Halfway Point Webinar Updates on Week One of COP 29 Talks, Previews Week Two

Halfway through the UN Climate Change Conference (UNFCCC COP 29) in Azerbaijan, Baku, the International Institute for Sustainable Development (IISD) hosted a webinar updating participants on the state of the talks. The Earth Negotiations Bulletin (ENB) team reviewed negotiating items that progressed in the first week, where the greatest obstacles have arisen – and why, and what we can expect from the final week of COP 29.

Opening the webinar, climate negotiations expert and ENB team leader Jennifer Allan characterized the COP so far as “maybe in a bit of trouble.”

Allan flagged that the Dubai outcome on the Global Stocktake (GST) included the energy transition package, including tripling renewable energy, doubling energy efficiency capacity, and moving towards low-carbon energy technologies. She said while the Paris Agreement on climate change envisions the GST informing nationally determined contributions (NDCs), it doesn’t say how. Parties sought to “fill this gap” in Baku, Allan noted, even though not much was said about NDCs in week one of the talks. New NDCs are due to be submitted nine months before COP 30 in Brazil.

Allan called attention to the United Arab Emirates (UAE) dialogue on implementing the GST outcomes, noting disagreement on whether it should focus on finance alone or on other issues like energy, adaptation, and loss and damage as well.

As the UNFCCC Subsidiary Bodies (SBs) closed on Saturday, Allan said there was no agreement on several issues, including the mitigation work programme and around loss and damage and adaptation. Under Rules 10(c) and 16 of the draft rules of procedure, these would be included on SB 62 agendas, meaning parties would have to “start anew” at the next round of talks in June, she explained.

Allan described the negotiations on the mitigation work programme as “not constructive,” with a lot of mistrust, blaming, and finger pointing. Some, she said, wanted to work on mitigation around the energy transition package, while others saw it as infringing on countries’ nationally determined strategies. While the issue ended up “Rule 16,” Allan saw it as potentially having “another life” under the Conference of the Parties (COP) serving as the Meeting of the Parties to the Paris Agreement (CMA) in week two as many, including the Alliance of Small Island States (AOSIS), Least Developed Countries (LDCs), and the EU, spoke in favor of having further discussions.

During week one, negotiators worked hard on the new collective quantified goal on finance (NCQG), but without political guidance, progress was limited, Allan noted. The NCQG will replace the current goal of USD 100 billion annually in climate finance from developed to developing countries. Allan said the “ultimate trade-off” in these talks is the quantum and contributor base.

Developing countries, Allan said, point to the global climate finance gap of USD 1.3 trillion per year, with some proposing a regional approach. Developed countries “have been quiet on the quantum,” suggesting an “investment layer” to bring hundreds of billions in public finance and finance mobilization up to trillions.

According to the Paris Agreement, Allan further explained, climate finance would come from developed countries and those “in a position to do so.” With origins in a bilateral agreement between the US and China, this provision has generated a lot of debate and a lack of trust, which is “really hurting the negotiations,” she noted. She said the quantum and contributor base, along with eligibility criteria, would need to be addressed politically before the talks can move further, to deliver an NCQG by 2025.

Allan then explored the possibility that a cover decision would be proposed at COP 29 – a decision that does not come from an agenda item. As cover decisions are “wide open,” they are hard to negotiate as parties can add any number of issues. She said the Azerbaijani Presidency may not have the diplomatic capacity to push a cover decision through, indicating the Brazilian COP 30 Presidency might inherit issues like the NCQG and GST dialogue if no deal is reached.

Responding to questions from the audience, Allan offered thoughts on:

The NCQG investment layer and transparency around climate finance provided and received;
The impacts of countries pulling out of the climate process;
The role of the Group of 20 (G20) in responding to the climate crisis and its relationship with the UN climate process; and
Carbon markets and Article 6 negotiations.

She briefly discussed the slow progress around adaptation and the just transition work programme, the treatment of the term “Indigenous Peoples” in the negotiations, the interlinkages between COP 29 and the UN Biodiversity Conference 2024 (CBD COP 16), including the role of Nature-based Solutions (NbS) in driving climate action, and expectations for COP 30 in Belém, Brazil.

Allan indicated that as technical negotiations continue on the NCQG, the GST, just transition, and other issues, ministerial engagement is expected towards the second half of the week. She said it is “unusual” and “worrisome” that issues like gender and National Adaptation Plans (NAPs) are going into week two of the negotiations and described the overall state of the talks as “grim” and “dire.”

The 2024 UN Climate Changes Conference is scheduled to conclude on 22 November. [COP 29 Halfway Point Webinar] [ENB Coverage of COP 29] [SDG Knowledge Hub Sources]