Despite the incremental progress made during COP29, much work needs to be done to align with the speed and scale required for the 1.5°C target
Image Source: Getty
The 29th Conference of the Parties hosted in Baku, Azerbaijan, was branded as the “finance COP”. It concluded with a landmark yet contentious agreement on climate finance. The two weeks of intense negotiations highlighted both the progress made and the challenges faced in climate diplomacy. This article aims to summarise the prominent points of divergence and convergence- where convergence refers not to full consensus but to areas of partial agreement—from the wide-ranging discussions at COP29.
1.New Collective Quantified Goal (NCQG)
In the lead-up to COP29, the NCQG was anticipated to be one of the most contentious issues in the negotiations. According to numerous studies, climate finance needs to scale up to US$2.4 trillion annually by 2030 for developing countries, excluding China, to implement the necessary climate actions. Despite this background, the agreed NCQG was US$1.3 trillion annually by 2035 from various sources, with a minimum of US$300 billion annually dedicated to developing countries. Unsurprisingly, this target faced heavy criticism for falling short of what was needed. Countries in the Global South described the target as “insultingly low” to build upon the commitments made at COP28. The NCQG decision also included a commitment to triple annual outflows from key climate funds such as the Green Climate Fund (GCF) and the Global Environment Facility (GEF)—by 2030 compared to 2022 levels. While this is a positive step, it lacks clear guarantees for vulnerable countries. Ultimately, while NCQG was a critical milestone, its modest ambition left many developing countries questioning its adequacy to address the climate challenge.
In the lead-up to COP29, the NCQG was anticipated to be one of the most contentious issues in the negotiations. According to numerous studies, climate finance needs to scale up to US$2.4 trillion annually by 2030 for developing countries, excluding China, to implement the necessary climate actions.
2.Global Stocktake Outcomes (GST) and Fossil fuel transition
The GST, a critical mechanism for assessing the progress towards the 1.5 degrees Celsius target, includes a historical call for countries to transition away from fossil fuels. Developed countries were adamant about including strong language on transitioning away from fossil fuel while many developing nations, including Saudi Arabia, called for the discussions to focus exclusively on scaling up finance. Despite efforts to bridge divides, negotiators did not achieve consensus.
3.Mitigation Work Programme (MWP)
MWP, established at COP26 and formally adopted at COP27, also saw significant divisions, particularly over whether the program should address more specific mitigation actions such as coal phase-out and fossil fuel subsidies. For developed countries, the inclusion of these elements was key. For China, on behalf of the LMDCs, and Saudi Arabia for the Arab Group, the inclusion of the stocktake or NDCs was a “red line”. On the final day of COP29, the first draft of the MWP negotiating text was released. It made no mention of stocktake, fossil fuels, or any guidance on the next round of NDCs and was met with criticism from the Global North countries. A second draft negotiation text maintained the lack of reference to the stocktake but contained a changed preamble with a softer high-level political messaging. Ultimately, COP29 failed to make significant progress on the MWP, and the matter was pushed to future negotiations.
4.Unilateral Trade Measures
Finally, unilateral trade measures, especially the European Union’s Carbon Border Adjustment Mechanism (CBAM), emerged as another contentious issue at COP29. Developing countries expressed concerns about the potential for developed countries to implement carbon border taxes or other trade restrictions that could disproportionately affect their economies. Restrictive unilateral measures force developing and low-income nations to bear the costs of transitioning to low-carbon economics. Developed countries, on the other hand, maintained that this issue falls under WTO jurisdiction and not UNFCCC. This issue will likely continue to be a point of contention in future climate negotiations.
1. Carbon Markets
Despite the numerous points of divergence at COP29, there were several areas of convergence where parties showed a commitment to advancing global climate goals. One of the most important points of alignment was on Article 6.2 (cooperative approaches) and Article 6.4 (mechanism) of the Paris Agreement, which after years of negotiations, saw progress towards operationalizing carbon markets. The transparency features included in the decisions, such as publicising inconsistencies in data for internationally transferred mitigation outcomes, received cautious praise even from sceptics. Additionally, the Article 6.2 decision also empowers the UNFCCC Secretariat to provide registry services for countries that cannot establish their own to ensure broader participation in carbon markets. This measure is seen as especially important for developing nations, as it provides equitable access to the benefits of carbon trading.
Despite the numerous points of divergence at COP29, there were several areas of convergence where parties showed a commitment to advancing global climate goals.
2. Ambition of individual countries
Another area of convergence was the ambition to address climate change. The next round of countries’ NDCs is due early next year, and some countries have unveiled their new NDCs at COP29. The United Kingdom (UK), Brazil, and the United Arab Emirates (UAE) have announced 2035 NDC targets, setting a high bar for ambition. Meanwhile, Canada, Chile, the European Union (EU), Georgia, Mexico, Norway, and Switzerland hope to submit NDCs that are consistent with the IPCC emissions trajectories. The UK aims to cut greenhouse gas emissions by 81 percent by 2035 compared to 1990 levels, while Brazil targets a reduction of 59-67 percent from 2005 levels by the same year. Several key initiatives also gained widespread support during COP29, especially relating to clean energy technologies. A collective agreement to triple global nuclear energy capacity emerged as a crucial step towards diversifying clean energy sources. Additionally, over 30 countries signed a pledge to reduce methane emissions from organic waste.
3. Global Goal on Adaptation (GGA)
Finally, some aspects of adaptation finance remained a key area of consensus at COP29. Until recently, the GGA was the least developed of the Agreement’s goals. Initial discussions around the GGA saw some developing countries expressing their disappointment with the inclusion of transformational adaptation. They were concerned that it could create “barriers to access” for adaptation finance, as it shifted the focus from immediate, practical adaptation measures to broader, systemic changes. However, delegates advanced discussions on defining indicators to track progress towards adaptation goals. Parties also guided experts contributing to the indicator-definition process and agreed to create a set of indicators, capped at 100 for the means of implementation.
1.National Adaptation Plans (NAPs)
As COP29 concluded, several issues remained unresolved. Among these, the NAPs emerged as a significant point of contention, as there was a lack of progress in formulating and implementing them. While the discussion on NAPs made “significant progress” during the first week, parties could not reach an agreement by the conclusion of the conference. Differing views on key issues such as developed countries’ obligations for means of implementation in NAPs, and the private sector’s role in adaptation finance contributed to the lack of consensus on this issue. The discussion has been pushed to Bonn, to recommend a draft decision for consideration at COP30.
2.Just Transition Work Programme (JTWP)
The JTWP also saw limited advancement during the climate conference, with observers calling it a “betrayal of workers, communities, young people, and everyone on the frontlines of this transition.” Last year, for the first time in UNFCCC history, labour rights were officially recognised in a negotiated text. However, in June, the follow-up talks stalled. The most recent text faced criticism for several reasons, including changes to the opening lines, where references to the stocktake were removed. COP29 ended with no text or agreement on the JTWP.
Another modest step was taken in the global effort to combat climate change as COP29 drew to a close. The decision on NCQG signalled a renewed focus on finance. However, its ambition fell short of the needs of the developing nations. Progress on carbon markets was also significant, yet many critical issues were pushed to future conferences. Ultimately, despite the incremental progress made this year, much work needs to be done to align with the speed and scale required for the 1.5°C target.
Abhishree Pandey is a Research Intern at the Observer Research Foundation
The views expressed above belong to the author(s). ORF research and analyses now available on Telegram! Click here to access our curated content — blogs, longforms and interviews.
Abhishree is a Research Assistant at the Centre for Economy and Growth in New Delhi. Her areas of interest include climate policy, energy, and adaptation ...
Read More +
PREV
