Loss and Damage - COP29 Updates

Share this to :

    Loss and Damage (L&D) refers to the unavoidable impacts of climate change that exceed what communities can adapt to. These impacts include economic losses like damaged infrastructure and disrupted livelihoods, as well as non-economic losses, such as the loss of cultural heritage and biodiversity (UNFCCC, UNEP). L&D is a matter of climate justice and in this way, is closely related to the concept of Just Transition, as the most vulnerable countries to the adverse effects of climate change are often the lowest emitters of greenhouse gases.   

    The urgency of addressing Loss and Damage has grown significantly in recent COP negotiations. In 2010, COP16 formally acknowledged L&D with the creation of the SBI Work Programme on L&D. Building on this, COP19 established the Warsaw International Mechanism (WIM) to provide countries facing L&D with knowledge-sharing, coordination, and financial support. Four years later, at COP25, the Santiago Network was launched to catalyze action by offering the technical assistance needed for developing countries to implement L&D on the ground, at local, national, and regional levels.

    A significant breakthrough came at COP28 when countries signed an historic agreement to operationalize the Fund for responding to Loss and Damage (FRLD) — enshrined in decisions 2/CP.27 and 2/CMA.4 — and followed it with a $420 million pledge. To advance the operations of the Fund, COP and CMA appointed Ibrahima Cheikh Diong as its first Executive Director in September 2024.  

     This year, the focus will shift to discussions on how to efficiently implement the L&D Fund, including setting eligibility criteria, defining disbursement procedures, and ensuring rapid access to funding — avoiding delays that have plagued other climate finance mechanisms. While $700 million was pledged since COP28, this amount is far from the $580 billion in climate-related damages that developing countries could face by 2030. At COP29, developed countries should announce new pledges to ensure that support reaches real-time needs of most vulnerable communities.

    In addition, agriculture, which received only 4.3% of climate finance in 2019-2020 and has not been a central focus in L&D discussions, must be prioritized. The L&D Fund must allocate sufficient resources to strengthen food systems, given their crucial role in achieving global climate action. Equally important is the question of whether the New Quantified Goal on Adaptation will explicitly address loss and damage or include a dedicated sub-goal to this end.  

    Relevant documents: 

    • FCCC/SB/2024/2 – Joint annual report of the Executive Committee of the WIM for Loss and Damage associated with Climate Change Impacts and the Santiago network for averting, minimizing and addressing loss and damage associated with the adverse effects of climate change 

    Related events: 

    • 12 Nov – 2024 review of the Warsaw International Mechanism for Loss and Damage associated with Climate Change Impacts – Mandated event                  

    COP29 Day 2 Updates, November 12, 2024

    Today marked a critical day for Loss and Damage (L&D) negotiations at COP, with a focus on assessing and advancing the Warsaw International Mechanism (WIM) and the Santiago Network (SN). As the climate crisis intensifies, the urgency for accessible, operational L&D funding for vulnerable communities was highlighted throughout sessions and side events. 

    Core Debate: Structuring the final Decision
    The primary sessions included the “2024 Review of the WIM for Loss and Damage associated with Climate Change Impacts” and a “Joint Report of the Executive Committee of WIM and SN.” 

    A major debate focused on structuring the final decision around the Warsaw International Mechanism (WIM) and the joint report. The G77 advocated for addressing the joint annual report and the WIM review separately to give each issue its due focus. In contrast, the EU, United States, AILAC countries, and Least Developed Countries (LDCs) supported a unified decision to streamline recommendations, prevent overlap, and make the best use of limited session time. 

    Other Key Positions and Inputs  

    • Delegates from the Global South, led by China and the G77, emphasized the immediate need to make L&D funds operational and accessible, while also calling for enhanced support for those most impacted by climate change.  
    • United States: Proposed a thematic structure for the final decision to cover four areas: 
    1. Welcoming the progress achieved, as noted by the G77, China, and the EU,
    2. Improving technical guidance and accessibility,
    3. Prioritizing support for the most vulnerable communities, and
    4. Enhancing coherence and coordination.
    • Additionally, the US recommended including a procedural rule for the Santiago Network’s advisory board into the decision and suggested that most funds should support technical assessments.  
    • Least Developed Countries (LDCs) emphasized the importance of focusing on migration and non-economic losses in the L&D context.  
    • The African Group of Negotiators (AGN) emphasized the gap in actions and support regarding L&D, highlighting the urgent need to finalize the operationalisation of the Santiago Network. It also called for a minimum of three regional officers dedicated to the region to ensure adequate coverage of the African continent and meet technical needs. 

