At the COP29 climate summit in Baku, Azerbaijan, nearly 200 nations agreed to a $300 billion annual climate finance target to assist poorer countries facing the brunt of climate change. The deal, finalized after extended negotiations, aims to replace the previous $100 billion commitment established in 2020, which was only met in 2022 and is set to expire in 2025.
UN Climate Chief Simon Stiell described the agreement as an "insurance policy for humanity," emphasizing its potential to bolster clean energy growth and mitigate climate risks. “This deal will protect billions of lives and help ensure shared benefits of bold climate action," he stated, while cautioning that its effectiveness depends on timely and full contributions.
While some saw the agreement as a positive step, it was widely criticized as inadequate. India’s negotiator, Chandni Raina, dismissed the deal as a “paltry sum,” questioning its ability to address the scale of the climate crisis. Nigeria’s Nkiruka Maduekwe echoed similar sentiments, calling the deal an “insult.”
The agreement also exposed tensions between wealthy nations—accountable for historical emissions—and developing countries grappling with rising costs from climate-related disasters. Delegates from smaller and vulnerable nations staged a walkout during talks, frustrated by what they perceived as insufficient inclusion and influence in negotiations.
The summit’s outcomes highlights the urgent need for financial resources to combat climate change. Current global warming projections suggest a rise of up to 3.1 degrees Celsius by the end of the century, far above the Paris Agreement's goal of limiting warming to 1.5 degrees. The U.N.'s 2024 Emissions Gap Report attributes this to continued fossil fuel reliance and rising emissions.
Beyond the $300 billion target, the agreement sets a broader goal of raising $1.3 trillion annually in climate finance by 2035 from both public and private sources. However, disparities remain over who should contribute. While industrialized nations like the U.S., EU countries, and Canada are obligated to pay, others, such as China and oil-rich Gulf states, are only encouraged to contribute voluntarily.
The path to the deal was fraught with difficulties. Delays pushed the summit into overtime, with tensions flaring over differing priorities and geopolitical distractions, including Russia’s war in Ukraine and rising inflation. The election of Donald Trump in the U.S., a known skeptic of climate agreements, added further uncertainty about America’s future contributions.
Despite these challenges, European leaders, including the EU’s Wopke Hoekstra, welcomed the agreement as a foundation for a new era in climate financing. However, disruptions during speeches from activists reflected dissatisfaction from civil society.
The urgency of action was underscored by a year of unprecedented climate disasters. Floods in Spain claimed over 200 lives, while wildfires ravaged California, and droughts crippled South America’s waterways.
UN Secretary-General Antonio Guterres described the agreement as “a base on which to build” and urged for more ambitious commitments. While the deal represents progress, its success will depend on the timely mobilization of funds, inclusive policies, and addressing structural inequities between rich and poor nations. As climate impacts escalate, the stakes for future summits will only grow higher.
