The Conference of the Parties to the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change
Past Event
2024-12-04
COP29 Climate Negotiations Outcome Series (Part I): Contentious Negotiations - Deep Divisions on Finance to Global Stocktake
The United Nations Climate Change Conference (COP29) concluded amid controversy in Baku, Azerbaijan in November. Colleagues from CarbonCare InnoLab and youth delegates participated as NGO observers, actively engaging in two weeks of negotiations. Despite various restrictions, they continued advocating for climate justice, including fossil fuel phase-out, higher climate finance targets, promotion of integrity, transparency and human rights standards, and recognition of women's role in climate action.
Without full consensus, the conference established the controversial New Collective Quantified Goal (NCQG). Notably, the COP28 commitment to "transition away from fossil fuels" was absent from COP29's mitigation agenda. While carbon market mechanisms were approved, questions remain about the effectiveness of guidelines regarding transparency, integrity, and human rights safeguards. These issues exposed deep divisions between developed and developing countries, oil-producing and non-oil-producing countries, leaving key policies unresolved or even regressing, highlighting major challenges in global climate governance.
Developed Countries' Leadership Without Responsibility: Climate Finance Goals Ignore Actual Needs
The COP15 conference in 2009 established a climate finance goal of $100 billion annually from developed to developing countries, with the NCQG intended as its replacement. COP29 negotiations revealed persistent divisions between developed and developing countries over the amount, sources, and uses of climate finance.
Developing countries initially proposed a $1.3 trillion annual target, with COP29 resolution texts noting that US$5.1-6.8 trillion annually would be needed for effective climate action. However, developed countries only agreed to a $300 billion annual target from next year through 2035. While this exceeds the 2009 goal of $100 billion, accounting for inflation, the $100 billion would be equivalent to $250-280 billion by 2035, making the $300 billion target barely above inflation adjustment. Furthermore, developed countries didn't set specific minimum funding allocations for "climate-vulnerable countries" - including small islands, developing countries, and least developed countries - leading to their dissatisfaction.
Regarding funding sources, developed countries proposed a mixed model of public, private, and multilateral development bank financing, which developing countries opposed. Most current climate finance consists of loans rather than grants, potentially turning climate crisis into debt crisis for developing countries. Private financing often transfers risks to climate-vulnerable countries, exacerbating international inequality. Developed countries' proposal that wealthier developing countries should also contribute to financing further weakens their own responsibility. The finance usage was limited to climate mitigation and adaptation, notably excluding the Loss and Damage Fund, preventing compensation for climate disaster-related economic losses.
The outcome was particularly disappointing for climate-vulnerable countries. While the "Baku-Belém Roadmap" mentioned the $1.3 trillion target as a vision for COP30, it lacks clear implementation mechanisms or timelines. Substantial work remains to align the global financial system with Paris Agreement goals and increase financing flows. Discussions on aligning financial systems, including private institutions, national finances, and development banks, with Article 2.1c of the Paris Agreement will continue before COP30.
No Progress on Global Stocktake Negotiations: 1.5°C Target Lost Accountability
The Global Stocktake (GST) is the most crucial mechanism established since the 2015 Paris Agreement, designed to review, track, and support countries' carbon reduction progress and their ability to meet 2030 emission reduction commitments. However, after the first GST at COP28 last year, COP29 failed to follow up on the commitment to "transition away from fossil fuels," let alone establish next steps, pushing negotiations to COP30 next year.
GST negotiations clearly lacked consensus. Developed countries generally opposed limiting the GST's scope to finance alone, arguing it should broadly encompass other climate actions. They advocated for GST outcomes to be reflected in countries' Nationally Determined Contributions (NDCs) - national carbon reduction commitments from now until 2035, with the next NDC submission deadline in February next year. Developing countries focused on developed countries' willingness to provide finance, while emerging developing countries resisted mandatory linking of GST with NDCs without adequate financing, arguing it "is beyond the Paris Agreement framework." These divergent positions led to a negotiation deadlock.
Furthermore, last year's COP28 commitment to "transition away from fossil fuels" continued to face resistance from oil-producing countries, led by Saudi Arabia and Russia. These countries attempted to downplay or prevent any explicit fossil fuel-related language during COP29 negotiations. Ultimately, not only did GST negotiations fail to reach any agreement, but discussions on NDC Features and procedural reforms for the next GST were all postponed to next year's Bonn climate conference and COP30, further jeopardizing the goal of limiting global warming to 1.5°C.
The various consensuses hard-won at COP28 have been threatened by major oil-producing countries' intervention at COP29, compounded by potential global climate policy shifts following Trump's victory in the US election. The failure to reach GST agreements has added uncertainty to the next round of NDCs due next year. These delays have raised widespread concerns about fulfilling Paris Agreement's commitments.
Proceed to Part II