    Next Steps
    The session concluded with plans to convene an informal session at 10 a.m. on Wednesday for two hours to decide whether to proceed with one integrated decision or separate ones for the Joint Report and WIM review.  

    Financing Loss & Damage: GHG pricing mechanism in the agricultural sector 

    In a declaration supported by Equatorial Guinea, the Democratic Republic of Congo, Nigeria, and Uganda, the Africa Climate Action Initiative and the True Animal Protein Price Coalition emphasized the need to implement greenhouse gas (GHG) pricing mechanisms within agrifood systems. The statement further advocates that at least 20% of the revenue generated from these mechanisms should be allocated to finance the L&D Fund. 

    Highlight: Indigenous Peoples and Local Communities (IPLCs) and Loss & Damage 

    A parallel side event organized by GNDR, Nadam Foundation, and IAITPTF focused on the L&D needs of IPLCs. Despite their vulnerability, IPLCs face significant capacity gaps and lack of technical resources needed to accessing L&D funding mechanisms. Participants highlighted the need to rethink eligibility and financing strategies, shifting away from top-down approaches and towards direct community-level support. In particular the narrative that “communities need training to use funds correctly” requires a critical reassessment.     

    Key priorities for IPLC support include addressing displacement, scaling up current initiatives, managing resources sustainably, and implementing practical mechanisms, such as social protection measures and direct cash support. To ensure effective outcomes, IPLC organizations must also be fully and directly involved in these processes, rather than being represented by intermediaries.      

    In addition, IPLC knowledge is of great importance in assessing, mapping, and monitoring L&D impacts.  For example, IPLC expertise in areas like agriculture, soil management, and water usage is invaluable for sustainable adaptation measures, and should be a cornerstone of L&D policy. 

    COP29 Day 3 Updates, November 13, 2024

    On Day 3 of COP, a joint session reviewed both the Joint Report of the Executive Committee Report of the Warsaw International Mechanism (WIM) and the Santiago Network (SN), and the 2024 WIM Review. Parties reiterated their positions on whether to consolidate decisions for the joint report and the WIM review or to maintain two separate resolutions. The AGN and the LDCs joined the G77+China in support of separate decisions, underscoring the need for distinct reflections of each body’s mandate and dependencies. Parties then shared their views on the content and priorities for the final decision(s). 

    • Improving accessibility and outreach for WIM knowledge products 

    Parties raised concerns about enhancing the accessibility and reach of WIM’s communication materials, pushing for language translations across all UN languages. They stressed that technical resources should reach beyond the UNFCCC website, be simplified, and avoid jargon to maximize practical use, especially for local stakeholders. 

    • Enhance coordination and coherence between L&D institutional bodies 

    A key point raised during the meeting was the need to improve coordination across L&D bodies to avoid overlap and enhance effectiveness. Parties urged regular, structured coordination between the WIM Executive Committee, the Santiago Network, and the Fund Board to ensure a complementary approach to L&D efforts. 

    • Global Assessment Report on Loss & Damage 

    Parties proposed creating a Global Assessment Report on L&D for the next GST. They urged the WIM Executive Committee to provide a comprehensive report with current data and solutions, aimed at enhancing WIM’s capacity to track L&D impacts and inform actionable policy and technical responses. 

    • Tailoring approaches to regional and community needs 

    Many Parties, including the G77+China, pushed for a programmatic approach that is sensitive to regional needs and directly informed by those most affected. This aligns with the proposal from G77+China to incorporate a reference to science in the preamble of the final decision to reinforce L&D position within the UNFCCC convention along with mitigation and adaptation. 

