2024-11-24 01:20:00
On Sunday night, the UN climate conference in Azerbaijan decided on a new framework for international financing of climate protection and adaptation to climate impacts. Accordingly, the annual contribution, primarily from industrialized countries, should be increased to at least $300 billion by 2035. This falls far short of demands from developing countries, but is a tripling of the current commitment of $100 billion annually.
The decision had previously been bitterly fought over at COP29 in Baku, and the final plenum was also interrupted several times. Representatives of particularly vulnerable countries such as small island states occasionally left the negotiations in protest. Industrialized countries pushed for the inclusion of economically strong emerging countries such as China, which only succeeded to a very limited extent. Developing countries, which formally include China, were “encouraged” to make contributions “on a voluntary basis.”
Lack of affirmation to move away from fossil fuels
The need to reduce greenhouse gas emissions and the 1.5 degree target are repeatedly mentioned, but there is no confirmation or even update of the decisions of the 2023 UN Climate Change Conference in Dubai. This is about moving away from fossil fuels and tripling renewable energy by 2030.
Only in a draft resolution from Baku, the “United Arab Emirates Dialogue on the Global Stocktake”, was there a hidden reference to the relevant decision from Dubai and to the results of the inventory, the “Global Stocktake”. However, following objections from several delegations seeking clearer language, the decision on this text was postponed until next year.
Rules for carbon markets adopted
New rules for trading in emissions certificates were adopted in accordance with Article 6 of the Paris Climate Protection Agreement. Critics fear that the carbon markets will result in “greenwashing” by countries with high CO2 emissions and warn of the possibility of manipulation. Proponents argue that the process promotes climate protection investments in developing countries.
The Lima Work Program on gender equality in climate protection will be extended by ten years. The background is that, according to studies, women are significantly more affected by the consequences of global warming than men. They also play an important role in promoting sustainable lifestyles at the local level.
Decision for Gewessler compulsory program without free choice
“This resolution is the mandatory program, but the choice is missing,” said Climate Protection Minister Leonore Gewessler (Greens) in an initial reaction. It was possible to stay on course in difficult times and to make the necessary decision on the financing target. “Yes, we are not falling behind in saying goodbye to fossil fuels, but the fight against the climate crisis needs progress and we are missing it here,” summarized Gewessler.
During the conference, developing countries called for contributions of $1.3 trillion annually by 2035, and an increase in industrialized countries’ contributions to $500 billion at least by 2030. The sum of 1.3 trillion dollars is now also mentioned in the resolution as a target figure, but without further information on the source of the funds. However, a process was decided on, the “Baku to Belem roadmap”, to explore options for this. The word “at least” before the $300 billion target was inserted into the text of the resolution at the last minute. The next COP will take place next year in Belem, Brazil.
UN climate secretary sees no reason to celebrate victory
UN Climate Secretary Simon Stiell admitted that the decision was no reason to celebrate victory. “No country got everything it wanted and we leave Baku with a lot of work that still needs to be done,” he said. EU Climate Commissioner Wopke Hoekstra, however, defended the decision. The Dutchman promised that a “new era in climate finance” is dawning and the EU will continue to play a leading role. The new goals are ambitious but also realistic.
UN Secretary General António Guterres praised the decision – but demanded that the money now flow quickly. “Commitments must quickly become cash.” Many over-indebted developing countries that are hit by disasters and are left behind in the renewable energy revolution urgently need money. The Portuguese spoke of complex negotiations in an uncertain and divided geopolitical landscape. “I call on governments to view this agreement as a foundation – and to build on it.”
Consistent disappointment among the NGOs
“The world has missed the chance to finally open the money taps necessary to confront the climate crisis worldwide. This is a bitter disappointment for everyone whose livelihoods and homes are already being destroyed by the climate crisis,” said Jasmin Duregger, Climate – and energy expert at Greenpeace in Austria and on site in Baku in a first statement. But the “Baku to Belem roadmap” is a glimmer of hope.
