Did COP29 Succeed or Fail?

Sunday marked the end of the year’s most important climate summit, the 29th UN Conference of the Parties (COP29). Hosted by a petrostate and attended by nearly 2,000 fossil fuel lobbyists, the “finance COP” promised to deliver much-needed progress on the critical issue of supporting developing countries’ mitigation and adaptation efforts. But the COP29 Presidency faced other challenges, and not all of them have been addressed. So, did COP29 succeed or fail? And, most importantly, is COP still “fit for purpose”?

—

More than 50,000 people attended the two-week summit in Azerbaijan’s capital Baku, including 80 world leaders and at least 1,773 fossil fuel lobbyists.

The 29th edition of the United Nations Conference of the Parties was nicknamed the “finance COP,” sharp in focus on mobilizing the trillions of dollars needed – first and foremost by developing countries – to mitigate and adapt to climate change. But there is a lot more to unpack.

Earth.Org recaps the main achievements and failures of COP29 and looks at what is next for the UN summit.

Achievements and Failures

Climate finance

All eyes were on the New Collective Quantified Goal (NCQG) this year, a key element of the 2015 Paris Agreement aimed at setting a new financial target to support developing countries in their climate actions post-2025.

The NCQG is building on the $100 billion pledge to mobilize $100 billion per year by 2020, which is set to expire next year, aiming to provide a more realistic and ambitious financial framework.

On Sunday morning, nearly two days behind schedule, negotiators finally agreed on a new finance deal: $300 billion per year by 2035. This will replace the existing $100 target, which was proposed at COP15 in 2009 but not met until 2022. But is it enough?

Global South delegates had been pushing for “trillions, not billions” throughout the summit, as recent reports have put the amount needed to deal with the consequences of climate change at some $1.3 trillion annually.

Several delegations representing least-developed countries and small island developing nations were seen walking out of consultations on Saturday morning, as negotiations headed into the final stretch eyeing at a $250 billion pledge. Countries eventually settled for $300 billion, a target that infuriated developing nations. They called it a “joke” and “insultingly low.”

Indian negotiator Chandni Raina said her country “[did] not accept the goal proposal in its present form,” calling the amount proposed a “paltry sum” and “abysmally poor.”

“It is not something that will enable conducive climate action that is necessary for the survival of our country,” she said. 

Developing countries also mainly campaigned to get public grant-based money that would not have to be paid back as many of them are already heavily burdened by debt from previous development assistance.

As per the final text, the money will come from a “wide variety of sources,” including public and private finance as well as bilateral and multilateral deals. While developed countries are “taking the lead,” the text also “encourages” developing countries to contribute, albeit on a voluntary basis.

Western diplomats have been pushing for China, the world’s biggest carbon emitter, and oil-rich Gulf nations – both of which the UN designates as “developing countries” – to contribute.

Zhao Yingmin, head of China’s climate delegation, had previously hinted that the country would only agree to make voluntary contributions to future climate finance, arguing that developed countries should be responsible for mandatory contributions under the draft finance goal.

To many, the country’s refusal to officially become a climate finance donor raises questions about how far future negotiations can go on cutting emissions and raising money.

A coalition of least developed countries and small island developing states also secured language in the final text that establishes a process to boost climate finance towards the $1.3 trillion goal. That effort will be part of a “Baku to Belem Roadmap to $1.3 trillion,” which will look for additional resources to “support support low greenhouse gas emissions and climate-resilient development pathways.”

Fossil fuels

Despite last year’s summit ending with an unprecedented call to “transition away” from fossil fuels, COP29 saw few related announcements.

The European Union along with 25 nations – including Canada, the UK, Germany and the world’s largest coal consumers India and China – pledged to commit to “no new unabated coal power” in their next round of national climate plans.

Coal, the cheapest and dirtiest fossil fuel, is the single-largest source of carbon emissions, responsible for over 0.3C of the 1.3C increase in global average temperatures. “Unabated” coal refers to the burning of coal without efforts to capturing the carbon dioxide emissions generating from it.