    While many countries emphasized the need for L&D mechanisms tailored to vulnerable communities, the Indigenous Peoples’ Organizations called for distinct recognition of Indigenous Peoples within L&D frameworks, highlighting their unique status under international law and the need to address their specific rights directly, rather than under broad “vulnerable” categories.

    • Enhancing Implementation and funding 

    Parties highlighted the need to secure adequate funding for both WIM and the SN, with the Philippines, on behalf of G77+China, emphasizing that all resources must directly benefit developing countries. AILAC also echoed the need for additional funding to support WIM and SN’s technical assistance for developing nations. 

    • Further insights: the tole of research and academic institutions in supporting and amplifying Indigenous People voices to inform L&D process 

    A parallel side-event reflected on the potential of academic research and institutions in contributing to Indigenous voice amplification by focusing on three main areas: contextualising, communicating, and scaling. First, they provide contextual insights, ensuring Indigenous perspectives are rooted in local realities rather than global generalizations. Second, institutions aid in communicating Indigenous experiences across linguistic and cultural boundaries, helping diverse audiences appreciate the uniqueness of each story. Lastly, by supporting horizontal scaling, they help share Indigenous knowledge across cultures, places, and communities.  
    Sharing Indigenous People knowledge is crucial to inform the L&D negotiations and broader L&D landscape. Participants stressed the need for negotiations on L&D to extend beyond a state-centered framework, advocating for a ‘state-society’ approach that better incorporates the specific needs, knowledge systems, and traditional practices of Indigenous Peoples. 

    COP29 Day 4 Updates, November 14, 2024

    In today’s discussions, was presented the Co-chairs presented their informal note detailing the initial structure of the draft decision for the 2024 review of the WIM for L&D. The session closed with an agreement to let the Contact Group continue refining the draft. Their immediate focus includes procedural rules (Articles 1–3), coherence among WIM bodies (Articles 10–12), and improving access to knowledge resources (Articles 14–16). 

    Unpacking the Loss & Damage landscape: insights from WIM members 

    A significant highlight of the day was the “Unpacking the Loss & Damage Landscape” event, hosted by the WIM Executive Committee and the COP29 Presidency. Key members of the WIM Executive Committee, the Fund Board, and the Santiago Network Advisory Board shared recent technical advancements and tools to support the operationalization of the Santiago Network. 

     

    Loss and Damage landscape under the Paris Agreement, adapted from an original figure from the WIM ExCom presented at COP29 

    Alpha Kaloga, Co-chair of the Santiago Network Advisory Board, notably announced the launch of a new Template for Expression of Interest to streamline technical assistance requests from the Santiago Network. Stella Brozek Everaert then provided updates on three of the latest 2024 WIM knowledge products, developed under their 5-year rolling work plan: 

    You can access the full list of the 2024 WIM knowledge products here.

    COP29 Day 5 Updates, November 15, 2024

    November 14 marked a significant milestone as the Arrangements between the COP, CMA, and the Board of the Fund for responding to Loss and Damage were officially adopted under COP 29 agenda item 8f and CMA 6 agenda item 11f. This adoption strengthen the Fund’s governance framework within the legal structures of the UNFCCC and Paris Agreement, ensuring coherence and coordination in its operations.  

    So far at COP29, Sweden is the only country to have pledge to the L&D Fund, with a commitment of 18.3 million USD. You can access the full list of pledges to the Fund here. 

    Delay in the WIM Report negotiations  

    Negotiations on the 2024 WIM Review continued with intensity but little progress. Informal sessions stretched late into the night as Parties reviewed the first version of the draft, released earlier in the afternoon. Discussions centered on timelines for feedback and decision-making, but Parties ultimately agreed to delay further consideration of the text. Despite pressure to finalize decisions by November 16, the late release of the draft has slowed progress toward consensus.  

    It remains unclear whether there will be one or two final decision(s) regarding the 2024 WIM Review and the Joint Report. 

