Focus on Arts and Ecology

Leaders and scientists are seeking solutions to the health and income problems that extreme heat causes for Global South food stall traders. 

By Mtias Avramow, October 27, 2025

When a person is exposed to extreme heat, their body increases blood flow to the skin as it desperately tries to cool down.

This attempt to cool creates more strain on internal organs and, if exposure is prolonged, serious organ failure is a possible outcome.

“The effects are particularly severe on the brain, although organs such as the heart and kidneys are where we have recorded chronic failures,” says Jonathan Lee, a researcher in environmental health who works on heat at Boston University in the United States.

Lee is one of a small number of scientists currently studying the effects of extreme and prolonged heat on an extremely vulnerable and often neglected group: those who work outdoors. These people have always been exposed to inclement weather but now, climate change is dramatically escalating the risks they face.

According to a report published in May, nearly half of the world’s population had suffered at least 30 days of extreme heat due to climate change in the previous 12 months. The report defines extreme heat as temperatures that are “hotter than 90% of temperatures observed in their local area over the 1991-2020 period”.

Many studies document the health problems that result from exposure to heat around the world, including immediate issues such as dehydration and heatstroke, and longer-term problems such as kidney failure. But there are few that address the issues faced specifically by those whose place of work is the streets, such as market traders or street vendors. This is according to Nash Tysmans, who works as Asia coordinator for Streetnet International, which brings together street vendors’ unions in 55 countries.

This lack of data and interpretation – especially in the Global South – makes it difficult to gauge the scale of the problem facing vendors, she says. Anecdotal reports suggest informal workers in general, and street vendors in particular, face growing pressure from heat.

“For them, climate change is already palpable. It exacerbates the precarious conditions in which they already worked. People are noticing the effects on their health and also on their income,” says Tysmans.

She led a field investigation with Oxfam that spoke with dozens of vendors in Cambodia, Vietnam and Laos. Some 77% of interviewees highlighted the risks that climate change poses to their health and their businesses.

Lee points out that personal protective equipment can be used to help workers cope with heat. This includes cooling vests, bandanas and fans. During extreme conditions, cities can declare “heat emergencies” and set up assistance centres where people can find cool refuge. Longer term solutions being studied around the world include the provision of shade in cities. Which solutions work best in which cities is an increasingly urgent question.

Disease, economic losses and emergency plans

While street vendors across much of Asia have long faced floods and storms that threaten their lives and businesses, heat has also become a chronic problem. The continent is warming almost twice as fast as the global average, according to the World Meteorological Organization.

As well as the health problems this brings, it can cripple street vendors’ income.

“When we talk to them, they mention economic losses first,” says Tysmans.

Fresh food rots faster in heat, driving up costs while lowering the prices many vendors can charge. High temperatures also drive away customers.

“People don’t go out during the hottest times of the day, which always coincide with the working hours of vendors. Many choose to open at night, but the flow of people is not the same,” says Tysmans.

According to the study coordinated by Tysmans, some vendors suffer a 30-40% drop in income during extreme-heat events. When you add in the extra costs of ice and water, the economic impact is even greater. And poverty adds to health problems, making it harder for people to eat healthily and seek medical treatment.

Vulnerability compounded by insecurity

One of the places hardest hit by extreme heat globally is India. In the city of New Delhi, 33.8 million people have to deal with temperatures that last year hit a record 49C.

Delhi has around 652,000 street vendors, of whom 94% of men and 46% of women report working more than 48 hours per week. That is according to research published last year by Women in Informal Employment: Globalizing & Organizing (Wiego).

During heatwaves, over half of the vendors experience headaches, dehydration, fatigue and cramps, according to a 2024 survey by Greenpeace and India’s National Hawker Federation.

Like many other densely populated cities, Delhi has drawn up emergency heat plans to try and deal with the problem. The 2024/25 action plan developed last year identifies street vending as among the most vulnerable sectors. It recommends more health centres, improved water supply and the promotion of night-time trading. But, again, a lack of data complicates action. There are no clear records of street vendors or their distribution, making it difficult to determine where to set up health centres or improve access to water.

Formalisation as solution

Jorge Peralta is the secretary general of Guatemala’s National Federation of Independent Workers and Vendors (Fentravig). He represents more than 125,000 vendors across the country.

