Wealthy and polluting nations from the Global North have been urged to step up their financial commitments for climate adaptation, mitigation, and loss and damage.
Speaking during a press briefing on the opening day of COP29, Teresa Anderson, the Global Climate Justice Lead at ActionAid said that there is no way countries can stop the climate crisis by spending less on climate finance than they spend on ice cream.
“COP29 is about the new climate finance goal to unlock climate action in the Global South. Without finance, talk about climate action will remain just that -talk. They say there is no such thing as a free lunch – well there’s no such thing as a free climate target either. If we’re serious about climate action, we have to pay for climate action,” said Anderson.
According to her, wealthy countries of the Global North, who have been polluting for a century or more need to start paying real money for climate action. So far wealthy countries have been evading their responsibilities. In 2022, developed countries only provided $28-35 billion in grants for climate action in the Global South. For context, the world spent twice as much on ice cream that year ($71 billion).
She reveals that sticking the Global South with an escalating climate bill is not only unfair, it’s a recipe for certain planetary breakdown. This is why climate-hit countries desperately need COP29 to agree a new climate finance goal that delivers real worth trillions of dollars in grants each year.
According to UN Secretary-General António Guterres, developed countries must honour their commitment to double adaptation finance to at least $40 billion a year by next year. This is an important step to closing the adaptation finance gap.
There is also a need for a new climate finance goal that mobilizes the trillions of dollars of finance developing countries need with a significant increase in concessional public funds. That goal must provide clarity on how money will be mobilised and include an accessibility, transparency and accountability framework to build confidence that funds will be delivered and available.
“There is a need for significant contributions flowing to the loss and damage fund so it can have a meaningful impact. There is also a need for funds to protect people from climate impacts; impacts that are growing in strength and frequency. Everyone must have the chance to build resilience. And to seize the benefits of adaptation to drive progress across the sustainable development goals,” said Guterres.
Guterres warned that the global adaptation finance gap could escalate to $359 billion per year by 2030, which could be catastrophic for vulnerable nations bearing the brunt of climate disruptions.
These missing dollars are not abstractions on a balance sheet,” Guterres said. “They are lives taken, harvests lost, and development denied.” He also urged nations to contribute to the newly established Loss and Damage Fund, which aims to support communities already experiencing the devastating effects of climate change.
Speaking at another meeting in Baku, Kenya’s Environment Cabinet Secretary Aden Duale emphasized that Africa should receive a new $1.3 trillion climate financing package in the form of grants rather than loans. He stressed that grants would not require repayment, unlike loans, which come with interest and would further deepen the debt burden of African countries. Such funding is essential to support resilience-building in the Global South and help these nations address the significant impacts of climate change without exacerbating existing financial challenges.
Despite stepping up the commitments, the United Nations Programme on Reducing Emissions from Deforestation and Forest Degradation (UN-REDD+) says that these resources need to reach those countries and communities that are on the frontline of the climate crisis, especially the indigenous communities. Despite significant global commitments to climate action and pledges, climate resources often do not reach those who need them most.
Bureaucratic delays, inefficient distribution channels, and a lack of transparency hinder the flow of funds to frontline communities and vulnerable countries.
This disconnect between climate finance pledges and their implementation on the ground leaves many regions without the necessary resources to adapt to or mitigate the impacts of climate change.
