As Africa engages with the global ambition to green her marine and blue economy sectors, University College London’s LEAP Project Principal Investigator, Dr. Dola Oluteye, in collaboration with Dr. Oma Ofodile, Head of Climate Change at the Nigerian Maritime Administration and Safety Agency (NIMASA), and the Climate Champions Team (CCT), draws global attention to three key project indicators: green capacity building, green economic empowerment, and inclusive advocacy.
A cross section of the speakers at the side event organised by the LEAP Project. Photo credit: Climagraphy / Adebote Mayowa_COP29
During Session Two on “Catalysing an Evidence-Based Just Transition for Africa” at COP29, discussions focused on building capacity within the region as it leverages its abundant renewable energy resources for developing green infrastructure and technologies. African nations must take a leadership role in green maritime practices. Panel discussions took a holistic approach and explored the nexus between zero-emission ambitions and the creation of economic opportunities.
Collaborative initiatives among governments, private sector stakeholders, and international organisations are essential for driving the much-needed transformation, ensuring that Africa’s maritime sector contributes meaningfully to global climate goals without hindering regional development and prosperity.
At the ongoing UN Climate Change Conference (COP29) in Baku, Dr. Oma Ofodile opened the expert panel session by setting the scene for the discourse. She highlighted Africa’s abundant resources necessary for leading global zero-emission efforts in the maritime sector. However, she emphasised the existing gaps in financial resources and skills, both of which are essential for transforming the continent.
“Africa has the land, labour, and raw renewable resources and materials – including sun, wind, a youthful demographic, land, and hydrogen – that are needed to drive zero-emission shipping and the blue economy. We have everything required to be a global leader; what we need is to attract sufficient investment through partnerships that will enable us to harness these resources and develop our people,” she explained.
This UCL-NIMASA LEAP Project side event, organised by Dr. Dola Oluteye, Principal Investigator, was hosted at the Nigerian Pavilion with the support of the Minister for Marine and Blue Economy, Adegboyega Oyetola. The event focused on attracting financial resources to promote Africa’s transition to a green maritime sector. The panel featured speakers including Winfrida Shonde from TEEMO Africa, representing the office of the Vice President of Tanzania; Amna Munawwar Awan, President of the Centre for Climate Advocacy and Policy Research Institute; and Maritime Associates from the Climate Champions Team (CCT).
Winfrida Shonde emphasised the necessity of partnerships with international organisations and public-private collaborations to drive economic development. She noted that such partnerships are vital for mobilising resources and building the infrastructure needed for capacity development across the continent.
The Climate Champions Team elaborated on how the Just Transition principles for African seafarers can align with local economic needs.
“Climate diplomacy can play a crucial role through capacity building, research and development, financial inclusion, and adaptation to change. However, for this transition to succeed, coordinated efforts from individuals, journalists, civil society, government, and the private sector are essential,” stated a member of the team.
The team also highlighted the importance of promoting gender equity in the maritime industry, advocating for increased opportunities for women, and calling for investments in training programs designed to address the unique challenges faced in Africa.
Furthermore, the panel discussed the role of technology in facilitating the green maritime transformation. “This transition provides a level playing field for Africa and empowers our seafarers. Unfortunately, many African countries have not fully capitalized on this opportunity due to a lack of technological advancement, among other factors,” stated a Climate Champions Maritime Associate.
In her concluding remarks, the moderator, Dr. Ofodile, a Technical Expert on Climate Change and Decarbonisation of the maritime sector and international shipping, urged stakeholders to actively engage with initiatives and platforms that promote sustainable economic development within the maritime sector.
“By focusing on capacity building and economic empowerment, Africa can meet the challenges of climate change and emerge as a frontrunner in the green maritime economy. For this to happen, we need significant investments in education, infrastructure, and community engagement to leapfrog into the next industrial revolution already underway,” stated Ofodile.
By Seyifunmi Adebote, seyi@climatetalkpodcast.com (Environmental Communicator and Host, Climate Talk Podcast) and Dr. Dola Oluteye, ucftolu@ucl.ac.uk (Senior Research Fellow at University College London)
Remote workers can have a 54% lower carbon footprint when compared to onsite workers, highlights a study by Cornell and Microsoft. The Cornell Chronicle article goes on to point out that lifestyle choices and work arrangements play “an essential role in determining the environmental benefits of remote and hybrid work.”
Adejoke Lasisi has turned “pure water” sachets into items such as bags, purses, slippers, mats, and more
For Nigerian businesses and their workers, green business practices can extend well beyond the value of a remote work schedule. Recycled materials and paperless initiatives are just two environmentally beneficial practices that remote workers can implement, each with surprising benefits.
Recycled materials
Waste and waste management is a significant concern, not just in Nigeria but throughout the world. In fact, Al Jazeera notes the 2019 Global Material Footprint, which amounted to 85.9 billion tonnes (up from 73.2 billion tonnes 10 years before), according to the United Nations. The Global Material Footprint involves the amount of raw material, which includes fossil fuels, biomass, metal and non-metal ore that is extracted to meet total consumption demand.
Al Jazeera goes on to highlight “wastepreneurs” in Nigeria, who take waste straight from the dump in order to transform it and redefine its purpose. While some upcycle material such as car tyres and scrap metal into art, others take advantage of waste materials in order to create functional items – Adejoke Lasisi is just one individual highlighted by Al Jazeera, who turned “pure water” sachets into items such as bags, purses, slippers, mats, and more.
An at-home work environment that incorporates recycled materials can save workers money while preventing waste from ending up in the landfills. A desk made from reclaimed wood, a reupholstered chair, or a repurposed shelving unit can all serve as smart ways to create a more sustainable home office. Beyond recycled materials, the design of a sustainable home office may include eco-friendly lighting solutions, or the introduction of plant life. A focus on natural lighting, for instance, can not only benefit a remote employee’s health and wellbeing (as it helps reduce eye strain), but can be a proactive way to save energy. Natural lighting can also benefit plant life in a home office setting and help the environment flourish as one that is conducive to productivity.
Paperless practices redefine remote work
A ThisDay article describes Nigeria’s federal government plans to digitalise 80% of its activities by 2025. The ambitious change highlights a step towards modernisation, and a step in an eco-friendly direction. According to the article, the project is part of the President Bola Tinubu administration’s “drive towards modernising Nigeria’s public sector.” Additional benefits mentioned include enhanced efficiency, a reduction in corruption, and improved transparency.
Those who work remotely can adopt a like-minded approach to the digitalisation of work practices, which can cut down greatly on unnecessary paper waste. The workplace productivity platform known as Formstack highlights the significance behind paper waste – for example, it’s cited that the average office worker uses around four dozen sheets of paper each day – half of which is considered waste. Regardless of the industry or location, a move towards digital practices can make a difference. In many cases, this can mean simple changes, such as the routine use of a notes app rather than using a fresh sheet of paper.
Green practices may appear to be reserved for the traditional office setting, though there are a number of ways that remote workers can contribute as well. Paperless practices and the integration of recycled materials are just a few initiatives worth consideration, from the simple use of digital tools to stay organised to the value of sustainably sourced furniture.
A new streamlined draft text was published on Friday, November 22, 2024, at COP29 for the new climate finance goal. For the first time, the text includes a proposal for a provision of climate finance: $250 billion per year in climate finance by 2035.
COP29 President, Mukhtar Babayev, speaking at the official opening of COP29
Assessed against climate finance needs and demands from civil society and countries of the Global South, the number provided falls significantly short. Furthermore, provision in grant-equivalent was dropped.
The decisions made now will determine whether the Global South will have the resources to adapt, recover, and transition to a sustainable future – or will be left behind. Today’s text is not expected to be the final text, so it is now up to wealthy countries’ governments to put their money on the table and provide a higher support quantum.
Reactions have however trailed the publication, with activists describing the text as “a joke” as, according to them, the proposed $250 billion falls short of expectations.
Tasneem Essop, Executive Director, Climate Action Network International, said: “This latest draft text on the New Collective Quantified Goal is not just a joke – it’s an insult to the billions of people in the Global South living on the frontline of the climate crisis. The $250 billion per year in public finance is peanuts, doubling a failed $100 billion goal instead of addressing real needs.
“The Global South must not carry the burden of historic emitters’ failure to act. No deal is better than a bad deal – but we are not done yet. To essentially shift the responsibility to developing countries and the private banks with the $1.3 trillion by 2035 mobilisation goal just adds insult to injury. In the meantime, millions of people’s lives are at risk. We are angry, but we will keep fighting until the end.”
Namrata Chowdhary, Chief of Public Engagement at 350.org, said: “The Global North must stop playing poker with people’s lives and pay their overdue debt. We need real leadership – from wealthy nations and the Presidency – to land this deal. If they can’t deliver, they must step aside, because we will not accept a bad deal that fails to meet the moment.
