The 29th annual Climate Summit in Azerbaijan reached an impasse as developed and developing nations remained divided over climate finance commitments
The negotiation process at the 29th annual Climate Summit (COP29) in Baku, Azerbaijan came to a halt as both developed and developing countries did not agree with the proposed quantum of climate finance, and its mobilisation approach. The COP29 Presidency had two quantitative targets before the negotiating countries. A USD 1.3 trillion of total annual climate investments in developing countries by 2035 and USD 250 billion of annual climate finance from developed to developing countries by 2035. These targets are to be met through a variety of sources and actors. While it is learnt informally that developed countries, after initial rejection, are willing to commit to USD 300 billion per year by 2035, developing countries rejected the Presidency proposal.
For them, the commitment is too little and too late. Against the estimated cost of about USD 7 trillion required to implement current Nationally Determined Contributions (NDC), developing countries demand more than USD 1 trillion per year of public finance from developed countries. By 2035 the ambition of NDCs is likely to be revised upward twice and total implementation costs would increase substantially. In this context, the Presidency’s proposal shatters any hopes of raising ambition consistent with the goal agreed at the Paris Agreement.
The current policy commitments are likely to lead to a temperature rise of a minimum of 2.7 degrees Celsius compared to the aspiration target of 1.5 degrees Celsius. In a surprising departure, the proposed target of mobilising USD 1.3 trillion is to be achieved by ‘all actors’ instead of ‘all Parties’ to the UNFCCC. Since a COP decision cannot be binding on ‘all actors,’ the target holds little value beyond a half-hearted appeal. The G77 and China rejected the Presidency proposal followed by a strong letter from the civil society organisations supporting the rejection. The COP29 may still deliver a decision keeping the negotiation process alive as the negotiations are in extended hours searching for a political compromise. Yet, the position taken by the developed countries during COP29 is a concern for developing countries in the next rounds of negotiations. Outsourcing Responsibility The reluctance of developed countries to commit to new, additional and predictable climate finance is not new. At COP29, this reluctance turned into an aggressive posture, shifting the responsibility to mobilise commensurate finance primarily onto emerging economies and other actors.
Throughout COP29, developed countries left no stone unturned to shift responsibility onto emerging economies, including China, India, Brazil, and South Africa. They pressed for emerging economies to be considered ineligible for receiving climate finance, except in the form of debt. Additionally, they suggested including emerging economies’ domestic investments and climate-friendly South-South cooperation in accounting for climate finance, urging them to voluntarily contribute. Outside the negotiation process, a group of developed countries, including the UK and Australia, signed a pledge to have “no new unabated” coal-based power plants. This may be a response to the ongoing energy crisis in some developed countries, indirectly pledging to continue using coal with expensive carbon capture and storage technologies, expecting emerging economies to do the same. Adaptation Marginalised The Second Needs Determination Report (NDR) by the UNFCCC Standing Committee on Finance (SCF) estimates that more than USD 200 billion per year of adaptation finance is needed till 2030. So far, adaptation has received little finance from non-public sources.
Even if the developed countries agree to USD 300 billion per year by 2035 as some reports suggest, it will categorically leave the adaptation needs on the margins of global climate governance.
On a parallel negotiation track on the Adaptation Fund, the USA and EU sparred with the Arab Group on the need to scale up mobilisation beyond USD 300 million. While the financial commitments to developing countries are likely to remain meagrely, the Global Goal on Adaptation negotiations expect the developing countries to develop, implement, track, and report their National Adaptation Plans (NAPs) commensurate with the projected temperature rise.
Equity Under SiegeThe principle of equity and common but differentiated responsibility and respective capability (CBDR&RC) is the soul of global climate governance through the UNFCCC. The primary responsibility of creating enabling conditions for an equitable transition to a climate-resilient and low-carbon world, including through means of implementation, rests with the developed countries.
By trying to shift the burden on emerging economies and keeping the interests and needs of the vulnerable populations on margin, developed countries have aggressively pushed to open the negotiations on equity principles at COP29. Irrespective of the number finally agreed at the COP29, the intent made abundantly clear by developed countries is alarming.
It can potentially make any discussion on the quantum of finance irrelevant. It will certainly leave the vast vulnerable population unprotected- a marker of an unequal world.
(The writer is a Senior Fellow and Associate Director, Earth Science and Climate Change Division, The Energy and Resources Institute (TERI); views are personal)