“Last year, I went to a forum in Medellín that blew my mind,” he tells Dialogue Earth, referring to the forum of the General Union of Informal Workers, which is based in Colombia. The 2024 meeting featured a presentation on the effects of climate change on health. “There, I understood that climate change generates migration, that constant sun exposure increases the risk of skin cancer and affects the entire dynamic of our work.”

Guatemala City’s high altitude means temperatures of 30C are rare. But the union leader says the city has experienced heatwaves in recent years that can reach 33C, while elsewhere in the country temperatures of 40C have been recorded.

This creates problems for vendors concentrated in established markets. These structures are often aging and ill-prepared for heat or extreme storms. “The premises are old, and earthquakes and rain make them even more vulnerable,” says Peralta. “The roofs are made of sheet metal and burn everyone below [when it gets hot]. But street vendors are more vulnerable because they are more exposed.”

Peralta believes one major problem is that street vendors are informal workers, largely operating outside the usual systems of taxation, labour laws, contracts and controlled working conditions. For him, the formalisation of their employment is the first step on the road to adaptation. This means paying taxes, and having access to health insurance, electricity and water services, career progression and holidays.

Patrick Kane, Streetnet representative for Latin America, says street vendors suffer double victimisation: “Firstly, because they are excluded from the formal economic system and its benefits, but also because of the risks of climate change and the fact that they have no protection.”

In Guatemala and some other countries, trade unions are driving action to mitigate the heat, Kane says. The main measure associated with adaptation is formalisation of employment, but they are also proposing initiatives such as hydration points and environmental education. “In Uruguay and Brazil, there is also a lot of discussion about climate justice,” he adds.

Every five years, the countries of the Paris Agreement must update their climate action plans to show greater ambition. Current commitments made in these plans, known as Nationally Determined Contributions (NDCs), would only limit global warming to between 2.6C and 3.1C over the course of the century – far from the Paris targets of 1.5C or 2C.

Little mention is made of informal employment in many of the new plans published so far this year. The only country to include it as an issue in Latin America is Ecuador. Within its NDC, job losses and informal work are identified as part of the structural factors that affect society and make it more vulnerable. The NDC does not contain explicit policies to address the situation of street vendors.

One country where formality has proven advantageous for adaptation is Uruguay. Gabriela Calandria, leader of the Association of Special Market Vendors in Montevideo, tells Dialogue Earth that heat has brought several problems to street vendors, or feriantes, as they are called there.

“We have already recorded 15 cases of skin cancer, there are people who become dehydrated and there was even someone who suffered a heart attack,” she says.

But street vendors in Calandria’s country have several advantages over those in others: “Here, we are very included by the state. We are regulated by the local government. And we are not informal. We pay taxes, almost all of us.” They also have access to facilities such as covered market areas, medical insurance and pensions.

Calandria says this situation is unique: no other country in Latin America has these kinds of conditions. “Although the sun beats down on us, we are protected.”

Matias Avramow

As the UN climate summit returns to the region, we look back at decades of leadership from its nations at the talks – and also fragmentation. 

By Fermín Koop, October 28, 2025

After more than a decade, the United Nations’ annual climate change negotiations return to Latin America in November. In the Brazilian city of Belém, governments, civil society, businesses and other actors will meet for two weeks at COP30 to discuss climate plans and pledges, financing, the energy transition and forest protection, among other issues.

The last time the region hosted the conference was in 2014, in Lima, Peru. That was the year before the signing of the Paris Agreement, the landmark climate treaty that seeks to limit temperature rise this century to 2C, preferably 1.5C, above pre-industrial levels. Buenos Aires, Argentina (1998 and 2004) and Cancún, Mexico (2010) have also hosted the conference. Santiago, Chile, was also due to host it in 2019, but it was moved to Spain due to social unrest.

The countries of the region have been actively involved in climate negotiations since the early 1990s. Although they have mostly done so in a fragmented manner, there are signs of a more united front ahead of the Belém summit: nations seem to agree that, on the one hand, they are among the most vulnerable to climate change and, on the other, they have large carbon sinks and great potential for renewable energy.

Several countries have also played a significant role at key moments in the negotiations, such as the creation of the Kyoto Protocol and the Paris Agreement, according to experts consulted by Dialogue Earth. At COP30, they argue, there will now be a new opportunity to demonstrate that leadership and reaffirm the importance of multilateralism amid global tensions.

