As governments, investors, and businesses alike look to the forthcoming COP31 for climate leadership, focus remains largely on policy ambitions. But what about the individuals tasked with steering the process? At the first COP to adopt a joint leadership model, what can a review of their careers reveal about Murat Kurum and Chris Bowen and how might their combined leadership shape the direction and priorities of the summit?
COP31
The 31st Conference of the Parties (“COP”) is scheduled to commence its proceedings on the 9th of November 2026, in Antalya, Türkiye and many anxious ears are pre-emptively tuned in to hear what conclusions these vital negotiations may reap.
The COP is a significant and historic annual assembly of the main decision-making body of the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (“UNFCCC”). The first instalment of the summit was held in 1995 in Berlin and has since, been held every year, its location and presidency rotating annually between the five UN regional groups. Since the first summit only one year has been missed, 2020, due to the COVID-19 pandemic.
While the agenda of each COP varies, to differing degrees, between the years, its fundamental purpose remains the same, namely, to act as a united forum for all parties to review national communications and inventories (e.g. GHG emissions). Each COP provides a vital assessment opportunity for existing measures and allows for evaluation of whether collective climate efforts remain aligned with the original 1992 UNFCCC. Effectiveness of action in relation to subsequent landmark agreements such as The Kyoto Protocol of 1997 and The Paris Agreement of 2015 are also discussed annually, as barometers of progress.
The UNFCCC is made up of 198 parties (197 states and the European Union), of which all are eligible for attendance at COP31. Country parties are divided into three groups, with differing commitments.
With over 30 years of climate diplomacy behind it, COP31 is already setting itself apart from its predecessors when taking into consideration unique aspects of its planning, geopolitical context, and perhaps most notably, its leadership.
Beyond Business as Usual:
When the UNFCCC was adopted it was no secret amongst its cosigners that the objectives they had just agreed to undertake were no simple feat, especially against a socio-political backdrop in which climate science was still widely debated and, in some quarters, openly disputed.
A lot has changed over the last three decades, as climate diplomacy has evolved, so too has the structure of COP itself. Beyond policy points and agenda COP31 is set to break new ground in another significant way; it will be the first UN summit to employ a joint leadership model, between two parties. With this comes notable change to ‘normal’ COP proceeding.
This new model was developed by negotiators after a lengthy impasse in the decision-making process to elect the host country for COP31. Standard procedure, in regard to this selection, notably calls for the following: firstly, with each year, the location of the upcoming COP must rotate between the five UN regional groups Africa; Asia; Asia-Pacific, Eastern Europe; Latin America and the Caribbean; and Western European and Others Group (“WEOG”) – COP31 was set to be hosted by WEOG. Secondly, the countries within the group whose year it is to host, wishing to hold the summit, must submit a formal proposal to the UNFCCC Secretariat whom, through the sitting COP will, after conducting a fact-finding mission to ensure the prospective host country has the right infrastructure to hold such an event, decide to accept or reject the offer. A host country must then, most importantly, be agreed upon by consensus.
During the host decision process for COP31 events deviated from standard procedure; both Türkiye and Australia made strong rival bids to host the summit, resulting in a prolonged deadlock, when neither country agreed to revoke their respective bids.
In favour of maintaining the political leadership style associated with a host presidency, the UN, after significant negotiation, opted to resolve the deadlock by approving a unique joint-leadership compromise. This was preferable than letting the impasse between the two Parties stagnate, ultimately resulting in the location of COP31 defaulting to Bonn, Germany.
This leadership compromise represents the first shared leadership model in the history of the COP summits.
A Presidency Divided
This unique dual leadership model divides the standard procedural hosting responsibilities between the two parties under the ‘Türkiye-Australia Partnership Modalities’, the name given to the formal arrangement which details the roles both countries must uphold.
As agreed, upon by negotiators and cosigned by Türkiye and Australia, this arrangement sees that the former will be responsible for the main functions attributed to the COP Presidency, signing an amended ‘Host Country Agreement’ with UNFCCC, which delegates all operational and logistical obligations concerned with organising a COP summit to Türkiye. Under these terms, Türkiye is responsible for managing engagement and communications relating to the conference as well as for appointing the UN High-Level Climate Champion. Furthermore, Türkiye must provide a representative of their country for nomination to serve as President. Murat Kurum, Minister of Environment, Urbanization and Climate Change was nominated as President-Designate of COP31 by President Recep Tayyip Erdoğan. Kurum is now actively managing global preparations for the summit as well as developing the COP31 Action Agenda as in line with his Presidential role requirements.
Australia’s roles under the Partnership Modalities call for, in the first time in COP’s history, the appointment of a second President, who is known as the President of Negotiations. It was the responsibility of Australia to nominate a representative from their country for this role which President-Designate Kurum would approve. Ultimately Christopher Eyles Guy Bowen, Minister for Climate Change and Energy of Australia was appointed, making him also Vice-President of COP31.
