The 29th United Nations Framework Conference on Climate Change (UNFCCC) annual Conference of Parties (COP 29) held in November 2024, in Baku, Azerbaijan, marked yet another turning point in the global climate movement space, by setting standards for and promoting initiatives aimed at reducing emissions, expediting just transition and adoption of Renewable Energy, and assisting countries to enhance resilience against climate change and related challenges.
Dubbed as a ‘Finance COP’, this year’s conference was platformed to be the centre-stage of the governments establishing a new climate finance goal and mobilizing finance for climate change mitigation and adaptation. However, the situation was not entirely as straight-forward at the close of the extensive two weeks in Baku, it was apparent that the outcomes were extensively invoking a poignant precedence.
Just as was witnessed at COP 28 in Dubai, UAE – a similarly controversial host, Azerbaijan was not any different - both are petrostates; appointed COP presidents having links with the fossil fuels sector; and a series of ‘disappointing’ draft texts... – parties did manage to scrap marginal wins.
Recap SID’s engagements at COP 28
From the outrageous to the controversial, many were the intrigues, occasions and events at this year’s COP 29, such as the recorded high number of fossil fuels lobbyists delegates (over 1700); the push through of false climate crisis carbon markets mechanisms solutions, under the Paris Agreement; and the stance by the Least Developed Countries (LDCs) lambasting the initial proposed climate finance, among others. However, in this brief we shall highlight the critical outcomes that fall under SID’s thematic areas of focus, in this year’s COP.
The world has, in the recent past, experienced the extremes of a changing climate, with devastating natural calamities, wildfires, floods and hurricanes. This signals a need for urgent action and concurrence among delegates to mobilize finance for mitigation and adaptation against climate change, particularly for the developing countries.
Among the anticipated outcomes of COP 29 was the setting of an ambitious yet achievable New Collective Quantified Goal (NCGQ), an element of the 2015 Paris Agreement on climate finance, aimed at setting a new financial target for the developed countries, to support developing countries in their climate actions post-2025. It is worth noting that previous set target, of US $ 100 billion per year established at COP 15 in 2009 was unattainable, until 2022.
Developed countries delegates at the end of the deliberations, announced a new NCQG target of $ 300 billion per year by 2035, a sum that is critically too low and presents difficulties for many developing and least developing countries to transform their economies, adapt to the climate crisis and be compensated for loss and damage. That figure, christened ‘a joke’, is a far cry from the actual amounts needed, that runs into trillions and even highlighted in the COP Text:
'... Costed needs reported in nationally determined contributions of developing country Parties are estimated at USD 5.1–6.8 trillion for up until 2030 or USD 455–584 billion per year’
Initially, a proposed sum of $ 250 billion was blasted by the developing and least developed countries governments and declared to be unworkable.
Another aspect of climate finance that was within the purview of the delegates is the operationalization of the Loss and Damage fund (L&D). Though a key success outcome of the COP 27 with significant catalysation at COP 28, no vulnerable country has been a recipient of the funds yet, and there is a need to concretize it as a core component of the international climate finance. At the close of COP 29, efforts to address the L&D funds under the Climate Finance package fell short. Despite pledges of up to $ 759 million, developed countries remained steadfast in their refusal to accept their obligation to compensate developing countries for climate-change-related loss and damage.
The finance flows to enhance adaptation efforts are not remotely close to what is needed, particularly in climate-vulnerable developing countries, to keep up with the rapidly intensifying impacts of climate change, according to the 2024 UN Environment Programme’s (UNEP) Adaptation Gap Report.
And sticking to its nature - of commitments and pledges, COP 29 also activated a Climate Finance Action Fund (CFAF), which will be capitalised with voluntary contributions from fossil fuel producing countries and companies across oil, gas and coal. Members will commit to transfer annual contributions as a fixed-sum or based on volume of production. However, this cannot be quantified as a tangible achievement, yet.
Fifty percent of the capital will be directed towards climate projects in developing countries that rely on support, across mitigation, adaptation, and research and development to signal promoting the adoption of clean energy technologies, improve energy efficiency, strengthen climate resilience of vulnerable populations, and facilitate the development of cutting-edge technologies. The other fifty percent will be allocated to help meet members' next generation of Nationally Determined Contributions (NDCs) to keep the 1.5C target within reach. Twenty percent of the revenues generated from investments will then be deposited in a Rapid Response Funding Facility (2R2F) providing highly concessional and grant-based support.
