COP29 – a climate conference that left everyone disappointed
11.25.2024
Author: Tibor Schaffhauser

The latest annual UN climate conference recently concluded in Baku, where developing countries sought new financial resources, while developed nations aimed to secure strengthened emissions reduction measures. However, except for the Gulf countries, all parties left disappointed. What exactly happened in Azerbaijan, and what does it mean for the future?

Delegates from the world’s nations, alongside representatives from civil organizations and businesses, gathered for the 29th time to address the challenges of climate change. This year, the event took place in Baku’s Olympic Stadium. The various country groups arrived with differing expectations: developed countries wanted to establish stronger emissions reduction targets and programs to keep climate change under control, while developing nations sought increased funding for their activities. After more than two weeks of negotiations, decisions were finally adopted at dawn on Sunday, 36 hours behind schedule, leaving almost all sides dissatisfied.

High Expectations

The question of who should pay for the costs of the green transition and the damages caused by climate change has long been contentious. The 2015 Paris Agreement acknowledges the historical responsibility of developed nations for climate change, urging them to provide resources for the climate protection efforts of developing countries. Within this framework, the current climate finance goal, running until 2025, was established, with developed nations committing $100 billion annually to developing countries. As this goal approaches its end, negotiations over the past three years have focused on setting a new target for the period from 2025 to 2035.

Three main principles guided these talks: developed countries would continue to lead in providing resources, other economically capable nations would also contribute, and the annual funding target would rise above the current $100 billion.

Developing nations’ expectations varied widely. Some estimates suggest that achieving the national plans of developing countries through 2030 would require $5.1–6.8 trillion, or $455–584 billion annually, alongside an additional $215–387 billion annually for adaptation efforts. Meanwhile, developed nations face slowing economic growth, rising war and humanitarian expenses, and general fiscal constraints.

Source: UNFCCC

To address these expectations, developed countries proposed expanding the pool of contributors, including through greener financial flows from development banks and private sources, as well as involving nations that were classified as developing in 1992 but are now major emitters and economically strong, such as certain Asian countries and Gulf oil monarchies.

Developed nations also sought agreements on stronger emissions reduction measures, arguing that minimizing climate impacts would reduce future costs. A recent study suggests that every 1°C rise in temperature could shrink global GDP by 12%, making prevention a better investment.

Breakdown of Trust

Further complicating matters, this year’s conference was hosted by a resource-rich country with limited experience in international climate negotiations. Delays, poor organization, and communication issues hampered progress. The UNFCCC Secretariat tried to assist Azerbaijani diplomats, but the Secretariat is not designed to lead negotiations.

In the final days, public consultations ceased entirely, with Azerbaijan’s COP presidency holding closed-door meetings to secure agreements. The lack of competence and vision eroded trust, which collapsed completely when a negotiation document was mistakenly shared in an editable format, revealing that it had been drafted not by the Azerbaijani presidency but by Saudi Arabian representatives.

Delegates arguing during the closing plenary of COP29

Saudi Arabia, leading a group of countries, aimed to block any agreements in Baku that would require ambitious new climate finance commitments or emissions reductions, as these would have implicated them in significant obligations. Their support for Azerbaijan’s presidency served their own interests.

Outcomes of the Talks

The Azerbaijani COP presidency sought to build trust by resolving long-standing negotiations on international carbon market mechanisms, which could mobilize $250 billion annually for emissions reduction measures. While launching international carbon trading is a significant achievement, other outcomes fell short.

The final decisions, adopted after a 36-hour delay, tripled the post-2025 climate finance goal to at least $300 billion annually from developed countries’ public funds, with efforts to raise the total to $1.3 trillion from all sources. However, this fell short of developing countries’ expectations. A proposal led by India to veto the decision was overruled by the Azerbaijani presidency.

The view of Baku Olympic Stadium

Additionally, Gulf countries were not obligated to contribute to the new targets, leaving this as a voluntary option, despite China showing some openness to mandatory contributions. Meanwhile, the Mitigation Work Program aimed at stronger emissions reduction measures did not include new targets, while the decision on the UAE Dialogue was vetoed by developed nations, as it lacked sufficient commitments to limit global temperature rise and accelerate the energy transition.

Disappointment Across the Board

In summary, the Baku climate conference ended with all parties — except perhaps Saudi Arabia — leaving disappointed. Developing nations fell short of securing the resources they hoped for, while developed nations failed to achieve stronger emissions commitments. The limited outcomes of COP29, combined with geopolitical challenges, signal tough years ahead for international climate policy. It is essential that regions and nations pursue ambitious climate action domestically.