    Turning pledges into climate actions: SIDS perspectives to close the L&D funding gap 

    “Addressing loss and damage, reparations, and climate debt is a human rights obligation, not a charity,” was the resounding call at today’s side-event organized by Asociación La Ruta del Clima, ONG CEUS Chile, FIAN Germany, and AAS. This urgency was reflected in four other side-events on L&D that unfolded today. Sharing on-the-ground stories, they put emphasis on innovative solutions to establish concrete funding mechanisms for the Fund, from levies on fossil fuel companies to debt cancellation for climate-impacted nations. 

    At the forefront of climate change, the stakes are especially high for Small Island Developing States. A representative from Vanuatu emphasized the need for COP29 to adopt institutional mechanisms that deliver tangible support and called for a comprehensive “state of play” report on L&D to assess the specific needs of communities. Meanwhile, Samoan Natural Resources and Environment Minister proposed an innovative funding approach to advance global equity: channeling the carbon footprints of international travel into contributions for L&D funds for developing countries. Across multiple side-events, speakers also emphasized the need to acknowledge and address the colonial legacies that continue to shape international financing mechanisms. 

    COP29 Day 6 Updates, November 16, 2024

    Negotiations on Loss and Damage related to the 2024 WIM Review and Executive Committee Joint Report saw limited progress, with key issues deferred to the next SBs meeting in 2025 in Bonn. Informal talks identified potential areas of progress, such as regional offices for the Santiago Network, enhancing coherence in the L&D framework, and exploring a state of L&D report. However, disagreements persisted, including the Santiago Network’s location and procedural approaches.  

    An informal note was introduced to capture progress, but objections from some groups led to procedural conclusions without substantive resolutions, leaving the agenda open for further consideration.  Negotiations have zeroed in on the proposal to draft two separate decisions: one dedicated to the 2024 WIM Review and another addressing the ExCom Joint Report.   

    As the clock ticks down on COP29, delegates are grappling with tight deadlines. Benin firmly emphasized the gravity of delaying the WIM Review decision this year, stressing that the review, held only once every five years, is essential for assessing progress and recalibrating actions to address the L&D pressing challenge.  

    A compromise approach was floated: working on both issues simultaneously until tomorrow by drafting two distinct sections—one for the WIM Review and another for the Joint Report. Whether these are ultimately presented as a single consolidated document or as two separate texts remains to be decided, but the need for urgency and efficiency is clear. Informal consultations are set to intensify, with Parties facing the pressing challenge of reaching a consensus by tomorrow, as a final deadline.  

    In parallel, discussions regarding the L&D Fund Report also faced significant controversy, with Australia and Switzerland emphasizing the need to better align the text with the $100 billion climate finance goal. Australia further argued that the current L&D Fund Report decision falls short of the original objectives set for the Fund and called for the deletion of paragraph 14, which aims to limit financing sources.  

    Maldives supported AOSIS’s proposal to include specific references to adaptation finance and called for more pledges to the Fund, highlighting the unique vulnerabilities faced by SIDS in addressing L&D. Finally, the African Group of Negotiators underscored the need for adequate resource allocation to address the continent’s challenges in managing L&D, advocating for solutions that meet specific Africa’s substantial needs.

    COP29 Day 8 Updates, November 18, 2024

    Still no updated draft negotiating text. Co-facilitators relayed that the directive from the plenary was to discuss the remaining agenda items under consideration (WIM review and JAR) and to arrive at a decision text by Tuesday evening. Parties all expressed their willingness to discuss and arrive at an outcome. Parties likewise stressed the importance of arriving at an agreement in light of the developments in the L&D landscape. Others (EU, US, Australia) mentioned how a failure to arrive at a decision could undermine the WIM and SN. Points of divergence are largely procedural. Some parties (EU, UK, US, Canada, Australia) shared the view that they would prefer to have a separate decision for the WIM Review and the Joint Annual Report. G77+China stated that their understanding was that a single decision could have designated portions for each item (without expressly opposing the idea of having separate decisions). Others indicated that they have no preference as to this matter. Some parties (G77+China, AOSIS, AILAC, LDC, Arab Group, Africa Group), reiterated their views as to what they want to see in the decision. Much of the discussion revolved on procedural clarifications (whether there should be two separate decisions or just one, whether any guidance was provided by the presidency in terms of identified landing zones, and steps forward). The co-facilitators reiterated that negotiations are a party-driven process and that the parties are free to decide as to what the outcomes would be (whether there should be two separate decisions or just one; and which agenda item they wish to prioritize) After much procedural discussion, the meeting was briefly suspended for a recess so that parties can huddle and discuss on steps forward.
     