“As the world watches what should be the final day of this year’s climate talks, the agreement we came here for remains elusive. This new climate finance goal is three years in the making, and the global majority remains leaps and bounds ahead of the governments who are continuing to stall and let progress slip away in the name of profits. But we will not be silenced. At COP29, we hold the line in our demand for more climate finance, not this bare minimum offer.”
Dr Sindra Sharma, Senior Policy Advisor, Pacific Islands Climate Action Network, said: “This draft text reflects the backroom secrecy that was used to concoct it. As it stands, the text fails to honour the spirit of the Paris Agreement, shirks the responsibility of historical emitters to pay for the harm they’ve caused and falls far short of the ambition needed to protect our people and planet. $250 billion mobilised per year by 2035 is both inadequate and shameful. If finance is the realisation of ambition, then we are still asleep. There’s still time to wake up and push – negotiations must continue!”
Dr. Wafa Misrar, Campaigns and Policy Lead, CAN Africa, said: The new NCQG text is a profound disrespect to the people on the frontlines of the climate crisis – those losing their lives, homes, and livelihoods every day. It is disheartening to witness the lack of commitment from Global North countries, who seem willing to disregard our realities. Our demands were clear, and let it be known: the proposed $250 billion is not just inadequate – it’s unacceptable. This is our message to developed countries: go back to your homes, revisit your priorities, and come back with real solutions that reflect the urgency of this crisis and the dignity of those most affected.
Shailendra Yashwant, Senior Advisor, Climate Action Network South Asia, said: “The NCQG number of $250 billion in the latest ministerial text is not a joke, it’s an insult to the people of the global south salvaging their belongings and trying to rebuild their lives from floods, heatwaves, cyclones, landslides or forest fires and other climate change induced disasters. We wanted to see minimum of $1.3 trillion in public finance but what we have instead is a measly $250 billion that is being pushed as a hybrid of loans and private sector investment. This is unacceptable and will not only fail to deliver climate ambition but also completely undermine the principals of Paris Agreement.”
Fidelis Stehle, President FIMCAP Europe, FIMCAP (Youth), said: “We have to achieve the 1.5 degrees of Paris to save human lives, therefore this multilateral process is crucial. The EU has trillions dollar climate debt to pay. The current texts and the NCQG are unacceptable and far from what we need to save the planet and human lives. From a youth perspective, it is unacceptable to have a bad deal for a decade that leaves the most vulnerable on a burning planet.”
Pegah Moulana, Secretary General, Youth and Environment Europe, said: “We cannot believe it: the new NCQG text fails us all. The $1.3 trillion target by 2035 puts all actors into the same box, when developed countries – those we, civil society, urge to pay are only called to mobilise $250 billion annually. Still nowhere near addressing the urgent needs of the Global South. Moreover, where is the funding for loss and damage? Where is any consideration of human rights, workers, gender and youth? This text is injustice in slow motion. Keep negotiating. We demand and deserve better!”
Camila Mercure, Climate Policy Officer, FARN, said: “There is no room for ambiguities and unclear responsibilities at this point: developing countries are already facing the impacts of the climate crisis and are in no position to address loss and damage not adaptation measures without good quality finance in adequate amounts. Many countries from the Global South are already indebted and are in no position to finance the adaptation to a climate crisis they themselves have not caused. Rich countries have to commit to a good quality and quantum for this NCQG in order for developing countries to be able to implement their NDCs.”
Marlene Achoki, Global Climate Policy Lead, CARE International, said: “The new quantum proposed by developed countries is unbelievable! It is wholly inadequate, to say the least. It does not show any care to the world’s most climate-vulnerable nations, fighting against the escalating climate crisis. It’s alarmingly insufficient, with proposed funding falling far short of climate needs. The quality is also faulty, as it leans on loans and private investments – approaches that have consistently failed to deliver for those most in need. A bad deal that sets the bar too low.”
Bertha Argueta, Senior Advisor for Climate Finance and Development, Germanwatch, said: “This proposal is a complete abdication of the responsibility of the Global North, as the largest historical polluters, to ensure a liveable planet for all, particularly those most affected by the climate crisis, largely in the Global South. That Global North countries are willing to put their political priorities and self-interest above the survival of millions of people in the Global South is shameful. We need developed countries to come back to the table with a deal that is truly ambitious and just, and to live up to their obligations to the Global South and the world.”
Claudio Angelo, head of International Policy at Observatório do Clima, said: “At least the NCQG text put forward by the Azeri presidency on Friday afternoon answers an important question formulated this week by developing country diplomats: ‘Is this a joke?’, they asked. It is, indeed.”
Mariana Paoli, Global Advocacy Lead, Christian Aid, said: “It is baffling that despite everyone knowing all year that this was the ‘finance COP’, rich countries are still refusing to put substantial enough funding pledges on the table. This is irresponsible, immoral and risks condemning both people and planet. Developing countries would be better walking away from the table than signing up to this garbage.
“With hours to go, unless significant changes are made to the text, especially the amount of finance to be provided, developing countries will be left behind. The funding that the global south is fighting for here is a lifeline and will lay the groundwork for climate action over the next decade.”
Kelly Dent, Global Director of External Engagement and Media, World Animal Protection, said: “The current NCQG text is a disgrace and must be rejected – it fails utterly in both quantity and quality, abandoning small farmers, ecosystems and wildlife to their fate. In these final hours, we need a massive surge in grant-based financing, or we face an irreversible ecological collapse. The world doesn’t need empty promises; it demands bold action. Those who feed the world deserve justice, yet billions of animals remain condemned to profit-driven factory farms, and the devastation of our biodiversity only accelerates. Enough with the shallow excuses – it’s time to act.”
Marjorie Pamintuan, Finance Campaigner, Recourse, said: “There is still no new real money on the table. Instead of paying the climate finance they owe, developed countries are sanctioning the multilateral development banks’ abandonment of their development mandate, enabling private sector profit-making out of the climate crisis and continued support for fossil fuels. It is crucial that the new climate finance goal is not handed over to the multilateral development banks, which are not set up to deliver grant-based, public finance for those who need it most: women, workers, young people and vulnerable communities.”
Fred Njehu, Pan-African Political Strategist, Greenpeace Africa, said: “While developed nations continue to dodge their responsibilities, our communities are drowning, starving, and losing their homes to a crisis they didn’t create. We refuse to accept a hollow finance deal that betrays climate justice and mocks the polluter pays principle. To my African colleagues – this is our moment to stand united. No deal is better than a deal that condemns our continent to further climate devastation. Developed nations must pay their fair share now.”
Felix Finkbeiner, Founder of Plant-for-the-Planet, said: “Nobody is paying up for the rainforest. At the beginning of 2024, the US pledged $500 million for the Amazon Fund. Since the US election we know, at most $100 million will actually be paid. We desperately need other countries to step in to fill this essential gap.The 2022 IPCC Report laid out that it is impossible to limit temperature rise to 1.5°, without vastly improving forest conservation.
“Despite holding out hope until the last minute of this Finance COP, we have not heard any meaningful commitments from global north countries to fund the preservation of the world’s rainforests.”
Soomin Han, Climate Finance Policy Analyst, Climate Action Network Canada, said: “This latest text is a limp, disappointing word salad with zero nutritional value or seasoning. It contains no commitment for public, grant-based non-debt-inducing finance, or for scaling up efforts on adaptation and loss and damage. Contrary to the spirit of the Paris Agreement, the new text shifts responsibility to the Global South and shows no real effort to restore the trust that had been broken by the failures of the $100 billion goal. This mess of a text isn’t what we ordered, and Parties here need to send it back to the kitchen.”
Dr. Rachel Cleetus, Policy Director for the Climate and Energy Programme, Union of Concerned Scientists, said: “With a paltry climate finance offer of $250 billion annually, and a deadline to deliver as late as 2035, richer nations including E.U. countries and the United States are dangerously close to betraying the Paris Agreement. This is nowhere near the robust and desperately needed funding lower income nations deserve to combat climate change. The central demand coming into COP29 was for a strong, science-aligned climate finance commitment, which this appalling text utterly fails to provide.
“Wealthier nations seem content to shamefully renege on their responsibility and cave in to fossil fuel interests while unjustly foisting the costs of deadly climate extremes on countries that have contributed the least to the climate crisis. Instead of actions to undermine trust and thwart progress, it’s urgent for developed countries to agree to a meaningful scale of funding that treats people on the frontlines of climate change with humanity and respect.”
Hari Krishna Nibanupudi, Global Climate Change and Agieng Adviser, Help Age International, said: “The latest text, New Collective Quantified Goal on climate finance, falls short of the spirit and will of the Paris Agreement. Specifically, Section 8 and its clauses allow for alternative sources, creating potential escape routes for developed countries to avoid the real cash guarantee of $250 billion. Additionally, the recall of transparency commitments in Sections 27 and 28 undermines the principles of transparency and accountability critical to ensuring the equitable implementation of climate finance goals.”
