The clock hands mark the closing time of COP29, but there is still an extraordinary extension that will end on Sunday after countries have not reached any agreement. “This is a common practice at these summits,” according to sources from Ecologistas en Acción to this newspaper. Financing, the cornerstone of the meeting in Baku (Azerbaijan), has been disappointing for both experts and civil society representatives.
Financing has precisely marked this Friday’s day. The Azeri Presidency of COP29 has presented a new proposal at the last minute. It is about the New Quantified Collective Objective (NCQG, for its acronym in English), a financial instrument with which to combat the climate crisis on a global scale and which aims to replace the current Green Climate Fund from 2025.
The proposed text sets the amount at 1.3 billion dollars (trillions in Anglo-Saxon terminology), of which only 250,000 million would correspond to the public contribution of the countries. The figure has shocked experts and activists, who have considered it laughable, and has raised concerns about the future of the economic objective to confront the environmental emergency.
The proposal presented by the COP29 Presidency “is light years away from what southern countries are asking for,” he criticizes Olga Alcarazdirector of the Grup Governament del Canvi Climàtic of the Polytechnic University of Catalonia (UPC). “It’s almost an insult to your claims“she emphasizes. In this scenario, the expert fears that an agreement will not be approved during this weekend’s extension.
“It seems that it will be practically impossible for the 1.3 billion to be agreed upon,” he warns in statements to this medium. Ana Barreiradirector of the International Institute of Law and Environment, who has attended Baku these weeks. For its part, Jasper Inventorhead of the Greenpeace Delegation at COP29, considers this draft “inadequate, far from the reality of climate impacts and scandalously below the needs of the countries of the global south.
According to Pedro Zorrillarepresentative of Greenpeace Spain in Baku, regrets “the ridiculous effort” that the figure of 250,000 million dollars annually implies, especially “if we compare it with the financing needs of the countries of the global south,” he adds.
The amount of financing has been and is one of the critical issues of this summit, according to Public Alexandra Scottresponsible for Environmental Diplomacy in the think tank Italian ECCO Climate and present in Baku. “Reaching an agreement in the NCQG is the key“Barreira agrees.
The NCQG is essential to determine the conditions under which all countries, and especially those with fewer resources, manage to face an ecological transition based on the criteria of climate and social justice. This is based on the “polluter pays” premise, but which the latest draft does not include.
Reducing emissions and the troika of presidencies
Another of the focuses on which the meeting has focused, as Scott and Barreira point out, is the reduction of emissions. Last year, the Dubai Climate Summit closed with the agreement to leave fossil fuels behind, but this requires “clear commitments from the countries to make it possible”, as stated in a report by Ecologistas en Acción to which Public has had access.
From London, Rafael Jimenezadvisor on Environmental Democracy at the Westminster Foundation for Democracy, positively values ”the commitment to methane reduction and to go beyond the fossil fuels” that the Azeri presidency has shown.
The expert attributes this sensitivity to the creation of the troika, which unites the presidencies of the last COP28 – held in United Arab Emirates– with the next two – the current one, hosted by Azerbaijan, and COP30, which will take place in the Brazilian city of Bethlehem–. “This is genius. By formalizing this troika of presidencies, there has been a consolidation of the agendas,” he values.
Nevertheless, Camila Jardimspecialist in International Politics at Greenpeace, declared this Friday at a press conference of the organization in Baku that “countries lack the political will to defund fossil fuels and take action“. But the environmentalist has concluded that “in this final hour, we remain confident that an agreement will emerge from this COP. Together we can persist.”
For his part, Alcaraz insists that commitments related to emissions reduction “revolve around financing.” In this sense, Harjeet Singhdirector of Global Engagement at the Fossil Fuel Treaty Initiative, remarked in another panel: “No deal is better than a bad deal.”
His assessment contrasts with that of Alicia Pérez-Porroresponsible for policy and institutional relations at the Center for Ecological Research and Forest Applications (CREAF), who tells that newspaper that “at some point during COP29 there was doubt that an agreement on the NCQG would emerge.” For this reason, he considers that “it is positive that the draft text has already been published”, although he recognizes that his ambition is insufficient.
“There is a lack of political will to achieve this global objective together,” claims Alcaraz. It remains to be seen what happens in the next 48 hours to assess the results of COP29. Meanwhile, science and civil society remain in suspense in the face of climate diplomacy that predicts an uncertain future.
#COP29 #extension #weekend #draft #agreement #represents #ridiculous #effort
