Editorial 1: Reflections on Baku’s ‘NCQG outcome’

Context

It appears to have bypassed the principles of equitable burden sharing and climate justice, having failed to have recognised the financial needs of the global south.

 

Introduction

The urgency of climate change has never been more evident. The Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) has highlighted the need for significantly stronger commitments to limit global warming to 1.5°C above pre-industrial levels. Current policies, if continued globally, are expected to lead to a temperature rise of up to 3.1°C.

• The increasingly visible impacts of climate change across geographies, apart from the growing body of scientific evidence, serve as a constant reminder of the need to accelerate climate action.
• Cleaner fuels and technological solutions are emerging across sectors and could be increasingly accessed and deployed with adequate focus on the means of implementation.
• Against this backdrop with COP 29 (in Baku, Azerbaijan, in November 2024) branded as the “Finance COP”, the hope was to see an ambitious outcome (specifically related to the NCQG or New Collective Quantified Goal) which strongly supported this understanding.

 

Financing needs of the developing world

• Role of Finance in clean energy adoption: Finance is a critical component in accelerating the adoption of cleaner alternatives, especially in developing countries.
  • While some renewable technologies pay off in the long run due to lower fuel and operational costs, the upfront costs of some of these technologies are much higher than the current options requiring government support to ensure affordability at the consumer end.
• Challenges with green technologies: Other green technologies may still be evolving and are associated with risks of failure that front-runners may need to bear.
  • Given the pressure on government resources that need to be prioritised towards development activities, additional finance must be up-scaled urgently within this decade if transformational changes are to be expected in the adoption of clean and efficient alternatives in developing countries, as access to modern energy and infrastructure improves.

 

India's Expenditure on Green Energy

• Government allocation for green energy: India’s expenditure on green energy schemes encompasses a wide range of initiatives aimed at expanding renewable energy infrastructure, promoting energy efficiency and clean fuel and technology innovations as part of its commitment to global climate goals.
  • MNRE received its highest-ever allocation of ₹19,100 crore in the Budget 2024-25, apart from about ₹40 crore being allocated for enhancing energy efficiency.
• Support for electric vehicles: n the transport sector, a subsidy of ₹5,790 crore has been provided to electric vehicle manufacturers under phase-II of the Faster Adoption and Manufacturing of (Hybrid) Electric Vehicles (FAME) scheme.

 

Source and Type of Finance for Transition

• Concerns on fiscal debt: There are growing concerns regarding fiscal debt, which forms the basis of the ask for part of the financial support from developed countries to be in the form of public grants rather than loans.
• Challenges of high capital costs: The pace and the scale of transitions are also affected by the higher cost of capital in developing countries.
  • Financial flows from developed countries must ideally aim to strengthen fiscal capacities and enable the unlocking of financial markets in developing countries to support and accelerate their climate action.
• Limitations of debt instruments: The use of debt instruments to access finance does not work well for developing countries since their high debt burdens limit their ability to successfully incentivise domestic private capital for climate action.
  • Developing countries attract much higher lending rates as compared to developed countries, and much of the global financial flows are restricted within the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD) countries.
• Ensuring affordable climate finance: Ensuring the flow of climate finance to developing countries at affordable lending rates is important.

 

Role of the NCQG

• Cancun Pledge (2010): At Cancun, in 2010, developed countries had pledged to provide $100 billion annually up to 2020.

• Paris Agreement (COP21): Further, at COP21 in Paris, the parties decided to establish an NCQG prior to 2025, with the Cancun commitment as the base point.
  • The rationale for establishing the NCQG was pressing.
  •  The existing climate pledges have generally been criticised for their lack of specificity and accountability.
• Objective of NCQG: Therefore, the NCQG was intended to create a framework for shared climate goals, to establish clear and quantified objectives that nations could aim to achieve, with transparency and accountability at the forefront.
• Ad Hoc Work Programme (COP26): At COP26 at Glasgow in 2021, an ad hoc work programme for NCQG discussions was established to run from 2022-24, culminating towards the discussions at COP29.