Catherine Pettengell, Executive Director of CAN-UK, said: “Developed countries have once again failed their maths homework. The $250bn on the table from them makes no sense in the context of the actual and escalating costs of the climate crisis and fails any test of fairness. It is completely unacceptable and an insult to countries and communities on the frontline of the climate crisis not of their making. How can this proposal be considered an ambitious ramping up of action to match the scale of the crisis? Must do better.”
Salomé Lehtman, Project and Advocacy Advisor, Mercy Corps, said: “The latest text on the NCQG is unacceptable. Agreeing a figure of $250 billion mobilised per year by 2035 would not only be inadequate but shameful. Adjusted for inflation, it represents virtually no increase in public finance from developed countries beyond the $100 billion commitment made 15 years ago.
“Worse still, the proposal shifts responsibility to the private sector to mobilise trillions, despite overwhelming evidence that private finance cannot be relied upon to deliver equitable climate solutions. This text is a betrayal of trust, a betrayal of science, and a betrayal of rich countries’ legal obligations.
“The failure to put loss and damage on par with mitigation and adaptation is a glaring omission. Communities on the frontlines of climate change need reliable, accessible finance to recover from climate-induced disasters – not vague mentions in a text.
“This text would lock in insufficient climate action for the next decade at a time when incremental measures are no longer enough. It is time for rich countries to step up and pay up.”
Laurie van der Burg, Global Public Finance Campaign co-Manager, Oil Change International, said: “This text is an absolute embarrassment. It’s the equivalent of governments handing the keys to the firetruck to the arsonists. The vague $1.3 trillion investment target is not to be relied on and the $250 billion goal is not debt-free. Previous suggestions to end fossil fuel handouts and make polluters pay have all been axed. This amounts to a cop-out for polluters and allows rich countries to dodge their responsibilities by relying on the private sector and even developing countries to cover the bill, creating a debt-trap for countries most vulnerable to the climate crisis.
“We know rich countries can pay up the trillions they owe to the Global South by ending fossil fuel handouts, taxing the super-rich, and changing unfair global financial rules. We need a dramatic change in direction if we want a fighting chance to leave Baku with a finance deal that can support the fair fossil fuel phaseout that we need to avoid breaching 1.5°C.”
Teresa Anderson, the Global Lead on Climate Justice at ActionAid International, said: “This new text is absolutely heartless.
“The developed countries most responsible for causing climate destruction have turned their backs on climate-hit nations. The document offers no guarantees of real grant-based finance to those on the front lines. Instead of holding the developed countries that caused the climate crisis accountable, it shifts the burden onto developing countries and the private sector. Essentially, this draft text says ‘sorry, you’re on your own,’ to those on the frontlines.
“The Global South needs to keep up the fight. The whole planet needs them to stand up for the trillions of dollars in grants each year needed to keep the planet safe.”
Safa’ Al Jayoussi, Climate Justice Lead, Oxfam International, said: “This is a shameful failure of leadership. The COP29 Presidency’s top-down ‘take-it-or-leave-it’ approach has sidelined progressive voices. All the while rich countries boycott climate justice by refusing to pay up and putting only false solutions on the table. No deal would be better than a bad deal, but let’s be clear – there is only one option for those grappling with the harshest impacts of climate collapse: trillions, not billions, in public and grants-based finance.”
Alun McDonald, Islamic Relief Worldwide, said: “This new draft is an insult to people all over the world. We need a bold new finance deal, but instead rich countries are offering pocket change. The gap between the daily reality for people on the frontlines of the climate emergency and the negotiation rooms here at COP has never been so wide.
“Given inflation, this proposed new goal isn’t even an increase on old deals. Commitments to phasing out fossil fuels and keeping global heating below 1.5 degrees are being watered down. There’s far too much emphasis on profit-driven private finance. Overall, this latest draft is still a million miles away from what is needed.”
Dr. Maria Ron Balsera, Executive Director at the Centre for Economic and Social Rights, said: “After three years and two weeks of negotiations, the derisory $250 billion financial commitment offered is a profound betrayal, particularly for developing countries, which are bearing the brunt of a crisis they did not create. This was the Finance COP – the moment for developed countries to to rise to their moral and historical responsibility and fulfil their obligations. Instead, we’ve seen empty promises, lame excuses and infuriating delays. Let’s get a decent NCQG deal done!”
Harjeet Singh, Global Engagement Director, Fossil Fuel Non-Proliferation Treaty Initiative, said: “It is a disgrace that despite full awareness of the devastating climate crises affecting developing nations and the staggering costs of climate action – amounting to trillions – developed nations have only proposed a meagre $250 billion per year. To add insult to injury, this paltry sum includes loans and lacks the crucial commitment to grant-based finance, which is essential for developing nations to both address climate impacts and transition away from fossil fuels. The trust has been shattered; developing countries must stand firm. Rejecting this is a stand for dignity – no deal is better than a bad deal, especially when it disrespects those bearing the brunt of a crisis they did not create.”
Erin Ryan, Senior International Campaigner, Climate Action Network Australia, said: “Pacific Island negotiators have spines made of steel. Any developed countries who accept this finance deal have hearts made of the same stuff. $250 billion annually, with a 2035 deadline to deliver, is a pittance compared to the costs of actioning the transition from fossil fuels, funding adaptation and recovering from incalculable loss and damage in our region – let alone the wider Global South. Any acquiescence to this deal is a betrayal of the frontline negotiators here fighting in good faith, a betrayal of the world’s existing agreement to transition away from fossil fuels, and most importantly a betrayal of the people.”
Ann Harrison, Climate Justice Adviser, Amnesty International, said: “This is a shameful proposal that is torching the human rights of those on the front line of climate harms. High income states that are the most responsible for the mess we are in are failing to meet their legal obligations to provide adequate international cooperation and assistance to states in need of support. The money is there – eliminating fossil fuel subsidies, taxing polluters and the very rich is the way to provide the much higher levels of grants based public finance that lower income states have shown they need for mitigation and adaptation to protect the planet for us all, and to respond to ever increasing loss and damage.”
Bridget Burns, Executive Director, Women’s Environment and Development Organisation (WEDO), said: “The NCQG text reeks of cowardice – a monument to the hypocrisy of the COP process. In 2024, global military spending exceeds $2.4 trillion, yet climate action receives a pittance. Feminist organisations, Indigenous Peoples, and women and girls in all their diversity hold communities together, driving solutions systematically starved of resources. The current system doesn’t fail them – it sabotages them. Justice demands public finance – massive, unrestricted, and immediate – flowing directly to frontline communities, free from red tape. Anything less is complicity in humanity’s destruction. Redirect trillions from destruction to survival, or admit you’ve chosen profit over life.”
Liane Schalatek, Associate Director, Heinrich Boell Foundation Washington, said: “With this proposal, the Paris Agreement is essentially dead and the great bargain from Paris, that the ratcheting up of ambition for collective climate action requires a commensurate raising of the ambition of finance provided for developing countries, cancelled by heartless Global North countries abdicating their historical responsibility. Not polluters are being made to pay, but the people in developing countries.
“The proposed structure of the goal would ask the Global South instead to contribute in several ways, while only vaguely promising that developed countries take the lead in mobilising finance at an amount, which is stuck at the inadequate ambition level of 2009 when the 100 bn goal was set. With no reference to human rights and gender equality, the proposal continues the march backwards away from climate justice and will make it even harder for the most affected communities to get access to finance. No climate justice without human rights.”
Mohamed Adow, Director, Power Shift Africa, said: “Our expectations were low, but this is a slap in the face. No developing country will fall for this. What trick is the presidency trying to pull? They’ve already disappointed everyone, but they have now angered and offended the developing world. It seems that building an ambitious climate finance outcome in Baku is not the ballgame this presidency is playing. The figure of $250 billion is about 20% of what developing countries have asked for. Are we really settling for a fifth of the ambition that is needed to tackle the climate crises? We need developed countries to grab the bull by the horns and put forward a number that reflects the actual needs of developing countries. Rich countries need to bypass this president and negotiate eye to eye with developing countries.”
Gerry Arances, Executive Director, Centre for Energy, Ecology, and Development, said: “We started COP29 with alarm that the outcome of the US presidential elections would deter global climate action – apparently, the halls of COP29 are already flooded with many Trumps. The $250 billion a year is a cruel condemnation to death for the world’s vulnerable peoples – it barely begins to cover what developing nations need to adapt to worsening climate impacts, account for decades of loss and damage, and mitigate more catastrophic climate chaos. We wonder how governments of historically polluting nations still dare show their faces with claims of climate leadership and commitment. Communities of the Global South will not allow our survival to be dictated by this text. We will not allow this atrocity to trump climate action while perpetuating the many injustices done to our people by developed nations.”
