Baku: The COP29 climate change summit said developing countries were furious over a proposal by developed countries to provide $250 billion a year in climate finance by 2035, calling it a “slap in the face” and adding only $1.3 trillion of the requested amount. The amount was so outraged that it was far less than 100 million dollars, so it was extended for one day. Concerns about a Copenhagen-like impasse.
The first concrete numbers revealed after two weeks of negotiations came on Friday in the COP29 Presidency’s draft, which not only set significantly lower funding targets but also It made controversial changes to the wording to suggest that developed countries were simply “taking the lead.” Rather than providing climate finance outright.
The draft proposal proposes to raise finance from “public and private, bilateral and multilateral, and alternative sources,” while “all actors” will need to raise 1 trillion yen per year by 2035. It also mentions a broader but largely symbolic goal of mobilizing $300 billion.
“Quantum theory is a wash,” said a developing country negotiator, who pointed out that the draft departed from Article 9.1 of the Paris Agreement, which obligates developed countries to provide climate finance.
Despite early agreement on carbon markets, the summit risks ending without agreement on its central issues, with a similar ‘take it or leave it’ approach to climate finance creating lasting mistrust. It is a reenactment of the controversial 2009 Copenhagen summit.
The COP29 Presidency called on parties to consider a “balanced and reasonable” text, but observers said another draft was expected to be submitted on Saturday morning, pushing negotiations into extra time. It notes that bridging the deep divides surrounding both the quantum and structure of climate finance remains difficult.
Brazil has warned that a lack of funding could jeopardize key climate change efforts next year. “We decided to align our NDCs with the 1.5 degrees Celsius target. But now the means of implementation are in question and our NDCs will be affected,” said Brazilian Environment Minister Marina D. Silva. He emphasized concerns about Brazil’s COP30, when countries are expected to update their climate change commitments.
Brazil’s concerns highlight the important link between public finance and climate action. “At COP30 in Brazil, parties are supposed to update their NDCs to limit temperature rise to 1.5 degrees Celsius,” Silva stressed, adding that without adequate financial commitments in Baku, countries will be forced to move to Belem next year. expressed concern that the United States may be unable or unwilling to strengthen its climate commitments. .
The Independent High-Level Expert Group on Climate Finance presents a detailed roadmap, calling for “strengthening direct bilateral financing from developed countries, higher ambitions on the part of multilateral development banks, and improved mobilization of private finance.” are. Their analysis suggests that the proposed $250 billion falls far short of what is needed to meet the goals of the Paris Agreement.
Leading climate finance experts Amar Bhattacharya, Vera Songwe and Nicholas Stern said this number was “too low to be consistent with implementing the Paris Agreement” and instead suggested that “at least 300 billion per year, and $390 billion per year by 2035. ”
Experts also pointed out that if inflation is taken into account, $250 billion over the next 10 years to 2035 would be equivalent to the target of $100 billion, which expires in 2025.
“The apparent increase in supplies from developed countries to developing countries by $250 billion per year by 2035 is equivalent to $100 billion per year by 2020, taking into account an average annual inflation rate of 6%. There is no low-cost funding. This is a bad deal for developing countries, regardless of how the president views it,” explained Vaibhav Chaturvedi of CEEW.
The draft document on the NCQG and mitigation work program notably lacks any reference to the “transition away from fossil fuels”, a key agreement reached at COP28 in Dubai. This omission, combined with lower financial numbers, has raised concerns that earlier promises could be set back.
“Our expectations were low, but this is a slap in the face,” said Mohamed Addo of Power Shift Africa, while Meena Raman of Third World Network commented on how the Fiscal COP He questioned whether it would be possible to roll back on the agreement’s commitments.
TERI’s RR Rashmi said this is a “quite compromised version of the objective” that dilutes government responsibility and weakens core fiscal obligations by relying heavily on private funding.
The United States appeared satisfied with the document, with a senior official noting that “significant increases” would be needed to meet even this goal. The US position is important given Donald Trump’s election victory and the expected withdrawal from the Paris Agreement, which requires countries to strive to limit global warming to 2°C (and preferably 1.5°C) above pre-industrial levels. It’s becoming more sexual.
Regarding expanding the donor base, Li Shuo of the China Climate Hub Asia Association proposed a compromise that would allow countries like China to contribute toward the $250 billion goal without assuming formal responsibility.
“We cannot leave Baku without this,” Brazil’s Silva said, referring to the funding levels recommended by the expert group, adding that countries may not be able to renew their climate commitments next year without clear funding provisions. I warned you that it’s sexual.
