COP29 fails to secure clear climate finance goals but delivers definite doubts over global response

Listen to Australian and world news, and follow trending topics with
SBS News Podcasts
.
TRANSCRIPT:
The COP29 summit in Azerbaijan has ended without firm climate finance targets, despite a last-minute agreement to increase funding to help developing nations tackle global warming.
Delegates agreed on AU$461 billion annually by 2035, up from AU$250 billion proposed earlier.
However, the figure falls short of the $1.3 trillion requested by developing nations, leaving many dissatisfied.
COP29 President Mukhtar Babayev closed the U-N climate summit in Baku praising his country’s efforts in hosting the conference and delivering results.
“People doubted that Azerbaijan could deliver. They doubted that everyone could agree. They were wrong on both. We never accepted that the task was impossible. We knew that breakthroughs demand courage. We understood that reaching for the highest possible ambition is difficult. And we asked everyone to be brave. We called on you to think of each other. We put LDCs (Least Developed Countries) and SIDS (Small Island Developing States) at the heart of the process, and we insisted that you think of your shared future.”
Initially, there were significant concerns about Azerbaijan hosting the conference due to its human rights record, particularly regarding the treatment of ethnic Armenians in Nagorno-Karabakh.
U-N Secretary-general Antonio Guterres posted on X that the agreement provides a base on which to build, adding that he had hoped for a more ambitious outcome.
Panama’s Special Representative for Climate Change, Juan Carlos Monterrey Gomez, says developed nations are forcing developing nations to agree to commitments that are detrimental for them.
“We’ve been negotiating this for over three years. We have been here in Baku for over two weeks. So we had enough time to get to a consensus text. However, you know, the developed nations didn’t throw their figure until barely up to two days ago. And as I said earlier,  this is what they always do. You know, they throw texts at us at the last minute, shove it down our throats. And then for the sake of multilateralism, we always have to, like, accept it and take it. Otherwise, the climate mechanisms will go into a horrible downward spiral and no-one needs that. This is the only space that we have to negotiate.”
 
Saint Lucia’s Parliamentary Undersecretary, Pauline Antoine-Prospere, highlighted the economic strain on vulnerable nations.
“The implications for our economies, our people and our ecosystems are severe. Our developmental gains are undermined, as national infrastructure, built with significant multilateral loans, are destroyed before the debt is paid, and we must rebuild from scratch. The costs of these catastrophes are growing exponentially, with every increment of global warming. We cannot avert the climate crisis on our own.”
Cedric Schuster, Head of the Alliance of Small Island States, is critical of the deal.
“Still not the deal that we wanted. We didn’t come here to get the outcome, but in terms of the spirit of multilateralism we wanted to engage with all the other countries and come up with an outcome. Some, especially in the NCQG (New Climate Quantified Goal) and mitigation areas that didn’t go anywhere. But we’re satisfied – in a way. We got something to start with.”
The summit coincided with warnings from scientists about escalating climate impacts, with 2024 on track to become the warmest year on record.
Sofia Gonzales-Suniga, of Climate Action Tracker, warned:
“Once again (we) are leading to the same temperature estimate for the end of the century, something around 2.7 degrees (Celsius). So not a lot has changed, one could say. And this is what we also highlight, there’s not enough. The curve is not going down.”
Some wealthy nations also expressed dissatisfaction with the negotiations.
US climate envoy John Podesta says the agreement isn’t balanced.
“We are frankly deeply concerned at this stage about what we view as a glaring imbalance in the text thus far. In particular, we want to underscore that the treatment of mitigation in the current draft is absolutely unacceptable. We join many others and are surprised that there is nothing that carries forward the central work of mitigation and the key mitigation outcomes that we agreed on last year in Dubai.”
The United States is the world’s biggest historic emitter of greenhouse gases, but has played a small role in the talks as it braces for another presidency under Donald Trump.
Australia’s Climate Change Minister Chris Bowen detailed confusion over inconsistent proposals during the conference.
“Minister (Yasmine) Fouad and I heard from developing countries a requirement of $1.3 trillion of finance mobilised. But we heard different proposals for the split between the provided element and the element which would be mobilised from that provision quantum. For example, we have heard three different proposals for the provided quantum of $900 billion, $600 billion and $440 billion. Others have mentioned the floor of US$100 billion with linkages to the contributor-based resolution, as well as sources and structure.”
However, South African Minister of Forestry, Fisheries and the Environment, Dion George, says he is pleased with the outcome of the conference.
“I think it was the best outcome we could possibly achieve. There is obviously a lot of work that still needs to be done but I do think it’s a step in the right direction. There is obviously a lot of unhappiness, but I think that it was the best outcome that was possible. So I think we’re relatively pleased.”
With no consensus on concrete targets, COP29 concluded with deep divisions over financial responsibility for addressing the climate crisis, leaving the international community uncertain about the path forward.
COP30 is to be held in Brazil, while Australia is lobbying to host COP31 in 2026, in partnership with Pacific nations.