Through the Global Negotiations Support initiative and the Global Climate Change Fellowship programme, SLYCAN Trust aims to contribute to a better engagement of developing countries in the UNFCCC and other multilateral processes, as well as building trust among Parties for successful outcomes. Gabriel Pierre Ndiaye is a negotiator from Senegal who works as Head of Climate Finance and Ecological Transition at the Ministry of Environment and Ecological Transition and is a SLYCAN Trust fellow. These are his reflections from participating in the 29^th session of the Conference of the Parties to the UNFCCC (COP29).

‍

My participation in COP29 was enriching and allowed me to participate as a negotiator in the pre-sessions that started from November 4^th to 8^th, 2024, as well as in the COP itself from November 11^th to 22^nd, 2024, thanks to the support of SLYCAN Trust. The negotiations allowed us, as countries that are part of the African Group, the Least Developed Countries (LDCs) Group, and the Group of 77 and China, to better prepare our positions on the new collective quantified goal on climate finance (NCQG). COP29 was a key platform to strengthen collaboration between countries in the fight against climate change. I have seen the importance of working together to achieve common goals.

‍

However, the negotiations have been complex and lengthy, with divergent interests between countries and even sometimes within the G77 and China.

As a reminder, in 2009, developed countries agreed to collectively mobilize USD 100 billion per year by 2020 to support climate action in developing countries. According to the OECD, this target was reached for the first time in 2022, two years after the initial deadline.

‍

When countries signed the Paris Agreement in 2015, they decided to set a “new collective quantified goal on climate finance” to replace the existing target of USD 100 billion per year. COP26 launched the process to set new climate finance targets, with technical discussions taking place until the end of 2024 at COP29 in Baku.

‍

Outcomes of the negotiations

From the outset of the negotiations at COP29 in Baku, country representatives began to express their dissatisfaction with the substantive framework for a draft negotiating text presented by the co-chairs. These grievances were widely voiced during the NCQG's opening discussions on the first Tuesday.

‍

For their part, developed countries argued that they did not want to set an amount before knowing who would contribute and what type of funds would be taken into account. Thus, major disagreements were noted during all two weeks of negotiations, which will be detailed below.

‍

The negotiations on the NCQG revolved around three main questions: What will be the amount? Who will contribute? And who will be eligible to receive funds? In addition to these main questions, Parties had to agree on the following points:

1. The base of contributors
2. Inclusion of loss and damage (L&D)
3. The timeline of the funding goal.
4. Conditionalities and problems of access to finance
5. The establishment of a transparency process to monitor progress
6. The definition of climate finance
7. The financial quantum, i.e., the quantitative objective in concrete terms
8. Debt forgiveness and financial sustainability
9. Defining the scope of the NCQG and its relationship to Article 2.1(c) of the Paris Agreement

‍

After two weeks of intense negotiations, including an additional day, Parties agreed to provide finance annually, with an overall climate finance target to reach “at least USD 1.3 trillion by 2035” from all sources, with a strong focus on climate finance. COP29 therefore reached an agreement that will:

• Triple funding to developing countries from the previous target of USD 100 billion per year to USD 300 billion per year by 2035.
• Ensure the efforts of all actors to work together to increase financing to developing countries, from public and private sources, to USD 1.3 trillion per year by 2035.

‍

In addition, the final text:

• Encourages the mobilization of funds from public and private sources, and encourages developing countries, which could include nations such as China or Saudi Arabia, to voluntarily contribute to climate finance.
• Does not mention specific targets for L&D and adaptation, or measures that would build on the commitment of developed countries to double their adaptation finance. Activities in these areas are grossly underfunded and are particularly in need of public funding in the form of grants.
• Does not solve the problem of defining “climate finance.”
• Refers to the special circumstances of LDCs and Small Island Developing States (SIDS) and advocates easier access to finance, for example by simplifying application and disbursement procedures.
• Has limited ambition to improve the quality of finance, with timid calls to improve access and no clarity on what a “balance” between mitigation and adaptation finance means.
• Recognizes the importance of transparency in measuring progress in improving access to climate finance and the impact, results and outcomes of climate finance flows to meet the needs and priorities of developing country parties.

‍

In the final text, developing countries are encouraged to contribute to the goal of USD 300 billion on a voluntary basis. At the same time, the text reassures that developing countries' additional contributions to the target will not affect their development or their status as beneficiaries for other aspects of the Paris Agreement.

‍

Mixed reactions

While the COP29 decision on the NCQG represents a step forward, many developing countries believe that the amount remains insufficient to address current climate challenges. Critics have called the agreement “too weak, too late, and too ambiguous.”

‍

There is room to further scale up ambition and work towards the adequate provision of finance for all areas of climate action, including adaptation and L&D. A “Baku to Belém roadmap” has been drawn up to increase financial contributions by COP30, which is scheduled to take place in Belém, Brazil. 

‍

In short, COP29 set a new financial target to support developing countries in their efforts to combat climate change. However, the effective implementation of this commitment will depend on political will and the concrete mobilization of the funds pledged. It also highlighted significant gaps in emission reduction ambitions and financial commitments. The next steps, especially at COP30, will be crucial to turn promises into concrete actions and respond to the climate emergency.

‍

A major challenge remains for climate finance in 2025 and beyond: Closing the gap between commitments made by countries and the concrete actions implemented so far.