“Negotiators Close in on Post-2025 Climate Finance Goal Structure, But Funding Gaps Remain”
Negotiators at the United Nations climate talks in Baku have reported progress on the structure of a new global climate finance goal post-2025, but significant gaps remain on contributors and amounts.
Ministers from around the world gathered in Azerbaijan’s capital to discuss a new finance goal to assist developing countries in addressing climate change. The goal is set to be finalized by the end of the COP29 climate summit in late November.
Azerbaijan’s COP29 President Mukhtar Babayev expressed optimism about the growing convergence on the structure of the goal, while negotiator Zaheer Fakir acknowledged that parties are still divided on core issues but have made substantial progress.
The structure of the New Collective Quantified Goal (NCQG) is a key point of contention, with some countries advocating for specific sub-goals to address adaptation needs in developing countries. However, resistance remains to the proposed complex structure, particularly from China’s negotiator.
Developed and developing countries are also at odds over the size of the goal and the countries responsible for contributing. Developing nations are pushing for a goal between one and two trillion dollars annually, while wealthy nations have only committed to meeting the previous $100 billion goal, which was achieved two years late.
US climate envoy John Podesta emphasized the need for an ambitious yet achievable goal, highlighting the importance of public and private finance contributions. Switzerland’s negotiator echoed this sentiment, stressing the importance of political and economic realities in setting realistic targets.
The debate over who should pay for the climate finance goal reflects broader tensions within the UNFCCC framework, with developed and developing countries disagreeing on the classification of countries and their financial obligations. Japan and Switzerland called for all countries to contribute, but China and other developing nations rejected any changes to the existing rules.
Despite the disagreements, Brazil’s National Secretary for Climate Change pointed to the Paris Agreement’s provisions on climate finance as a framework for action. However, critics like ActionAid International’s Teresa Anderson raised concerns about developed countries’ attempts to include loans and private investments in the finance goal, calling for more substantial grants instead.
As negotiations continue in Baku, the outcome of the discussions will have far-reaching implications for global climate finance and the future of international cooperation on climate change.