“It’s a good time to host the COP in the region. We have very good things to show the world. There are no new coal projects, we are making rapid progress in renewable energy, we can present solutions and work for multilateralism,” says Natalie Unterstell, president of Talanoa, a Brazilian climate think-tank. “We are ready to get started.”

Latin America at COP climate negotiations

In most international environmental negotiations, from biodiversity to mercury, the region participates as a single bloc, the Latin American and Caribbean Group (GRULAC). But on climate change, countries have always distanced themselves from each other, according to Jimena Nieto Carrasco, who was part of the Colombian delegation during the Paris Agreement negotiations in 2015.

“You haven’t been able to talk about ‘the region’, when it comes to climate change issues, for more than 20 years. We soon realised that it was not possible to reach consensus among such different countries, from giants like Brazil to small island states to intermediate countries like Colombia. It makes no sense to try because we are not going to reach agreement on most issues,” she adds.

Instead, on climate change, countries negotiate individually and in various blocs that have been formed and disbanded over the years. Most nations are part of multiple such groupings, based around shared interests and positions with their fellow members.

All countries in the region have long been part of the Group of 77 and China, a coalition of developing nations at the UN, which has consistently demanded that developed countries drastically reduce their greenhouse gas emissions first.

Elsewhere, Chile, Colombia, Costa Rica, Guatemala, Honduras, Panama, Paraguay and Peru are part of the Independent Association of Latin America and the Caribbean (AILAC); Argentina, Brazil, Ecuador, Paraguay and Uruguay are members of the SUR Group, with Brazil also coordinating its positions with South Africa, India and China as part of the BASIC Group; and 16 island countries in the region are part of the Alliance of Small Island States (AOSIS), which brings together a total of 39 countries globally.

Other groups include: the Bolivarian Alliance for the Peoples of Our America (ALBA), created by Venezuela in 2004 and including Bolivia, Cuba and Nicaragua, but now less active; the Coalition for Rainforest Nations (CfRN), of which 18 countries in the region are part; and the Like-Minded Developing Countries (LMDC), with 24 countries globally, including Bolivia, Venezuela and El Salvador, among others.

“Latin America has not been able to overcome its fragmentation, which means that it has a divided and poorly coordinated voice in negotiations,” says Manuel Pulgar-Vidal, global leader of climate and energy at the World Wide Fund for Nature (WWF), a former environment minister of Peru, and president of COP20. “Despite this diversity, the region has contributed greatly to the global climate debate.”

Key moments and regional leaders

Climate change negotiations under the UN formally began in Latin America, with the Earth Summit of 1992 hosted in Rio de Janeiro. There, the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC) was opened for signature, identifying climate change as an urgent global problem. The first COP took place in 1995 and at the 1997 conference, countries agreed to the Kyoto Protocol, a climate agreement that set binding targets for industrialised countries to reduce their emissions. Argentine diplomat Raúl Estrada-Oyuela chaired the negotiations, while Brazil strongly supported the agreement’s distinction between developed and developing countries.

In their book A Fragmented Continent: Latin America and Global Climate Change Policy, researchers Guy Edwards and J Timmons Roberts describe Kyoto as a success for the region, as it did not have to make any commitments to reduce emissions. “Outside Brazil, most other Latin American countries barely made their voices heard in Rio or Kyoto,” they said.

The protocol came into force in 2005. That year, Costa Rica, together with Papua New Guinea, proposed a mechanism to reduce emissions from deforestation that would later become REDD+, which today finances actions to protect forests. Earlier versions of the mechanism were criticised by Brazil, which had feared losing control over its territory, Edwards and Roberts said.

Despite not having to make commitments under Kyoto, Peru offered in 2008 to reduce emissions in its forestry sector in exchange for new measures by developed countries. It was joined by Costa Rica, with a goal of becoming carbon neutral by 2021 (a target it ultimately missed); by Mexico, with a goal of reducing its emissions by 50% by 2050; and by Brazil, with a goal of reducing deforestation by 70% by 2017 (a goal which was also missed amid challenges in the latter part of the decade).

In 2009, countries were supposed to reach a new climate agreement. However, differences prevented them from moving forward. This raised questions about the negotiations and put pressure on Mexico as the host of the next summit. However, Patricia Espinosa, president of COP16, and Christiana Figueres, executive secretary of the UNFCCC, were able to reactivate the process.