    Fund for Loss and Damage 

    Report of the FRLD and Guidance to the Fund: COP29 8(e) and CMA6 11(e)  

    Co-facilitators followed a set of guiding principles to ensure that the COP and CMA are entrusting [the Board] with implementable guidance, no conflict, and without micromanaging the Fund and Board (reiterating only the guidance to undertake plans for the Board). There is likewise no intent to highlight certain parts of the instrument. Goal is to finalize the text as soon as possible. Co-facilitators urged parties to be concise, avoid repetitive statements, and to swiftly move to inf inf for proper convergence of points raised. Note that views raised on the COP agenda item will likewise be reflected in the CMA agenda item. 

    African Group expressed that the text went too far in not micromanaging, stressing that guidance is merely an expectation for the Fund to deliver on agreements and to be clear on resource mobilization. The Arab Group prefers not to micromanage the Board. The US noted that the guidance provided should be for the Board (not the parties) but that they are fine with including discussion on resource mobilization (this was echoed by Australia and UK). LDC agree that not too much guidance should be provided to the Board.  Africa Group mentioned that they have given guidance before to other institutions, so they see no reason why they can’t do it for the L&D Fund. They also want the report to reflect that not all financial pledges were confirmed. Japan prefers not to provide further guidance. Regarding providing guidance to the Board (instead of parties) which was raised by US and echoed by Australia and UK, the African Group responded by saying that in previous instruments they were able to provide guidance to parties, so they should also be able to here.

    COP29 Day 9 Updates, November 19, 2024

    Failure to deliver on key Loss & Damage items, Joint Report and 2024 WIM Review paths forward deferred to Bonn 2025  

    The Joint Report and 2024 WIM Review discussions were on hold today. Co-facilitators indicated that despite efforts to bridge gaps, Parties were unable to reach a decision on these key Loss and Damage agenda items. As a result, critical recommendations have been deferred to the next SBs meeting in Bonn, 2025. While Parties expressed mixed feelings, with some emphasizing frustration at the lack of substantive progress, others emphasized the need to build on this momentum to deliver meaningful outcomes in future negotiations.

    Key recommendations to shape the path forward were put forward by the G77+China and approved by the LDCs, AILAC and AGN groups, including: 

    • Establishing a Global L&D Report to inform the GST. 
    • Enhancing the operationalization of the Santiago Network (SN) with stronger language for programmatic approaches. 
    • Strengthening regional offices and coordination through national contact points. 
    • Ensuring adequate resourcing for the L&D Fund and institutions under the WIM framework. 

     While procedural disagreements persisted, Australia announced a pledge of A$50 million (US$32.5 million) to the L&D Fund, signalling its commitment to advancing support for the most vulnerable communities. The session closed on the words of Colombia, that reminded Parties of a critical points: the need for ambitious mitigation is paramount —effective climate action now reduces the future scale of L&D. With renewed commitment and further collaboration, Parties must ensure that operationalizing L&D support becomes not just a promise, but a reality. As South Africa recalled: “This issue is not just about policy; it is about survival.“
     

    Last discussions for the Report of the Fund for Responding to Loss and Damage  

     Meanwhile, discussions continued for the Loss and Damage Fund.  The debate highlighted differing priorities: ensuring clarity and accountability for the L&D Fund’s operations versus granting the Board flexibility to carry out its mandate.  

    The African Group expressed concern that the current draft goes too far in avoiding micromanagement. They stressed that clear guidance is essential for the Fund to meet its goals, particularly around resource mobilization. AGN noted that in previous agreements, guidance was directed at parties and questioned why a similar approach could not be taken here. They also emphasized the importance of transparency, urging the report to reflect that not all financial pledges have been confirmed. This position was contrasted by the Arab Group, which, along with Japan, prefers a less directive approach. The US, supported by Australia and the UK, reiterated that guidance should primarily be for the Board rather than the parties. However, they agreed that including resource mobilization in the guidance was appropriate. 

