There is widespread criticism over a draft finance proposal released by the COP29 presidency on the final day of the UN climate summit in Baku, calling for developed nations to contribute $250 billion annually by 2035 to help poorer countries mitigate the adverse effects of climate change.
According to the developing nations, the $250 billion offered by the developed world, though marks an increase from the $100 billion per year initially agreed upon in 2009 to support developing countries’ decarbonization and adaptation plans, is far less in real terms once inflation is factored in.
“This is not even a joke. This is an insult,” said Fadhel Kaboub, Senior Advisor for Climate Finance and Just Transitions at the influential think tank Power Shift Africa, in an interview with Al Arabiya English.
“If you adjust the $250 billion to inflation, we’re looking at the Global North offering 30% less than what they offered 15 years ago,” he said, adding: “This shows how unserious the historic polluters are about climate action.”
This marks the first time that a specific figure has been formally proposed at the climate talks, highlighting a divide between wealthy governments resisting expensive climate commitments and developing nations demanding greater support.
The Baku draft also outlines a broader target to mobilize $1.3 trillion in climate finance annually by 2035, drawing contributions from both public and private sources.
Responding to demands that her country and other affluent nations commit beyond the $250 billion outlined in the draft proposal, Annalena Baerbock, the German Foreign Minister, said: “We will not issue blank cheques.”
In a statement on social media, Baerbock also called for a new approach to climate finance.
“We need answers that match the reality of the world we live in. Vulnerable states must have access to financing, and emerging economies must also benefit,” she said.
The US described the proposed $250 billion goal as ambitious, but potentially achievable if contributions come from banks, businesses, and governments.
“This goal will need to be supported by ambitious bilateral action, MDB contributions, and efforts to better mobilize private finance, among other critical factors,” a senior US official said, referring to multilateral development banks.
Negotiators have voiced disappointment with the proposed figure, citing challenges bridging the gap between government commitments and private sector contributions.
“What the Global South was suggesting was $1.3 trillion per year of high-quality, impactful, transformative climate finance. Instead, we wait until the very last week, and what we get is $250 billion of mobilized money — not even provided money. ‘Mobilized,’ meaning it’s mostly going to be the private sector,” Kaboub told Al Arabiya English.
Deal still far apart
The draft $250 billion deal has struck a sour note for developing countries, which see conferences like COP as their biggest hope to pressure rich nations since they aren’t part of the meetings of the world’s biggest economies.
Lead negotiator Yalchin Rafiyev, Azerbaijan’s deputy foreign minister, said the presidency hopes to push countries to go higher than $250 billion, stating: “It doesn't correspond to our fair and ambitious goal. But we will continue to engage with the parties.”
Brazil, set to host COP30, has proposed a higher number based on a report by an expert financial panel appointed by the United Nations Secretary-General Antonio Guterres. Marina Silva, Brazil’s Environment Minister, suggested $300 billion annually until 2035, with the figure increasing to $390 billion per year thereafter.
The EU, the US, and other wealthy countries have also agreed to raise their global finance target to $300 billion per year by 2035, following backlash from developing nations over the draft’s low figures.
“If you remember the powerful line from the G77 negotiator, the legendary South Sudanese Ambassador Lumumba Di-Aping at the time (2009) when people were suggesting the small billions, he said: ‘This is not enough to even pay for the coffins of the climate victims,’” Kaboub told Al Arabiya English.
“And today, when we’re talking about $250 billion of mobilized money, maybe it will cover the coffins and the funeral costs, but not real climate action,” he added.
Is the 1.5°C goal dead?
The past 10 consecutive years have been the hottest on record, and scientists say the internationally agreed goal of keeping global temperature rise below 1.5°C — set by the famous Paris Accord — is now “deader than a doornail,” with 2024 on course to breach the threshold.
Despite this, diplomats, negotiators, and campaigners have not stopped referencing the 1.5°C goal. The figure remains emblazoned on signs and leaflets at COP summits.
“The sound you hear is the ticking clock. We are in the final countdown to limit global temperature rise to 1.5 degrees Celsius, and time is not on our side,” Guterres said during his opening speech in Baku. “The world must pay up, or humanity will pay the price,” he warned.
Environment organization Power Shift Africa’s Kaboub has blamed the inaction of historic polluters for the failure to achieve the 1.5°C target.
“To preserve a liveable planet, we need to stay within a 1°C limit. The compromise is already 1.5°C, so we’re not going to accept anything that destroys the planet for future generations — both in the Global North and the Global South,” he said.
COP talks ‘not fit for purpose’
Midway through this year’s climate talks in Baku, a group of influential climate policy experts published a critical open letter, arguing that the COP process is no longer fit for purpose.
The letter, signed by more than 20 experts, former leaders, and scientists — including former UNFCCC chief Christiana Figueres, former President of Ireland Mary Robinson, and former UN Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon — acknowledged the COP process’s past achievements but emphasized the need for a comprehensive overhaul.
Kaboub echoed similar sentiments, stressing the urgency of addressing criticisms to prevent reaching the point of no return.
“Those are serious criticisms. The current process has not delivered any serious transformation, climate action, or climate finance,” he said.
“This doesn’t mean it can’t, but delivering real results requires the Global North — the historic polluters—to take their responsibilities seriously,” he added.
