COP29 convened in Baku amidst worsening climate disasters and was touted as a turning point in global climate action. However, its outcomes point to some very systemic shortcomings of the international climate regime. Though COP29 finally managed to agree upon a historic deal which is supposed to go ahead and quicken climate finance and decarbonization, the agreement falls frustratingly short of the urgency needed in trying to combat the escalation of the climate crisis.
A Deal Too Little, Too Late. On paper, the COP29 agreement promises more climate financing and ambitious decarbonization goals for wealthier countries. But the $300 billion annual climate finance it pledges by 2035 is chided as a “paltry sum” because it falls short of what is needed to tackle the scale of the crisis. To a country like Bangladesh – toiling hard just to keep its head above rising sea levels amidst wild weather – the deal offers little hope for respite. Poorer countries continue to bear unbalanced portions of a climate crisis that is not their making, so the agreement underlines ongoing inequities in global climate action.
It also contains no binding commitments and no real mechanisms for implementation. For this reason, it has been called “a band-aid on a gaping wound” because it treats symptoms and not causes. Yet, despite these commitments, record-high carbon emissions forge relentlessly ahead, and the Agreement does little to alter this trend. Scientific consensus would show that the world is standing precariously close to the 1.5°C warming threshold beyond which there exists a cascade of tipping points with devastating consequences. This is urgent and needs immediate action, not in some undefined future, yet the results of COP29 would fail to take up that challenge when concrete measures are needed. Time is running out, and every delay makes the global predicament worse.
Again, the voices of developing countries were drowned out by priorities set by richer ones. Issues like funding for loss and damage, support for adaptation to climate change, and technology transfer remain inadequately resolved.
The Need for COP Reform. There certainly is a growing sense that COP climate talks no longer constitute a process that is “fit for purpose” and urgently needs reform. The deep structural and functional flaws marked COP29 in these negotiations. These so-called inclusive summits often manage to marginalize smaller countries on many occasions at the behest of global powers and corporate interests. These would include procedural inefficiencies, a lack of enforceable commitments, and rampant lobbying by fossil fuel companies that undermine integrity. To regain credibility, COP needs to shift from a platform of rhetorical commitments to one of binding agreements and fair representation; and not host these crucial talks in countries which cannot, or will not, support the phase-out of fossil energy.
Who Can Lead the Climate Fight? The spectre of Donald Trump’s return to the White House in 2025 loomed over COP29, amid concerns that his administration would torpedo the United States’ commitment to global climate efforts. After all, Trump pulled the USA out of the Paris Agreement during his tenure; even his words at COP29 indicated a desire to tear down the present climate framework. A disrupted US role carries a very real risk of eroding fragile trust among countries and imperilling future climate talks.
The question arises now, with the US role in doubt, who is to drive global climate action? The European Union has long taken the lead on climate change, but fragmentation in its politics greatly limits its potential to spearhead transformative change. China, while a great emitter, has assumed leadership in renewables investment but has credibility problems. The most plausible leadership could arise perhaps from coalitions of vulnerable nations, and emerging economies that make full use of their collective voice to push for more ambitious commitments.
What Should Countries like Bangladesh Do? Bangladesh and other developing countries should be able to seize this opportunity through COP29, charting their course yet leading in calling for global action. Resilience will have to be one of the priorities through investment in strong adaptation measures like coastal defences, climate-resilient infrastructure, and sustainable agriculture. These countries should lead and leverage alliances with other climate-vulnerable countries to demand just financing and technology transfer while seeking greener growth on a low-carbon development trajectory, to attract climate-friendly investment and decrease the dependency on fossil fuel gradually. Further, regional cooperation with neighbours will also help to combat common challenges and create shared climate resilience for a more sustainable future in this region. As the global climate regime faces existential challenges, the need for reform and equitable participation has never been greater. Bangladesh and other vulnerable countries must amplify their voices, hold powerful polluters accountable, and pursue self-reliant strategies to safeguard their futures. The climate clock is ticking—and for countries like Bangladesh, it’s ticking faster than ever.
This article was first published in the December, 2024 edition of the Thinking Aloud
RECENT COMMENTS