Who will blink first? The dismal contestations over climate finance

---

---

 

Synopsis The conclusion of COP29 exposed deep divisions between developed and developing nations, with the Global South in general and India in particular, rejecting a proposed USD 300 billion climate finance deal as inadequate and unfair. The critique focused on the deal’s reliance on loans rather than grants, its insufficient scale, and bureaucratic barriers perpetuating inequities in global climate action. This reflected broader frustrations within the Global South, especially regarding the unmet USD 100 billion climate finance pledge and the need for transformative changes in international climate negotiations. As economic losses mount and climate impacts worsen, COP29’s outcomes underscore the urgency of rebuilding trust, ensuring fairness, and prioritizing vulnerable populations.

At the recently concluded 29th United Nations Climate Change Conference (COP29) in Baku, Azerbaijan, tensions had reached a boiling point. The much-anticipated USD 300 billion climate finance deal – hailed by some as a breakthrough – was roundly criticized by India as inadequate, unfair, and ‘stage-managed.’

This reaction underscored the persistent divide between the Global North and South over climate commitments. India’s outright rejection of the deal and its scathing critique of the negotiation process reflect broader frustrations within the Global South. The stage-managed nature of the agreement, as described by Indian officials, epitomizes the inequities that have long plagued climate negotiations.  

Bridging this divide remains critical to achieving global climate goals, but the path forward is fraught with challenges.

India’s stand on equity: A call for climate justice

India has consistently championed the principle of common but differentiated responsibilities and respective capabilities (CBDR-RC), which lies at the heart of international climate frameworks. At COP29, this principle served as the foundation of India’s opposition to the proposed finance deal.

India was also critical of the developed countries during proceedings at the recent International Court of Justice (ICJ) hearing, emphasizing their historical responsibility for climate change and failure to fulfil financial commitments, which has disproportionately impacted developing nations.

Indian representative Luther M Rangreji highlighted the irony in wealthy nations’ demands for resource restrictions, while they benefited from fossil fuel exploitation. “The developed world, which historically contributed the most, is ironically the best equipped with the technological and economic means to address this challenge,” Rangreji said.

India’s stance stressed the principle of equity in climate responsibility and reiterated its dedication to meeting Paris Agreement targets while cautioning against its citizens bearing excessive burdens.

Historical responsibility: Developed nations, having industrialized earlier, are responsible for most of the historical emissions driving the climate crisis. India reminded the world that the long-promised USD100 billion annual climate finance pledge remains unmet, highlighting the persistent inequities in addressing global climate challenges.

Structural inequities in finance: India criticised the USD 300 billion deal for its reliance on loans rather than grants. This approach risks exacerbating debt burdens on developing countries, already struggling with economic challenges. Moreover, the lack of clarity on timelines and implementation mechanisms added to the scepticism surrounding its effectiveness.

Accessibility issues: Indian officials raised concerns about the bureaucratic complexities that often hinder smaller economies from accessing promised climate finance. For many developing nations, the promise of financial aid remains theoretical rather than practical.

Rejection of the USD 300 billion deal: A defining moment

The USD 300 billion annual climate finance target set for 2035 at COP29 has been met with criticism from developing nations, who argue that it falls far short of the estimated USD 1.3 trillion required annually for a just transition to clean energy. The commitment is viewed as considerably falling short of this target, seen by the developing world as essential to addressing the global climate crisis.

The agreement acknowledged significant funding gaps for climate needs, estimating that developing countries require between USD 5.1 trillion and USD 6.8 trillion up to 2030. Overall, while the agreement outlined the necessity for enhanced cooperative financing, many nations remain sceptical about the feasibility of the pledges made.

India called it “abysmally poor,” while other countries, including Nigeria, dismissed the promise as inadequate.

India’s Environment Minister Bhupender Yadav urged global leaders to remain committed to the Paris Agreement, stressing the importance of equity and climate justice in climate action. He called for a fair approach that recognizes the different capacities of nations to combat climate change.

Critics also expressed concerns about the reliance on private financing, loans, and grants, which they say do not guarantee fair and effective climate action. The deal’s emphasis on loans has drawn sharp criticism from multiple sources, with many arguing that it risks perpetuating cycles of dependency and debt.