Separately, the UK, New Zealand, and Colombia announced they would join the international Coalition on Phasing Out Fossil Fuel Incentives Including Subsidies (COFFIS), bringing the total number of members to 16. Launched last year at COP28, the coalition aims to “remove barriers and facilitate transparency toward the phase-out of fossil fuel subsidies.”

Ahead of COP29, the 13 original members were required to publish their subsidy inventories. Only four – the Netherlands, Belgium, France and Ireland – have done so, according to Climate Change News.

Meanwhile, a top delegate of Saudi Arabia, an oil-rich country long known for repeatedly opposing measures aimed at cutting fossil fuels production, earlier this week said the “Arab group will not accept any text that targets any specific sectors, including fossil fuels.”

Hitting back at Saudi Arabia, former climate minister for Canada and chair of the UN group on net-zero emissions commitments Catherine McKenna wrote in a post on social media X: “I am so sick of Saudi Arabia’s opposition to any suggestion of a transition away from fossil fuels. We are in a fossil fuel climate crisis. Please go hard everyone at #COP29 and get it done.”

The Guardian also revealed that a Saudi Arabian delegate had made changes to an official COP29 negotiating text on the just transition work program (JTWP), a UN initiative aimed at promoting pathways which ensure that the goals of the Paris Agreement are achieved justly and equitably.

Article 6

On day one of the summit, the COP29 Presidency fast-tracked the adoption of a centralized carbon trading mechanism. The system effectively allows countries to buy credits for removing and/or avoiding planet-warming pollution around the world, such as by planting trees or protecting rainforests.

The move clears the way for the long-awaited global carbon market set out in Article 6.4 of the Paris Agreement, which will be open to countries and companies to trade through under UN supervision, to become operational.

The agreement was rushed and adopted without discussion and negotiations, prompting widespread criticism. Isa Mulder, a policy expert at the non-profit group Carbon Market Watch, said that adopting the rules on the first day of the summit without discussion “undermined trust” in the UN climate conference process. “Kicking off Cop29 with a backdoor deal … sets a poor precedent for transparency and proper governance,” she said.

There were also agreements made to kickstart global carbon credit trading on Saturday, something that no previous COP had been able to achieve. They will help countries deliver their climate plans more quickly and cheaply, and make faster progress in halving global emissions this decade, as required by science.

The COP29 Presidency hailed the agreement as a “breakthrough” that “achieves full operationalisation of Article 6,” which has been stuck on issues that have plagued it since the Paris Agreement was signed 10 years ago.

“We have ended a decade-long wait and unlocked a critical tool for keeping 1.5 degrees in reach,” said COP29 President Mukhtar Babayev. “Climate change is a transnational challenge and Article 6 will enable transnational solutions. Because the atmosphere does not care where emissions savings are made.”

Rueban Manokara, global lead at WWF’s Carbon Finance and Markets Taskforce, described the deal as a “significant milestone.”

“The agreement is a compromise that reflects the challenging negotiations that have been underway since 2015, but ultimately it is positive that there is now further guidance on how Article 6 mechanisms will operate,” Manokara said, adding that while the text was “not perfect,” it provided long-sought clarity to coordinate international emissions trading and carbon crediting.

Methane

30 countries collectively responsible for nearly half of all global methane emissions from organic waste, including seven of the world’s 10 largest organic waste methane emitters, endorsed a new declaration on reducing methane from organic waste. 

The declaration strengthens the Global Methane Pledge, a voluntary pact launched at COP26 in 2021 that seeks to cut global methane emissions 30% by 2030. 159 countries currently back the pledge.

Methane is a potent greenhouse gas with 28 times greater global warming potential than carbon dioxide on a 100-year timescale and 84 times more potent than CO2 on a 20-year timescale.

Separately, a UN report published ahead of the summit found that just 1% of 1,200 notifications on major methane leaks delivered to governments and companies in the past two years by a high-tech detection system were responded to.

“Governments and oil and gas companies must stop paying lip-service to this challenge when answers are staring them in the face,” UNEP chief Inger Andersen urged in a statement.

Loss and Damage

COP29 needed to deliver clear commitments and foster collaboration to ensure the Loss and Damage Fund agreed upon in principle at COP27 could effectively address the urgent and growing needs of affected nations.