Chiara Martinelli, Director, Climate Action Network (CAN) Europe, said: “This is not even breadcrumbs. A $250 billion annual target by 2035, spread across all actors, is not even breadcrumbs. With no guarantee for new grants and minimal accountability for historic polluters – it’s just putting the burden on those most vulnerable.
“At the beginning of COP29, the EU said we can count on them. Since then, we have seen only words and no action. Rich countries must return to the negotiation room to step up, pay up, and deliver real climate finance. This text is unacceptable. We will fight until the last minute for an ambitious deal.”
Gaïa Febvre, international policy coordinator, RAC France, said: “This text is disrespectful! 2024 was the hottest year on record and climate disasters continue to intensify. Climate change is killing people, rendering entire territories uninhabitable, and after three years of technical negotiations, the countries of the North dare to give us a ridiculous figure? We refuse to believe it!
“Northern countries must assume their responsibilities and pay; developing countries must stand firm and demand fairness.
“The agreement must make polluters pay to stop their emissions and make them accountable, instead of passing the burden on to the most vulnerable, who pay with their lives. The “polluter pays” principle must be brought back into the text.
“An honest agreement is still possible, developed countries: you can still leave this COP with your heads held high: just know that we, the NGOs, will be fighting right up to the last minute, alongside the most vulnerable populations!”
Maria Hammer, Campaigner, Südwind (Austria), said: “The text presented just now is an absolute disaster. $250 billion until 2035 cannot be taken seriously, it represents, if anything, an inflation adjustment of the previous inadequate financing. To only implement the figure of 1,3 trillion by 2035 seems to postpone the upscaling of climate finance for more than ten years. We call on the EU and other Global North parties to urgently step up and come up with a serious proposal reflecting their historical climate debt and responsibility for climate finance for mitigation, adaptation and loss & damage.
Martin Krenn, Spokesperson for the Austrian Alliance for Climate Justice, said: “This fist number by developed countries of only $250 billion comes at the last day of the COP and it’s a slap in the face for the poorest countries and for the development of ambitious nationally determined contributions. It doesn’t represent an increase to the current goal and would exacerbate the debt crisis in the poorest countries. Furthermore, the 1,3 trillion number is meaningless as it includes every kind of finance flow and cannot be accounted for. Parties need to return to the negotiating rooms immediately and come up with a result that will actually save lives and enable the transition to climate neutrality in the Global South.”
Sinéad Loughran, Climate Justice Policy & Advocacy Advisor, Trócaire, said: “This proposal would further entrench the triple-edged injustice for climate vulnerable countries; the intensifying impacts, the bill they are left to foot in the absence of needs-based, adequate climate finance, and the diversion of money from basic services such as healthcare and education to pay for climate impacts and loan repayments. It is an insult, and reflects a step backwards in ambition, and a complete disregard for the impacts being felt by those who have done nothing to cause this crisis. It flies in the face of climate justice and the responsibilities of rich countries.”
Nadia Cornejo, Vice-présidente, Climate Coalition Belgium, said: “We thought the fog was finally going to lift over Baku but it’s the sky that’s falling. Neither the quality nor the quantity is there. The $250 billion proposed between now and 2035 is peanuts when you consider that the countries of the South will need more than twice that amount to recover from floods, heat waves and other climatic disasters. Without another string to the bow of the countries of the North, COP29 will well and truly end in failure.
Lien Vandamme, Senior Campaigner, Centre for International Environmental Law, said: “This new text is the definition of a bad deal. The peanuts committed to will deny any form of justice for those on the frontlines of the climate crisis, and push developing countries deeper into debt. The vague language on sources isn’t fooling anyone – wealthy countries do not want to pay and are shifting the burden even more onto climate-vulnerable countries.
“The new text entirely denies wealthy countries’ obligations to remedy the massive harm that the climate crisis is causing, providing grants-based finance for loss and damage and full reparation. The removal of all references to human rights is ugly and demonstrates how they are too often used as a bargaining chip in this process, rather than upheld as the obligations they are. Without human rights safeguards, a climate finance goal – especially one that encompasses private finance and opens the door to carbon markets – risks compounding harms to communities and ecosystems. Countries should reject this text.”
Marie Cosquer, Advocacy analyst- food systems and climate, Action against Hunger, said: “Global North countries should be ashamed. They have forgotten the very real weight of their climate debt. The human face of this debt is the many lives lost on climate change impacts and the rise of hunger. The finance goal cannot cynically ignore the needs and must clearly prioritise additional public finance that will be accessible by the communities, such as small-scale food producers, who, while bearing the brunt of climate change, are the ones nourishing the planet.”
Least Developed Countries (LDC) Group: “We are deeply concerned with the text released this afternoon on the New Collective Quantified Goal (NCQG) on climate finance. It dilutes the existing commitments of the developed countries and does not reflect the ambition needed for global climate action. Our Group is alarmed to note that our three years of hard work is not reflected in the proposed draft text.
“The text is weak on many issues: it does not take into account the issues of most vulnerable countries, particularly LDCs and SIDS, the quantum is far less than needed, it offers no guarantee of minimum allocation for our groups. Support for Loss and Damage remains conspicuously absent in the new goal. There is also no minimum share of the goal flowing through operating entities and the funds established under the Convention and serving the Paris Agreement.
“The language on access is weak and lacks concrete commitments to improve access by the most vulnerable. Similarly, the definition of climate finance is missing, leaving ambiguity in accounting.
“The text on implementation of the Global Stocktake outcome, that we all collectively agreed in Dubai last year, requires more work. We must ensure there is a clear follow-up on implementation of all the Global Stocktake outcomes, which now includes just as an option in the text. We must implement what we all collectively agreed and ensure there is provision for the means of implementation.
“We need to ensure that our ambition to limit temperature rise to 1.5°C remains front and centre, otherwise our survival is threatened. That means a strong call for raising ambition through updated NDCs, and to ensure support for the NDC implementation. Right now, all of these features are missing from the text.”
As COP29 draws to a close in Baku, artists, scientists, faith leaders and climate advocates have come together in a last push to call for greater commitment in the delivery of climate finance and an actionable plan for a just transition away from fossil fuels.
Fossil fuel pollution from a coal power station
During a press conference on Friday, November 22, 2024, civil society experts expressed disappointment with what was termed a “lack of commitment” by developed nations, and launched an open letter signed by over 100 climate champions from all walks of life calling on world leaders to chart a plan for a truly just transition to a cleaner, fairer and safer future.
The analysis follows the release of a revised text on Thursday, that was hailed for recognising the need to prioritise grants but criticised for a host of reasons among them failing to include the scale of the new finance goal the lack of clear financial sub-goals for mitigation, adaptation, and addressing loss and damage for developing nations.
Given the bumpy COP negotiations, the open letter calls for further international cooperation towards a complementary global plan for the transition in the form of a Fossil Fuel Non-Proliferation Treaty – a new binding framework that will help achieve the goals of the Paris Agreement without rich, polluting nations calling the shots in the negotiating rooms.
Signed by over 100 individuals, including actors, writers, influencers, youth and faith leaders, scientists, health professionals, activists and civil society leaders, the letter proposes a stop to the expansion of fossil fuels, a fair and equitable phase out of existing fossil fuel production and a financed transition to clean energy.
Scientist David Suzuki, a signatory of the letter, said: “The science has been in for decades and now we have surpassed so many planetary boundaries that civilisation itself is at grave risk. We must act as one species and stop using economic, political, legal and religious excuses to block action.”
Actress Alysia Reiner said: “There are solutions. Look for them. Invent them. Imagine them. Invest in them and support them. The Fossil Fuel Non-Proliferation Treaty is one of them. It needs all our support. Now.”
Writer and activist, Rebecca Solnit, said: “We know what we need to do. We know what the stakes are-everything for everyone for centuries to come. We know who is trying to stop us from doing it. The true purpose of COP is to orchestrate doing it-lead a swift transition away from fossil fuels and protect the earth, which no country or oil company has the right to destroy. So do it.”
Mitzi Jonelle Tan, climate justice activist, said: “With a climate denier as President-elect of one of the biggest nations in the world, we need other governments to step up for the people and planet. As with previous international treaties like the Land Mines treaty, we need governments who are dedicated to climate action, equality, and a living planet to support the call for a fossil fuel treaty. Our lives depend on this generation of leaders ending the fossil fuel era.”
