The gavelling that sealed the Glasgow Climate Pact was muted. Not just on the screens outside the negotiating room, where I watched with journalists jockeying for space. But inside too, where most delegates accepted the text of the biggest climate agreement since Paris in 2015 with weary resignation. After two weeks of intense debate, countries agreed to meet yearly to submit more ambitious emissions-cutting plans, to double aid for developing countries to adapt to extreme weather, and to reduce rather than eliminate (thanks to a last-minute intervention by India and China) unmitigated coal power.

Simon Lewis – a professor of global change science at the University of Leeds – was inside the room with the delegation from Gabon. Together with Mark Maslin, professor of earth system science at UCL – he explains why the goal of limiting global warming to 1.5°C is still on life support, and four other things you need to know about the deal. They were joined over the weekend by experts from across our international network giving their reactions to the most significant outcomes from the summit. You can read their thoughts on deforestation deals, methane pledges, fossil fuel subsidies and nature-based solutions here.

I’m writing this on the train home after spending the final week of COP26 in the sprawling Clydeside convention centre that hosted it. The three words that were repeated most by delegates I spoke to and that threatened to pierce the conference’s stage-managed facade were “loss and damage” – the harmful impact of climate change that many argue rich countries should pay for. Though plans for a compensation system for poorer countries were blocked, the summit showed this issue is becoming unavoidable.

Elsewhere on The Conversation, you can read about two new antiviral drugs that will soon be available to treat COVID. Here’s what they mean for the pandemic. And if you’ve been inspired by COP26 to cut your own emissions, you might be interested in recent research showing that, contrary to what many believe, going vegan, vegetarian or flexitarian could actually save you money.

For now, our recent donations campaign ends here. We have been heartened by the response of readers over the last two weeks, with almost 1,000 donors helping us toward our annual giving target. If you are able to donate anything toward our aim to spread academic expertise widely and help inform the world, there’s still time.

Donate now

Thanks for your support, and thanks for reading and being part of The Conversation.

Contact us here to have your event listed.

For sponsorship opportunities, email us here