Despite the standing, formal details and agreements among the members and the private sector have not been achieved yet. Even so, the COP29 Presidency has already established a working group with participation of international financial experts, which is tasked with further developing the management model and funding mechanism.
The developing nations (G77+China), Least Developing countries (LDCs) and the civil society under COP29 Justice Coalition raised key contentious issues with regards to Climate Finance, including on:
Who pays; Who receives? As the civil society seeks clarity on the contributors and recipients, the developed nations argue that the contributor base ought to be determined on the evolving capabilities of parties, thus their push for a Common But Differentiated Responsibilities and ‘Evolving’ Respective Capabilities (CBDR – Evolving RC) model. The group of G77+China however argues that should that be the case, this model will equate to developing countries foregoing other priorities, such as poverty eradication and sustainable development. They therefore propose the adoption of equity and CBDR – RC (not CBDR – Evolving RC).
As to the recipients of the funds, the developed nations are seemingly setting up a tussle among the developing nations by proposing only the most vulnerable.
“Accountability for climate harm does not require development of new norms but application of existing legal frameworks.” - Lien Vandamme, Centre for International Environmental Law
COP 29 did feature the first high-level meeting on digitalisation this year, in a bid to spur interest in the role of innovative technology in supporting countries set and deliver their Nationally Determined Contributions (NDCs), for instance in developing early warning systems, in agriculture.
Also launched was the COP 29 Green Digital Action Declaration. This outcome Declaration aims to accelerate climate-positive digitalisation and emission reductions in the Information and Communication Technology sector and enhance accessibility of green digital technologies. It will commit endorsers to pursuing leveraging digital tools for climate action, incorporating climate resiliencies into digital infrastructure, mitigating the environmental impact of digitalisation, enhancing data-driven decision making, promoting digital inclusion and equity, accelerating sustainable innovation and research, and encouraging sustainable consumer practices.
Discussed at the first Global Stocktake, parties were called to contribute to the Nationally Determined Contributions by tripling renewable energy capacity. This, as was conceived, will be achieved by establishing Green Energy Zones, to act as centralised hubs where sustainable energy generation is maximised. Complimenting these zones will be green energy corridors that allow for cost-effective transmission over large distances and across borders.
Also in tow is the establishment of global energy storage grids, that is intended to enhancing energy storage and significantly aid grid expansion. This, as cited by the COP 29 Presidency, is to address the frequent concern raised by parties on the lack of energy storage solutions and the need to upgrade their grids as a constraint to their ability to increase the share of renewable energy in power generation.
Whereas this option is sound on paper, it poses fundamental queries on the path for a just transition. Particularly for the developing countries where there is vast mismatch between the supply chain of clean energy, and the energy needs and demands of the market. Let alone the financial burden, technological capacity required to aid the setting up of these green energy zones and corridors and the impact of these installations on biodiversity. Otherwise, in the developing countries' economies, this might be a profiteering exercise for developed countries led by the private sector who might capitalize on a financial credit model, and sink the receiving nations further through debts, exacerbating the existing financial crisis and energy poverty. And as for the technological interventions, such as for energy storage, it will be interesting to follow the source of these units.
This ‘Climate Finance Cop’ mirrored last year’s, with high hopes for a just recognition and finances being directed at adaptation in the developing and lead developed countries. However, as outlined, such expectations were cut to size, as in the NCQG. Also, as a sign for what the future holds with regards to fossil fuels, the world will bear with the intricacies of these fuels longer, as the efforts advancing ‘phase-out’ were vehemently opposed by OPEC axis countries. With regards to negotiations on carbon markets as per Article 6 of the Paris Agreement, besides these being labelled as false solutions, there is further concern on the inclusion of geo-engineering technologies as “carbon removals” meaning CO2 removal from the atmosphere could be introduced as an added trading mechanism in the future. A scenario that will deepen the climate crisis for the benefit of polluting industries and economies.
As the world gears towards 2025’s COP 30, in Belem, Brazil, judging by the outcomes of the Baku process, the outlook signals plenty of outstanding issues to be addressed, including; discussions on the implementation of the Global Stocktake recommendations to align NDCs with the goals of the Paris Agreement and on expanding climate financing, especially considering the divided opinions regarding the results achieved in Baku.
Image credits: COP29 Media Hub
Leveraging on the success of youth engagement at the Africa Climate Summit, SID sort partnerships with other likeminded organizations, to forge and advance implementation options for youth engagements in climate at the global arena - the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change’s (UNFCCC) Conference of Parties (COP28), hosted in Dubai, UAE on November 30, to December 13, 2023.