“The region has made significant contributions to the negotiation process,” says Alejandra López Carbajal, director of climate diplomacy at the NGO Transforma. “I would highlight complicated presidencies, such as COP16. The UN system was being questioned, as was multilateralism. But Mexico’s presidency played an important role in restoring confidence.”

AILAC, a bloc described by Edwards and Roberts as the “third way” due to its role in building bridges between developed and developing countries, was launched in 2012. Then, in 2014, COP20 took place in Lima under Peru’s presidency. That meeting paved the way for the subsequent Paris Agreement, with the presentation of numerous climate commitments.

Pulgar-Vidal and Figueres are often described as two of the “architects of the Paris Agreement” for their diplomatic skills and optimism. At the group level, AILAC also played a prominent role in achieving the agreement, according to an analysis by Edwards, who points to its efforts to build bridges and raise countries’ ambition.

The road to COP30

In August, representatives from environmental agencies in 22 Latin American countries participated in a meeting in Mexico to strengthen cooperation in the region ahead of COP30. “In the face of the multiple crises we are facing, it is more important than ever to discuss our common challenges,” said Mexico’s environment minister Alicia Bárcena at the conference’s opening.

The meeting resulted in a position paper from the region for COP30. The countries found common ground in moving forward with a transition “that leaves behind” fossil fuels, accelerating climate action and prioritising adaptation. They also highlighted the urgency of increasing financing and committed to conserving and protecting forests.

“It was a positive surprise,” says López Carbajal. “They met in a forum that did not exist before and produced a good statement that speaks of ambition. There is genuine interest in working together. Mexico’s leadership [as host] brings a different atmosphere of cooperation to the region.”

The specialists consulted expect Latin America to be able to take advantage of these commonalities to achieve a more unified front at COP30. They also expect Brazil’s presidency to promote issues particularly relevant to the region through ongoing initiatives such as the Tropical Forest Forever Fund (TFFF) for forest protection.

Pulgar-Vidal believes Brazil will be successful at COP30. “This year’s COP will have many fronts; there is no single goal to achieve. But success will come from a focus on implementation. We need the end result to be disruptive. The COP has to show that even without political will, the economy is maturing and is already capable of providing the necessary impetus,” he concludes.

 The Dialogue Earth team examines some of the other important ocean stories making waves around the globe this month, October 31, 2025

Around 2,000 ships use the port of Felixstowe in the United Kingdom every year. But the arrival this month of the Istanbul Bridge was special.

On 13 October, the container ship docked at the port after a pioneering 20-day journey from China. It had eschewed the usual maritime Silk Road to Europe around India and through the Mediterranean in favour of an Arctic voyage.

“We navigate this route with a deep sense of respect and caution,” the vessel’s captain Zhong Desheng told Xinhua, China’s state press agency. “There’s a certain pressure that comes with the great responsibility we carry, but with thorough preparation and strong support, we’re fully confident in completing the voyage safely.”

Sea Legend Shipping arranged the voyage. The company’s chief operating officer, Li Xiaobin, told Global Times that he hopes to run the route weekly or biweekly during the summer. Ice-hardened vessels could be used in the future to allow year-round voyages.

Li said the ship was mainly carrying China’s current big three exports: electric vehicles, lithium batteries and solar panels.

“This is the world’s first container route through the Arctic specifically designed for cross-border e-commerce and high-value-added goods. It is also a major achievement in the development of the ‘ice Silk Road’ under the Belt and Road Initiative,” said an official from China’s Ministry of Transport (People’s Daily).

Global shipping and trade is increasingly politicised, especially for green transition products such as batteries and solar panels, which have become subject to tit-for-tat trade wars. Russia has long been interested in seeing more cargo flow along its northern border, while China has taken an increasingly active role in Arctic affairs as it asserts itself as a global power.

In 2018, China published an Arctic strategy white paper that included supporting the development of a polar Silk Road. It included: “China, as a responsible major country, is ready to cooperate with all relevant parties to seize the historic opportunity in the development of the Arctic, to address the challenges brought by the changes in the region.”