Following the launch of the fund at last year’s summit, all eyes were on COP29 to address several outstanding issues critical to make the fund fully operational and effective. These included determining who would contribute to the fund and how much; setting clear eligibility criteria and streamlined access mechanisms to ensure Least Developed Countries (LDCs) and Small Island Developing States (SIDS) could benefit quickly and effectively, and outlining a firm timeline for operationalizing the fund to avoid delays.

While total pledges to the fund reached $759 million at COP29, the final NCQG fails to effectively address these issues and instead merely “acknowledges” that “gap remain.”

During a high-level dialogue on loss and damage funding at the summit, UN Secretary-General António Guterres described the creation of the fund as “a victory for developing countries, for multilateralism, and for justice,” but stressed that its initial capitalisation of $700 million “doesn’t come close to righting the wrong inflicted on the vulnerable.”

Deforestation

The world has lost one-third of its forests, with deforestation driving desertification, soil erosion, and jeopardizing food security. It directly impacts the livelihoods of millions, particularly Indigenous communities, while contributing around 20% of global CO2 emissions that fuel climate change.

Ahead of the summit, the Global Forest Coalition (GFC) and allies from Central Asia and the Caucasus issued the “Baku Forest Declaration,” urging a paradigm shift in climate negotiations to prioritize forest protection, Indigenous rights, and climate justice.

“We urge climate negotiations to focus on justice, sustainability and equity, and to take into account the voices of those most affected by climate change,” the declaration read.

Despite its wide-ranging impact, the call went unheard, with little accomplished on the issue.

14 countries part of the Forest & Climate Leaders’ Partnership (FCLP) issue a political statement underscoring their commitment to scaling up finance for forests, while the UK unveiled £239 million (US$300 million) in new funding to help forest-rich nations tackle climate change.

The money comprises £188m to SCALE programme for high-integrity forest carbon markets, £48m blended finance to unlock private investment in tropical forest enterprises and £3m for UNFCCC to help countries protect forests and support local communities.

Agriculture & Food Security

On Food, Agriculture and Water Day, the Food and Agriculture Organization (FAO) and the COP29 Presidency launched the Baku Harmoniya Climate Initiative for Farmers “to help farmers navigate their way through dozens of initiatives and programs working to support climate-resilient agrifood systems transformation.”

Separately, the Alliance of Champions for Food Systems Transformation (ACF) reconvened in Baku last week, one year after its launch at COP28. The alliance of five countries – Brazil, Cambodia, Norway, Sierra Leone and Rwanda – urged governments and financial institutions at COP29 to prioritise climate finance for food systems. The ACF also released a snapshots showcasing progress since the initiative was launched.

Controversies at COP29

The COP29 Presidency found itself at the center of numerous controversies.

Azerbaijan, this year’s host, is a highly fossil fuel-dependent state and the oldest oil-producing region in the world. According to the International Energy Agency (IEA), oil and gas account for about 90% of the nation’s exports’ revenue and 60% of the government’s budget.

Climate activists have long called COP meetings a “farce” due to the presence of thousands of fossil fuel representatives, with this year’s host pick reigniting the debate over the role of fossil fuels in the summit.

The burning of coal, natural gas, and oil for electricity and heat is the single-largest source of global greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions, the primary drivers of global warming by trapping heat in the atmosphere and raising Earth’s surface temperature.

In April, Azeri President Ilham Aliyev said his country will continue to invest in gas production in order to meet European Union demand for energy in a “sign of responsibility.” He also called fossil fuels “a gift of God,” a statement he reiterated during the first week of the summit.

“Having oil and gas deposits is not our fault. It’s a gift of God. We must be judged not by that but on how we use this resource for the development of the country, for reduction of poverty, unemployment and what is our target with respect to [the] green agenda,” Aliyev remarked in April.

The COP29 Presidency was also criticized for failing to include any mentions of a plan to phase out fossil fuels in its summit’s Action Agenda despite the COP28 unprecedented call to “transition away from fossil fuels in energy systems, in a just, orderly and equitable manner to achieve net-zero by 2050 in keeping with the science.”

