This was the last remaining window for the North to step up, pay its fair share, and restore some semblance of trust in the multilateral process. They have failed.

As the conference ended in the wee hours of November 24, close to 36 hours beyond the scheduled closure, there is much to contemplate and little to hope regarding the state of finance that has been forced upon us by the developed countries.

Earlier on the night of November 23, 2024, the LDC and SIDS negotiators walked out of consultations on a text that offered a meagre $300B from developed countries and other sources by 2035 to developing countries. This was after a decade long discussions on a New Collective Quantified Goal. The $300B amount was fixed despite the pressing demand of the G77 and China to allocate $1.3T of funds as a part of NCQG.

The negotiators were also demanding that $600B of the $1.3T should be public grant or grant-equivalent finance, which essentially puts the responsibility of adaptation and mitigation on the historical polluters. Instead, the text “calls on all actors” to enable scaled up climate finance for developing countries to at least $1.3 trillion per year by 2035 and encourages developing countries to contribute towards this target on a voluntary basis.

This dilutes the legal obligation of developed countries to provide the entirety of the finance under the goal. So, what does the $300B mean for the global south? The Global South is home to over 6 billion people. If we do a rough calculation on per capita allocation, it comes down to just $50 per person per year. Essentially, this is the fund allocated by the developed countries for all loss and damage, adaptation and mitigation needs of developing countries.

But according to the UNFCCC’s Second Needs Determination Report, a cumulative $5.012-$6.852 trillion is required until 2030 to support developing countries in achieving their NDCs. The gap in adaptation finance alone stands at a staggering $194-366 billion per year. This only shows dismal levels of ambition from developed countries.

Furthermore, the quantum and the timeline of the finance are also raising major issues. The decision text does not clarify any separation between ‘provision’ and ‘mobilisation’, which provides leeway for developed countries to shift their financial obligations onto the private sector.

Moreover, given the timeframe provided in the text, developing countries could remain stuck with a highly inadequate quantum of finance till 2034, before it gets ramped up to $300 billion by 2035.

India had an unusually aggressive response on the matter and criticised the developed countries for undermining the principal of equity. Indian negotiator Chandni Raina said, “India does not accept the goal proposal in its present form. The amount that is proposed to be mobilised is abysmally poor. It is a paltry sum. It is not something that will enable conducive climate action that is necessary for the survival of our country.”

As the COP29 comes to a disappointing end, the Global North has essentially abandoned the South with this meagre offer of $300 billion. The ambiguities of the goal make it clear that there will be little accountability and traceability of funds. This was the last remaining window for the North to step up, pay its fair share, and restore some semblance of trust in the multilateral process. They have failed.

The next edition of COP is scheduled to be held in Belém, Brazil in November 2025 with emphasis on global and regional environmental issues.