The Istanbul Bridge’s 20 day voyage from Ningbo-Zhoushan to Felixstowe was five days shorter than the equivalent rail journey. According to Xinhua, the traditional maritime route via the Suez canal takes 40 days, while another alternative around the tip of Africa and up the Atlantic takes even longer. The Centre for High North Logistics thinks the Suez route could take 27 days only, if ships omitted their usual stops along the way – which do not exist along the Arctic route.

As The Maritime Executive reports, voyages along this Arctic passage – sometimes called the Northern Sea Route (NSR) – traditionally require a Russian icebreaker to safely lead the way.

As the NSR is shorter, it could bring benefits in reduced carbon emissions from shipping. Not everyone has been celebrating, though.

Sian Prior, a marine science and policy specialist, and lead adviser of the Clean Arctic Alliance, expressed concerns about the fuel being used by the Istanbul Bridge for the journey. The Clean Arctic Alliance is campaigning for ships in the area to reduce their “black carbon” emissions. It argues that the black particles emitted by ships burning heavy fuel oil cause significant global warming when they settle on white snow and ice.

“Although shipping operators may argue that a shorter route – via the Arctic – will result in lower CO2 emissions, the Arctic has been largely undeveloped in terms of transit shipping, due to the risks posed by sea ice, and the waters are poorly charted,” says Prior. “CO2 reductions will be meaningless if shipping in the Arctic results in higher emissions of super pollutant black carbon, which has a 1,600 times greater climate impact than CO2 on a 20 year basis, and a disproportionate impact when emitted near to snow and ice.” 

Ksenia Vakhrusheva, of Norwegian environmental group the Bellona Foundation, told The Observer: “The Russian narrative that the NSR is a quicker, cheaper and environmentally friendly alternative to the Suez canal is false. The development of infrastructure and more intense use of NSR will put at risk the fragile Arctic environment.”

(Sources: Dialogue Earth)

The Dialogue Earth team examines some of the other important ocean stories making waves around the globe this month, October 31, 2025

On 28 October, China achieved a major legislative step towards ratifying the Biodiversity Beyond National Jurisdiction (BBNJ) Agreement. Also known as the High Seas Treaty, it is hailed as a landmark agreement to protect the high seas.

Zhou Wei, Greenpeace East Asia’s oceans project manager, commented on the news: “We are delighted to see that China completed a key step in its domestic ratification process, making a leap forward in marine conservation.” China will become a member state of the treaty once it formally notifies the UN of its acceptance. 

More than 60 countries have now ratified the BBNJ Agreement – that number was hit in September, at which point it qualified for entering into force. According to UN rules, it will take effect globally on 17 January 2026. 

The high seas account for about two-thirds of the ocean and have long lacked a unified governance framework. The BBNJ Agreement is the first legally binding global legislation that protects marine life in such areas.

The agreement was adopted in March 2023 after nearly two decades of negotiations.

It covers issues such as the sharing of marine genetic resources, the establishment of marine protected areas (MPAs) on the high seas, environmental impact assessments, and the transfer of marine technology and capacity-building support.

Under the treaty, its first dedicated Conference of the Parties (COP) must now be convened within one year of the agreement entering into force. That meeting will discuss the establishment of a permanent secretariat, financial arrangements, and procedures for proposing new MPAs. Chile and Belgium have both expressed interest in hosting the secretariat. Preparatory committee meetings at the UN are ongoing.

Still, experts note much remains to be done before the treaty can deliver tangible results. In a recent Dialogue Earth article, the Stockholm Resilience Center professor Robert Blasiak said designating the first MPAs through the BBNJ Agreement before 2030 would be “a remarkable success”.

China has taken additional steps to strengthen ocean governance this year. In April, the country joined the legally binding Agreement on Port State Measures. This requires member states to inspect foreign fishing vessels, verify their licences and deny port access to those suspected of illegal fishing activities.

Ocean governance was also highlighted in the proposed blueprint for the next five years of economic and social development in China. Also known as the 15th five-year plan recommendations, this blueprint was announced at the Central Committee of China’s ruling Communist Party meeting this month. It calls for improved marine development and protection, better integration of land and sea planning, and the “high quality growth” of the marine economy.  

The proposal also outlines priorities such as marine science and technology innovation, the upgrading of ocean equipment manufacturing, enhanced deep-sea and polar research, ecosystem restoration in key sea areas, and stronger maritime law enforcement and judicial capacity.