 

Financial Needs and Pledges

• Financial needs report: The Second Needs Determination Report by the Standing Committee on Finance under the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC) estimated that between $5 trillion to $7 trillion would be needed by 2030 to meet half the needs of 98 countries.
• Developing countries' request: Developing countries had put forward a conservative ask of $1.3 trillion annually at COP29 (largely from public sources to enable leveraging the rest through private finance).
• Developed countries' pledge: However, the developed world has in the NCQG agreed to provide an abysmal figure of $300 billion annually till 2035.
  • This quantum is not only miniscule but hardly represents any major change in real flows — probably a target that could be achieved even with current or minimally additional efforts, if we account for inflation.

 

Challenges with NCQG Outcome

• Structure of finance: Further, the mobilisation of funds is expected through all sources of finance, including private capital.
• Disappointment with NCQG: Undoubtedly, therefore, there is disappointment with the NCQG outcome, both on the quantum and structure of finance since it does not support the narrative of transformative action.
• Positive aspects and concerns
  While the decision to triple the flow of public resources through various operating entities of the Financial Mechanism, the Adaptation Fund, the Least Developed Countries Fund, and the Special Climate Change Fund from the 2023 level by 2035 is a positive aspect, it could also see rather slow progress in the next few years (and not aligned to the narrative of the urgency in climate action).

 

Way Forward: The Road Ahead

• Finance Commitment at COP29: COP29 saw the finance commitment step up from the earlier commitment of $100 billion a year to $300 billion a year.
• Progress but not ambitious enough: While this is a step in the correct direction, it is clearly not as ambitious as expected given that climate change is clearly recognised as one of the greatest threats and challenges of our time.
• Disappointment with NCQG outcome: Overall, the NCQG outcome is rather disappointing and does not seem to have aligned well with the very core of why the goal was set up in the first place.
• Failure to recognise the global South's needs: It clearly bypasses the principles of equitable burden sharing and climate justice as it fails to recognise the financial needs of the global south.

 

Conclusion

The way forward is to keep the talks ongoing. Climate change has no geographical boundaries. Thus, it is imperative that the international community cooperates towards the global good, keeping climate justice at the core and respecting the principles of the Common but Differentiated Responsibilities and Respective Capabilities (CBDR and RC). Developing countries must stick together and ensure that any transition is just and fair in the real sense. The global community must prioritize climate justice, ensuring fair and equitable financial commitments for all nations.

---

Editorial 2: Rethinking ‘representation’ for a meaningful COP30

Context

Future climate change conferences can achieve meaningful outcomes only if there is honest representation, actionable commitments, and a transparency of intentions.

 

Introduction

Frustration over the slow progress made during COP29 negotiations in Baku is hardly new. History has repeatedly shown us that the politics of climate change and the forces of nature rarely align. Adding to this challenge is the absence of a unified global authority to address the urgency of the issue. There is no world government or state to act on behalf of the planet. Compounding this challenge is the lack of a universal metric system capable of reconciling the diverse political, economic, and social interests of nation-states. While the jury is still out on whether COP29 was a “disappointment”, “failure”, or “disaster”, critics have often pointed out that ‘business as usual’ does not work. As Brazil prepares to host COP30 in Belém next year, here is an alternative suggestion on the concept of ‘representation’ for them.

