All Roads Lead To Belém

A discussion on the NCQG from COP29 and the resulting ‘Baku to Belém roadmap’ that is make-or-break for its success.

‍

Negotiations at Conference of Parties (COP) 29 wrapped up well past the eleventh hour and with the sort of lateness your lazy course mate who never makes his nine a.m. lectures would be proud of. After long and drawn-out negotiations, key breakthroughs and partial agreements were finally made by parties, in particular on the New Collective Quantified Goal (NCQG) on Climate Finance, which is perhaps the most important thing to come from COP29.

‍

With COP28’s ostensible agreement on “transitioning away from fossil fuels” - is it really written down anywhere?- and the results of the first Global Stocktake (GST) showing that we are not on target to meet global warming goals set out in the Paris Agreement, fromCOP29 (dubbed the ‘finance cop’), which looked to address funding problems for developing nations. Developing countries face a chronic finance gap when it comes to the clean energy transition and the NCQG looked to remedy this, hoping to provide a clear framework of how finance would be funnelled towards developing nations and replace the previous 100 billion USD a year goal from2015.

The negotiations, however, did not come without their troubles as mismatched views and priorities on what should be a clear and centralised goal meant that landing on a definitive finance target proved tricky. Proposals put forward by the hosts included an ‘X’ in place of an actual number for a proposed monetary figure and a temporary walkout was staged by the least developed countries (LDCs) and Alliance ofSmall Island States (AOSIS) to demonstrate their disapproval of proposed deals and diminutive role within the negotiating process. Developing countries backed a proposal that put the goal broadly in the trillions whilst the proposal backed by more developed nations consisted of a much smaller amount of finance mobilised.

‍

‍

It’s not hard to see why, with so many conflicting priorities, an impasse was reached and in the end why the final target ended up as a compromise. But alas, a tentative agreement was reached - just thirty-five hours over time! - of 300 billion USD needed annually by the year 2035.

Yet, experts and developing nations estimate that the amount needed is instead $1.3 trillion USD, comparable to Australia’s GDP! There is a clear gap between these two figures and as such the ‘Baku to Belém roadmap’ was a last-minute addition that looks to scale the current goal up to $1.3 trillion USD and is to be finalised at COP30 in Belém. But what is the roadmap and what, looking at lessons learnt from COP29, should be included in it?

Firstly, and this is no radical idea, there must be a concrete agreement on the dialogue from COP28 and outcomes of the first GST, namely the agreement to transition away from fossil fuels. Many countries had hoped that this agreement would be reiterated, and that progress would be made on setting it in stone and taking it forward. Yet, discussions made little progress with oil states, led by Saudi Arabia looking to undermine and reduce the scale to which fossil fuels are transitioned away.So much so that many felt that draft texts contained heavily watered-down commitments from those made just a year ago at COP28. This cannot happen atCOP30 and an agreement must be made on the GST outcomes that aren’t reduced or changed in any way, simply put, we must transition away fully from fossil fuels. Not only does this play a massive role in reducing global warming but may be a crucial step in enabling the scaling up of the NCQG promised by the roadmap. Once a strong path forward has been defined, more finance may be able to be mobilised towards the NCQG, as fossil fuel spending will inevitably have to be reduced.

Secondly, a reassessment of who must donate likely has to be made. Currently, only 24 ‘Annex II’ countries, under the UN process, are required to provide climate finance to developing nations. Voluntary contributions from developing nations will now contribute as well under the NCQG. Yet, at what point do certain developing countries such as China and Saudi Arabia need to be reclassified, within the context of the NCQG, as developed nations too? As large economies and huge emitters of greenhouse gases, why should they only be relied on to make voluntary donations? I sense that as the roadmap looks to scale up from the 300billion USD there will be pushback from the current developed nations on how much their current involvement should be increased. As such it makes sense tome to broaden the pool of countries which must donate to help achieve the roadmap, especially when it is evident that countries such as China and SaudiArabia have the required finances. It is to be noted that China does already invest millions in renewable energy infrastructure in developing nations but whether this will count towards the annual figures is another point of discussion for the roadmap.

Finally, developing nations such as those in the LDCs or AOSIS must be given a bigger voice atCOP30. Countries that are most at risk from increasing environmental effects, and that desperately need a larger NCQG goal to close the finance gap, cannot continue to be belittled to the point that they feel no choice but to walk out of negotiations. Developed nations remain two-faced, publicly committing to trying to reduce climate change yet selfishly looking to reduce their role in doing so. If their voices remain as loud as they have been, the NCQG may never scale up to the required amount.

There are many other subjects that cannot fit in this article but need to be incorporated into the roadmap. What role will private investment and Multilateral Development Bank shave in contributing to the $1.3 trillion USD goal? How will funding targets within the roadmap and the types of funding within the goal make debt-free funding easily accessible to each developing nation? These are just to name a few. And we have seen, from COP29, how easily a proposal, meticulously planned for almost a year, can be torn apart in a matter of days. So, will the Baku to Belém roadmap successfully scale up the NCQG? You should have your doubts. But if it incorporates some of the ideas in this article then it might just have a chance.

Or perhaps we just get Ali G to be the president at Belém, he seemed to do alright last time…

‍

‍