COP 29: A Crossroads for Global Climate Governance

COP 29, Baku, Azerbaijan.

COP 29, Baku, Azerbaijan

The COP 29 summit in Baku, Azerbaijan, convened amidst unprecedented challenges, not just from the escalating impacts of climate change but also from shifting political landscapes. Often referred to as the "Finance COP," this gathering addressed crucial topics such as climate finance, carbon markets, adaptation strategies, and equitable transitions. Yet, the event highlighted stark divides between developed and developing nations, casting doubt on the future of global climate cooperation.

COP 29, Baku, Azerbaijan

​New Collective Quantified Goal (NCQG) on Climate Finance
​The NCQG emerged as a cornerstone of COP 29, reflecting the financial disparities that challenge equitable climate action.
Developing Nations' Advocacy

• Developing nations, led by the G77/China and supported by the Least Developed Countries (LDCs) and Small Island Developing States (SIDS), demanded $1.3 trillion annually by 2030 to address:
  • Mitigation: Scaling renewable energy and reducing emissions.
  • Adaptation: Building resilience to climate impacts.
  • Loss and Damage: Covering irreversible climate consequences.
• Public finance was emphasized as the primary funding mechanism, with allocation floors of $220 billion for LDCs and $39 billion for SIDS to ensure equitable distribution.

Developed Nations' Response

• Developed nations agreed to triple climate finance to at least $300 billion annually by 2035 to support developing countries' climate adaptation and mitigation efforts. 
• The agreement includes a broader goal to mobilize $1.3 trillion annually from diverse sources, including private investment, by 2035, but lacks binding commitments.
• Proposals focused on broadening the contributor base to include emerging economies, which developing nations resisted as a dilution of historical accountability under the Paris Agreement.
• Developed nations highlighted private sector mobilization as a vital supplement to public finance, a suggestion met with skepticism over its reliability and equity.

Key Challenges

• Transparency and Accountability: Disagreements persisted on mechanisms to track and verify financial flows.
• Quantum vs. Quality: Developed nations emphasized effective utilization over absolute amounts, while developing nations pushed for a substantial quantum.

Outcomes
​Despite extensive discussions, fundamental disagreements on quantum, scope, and structure of the NCQG were unresolved. While frameworks were advanced, the lack of consensus left critical gaps that will carry over to COP 30.

Article 6.4 Negotiations, COP 29, Baku, Azerbaijan

Article 6: Carbon Markets and Cooperative Approaches
​Article 6 discussions aimed to operationalize mechanisms for global carbon markets under the Paris Agreement, addressing both market-based and cooperative approaches.

• Negotiators finalized all remaining sections of Article 6, completing the framework for international carbon markets under the Paris Agreement after nearly a decade.

Article 6.2: Cooperative Approaches

• A dual-layer registry system was proposed:
  • An international registry for transparent tracking of carbon units.
  • An optional UNFCCC-managed layer offering additional functions such as transfers.
• Authorization flexibility was a point of contention, with developing nations advocating for less restrictive guidelines to enable broader participation.

Article 6.4: Carbon Markets

• Emphasis was placed on methodologies to ensure market integrity, including:
  • Robust baseline setting.
  • Avoiding double counting.
  • Transparency in reporting and verification.
• Voluntary Carbon Markets: Developing nations expressed concerns about the credibility and inclusivity of these markets, citing potential inequities.

Challenges

• Persistent divides over certification mechanisms and the role of voluntary markets highlighted the need for inclusive frameworks that avoid undermining trust in carbon trading.

Outcomes

• Progress was made in advancing transparency frameworks, yet unresolved issues around certification and equity were deferred to future negotiations.

Harvard Kennedy School Participants at COP 29, Baku, Azerbaijan

Adaptation, Loss and Damage, and Just Transitions
​While finance and mitigation dominated the agenda, other critical areas demanded attention:

• Global Goal on Adaptation (GGA): Discussions focused on adaptation finance and measurable progress, but resistance to binding commitments limited actionable outcomes.
• Loss and Damage Fund (LDF): Operationalization of the LDF highlighted the need for simplified access and predictable funding, particularly for vulnerable nations like SIDS and LDCs.
• Just Transition Work Programme (JTWP): Efforts to integrate equity into energy transitions faltered, reflecting the ongoing struggle to balance ambition with social justice.

Global Stocktake Decision Deferred:

• No agreement was reached on how to advance the outcomes of the COP28 “global stocktake”. This decision was postponed to COP 30 in Brazil.