(Sources: Dialogue Earth)

Amid threats and tears, nations failed to sign off a ground-breaking deal to curb the sector’s huge appetite for fossil fuels. 

By Regina Lam, October 28, 2025

Negotiators from across the world met in London this month at the UN shipping agency’s headquarters to adopt landmark rules to reduce the sector’s carbon emissions.

Though the rules had been agreed on in April, the meeting at the International Maritime Organization (IMO) ended with deep division and the plans delayed for at least a year. The week-long talks witnessed complaints of intimidation and some delegates brought to tears.

Delegates said the meeting turned into a political battleground, with the US issuing public threats to nations supporting curbs on emissions. Some nations backtracked on their support for tough regulations to make shipowners pay for high-emitting vessels, and instead supported Saudi Arabia’s ultimately successful moves to delay the plans. 

But this was not just about rich fossil-fuel-producing countries scuppering curbs on oil use. Some developing nations voiced fears that the IMO’s plans would spike food prices for their citizens. They said they supported decarbonisation but had not been assured the money raised by the levy would ensure an equitable transition away from oil. 

The shipping industry burns 350 million tonnes of fuel oil every year as it moves over 80% of goods traded worldwide, producing 3% of human-caused greenhouse gas emissions in the process. Advocates for the IMO’s regulations to change this have vowed to address key sticking points and come back next year to try again.

At the IMO in London, overlooking the River Thames, Dialogue Earth spoke with delegates and observers across the debating chamber and bustling lunch-hour canteen – documenting the meeting’s highs and lows. Then, after the unexpected denouement, we asked them if there is a path forward for the net-zero plans.

A plan to move away from fossil fuels

Shipping is under huge pressure to move away from fossil fuels, especially from governments in countries threatened by climate change such as the Pacific island nations, and from Europe, where the European Union has introduced its own shipping-emission rules. 

In 2023, IMO member states unanimously agreed to achieve net-zero emissions from the sector “by or around” 2050. To meet this pledge, a Net-Zero Framework was proposed to incentivise investments into greener marine fuels; construction of greener ships; and upgrades of existing vessels and ports to use fuels like green methanol and green ammonia.

The framework set out rules for vessels to reduce their greenhouse gas intensity, meaning their emissions per unit of energy used. Vessels failing to meet the base intensity target would face charges, starting at USD 100 per tonne of CO2 equivalent.

Those failing short of an even more lenient threshold would face a higher rate under the framework: USD 380 per tonne on emissions exceeding the base target. Vessels that overperform and are more efficient than required could earn “surplus units” and trade these with other ships.  Any payments collected would go into a Net-Zero Fund to mitigate impacts of climate change on developing states and reward low-emission ships.

‘Unexpectedly challenging’

The overarching framework was approved in April by a large majority of nations: 63 backed it, 16 were opposed and 24 abstained. Despite strong opposition from the US, many of these countries appeared to have maintained their support heading into this month’s talks – which were supposed to consider some changes to the text and give it a final sign-off. This gave proponents early confidence that adoption was within reach.

The official adoption would mean writing the new rules into the International Convention for the Prevention of Pollution from Ships (Marpol). The plan was set to come into force in 2027 and be fully operational in 2028. But the outcome of this month’s meeting means it could instead be pushed back or even abandoned entirely.

Anita Mäkinen, one of Finland’s representatives to the IMO said she entered the first session on 14 October aware that the geopolitics could threaten the adoption. “But I never really thought it could be this challenging.” 

Finland is part of a group of EU countries pushing for the deal, alongside other vocal proponents such as Brazil and some Pacific island countries including Tuvalu. 

Their initial optimism faded midweek, when the negotiations grew increasingly tense. At one point, tension ran so high the meeting’s chair tried to cut it by asking if there was a doctor in the room.

Delegates from the US and Saudi Arabia made attempts to stall the proceedings. Their tactics ranged from challenging the plan’s adoption to proposing the IMO should require governments’ explicit acceptance for adoption, which would go against the usual IMO approach of assuming acceptance of negotiation outcomes. Meanwhile, more nations expressed doubts about the adoption as the week went on. 

Countries that had previously voted to approve the framework – including China, India and Kenya – supported delaying a vote on the adoption, while major shipping nations such as Greece and Cyprus abstained. On the final day of the meeting, 17 October, countries voted 57 to 49 in favour of delaying, with 21 abstentions.