Written by Associated Press’s Melissa Walling
Azerbaijan’s BAKU (AP) At the United Nations climate meetings in the early hours of Sunday, nations from all over the world came to a consensus on how wealthy nations may contribute to the financial support of developing nations facing climate change.
Although many parties remain extremely dissatisfied with the settlement, some are optimistic that it will be a positive move.
Ani Dasgupta, the president and CEO of the World Resources Institute, described it as a significant first step toward a safer, more just future, but he also said that the most vulnerable and impoverished countries are understandably disappointed that wealthier nations did not contribute more when the lives of billions of people are on the line.
Negotiations continued into early Sunday, even though the conference was due to end on Friday night. Tensions were high as delegations attempted to bridge the expectations gap between nations on opposing sides of a huge abyss.
This is how they arrived:
What financial agreement was reached during the climate talks?
By 2035, wealthy nations have committed to pooling at least $300 billion annually. It falls well short of the $1.3 trillion that experts believed was required and that poor nations were requesting. More upbeat delegations, however, stated that the accord is on the right track and expressed optimism that more funding will come in the future.
In order to reach the $1.3 trillion annual target by 2035, the document called on all stakeholders to cooperate and use all available public and private resources. This also entails advocating for taxpayer-funded multinational megabanks to contribute to the cost. Additionally, it is hoped that businesses and private investors will follow suit and donate funds to climate action.
The deal is also a crucial step in assisting recipient nations in setting more aggressive goals to reduce or restrict heat-trapping gas emissions by the beginning of next year. It is a component of the global agreement made at the 2015 U.N. meetings in Paris to continue reducing pollution with new goals every five years.
The Paris Agreement established a mechanism for consistently increasing efforts to combat climate change in order to limit global warming to less than 1.5 degrees Celsius (2.7 degrees Fahrenheit) beyond pre-industrial levels. Carbon emissions continue to rise, and the global temperature is already at 1.3 degrees Celsius (2.3 degrees Fahrenheit).
For what purpose will the funds be used?
The agreement reached in Baku replaces one that was reached 15 years ago and taxed wealthy countries $100 billion annually to provide climate financing to the poor world.
Similar goals will be pursued by the new number, which will contribute to the developing world’s extensive to-do list for preparing for global warming and preventing further warming. This involves funding the shift away from fossil fuels and toward clean energy. To develop the infrastructure required for the widespread use of technologies like solar and wind power, nations require funding.
Extreme weather-affected communities also desire funding to prepare for and adapt to disasters like fires, typhoons, and floods. The money might be used to help people relocate from the most affected areas, design homes differently to withstand storms, help leaders strengthen emergency plans, and support in the aftermath of disasters. It may also be used to improve farming techniques to make them more adaptable to weather extremes.
For instance, the Philippines has seen six powerful storms in less than a month, causing devastating damage to homes, infrastructure, and crops, howling winds, and enormous storm surges for millions of people.
According to Asian Farmers Association member Esther Penunia, family farmers require funding. According to her, many have already had to cope with storm damage worth millions of dollars, some of which includes trees that won’t produce fruit for months or years or animals that pass away, eliminating a primary source of income.
“There would be nothing to harvest if you were to imagine a rice farmer who relies on their one-hectare farm, rice land, ducks, chickens, and vegetables, and it was flooded,” she said.
Why was finding a bargain so difficult?
A final crunch that left few satisfied with a faulty agreement was caused by a disorganized host nation, a few key actors with motivation to postpone the talks, and election results around the world that signaled a change in climate leadership.
According to Li Shuo of the Asia Society, the conclusion of COP29 is indicative of the more challenging geopolitical environment the world is currently experiencing. He mentioned that the connection between China and the EU will be more significant for global climate policy going ahead because of Trump’s recent victory in the US and his pledges to withdraw the US from the Paris Agreement.
In the final hours, developing countries also had trouble reaching an agreement. One member of the Latin American delegation claimed that when small island states had last-minute discussions to try to reach an agreement, their group didn’t feel adequately consulted. Different approaches to the agreement were taken by negotiators from the developing world before they ultimately decided to make concessions.
Meanwhile, campaigners increased the pressure, with many saying that no deal would be better than a bad one and urging negotiators to remain firm. But in the end, the urge for a bargain prevailed.
Some attributed the conflict to the host nation as well. This COP presidency is among the worst in recent memory, according to Mohamed Adow, director of the climate and energy research group Power Shift Africa, who described the meeting as one of the most chaotic and worst run COPs ever.
In a statement, the president stated, “We have brought people together at all hours of the day.” We have consistently advocated for the highest common denominator. Despite geopolitical challenges, we have done everything we can to act as an impartial mediator for all parties.
Regardless of their position on the matter, Shuo is still optimistic that the prospects presented by a green economy will make inaction counterproductive for nations everywhere. However, it is unclear if the UN negotiations will be able to provide greater ambition the next year.
Shuo stated that this COP procedure must recuperate from Baku in the interim.
Note: Every piece of content is rigorously reviewed by our team of experienced writers and editors to ensure its accuracy. Our writers use credible sources and adhere to strict fact-checking protocols to verify all claims and data before publication. If an error is identified, we promptly correct it and strive for transparency in all updates, feel free to reach out to us via email. We appreciate your trust and support!
