The COP29 summit, held in Baku, Azerbaijan, concluded with an agreement on a landmark climate finance pledge, but the deal has been met with significant backlash. Developed nations have agreed to raise their contribution to climate finance, committing to $300 billion annually by 2035. While some Western leaders hailed the deal as a step forward, critics, including several developing countries and climate activists, argue that the figure is insufficient to meet the growing challenges of climate change, particularly for vulnerable nations.
A Distant Goal: $300 Billion Annual Commitment
The main outcome of COP29 was the establishment of a New Collective Quantified Goal (NCQG) on climate finance. This goal will increase the current $100 billion annual target to $300 billion by 2035, aimed at helping developing countries tackle climate change through mitigation and adaptation efforts. Developed countries, including the United States, have been tasked with leading the funding effort, with private-sector investments also playing a critical role.
However, the $300 billion figure has drawn strong criticism from developing nations, which argue that this sum is far too small given the scale of the climate crisis. India, represented by Chandni Raina, dismissed the amount as “abysmally poor,” while the African Group of Negotiators expressed disappointment, labeling the pledge “too little, too late.” Vulnerable nations, particularly in Africa and the Pacific islands, have been calling for a much larger sum, with some even pushing for $1.3 trillion annually to adequately address their needs.
Discontent Among the Developing World
The lack of adequate financial support for the world’s poorest countries was a central issue during COP29 negotiations. Representatives from small island states, like the Marshall Islands, voiced frustration with the deal, highlighting the urgent need for climate funding to help them adapt to rising sea levels and extreme weather events. Tina Stege, the climate envoy for the Marshall Islands, acknowledged that while the $300 billion deal was a “start,” it was nowhere near enough to meet their immediate needs.
The African Group of Negotiators, led by Ali Mohamed of Kenya, similarly decried the deal, stressing that Africa continues to face the brunt of climate impacts despite contributing minimally to global emissions. Developing nations, which already suffer from limited resources and high vulnerability to climate change, have long argued for a financial commitment that reflects the urgency of the situation.
Carbon Markets and the Controversy Over Loopholes
Another significant aspect of the COP29 discussions was the approval of carbon markets under Article 6 of the Paris Agreement. The goal is to create a global system where countries can trade carbon pollution rights, allowing them to offset emissions through projects in other regions. Proponents argue that this could generate additional funds for climate finance, potentially raising up to $250 billion annually.
However, the carbon market proposal has been met with heavy criticism. Environmental groups, including Greenpeace, have raised concerns that carbon markets provide a loophole for major polluters to continue emitting greenhouse gases while claiming to offset their emissions through questionable schemes. Tamara Gilbertson from the Indigenous Environmental Network described the deal as “undermining the mandate” to reach the crucial 1.5°C target for global warming, while Greenpeace’s An Lambrechts referred to it as a “climate scam.”
Fossil Fuels: A Compromised Approach
Another contentious issue at COP29 was the language surrounding fossil fuels. The summit failed to reiterate last year’s commitment to a transition away from coal, oil, and natural gas, a pledge that had been a key breakthrough in the fight against climate change. The final text mentioned the need for a transition but avoided explicitly targeting fossil fuels, much to the dismay of climate activists and some nations. Saudi Arabia, a major oil producer, successfully blocked any explicit reference to the phase-out of fossil fuels, reinforcing its stance on maintaining “transitional fuels” like fossil gas.
Looking Ahead: What Will COP30 Hold?
As COP29 draws to a close, the focus now shifts to COP30, set to take place in Belem, Brazil, in 2025. With the $300 billion climate finance goal set to begin in 2026, developing countries will continue to push for more substantial and immediate action. The success of the carbon market system and the future of fossil fuel commitments will likely dominate discussions in the upcoming climate talks.
Will the COP30 Summit Deliver on Climate Justice?
As COP29 wraps up with mixed results, one pressing question remains: Will future climate summits be able to deliver on the promises of climate justice, or will the gap between the rich and poor nations continue to widen?
Related Stories:
At COP29, $250bn Climate Finance Offer Sparks Outrage, As Developing Nations Demand Trillions
Fossil Fuel Debate Sparks Fury at COP29 as Oil-Producing Nations Block Crucial Commitments
Interim Leader of Bangladesh Slams Wealthy Nations at COP29: “You Are Causing the Problem”