Related Articles

 

The sense of urgency has not yet entered the room – taking stock of the first week of COP27

The sense of urgency has not yet entered the room – taking stock of the first week of COP27

Just before midnight on Saturday evening, the technical negotiations of the UN COP27 climate conference currently taking place in Egypt have ended, giving the opportunity to the ministers arriving in the second week to reach political agreements. Although we have seen some progress and the positions of developed and developing countries have converged, there is still a lot of work ahead of the negotiators in the second week of the conference in order to be able to talk about real results in Egypt. A quick analysis by a colleague of the Green Policy Center on site.

UN climate conference – Balancing between finance and ambition

UN climate conference – Balancing between finance and ambition

This week, the 27th annual climate conference of the United Nations the COP27 begins under the presidency of Egypt. The “African COP”, as the developing countries refer to the conference, faces serious challenges: it must simultaneously increase the ambition to reduce emissions in order to maintain the climate goals and preserve a ray of hope for small island states of survival, as well as meet the developing countries’ huge financial expectations. Will the Egyptian presidency manage to reach agreements acceptable to all parties and what role will the European Union play in all of this?
Although we are currently mostly occupied with the energy price crisis, we must not forget the challenges caused by climate change. That is why it is worth paying attention to Sharm el-Sheikh in Egypt, where delegates from nearly 200 UN countries are expected to discuss the most burning issues of international climate policy in the next two weeks. And there are plenty of burning issues; this year we have all felt the negative effects of climate change on our own skins, just think of the summer droughts and forest fires, or the floods in Pakistan that claimed 1,500 lives and caused 30 billion dollars in damages.
One of the most controversial topics in the coming weeks will be related to these events; the so-called Loss and Damage negotiations. According to the IPCC, the climate change scientific advisory body of the UN, climate change threatens the lives and livelihoods of 3.3-3.6 billion people in the future. Climate change strongly affects the poorest strata of the population, as they are much less able to adapt to its negative effects; developing countries are therefore demanding a new financial fund to compensate for the damage caused by climate change. Since developing countries generally emit less greenhouse gases and they are still affected by climate change, they are calling upon developed countries to finance this new fund due to climate justice and the “historical responsibility” of developed countries. However, opinions differ as to what amount would be sufficient; calculations are about expected damage between 1-1.8 trillion and 5.6 trillion dollars by 2050.
The United States, as well as the European Union and its member states, have so far opposed the establishment of a separate financial fund, fearing that, if it is created, there will be no limit to the financial claims of developing countries. During the negotiations, the EU has also underlined that there are already an existing fora for the topic under the UN umbrella, and that developed countries have undertook to mobilize 100 billion dollars yearly to support the climate protection efforts of developing countries. Since we have not yet succeeded in achieving this goal, the developing countries are distrustful of the developed countries for the time being.
In order to rebuild trust, several European member states have already offered resources to deal with Loss and Damage, and developed countries have pledged to double the resources offered for adaptation action. Furthermore, developed countries are also developing a delivery plan on reaching the 100 billion dollar per year goal, and started negotiations to define the new long-term climate financing goal as well. However, according to the position of the EU and its member states, public resources alone will not be sufficient to curb climate change, so we recommend starting negotiations on how to bring global financial processes in line with the 2050 climate neutrality goals. It is still an open question whether this topic will be on the agenda or whether developing countries will only see it as a distraction from the immediate mobilization of finance.
The chance of survival of small island states is an open question at the moment as well. If we cannot keep the rise of the global average temperature below 1.5°C, several of these countries may drown in the sea, so it is really a matter of life and death for them to reduce emissions as ambitiously as possible. Last week, the UN environment and climate change organizations both published their assessments on how we are doing in the fight against climate change. While we could be optimistic after last year’s climate conference because of the new commitments announced there. according to these latest analyses, we are no longer doing so well in terms of implementation. Among the major emitters, only the EU and the USA have reduced their emissions, while the global GHG emissions have reached new all-time record high levels. Another cause for concern is the fact that even if the current commitments are fully fulfilled, we can still expect a warming of around 2.8°C by the end of our century – not aligned with the 1,5°C pathway recommended by science and necessary for the survival of small island states.
For the EU and its member states, the progress under the mitigation work program up to 2030 during COP27 is therefore of outstanding importance, so that the countries of the world can formulate more ambitious climate policy steps as soon as possible. This is not only important for the survival of small island states, but if we can keep climate change under control, its negative effects will cause less loss and damage, and the we need to mobilize less resources to compensate for those. As we can see, everything is connected with everything, which is why the Egyptian COP presidency will be in a difficult situation in the next two weeks. We can hope for all of our sake that they manage to deliver on the expectations of all sides, both on ambition and finance.