Another round of climate negotiations has concluded, but what truly did the conversations accomplish? Billed as the “Finance COP,” the 29th United Nations Climate Change Conference of the Parties (COP29), held from November 11 – 22, 2024, in Baku, Azerbaijan, bore the weight of expectations for delivering a transformative global climate finance framework capable of addressing the escalating crises disproportionately affecting vulnerable communities.
Corporate Accountability and Public Participation Africa (CAPPA) was at the forefront of these engagements, mainstreaming the realities of frontline communities in the discourse. In this context, our members joined and organised advocacy actions and meetings that challenged the dominant narratives underpinning global climate finance. Chiefly, we rejected false solutions such as carbon markets, which commodify pollution and perpetuate the logic of capitalist extraction while failing to address the root causes of climate breakdown. We also monitored proceedings and plenaries of interest to us!
At the centre of this year’s COP’s proceedings was the establishment of a New Collective Quantified Goal (NCQG), intended to replace the long-unmet $100 billion annual climate finance commitment pledged over a decade ago. For developing countries grappling with rising sea levels, worsening extreme weather events, and forced climate-induced displacements despite contributing less to global emissions, the stakes could not have been higher. Addressing these challenges requires trillions of dollars in financial support, far exceeding the inadequate commitments of the past.
According to the Second Needs Determination Report (NDR) released by the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC) in September 2024, developing countries will require between $5.012 trillion and $6.852 trillion cumulatively by 2030 to meet their stated Nationally Determined Contributions (NDCs). This staggering amount underscores the sheer scale of the crisis and the urgent need for substantial mobilisation of climate finance. Against this backdrop, the NCQG was not just a question of how much but also a litmus test of whether the wealthiest, most polluting nations would finally confront their historical responsibility and act decisively.
By the end of the conference, a final deal of $300 billion annually—a figure far below the $1.3 trillion demanded by climate-imperilled countries and not scheduled for review until 2030—laid bare the persistent lack of ambition and the entrenched refusal of wealthy polluters and the Global North nations, whose wealth was built on centuries of carbon-intensive industrialisation and colonial exploitation, to take meaningful responsibility.
If the inadequacy of the pledge sparked frustration, its composition deepened the dismay. The $300 billion is set to be sourced from a convoluted mix of private investments, multilateral development bank loans, public funds, and other loosely defined alternatives rather than the unequivocal, grant-based financing that struggling countries urgently need. Finance from private and multilateral sources is notoriously tied to conditions and repayment cycles that erode sovereignty, deepen dependency, and ultimately re-direct resources away from essential social and development priorities. For nations already overwhelmed by crushing debt obligations alongside the devastating impacts of climate change, this outcome offers little relief and represents yet another deferred action. Worse still, the $300 billion target lacks enforceability, relying entirely on voluntary contributions and non-binding agreements.
Loss and Damage Fund Operationalised, But Concerns Persist
At COP29 in Baku, Azerbaijan, a decision was reached to operationalise the Loss and Damage Fund, with disbursements set to begin by 2025. This Fund, originally agreed upon at COP27 in Egypt and formally launched at COP28 in Dubai in 2023, is designed to provide financial support to developing countries suffering from irreparable economic and non-economic losses caused by climate change. While this milestone marks progress in acknowledging the lived realities of vulnerable communities, the outcomes from Baku underline the persistent inadequacies and contradictions of global climate governance.
At its inception, donor countries pledged a combined $700 million, an amount that pales in comparison to the $200 to $400 billion experts estimate is required annually to address the scale of losses. Despite some additional contributions, such as Australia’s AUD $50 million pledge at COP29, the Fund remains grossly underfunded. Furthermore, the failure of the NCQG to allocate resources to the fund has once again raised unresolved questions about its sustainability and predictability. With its reliance on discretionary inflows from donor countries—who retain unilateral control over the timing, amounts, and conditions of their contributions—the Fund’s long-term viability remains deeply uncertain.
1773 Oil and Gas Lobbyists were at COP29
The pervasive influence of corporate interests at COP29 was glaringly evident, with 1,773 oil and gas lobbyists present—an infiltration larger than the delegations of most countries. These actors actively shaped discussions, championing market-based solutions that commodify the climate crisis. Predictably, carbon markets dominated the agenda, sidelining equitable and non-market approaches and leading governments to finalise the operational details of Article 6 of the Paris Agreement. This established frameworks for international carbon markets to facilitate global cooperation in reducing greenhouse gas emissions.
Under Article 6.4, a centralised UN-supervised carbon market was created, allowing public and private entities to generate and trade credits from emission reduction projects, with standards designed to avoid leakage and ensure supposed long-term climate benefits. However, carbon trading schemes risk placing markets at the centre of global climate responses. These schemes allow polluters—primarily from the Global North—to purchase inexpensive “pollution allowances” from Global South entities, enabling continued harmful practices. This mechanism evades historical responsibilities, exacerbates the climate crisis, deprives Global South countries of the allowances necessary for development, and even displaces communities in the process. CAPPA and other members of the Make Big Polluters Pay coalition at the conference strongly rejected this trajectory, denouncing the commodification of the climate crisis and the reduction of justice to a mere transaction.
Way Ahead
Beyond observing the formal negotiations, CAPPA participated in numerous side events and protests that sought to challenge the false dominant narratives of COP29. The demonstrations, though heavily policed and infiltrated by corporate interests, served as platforms to voice resistance against greenwashing, debt-driven finance models, and the exclusion of vulnerable communities from decision-making spaces.
We also engaged with grassroots movements and international stakeholders to reimagine what climate justice could look like. At the Development and Climate Days event, we pushed for Afrocentric adaptation strategies and culturally grounded interventions, directly challenging the dominance of imposed foreign solutions on local communities. We drove home the need for a decolonised approach to climate governance—one that puts people over profits and centers the lived experiences and expertise of those most impacted by climate change. As attention shifts to COP30 in Belem, Brazil, the stakes remain critical. Brazil, home to the Amazon rainforest—a global emblem of biodiversity—provides an opportunity to highlight the intersections of climate justice, Indigenous rights, and ecological preservation. However, if the lessons from COP29 are any indication, the current global climate regime continues to place profits and corporate interests over people, justice, and equity. The path forward, therefore, requires dismantling these exploitative structures and replacing them with systems rooted in reparations, fairness, solidarity, and collective action—essential for planetary survival.