Through the introduction of this influential secondary presidency Australia is delegated exclusive authority over COP31 negotiations, a departure from the usual COP model in which the host country’s President leads both the political and negotiating processes. During the summit Australia is set to assume responsibility for leading the negotiation agenda, producing draft texts, convening consultations, and all decision making associated with negotiated outcomes.
The Australians will also take shared responsibility in the appointment of the Youth Champion and an advisory role in the development of the COP31 Action Agenda. Under the joint leadership module both parties are obligated to ensure thorough consultation with each other, with any differences resolved through consultation until mutual satisfaction.
Additionally, Australia holds all operational and logistical responsibilities for the pre-COP, which will be held in the Pacific, marking the first time a pre-COP is hosted outside of the country holding the Presidency, as well as complete authority over its agenda.
As a result of this joint leadership model, and its division of responsibilities between two parties, the success of COP31 is hinged on new standards. To understand how this stands to affect the priorities, dynamics, and potential direction of the summit it is necessary to look beyond the institutional framework and examine the individuals entrusted with its leadership. A review of Murat Kurum and Chris Bowen’s careers provides helpful insights into the experience, policy priorities and leadership styles that may ultimately shape the course of COP31.
Chris Bowen: The Negotiator
Chris Bowen is the presiding Minister for Climate Change and Energy of Australia; he is an MP under the Australian Labour Party and, since his approval for the role by Kurum, the first President of Negotiations in COP’s history.
Bowen has been a member of the Parliament of Australia since 2004, and over 20 years later, he has had a dynamic career holding ministerial office in both the Rudd and Gillard Labour governments. In 2019 Bowen was a favourable candidate for party leader but withdrew in favour of the current Australian Prime Minister Anthony Albanese.
Bowen was born, raised and educated in Sydney where he graduated with a bachelor’s in economics in 1994. In 1998 he was elected Mayor of the City of Fairfield, New South Wales.
Bowen was appointed to his current position as Minister for Climate Change and Energy in 2022, where he has notably overseen implementation of the Albanese Government’s climate and energy agenda, including policies for renewable energy expansion and energy market reform. He drove government efforts to consolidate Australia’s current carbon reduction and net-zero goals.
Bowen maintains quite an active and occasionally colourful social media presence posting often to his accounts on TikTok, Instagram and Facebook, discussing Australian regulation, policy and novelties.
Despite his prominence within Australia’s climate agenda and the ALP, Bowen’s public profile has not been without controversy. His active communication style across social media platforms has made him one of Australia’s most visible Ministers whilst simultaneously opening him up to heightened scrutiny.
In April 2024 Bowen, along with Prime Minister Albanese, received major criticism for the method of transportation the pair, and their entourage, took to attend a launch announcement event for the AUD 1 billion federal clean energy initiative, ‘Solar SunShot’, which was held in Hunter Valley – approximately 250km from Sydney. Bowen and Albanese chartered two private jets for the less than 40-minute flight. Despite it being relatively standard procedure for the Australian Prime Minister to travel via private aircraft of the Royal Australian Air Force (“RAAF”), the Australian public did not take so kindly to this additional aircraft, especially considering the sustainability focused nature of the event the pair were traveling to attend. After initial criticism, Bowen spoke to the Australian press, on behalf of himself and Albanese, maintaining that the aircraft allocation was a strictly operational decision made by the RAAF, in light of specific landing conditions in the Scone regional airport, which would not support the PM’s usual jet. Despite these explanations the episode nevertheless garnered serious traction, critiques particularly homing in on Bowen, considering his ministerial role.
Moreover, Bowen has become a somewhat polarising figure in Australian politics, facing criticism for Australia’s energy transition, especially cost-of-living concerns associated with the implication of his climate policy, with one Sky News Australia host referring to Bowen as “a liability for the Albanese government”, in a broadcast discussing rapidly rising gas prices across Australia.
Bowen’s profile suggests that he is likely to approach the COP31 proceedings with his experience as a political negotiator on the forefront. Having spent much of his political career and ministerial tenure advocating for Australia’s climate policies, as well as speaking out passionately in favour of Australian competency during the COP31 Presidency bidding process, Bowen has demonstrated a leadership style defined by active public engagement, strategic communication, and an emphasis on the importance of political consensus.
Whether this highly visible and politically engaged approach strengthens negotiations or attracts further scrutiny is likely to become a defining feature of Australia’s role at COP31. As President of Negotiations, Bowen’s effectiveness will likely depend on his ability to translate political confidence into diplomatic trust, balancing ambition with compromise across a divided negotiating landscape.
Murat Kurum: The Administrator
Kurum is the Minister of Environment, Urbanization and Climate Change of Türkiye and now, the official President-Designate of COP31. He also serves as Chairman of the Parliamentary Committee on Environment and is an MP for the Adalet ve Kalkınma (“AKP”), the Turkish Justice and Development Party.