Around the COP29 negotiations, Harjeet Singh, Global Engagement Director for the Fossil Fuel Non-Proliferation Treaty Initiative, said: “On this last official day of COP29, we are frustrated, angry, and exhausted by decades of games played by developed countries. While this was supposed to be the ‘Finance COP’ – a moment to agree on new climate finance goals critical for our planet’s survival, we’re trapped in deadlock and deep divisions. Developing nations are demanding $1.3 trillion annually to confront the climate crisis, and even the latest draft acknowledges the need for trillions.
“Yet, after three years and countless high-level meetings, developed countries have offered nothing – not a single figure. Their priority remains profits at the expense of global equity and justice. This bad faith negotiating by wealthy nations is not just a dangerous waste of precious time; it is a grave betrayal. We’re going into overtime yet again, because justice and fairness have been kicked down the road for far too long. The world is watching, and history will not forget.”
Just hours before the conclusion of COP29 on climate change, more than 80 countries vulnerable to climate change and that urgently need the finance are calling for an additional effort to provide and mobilise $1.3 trillion per year, moving beyond the $100 billion agreed upon in 2009.
Chairs of the Independent Association of Latin America and the Caribbean (AILAC), the African Group of Negotiators (AGN), the Alliance of Small Island States (AOSIS), and the Least Developed Countries (LDC) Group note that a clear mandate is demanded to comprehensively transform the global financial system and apply measures to bridge the finance gap and meet the urgent needs of developing countries suffering the worst effects of climate change
Ali Mohamed, Chair, African Group of Negotiators (AGN)
After a week and a half of intense negotiations, the Independent Association of Latin America and the Caribbean (AILAC), the African Group of Negotiators (AGN), the Alliance of Small Island States (AOSIS), and the Least Developed Countries (LDC) Group propose a path to the presidency of COP29 to definitively resolve discussions regarding the New Collective Quantified Goal on Finance and achieve the $1.3 trillion needed to enable developing countries to undertake climate action and face its adverse effects.
The proposal, presented by more than 80 countries vulnerable to climate change, is based on making an additional effort to increase from the insufficient $100 billion agreed upon in 2009 to $1.3 trillion per year. These funds would cover the needs in the regions and develop necessary actions to counteract and adapt to the effects of climate change, and address loss and damage, which have exacerbated its impacts and the number of affected people on the planet.
The Call from the Countries
For their part, developing countries demand greater political will, reiterating that the New Goal should be delivered through grants and highly concessional finance to avoid worsening the debt crisis. Regarding resources, we emphasise that they must be additional, accessible, affordable, predictable, sustainable, transformative, and tangible, considering the high cost of capital, limited fiscal space, and unsustainable debt; we cannot afford empty promises. It is necessary and possible to provide and mobilise real financing to developing.
This would enable achieving of the $1.3 trillion per year target. There are innovative strategies to breach the finance gap, including fiscal measures by developed countries such as redirecting fossil fuel subsidies, to raise new public resources and re-orient current existing public expending to as much $1.3 trillion per year. We jointly request to work together on a roadmap to make it happen.
The Lagos State Government has advocated early warning system as a necessary environmental protection strategy against climate change effects.
Governor Babajide Sanwo-Olu of Lagos State
Dr Babatunde Ajayi, the General Manager, Lagos State Environmental Protection Agency (LASEPA), made this known in a statement made available on agency’s X handle on Thursday.
It was also stated on the X handle that he made the call at the close of the International Climate Change Conference held in Baku, Azerbaijan popularly called COP 29.
Ajayi, who delivered a compelling presentation at the International Climate Change Conference, emphasised the critical role of integrating green skills and proactive measures for a sustainable future.
He spoke on the topic: “Climate Mobility Discourse: Early Warning Systems as a Worthy Investment in Environmental Protection against Climate Displacement.”
Ajayi highlighted the importance of early warning systems in mitigating the adverse effects of climate change.
Ajayi noted that climate change triggers a range of environmental and public health challenges.
“This includes coastal erosion, flooding, cyclical disease patterns, and vector migration,” he said.
He noted that early warning systems through data gathering would help to protect lives and property from adverse climate change and other environmental disasters.
He cited LASEPA’s weekly air quality monitoring initiatives as a prime example of using data to predict, detect and prevent environmental hazards through urgent action plans.
He said the state government, through LASEPA and other relevant agencies, was committed to deploying more early warning systems to prepare for and respond swiftly to climate change-related disasters for human safety.
“If we anticipate floods or droughts, the early warning systems would help people to migrate early, thereby, reducing the risk of lives and minimising the impact of such disasters,” he stated.
Ajayi further explained that the understanding cyclical vector migration patterns through the use of data could help the government to strengthen health systems and implement structures to mitigate risks, such as flooding.
He stated that LASEPA’s focus on climate mobility, ensuring that communities are relocated with dignity and provided with sustainable options for a better living.
He reiterated the need for strategic planning, public awareness, and robust policy frameworks to address the growing challenges posed by climate change.
Ajayi reaffirmed the government’s commitment to enhancing resilience through proactive measures, data-driven decision-making, and collaboration with local and international stakeholders.
The Federal Government of Nigeria has reiterated commitment to promote hydrogen as a clean energy source, with vast potential to reduce greenhouse gas emissions, improve energy efficiency and boost economic growth.
Minister of State Petroleum Resources (Gas), Mr Ekperikpe Ekpo
Amb. Nicholas Ella, Permanent Secretary, Ministry of Petroleum Resources, stated this in a statement on Thursday, November 21, 2024, to highlight the importance President Bola Tinubu’s administration placed on the development of clean energy in the country.
Ella said that the country would host the inaugural international hydrogen conference at the State House Banquet Hall, Aso Villa, Abuja, to expand investment opportunities on hydrogen.
“The conference will unlock the potential of hydrogen to power and build a resilient energy future for Nigeria,” Ella said.
The permanent secretary said that the conference, with the theme “Building a Hydrogen Economy for Nigeria”, would hold from Nov. 26 to Nov. 28, 2024.
“The conference is being organised in collaboration with the Foundation for Sustainable Social Responsibility in Emerging Africa (FOSSREA).
“It is aimed at promoting hydrogen as a clean energy source, reducing emissions, creating jobs and above all boosting economic growth.
“The conference will convene over 1,000 attendees, including public and private sector investors from Africa, Europe, Asia and the U.S.A. It will foster partnerships towards shaping and securing Nigeria’s energy future.
“Highlights of the Conference will include – Cutting-edge research and innovative technologies, expert insights on investment opportunities, exhibitions of latest trends and innovations and networking sessions with decision-makers, industry leaders and policymakers.
“Discussions will focus on blue and green hydrogen production, investment opportunities, supply chain development, policy frameworks, technology transfer, infrastructure development and unlocking Nigeria’s hydrogen potential.
“The conference promises to be a remarkable turning point in Nigeria ‘s energy landscape and every stakeholder is therefore warmly invited to participate effectively in the conference,” he said.
According to Ella, the conference will have the Minister of State Petroleum Resources (Gas), Ekperikpe Ekpo, as the chief host, while the Ministers of Foreign Affairs and Industry, Trade and Investment are expected to be in attendance.
“Top policy makers, Directors in the Ministry, as well as Chief Executive Officers (CEOs) and Directors from the Agencies under the supervision of the Ministry are expected to attend.”
Despite acknowledging the widening financial gaps and barriers faced by developing nations, the NCQG text, says the Pan African Climate Justice Alliance (PACJA) in a reaction to the document, points out that it lacks meaningful commitments from developed countries
Dr Mithika Mwenda, Executive Director, Pan African Climate Justice Alliance (PACJA)
In less than 48 hours, COP29 climate negotiations will come to a close. In the wee hours of the night, a new text on the New Collective Quantified Goal (NCQG) was released and it is profoundly disappointing.
We are outraged by this latest iteration, which utterly fails to meet the expectations of many. Despite acknowledging the widening financial gaps and barriers faced by developing nations, the text lacks meaningful commitments from developed countries.
It is the AGN which christened COP29 as the “COP of climate finance”. There was a reason for this – it raised the expectations of the vulnerable communities particularly from Africa, and it was seen as beacon of hope especially on the ever-elusive climate finance agenda.
Africa and its allies within the G77 and China negotiating block are clear on their demand for $1.3 trillion quantum of climate finance that is new, additional, predictable, grant-based, and non-debtinducing to address the existential threats of climate change. This quantum is informed by needs of vulnerable communities in developing countries.
It is disheartening that just a few hours before the curtains fall on COP29, Parties have not agreed on the most-awaited quantum as essential element for NCQG. Paragraph 6 of the text estimates the costed needs in Nationally Determined Contributions of developing countries at $5.036 – 6.876 trillion up until 2030.
We are greatly concerned that paragraph 39 of the draft text allegedly driven by developed countries proposes at least $220 billion for LDCs and at least $39 billion for SIDS. In addition to this being ridiculously low and undoubtful on the format with which the figures were reached, we find this throwing of figures as veiled attempt to use money to fragment poor countries based on their vulnerabilities.
