In the span of just a few years, governments have watched a war in Ukraine upend Europe’s gas supply and a war between the United States and Iran threaten the Strait of Hormuz, which carries a fifth of the world’s oil. The pattern is hard to miss: Fossil-fuel dependence has become a recurring source of economic pain and strategic vulnerability.While clean energy deployment has accelerated, few governments have developed explicit plans for managing fossil fuel consumption and, where relevant, shifts in fossil fuel demand and production. This matters because fossil fuel demand does not automatically fall when clean energy grows. Rapid growth in the absolute amount, or even the share, of clean energy may not lead directly to a decline in fossils, but rather serve at least partly to meet rising energy demand (from cooling, industrialization or data centers). Without such planning, governments risk treating fossil fuel decline as a by-product of clean energy growth rather than as a structural, economy-wide transformation that must be deliberately managed.National planning for transitioning away from fossil fuels (TAFF) can therefore set out how national fossil fuel use will evolve; how existing energy transition strategies can be integrated into a coherent whole; and how governments will manage the fiscal, infrastructure, investment and social dimensions of the transition. Given the necessary scale of the transformation over the coming decades and the uncertainties around how it will unfold, governments need plans that provide a long-term direction while enabling them to anticipate emerging risks and adapt to changing circumstances. While planning alone will not deliver the transition, it is a vital stepping stone to integrating such plans into more economic and sectoral planning, policies and investment choices.This article makes the case for why countries need explicit planning for the transition away from fossil fuels, what these plans could address, and what considerations should shape countries’ plans. It also explores how COP31 and other international forums could help advance this agenda.What Is National TAFF Planning and Why Is It Important?National TAFF planning sets out how fossil fuel consumption and, where relevant, production, will evolve, how clean alternatives will scale, and how the macro-fiscal, social, infrastructure, and investment consequences of that shift will be managed.Planning for the transition can be done through standalone plans or roadmaps, or embedded in a variety of policy instruments. These could include climate planning tools such as updated NDCs or just transition plans to core economic and sectoral plans such as long-term development strategies, national energy plans, or other national planning instruments. Regardless of the approach, TAFF planning needs to address the difficult choices and trade-offs that countries face in managing the transition alongside their broader economic and development implications. TAFF plans can serve three practical functions. First, they can improve policy coherence by linking separate climate, energy, fiscal, industrial and just transition strategies in a common framework. Second, they can support domestic coordination by giving ministries and other stakeholders a shared reference point for making decisions that may otherwise be made in silos. And third, they can provide clear signals to investors and trading partners, helping reduce policy uncertainty and showing that a country is not only expanding clean energy, but also deliberately managing its fossil fuel dependence.Why Are Existing Climate and Energy Plans Not Enough?Most existing climate and energy plans miss the mark, focusing more on building the ‘clean’ energy system than on governing the decline of fossil fuel systems. For example, WRI analysis finds that while many NDCs seek to expand clean energy, few explicitly focus on policies for the shifts away from fossil fuel use and production.Some NDCs and other national plans include commitments to increase the share of non-fossil energy use, providing a helpful sense of direction for reducing fossil fuel dependence. But clean energy plans mainly focus on renewables, grids, storage, efficiency and electrification without necessarily addressing how existing fossil fuel systems will be managed.Planning the transition away from fossil fuels can expand the scope for national planning and ask the questions that clean energy plans often leave unanswered. These include specific sectoral issues involving fossil-based power plants or oil demand for transport, as well as critical issues with the political economy and broader economic and social implications such as public revenues, subsidies, employment, regional economic impacts and decommissioning liabilities. A solar or wind energy target by itself does not tell a country how workers will transition or how changing fossil revenues will be managed.Focusing on expanding clean energy can often draw more political support because it promises new investment, industries and jobs — all essential objectives. But planning for TAFF can be politically valuable by making the challenges and opportunities visible early and then addressing them squarely. Managing the transition also requires governments to confront risks that may emerge unevenly or abruptly as the energy system evolves. Volatile global markets, shifting demand and infrastructure tipping points can create sudden economic and social pressures, requiring ministries to develop stronger capabilities for anticipating, stress-testing and managing transition risks. Planning for TAFF can help make these vulnerabilities visible early, identify economic diversification opportunities, sequence reforms, develop support measures, and build broader coalitions around a managed transition rather than through fragmented policies and short-term crisis response.Existing Plans Provide a Starting PointNational TAFF planning does not need to be built from scratch. Many countries already have parts of the architecture in place through NDCs, long-term strategies, plans to decarbonize power systems, subsidy reforms and just transition frameworks. IISD notes that at least 46 countries already have power-sector decarbonization plans. A growing number also have demand-side or decommissioning frameworks. The challenge is less about creating an entirely new planning tool than about integrating existing policies into a coherent framework that explicitly addresses the transition away from fossil fuels.Countries are approaching this challenge in different ways, from explicit