COP29: Finance Delayed is Justice Denied

KATHMANDU, NOVEMBER 7: Thousands of delegates are now heading to Baku, the capital of Azerbaijan, for the 29th UN Climate Change Conference (COP29), taking place from November 11 to 22. Some have already arrived in the Eurasian country, while others are preparing their luggage to join the global event.

Evans Njewa, Chair of the Least Developed Countries (LDC) Group at the UN Climate Change negotiations, recently posted on X (formerly Twitter), stating: “Setting a science-based New Collective Quantified Goal (NCQG) on climate finance to meet the evolving needs of developing countries, especially LDCs, is critical. LDCs need at least 1 trillion US dollars to implement their current Nationally Determined Contributions (NDCs) by 2030. Evans Njewa emphasized that these funds should be grants, not loans.

​​While climate finance is not a new issue, the language used in climate negotiations often makes the process cumbersome and bureaucratic. This complexity is troubling, especially when climate extremes are increasingly affecting vulnerable countries like Nepal. Nepal, along with many other LDCs, is calling for easier access to climate finance for adaptation, mitigation,  resilience, and response to loss and damage caused by climate change.

As climate negotiations drag on with lengthy processes and new terminology like New Collective Quantified Goals (NCQG), it raises the question of whether these conferences are truly delivering results for those most affected by climate change.

For years, terms like “phase out” and “phase down” dominated discussions, while issues like loss and damage and transitioning away from fossil fuels gained prominence. Now, NCQG is the focus. It remains to be seen how negotiators from LDCs will urge major economies to recognize their historical responsibility for climate damage and push for increased financial support.

If the countries that have contributed the most to climate change acknowledge their role, COP29 could be an ideal platform to commit to greater climate finance for developing nations.

Challenges of the Multilateral Process

Raju Pandit Chhetri, Executive Director of Prakriti Resource Centre and a strong advocate for climate finance, acknowledges that climate negotiations can be slow. He explains that these discussions are complex, involving 197 countries with differing interests and climate priorities. However, he believes that the NCQG, which builds on the Paris Agreement, represents a more science-driven approach to determining climate finance for developing countries.

Chhetri is optimistic that NCQG will be implemented starting in 2025. Despite the slow pace of negotiations, he argues that such dialogues have resulted in incremental progress, though global climate crises continue to escalate.

The Global Impact of Climate Change

Climate change is not only leading to the loss of biodiversity, habitat destruction, rising sea levels, and threats to security and water supply, but it is also undermining progress on the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs). Despite this, resource-rich countries remain relatively comfortable, while LDCs continue to struggle, calling for assistance to cope with the devastating effects of climate change.

As veteran climate scientist and activist Saleemul Huq once noted, polluters and greenhouse gas emitters are found everywhere—rich and poor countries alike. Even poorer countries have wealthy companies that contribute to the global emissions.

Nepal’s Domestic Climate Challenges

Nepal must also highlight its own climate challenges at COP29. The country has already faced significant climate impacts, such as the Thame Glacial Lake Outburst Flood (GLOF) and the devastating floods and landslides triggered by heavy rains in September. The impacts on Nepal’s agriculture, health, biodiversity, and overall development need greater attention on the global stage.

However, some disasters, like the Roshi and Koshi River floods, cannot be attributed solely to climate change. Poor urban planning and violations of environmental laws have exacerbated the damage. The uncontrolled extraction of stone, and sand, and the operation of crusher industries in the Kathmandu Valley have worsened landslide and flood risks. These practices reveal the gap between environmental policies and their actual implementation.

Chhetri points out that Nepal’s climate actions are still largely reactive rather than proactive. The recent floods should serve as a wake-up call to both Nepal and its development partners to prioritize disaster preparedness and climate adaptation.

Building Capacity at the Local Level

With power now devolved to subnational governments, local governments must play a more active role in addressing climate change. However, despite having executive, legislative, and judicial powers, local governments in Nepal remain weak in implementing climate actions. A glaring example is that only two local representatives attended COP28, and similar concerns are raised for COP29.

If local leaders were included in such events, they could gain valuable insights to bring back to Nepal and enhance climate action at the local level. The dominance of the federal government in these discussions reflects a continued top-down approach, which hampers meaningful progress. Building the capacity of local governments is essential for effective climate change adaptation and mitigation.

The Need for Continued Activism

Finally, Nepal’s climate efforts should not be occasional, limited to speeches during COP events. Outsourcing climate activism solely to government officials risks sidelining the broader public's role in climate action. Creating climate-resilient communities requires a grassroots approach, where people are deeply engaged in understanding and responding to climate impacts.

The world will be watching COP29 to see if it truly lives up to its promise of being the “finance COP”, delivering the financial support needed for climate action in vulnerable countries.

RSS