The text also cynically prioritises concessional loans and mixed sources (public private and innovative sources), shifting the burden onto the very countries least responsible for the climate crisis and most impacted by its devastating effects.
Based on the foregoing, we thus demand the following:
1) The Parties to immediately revise the released text to address all the issues presented by the AGN, which they seem to blatantly ignore.
2) We reiterate that the goal must reflect the proposal by the AGN on provision of least $1.3 trillion from 2025-2035 to address adaptation, mitigation and loss and damage needs.
3) The quantum must be mobilised by developed countries and from public sources. We vehemently oppose inclusion of funds mobilised as loans, “Innovative and alternative sources” or private sector investments in reporting on delivery of the quantum.
Adaptation experts from Africa and the Global South have contested the text on Global Goal on Adaptation (GGA) and the draft text of the New Collective Quantified Goal (NCQG), describing them as insufficient and underwhelming for lacking clear targets on adaptation and loss and damage and for including ‘‘extreme proposals’’ that go against the Paris Agreement.
COP29, Baku, Azerbaijan
The experts have also faulted the text for failing to link the GGA and the NCQG to climate finance. Overall, the text falls short of expectations on many fronts for a ‘‘finance COP’’, they say.
Millions of communities in the Global South have borne the harshest effects of climate change, including ferocious floods, dreadful droughts and cataclysmic cyclones.
Many had hoped that this COP29 would yield the much-needed finance to enable populations in vulnerable countries to adapt to and build resilience against climate shocks.
Contention with the GGA text and draft on the NCQG
Specifically, they have raised the following issues with the text saying it:
● Lacks a specific figure on the climate finance goal
● Lacks the quantum of the provision and mobilisation goal
● Lacks clear targets for adaptation and loss and damage
● Includes proposals that violate the principles of the Paris Agreement
● Fails to mention women as a vulnerable segment of society on social inclusion
● Contains weak statements like grant financing being used for adaptation and loss and damage ‘‘to the largest extent possible’’
● Lack of linkage between the GGA text and the draft on the NCQG
● Fails to connect resources to solutions like the UAE Framework for Global Climate Resilience.
In a reaction to the new text on the NCQG on climate finance, Mohamed Adow, executive director of Power Shift Africa, called it a blank cheque and asked developed countries to put actual figures on the table.
According to him, it is only by putting specific numbers to the goal that negotiations at COP29 will move forward smoothly.
He said: “The new text rightly diagnoses the climate problem, including the required finance for adaptation and energy transition, but glaringly omits what the rich countries will actually provide to developing countries. The elephant in the room is the lack of specific numbers in the text. This is the ‘finance COP’. We came here to talk about money. You measure money with numbers. We need a cheque but all we have right now is a blank piece of paper.
“The text includes some important signals on grant-based financing, and the need to avoid debt inducing instruments. Developed countries now urgently need to fill in the blanks and put their finance card on the table to move the negotiations forward.”
Amy Giliam Thorp, Senior Adaptation and Resilience Policy Advisor, Power Shift Africa, said: ‘‘The latest NCQG text falls far short of expectations for a ‘finance COP’, particularly on adaptation and loss and damage. Without clear, quantified goals with no sub-goals for adaptation, mitigation or Loss & Damage, developed countries have glaringly failed in their leadership role at this COP. While the text mentions grant-based finance and non-debt instruments, the language lacks the strength needed to drive real adaptation action.
“Alarmingly, it remains silent on financing the Global Goal on Adaptation and the UAE Framework for Global Climate Resilience. The NCQG must include a quantified adaptation sub-goal and a strong reference to the finance needed to achieve GGA targets lest adaptation finance is deprioritised again.’’
Juma Ignatius, Senior Adaptation Policy Advisor, Africa Group of Negotiators, said: ‘‘Even as we come to the homestretch of COP29, we must not forget that the Global Goal on Adaptation remains a key priority. The means of implementation (MoI) is crucial for the full implementation of the GGA targets in line with the commitments of the climate dialogue. Developed countries have an obligation to provide the means to implement climate action by providing finance that is adequate, predictable and based on grants.
“All financing for adaptation must also be compatible with and responsive to the evolving needs of developing countries. This COP was supposed to bring parity between adaptation and mitigation. We did not get that.’’
Cristina Rumbaitis, Senior Adaptation and Resilience Advisor, UN Foundation, said: ‘‘The text is very poor and disappointing, especially on adaptation. First, the floor for adaptation is out. Secondly, there is no reference to the Global Goal on Adaptation or the UAE Framework for Global Climate Resilience. Thirdly, there is only language around balancing between mitigation, adaptation and loss and damage. This could further reduce funding for adaptation.
“There is some good language on qualitative elements and calls for a floor for adaptation for LDCs and SIDs from all relevant actors and financial mechanisms. There are also very weak statements like “grant financing should be used for adaptation and loss and damage to the largest extent possible”. We had hoped for more.”
Bertha Argueta, Senior Advisor, Climate Finance and Development, Germanwatch, said: ‘‘The text presented is still far from the outcome we had hoped for from this COP. It lacks the key elements of the quantum of the provision and mobilisation goal. Without this key piece of the puzzle, very little progress can be made elsewhere. Developing countries have put their proposal on the table, but developed countries are still holding back, making a compromise difficult to reach.
“Clear targets for adaptation and loss and damage are also missing. However, there is still time to work on a goal that respects the Paris Agreement; a goal that is responsive to the needs and priorities of developing countries, particularly for adaptation and loss and damage.’’
Lina Yassin, Adaptation Negotiator, IED, said: ‘‘It is deeply concerning to see the NCQG missing from the GGA text. This COP process has turned its back on the very communities these climate negotiations are meant to protect and provide for. How can we not connect resources to real solutions like the UAE Framework for Global Climate Resilience at a ‘finance COP’? Without this link, we risk walking away from COP29 with empty promises while vulnerable communities in Africa and elsewhere in the Global South continue to suffer the harshest consequences of the climate crisis.”
Ndivile Mokoena, Project Coordinator, Gender CC, said: “From the text, it looks like developing countries might have to spend their resources to finance climate adaptation. The language on gender and support for vulnerable members of society is also very weak. Women take care of their families, communities and environment. Shockingly, however, women are not mentioned in the paragraph on social inclusion. The context-specific nature of adaptation action and national circumstances have not been recognised either. The goal and vision of this text are not clear, and neither is the timeframe.’’
Fredrick Otieno, Programmes Associate, Power Shift Africa, said: ‘‘Adaptation has been relegated to the backburner in the climate discourse and in financing. As a result, whatever quantum Parties will agree on may not resolve the endemic underfinancing of adaptation. The current GGA text lacks a clear linkage with the draft on the NCQG. It appears that negotiators from Global North consigned all finance items, including the means of implementation (MoI), to the NCQG.
“It is equally disturbing that the current text lacks a specific figure on the climate finance goal. This puts ambitious climate action in jeopardy. Only indicators for tracking finance flows towards the GGA targets would catalyse more ambitious adaptation investments.’’
Harjeet Singh, Global Engagement Director for the Fossil Fuel Non-Proliferation Treaty Initiative, said: “The revised draft text, while more streamlined, presents a spectrum of options – some good, some bad, and some outright ugly. It recognises the need to prioritise grants but remains silent on the critical scale of the new finance goal, instead shifting pressure onto developing countries to mobilise more domestic resources. We must focus not only on the vast sums required – trillions, as acknowledged – but on ensuring these funds are provided as grants, not loans, to shield nations most impacted by climate change from further financial burdens.
“Alarmingly, the text lacks clear financial sub-goals for mitigation, adaptation, and addressing loss and damage – areas where needs have skyrocketed while resources remain scarce. True support for a just transition away from fossil fuels must include robust public finance, not hollow words.”
Tasneem Essop, Executive Director, Climate Action Network International, said: “The latest draft NCQG text remains glaringly incomplete without the concrete numbers for the finance goal – the very cornerstone of any agreement at COP29 and the unwavering demand of developing countries throughout this summit. Developed countries knew they were expected to arrive in Baku ready to agree on a meaningful climate finance goal. Instead, they continue to play games with the lives of people on the frontlines of climate disaster, manipulating and undermining these critical negotiations. They need to put the numbers on the table now, or we run the risk of not getting an outcome.
“Developing countries should push to ensure that public grants-based funding is prioritised by developed countries, and that there is robust architecture for the monitoring and accountability for the delivery of these public funds. After 10 days, we’re still stuck at the starting line. But the race isn’t over yet – there’s still time to cross the finish line. Everything is still to play for.”
