough.
At Milgro, we believe that waste-free and circular operations are achievable in 2040 - provided the raw material transition is tackled structurally now. Not waiting for the next summit, but starting today to measure, steer and cooperate.
The call is clear: do not see COP30 as an end point, but as a starting shot for accelerating the raw materials transition.
Staying up-to-date!
Want to stay informed about all new developments? Follow us onLinkedIn and Instagram or subscribe to thenewsletter. Are you curious about what Milgro can do for your operations and waste process? Then get in touch.