Separately, an undercover investigation by campaign group Global Witness caught Elnur Soltanov, the COP29 chief executive and Azerbaijan’s deputy energy minister, using his role at the UN climate summit to facilitate fossil fuel deals. Meeting recordings leaked ahead of the summit show Soltanov agreeing to sponsorships in exchange for aiding oil and gas deals, a move that clashes with the global push towards climate adaptation and mitigation efforts.

“Just as we saw with the UAE last year, the event’s hosts have an agenda that is at serious odds with climate justice,” Amnesty International’s Schaaf remarked.

Human rights groups have also accused the Azerbaijani government to use COP29 to crack down on environmental activists and other political opponents.

“We’ve seen a dramatic increase in arrests and clamp down on all issues that the government may perceive critical or contrary to its political agenda,” Natalia Nozadze from Amnesty International told BBC news.

Did COP29 Succeed or Fail?

In a letter to the UN published at the end of the summit’s first week, a group of influential climate policy experts said that COP summits are “no longer fit for purpose.”

The signatories, which included former UN secretary-general Ban Ki-moon, former president of Ireland Mary Robinson, former UN climate chief Christiana Figueres and prominent Earth scientist Johan Rockström, demanded that the current complex process of annual COP meetings be streamlined, with summits held more frequently and developing countries allowed to have greater influence in the process.

The sentiment was echoed by many delegates during the past two weeks.

Juan Carlos Monterrey Gómez, Panama’s special representative for climate change, was one of them.

“Developed nations always throw text at us at the last minute, shove it down our throat, and then, for the sake of multilateralism, we always have to accept it, otherwise the climate mechanisms will go into a horrible downward spiral, and no one needs that,” he said as he questioned the process of the deal’s adoption on Sunday.

Always have to accept a bad deal for the sake of multilateralism? What a poor negotiating position! Maybe it’s time for climate negotiators to work more closely with their peace and security counterparts – because to get any deal worth having, you have to be willing to walk away https://t.co/KTKHBhc61P

— Martin Kimani (@AmbMKimani) November 24, 2024

The letter also criticized Azerbaijan’s pick to host the talks: “We need strict eligibility criteria to exclude countries who do not support the phase-out/transition away from fossil energy. Host countries must demonstrate their high level of ambition to uphold the goals of the Paris agreement,” the group wrote.

Azerbaijan is the third petrostate in a row to host the talks after one of the world’s richest petrostates in the world, the United Arab Emirates, hosted COP28 last year and Egypt hosted COP27 in 2022. 

Some 1,773 oil and gas lobbyists attended the summit in Baku. At COP28 last year, at least 2,456 lobbyists were granted access, while COP27 allowed some 636 people linked to the fossil fuel industry to join the climate talks.

The structure and format of these meetings, unchanged since the inaugural one in 1995, no longer meet the scale and complexity of the unfolding climate crisis.

It is true that global climate negotiations have long fell far short of the urgent and transformative action needed. However, some argue that COP’s most vital role is perhaps to continue to exist, to provide a platform for countries to keep engaging, maintain momentum, apply peer pressure, and steadily address the problem while individual nations and private companies work toward more lasting and comprehensive solutions.

“The deal’s greatest success is that it at least kept the COP process from falling apart entirely,” said Katharine Hayhoe, an atmospheric scientist and professor at Texas Tech University.

“Now comes the really hard part: Turning those numbers on a page into hard cash in the hands of the most climate-vulnerable countries. Recent history, and the new language adopted in Baku, don’t bode well for that,” she added.

What’s Next?

As UN climate chief Simon Stiell put it on Sunday, the Azerbaijani presidency left Brazil, which is next in line to host the talks, with “a mountain of work to do.”

“The many other issues we need to progress may not be headlines but they are lifelines for billions of people. So this is no time for victory laps, we need to set our sights and redouble our efforts on the road to Belém. Even so, we’ve shown the UN Paris Agreement is delivering, but governments still need to pick up the pace. Let’s not forget, without this UN-convened global cooperation, we’d be headed towards 5 degrees of global warming,” Stiell said.