    The goal remains to finalize the text swiftly, ensuring that points raised under the COP and CMA agenda items are fully aligned. Co-facilitators urged parties to focus on concise contributions to facilitate convergence. The challenge will be to craft a framework that empowers the Board to act decisively while ensuring it remains accountable to the most vulnerable communities. 

    COP29 Day 10 Updates, November 20, 2024

    WIM Review and Joint Report: delayed decisions reflect mixed outcomes 

    Negotiations on Loss & Damage concluded as the COP29 Presidency brought discussions to a close. While no consensus was reached on critical issues, in their final decision Parties agreed to defer the WIM Review and Joint Report to the sixty-second sessions of the subsidiary bodies in June 2025. These sessions l focus on developing draft decisions for adoption by the governing bodies at COP30 in Belem, Brazil.

    Central to the discussions was the long-standing debate on governance on whether the WIM should fall exclusively under the Conference of the Parties (COP) or also operate under the authority of the Conference of the Parties serving as the meeting of the Parties to the Paris Agreement (CMA). The EU and the US maintained their stance that COP retains primacy, citing Article 8.2 of the Paris Agreement. In contrast, G77+China, strongly supported by the African Group of Negotiators, advocated for dual governance, emphasizing the need to align WIM’s work with broader Paris Agreement objectives. Despite these divergences, Parties reached a consensus, confirming the CMA’s authority. While this decision marks a cautious step forward, unresolved tensions suggest this dialogue is far from over, paving the way for future negotiations.  

    Operationalizing the Loss & Damage Fund 

    In a historic move, COP29 also saw the adoption of the decision operationalizing the L&D Fund, a critical milestone. However, compromises were inevitable to secure consensus. Key elements—such as a work program on climate finance, definitions informing the 2028 review of the MPGS, and a proposed special report on climate finance for Loss and Damage—were excluded from the final agreement. 

     Efforts are now focused on translating pledges into action. The COP29 Presidency is actively engaging countries that committed funds to ensure timely contributions. The successful operationalization of the L&D Fund remains a pressing task for the months ahead, underscoring the need for sustained collaboration and accountability. 

    Looking ahead 

    COP29 showcased the complexities of advancing governance while achieving operational breakthroughs. The outcomes underline both progress and the challenges that remain, reinforcing the need for continued dialogue, trust-building, and inclusivity. As we move forward, the global climate community must build on these steps, striving for equitable and effective solutions to address the climate crisis. 

    Loss and Damage Fund can deliver transformative change in the agrifood sector 

    With the operationalization of the Loss and Damage Fund, there is potential for transformative impact if resources are channelled effectively to the regions most affected by climate change. A recent CGIAR blogpost on agriculture’s role at COP29 underscores the urgency of directing funding toward climate-resilient solutions in the agrifood sector. Investments in improved seeds, climate-smart technologies, and farmer training could empower rural communities to rebuild livelihoods, adapt to changing climates, and strengthen food systems worldwide. 

    However, achieving this vision requires more than financial mechanisms—it demands unwavering political will. With agriculture often sidelined in climate finance discussions, countries must prioritize this critical sector and address its critical funding gaps

    COP29 Day 11 Updates, November 21, 2024

    While Loss & Damage (L&D) was not formally on the agenda today, climate finance remained a focal point of discussions. During the “Qurultay” single-setting meeting, COP29 President Bababyev invited Parties to share their views on key topics, including the New Collective Quantified Goal (NCQG) and Global Stocktake (GST). In these discussions, delegations underscored the urgency of ambitious and actionable outcomes for L&D. 

    AILAC emphasized that the GST should address mitigation, adaptation, L&D, and Means of Implementation (MoI) comprehensively. They highlighted the critical link between financial resources and mitigation ambition while expressing disappointment over the lack of progress on phasing out fossil fuels. 