Joseph Sikulu, Pacific Director, 350.org and Pacific Climate Warrior, said:“We hoped to see a draft text today that would show rich nations putting their money where their mouth is and responding to the demands from the Global South. What we got is a text with no clear grant based core money. Nothing less than one trillion dollars in grants per year will be enough to see those most impacted by climate change on a just transition towards a safe, equitable future. Rich countries must stop dithering, and start delivering – this is not charity, it’s time for them to pay their debt.”
Sanjay Vashist, Director, Climate Action Network South Asia, said: “We are disappointed to see no clear NCQG numbers in the draft text that has been streamlined and includes some strong options and good elements, however our biggest concern is that this text explicitly tries to erode all references to historical polluters’ obligation to pay under Paris Agreement and is an attempt to prepare the ground for a private sector led global finance goal with minimal accountability on developed countries. That said, as always the good elements are bracketed, and we hope that in the next 48 hours the developed countries demonstrate ambition and commitment to deliver at least $1.3 trillion the 1.5 C goals of the Paris Agreement.”
Gerry Arances, Executive Director, Centre for Energy, Ecology, and Development (CEED) – Philippines, said: “The clock is ticking for developed nations to put forward a finance goal that begins to give justice to the death and devastation suffered by vulnerable peoples of the Global South. In Southeast Asia, coal and gas still received nearly three times as much financing as renewables since the Paris Agreement, fueled largely by Global Northern firms and governments. This, despite nearly 400 GW of renewables already being proposed across the region. There’s no lack of finance to confront the climate crisis; there’s only the brazen lack of will from historical polluters to pay up on their accountabilities.”
Anthony Wolimbwa, National Coordinator, Climate Action Network Uganda said:“Our hope as most vulnerable and countries at risk lay in the magic quantum. As it turns out, we may only count the number of endless meetings and not the much-needed financial numbers. Our hope is deeming, and we need the world to act in solidarity and move beyond rhetoric to real action. The Global North must Pay up their climate debt.”
Marlene Achoki, Global Policy Lead, CARE International, said: “The presidency proposal draft text offers a range of options, and it lacks specific numerical targets to establish a quantified goal, the VERY purpose of COP29! Where is the number? This is the finance COP: it is about a clear and ambitious commitment that would enable vulnerable communities to address the impacts of climate change. We need developed countries’ concrete quantum proposals that show leadership and ambition, with a high percentage to provision of grant based climate finance as opposed to mobilisation and channelling climate finance through MDBs that increase the debt status of developing countries.”
Olha Boiko, Network Coordinator, CAN EECCA, said:“The draft text on the NCQG fails to guarantee a successful outcome of COP29, the main expectation of which was a decision on a concrete quantum. The Parties are making baby steps in the right direction, but they are walking on air, as long as there is no final sum agreed on. We are expecting the final decision to respond to the urgent need of having clear quantified goals for mitigation, adaptation, as well as loss and damage. We urge the Parties not to waste another year while failing billions of people, who are suffering from the climate crisis.”
Stela Herschmann, Climate Policy Specialist, Climate Observatory, said:“The new text brings two diametrically different options, reflecting the deadlock we have seen since negotiations started. It also lacks the level of ambition of the NCQG. Without numbers on the table and with opposite views of what a new goal should look like, it is unclear how parties will find a common ground. The presidency needs to step up its game to make parties move to a positive outcome.”
Javier Andaluz, Climate and Energy Head, Ecologistas en Acción, said:“The hypocrisy with which the negotiations are moving forward is evident with the new text. While the numbers on the needs of the global South are clear with the new text, the inability of the Global North to come to this summit with its homework done, having increased its contribution significantly puts the fight against climate change even more at risk. In this crucial decade there is no room to fight between mitigation and finance. In these final hours of COP29 we demand climate reparations that will enable fast, fair and forever decarbonisation.”
Erin Ryan, Senior International Campaigner, Climate Action Network Australia, said: “This isn’t a game. The Global South are here in good faith, plainly telling us what’s needed to action the agreed transition away from fossil fuels, adapt to the climate crisis and recover from loss and damage in their communities. By failing to put a figure on the table and assuring us that the private sector will fill in the chasmic gaps, high income and high polluting countries like Australia are first and foremost failing the people. But they’re also failing the process by treating it like a win-lose game. There are no winners in a climate crisis, and the only way to end the stalemate is to pay up to action the urgent transition away from deadly coal, oil and gas.”
On the role of Australia’s minister as co-chair specifically, Erin Ryan, Senior International Campaigner, Climate Action Network Australia, said:“As co-chair of the COP climate finance negotiations, Chris Bowen has guided the world to a crossroads. One path upholds the obligations of the Paris Agreement, the other leaves them in the dirt. His mandate now is to listen to those who have come to COP29 to talk earnestly about the finance needed for their communities to action the agreed transition away from fossil fuels, adapt to the climate crisis and recover from loss and damage. Without a dollar figure on the table he’s navigating without a north star, but we still have options in front of us. Only by listening to those here in good faith can he guide the world to the ambitious finance outcome it urgently needs.”
Kelly Dent, Director of External Affairs, World Animal Protection said:“The NCQG text unveiled at COP29 is an alarming betrayal. Developed countries are once again dodging their responsibilities and hoarding the critical climate finance that the Global South desperately needs. As well keeping 1.5°C alive – this is about justice for small scale producers, family farmers and the millions who sustain our world and yet remain abandoned with mere scraps of the promised funds. Even less is invested in sustainable, agroecological practices that could revolutionise our fight against climate collapse.
“This failure isn’t just a human tragedy – it’s an ecological catastrophe. Entire ecosystems, already buckling under the weight of climate change, are on the brink. Wildlife faces obliteration. Biodiversity loss accelerates. Without substantial, grant-based financing now, we’re hurtling towards irreversible habitat destruction and an ecological collapse that imperils every living being. The world is watching and demands leaders do better – or bear the blame for a planet undone.”
Petra Kjell Wright, Campaigns Manager, Recourse, said: “Developed countries need to step up and provide climate finance. But channelling it through multilateral development banks and the private sector is not the way forward. It will remove national ownership over climate actions, add debt, and take urgently needed resources far away from the most climate-vulnerable communities — basically handing them to big business. The development banks have a poor track record on delivering climate finance to people and communities that need it most, and as neither they nor the private sector are accountable to the UN climate convention, they should not be counted in the COP29 climate finance goal.”
Dr. Rachel Cleetus, Policy Director for the Climate and Energy Programme, Union of Concerned Scientists, said:“The latest text shows nations still alarmingly far apart. Without urgent course correction, countries are careening towards a dismal and unjust COP29 outcome. They must use these final days to bridge harmful trust gaps and secure an ambitious and fair climate finance agreement. The clarion call to rich countries is to lead on providing adequate climate finance to low-income nations on the order of at least $1trillion per year in grants and low-interest loans. The science is clear: this funding is crucial for countries to transition rapidly away from fossil fuels to clean energy, protect people, economies and ecosystems from extreme climate impacts, and cope with mounting loss and damage.”
Teresa Anderson, Global Lead on Climate Justice and Head of Delegation for ActionAid International, said: “Rich countries are failing this moral test. Developing countries have come to Baku with the hope that this COP would finally deliver the funding they need to cope with climate impacts and cut emissions. But the developed countries most responsible for causing climate destruction are turning a deaf ear to the reality faced by frontline nations. This draft doesn’t provide the trillions in grants that are needed to keep the planet safe.
“Instead of actually increasing their climate finance contributions, rich countries just want to increase what counts as climate finance. With all the loans and corporate investment being pushed into this new goal, this text could end up being a pretext for corporate profit under a climate veneer. The whole world needs COP29 to deliver trillions in grants every year for urgent climate action.”
Stephen Cornelius, WWF Deputy Global Climate and Energy Lead, said: “The text is narrowing, but so is time to reach a final agreement. Negotiators and ministers need to pick up the pace, ramp up their diplomacy and drive consensus around an ambitious climate finance deal. The lack of a finance target in this draft is a worrying sign that the most challenging decisions are being left to the last minute. This agreement will decide the climate finance landscape for years to come. We simply can’t afford to get this wrong. Without adequate finance for climate solutions, we won’t be able to prevent catastrophic climate impacts. It is essential we get an outcome here capable of unleashing climate action at speed and scale around the world.”
Andreas Sieber, Associate Director of Global Policy and Campaigns, 350.org, said: “The new climate finance and mitigation draft texts presented at COP29 today fail to deliver what is needed to transform the lives of those most impacted by the climate crisis. Will governments recall this moment too, when the next climate disaster hits their country? A fast, fairly funded fossil fuel phase out is what we need reflected in these texts. Right now, we only see cowardice and a void in leadership, ignoring the undeniable science. By the end of the UN climate talks, we must see at least a trillion dollars in public finance on the table.”