​

"Pay Up" Demonstrations on Climate Finance for the Global South, COP 29, Baku, Azerbaijan

Reflections on Global Climate Governance
​COP 29 highlighted the fragility of the global climate negotiation process. The election of Donald Trump and his renewed pledge to withdraw the United States from the Paris Agreement, coupled with Argentina’s abrupt exit from COP 29 negotiations, highlighted the challenges of sustaining collective action in an increasingly polarized world.
Argentina's Exit: A Signal of Disregard

• President Milei's withdrawal of Argentina’s delegation from COP 29, along with the dissolution of its Ministry of Environment, marked a sharp departure from the country's progressive climate stance.
• This retreat not only diminished Argentina’s influence but also weakened advocacy for critical issues such as climate finance for developing nations.

Trump's Return: A Blow to Multilateralism

• A potential U.S. withdrawal would strip the world's second-largest emitter of decision-making power in Paris Agreement negotiations, emboldening climate-skeptical nations and jeopardizing global cooperation.

The Future of COPs
The simultaneous challenges posed by the U.S. and Argentina raise a pressing question: 
Will COP 30 mark the end of the COP process as we know it?
The effectiveness of annual COPs is increasingly under scrutiny. The procedural inefficiencies and entrenched divides evident at COP 29 have fueled debates about whether this framework can deliver transformative action. While abandoning the COP process could risk decades of progress, reforms are imperative to ensure these summits remain relevant.

Delegations Pavilions, COP 29, Baku, Azerbaijan.

A Way Forward
To safeguard the future of global climate governance, the following steps are critical:

1. Historical Responsibility and Common but Differentiated Responsibilities and Respective Capacities (CBDR-RC): The principle of CBDR-RC, central to the Paris Agreement, underscores the moral and legal obligation of developed nations to lead on climate action. Historical emitters like the United States must acknowledge their outsized contribution to global emissions and provide financial and technical support to developing nations. However, a growing trust deficit threatens this framework. The unfulfilled $100 billion annual climate finance pledge, agreed upon in 2009, has left vulnerable nations questioning the sincerity of new commitments like the proposed $300 billion NCQG target. Especially as the U.S. threatens to leave the Paris Agreement, again. If the $100 billion was never honored, why should developing nations believe this time will be any different?
2. Strengthen Accountability: Restoring trust requires robust mechanisms to hold nations accountable for their commitments. Transparent tracking of emissions reductions, financial contributions, and progress on adaptation is essential. Developed nations must deliver on past promises while ensuring that new pledges are credible, verifiable, and actionable.
3. Enhance Equity: Inclusive financing mechanisms and equitable access to carbon markets are necessary to bridge the North-South divide. Least Developed Countries (LDCs) and Small Island Developing States (SIDS), which are disproportionately impacted by climate change, must have their voices amplified in decision-making processes. Rebuilding trust also means prioritizing predictable and grant-based public finance over uncertain private investments.
4. Reform COP Structures: The COP process itself must evolve to address inefficiencies and deliver tangible outcomes. Procedural delays and fragmented negotiations erode trust and diminish the urgency of climate action. Streamlining discussions to focus on implementation, rather than endless debates, can enhance the credibility of these summits.
5. Adapt to Geopolitical Realities: The withdrawal of Argentina from COP29 and the looming threat of another U.S. exit under Donald Trump’s renewed leadership have intensified doubts about multilateral cooperation. To counter these setbacks, coalitions of like-minded nations must step up to sustain momentum, demonstrating that global climate action is resilient to political disruptions.

Rebuilding Trust in Climate Governance
The trust deficit that permeates climate negotiations is a direct consequence of unkept promises and perceived inequities in burden-sharing. Developing nations, already bearing the brunt of climate impacts, cannot afford to rely on commitments that lack follow-through. For global climate governance to succeed, trust must be restored through actions, not words.
As COP30 approaches, the stakes could not be higher. Delivering on past pledges, aligning new commitments with the principles of CBDR-RC, and addressing the trust deficit head-on will determine whether the world can unite to confront this existential crisis. Without trust, the foundation of multilateral cooperation will crumble, leaving the future of climate governance—and the planet—in jeopardy.
​The choice is clear: rebuild trust through equitable, collective action or risk collective failure.

MC/MPA Candidates, Harvard Kennedy School Participants at COP 29, Baku, Azerbaijan