national TAFF roadmaps to broader energy transition strategies that provide important building blocks:France, the Netherlands and Germany were the first three countries to develop a more explicit national TAFF roadmap in 2026. France’s TAFF roadmap, released at the Santa Marta conference, brings existing national climate and energy commitments under a fossil-fuel specific roadmap and sets end-of-consumption targets for coal by 2030, oil by 2045 and fossil gas by 2050 for energy purposes. The Dutch roadmap brings together existing and planned measures across different fossil fuels while stopping short of setting a single phase-out date. Germany’s roadmap also builds largely on its existing climate and sectoral policies and sets out how these contribute to transitioning away from fossil fuels by 2045.Colombia’s Just Energy Transition Roadmap in 2025 defines decarbonization trajectories and covers hydrocarbons, mining, electricity, new energy and demand management. It was built through a broad social-dialogue process involving communities, business and sectoral actors.The United Kingdom’s carbon budget and clean power plans provide examples of economy-wide delivery and power-sector transformation, while its North Sea strategy engages more directly with the future of domestic oil and gas production.Malaysia’s National Energy Transition Roadmap, published in 2023, is designed around the trilemma of energy security, affordability and environmental sustainability.Ghana’s long-term energy transition framework and investment plan outlines a pathway to net-zero by 2060, across oil and gas, transport, cooking, industry and power.At the regional level, Pacific Island countries have also begun developing a similar approach. Six Pacific governments adopted the Tassiriki Call for a Fossil Fuel Free Pacific in April 2026, setting out a common vision for 100% renewable energy and a just transition away from fossil fuels. Pacific ministers are now taking this forward through work on a regional TAFF roadmap. Other countries are beginning to explore similar approaches, with support from the NDC Partnership and Beyond Oil and Gas Alliance (BOGA).None of these examples is a perfect template. But together, they show that countries are already developing many of the core ingredients of a fossil fuel transition plan. National TAFF planning can help advance these pieces, identify what is missing, and ensure that the transition away from fossil fuels is treated not as an assumed by-product of clean energy deployment, but as an explicit and governed process.What Questions Should TAFF Plans Answer?There is no single template for national TAFF planning. Countries differ widely in their energy systems, economic structures, levels of development and exposure to fossil fuels. As a result, its design will necessarily vary and should reflect principles of equity and national circumstances while maintaining ownership, credibility and coherence. Emerging guidance, including recent guidance by IISD, suggest that credible TAFF planning needs to answer five core questions:How will fossil fuel use and, where relevant, production evolve? Credible TAFF planning can set goals and a clear direction of travel while recognizing that countries will move at different speeds depending on national circumstances. In many developing countries, the pathways must also account for rising energy demand, access and affordability — where the transition must be designed as a development strategy as much as a decarbonization one, including through expanding clean, decentralized energy access. Goals may take the form of fuel-specific benchmarks, sectoral milestones or qualitative transition objectives, but their purpose is to provide a reference point against which policy, finance, governance, infrastructure and just transition measures can be designed and assessed.How will the transition be financed and linked to economic diversification? TAFF plans can identify the investment needed to implement the transition, including for industrial conversion, decommissioning and site rehabilitation, worker support and regional diversification. It can also help prioritize investments, determine the respective roles of public, private, domestic and international finance, identify the enabling policies and institutions, support project pipeline development and specify appropriate financing instruments. For fossil fuel-dependent economies, this financing framework needs to be linked to a broader economic diversification strategy: identifying new sectors, export opportunities and domestic industries that can absorb capital and labor losses as fossil fuel revenues and jobs shifts. For many developing countries, high costs of capital can constrain investment in clean alternatives, making concessional finance, guarantees and other risk-sharing instruments particularly important. Fossil fuel-exporting economies face an additional challenge: financing economic diversification as export earnings, revenues and associated economic activity change.How will macroeconomic and fiscal risks be managed? For exporting countries, this means explicitly addressing how revenues tied to extraction and exports will be replaced as fossil fuel income changes. Fossil fuel importers may also see changes in tax revenues and continued exposure to external price shocks. Geopolitical conflicts can fuel ‘fossilflation,’ or fossil fuel-driven inflation that raises living costs and risks interest rate hikes, potentially constraining investment in clean energy. Central banks therefore have an important role in assessing these risks and their implications for monetary policy and financial stability. TAFF planning can help governments identify where these vulnerabilities lie, assess how they may evolve over time, and put in place the macroeconomic and fiscal measures needed to manage the transition without majorly destabilizing public finances or the broader economy. How will workers, households, communities and regions be supported? TAFF plans should identify which workers, industries and regions face the impact of the transition. They should set out how these groups will be supported to ensure that economic restructuring does not deepen existing inequalities but instead minimizes costs, supports equitable sharing of opportunities and promotes decent work. This includes provisions for reskilling, retraining, early retirement, social protection, community investment and regional economic diversification, as well as reforms to fossil fuel subsidies that protect affordability and provide better- targeted support