 

Pioneering Methodology by Bruno Latour and Laurence Tubiana

• Background: This innovative methodology was pioneered by Bruno Latour, Emeritus Professor at Sciences Po, and Laurence Tubiana, France’s Climate Change Ambassador and Special Representative for the 2015 COP21 in Paris.
• Theatre of Negotiations: In the lead-up to COP21, in May 2015, there was a week-long public event, hosted by Sciences Po, called the ‘Theatre of Negotiations’ at Nanterre-Amandiers on the outskirts of Paris.
  • This experiment brought together 200 students from 143 universities worldwide to role-play and reimagine a life-sized COP.
  • The goal of this bold pedagogical initiative was to transform the traditional framework of climate negotiations.
  • At its core was a radical rethinking of ‘representation.’
• Sally Rooney’s Perspective on Representation: As Irish author Sally Rooney writes, “When American colonists famously rebelled against the practice of ‘taxation without representation,’ [how] is environmental devastation without representation any different?”
• Key Insight: “Even if carbon emissions were thoroughly democratically determined — which they are not — why should voters in the world’s richest countries have the right to poison the air, sea, soil, and rivers for the entire population of Earth?”
• Global Impact: People living on Polynesian islands or in Africa have no right to vote in American or European elections.
  • Yet, they often bear the brunt of the resulting environmental damage.

 

Granting equal rights

• Equal Rights for Humans and Non-Humans: In the approach to representation, humans and non-humans — such as the atmosphere, oceans, and soil — were granted equal rights in negotiations.
  • The idea was to give voice and agency to these non-human entities, allowing them to express their stakes in climate negotiations.
• Shift from Conventional Authority: Unlike conventional COP meetings, this assembly did not defer to the authority of science or nature, as these too were subjects of negotiation.
  • The aim was to simulate a truly inclusive and representative process.
• Creative Negotiation Techniques: The theatre setting at Nanterre-Amandiers encouraged dynamic and creative reinterpretations of negotiation.
  • Delegates dramatised and de-dramatised issues, explored alternative spatial-temporal perspectives, and allowed non-speaking entities to ‘represent’ or ‘speak’ through proxies.
  • This flexibility opened new avenues for addressing climate challenges, from reframing territorial sovereignty to dramatising the interdependence of ecosystems and nations.
• Examples of Novel Interactions: For example, the ‘Ocean’ imposed conditions on the ‘United States,’ while the ‘Atmosphere’ directly addressed ‘China’ regarding greenhouse gas emissions.
  • These novel interactions forced participants to reconsider the boundaries of sovereignty and territorial responsibility.
• Representation by Diverse Delegations: This writer, who was a part of the Philippines delegation, represented a civil society organisation, voicing the concerns of indigenous, rural, and coastal communities.
  • Each delegation comprised a diverse mix of actors — state and non-state representatives, scientists, business leaders, and civil society members — thus ensuring a broad range of perspectives.
• Insights from the Simulation: The week-long simulation yielded profound insights:
  • For delegates, it underscored the critical need for clear communication of interests, values, and territorial concerns.
  • For organisers, it highlighted the logistical and resource mobilisation challenges required to facilitate a process of this scale.
  • For students, it revealed alternative pathways for advancing the climate agenda, recognising the limitations of existing negotiation frameworks.
• Representation of Non-Humans in Global Governance: One could argue that the prevailing global governance system does not allow for such ‘representation,’ or critique it from an anthropocentric point of view.
  • While there are gaps in the existing legal-cum-institutional framework to govern and/or implement rights, the recurrent tendency to give representation of non-humans via courts (in the case of India, Pakistan), parliament (Ecuador, New Zealand) or other institutions (Canada) is to only enlarge its legal and political agency.
  • Such tendency stems from the fact that non-humans are ‘interest bearers’ having moral standing and deserving political and legal representation.

 

Conclusion: There needs to be transparency

So, if future COPs are to achieve meaningful outcomes, honest representation and actionable commitments must be paired with a transparency of intentions. Hosting COPs in economies which are heavily reliant on oil, sends mixed signals, particularly when the host nation simultaneously promotes investment in state-run oil and gas enterprises. Such contradictions erode trust and undermine genuine progress. It would be a significant step forward if COP30, held in Belém, the heart of the Amazon, gave representation to the ‘Amazon’ as an entity, exploring what possibilities this opens up. Bridging the gap between ambition and action requires not just new negotiation methods but also a willingness to align policies with the values we collectively champion. Let us hope we are not sleepwalking through the Anthropocene.

---