Soomin Han, Climate Finance Policy Analyst, Climate Action Network (CAN-Rac) Canada, said: “The lack of a bridging option within the new draft text shows the Global North’s effort to let the clock run out without real progress. While the new text includes recognition of the importance of grants at the heart of climate finance, what is needed is a real commitment to act in good faith to deliver the high-quality financing that will meet the needs of those that contributed the least to the climate crisis. It’s time for the Global North to show their cards, break the cycle of inaction and delay, and adopt a fair and ambitious NCQG in Baku.”
Cristina Rumbaitis, Senior Adaptation and Resilience Advisor, UN Foundation, said: “The text is very poor and disappointing, especially on adaptation. First, the floor for adaptation is out. Secondly, there is no reference to the Global Goal on Adaptation or the UAE Framework for Global Climate Resilience. Thirdly, there is only language around balancing between mitigation and adaptation and loss and damage. This could further reduce funding for adaptation. There is some good language on qualitative elements and call for a floor for adaptation for LDCs and SIDs from all relevant actors and financial mechanisms. But also very weak statements like grant financing should be used for adaptation and loss and damage to the largest extent possible. We had hoped for more.”
Hari Krishna, Global Climate Change and Ageing Adviser, Help International, said:“The document highlights progress in equitable climate finance. Still, it must explicitly recognise the need to address global financial asymmetries that hinder low-income nations’ ability to fund critical climate actions. Section 18 notably overlooks older people disproportionately affected by climate extremes like heatwaves and floods. By 2050, the global population aged 60+ will reach 2.1 billion, with 426 million aged 80+. This demographic shift requires urgently including older people in climate finance policies to ensure their vulnerabilities are addressed, and the inevitable challenges of ageing populations in the context of climate change are recognised.”
Chiara Martinelli, Director at Climate Action Network Europe, said: “The new text on climate finance is like a bridge half-built. It gives the illusion of progress but leaves us stranded when we need to cross. The lack of even a proposed scale for the quantum sends a troubling signal about the level of ambition. The EU came to COP29 knowing they needed concrete numbers, yet withholding them now feels like gambling with the future of our planet. The elements for a strong outcome are still on the table, and the money exists. The clock is ticking, we need to turn vague ideas into a concrete proposal that meets the urgency of this moment.”
Catherine Pettengell, Executive Director, Climate Action Network UK (CAN-UK), said: “The draft text includes one option for an ambitious global climate finance goal that’s fit for purpose, and one option that frankly isn’t even an option. Option two doesn’t reflect the spirit or responsibilities of the Paris Agreement – and including it is an insult – it is simply a compilation of all the very worst things developed countries have suggested during this process.”
Mariana Paoli, Global Advocacy Lead, Christian Aid, said: “COP29 was supposed to be the finance COP. Rich countries had one job to do: lay out how much finance they are going to provide but there’s no numbers yet. It’s like developed countries are saying the dog ate their homework.
“The text correctly talks about the seriousness of the climate crisis but it’s solutions don’t match the diagnosis. This new goal cannot be about charity, it is rather an obligation that developed countries must fulfil for being largely responsible for the climate crisis in the first place. Countries must reach an agreement that delivers public finance at scale and this option remains on the cards. The current text suggests we’re not close to a landing zone in Baku and rich countries need to get serious if we’re going to finish on Friday as the COP hosts intend.”
Laurie van der Burg, Oil Change International Global Public Finance Manager, said:“The draft climate finance deal is a mixed bag with good, bad and ugly options. Rich countries now have a last chance to step up to pay the climate debt they owe to the Global South and unlock a fair and funded fossil fuel phaseout, while barring dangerous distractions. Wealthy nations must support delivering the trillions urgently needed in public finance with the majority provided debt-free, which is currently on the table.”
Safa’ Al Jayoussi, Climate Justice Lead, Oxfam International, said: “COP29 must deliver more than threadbare promises. The most polluting countries need to provide trillions, not billions, each year in public, grant-based climate finance to address their climate debt. This is not charity; it’s the bare minimum needed to protect frontline communities from climate devastation, support recovery after disasters, and ensure a just transition to a sustainable future. The world is watching and it’s past time for rich countries to act decisively and pay up —or forever be remembered as those who prioritised profit over people and complacency before courage.”
Lien Vandamme, Senior Campaigner, Center for International Environmental Law, said: “Having a draft text on climate finance without a number is like a map with no destination. The lack of clarity and consensus that this goal will also address loss and damage is symptomatic of the decades of denial of States with a historic responsibility for the climate crisis of their obligations to remedy climate harm. Leaving a loss and damage-sized hole in the climate finance goal will further escalate the harm to those on the frontlines of the climate crisis. States have legal obligations to pay up for climate finance and this means trillions, not billions, of public, grants-based finance for mitigation, adaptation AND loss and damage.”
Gaïa Febvre, International Policy Coordinator, RAC France, said: The new text remains incomplete because the taboo in the room has not been lifted: the quantum is the big absentee. Yet one option indicates that trillions are needed. The clock is ticking: the Northern countries absolutely must put a figure on the table. If they don’t, we have no idea what kind of ambition we’re talking about. They therefore refuse to accept their historic responsibility for climate change. It is also essential that the countries of the North do not give in to the siren songs of private finance and carbon markets. Giving up is not an option.”
Jamie Williams, Senior Policy Advisor, Islamic Relief Worldwide, said: “This text signals a shameful abdication of moral responsibility from rich nations. People dying from the climate emergency can’t survive on empty words, they need clear financial commitments from the countries that caused the crisis. The text recognises that trillions of dollars are needed but fails to commit any specific amount.
“The increasing shift towards private investment over public finance is extremely worrying. We can’t leave tackling the biggest crisis facing humanity to unaccountable corporations that will always put profits before people and want a return on any investment. Because of that, private finance doesn’t fund adaptation, so relying on it will leave the most vulnerable people abandoned.
“The time spent debating overall finance is distracting from moving ahead with negotiations on the quality of adaptation, meaning that money for adaptation will not only be inadequate but also less equitable, less efficient and less effective.”
Jasper Inventor, Head of COP29 Delegation for Greenpeace International, said: “The draft text has one option that rightly recognises trillions are needed, but the fact there is no number specified for the climate finance goal is an insult to the millions of people on the frontlines bearing the brunt of climate change impacts. Developing countries have clear sums in mind and developed countries need to put forward a sufficiently high enough public finance offer to build trust and for these talks to progress. There are two options: one that could unlock trillions in finance or one allowing developed countries to shirk their responsibilities onto the private sector and developing countries. Agreeing to put the bill to the fossil fuel polluting companies offers a real path forward to bridge the financing gap and it’s encouraging this is still included in the negotiating text.”
Greenpeace Africa has expressed disappointment with the outcomes of the New Collective Quantified Goal (NCQG) on climate finance unveiled at COP29, citing insufficient ambition to address the continent’s pressing climate needs.
COP29 entrance
While the text acknowledges the scale of required funding – estimated at $5-6.8 trillion until 2030 – it lacks concrete mechanisms and desired political commitment to deliver this financing.
Fred Njehu, Pan-African Political Strategist at Greenpeace Africa, stated: “The latest NCQG document is a missed opportunity to decisively make polluters pay for the destruction they have caused and falls short of expectations from developed countries. While the principle of ‘polluter pays’ is mentioned, there are no enforceable mechanisms to ensure that fossil fuel corporations contribute to climate action. The voices of 10,000 Africans who signed our petition demand real action, not just acknowledgements, bracketed texts and unagreed options without actual figures.”
The NCQG highlights the need for grant-based climate finance and acknowledges systemic barriers to access, including debt burdens and high capital costs. However, the scale of commitments remains unclear, leaving vulnerable communities at risk.
Dr. Lamfu Yengong, Forest Campaigner at Greenpeace Africa, emphasised: “African communities are on the frontlines of the climate crisis, yet the ambition on climate finance commitments is inadequate. Without clear targets and mechanisms to mobilise trillions annually in non-debt-inducing finance, the adaptation finance gap will continue to grow. This is unacceptable, given the dire climate impacts already faced across the continent.”
Greenpeace Africa welcomed some positive aspects of the NCQG, such as:
• Provisions for grant-based financing for adaptation and loss and damage, especially for least-developed countries (LDCs) and small island developing states (SIDS).
• Recognition of the need to address systemic inequities in accessing climate finance.
• Promoting renewable energy as a cornerstone of the global energy transition.
• Reducing investment flows towards fossil fuel infrastructure, inefficient fossil fuel subsidies which do not address energy poverty and just transitions repurposed in line with the 1.5°C pathway.
Greenpeace Africa calls for immediate revision of the NCQG text to include stronger commitments on fossil fuel phase-out, concrete polluter-pay mechanisms, and guaranteed climate finance that reaches vulnerable communities.