    Furthermore, Senegal and Nepal reiterated the trillion-dollar call mobilized under the NCQG, advocating for grant-based L&D finance. Similarly, the Holy See emphasized the need to recognize non-economic L&D in the NCQG.  

    Finally, the LDCs called to include a special allocation to LDCs in the NCQG by securing an annual USD 220 billion allocation to prevent vulnerable nations from being left behind.  

    As COP29 is set to conclude on Friday evening in Baku, all eyes are on the final outcomes, with hopes that the agrifood sector will receive explicit attention in the concluding statements.

    COP29 Day 12 Updates, November 22, 2024

    Parties adopted rules of procedure of the Santiago Network’s Advisory Body    

    Despite significant setbacks in the final decision on the WIM and Joint Report, Parties finalized and adopted the Rules of Procedure for the Santiago Network’s Advisory Board. Mandated by the COP28 decision in Dubai, these rules are vital for the smooth and effective functioning of the SN Advisory Board. Despite the lack of decisive progress on L&D this year, this paves the way for the Santiago Network to make headway in the L&D landscape to advance its work in preparation for the next COP session in Belém.  

    Failure to address Loss & Damage under the climate finance package 

     As COP29 approaches its “endgame,” climate negotiations are stalling, and multilateralism is taking a hit. The climate finance package exposed deep divisions between developed countries and countries from the Global South, with final drafts of the NCQG, GGA, and Just Transition Work Programme described by many Parties as “unacceptable” and “unworkable.” Negotiations are set into the weekend to tackle critical financial items.   

    Let’s seize this opportunity to reflect on key discussions behind the rejection of the climate finance package, particularly on its integration at the margins of L&D key issues. 

    Key Points of Contention:  

    • Dilution of developed country obligations: 
      The latest text controversially broadens responsibility for climate finance to all countries, with developed nations merely “taking the lead.” This shift challenges the historical principle of holding wealthier nations accountable for their disproportionate contributions to climate change A recent study support this view, showing that developed countries would account for over 75% of cumulative global greenhouse gases emissions since industrialization.  
    •  Absence of specific sub-goals: 
      Critics argue the package lacks clear sub-goals for L&D, along with adaptation and mitigation. These would however be essential for tracking progress and accountability of the measures taken to tackle the global climate crisis.  
    • Insufficient financial commitment: 
      While the Global South faces mounting climate-related losses, developed nations have fallen short of addressing the $1.3 trillion annual financing needed for mitigation, adaptation, and L&D. However, this estimate falls far short of a 2023 study projecting that the Global North will owe the Global South $192 trillion in reparations by 2050—even if global warming is limited to 1.5°C. In practical terms, this equates to an annual climate debt of $5 trillion owed by wealthy nations to poorer ones 

    Response from Parties and key groups of interest:   

    The Alliance of Small Island States expressed disappointment, pointing out that L&D is relegated to a mere mention in the preamble, reflecting a failure to prioritize the urgent needs of vulnerable nations. Meanwhile, the G77+ China issued a scathing rejection of the proposed text, stating that the text “gives the developed countries a complete exit from their obligations to provide climate finance for developing countries.” They added that “no deal in Baku is better than a bad deal, and this is a very, very bad deal because of the intransigence of developed countries”. 

    Civil society voices also echoed these concerns. Harjeet Singh, from the Fossil Fuel Non-Proliferation Treaty Initiative, described the package as a mix of “good, bad, and some downright ugly.” He emphasized the glaring absence of sub-goals regarding some of the most critical components required for effective climate actions—including cutting emissions, adapting to climate change, and addressing L&D. Provocatively asking if “developed countries” were “running from the bill”, Mattias Söderberg, co-chair of the ACT Alliance, stressed a widely shared point that climate finance should primarily come from public finance in the form of grants, rather than loans.  

    The Closing Plenary, now scheduled for November 23, is eagerly anticipated, as Parties aim to resolve critical financial items. Whether COP29 will end with a unified vision for climate finance or leave key issues unresolved remains to be seen.
     

    Acknowledgement

    These negotiations were tracked, analysed and reported by: Louise Jeanneau 

    Share this to :

    Related news