Critics contend that instead of providing sustainable solutions, the focus on loans may trap developing nations in further financial burdens, undermining their capacity to address climate challenges effectively. They stress that grants, not loans, are needed for an equitable and long-term climate transition​.

The structure of the deal reinforced longstanding inequities. Developed nations, having benefitted from industrial growth, were now shifting financial responsibilities onto the Global South. This approach undermines the trust and collaboration needed to address the climate crisis collectively.

India’s four pillars of climate action

India’s approach at COP29 was guided by four key priorities, reflecting its broader vision for equitable and sustainable climate action.

Equity and fairness: India emphasized the need for a just distribution of responsibilities, urging developed nations to acknowledge their historical emissions and lead in providing financial and technological support to the Global South.

Climate finance: Beyond rejecting the $300 billion proposal, India called for grants-based funding mechanisms and innovative solutions that would not increase the debt burden on developing nations.

Adaptation and resilience: India highlighted the urgency of protecting vulnerable communities, both domestically and globally, through robust adaptation measures.

Technology transfer: India stressed the importance of access to affordable and sustainable green technologies to enable low-carbon transitions in developing countries.

These priorities align with India’s domestic climate policies, including its ambitious renewable energy targets and its commitment to achieving net-zero emissions by 2070, offering a balanced approach to global and local responsibilities.

The global divide: Developed vs. developing nations

India’s rejection of the $300 billion deal symbolizes the widening gap between the Global North and South in climate negotiations.

The failure to meet the $100 billion pledge has eroded trust. The new proposal, seen as a half-hearted attempt to address this gap, further strained relations.

While developed nations argue that domestic priorities, such as transitioning away from fossil fuels, stretch their resources, this narrative neglects the historical context and moral imperative for wealthier nations to support vulnerable economies.

Developed countries cite concerns about transparency and fund mismanagement, but developing nations argue that these issues can be addressed through better oversight rather than withholding funds.

COP29’s critical stakes

The stakes at COP29 were monumental, with global ramifications far beyond the conference halls.

In 2023, climate-related disasters caused over $313 billion in economic losses globally, disproportionately affecting developing nations. These figures underscore the urgency of climate action and the need for equitable solutions.

Current policies put the world on track for a 2.7°C rise above pre-industrial levels, far exceeding the 1.5°C target set by the Paris Agreement. Failure to act decisively at COP29 risks locking in catastrophic consequences for vulnerable populations.

Despite limited external support, India has made significant strides in renewable energy, reaching over 175 GW of capacity. India’s proactive climate action serves as a model for balancing development with sustainability.

The aftermath of COP29: What lies ahead?

India’s rejection of the climate finance deal at COP29 has sparked a broader debate about the future of international climate negotiations. Incremental solutions are no longer sufficient. The Global South demands systemic reforms in how climate finance is mobilized and implemented.

The growing assertiveness of countries like India signals a shift in global power dynamics. The Global South’s collective voice is becoming a critical force in shaping climate policy. Rebuilding trust requires developed nations to fulfil past promises, provide transparent funding mechanisms, and adopt a more collaborative approach.

India and other developing nations are not avoiding responsibility but highlighting the need for realistic, collaborative solutions. India, for example, has committed to net-zero emissions by 2070 and has made substantial investments in renewable energy, despite limited external support. India’s efforts prove that developing nations are stepping up, but global collaboration and support are vital to achieving shared climate goals.

The climate crisis urgently demands action

Climate-related catastrophes are intensifying worldwide, with devastating effects on lives, livelihoods, and economies — particularly in low-income communities. The poorest, who are least equipped to adapt, bear the brunt of these climate disasters. Immediate action is required to mitigate local impacts and prevent further harm. Delaying action risks further neglecting these vulnerable populations.

The poorest communities, with the least capacity to adapt, are suffering the most from climate-related disasters. Immediate action from countries like India can mitigate local impacts while creating green jobs, promoting sustainable development, and improving resilience. Delays only compound suffering and perpetuate inequality.