He was educated across several Turkish cities, graduating in 1999 as a Civil Engineer from Selçuk University. During his career Kurum has worked across both the private and public sectors, joining the Implementation Department at TOKI, which is the Housing Development Administration of Turkey; as well as Emlalk Konut GYO A.Ş, one of the most prominent publicly traded REITs in Turkey involved in large scale urban development and residential projects. His career as a civil engineer placed him at the centre of Türkiye’s ambitious urban regeneration sphere and provided him with extensive experience in the delivery of state-run public infrastructure programs.
In 2018 Kurum was appointed as Minister of Environment, Urbanization and Climate Change by President Erdoğan, a role which he has held ever since – stepping away solely for the duration of his, unsuccessful, candidacy for Mayor of Istanbul in the 2024 local elections. Throughout his ministerial tenure Kurum has overseen many notable policies regarding urban transformation, housing development, disaster recovery, and environmental regulation further claiming, in a biography on his personal site, that he “worked intensively to spread the Zero Waste philosophy”.
Unlike Bowen’s conversational and politically driven online presence, Kurum’s public profile and social media accounts project a carefully curated, institutional image, posting mainly in relation to his ministry’s operations, government projects, and environmental initiatives. This measured communication style can be seen to reflect his broader reputation as a technocratic administrator, focused on delivery. That said, Kurum’s ministerial record has still attracted scrutiny.
The AKP is often critiqued for prioritising efficiency and economic growth over reliability and sustainability, specifically regarding its construction initiatives. Following the devastating 2023 earthquakes, criticism intensified over the party’s use of construction amnesties, which allowed owners of non-compliant buildings to legalise them upon payment of a fee. Critics argued that the policy weakened building-code enforcement and contributed to the scale of the disaster. Kurum as a vital figure in the development and implementation of such initiatives has been scrutinised over this. He has received particular backlash for directives he has given within such disaster recovery projects
Kurum has also been subject to criticism over his negligence to condemn the Kanal Istanbul, which is a project announced by President Erdoğan in 2021 to reduce marine traffic in the Bosporus with the construction of a large artificial canal. The project has come under much scrutiny raising environmental, economic, and feasibility concerns. The project is as of 2026 approved but progress remains uncertain. Kurum has spoken up about the canal to say that although it is not a current priority motions are in place to see its continuation. Considering the controversial nature of the Kanal Istanbul, due to foreseen environmental impact, critiques expected a more hardline opinion on the project from Kurum.
In recent years, Türkiye has faced sustained criticism from international organisations over issues including pulbic sector transparency and institutional independence, with Transparency International’s 2025 Corruption Perception Index assigning Türkiye a score of 31/100. A score which has decreased by 3 points since 2024, Türkiye shares this standing with Uzbekistan and Belarus amongst others. While this assessment concerns Türkiye’s broader governance landscape rather than Kurum personally, his senior position with the AKP and close affiliation with President Erdoğan mean that his leadership is likely to be viewed against this reputational backdrop.
Kurum’s professional background suggests that he is likely to approach COP31 from the perceptive of an engineer and administrator, a perspective that can be seen taking shape through the ongoing work in preparation for the summit. Whereas on his official profile, on the COP31 Türkiye webpage, Kurum is described to be not “someone who speaks, he is someone who delivers”.
As the President of COP31 this technocratic approach may lend itself in favour of the complex logistical demands of hosting the summit. At the same time, Kurum’s affiliation and endorsement of President Erdoğan’s administration mean his presidency will inevitably be seen through the lens of Türkiye’s wider governance record. For those looking to COP31 for guidance Kurum’s success will subsequently be, at least partly, hinged, not only on the operational success of the summit but also by his ability to bolster credibility, transparency, and inclusiveness of the COP31 presidency.
Can Two Leaders Speak with One Voice?
The dual leadership model of COP31 is the first of its kind and was put in place as a means by which to resolve the presidency bidding deadlock between Australia and Türkiye. This new arrangement by nature begs the question, can a leadership model born out of disagreement operate effectively enough to deliver the outcomes expected from a summit of COP’s calibre?
The division of responsibility between the two parties represents both opportunities and potential challenges. On one hand, the separation of organisational responsibilities from negotiation allows each presidency to focus on respective strengths, potentially improving efficiency. Furthermore, such a model can be seen to increase regional representation within the UNFCCC process, bringing together, maybe for the first time, leadership perspectives from both Europe and the Asia-Pacific. In a forum such as a COP, built on global cooperation and consensus, this broader representation has the potential to reflect a wider range of regional priorities, facilitating decision-making from the very top down.
On the other hand, divided responsibility may create uncertainty in strategic direction and accountability, in a time where consensus on climate policy is increasingly difficult to mediate. Also, considering a lack of historical precedent to draw upon, there is no established framework from which effectiveness of this new model can be gauged.
Consequently, COP31 will serve as a test to see whether a shared presidency can deliver the coherence and leadership expected of the UN’s largest and most influential climate forum.
Ultimately the effectiveness of this unprecedented governance model will depend more than ever on those in charge, namely the ability of Kurum and Bowen to operate under the terms of this new model to maintain a coherent vision and present a united front through summit proceedings. Their capacity to do so may prove just as consequential as the very agreements negotiated.