to vulnerable households. Participatory processes are also key. Meaningful engagements with workers and communities to build trust and ensure they have a role in shaping decisions for better outcomes, particularly in regions most exposed to transition impacts, are both important for procedural justice and political durability.Who will be responsible for implementation and accountability? Making any plan operational requires cross-ministerial coordination, bringing finance, energy, industry, labor and regional subnational stakeholders under a shared framework, as well as clear institutional ownership, review cycles and robust monitoring systems. Such monitoring systems can track indicators related to changing fiscal and macroeconomic exposure to fossil fuels, shifts in economic and labor structures, adequacy of social safety nets for affected communities, availability of workforce transition programs, investment in cleaner economic sectors as well as small and medium enterprises (SMEs), and more. In large and regionally diverse economies, national TAFF planning should also be informed by subnational actors.What Should Shape the Design of TAFF Planning?Having the right content in a TAFF plan is one thing; whether it can be implemented depends on the political, financial and institutional realities countries actually face, as well as the wider global environment in which the transition unfolds. Countries will be managing these shifts amid volatile fossil fuel markets, geopolitical tensions, trade disruptions and rapidly changing energy value chains. TAFF planning therefore needs to be both grounded in domestic realities and robust enough to adapt as external conditions change.Finance is often the most immediate constraint. For many developing economies, high debt burdens and the cost of capital limit their ability to invest in clean alternatives and economic diversification. Credible TAFF planning will therefore depend on these countries increasing their fiscal space and reducing the cost of capital, whether through debt restructuring or relief, recognition of a well-managed transition strategy in their credit rating, receiving concessional finance and international support, access to other forms of lower-cost capital and availability of risk-sharing arrangements such as guarantees.Political economy is equally important. Subsidy reform, plant closures and industrial restructuring create visible losses, often before benefits arrive. Governments that have not prepared the ground politically will struggle to sustain them. Credible planning therefore needs to sequence reforms carefully, communicate clearly, bring incumbent industries and trade unions on board, and provide targeted protections for vulnerable workers and households.Equity between countries should also shape TAFF planning from the outset. TAFF will not unfold at the same pace or in the same way across countries. For many developing and fossil fuel-dependent economies, the feasibility of transitioning will depend on energy access, fiscal space (including debt sustainability, access to international public and private finance, and domestic resources), and the ability to diversify before revenues fall. TAFF planning should therefore identify who is affected, who participates, how costs and benefits are shared, and how national circumstances shape the pace and sequencing of the fossil fuel transition.Finally, implementation depends on state capacity and coordination. The transition is inherently complex and involves a large set of actors: line ministries, subnational governments, central banks, private investors, energy companies, workers and communities. Durable and decentralized governance structures, political buy-in, and stakeholder and community engagement are necessary for an effective governance of the transition. What’s Next for National TAFF Planning?Political momentum behind TAFF is building. At COP30 in Belem, more than 80 governments supported a global roadmap on transitioning away from fossil fuels. While the final negotiated decision did not include one due to a lack of consensus, the Brazilian COP30 Presidency committed to developing its own global TAFF roadmap, which they published just ahead of COP31. In April 2026, Colombia and the Netherlands hosted the first Conference on Transitioning Away from Fossil Fuels, which brought together 57 countries to discuss practical ways to manage the transition.Under the Turkiye-Australia COP partnership, COP31 is explicitly being framed as an ‘Implementation COP,’ with climate finance and the energy transition among its priority areas. That creates a natural opening for further progress on taking practical steps to transition away from fossil fuels.Given the lack of consensus at COP30, COP31 may be better suited for advancing national TAFF planning through voluntary participation and coalition building rather than relying solely on a negotiated outcome. For example, a coalition of countries could arrive at COP31 with completed TAFF plans in hand, whether standalone roadmaps or embedded in existing plans and policy instruments, or with a commitment to produce them by COP32 in Ethiopia. Such a coalition should not be limited to a group of countries that are able to move fastest. Its credibility will depend on whether it includes, or at least creates space for, fossil fuel-dependent developing countries whose transitions require more finance, fiscal space, coalition-building and time.These outcomes would not create new obligations. But they would help turn the political language of ‘transitioning away from fossil fuels’ into something more concrete: country-owned strategies that show how governments intend to deliberately manage the fossil side of the transition in ways that are orderly, just, equitable and economically credible. COP32 in Ethiopia next year would then provide a useful checkpoint for assessing whether that planning effort is spreading beyond first movers.Nor should this agenda of national TAFF planning remain confined to the COP process. The next TAFF conference, co-hosted by Tuvalu and Ireland in the spring of 2027, could provide another opportunity for countries to present TAFF plans and announce commitments to develop them. More broadly, the fiscal and macroeconomic stakes of the transition are also increasingly relevant in other forums such as G20 discussions, BRICS and regional forums. Whether pursued through roadmaps, NDCs, long-term strategies or other national planning tools, national TAFF planning can also inform wider debates on development, finance and economic resilience.