India as a catalyst for global collaboration

India’s leadership can pressure developed countries to step up, either by setting examples or through moral suasion. A demonstrated commitment to climate goals strengthens India’s negotiating position and builds global momentum. When developing nations align with India’s actions, they create a unified front that amplifies demands for equitable financial and technological support.

This is not about absolving the West of its responsibilities but recognizing that every delay in global action exacerbates suffering, particularly for the most vulnerable. Leadership in climate action, especially from countries like India, can bridge divides, set examples, and build pathways for cooperative solutions. India’s proactive stance shifts the narrative from blame to progress, fostering an atmosphere of cooperation.

India’s rejection of the proposed climate finance deal at COP29 underscores a pivotal moment in global climate negotiations. The failure to achieve fair, equitable, and transparent solutions threatens to undermine collective action. As the world confronts the climate emergency, India’s leadership in balancing development and sustainability, alongside its demands for justice, could pave the way for a more equitable and cooperative global climate framework.

A look back at COP28

COP28, held from November 30 to December 12, 2023, in Dubai, United Arab Emirates, marked a critical milestone in the global climate agenda. The conference was hosted by the UAE, one of the world’s major oil producers, which underscored the complexities of balancing fossil fuel interests with urgent climate action. The event attracted widespread attention, not only for its setting but also for its outcomes, which laid the groundwork for discussions at COP29.

The COP28 declaration in 2023 emphasized that achieving net-zero emissions by 2050 will require a yearly investment of approximately $4.3 trillion in clean energy until 2030, increasing to $5 trillion annually from 2030 through 2050. This significant scaling of financial commitments is essential for transitioning to sustainable energy systems and addressing the global climate crisis.

One of the key achievements of COP28 was the Global Stocktake — the first comprehensive assessment of progress since the Paris Agreement. The report revealed that the world was still far off track to meet the 1.5°C target, emphasizing the need for accelerated action.

Additionally, COP28 saw an increased focus on renewable energy, with nations agreeing to triple global renewable capacity by 2030. However, the conference was not without controversy; debates over fossil fuel phaseouts remained unresolved, with resistance from some oil-producing nations.

Despite the challenges, COP28 succeeded in spotlighting critical issues, such as loss and damage funding. A new loss and damage fund was formally operationalized, marking a historic step in addressing the needs of vulnerable nations grappling with the consequences of climate change. This initiative set the stage for COP29, where the focus shifted to translating pledges into actionable strategies, a task that remains crucial for bridging the global climate divide.

The need to go beyond the principles of reparation

Developed nations industrialized earlier and are responsible for the majority of greenhouse gas emissions driving the current climate crisis. India argues that those who have contributed most to the problem should take the lead in funding and facilitating solutions, particularly since their prosperity was achieved at a significant environmental cost.

Although India is now one of the largest emitters of greenhouse gases, its per capita emissions remain significantly lower than those of developed nations such as the United States and the European Union. Meanwhile, the Global South, including India, faces severe climate impacts despite contributing relatively less to the problem. This imbalance strengthens the call for Western nations to provide financial and technological support.

Climate change is a global issue that demands global solutions. The call for equity is not about assigning blame but ensuring fairness in tackling the crisis. India emphasizes that achieving global climate goals requires resources and technologies that many developing nations cannot afford without external support. Equity is essential to ensure that all nations can contribute to addressing the crisis, regardless of historical emissions.

Critics argue that emphasizing historical responsibility risks delaying urgent action in developing countries, which are now significant contributors to global emissions. They contend that all nations, regardless of their historical emissions, must act urgently. Developed nations, on the other hand, assert that their financial and technological contributions are already substantial and that their domestic priorities, such as transitioning away from fossil fuels, stretch their resources.

India and China’s argument that Western nations should bear primary responsibility for climate change costs, due to their historical emissions, aligns with the principle of reparations. However, their growing emissions and rising economic influence complicate this stance.

While past emissions undeniably play a significant role in the climate crisis, the global landscape today involves complex realities where emerging economies are also major contributors to greenhouse gases. For effective climate action, negotiations must balance past injustices with present-day responsibilities, ensuring fair and equitable solutions for all nations.

Originally published on The Polity

Kindly follow us for updates on:

LinkedIn

X