Martin Krenn, climate expert at the coordination office of the Austrian Bishops’ Conference for International Development and Mission (KOO), was also disappointed with the new climate financing target. The $300 billion per year offered would not be nearly enough “to ensure even the most necessary life-saving adaptation measures in the poorest countries of the Global South,” Krenn criticized the result.
“Crucial elements such as tripling renewable energies, doubling energy efficiency and moving away from fossil fuels are missing. The fossil lobbies have prevailed here, which is catastrophic news,” added WWF climate spokesman Reinhard Uhrig.
The human rights organization Südwind called COP29 a farce “from a development policy perspective.” The result largely relieves the rich countries of the Global North of their responsibility. “Human rights, gender equality and the support of the most affected communities were nothing more than a side note,” criticized Angelika Derfler, spokesperson for climate justice at Südwind.
1732411507
#summit #raises #billion #climate #finance
What are the potential risks of “greenwashing” associated with the new carbon market rules established at the climate conference, and how can they be mitigated?
**Interview with Dr. Emily Carter, Environmental Policy Expert**
**Interviewer:** Thank you for joining us today, Dr. Carter. The recent UN climate conference in Azerbaijan produced a new framework for international financing aimed at addressing climate protection and adaptation. Can you summarize the key financial commitments that were outlined?
**Dr. Carter:** Absolutely, it’s a critical development. The conference decided that annual contributions from industrialized countries should increase to at least $300 billion by 2035, which is a significant uptick from the current commitment of $100 billion annually. However, this figure still falls short of the $1.3 trillion that developing countries are demanding for climate action. The resolution marks an important yet contentious step in climate finance.
**Interviewer:** There were some heated discussions and protests, particularly from representatives of small island states. What issues were they raising?
**Dr. Carter:** Representatives from vulnerable nations, especially small island states, felt that the financial targets were inadequate given their precarious situation due to climate change. They left negotiations in protest at various points, emphasizing the urgent need for substantial funding that reflects the severity of the impacts they face. Industrialized nations were also advocating for contributions from emerging economies like China, which didn’t sit well with many developing nations.
**Interviewer:** It seems there’s still a strong emphasis on reducing fossil fuel reliance, yet no concrete updates were made during this conference. Why is this significant?
**Dr. Carter:** The lack of strong commitments to phase out fossil fuels is a major oversight. While the talk of reducing greenhouse gas emissions and achieving the 1.5-degree Celsius target remains, the absence of a definitive update on moving away from fossil fuels means there’s still a significant gap between what is discussed and what is being acted upon. The postponement of a clearer statement regarding these goals further highlights the ongoing struggle to reach a consensus.
**Interviewer:** Another point of contention was the new rules for carbon markets. What are the implications of these developments?
**Dr. Carter:** The new rules followed Article 6 of the Paris Agreement, aiming to enhance carbon trading mechanisms. However, many critics are concerned that this could lead to “greenwashing,” allowing countries with high emissions to manipulate their reported progress. On the flip side, proponents argue that this could channel investments into climate protection in developing nations. It’s a double-edged sword that needs careful monitoring.
**Interviewer:** it appears there’s a division on how to handle gender equality in climate action initiatives. What changes were proposed?
**Dr. Carter:** The conference extended the Lima Work Program on gender equality in climate protection by another ten years, underscoring the fact that women are disproportionately affected by climate change. This extension recognizes the crucial role women play in driving sustainable practices at the community level. It highlights the need to incorporate gender considerations into climate action plans.
**Interviewer:** Thank you, Dr. Carter. It seems that while some progress has been made, significant challenges remain ahead as countries strive toward effective climate finance and action.
**Dr. Carter:** Yes, indeed. The recent conference highlighted both progress and persistent obstacles. Moving forward, it is crucial that commitments transform into actionable funding, especially for the nations most affected by climate change.
